Public transport fares are about to increase again, by an average of 5.2%, according to a paper to Auckland Council’s Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee on Thursday by Auckland Transport. In addition, AT are going to be removing off-peak discounts and implementing some other structural changes to the fare system. Their summary says
- AT has experienced an unparalleled increase in PT operating costs in recent years due to contract indexation, increased track access charges and additional service provision.
- While indexation and cost pressures are starting to ease, the 5.2% fare increase is budgeted and necessary to increase overall farebox recovery.
- Several factors have now led AT to seek a review of its fare strategy. These include: COVID19 pandemic and work-from-home impacts, increased cost of living pressures, farebox
recovery targets, ambitious emission reduction targets, and the forthcoming National Ticketing System (NTS).- In January 2024, AT engaged LEK to conduct an extensive review of its fare structure. This review was concluded in August 2024 and recommended a phased approach to fare structure change implementation (Figure 1).
- In conjunction with the annual fare review, AT will be implementing Package 1A of the fare reforms. This strikes a balance between AT’s strategic priorities and customer and community priorities.
While I understand the pressures AT are under, any time fares go up it’s disappointing and will only make it harder to get more people to use public transport. As I’ve said before, I do think AT could help themselves by also changing parking costs at the same time
I’ll look at the fare changes first then the structural changes.
Fare Changes
AT say that “PT operating costs increased by $63m in the last financial year through contract indexation, increased track access charges and additional service provision“. This brings them up to nearly $700 million annually compared to being less than $500 million prior to COVID.
PT operating costs have been rising faster than general inflation, with Waka Kotahi’s PT index rising by 4.9% for the year to June 2024 while CPI was at 3.3%.
Auckland Transport not increasing fares in 2021 and 2022 during COVID means fares have fallen behind costs and that has been made worse by fewer people using PT since COVID.
AT also note that ferry cost recovery has declined since 2020 when they integrated ferries into the wider fare structure saying “The current fare integration has not allowed AT to proportionately adjust ferry fares without negatively affecting bus and rail passengers“.
AT include this table highlighting the average fare and subsidy for public transport by mode. It makes trains look particularly bad but on issue I have with how AT have presented it here is that they should include that the average train journey is around twice the length of the average bus journey, meaning the difference in subsidy per km travelled is close than this suggests.
Prior to COVID the average subsidy per km on trains had dropped below what it was on buses, however, that has changed again and AT do note that the train figures have been disproportionately impacted “due to supressed demand with on-going disruption and increased track access charges“.
AT do compare our fares to other cities and say:
- 2024 benchmarking shows that Auckland continues to offer relatively low cost short-distance fares, ranking well against peers at 7th place overall for affordability. Longer-distance fares (15km or more) benchmark poorly, ranking 33rd place for affordability, out of 44 global cities included in the benchmark.
While I get the analysis and have seen similar trends myself in the past, I do think AT miss the mark with this because they need to not only compare our fares to other cities but to the main alternative for Aucklanders which is driving. As an example, if I wanted to travel to my local shops, I could catch a train for 1.3km and I would currently have to pay $5.20 return. But equally I could travel 10 times that and pay the same rate. However, if I was to make a 1.3km journey in the city centre I’d pay just $1.40 return because of the special CityLink rate.
I have a few times wondered about something like a “short distance fare” where for trips under say 2km you pay the same as the CityLink rate. Could that open up PT to a wider set of uses that aren’t just 9-5 commuting?
A short distance fare isn’t part of proposed structural changes though.
The planned new fares are below and they’re due to take effect from February 9 next year. You’ll notice there’s only four zones, that is one of the structural changes being implemented.
AT say the average 5.2% increase will increase their revenue by $4.3 million (+2.4%) but it will result in 1 million fewer PT journeys. That’s going to only make it harder to get back to even pre-COVID levels of PT usage.
Changes to the Fare Structure
AT say that the current fare structure hasn’t changed since 2016 when it was introduced and an independent review has suggested a number of changes to it, some of which could see lower fares for some trips.
