Judicial Review To Challenge NZTA's Decision-making
Frustrated by NZ Transport Agency’s ongoing failure to give effect to the Government’s priorities for land transport, advocacy organisation MOVEMENT has lodged a Judicial Review to challenge NZTA’s decision-making.
Chair of MOVEMENT, Christine Rose says: “The Government Policy Statement (GPS) on Land Transport has specific priorities for NZTA which includes fewer private car trips and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. However, despite being legally required to do so, NZTA continues to develop transport plans that are not consistent with nor ‘give effect to’, these important priorities.
Road transport accounts for 42% of New Zealand’s CO2 emissions and is our fastest growing source of CO2 emissions, having increased 101% since 1990. This is more than double the growth rate in our population over the same period. It is time for NZTA to be held to account. NZTA’s transport investments, if left unchallenged, will result in decades of increased emissions.”
Patrick Morgan, spokesperson for Cycling Action Network says “The Government’s policy on transport recognises that we need a new approach to transport, as has Parliament in declaring a Climate Emergency. NZTA must stop prioritising private motor vehicles over the more sustainable modes of transport. This is why we have some of the world’s highest per capita rates of car use, greenhouse gas emissions and obesity.”
President of Living Streets Aotearoa and MOVEMENT Trustee, Andy Smith says “Our Judicial Review is focussed on NZTA’s long-term options for the Nelson Future Access Project.
MOVEMENT considers that NZTA has not given effect to the Government Policy Statement on transport, despite being required by the Land Transport Management Act.”
“We want NZTA to respect its legal obligations by giving effect to the Government’s priorities for transport. New Zealand and the planet will be a better place for it. Our efforts over the last 6 months have failed to convince NZTA to look at this issue. Having exhausted other options, we feel we have no other option than this legal path.”