6
BUDGET SENSITIVE
Green Transport Card
Overview and context
Key Question/area
Comment/answer
Portfolio of lead Minister
Hon Julie Anne Genter, Associate Minister of Transport
Portfolio(s) of other Ministers
Hon Phil Twyford, Minister of Transport
involved (if this is a joint initiative)
Votes impacted
Vote Transport
Initiative title
Green Transport Card to reduce public transport costs for low-income households
Initiative description
This initiative wil  establish a Green Transport Card to reduce the costs of public
transport for Community Services Card holders and their dependent children. Card
holders wil  be able to travel fare-free on public transport during off-peak travel periods.
More affordable travel wil  give these people greater access to social and economic
opportunities while reducing household costs. It wil  also contribute to a sustainable and
low-emissions economy by encouraging people to use low-carbon transport modes
instead of private cars. The initiative supports the Government’s desired outcomes for
both social development and transport.
Type of initiative
Priority aligning
If this initiative relates to a priority,  This bid wil  support the following priorities:
please outline the specific
•
Reducing child poverty and improving child wellbeing, including addressing
priority/ies it contributes to
family violence
•
Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi and others to
transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy
•
Lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skil s and opportunities
Does this initiative relate to a
Yes – the following commitment in the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the
commitment in the Coalition
New Zealand Labour Party and the Green Party.
Agreement, Confidence and
•
Investigate a Green Transport Card as part of work to reduce the cost of public
Supply Agreement, or the Speech
transport, prioritising people in low-income households and people on a benefit.
from the Throne?
Agency contact
Richard Cross, Manager Strategic Policy and Innovation, Ministry of Transport
[email address]
Responsible Vote Analyst
9(2)(a)
Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   1

BUDGET SENSITIVE
Funding
Funding Sought
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
TOTAL
Operating
$639,900
$50.42
$50.42
$101.48
million
million
million
Funding
2018/19  2019/20
2022/23  2023/24  2024/25 2025/26
Sought
Capital
-
-
-
-
-
-

Funding for this initiative is contingent on completing detailed policy work by mid-2019, and establishing implementation
systems in 2019/20.

The Green Transport Card could be funded from the National Land Transport Fund from 2021/22 onwards (subject to future
Government policies and funding settings in the next Government Policy Statement on Land Transport). This initiative cannot
currently be funded from the NLTF because the NLTF is fully commit ed until 2021. This means that additional revenue
would need to be collected for the NLTF, or activities reprioritised by the New Zealand Transport Agency, to fund the Green
Transport Card. The Government Policy Statement on Land Transport would also need to be amended, with appropriate
engagement, to signal the Green Transport Card as a priority for NLTF funding. To implement the Green Transport Card by
mid-2020, it therefore needs to be funded from the Crown until 2021/22.

1.  Executive Summary
1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Short summary of the
Aims of this initiative
proposed initiative and
•  This initiative aims to improve the wealth and well-being of people in low-income
expected outcomes.
households, and encourage travel by low-carbon transport modes, by reducing the costs of
public transport for Community Services Card holders and their dependent children.
•  Eligible people wil  be entitled to a Green Transport Card, enabling them to travel fare-free
on public transport during off-peak travel periods.
•  Funding will largely be spent on public transport subsidies, with additional funding to
implement and administer the system for creating and distributing cards.

Why it is required
•  Transport provides people with access to social and economic opportunities, such as
education, healthcare, work, and community services. Travel costs can be a barrier for low-
income households, limiting their access to these opportunities.
•  Many New Zealanders are highly dependent on private cars for transport, which leads to
high household transport costs. This initiative wil  make public transport a cheaper
alternative for many low-income households, and buffer them against the effects of volatile
fuel prices and rising transport costs in the future.
•  If no funding is provided, travel costs wil  continue to be a barrier for many low-income
households to access opportunities and participate fully in society.

Further information
•  This initiative has not been considered previously.
•  It is based on commitments in the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the New
Zealand Labour Party and the Green Party.

Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   2

BUDGET SENSITIVE

2.  The Investment Proposal
2.1 Description of the initiative and problem definition
What is this initiative
This initiative will establish and fund a Green Transport Card to enable Community Services Card
seeking funding for?
holders and their dependent children (under 18 years old) to travel fare-free on public transport
during off-peak periods. This is a new investment.