- Changing the fare structure to flat or distance-based fares was considered as an alternative to the current zonal structure.
- Evolving the current zonal structure is seen as the optimum path forward as it would allow for better transport outcomes and minimise the risks associated with the transition to the future-state fare system.
- Seven distinct reforms have been recommended to evolve AT’s fare system to meet these objectives. AT has gained board approval to implement Package 1A of the fare reforms, which include the following changes:
- Consolidation of fare zones from 14 to 9 to simplify the system and reduce fare complexity, thus making it easier for customers to understand and potentially increasing patronage.
- Simplification of the fare table to four zones, which will cover 99% of current journeys and reduce the number of unique peak travel fares from 59 to a more manageable number, thereby decreasing administrative overheads and customer confusion.
- Enable ferry fare flexibility to better align ferry operation costs with revenue, ensuring sustainable service provision without excessively burdening other transport modes.
- Removal of the off-peak discount, which has not been successful in modifying travel behaviour as intended.
There’s no map yet to show the changes to the fare zones but they say it’s these areas.
- Helensville, Hibiscus Coast, Huapai and Upper North Shore
- Manukau North and Beachlands
- Manukau South and Franklin
Personally I’d also like to see slightly larger zone overlaps. It seems absurd to me that some relatively short trips, like Morningside to Maungawhau or Grafton, can cross a boundary and have to pay a two-zone fare while some much longer long cross zone trips, like travelling from New Lynn to Newmarket or even Otahuhu only pay a single zone fare.
The zone consolidation is also being combined with setting a maximum fare of just 4 zones which will make trips much cheaper for people doing really long trips,
The removal of off-peak discounts the biggest disappointment here and that it didn’t modify travel behaviour is probably because AT never did much, if anything to advertise that it existed so most people wouldn’t have known about it.
Theses and the other changes are shown below
The combined impact of both the fare and structural changes are shown below
Finally AT say these changes are due for February but are dependent on AT’s successful rollout of Open Loop changes which will enable people to pay for PT with credit/debit cards which is expected soon.
Processing...
Pretty close to $10 return from Mt Eden or similar to the city. If you add AT’s subsidy to that fare, it would be cheaper to Uber! Maybe that is why AT were looking at ride share; could it be cheaper, more convenient, and better for the environment?
No. There’s no logical reason it would be.
Of course there is:
a) A bus company that needs to make a profit has to train someone to drive a heavy vehicle that is expensive to purchase and maintain and pay for all the diesel it uses and spits out into the environment while also damaging the road, while a public department squanders money
b) Bob looks at his app and jumps in his highly reliable / cheap / environmentally friendly Toyota hybrid van and picks some people up to make a bit of extra coin.
Are you telling me (a) is cheaper than (b)? I would estimate (a) could be up to 10x more expensive offpeak.
Why is it that western (colonialism) countries never factor the environmental, social, economic, sustainability, carbon emissions, etc involved in the mining of minerals and the many manufacturing plants; for processing raw minerals to the making of vehicles
( including freight boats that move ythe csrgo from country to gountry, the massive machines and trucks at mines etc) and parts including batteries, when looking at costs …
The massive amount of unsustainable processes involved in creating the marketing of the “sustainable” vehicle we are encouraged to buy mea”sustainable” is simply a marketing con that we believe because we don’t join the dots!
Between Mt Eden and the city your estimate is so far off as to be just silly, Jimbo. a) is much cheaper than b). a) is also the only one that makes sense in terms of space.
It’s in less congested, less populated areas that AT and other transport authorities have been trying to convince themselves that rideshare makes sense. But even there, it doesn’t work. Any low-density area will require subsidy (which is why sprawl must halt entirely). But subsidy to a proper timetabled frequent service leads to a shift in mindset and to a gradual increase in PT ridership, while subsidy to a rideshare service undermines public transport and eventually leads to higher and higher subsidies.
