Gisborne-Napier Line

In association with MOTORWAY ACTION GROUP, Napier HeavyTraffic Community Forum,

2011 September Barry Palmer's letter to the Minister of Transport, Stephen Joyce

2011 September 20 Barry Palmer's letter to the Regional Director Central, NZ Transport Agency, Jenny Chetwynd

,=====================================================================================================================

Click on these links for News, Events and things TO BE ACTIONED specifically related to the Gisborne-Napier Line

The Palmerston North-Gisborne Line ( on Wikipedia )

There is some discussion on the Gisborne Napier Line on the the Better Transport Forum here

The Gisborne District Council Transport Strategy

" 7.2 Freight Traffic – Road and Rail

As with most areas in New Zealand much of Gisborne’s economy is affected by the efficient movement of goods.

Gisborne has a particular dependence on its State highway network to shift goods in to, out of, and around the region.

In contrast the rail network (a single track to Napier via Wairoa) is not widely used for moving freight.

Although there is a rail line available for some trips the majority of freight movement through the region is undertaken on roads, mostly state highway.

There are currently issues in the region surrounding the use of the state highway for transporting freight.

These issues are already well understood within the region. Many of the parties consulted wished to see further reliance on rail freight to reduce the

negative impacts of road freight traffic. This strategy identifies this as an option, but its viability is unknown at this stage.

The recently released National Rail Strategy outlines the Government’s plan for rail use in the country.

“Through the National Rail Strategy, the Government is demonstrating its commitment to retaining the existing network; to investigating the

development of a number of new railway lines; and to maximising the use of rail transport. The aim is to move people out of cars for urban journeys, and

freight off roads, wherever possible. For freight this means a focus on bulk or containerised loads, including traffic such as milk or logs. For passengers it

means a focus on busy urban corridors in the larger centres, and using smart thinking to manage congestion.”

It is interesting to note that although there seems to be a commitment to retaining the existing network and maximising its use for freight, the future of

the Napier – Gisborne line is in question. A recent Dominion Post article (Nov 25 2005) stated that the fall in freight use of the line could see the line

closed within two years. The article sited a 6-12 fold increase in freight by rail would be required to make the line viable. The line is currently used for

one return trip each day. Ontrack have committed to keeping the line operative and will review the line if or as demand increases.

The Hawke’s Bay Regional Land Transport Strategy (2002) also recognises the importance of rail as an alternative transport mode particularly in regard

to freight rail.

“Rail will be promoted where appropriate within the region for the movement of freight, especially over long distances. This includes promoting the use of

the Napier-Gisborne line and the Napier-Palmerston North line for the transport of products such as timber, fertilizer, processed goods, milk and

other primary produce.

Nearly all goods will need to travel by road at some point. Therefore, the integration of road/rail facilities will be promoted to ensure rail is as

accessible as possible for the movement of freight.

Currently there are no passenger services operating in the Region”.

There is potential for increase in processed products particularly timber companies but it is recognised that this generates a need for double handling

of product from road to rail particularly in difficult and remote terrain where plantings are located.

8.3 The Role of Rail

The existing rail line running between Napier and Gisborne provides land transport opportunities, both present and future.

At present the rail line plays a role in the movement of some bulk goods items such as fertilizer.

Previous studies have shown that annual rail freight cartage is in the order of 43,000 tonnes per year.

Approximately 27,000 tonnes per annum is fertiliser, the remainder is a mixture of general freight.

As an example if services were discontinued, the above freight tonnage would equate to between 5-8 laden logging trucks per day, 312 days per year.

This increase in road usage is likely to be accommodated on the existing state highway network, increasing road wear and potential safety issues.

Currently rail is not used to transport logs from the region.

This is due to a number of issues including lack of suitable rail carts, required double handling of logs and increased costs.

In 2001 the then freight operator TranzRail said that “In its present condition the Gisborne line would be able to carry …600 tonnes per trip (about half

normal capacity for a line of this type in good repair). This is the equivalent of about 21 conventional logging trucks per trip.”

This would not provide any benefit for the area north of Gisborne where much of the forestry activity occurs. The benefit of using rail also assumes

an existing demand to move logs between Gisborne, Wairoa and Napier.

• Rail Freight: Increasing the potential freight carried by rail between Gisborne and Napier, and beyond. Rail freight could

reduce the number of large freight trucks using the state highway network. This potentially reduces vehicle conflict and may reduce

road maintenance and enhancement costs.

Read here on the Better Transport forum about Weekend services being restored from January 15th 2010

Media Coverage on the Gisborne Napier Line

Affected Parties

Anchor Tennants ( possible )

Kiwirail’s Statement of Intent includes keeping the minor lines open if there is “proven future potential” (or an imminent anchor customer).

They could be asked what they mean by the future…it could be ten years as there is suggestion of a ten-year plan, but there is also a prediction (in the growth-economy mindset) that freight will grow by 75% by 2031, implying perhaps a twenty-year plan.

Valuing the line as a capital investment brings in another order of magnitude—a hundred-year plan.

It seems that the future potential is easily proved if one has a long enough focus, and in fact cannot be disproved except by grossly shortsighted business assumptions. Kiwirail needs public pressure to explain this to the government.

The government has given the company little room to move and scant financial support, but the company can at least do the feasibility studies and insist that unfeasibility is not proven.

Questions:

1. How much consideration is given to future oil prices?

A good economist could do calculations on the competitiveness of rail over road for oil priced at 5, 10 and 20 times its present value.

We should see these projections.

2. Given that such price changes will eventuate sometime, how far into the future does Kiwirail estimate them to be?

3. How much consideration is given to passenger transport under the same oil-price regimes?

4. Given that the haste of air-travel is largely frivolous, the air-passenger market should be thoroughly analysed as a potential source of rail custom.

A flat rate of, say $100 to Wellington, rather than a lottery of grossly differing and largely higher prices, would be immensely popular to all income groups.

5. The same analysis of how oil prices affect current car travel should reveal a huge potential passenger market.

(The present bus market is of negligible size as it is such an unattractive journey.)

A revenue of $2m per year translates into $40,000 per week, or less than $8,000 per day.

There should be scenarios of this, composed of a mixture of passengers and freight. Surely such calculations have been done?

6. Ravensdown still trucks a third of their fertiliser to Gisborne because of a shortage of rolling-stock.

Can Kiwirail not insist on the government making their own business viable by investing in sufficient wheels? Does an “anchor customer” have to provide their own?

7. How much importance is placed on the capital value of the line? To replace it would cost $1b, on top of considerable previous destruction costs.

This is equivalent to 500 years of maintenance at $2m per year, disregarding any increase in revenue.

The question is important as Kiwirail is state-owned, and although companies keep a capital account, the government in its annual budget does not.

The government should be challenged to recognise capital when it sees it, by both the company and the public.

The potential of multiple custom is at present higher than that of a single anchor customer, and multiple custom requires an agency. It appears that neither Kiwirail nor the government itself is prepared to be the agent.

It is not responsible to sit back and hope that some great entrepreneur will come in with carriages, personnel and administrative structure for an attractive passenger service; and that another will turn up with extra freight capacity; and yet another—perhaps the most important—to run a freight service that does not expect full containers, but manages a freight centre where containers are filled by small customers.

If this is beyond Kiwirail’s brief, they should be complaining, and presenting a feasibility study to promote the same.

Gavin Maclean, 9 June 11