Pacific Empire

Public Transport Sucks

Reason Number 31: Unpleasant train stations.

Well done New Zealand, you are now the proud owners of the Linden train station.

They can’t even spell swear words right?

I travel to Linden on the train for work. The Wellington railway station has a supermarket, is clean and tidy, and the trains leave in the morning exactly on time.

Linden Station is a different story. In the mornings, I just walk through it on the way to work.

But in the evenings, the trains stop being on time and I often have to wait 15-20 minutes in these surroundings.

Photos, of course, can’t convey the strong smell of dried urine. I wonder how much it would cost to hose the place out every week?

Contemporary art by disadvantaged and misunderstood youth?

No, I don’t think so either.

You’d think they would get around to replacing the perspex covering the timetable. What would that cost, $50? It has been like this for about a month.

They do seem to paint the place every few months. But I can’t help thinking that two or three $350 cameras could save a lot of money and hard work.

I predict that now the trains are state owned, this sort of problem will get worse, not better.

Why is there rubbish here? Is it because people are inherently selfish litterbugs? Well, no. It is because there are neither rubbish bins nor ashtrays here. Not one. This stuff isn’t rocket science, folks …

Are you listening, environmentalists? This is why public transport - even in Wellington, where the geography is particularly suited to it - will never replace cars, no matter what the council’s Long Term Plan says. People prefer climbing into their car at their house, when they are ready, and driving straight to work. Even if it is more expensive, and, yes, even if it pollutes a tiny bit and (gasp!) uses up more precious resources. Nobody likes to look at graffiti and smell urine.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Posted by Luke H on Monday, July 21st, 2008 at 8:33 pm.

20 Responses to “Public Transport Sucks”

If you donâ€™t want to wait around at a dimly lit, graffiti-covered bus stop or train station why not take a Cityhop car instead?

Cityhop is a self-service car share company with cars for rent by the hour, day, or the week.

It only costs $75 to join Cityhop for 12 months. Once you’ve joined you are free to use the cars as often as you like for only $13.50 an hour or for a special daily or overnight rate.

The cars consist of a mixture of Daihatsu Sirions and Mitsubishi i-cars and are located all over Auckland’s CBD, Wellington and Christchurch.

Left by Cityhop on July 22nd, 2008

Cheers Cityhop - good to see that the free market provides.

Left by Luke on July 22nd, 2008

That’s the very train station my parents use to get to work in town every day. Luckily they sit on the other side of the station to where these photos were taken.

Left by Callum on July 22nd, 2008

Hi Callum - the pictures with the timetable are taken on the from-Wellington side; the pictures with the seats were taken from the to-Wellington side.

Left by Luke H on July 22nd, 2008

Father, forgive them, for they know not …… At least there IS public transport. Cousins who fled Midlothian to Texas rather than NZ have no choice. The Choctaw and Caddo (read TX Maori) did it better. Shoot, Luke, or give up your guns.

Left by john howison on July 22nd, 2008

I believe this station was erected pre-Graffiti days. Maybe you should be asking why are people under 18(maybe older even) are allowed to buy cans of spraypaint. This is a question that we should be asking our politicians

Left by Steve W on July 23rd, 2008

This is what happens when right-wing governments introduce policies which disadvantage the less fortunate and try to change the education system - poor kids get disenfranchised and feel left out, and so try to find something that makes them “fit in” - such as graffiti. Linden Station (as is Kenepuru Station) is close to one of the poorest pockets of people in the Wellington region, so it is no small wonder this stuff goes on.

Left by Ben Calcott on July 24th, 2008

Ben - first you blame the “right-wing governments” and then you blame the proximity of the “poorest pockets of people” - make up your mind!

Steve - I don’t have any problem with stores voluntarily (or after public pressure!) refusing to sell spray cans to youngsters, but I don’t think there should be a law to this effect.

Left by Luke H on July 24th, 2008

Interesting. Street language is not supposed to be correct English.

My husband - a Vice President of the worlds largest Bank - went to a youth support meeting a few weeks ago. The police took the participants down to the cells, which were covered in graffiti. My husband (a former libertarianz member until people like Lineberry came along and Perigo went nuts) said to the police “Now I know why kids tag. Because you take away their individuality and their humanity. They are trying to get that back - hence they see tagging as a positive, not a negative”.

Police didn’t say anything as that was not what they expected to hear.

You brothers are doing a good job and I hope you will one day revive true egalitarian libertarianism in NZ.

Left by Ruth on July 24th, 2008

Luke cheers for that; I guess it’s an individual opinion. I think that there could be better outlets for their communications (which are mainly to each other-huh). Mainly people see it as an in your face thing and unpleasant; it has a cost to the community. I was in Auckland recently and caught a train there and noticed the new station was tagger unfriendly. As Welly stations are rebuilt over time I think that they will incorporate these types of design. I just think that spray paint cans mightn’t be a lethal weapon but are still capable of making other people’s lives a misery. Voluntary refusal to sell these to a minor I think would result in the following
1) Possible retribution to the stores that refused.
2) Greater rewards for those that did proceed with the sales.
Neither a desirable result me thinks!
Steve W

Left by Steve W on July 24th, 2008

You Libertarianz are basically idiots. You don’t live in the REAL world. How many MPs have you managed to get elected to Parliament? That should be a good indicator of how the general public sees your mob.

Even Stephen Berry saw the light and jumped ship from the Libertarianz!