It wil  support the following priorities:
•  Reducing child poverty and improving child wellbeing, including addressing family violence:
by reducing household travel expenses for Community Services Card holders. Eligible
children in these households who do not have access to a car (for financial reasons, or
because they are too young to drive) wil  benefit from cheaper access to social and
economic opportunities via public transport.
•  Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi and others to transition to a
sustainable and low-emissions economy: by encouraging greater use of public transport (a
low emissions transport mode) as an alternative to using private motorised vehicles.
•  Lifting Maori and Pacific incomes, skil s, and opportunities: by making it more affordable for
low-income Maori and Pacific households to access social/economic opportunities via public
transport. It wil  increase disposable income by reducing household travel costs.
Approximately 27 percent of Maori and 16 percent of Pacific people have a Community
Services card.

Why is it required?
This initiative is based on a commitment in the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the
New Zealand Labour Party and the Green Party to “investigate a Green Transport Card to reduce
the cost of public transport, prioritising people in low-income households and people on a benefit.”

Transport allows people to access social and economic opportunities such as education,
healthcare, and jobs (which affect human capital) and to be part of a community (i.e. social
capital). High travel costs often have a disproportionate impact on low-income households, as
travel is usually a non-discretionary activity to access places for learning, earning, and participating
in society.

Future policy interventions to decarbonise New Zealand’s transport system are likely to increase
travel costs, particularly for people using old non-ef icient vehicles.

This initiative wil  help to counter the effects of volatile fuel prices and rising travels cost for many
low-income people. It will enable them to continue accessing social and economic opportunities,
by making it more affordable to reach destinations by public transport. It wil  therefore allow many
low-income people to be more resilient to rising/volatile transport costs in the future.

2.2 Options analysis and fit with existing activity
What other options were
To meet the aim of reducing public transport costs for low-income households and people on a
considered in addressing  benefit, three questions were considered:
the problem or
1.  Who should be entitled to a Green Transport Card?
opportunity?
2.  How large should the discount be?
3.  When should cards be valid for travel?

Pros and cons for each option are discussed below.

Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   3

BUDGET SENSITIVE

1.  Who should be entitled to a Green Transport Card?
•  Three main options were considered: Community Services Card holders, full-time tertiary
students, and full-time school students.
•  We assessed these options according to how well they meet the ‘low-income households’
target population, and how easy it would be to implement a card for each group.
•  Community Services Card holders are already recognised by government as low-income
households (although the lowest-income households are not highly targeted, and some
deprived communities encounter difficulties getting a card). Community services Card holders
do not receive any discounts on public transport fares in any regions. It would be
straightforward to provide a Green Transport Card to these people. This option is being
pursued.
•  Full-time tertiary students are on low incomes while studying. Many tertiary students use
public transport to travel to/from educational institutes. Full-time tertiary students currently
receive a 25 percent discount on public transport fares in Auckland and Wellington, and can
travel fare-free in Palmerston North. Making public transport cheaper or fare-free in all regions
would make it more affordable for students to access tertiary education, and reduce their
living costs. However, including tertiary students would approximately double the Green
Transport Card subsidy costs. Implementing a Green Transport Card for both Community
Services Card holders and tertiary students simultaneously could also have a major impact
on public transport networks, which may not be able to respond quickly to changes in travel
demand. This option wil  be investigated after implementing the Transport Green Card for
Community Services Card holders, and is not covered in this budget initiative.
•  Primary and secondary students live in households with a wide range of wealth. School
students receive a 50 percent discount on public transport in most regions. There are over
850,000 school students in New Zealand, so it would also be more expensive to make a
Green Transport Card available to all students. This option is being excluded. To target
students from low-income households, dependent children of Community Services Card
holders wil  be entitled to a Green Transport Card.

2.  How large should the discount be?
•  We considered two options: fully funded travel (i.e. fare-free public transport) or partially-
funded travel (e.g. a 50% discount).
•  Fully funded travel aligns with the fare-free public transport entitlements of SuperGold Card
holders during off-peak travel periods. Public transport costs vary across regions, so it would
be more equitable to make services fare-free for eligible card holders throughout New
Zealand. The fully funded option is being pursued.