Your focus on reducing off peak bus services is ill-supported by evidence. They’re part and parcel of the PT mode, and are required for people to use the peak services. Without the off peak services, the mode is not tenable for many people.
PT is far, far more efficient and cost-effective than smaller vehicles, whether those running around doing extra km in order to pick up individual paying customers, or privately owned and driven. A frequent, timetabled service through all parts of the day, along with connected active modes networks, wins hands down.
Where we’ve sprawled too much, solutions include targeted (much) higher rates for lifestyle properties to cover both the higher km of road to maintain per property and the higher cost of bus services per passenger km.
“a) A bus company that needs to make a profit has to train someone to drive a heavy vehicle that is expensive to purchase and maintain and pay for all the diesel it uses and spits out into the environment while also damaging the road, while a public department squanders money
b) Bob looks at his app and jumps in his highly reliable / cheap / environmentally friendly Toyota hybrid van and picks some people up to make a bit of extra coin.
Are you telling me (a) is cheaper than (b)? I would estimate (a) could be up to 10x more expensive offpeak.”
Now do the same comparison for moving 30 people..during peak time
As a gold card holder I would be ok to pay something for my many trips each week including an ocassional trip to Waiheke Island. Any time of the day after 9am. In Hamilton the free fare applies only between the hours of 9am and 3pm.
I am also surprised that the council is not using “user pays” and people living around Pukekohe are subsidised by other users and getting a weekly fare cap of $50 that is encouraging more sprawl.
I have never seen a chart from AT that shows the public funded portion of parking, is such a chart available?.
Similarly a graph showing actual parking costs .
This is not good. Actually it is cheaper to park in the city than catching a train to city for 2 adults shared ride. Parking is $18/day and train is $24/day.
In this example however, you’d qualify for free travel after 2 trips. As you pay max $50 per week.
Can’t wait to see nice shiny new buses with all this new revenue! Went on one the other day from Birkenhead – looked like one I went on to school 25 years ago..
AT is advertising for a new low emission bus fleet transition lead,, to lead the introduction of more zero emission buses. You should apply.See: https://careers.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/jobdetails?ajid=ytlcb
I’m a little confused. Are these fare changes being shown as based on the new structures rather than current structure. For instance currently the fare from Te Atatu to the city is $5.40 – it appears our fare will under the new structure be set at $6 but the fare increase takes it to $6.25. Does this mean next year our fares go up by 85c ( 5.4 to 6.25) rather than the 25c ( 6 to 6.25) Am I missing something here?
A nice way to kill off families attempting to use public transport. I move myself and my eldest child around now, and soon my second. Even as a low income beneficiary of Community Connect, that is going to eat up my food budget, with my rent already occupying the remainder of my income. Thanks AT.
What happened to Free Fares? Wasn’t that a proposal two years ago???
bah humbug
Yeah they may ad well make them free, rye payers already heavily subsidize them already incl with targeted rates. At least there would not be so many empty busses then.
Are you currently travelling off-peak?
$5.40 would be the current 3 stage adult ($6) with a 10% off peak discount?
Ah thanks for that – never realised that was how fares were calculated ( I ride a bicycle mostly)
As a progressive city, why not look at what Perth and Brisbane have done, including the whole state of Victoria.
Perth is a very long yet narrow metro region and as such, it was very expensive travelling north/south. Last year the WA Government capped fares at $5 – being a zone 2 fare. Ridership skyrocketed across all transit modes (bus and train). Brisbane on the other hand, dropped all fares to a standard 50 cents. Equally, the ridership on trams, buses, ferries and trains skyrocketed. If NZ is serious about cutting emissions and car commuting, it could adopt some measures from across the ditch. Victoria introduced a standard $5 fare on all state rail and coach services to anywhere within the state. The impact of this meant having to put on extra coach and train services for longer distance travel – possibly decreasing road trauma/deaths. Think ahead Kiwis.
Not a wonder they need more dosh with all the regular ghost buses. Will only mean even more ghost busses.