Bring back McGillicuddy Serious Party â€” at least they don’t forget to register their party for general elections like the Libertarianz did in 2002.

Left by Kiwithrottlejockey on July 25th, 2008

Hi Kiwithrottlejockey.

Ah yes, the dark days of 2002. Six years ago. We’ve come a long way since then.

But enough from me. Why don’t you tell us what you REALLY think?

Left by Luke H on July 25th, 2008

Mixing the message a bit here.

The issue of graffiti, why, and how to stop it is one thing, the issue of public ownership of infrastructure being implicated as implied in the headline, barely gets a look in. But what you imply is that public ownership is somehow responsible for the tagging and that the condition will now deteriorate BECAUSE of the public ownership.

Given the disgusting state of the station in private hands (and don’t kid me that private enterprise would have quickly forked out $50 to replace the perspex on the schedule) it is equally reasonable to assume that private enterprise doesn’t give a damn about the infrastructure from which it is desperately, but ineffectually, trying to profit.

You assume that it will now get worse merely because the ownership has changed, it would be good to see any actual evidence you have to support that contention.

I’m also intrigued that you suggest surveillance as the answer. Apart from the sight of a libertarian supporting big brother strategies, as Bruce Schneier suggests, it doesn’t work. http://tinyurl.com/6mczd3

Left by Earl Mardle on July 26th, 2008

Hi Earl,

Just to confuse things, the Wellington rail system was previously only partly private. It has been propped up by contributions from central and local governments because it is “environmentally friendly”. I don’t have a philosophical problem with the whole thing being shut down and removed entirely, if it doesn’t make economic sense.

So in this case we are talking about a shift from “partly privately owned, only partly operating within the free market” to “completely publicly owned, operating just barely within the free market”.

In general, public ownership presents completely different incentives to private ownership.

Private owners have a basic wish to INCREASE the usage rate of their trains to increase profits, and simple steps such as cleaning up stations and providing rubbish bins will generally contribute to that goal.

Public ownership takes away this overriding incentive to increase custom; the incentive is to “look good” and do things in the short-term (3 year election cycle, remember?) to impress the public. Eg, allow bikes on the trains for free.

Based on previous nationalisations and current trends in the public service, I anticipate an increase in the number of middle-management, executive and PR jobs, both directly attached to KiwiRail, and indirectly related via the Ministry of Transport. I also predict that these wages will grow faster than comparable private sector jobs.

This increase in cost due to bureaucracy will lead to one or all of the following:
a) an increase in ticket prices
b) a decrease in spending for track upgrades, cleaning and painting stations and so on
or,
c) an increase in public money entering the train system (probability: 100%).

Basically, we will see train service bloat. Instead of trimming here and there, and spending only to increase patronage and profits (private sector incentives), we will see spending directed towards lofty goals such as efficiency, environmental sustainability. There will a bloat in upper management and taxpayer money (even more than before) will be pumped into the system. Meanwhile, the actual measured performance of the system will either be stagnant or go backwards.

Left by Luke on July 28th, 2008

Well people, I thought I was having a discussion with someone intelligent yet mistaken on this issue (Earl).

“Profit is little more than slavery in a top hat and its the relentless search for it that got us to this place; we can’t afford it any more.”

I now realise my mistake, and I am going to back away slowly.

Left by Luke on July 28th, 2008

Hi Luke.

Not sure why you are backing away. I asked the blog to let me know when there were replies but I only checked the email for the first time today a few minutes ago.

Been building a shelf for my greenhouse and didn’t have email there.

The problem where systems maximise profit is that there are two parallel considerations.

1. Minimise costs and quality to the point just above the moment where you start to lose more business than it costs to run the system.

There is no commercial incentive for a business to maintain the stations in a monopoly until the unsightliness and the smell of pee actually starts to drive customers away and in a competitive environment there is constant pressure for the infrastructure owner to reduce its charges anyway. That threshhold is apparently quite low, below your current discomfort level because, while you blog the problem, you haven’t yet reached a point where the higher costs of alternative travel are less than your revulsion cost, so even a commercial approach would see further deterioration. A bit like Larry Summers suggesting that pollution costs should be born by countries where the relative economic value of life is lower than the US.

2. All systems such as a rail network are subject to the network effect where, even if a particular station or route may not produce a direct profit, the availability of that station enables travellers to use it occasionally and reinforces the value of that network to them. But a purely commercial approach will simply close “unprofitable” nodes on the network and eventually decaying the value of the system not only to the direct users, but their employers, customers, families etc.

The benefit of publicly owned systems is that they can subsidise that “unprofitable” usage in exchange for the indirect benefits that could not be charged for directly.

Philosophically I am very leery of privatising any monopoly resource or network because the moral hazard is too high, at least public ownership gives us the possibility of voting the bums out.

Then doing it again when the former opposition screws it up the other way.

Left by Earl Mardle on July 28th, 2008

While you are backing away, watch this. http://www.darwinsnightmare.com/darwin/html/startset.htm

Left by Earl Mardle on July 28th, 2008

tagging *is* art. it’s just like chinese calligraphy,
it’s all about technique and the flow of individual strokes. they have only one chance to get it right. even better actually, because it’s on a wall so they can’t throw the paper away.

under 18’s ALREADY can’t buy spray paint. they keep it in a locked cabinet at the warehouse. of course sometimes they can get hold of it, but even if they couldn’t they could just make their art with something else.