3.  When should cards be valid for travel?
•  We considered two options: during off-peak travel periods only (weekdays 9am-3pm and after
6:30pm, and all day on weekends) or travelling any time.
•  Off-peak travel periods align with the public transport travel entitlements for SuperGold Card
holders in most regions. This would allow existing local trains, buses and ferries to be used
efficiently throughout the day, potentially avoiding significant new capital investments. It could
also help to spread travel peaks, reducing traffic congestion. This option is being pursued.
•  Travel any time would provide the greatest accessibility benefits, particularly for Community
Services cardholders and their children who often travel to/from work and education at peak
periods. However, this would also come at a greater cost. It could also generate over-
crowding on some bus and train services in Auckland and Wel ington that are already facing
capacity limits at peak periods. This would adversely affect service quality, reliability, and
journey times. This option is being excluded.

Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   4

BUDGET SENSITIVE

We have not considered other initiatives that could improve access to social and economic
opportunities for low-income households via public transport, such as improving service coverage,
frequencies, or reliability.

What other similar
The SuperGold card provides fare-free off-peak travel on public transport for approximately
initiatives or services are  750,000 New Zealanders aged 65+, at an annual cost of $28mil ion. Approximately 285,000 of the
currently being
830,000 Community Services Card holders have a SuperGold card. People 65 years and older wil
delivered?
continue to receive a SuperGold card instead of a Green Transport Card. This wil  help to avoid
confusion for card holders (as SuperGold cards offer additional entitlements) and wil  reduce
administration costs.

There are no other initiatives targeted at making transport more affordable for Community Services
Card holders.
What other, non-spending  None.
arrangements in pursuit
of the same objective are
also in place, or have
been proposed?
Strategic alignment and
This initiative contributes to the fol owing outcomes of the transport outcomes framework, which
Government’s
has been adopted by the Ministry of Transport (as recognised in our Statement of Intent) and by
priorities/direction
other transport agencies:
•  Inclusive access - enabling all New Zealanders to access social and economic
opportunities such as work, education, and healthcare: it will make it easier for low-income
people to access opportunities that improve their wellbeing, by reducing/removing cost
barriers to travel.
•  Environmental sustainability – transitioning to net zero carbon emissions, and maintaining
or improving biodiversity, water quality, and air quality: it wil  encourage people to travel by
public transport, which is a lower carbon form of travel than using a private car.

It also aligns with the direction of the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018/19-
2027/28, which includes two key strategic priorities to improve access and safety. It wil  encourage
greater use of public transport, supporting the Government’s aims to encourage transport mode
shift towards public transport, walking, and cycling. Public transport is also the safest form of travel
in New Zealand.

2.3 Outcomes
Overall outcomes
The main outcomes of this initiative are:
expected from this
•  more affordable access to social and economic opportunities, and reduced financial
initiative
hardship, for low-income households and people on a benefit in urban areas;
•  more efficient use of existing public transport infrastructure, by utilising spare capacity at off-
peak travel periods; and
•  improved environmental and health outcomes, and reduced congestion, by supporting a
transport mode shift from private vehicles to public transport.

Public transport services are most developed in large urban areas. This means that low-income
households living in urban/suburban areas with regular public transport services wil  benefit from
this initiative, while those living in towns and rural areas are unlikely to benefit.

Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   5

BUDGET SENSITIVE
2.4 Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation
How will the initiative be
This initiative wil  be contingent on completing detailed policy advice and more accurate cost
delivered?
estimates by mid-2019.

The Ministry of Transport and Ministry of Social Development wil  draw on past experiences in
successfully implementing and administering fare-free public transport entitlements for SuperGold
Card holders, as the processes wil  be similar. Key steps for delivery wil  include the following:
•  Establishing a governance group including representatives from the New Zealand Transport
Agency (NZTA), Ministry of Social Development (MSD), and regional/local councils.
•  Modelling impacts on public transport networks, including their capacity to meet increased
travel demand.
•  Developing more accurate cost estimates.
•  Negotiating funding agreements with NZTA and regional/local councils.
•  Considering any implications for existing contracts between regional councils and public
transport operators under the Public Transport Operating Model.
•  Working with the Ministry of Social Development to establish processes for providing
Transport Green Cards to Community Services Card holders.

Key implementation risks or uncertainties are highlighted below:
•  We do not know how much demand for public transport services wil  grow, and associated
cost implications, as a result of making travel fare-free. We will mitigate this risk by
modelling likely changes in behaviour, integrating data from local authorities. We will also
pursue a capped funding model in our negotiations with regional/local government (similar to
the existing funding cap for the Super Gold Card). .
•  We need to ensure that public transport networks have sufficient capacity to meet demand
without adversely affecting network performance. We wil  mitigate this risk by working with
regional councils to verify network capacities.
•  We wil  need to ensure that people who are not entitled to a Green Transport Card do not
use others’ cards. We wil  mitigate this risk by investigating photo ID options. However, card
administration costs could increase by over $10 mil ion if cards need to include a photo.