Many cities I’ve visited have time based tickets and set ‘full network’ fixed price daily, weekly, fortnightly, monthly etc.
One city where I have lived the standard ticket is €1.45 for 60 minutes from the scan on time. €310 for an annual pass for a specific line, €380 annual pass for the entire network. Busses basically make up the system in this city about the size and shape of Wellington.
I wonder if they have ever reviewed getting away from the whole zone and stage system? Getting stuck in traffic would be the main downside, but then it’s still pretty cheap.
There is obviously a significant cost to tagging off: the cost of the exit door readers, the cost of holding up buses, fixing fares when people forget to tag off or if the reader doesn’t work, etc. And then there is the cost of running and testing a complex fare network inside HOP.
You have to question whether it makes economic sense compared to a simple single fare that can be transferred for a period of time. I am not sure if it is still the case, but when I was in London the buses were single fare and you did not tag off.
That’s still the case. You don’t tag off in London and Adult bus fares are NZ$3.80 (one pound seventy-five) for any trip. That also includes any transfers or second trips, including return journeys, which begin within one hour of tagging on. And children and full-time students are free. But, the bus fares are somewhat cross-subsidised from the more expensive underground fares.
(NB There’s very little government subsidy of Transport for London. There was no government subsidy required recently, but COVID-related loss of income from fares, Crossrail cost overruns, and some years of fare freezes, has meant some has been required of late…but it’s still lower much than almost any other city. Basically the London transport network pays for itself through fares, which is possible because it’s heavily used, which is possible because it’s very good, also because the alternative option of driving is more expensive and less time-efficient).
Oh, and don’t forget we are having to pay for AT’s programme of enabling fare evasion for societies scum bags.
How exactly would you propose AT stop this?
Many people probably cannot afford the fare anyway – so do we just accept they are not able to get around the city?
Combined with the archaic Hop system where you might get caught short with no money on your card, hardly nice to say these people are all “scum bags”.
They’re scumbags!! So sick of being a paying passenger on buses and witnessing so many fare evaders on EVERY trip.
Well I catch buses during the day and a lot of people are riding without paying. At least 10% of people riding.
Most are “bums” but 20-30% are more respectable looking people who pretend their card is empty or “accidentally” forget to tag on.
The drivers understandably avoid picking fights.
It can be genuine for normal law abiding citizens. I’m sorting out a few HOP cards all gone into negative due to clunky website system problems as I was not emailed to alert me. Had one failed Topup that then went through. A strange mess it became. Linked accounts make things not work right if you ask me.
Yes I was one of those whose Hop card expired with no warning. I had to go into a service centre New Lynn ( who directed me to Britomart) I was given a new card – but they were unable to reimburse the funds already on my old card – and took more than a year to register as they could not delete my old expired card from system ( why that should have been a problem I dont know)
Here is the solution to HOP Card issues:
Jesus $7.40 each way now for Birkenhead ferry??
I mean I love the ride but it’s basically now a mini sightseeing cruise journey rather than any sort of economical way to get to the city.
they are running too many buses that have hardly no passengers, of course the cost will be passed on, not even the rate payers subsidy is enough. Public transport needs to go back to being public transport with sensible bus schedules based around actual demand. its not cost effective or environmentally friendly running a bus with 0-3 people in it
funny, the northern busway NX1 service runs every 3 minutes at peak and it’s consistently well-used.
your comment spree reeks of insecurity. you’ve had it well and truly pointed out to you that frequent buses to Huapai would be a better return for the same investment as trains that would take 2-3 years to refit or order and arrive, and now you’re grasping at straws. There’s evidence that more public transport service = more ridership, by the way. Maybe go yell at the researchers of this study if you disagree.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X23000413
I am not referring to the Northern bus way re empty buses. You are saying the trains would take 2-3 years to refit. How long do you think it will it take for a bus way to Huapai to be approved and built?the NORs are 20 years. Why not light rail (at least to WEstgate, more directly), wont there be issues in town with too many buses trying to get into the centre if all these other areas have such regular services? Also you may find cost is a contributing factor to whether some people public transport and yes obviously the more services the more appealing it is to the general public, I am not disputing that, I am saying there are a lot of empty buses that are currently being subsidized in some areas.
