Government must step up to save vital regional air routes
Loss of regional air routes rips out lifelines for our communities – literally, in the case of Blenheim to Christchurch.
This is a critical healthcare link for Marlborough people needing specialist treatment such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy and day surgery in Christchurch.
As of September 28, that's gone and they face an about four-hour drive, one way.
Regional air services are the backbone of connectivity for New Zealand, not just healthcare and holidaymakers but business, education, freight and emergency response capability.
The Kaikōura earthquake and Cyclone Gabrielle showed us just how vital these regional air routes and carriers are in times of crisis, delivering vital supplies and medical care to cut-off communities.
With extreme weather events now part of life, they are becoming even more important.
Yet our regional carriers that serve smaller centres, supplementing Air New Zealand's domestic network, are struggling.
They face a growing burden of compliance costs across a range of government agencies that intersect with the industry.
This also includes other government charges such as ACC levies and airport landing fees.
Alongside the CAA's hikes, government air traffic control agency Airways New Zealand this week set a 6% average annual price increase.
These hikes amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for regional carriers, on top of fee increases from airports and growing operational and maintenance costs.
The assumption is that operators can pass the cost on to the passenger, but there comes a point where that's not feasible.
This leads to route cuts, aircraft sales and staff losses and once gone, these are very difficult to bring back.
The Government says it wants to partner with the industry to 'build an aviation sector that continues to be a pillar of New Zealand's economy and a lifeline for our communities'.
Its goal is to transition the CAA into a 100% industry-funded regulatory body (it is already 90% industry-funded) and rely on market forces to lift the sector and support regional communities.
This is wrong. As with Crown funding for critical infrastructure such as rail and roading, the Government plays a role in supporting access to safe and secure air services domestically and internationally.
This is in the wider public interest and good for New Zealand.
There are at least 30 countries around the world that support regional airlines in different ways.
In Australia, the Government has made a strong commitment to support access to safe and secure regional air services with a package of measures.
This includes access to concessional loans, something that has been floated here and is part of a possible solution.
Aviation services are essential to our regional communities and New Zealanders deserve access to them now and into the future.
If the Government really wants to support regional connectivity and deliver its economic growth plan, it urgently needs to lend a helping hand to our regional carriers so they can keep these routes in the air.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
2 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Why are we more likely to buy when our options are limited?
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech. Why are we more likely to buy when our options are limited? Good business sense using consumer psychology. Photo / Getty Images Every city has its signatures. In Ho Chi Minh City it was someone pointing at my sneakers and offering to clean them. In Da Nang it was, 'Taxi, sir?' and in Hội An it's been, 'Want a boat ride?' We have resolutely fought off all efforts to part us from our money. Well, most efforts. It was our first afternoon in Hội An, a historical port city in central Vietnam, home to a Unesco world-heritage ancient town. We'd gone in search of a particular tailor, recommended to us by our hotel and breathless English tourists on TikTok. At the first street corner, I got out my phone to check directions, and 15 minutes later we were at a completely different tailor, having been expertly waylaid by one of their 'scouts', who'd seen us and asked if she could offer directions … The next day we did a lantern-making class at our hotel, led by the ever-patient tutor, Moon. Moon asked us what we had planned and made a few recommendations, including one for dinner at the Citadel restaurant at which a friend of hers worked. That evening, we followed her advice and had a frankly delightful evening marked by fantastic food, an absolutely lovely waitress, Anna, and regular check-ins from Gray, the manager (who also happens to be a Kiwi). As with every restaurant we visited, we had to force ourselves to sit back and enjoy the experience; at no point did we ever feel like we had to rush to finish, pay, and give up our table to the next customer. Not like, ahem, at home in Wellington. What do these latter examples have in common? Bloody good business sense based on friendliness and strategic use of consumer psychology. Having recently hosted friends visiting Wellington from overseas, my heart was warmed by hearing them say how friendly New Zealanders are, but it's a step change to Vietnamese hospitality. For example, first and last impressions count or, in technical terms, primacy and recency. We make impressions incredibly quickly and largely unconsciously, and research shows that, while we care deeply about how good the chef is, we have to be drawn in first to find out. That can hang entirely on the rapport we sense from our first encounter. When we left the restaurant, Anna farewelled us by our names (which she remembered several days later when we happened to pass by). That's a personal touch that leaves a positive impression. Ever started to feel tense because wait staff check in on you a little too frequently? Or neglected because they don't check in at all? That's another tricky balance, and one that requires a bit of intuition about the best time to stop by. Another thing Citadel did well, but almost every other restaurant we ate at didn't, was a sensibly curated set of options. Ever eaten at the American restaurant chain The Cheesecake Factory? The menu runs to more than 200 items and around 20 pages. It is frankly exhausting. You get to a point where you no longer care what you order, you just want to make it stop. Psychology researchers Sheena Iyengar and Mark Lepper are probably best associated with the notion of this 'paradox of choice'. In a particularly well-known experiment they showed that people may be more likely to head over to a counter offering 24 types of jam than a counter with only six, but people were 10 times more likely to buy jam when the number of types available was reduced from 24 to six. Why? Because what if you make the wrong choice? The more choices, the harder the decision, and the greater the likelihood of buyer's remorse. So in keeping with this research, we broke our holiday rule and went back to the Citadel and its more limited number of choices a second time.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
The NZ economy is still sick, doubts are growing about the Govt prescription
