Cameron Brewer I had to respond to an article in last week's NBR that proposed Auckland give away its Port

to the Firth of Thames! That's economic treason and that person should surely be locked away in the Sky Tower? Dear Editor, I was interested to read your article Move the Auckland Port to Waitakaruru (Friday 15 June). Why would we want to give away Aucklands best economic asset, around which this city was founded and on which its past and future growth is based? It is odd that the author felt we shouldnt move the cruise industry because visitors on cruise ships contribute to Aucklands economy, when the port contributes $298 million directly and facilitates $12.2 billion of trade. The Port plays a role in facilitating almost one quarter (22.1 percent) of the total Auckland economy and the cruise industry would not exist in Auckland without the essential services provided by the port. Who would pay? A new port plus supporting road and rail infrastructure will cost billions. Selling the existing port land wont cover it, particularly as release of nearly 80 hectares of waterfront CBD land would drive down prices. To get best value from the land it would have to be privatised and developed intensely, so it wouldnt be the seaside park of some imaginings. What about the environmental consequences of building a new port in a pristine coastal environment when we have on our doorstep a port that can already handle the largest ships. Moving the port 100kms away replaces an efficient and sustainable form of movement in large container vessels by a much less efficient and sustainable movement by rail or road. I think it is time that we stopped being distracted by unrealistic fantasy ports and focussed on what is really important: getting the best value possible out of our existing asset. Cameron Brewer Auckland Councillor for Orakei Chair of the Business Advisory Panel

Like Share Yesterday at 11:10am

Berend de Boer likes this.

o
Michael Williams Industry grows around transport nodes. No nodes, no industry.

Yesterday at 11:13am Like 1

o
Andrew Hunt You hit the nail on the head.

Yesterday at 11:17am Like

o
Pippa Coom Totally agree with you on this Cameron.

Yesterday at 11:21am Like

o
Matthew Hooton Your letter is absurd. The container port is not an asset at all, let alone "Auckland's best economic asset". What planet are you living on? It doesn't even pay for its own cost of capital. It should be closed progressively over 20 years and the land developed into something that pays for itself without political protection from Len Brown and you.

Yesterday at 11:27am Like 1

o
Berend de Boer Matthew Hooton, you're confusing a potential asset with how it is run. That the council cannot run a port, nor should it, is quite different from: we should not even have a port. Cost for all Auckland's shipments would grow up. Just check the prices to get stuff from Auckland's port to Hamilton compared to trucking it down town.

Yesterday at 11:33am Edited Like

o
Matthew Hooton Berend, you are right that if Marsden Point and Tauranga took over Auckland's role, then it is possible that San Pellegrino, and iPhones may cost a cent or two more because of the transport costs to Ponsonby and Newmarket (I am guessing those products currently cost more in Hamilton than Auckland but am not sure). Auckland is only relevant for products like that, however, because it deals in imports with exporters already choosing to use Tauranga.

Yesterday at 11:36am Like

o
Berend de Boer Dear Matthew, I'm not talking about consumer goods. I'm talking from a business perspective of the difference you have to pay to get your goods to your door. And let me throw in one more argument: it's detrimental to the character of Auckland if we no longer want to see people working, only people partying. Having a port here is essential for more purposes than just financial.

23 hours ago Like

o
D. Mark Harrison Get rid of the ugly bloody thing! We can still own it.

23 hours ago Like 1

o
Stan Blanch Well I'd re;unctantly agree to it staying but not growing a sq cm bigger. Sydney siders did the right thing and got rid of their ugly container port eons ago... Contrary to economic arguements advanced here, it did'nt affect things there one ioata. But its the kiwi way to rip each other off mega bucks...Re transport...had a toyota Camry picked up in Sydney by a truck transporter delivered tpo the Sunshine Coast...$380.00....Qoute for same ChCh to Auckland $2,400.00. This Country7 is totally F***ed in so many senses.

22 hours ago Like

o
Stan Blanch Monthly power bill winter here in Auckland 4 bedroom house $540...3 months 3 bedroom house Quarterly Maroochydore $380.00 ...

22 hours ago Like

o
Stan Blanch Thats $120 a month with the aircon going...

22 hours ago Like

o
Ben Ross Despite I cant see the NBR piece due to it being Paid Content I can have a good guess what they said. And to be honest and being the devils advocate I would agree with them in principle minus location. The better location is actually in Clevedon for moving POAL and despite Cameron Brewer's letter which I am sorry is actually way off keel, relocating the port in stages is actually perfectly

viable economically and socially. I am covering this POAL relocation issue and redevelopment of the Waterfront in-depth (of which is I am still covering in bits at pieces as time allows). My commentary can be found through this index http://voakl.net/port-of-auckland-index/ on both moving the port and redeveloping the Water Front. And if someone is bold enough and with vision to do this of which Cameron has just proven he is not and under take a 25 year program doing this, then having the worlds most liveable city, a fully open water-frontier, a port that is not constipated nor constipating our transport system near the CBD and some nice urban development tacked on to house the people we need to house by 2032.!

Auckland Waterfront Index voakl.net The Auckland Waterfront The Auckland Waterfront is now divided into two separate...See More

George Wood Must check this out with Auckland Council's property guru Dick Quax?

Auckland homes costlier than New York homes www.3news.co.nz The latest Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey found the average home in Auckland was less affordable than New York.

Like Share Yesterday at 8:35am near Auckland

Andy Cawston and Sandy Mulqueen like this.

o
Stuart Clarke and there is a reason for that............

Yesterday at 8:38am Like

o
Corie Jon Haddock Seriously is anyone surprised by this. There has been a growing housing crisis in Auckland for the last 5 yrs and nothing is being done to address it. We have overcrowding, people living in substandard conditions, in cars, garages or on the streets... and we still pretend there isn't an issue...

Yesterday at 9:27am Like

o
Jack Henderson "In the United States, the meaning of "guru" has been used to cover anyone who acquires followers, especially by exploiting their naivet" (Wikipedia)

Yesterday at 9:28am Edited Like 1

o
Mike Rippin What a load of rubbish /manhattan apartments :upper east side /the village /this NYC property is way more expensive than comparable Auckland CBD and inner city property , wickipedia?

Yesterday at 9:40am via mobile Like

o
Sandy Mulqueen Its spin... just what for is the question...

21 hours ago Like

o
Dick Quax An interesting Campbell Live story on Auckland's extraordinary housing prices. It's been brought about by a number of factors. The Auckland construction industry needs to build 12,000 houses a year to meet the demand of population growth and presently building only 3,000 and that's been the case for 4/5 years. Councils insist on strict adherence to urban growth boundaries which restricts the supply of land available driving prices up even further. Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey looks at house prices related to incomes so while housing in New York might be more expensive pay there is also much higher. The most stable and most affordable are those markets such as Houston, Texas where land supply is not restricted as it is in Auckland.

19 hours ago Like

o
Mike Rippin Pretty basic :go up ! Re more high rises /

17 hours ago via mobile Like

o
Ben Ross Auckland Council missed the boat on getting house affordability back on track via the Long Term Plan and Auckland Plan. There is one more chance left and that is the Unitary Plan which is going to be the main primary document for our subsequent urban development. Message to Council with the Unitary Plan; stop planning every aspect of our lives and respect private property rights. Allow choice and allow us our freedom. The environment is already safeguarded via the RMA per se. Plan less, not more. BTW Dick Quax you been talking to Professor Wendell Cox again or reading those Owen McShane articles? Just asking