The Government is proposing to dramatically change the way roads are managed in New Zealand. It’s proposals are described in the consultation document Better Transport Better Roads (Ministry of Transport, 1998) and supporting documents. Copies of these can be obtained from the Ministry of Transport. This present paper is a brief summary of the proposal’s implications for cyclists and cycling as determined from reading Better Transport Better Roads alone. Submissions on the proposals close on 30 April 1999 and should be sent to: "Better Transport Better Roads, Ministry of Transport, PO Box 3175, Wellington".

The following are some key features of the proposed reforms (pp.7-8):

• A regionally based local road company would take over running local roads from City and District Councils (p.7). These councils "would lose powers that have road management and traffic safety as their primary purpose" (p.33).
• "A Crown-owned company (Transit New Zealand Limited) would operate State highways and motorways".
• "Another Crown-owned company, Transfund New Zealand Limited would provide road funding".
• "Their main objective would be to operate as successful businesses in the provision of roads and road-related services". "They would also be required to be good employers, and exhibit a sense of social responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community" (p.32).
• "Rates would no longer be used to fund roads".
• "Local authorities would own all the shares in local road companies and appoint their directors. They would have the ability to comment upon or change a local company’s Statement of Intent (which defines the company’s accountabilities). Local authorities would also exercise oversight of road companies through their district plan procedures" (p.14).
• "There is no provision for pedestrians or cyclists to be charged to use roads" (p.17).

Under the proposals, segregated cycle lanes constructed on the road reserve, but off the carriageway, are regarded as "amenities". Unless they chose otherwise, local authorities would retain their ownership and management rights over amenities like cycle lanes off the carriageway (p.49). "If a local authority did not wish to retain ownership or management rights over amenities, these would pass to the public road company" (p.49). "Local authorities would also be able to declare sections of the road corridor including parts of the carriageway, as land required for ‘public space development’ purposes" (p.14).

However, the Establishment Commission "would have the power to approve or decline all declarations of this kind " (p.50). " The three members of the Establishment Commission would be chosen primarily for their commercial skills and their ability to oversee and manage the formation of local road companies" (p.29). "…There would be a Corridor Management Agreement between each public road company and the local authority to provide the link between the management of the road and the operations of the local authority" (p.51). Any subsequent changes to the Corridor Management Agreement would require negotiation and full justification (p.51).

"A local authority would be able to purchase on-carriageway and off-carriageway services from a road company if there were other particular things the community wanted" (p.14). Better Transport Better Roads asserts that ‘access rights of …cyclists would be unchanged" (p.3) and that "road safety would improve for …cyclists…" (p.65). It also states, "there is no provision for …cyclists to be charged to use roads’ (p.17). However there are other statements in the document which suggest that, under certain circumstances, provisions for cyclists on roads could be threatened. For example:

1. "The powers to manage roads and to control roadside parking would pass to the new road companies" (p.33). Removal of car parking from one side of existing arterial roads is a common and inexpensive means of creating space to retro-fit cycle lanes. This measure would possibly be in conflict with a road company’s main objective to be as profitable as non-public companies.
2. " A public road company would take over … cycle lanes on the carriageway …. It would be required to retain these unless the local authority agreed to their removal or removal was required for the public road company to meet its safety management responsibilities" (p.50, emphasis added).
3. "The responsibilities for producing the initial Corridor Management Agreements would lie with the road companies’ establishment boards in negotiation with the local authorities. The Establishment Commission would provide guidelines, and would ensure that any initial Corridor Management Agreement did not unduly prejudice the purpose of changes in road management and funding and the ability of the road company to act as a successful business, or discharge its safety and environmental obligations" (p.51, emphasis added).

Better Transport Better Roads proposes "that all public road companies adopt a safety management system approved by the Director of Land Transport Safety as soon as practicable after their formation". The system would cover all road users, including cyclists, and would focus on road factors as causes of crashes (p.45). A safety management system would, amongst other things (pp.44-45):

1. "Set out the traffic management and road engineering standards, guidelines, manuals, codes of practice, and the proposed expertise and procedures for providing a safe road network";
2. "Provide for regular internal audits…to ensure compliance"; and
3. "Provide for the development of a safety strategy to identify problems and solutions".

"The Director of Land Transport Safety would have powers to ensure compliance and to address serious road safety concerns" (p.46). The design guidelines included in Austroads Part 14 Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice: Bicycles could possibly form the basis for the road engineering standards with respect to provisions for cyclists. Better Transport Better Roads proposes that the Government would continue to purchase safety services, a range of education and enforcement activities from the Police and the Land Transport Safety Authority (p.44).

Under Better Transport Better Roads, "… a Regional Council would be allowed to develop a strategy for land transport in consultation with local authorities and other interested parties, including road service providers and the public of the region" (p.54).

"The legislation underpinning the National Land Transport Strategy would be revoked. In its place the Minister of Transport would release a National Transport Statement setting out the Government’s broad policy objectives, and the outcomes that the Government seeks to achieve through these objectives, covering the transport sector overall" (p.54).

It will be vital that all parties interested in promoting cycling play an active part in determining the shape of roading reform and participate in the implementation of the reforms to ensure that access for cyclists throughout urban and rural areas is coherent, direct, attractive, safe and comfortable. If the roading reform proposals are adopted, any existing Cycle Network Strategy Reports could form a basis for negotiations between City and District Councils and the public road companies regarding provisions for cyclists in the relevant Corridor Management Agreements.