Are these the right antibiotics? Are the antibiotics making me feel sick? I do feel a little better I think. But it's taking longer than I expected. Maybe I should see the doctor again. Or am I just being impatient? Ugh, so much uncertainty. Hopefully, those who've tuned in for a fresh read on the state of the economy can see where this is going. Never let a metaphor go by, I say! Anyway, here's me and the New Zealand economy, both sick in the midst of a miserable wet winter and worrying about whether our recoveries have stalled. A run of negative data has knocked the wind out of the nation's sails. The bad vibes are being pushed along by a strong political current. Both the left and right are telling us that the Government has prescribed the wrong medicine. The left blames the Government for cutting spending into a downturn. The logic is pretty simple. Any good Keynesian will tell you, when demand in the private sector falls, that's the time for the Government to come to the party. Borrow a bit more, don't slash and burn civil service, hire more teachers and nurses, build more stuff ... it won't be inflationary because it won't be crowding out private sector competition, which is in recession. The trouble is, we're still in the aftermath of the last big spend-up, which went on too long. Labour's stimulus, once we got through the initial Covid shock, did clash with a private sector boom and exacerbated inflation. That muddied the political narrative. It made it inevitable that the incoming centre-right coalition would cut back despite the extra damage that would do to economic growth. In the context of using fiscal policy to drive economic prosperity, you can make a good case that successive governments have got things completely arse about face. You'd expect this argument from the left. But Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis are being savaged even more aggressively from their right flank. The monetarists, the supply-side guys, the neo-liberals, (whatever you want to call them) are berating the Government for not dealing with the national debt and Crown deficit by administering a Rogernomics-style reboot of the whole economy. I doubt that would make the current downturn any more pleasant, but they argue it couldn't be much worse. And the payoff would be longer-term gains as the economy found a more productive and financially secure baseline. Both arguments can be compelling and, if nothing else, add to the concern that the current strategy of subtle market-oriented tweaks risks underdelivering on all sides. But through all of this gloom, one thing we need to remember is that most economists still believe the foundations of recovery are in place. Step back a bit from the mess of ugly recent economic data – the second quarter sucked, we get it! What are we actually experiencing? The labour market is tough. Unemployment is rising, and new job creation is almost non-existent. But this is not a surprise. In fact, while economists do get things wrong, they've been forecasting unemployment to be about where it is now for more than a year. We know it's one of the last pieces of data to turn in any recovery. Unfortunately, it is now overlapping with an unwanted and unexpected spike in inflation. Like a jump scare in the final scene of a horror movie, food prices (with rates and power, and insurance) have conspired to pause Reserve Bank rate cuts and rattled our faith in the recovery. Then there are tariffs and global unrest and all of that. It's not really surprising that it all feels bleak. So it's a bit ironic to be writing an optimistic take on the economy, especially given the rough week stuck at home that I've just had. My view wouldn't have been so upbeat if I hadn't been woken from my sick bed on Friday morning by a text from investment bank HSBC's Australian head of communications. He was asking how far away I was from my scheduled meeting with their global chief economist, Janet Henry and and Australia-New Zealand chief economist Paul Bloxham. Oops ... I was a long way away. But they kindly let me Zoom in later, and I'm very glad I did. As anyone with Australian cousins will know, sometimes it's healthy to be slapped in the face with a slightly condescending, external view of the New Zealand condition. Bloxham told me his forecasts currently make him one of the gloomiest economists on Australian growth. However, he's one of the most positive on New Zealand growth. Last year, New Zealand had the single largest contraction of any economy in the developed world, Bloxham points out. That inevitably comes with a hangover. But if you believe in the fundamentals of the New Zealand economy, which he does, there is no reason to assume the cycle won't turn. 'I suspect why I'm a little bit more upbeat than others is I sit in Sydney and watch it from the outside and go: hey, you've got two big forces at work that are set to continue to lift growth and give you a recovery.' No prizes for guessing those two forces – falling interest rates and booming agricultural commodity prices. The money flowing into the rural economy must eventually flow through to the cities and lift growth, Bloxham says. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen (my words, not his). We've had a big downswing, which means we're due a pretty big upswing to get back to trend, he says. And we've got monetary policy and the terms of trade in place to drive that cyclical upswing. 'All cycles look different. We always ask the same question going through: oh, it's not quite happening as quickly as we thought. 'The question you ask yourself is: is that because it's not working? Is it that interest rates aren't going to have the same effect? That a positive-terms-of-trade shock won't have the same effect? Or are things just a bit different this time around?' Great question. And look, the sun's finally out and I think my head's clearing. Time to go for a walk and ponder it all. Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Editorial: Foreign tourist fee is a no-brainer
Those who have been lucky enough to visit these sites know how busy they have become as years have passed. According to Conservation Minister Tama Potaka, foreigners can now make up 80% of the total visitors. It's only right then that if we are willing to open up our precious places and taonga for the world, then the world should help us maintain them for future generations. 'Tourists make a massive contribution to our economy, and no one wants that to change,' Potaka said. 'But I have heard many times from friends visiting from overseas their shock that they can visit some of the most beautiful places in the world for free.' Many of us have travelled overseas and are familiar with the idea of paying a similar fee to see a country's great sights. Having often spent thousands of dollars on airfares already, it would take a particular type of Scrooge to mutter and moan about paying a $20 to $40 fee. The money that is generated from this scheme, however, must be used to help protect and maintain these places. Potaka said it would result in up to $62 million per year in revenue and he promised it would be 'directly reinvested' into DoC sites. Every tourist operator and Kiwi should ensure they hold this and the next government to that promise. Another promise was that New Zealanders would not be hit with the charge. We already enjoy similar schemes with some of our museums. The foreign tourist fee should be an easy political win for the Government and Luxon is unlikely to face any serious opposition to the move. A no-brainer, which now only leaves us wondering why we didn't make the move sooner. Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