thomas have you missed my point that the WX1 could run to Huapai with no busway, just an upgrade of SH16 from Brigham Creek to Kumeu to fix that traffic bottleneck and/or provide basic bus shoulder priority?There’s no busway north of Albany yet the NX1 and NX2 still run to the Hibiscus Coast. Yes the upgrade would also take time to build but it would deliver infrastructure capable of supporting double decker buses every 10 minutes or better to Huapai as opposed to an hourly rail shuttle, better value for money and makes travelling to Westgate (for transfers to the Shore) as well as to the city much more viable and convenient
Yes light rail/metro would be ideal and hopefully the NW busway is built to accomodate an upgrade, so that by the time the dedicated ROW to Huapai is needed that might be built as green-tracked rail from the start, but given the failure of Mangere light rail and the rabid anti-urban rail current govt busway is the hand we’re getting dealt.
Buses technically are more space-efficient and fuel-efficient right down to a passenger loading of 3, since they use less space and fuel than the comparable number of cars to move that number of people.
ok, yes, I did miss your point re being able to run buses with just an upgrade and shoulder priority, not the actual full on bus way project. Currently a bus journey from Kumeu to Auckland takes over 1 hr-1hr 20. Not a very desirable option unless there is no choice
and yes long term, a more direct green-tracked rail would be the best outcome for area that really needs its permeable ground, but of course that wont happen any time soon and not in the current political climate
What about those roads that have “hardly no drivers” at 3 am? Suggest we close them so we go back to sensible road opening times based around actual demand.
Out of curiosity, how much is parking going up by?
Is there any appetite in this country towards the Deutschlandticket-style flat monthly public transport fares? For 49 Euros this is like $NZ85 monthly it is unlimited ride on all but long distance public transport anywhere in Germany.
I know this will probably breach the 50% fare box recovery requirement we have in this country, but over in Germany it seems people don’t mind about subsidising public transport as both a relief on the cost of living crisis and also as an environmentally-friendly measure for reducing greenhouse emissions.
If I remember right, the news about Deutschlandticket was met with widespread derisions on New Zealand social media back in 2021 and 22. Has the situation changed today?
This is obviously relevant to the discussion: https://at.govt.nz/bus-train-ferry/at-hop-card/card-concessions-discount-fares/7-day-fare-cap-for-auckland-public-transport
So the $50 fare cap stays. For now.
“Noting the $50 fare cap itself will be reviewed periodically.”
I used to be a PT advocate, now, no longer. No thanks. It’s cheaper to drive my car. It’s freedom, and convenience. PT in this city is extremely expensive, and not worth funding. Shut it down!
Wait till more and more people start driving again when the economy picks up and/or we have more population growth and you see the roads congested and clogged.
“PT in this city is extremely expensive, and not worth funding. Shut it down!”
If you did that, the roads would be choked with selfish single occupancy drivers, preventing you from driving your private car. Instead, introduce congestion charges for single occupancy car drivers..
Enjoy the freedom and convenience of being stuck in gridlock then. And finding out which new “lesser” group of humans the petrolhuffers in power blame the congestion they caused.
agree, public transport is expensive, could it be because its not actually public transport but privately owned so not actually being run to suit customer requirements ? Lots of buses with very few people in being subsidized. There use to be less buses but they were full buses
Didn’t this government say, they expect greater fare box return for all subsided public transport services due to reduction in NZ Transport Agency funding across all 13 regional public transport operations.
Auckland is not the only region that has or will see an increase in public transport fares.
If I’m travelling with someone else from the Auckland CBD to Ponsonby it already makes more sense to share an Uber.
Which is sad. Showing need a cheap short distance fare.
“If I’m travelling with someone else from the Auckland CBD to Ponsonby it already makes more sense to share an Uber.’