How will the
Monitoring arrangements wil  be established when detailed policy work for this initiative is
implementation of the
completed in 2019.
initiative be monitored?
Describe how the
Evaluation arrangements wil  be established when detailed policy work for this initiative is
initiative wil  be evaluated  completed in 2019.

3.  Wellbeing Impacts and Analysis
See tables on the following pages.

Budget 2019: Guidance for Agencies   |   6

BUDGET SENSITIVE

3.1  Wel being domains – People’s experience of wellbeing over time

Domains
Impact(s) description
Who are affected?
Magnitude of impact
How big?
Realised
Evidence base
Evidence
in
quality
High/
Nature of evidence and key references
Moderate/
<5 / 5-10 /
High/
Low
10+ years
Medium/
Low
Social connections
Increased access and
Community Services Card
Communities living in areas with
High
Ongoing
Low public transport fares can help to provide disadvantaged people with
Medium
connectivity between
holders and their
high quality public transport
basic mobility, including access to essential shopping, medical services, and
people, their
dependent children, in
services will benefit most from this
education or employment opportunities. See Litman, T. (2011). Evaluating

family/whanau, and
urban areas served by
initiative. The benefits will be
Public Transit Benefits and Costs, Victoria Transport Policy Institute,
community services
public transport
greatest for people who do not need
http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf
to travel to work/education/services
at peak travel periods.
A review of the SuperGold card scheme found that fare-free access to public
transport has supported SuperGold cardholders to have greater
independence and higher levels of activity. See NZTA. (2010). Review of the
SuperGold Card Social and Economic Benefits, McDermott Miller Limited.
Research exploring the impact of fare-free public transport in Tallinn, Estonia
has found that the scheme has improved the mobility of low-income
residents, including a substantial increase in the modal share of public
transport usage amongst people who are out of education and employment.
See Cats, O. and Susilo, Y, O. (2017). The prospects of fare-free public
transport: evidence from Talinn. Transportation, Vol. 44, pp. 1083-1104
Income and
Increased household
Community Services Card
Travel is an essential activity, so
Moderate
Ongoing
A review of the SuperGold card scheme found that the total financial savings
Medium
consumption
disposable income
holders and their
lower travel costs will benefit
to SuperGold card holders who are public transport users through not having
dependent children, in
household wealth. The coverage

to pay full fares, car travel costs or car parking is around $19-23 million per

urban areas served by
and quality of public transport
annum. See NZTA. (2010). Review of the SuperGold Card Social and
public transport
services, including their frequency
Economic Benefits, McDermott Miller Limited.
and reliability, also affect access to
employment opportunities
A NZTA report found that a key barrier of public transport for Generation Y
includes affordability. However, the report suggests that Generation Y places
the greatest value on service frequency and reliability, including during off-
peak travel periods. See NZTA. (2015). Public transport and the next
generation.
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/assets/resources/research/reports/569/docs/569.pdf
Subjective
Improved access for low-
Community Services Card
To be assessed after further policy
Moderate
Ongoing
Analysis by the EU has demonstrated that public transport plays a crucial
High
wellbeing
income earners to
holders and their
work
role in supporting social inclusion. Social inclusion is significantly related to
participate in, and feel
dependent children, in

accessibility of public transport for those without a car or whose mobility is

included in, society
urban areas served by
impaired. The main barriers facing socially disadvantaged groups in Europe
public transport
includes availability of public transport services (including frequent services,
better coverage, and reliability), followed by the cost of public transport. See
Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union (European Parliament).
(2015). Social inclusion in EU public transport.
Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget initiative template   |   7

