IFT - Infratil

[Zaphod]

Here's an interesting piece on the The Public Transport Management Act, that will have a significant impact on the operations of NZ Bus.

Might spark some interesting debate.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/st...ectid=10531029

The original PDF copy of the bill can be viewed here

http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/gove...t/viewpdf.aspx

[Toddy]

Here's an interesting piece on the The Public Transport Management Act, that will have a significant impact on the operations of NZ Bus.

Might spark some interesting debate.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/st...ectid=10531029

The original PDF copy of the bill can be viewed here

http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/gove...t/viewpdf.aspx

I'm all for the Auckland rate payers following the Labour party model of NZ Railways and writing out a big fat cheque to the 'merchant bankers' so that can run the transport system themselves.

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Toddy You believe in competition they just stop subsidizing private operators and buy new busses or buy the bankrupt businesses off the receiver. They have no need to buy private operators out. They will be just trying to rescue as much as they can from the mess. The Ownership of Bus companies makes me forget about buying Infratil Shares

[Zaphod]

Bankrupting PT providers by removing subsidies would create one giant shambles for local authorities both legally and logistically.

What would you propose as the most efficient and effective ownership/operation model?

[Toddy]

Toddy You believe in competition they just stop subsidizing private operators and buy new busses or buy the bankrupt businesses off the receiver. They have no need to buy private operators out. They will be just trying to rescue as much as they can from the mess. The Ownership of Bus companies makes me forget about buying Infratil Shares

Possum, the Local Govt sold the bus business because they were inefficient at running it. Now they want the law changed so that they do not have to be involved in the day to day operations but want to be able to make all of the business decisions.

Infratil is like a good landlord who offers renovated properties. They have plenty of room to offer cheap budget services. The only loser would be the people that actually use the service (thats not you Possum).

Push the right buttons and I'm sure that Infratil can provide New Zealand standard services as opposed to International standard services.

If thats what Aucklanders want, then who am I to argue.

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Toddy when a 25min journey in a car takes over 90mins by bus only the desperate use bus. No the bookeeping makes it looklike they are inefficient at running it. Apparantly Infratil are not very efficient at running it either as they admit it is not performing to expectations. I also look at walking as it is quite often quicker and definately cheaper than catching bus.

[Toddy]

Maybe the timing is right to head up to Auckland and start a petition.

Buy back our bus company from those money hungry capitalists. We give them 90mil a year. That will be a 90mil savings if we, the rate payers, owned it.

I know it would be a dangerous strategy as people get elected onto councils saying such things. And I would have to front on that socialist tv program called 'Close up' to explain.

[Toddy]

It looks like the bus subsidies will be increased to cater for fuel efficient, disability friendly buses and increased red tape. This means that the cheap bus providers will be pushed out.

Legislation giving regional councils greater control over public transport services has passed into law as Parliament sits under urgency.

Previously councils could set standards for public transport it contracts.

The bill will also allow councils to:

* require services to be disability-friendly, such as super-low floor buses and public address systems;

* require information about demand and cost;

* allow councils to require providers to give 90 days notice instead of 21 days for changes such as to timetables;

* require different operators to use the same tickets in some cases, for example, where different providers work the same route;

* allow regions to insist on low emission buses.

The legislation follows a review of public transport law by a working group made up of central and local government as well as public transport operators.

Transport Minister Annette King said the bill did not tell regional councils how to run their public transport systems, just gave them the tools to run them effectively

The National Party did not vote against the bill, but transport spokesman Maurice Williamson said he had reservations about it as it created needless red tape for operators.

Unsubsidised public transport services should be able to operate without regional council interference as long as they followed Land Transport rules, he said.

[Zaphod]

Maybe the timing is right to head up to Auckland and start a petition.

Buy back our bus company from those money hungry capitalists. We give them 90mil a year. That will be a 90mil savings if we, the rate payers, owned it.

I know it would be a dangerous strategy as people get elected onto councils saying such things. And I would have to front on that socialist tv program called 'Close up' to explain.

That's the same rather questionable logic that was used to justify the re-purchase of the rail network.

If local authorities can operate the PT services more effectively, and at the same or lower cost, then perhaps it should be considered. History thus far does not support this argument, and I think that rate payers would revolt at the thought of the Cap Ex required to re-establish PT under rate-payer ownership.

[POSSUM THE CAT]

Zaphod They Can buy for pittance there are no other willing buyers