Provided you have someone that wants to go to CBD to Ponsonby at the same time as you. Why not take the Linkbus to Ponsonby?
See: https://at.govt.nz/bus-train-ferry/bus-services/link-bus-service
Interesting, finally read this.
Yes, totally agree, always advocated or a distance short fare (or distance based altogether, but maybe too complex to understand or implement). I, for example could hop on the bus to Sylvia Park and back for a small fee, but now, looks like I’m jumping in the car now we have one again that works…actually I normally bike now but for other family members who don’t or obviously similar situations it would be a draw card.
Compare that, for the same one zone fare price, I can go all the way to Point Chev!
Off-Peak, I would think it’s the piddly 10% that makes it not work and so yes, would just mean AT loose money that we dont’ notice we save. Also complicates fare amounts when looking at transactions etc.
I’d recommend it be 20% but perhaps reduce the window it can be used. In saying that I wonder how many help desk calls etc they get with people confused over their amounts. Also with post COVID ridership not that hot we perhaps don’t need to really reduce peak loadings anyway.
Interesting in that table, the Tertiary CityLink low patronage compared to other ones. So generally younger fitter people just walk/run/scoot/cycle about even though the Universities etc right there….though it’s away from the direct route of it I guess another reason.
Before Translink in SE Queensland introduced their flat $0.50 fare on 5-Aug they had Go Card off peak fares that were 20% below peak fares.
In Zurich the “short distance ticket” lets you travel up to 2 km at a reduced cost. However either the start or destination stop must be within a certain city zone.
https://www.zvv.ch/zvv/de/service/kundendienst/haeufige-fragen/kurzstrecken-ticket.html
Here’s an interesting point in the Thursday meeting Matt L is referring to. It has more details of the future thoughts on package 1B and 2.
“07.11.24 – Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee – Items 14-17”
I’ve queued it up to start where AT are talking about it, including 45 min transfer window and concession simplification.
https://youtu.be/CrMjpDZV6ig?si=ht07KIJd74ncKoeP&t=275
It is apparent when you watch how much the 50% farebox recovery set by government really constrains AT. It would be good to reduce this to say 35% at least.
I calculate the farebox recovery ratio on the Devonport ferry is about 92%.
I couldn’t fund any public costs for the Devonport ferry. However AT did state “The ferry network added $10.5m through the contracting of the Devonport ferry service” in https://at.govt.nz/media/0g2nnky1/220-annual-fare-review-and-fares-strategy.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawGaS3RleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHahOnW7LrWdQd5LqfHOE1dp2DTgKvf88pk2kO7CVUilzuCElYovW6jzAIQ_aem_5ugBruuOdbvjEG1J1Lp-Qg
AT says the total ferry patronage is almost back to pre-COVID levels of 6m passengers per annum. Again, I couldn’t find Devonport numbers but in 2013 the Devonport ferry made up about 27% ferry passengers according to this: https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2013-transport-monitoring-results.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawGaS6BleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHUiIkNHO2K670LXyGOYEuQDZ6RhyOBzhpiFSb1tnNUK2f427JrMky6Awhw_aem_1eSzOleCCXoYyR5B5D157Q
This is a bit old but the share cant have changed dramatically.
Based on this $10.5m / (6m * 27%) = $6.48 per trip. So this is a farebox recovery ratio of for the current fare of $6.50 is 92% compared to 25% on the wider network.
For all of the PR and PT experts that post on this site, here is your chance to improve or change the way AT engages with stakeholders and the wider public.
I look forward to interviewing each of you and asking you” So, how would you improve community consultation for changes to the Auckland PT network, given that the Council ( and ratepayers ) have asked AT to slash spending .
See: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/big-cuts-coming-to-auckland-transport-blame-the-government-says-mayor-wayne-brown/FIZJIJFQHBB6TF4UOBFWAL5SQ4/
AND:
https://careers.aucklandtransport.govt.nz/jobdetails?ajid=mdocb