BUDGET SENSITIVE
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/40b4f6de-
88dc-42ad-a869-a40b3aa64f81/language-en
Knowledge and
Cheaper access to
Tertiary students with a
Approximately 16 percent of tertiary
Low
Ongoing
An Auckland Transport survey of tertiary student travel found that the most
Medium
skills
tertiary education
Community Services card
students receive a student
commonly mentioned barrier to using public transport to get to campus in
allowance, and are entitles to a
Auckland was a perception that public transport is not cheaper or does not
Community Services Card. Many
save money. This was followed by suggestions to increase frequency of

students travel by public transport
services, and mentions of services being too indirect or slow compared to
to/from tertiary education institutes.
other travel options. See Auckland Transport. (2018). Tertiary Student Travel
Students may also choose to live in
Survey 2018. https://at.govt.nz/media/1977976/tertiary-student-travel-survey-
cheaper accommodation further
2018-report.pdf
from places of learning if transport
is free.
Environment
Lower greenhouse gas
All New Zealanders
Depends on how much of a mode-
Low
Ongoing
A review of the SuperGold card scheme found that the scheme has been
Medium
emissions from transport
shift this initiative causes from travel
effective in causing a modal shift away from travel by car. An estimated 1.4

by cars to public transport

million fewer car journeys per year are made because of the scheme. See

NZTA. (2010). Review of the SuperGold Card Social and Economic Benefits,
McDermott Miller Limited.
Better local air quality,
People living in dense
Depends on how much of a mode-
Low
Ongoing
See notes in Health section below, for links between air quality and human

due to less vehicle
urban areas where
shift this initiative causes from travel
health
pollution
transport emissions affect
by cars to public transport

air quality the most
Health
More affordable access
Community Services Card
Travel costs are an important factor
Moderate
Ongoing
Cost prevented approximately one in five adults living in the most
High
to health services,
holders and their
in the overall cost of accessing
socioeconomically deprived areas of NZ from visiting a GP in 2017/18.

including local GPs
dependent children, in
health services. However, public
Transport is a barrier to accessing health for about 3.2% of New Zealand’s
urban areas served by
transport networks do not
population, and is a significantly higher barrier for Māori and Pacific peoples

public transport
necessarily service the most
compared to non-Māori and non-Pacific communities. See Ministry of Health
deprived areas or communities
(2018). New Zealand Health Survey 2017/2018.

Improved physical and
Community Services Card
Depends on how much of a mode-
Low
Ongoing
Research in Australia found that public transport accessibility was positively
High
mental wellbeing of
holders and their
shift this initiative causes from travel
associated with walking at recommended levels, including for people who are
people travelling
dependent children, in
by cars to public transport
not otherwise vigorously active. See Barr, A. et al. (2016). Associations of
urban areas served by
public transport accessibility with walking, obesity, metabolic syndrome and

public transport
diabetes. Journal of Transport & Health. Vol. 3, p. 141-153.
Research in the UK has shown that public transport users get
significantly more moderate to vigorous physical activity during the commute
than car drivers. See Ferrer HB, Cooper A and Audrey S. (2018).
Associations of mode of travel to work with physical activity, and individual,
interpersonal, organisational, and environmental characteristics. Journal of
Transport & Health. Vol 9, pp. 45-55.
Research in the USA has shown that public transport can provide significant
health benefits. People who live or work in communities with high quality
public transportation tend to own fewer vehicles, drive less, and use
alternative modes more than they would in more automobile-oriented
locations. This can provide large reductions in traffic crashes and pollution
emissions, increases in physical fitness and mental health, and improved
access to healthy food, housing and medical care. See Litman, T. (2018).
Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget initiative template   |   8

BUDGET SENSITIVE
Evaluating Public Transport Health Benefits. Victoria Transport Policy
Institute. http://www.vtpi.org/tran_health.pdf
Reduced health impacts
People living in dense
Depends on how much of a mode-
Low
Ongoing
The 2012 Health and Air Pollution in New Zealand (HAPINZ) report found
High
and costs due to
urban areas
shift this initiative causes from travel
that harmful emissions from vehicles cause 256 premature deaths (with
improved local air quality
by cars to public transport
social costs of $934 million) annually in New Zealand. See
http://www.hapinz.org.nz/
Public transport vehicles with high occupancy levels produce less local air
pollution than many low occupancy cars.
Safety
Reduced injuries caused
People in urban areas
Depends on how much of a mode-
Low
Ongoing
Public transport is the safest form of travel in New Zealand. See Ministry of
High
by people driving light
shift this initiative causes from travel
Transport. (2016). The Transport Outlook: Current State.
passenger vehicles
by cars to public transport

International evidence shows declining per capita traffic fatalities with
increased public transport ridership. See Litman, T. (2011). Evaluating Public
Transit Benefits and Costs, Victoria Transport Policy Institute,
http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf
Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget initiative template   |   9

BUDGET SENSITIVE

3.1 Wellbeing capitals – Sustainability for future wel being

Capitals
Describe the impact and its magnitude
Realised in <5 /
5-10 / 10+ years
Financial/Physical
Decrease. This initiative draws down financial capital to fund fare-
<5 years as the
free public transport services.
cost is
immediate
Human
Increase. Transport costs can be a barrier for low-income people
<5 years as
to access health services, education, and work. This initiative will
access to
improve access to social and economic opportunities, which could
opportunities
lead to improved outcomes for people’s health, knowledge, and
will improve as
skills.
soon as card is
implemented
Natural
Maintain. This initiative will reduce environmental pressures. It will
5-10 years
support the transition to lower-carbon transport modes. Higher
public transport use will reduce the need for private vehicles (and
associated parking and road infrastructure), which will encourage
more efficient resource and energy use.

Social
Increase. Transport costs can be a barrier for low-income people
<5 years as
to travel to meet whanau/family and reach places in their
access to
community. This initiative will enable people to grow their social
opportunities
connections and participate more fully in society.
will improve as
soon as card is
implemented

3.2 Risk and resilience narrative
Does the initiative
Making public transport more affordable for low-income people will allow them to be more resilient
respond to or build
to the effects of rising transport costs in the future (e.g. from volatile international fuel prices,
resilience?
increasing carbon charges or fuel levies, increasing vehicle costs). It will make public transport
more affordable for low-income people, so that those people living in areas served by public
transport networks are less reliant on using private motorised vehicles.

Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget Initiative template   |   10

BUDGET SENSITIVE
4.  Costing understanding and options
This section wil  provide further information on the costs of delivering the initiative and options for scaling and
phasing to support assessment, prioritisation and decision-making.
4.1 Detailed funding breakdown
Cost breakdown
Total costs
Overall cost estimates are identified below.

2019/20  2020/21
2021/22
Administrative costs
TBC
TBC
TBC
Card costs
$639,900  $737,885
$737,885
Public transport subsidies for
-
$49.68 million
$49.68 million
Community Services Card holders and
their dependent children
Total
$639,900  $50.42 mil ion
$50.42 mil ion

We wil  complete more accurate cost estimates during the policy development stage of this
initiative in 2019, before implementation.

Public transport subsidies
Cost assumptions for each target population are identified below.
Target group
Population  Annual
Average
Total annual subsidies
size
average trips
fare
per person
Community Services  590,000
30
$2.40
$42.48 mil ion
Card (CSC) holders
(under 65 years)
Dependent children  200,000
30
$1.20
$7.20 million
of CSC holders

These estimates are based on the following data and assumptions.
•  The estimated number of Community Services Card holders aged under 65 by December
2019 (Source: Ministry of Health).
•  Estimating the number of trips that each group would take by public transport (averaged
across New Zealand), based on historical data gathered from the Ministry of Transport’s
Household Travel Survey 2009-2014.
•  The New Zealand Transport Agency’s (NZTA) average fare per boarding.
•  Total trips and costs could be higher, as people wil  use public transport more if it is fare-free.
However, not everyone who wil  be entitled to a card wil  use it. We have not yet modelled
how much public transport use is likely to change.

Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget Initiative template   |   11

BUDGET SENSITIVE
Administrative costs
Administrative costs wil  depend on what sort of cards are produced (e.g. standalone card, combo
cards, or stickers on existing cards), and how the GTC wil  be integrated with existing Community
Services cards and local travel cards. These costs wil  include:
•  Card design costs
•  Extra staff in MSD’s contact centre
•  Communication materials
•  Computer databases, systems, and equipment
We are unable to estimate these costs until detailed policy decisions are made in 2019.
Card costs
Card costs include the cost of manufacturing, distributing, and renewing cards. At this stage we
are assuming that the cards wil  be simple standalone physical cards without ID. We are also
assuming that dependent children wil  have their own cards.The estimated costs to produce the
first set of cards in 2019/20 are identified below.
Target group
Population size
Cost per card  Postage   Total cost in 2019/20
Community Services  590,000
$0.29
$0.52
$477,900
Card (CSC) holders
(under 65 years)
Dependent children  200,000
$0.29
$0.52
$162,000
of CSC holders
Total
$639,900
Cards will need to be renewed each year, for those that are stil  eligible for a Community Services
Card. If photo ID cards are required, this would increase card production costs to approximately
$12.90 per card (a total of $10.2 mil ion in 2019/20).
We estimate that 15 percent of cards wil  need to be re-issued or replaced each year due to loss or
damage. This is based on current replacement rates for Community Services Cards. This would
add $95,985 to card costs from 2020/2021 onwards.
4.2 Options for scaling and phasing
Scaling, phasing or
Options to scale this initiative:
deferring - including 75%  1.  75% option: Make public transport 75% cheaper for Green Transport Card holders,
and 50% scenarios
instead of fare-free. This would deliver less than 75% of the benefits (but more than 50%),
as cost would stil  be a barrier for many people using public transport. Regional councils and
public transport operators may resist implementing another fare structure that is unaligned
with other concessions that they offer.
2.  50% option: Make public transport half-price for Green Transport Card holders, instead
of fare-free. This would align fares with child concessions in most regions. It would deliver
less than 50% of the benefits, as cost would stil  be a barrier for many people using public
transport. Cardholders would be more discerning about using public transport, so there would
be less impact on the capacity of local public transport networks.

Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget Initiative template   |   12

BUDGET SENSITIVE
5.  Collaboration
This section provides information on how agencies have engaged both within and outside of
their own departments in the development of this initiative. Cross-agency and cross-portfolio
collaboration are both important in this context. Please ensure this section is clear and
succinct, and no longer than one page.
5.1 Collaboration and evidence
What type of cross-
This is a cross-portfolio and cross-agency initiative:
agency and/or cross-
•  The Ministry of Transport wil  lead the policy development, working closely with the
portfolio initiative is this?
Ministry of Social Development (MSD). It is anticipated that the Ministry of Social
Development wil  implement and administer the card.
•  The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) and regional councils will have joint
responsibility for delivery, similar to the arrangements for the SuperGold scheme that
provides fare-free off-peak travel for seniors.
Agencies and Ministers
The following Ministers have been closely engaged in developing the scope of this initiative:
that have been engaged
•  Hon Julie Anne Genter, Associate Minister of Transport
in initiative development
•  Hon James Shaw, Acting Associate Minister of Transport
•  Hon Phil Twyford, Minister of Transport.
On 2 November 2018, Hon Shaw met with Hon Sepuloni (Minister of Social Development) and
Hon Martin (Seniors Minister) to discuss the relationship between the Green Transport Card and
the SuperGold card. The proposed entitlements between the two cards overlap, so we have
clarified the relationship between the two cards to avoid implementation dif iculties.
We have shared briefings on this budget initiative with MSD and NZTA. We have also engaged
with the Ministry of Health.
Impact of cross-agency
We have collaborated with MSD to address concerns about potential overlaps between the public
collaboration
transport entitlements of the SuperGold card and the Green Transport Card. They have advised us
of implementation challenges we may face, based on their experience with SuperGold cards. We
are working with MSD to make administration processes as simple as possible, to manage costs.
NZTA advised us early in the development of the Green Transport Card initiative that there is
currently no capacity for funding this initiative from the National Land Transport Fund, as funding is
fully allocated. They have noted that accessibility is highly affected by the quality of public
transport services (including coverage, frequency, and reliability) as well as passenger fare costs.
The Ministry of Health indicated support for the initiative to reduce travel costs for Community
Services Card holders because transport is a recognised barrier to access to health services. They
also noted that benefits would be significantly larger if low-income households could travel at peak
travel periods fare-free, or at a discounted rate.
Risks and challenges
We are aiming to align the fare-free off-peak travel period for public transport with the same off-
peak period used by the SuperGold card in most regions (except Auckland, where entitlements are
greater). MSD has raised the option of extending off-peak travel entitlements for SuperGold Card
holders, as the Coalition Agreement between New Zealand First and the Labour Party includes an
agreement to introduce a new generation SuperGold smartcard containing entitlements and
concessions. MSD is not currently pursuing budget funding for this initiative, but have signalled
Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget Initiative template   |   13

BUDGET SENSITIVE
that it intends to explore this option further. If SuperGold travel entitlements are extended, Green
Transport Card holders may develop expectations for similar entitlements. We wil  continue to work
with MSD to manage the relationship between the two cards.

We expect regional councils to raise concerns about the costs of implementing the Green
Transport Card (as they co-fund local public transport services), and impacts on the capacity of
local public transport networks. They wil  seek to avoid taking on any financial risks from this
initiative. We wil  establish a governance group with representatives from regional councils and
NZTA to address funding and implementation issues.


Treasury:3998192v3
Template 1: Budget Initiative template   |   14

Document Outline

Green Transport Card