Dear Editor

I watched with great interest Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern defend the building of this bridge in Parliament. Where did she get the figures on who will use this bridge from? Did she pluck them out of thin air?

She obviously doesn’t drive around Auckland with her eyes open and see the unused cycle lanes already provided. She is also ignoring the numbers she quoted that would use the Hamilton to Auckland train. Those numbers she quoted when that project was started have failed to eventuate and it so far has proved to be a failure.

It’s all very well to say these sorts of figures will use this bridge but will they? She is assuming that people are going to get out of their cars and, out of nowhere, take to cycling.

I have been an avid runner and walker for many years and go to Cornwall Park daily for at least an hour’s walk. Over many years it has been stated fitness will help us live longer, but have the numbers of walkers in the park daily changed that much? The answer is a resounding no.

This bridge will be the same. Of course, people will use it but only fitness fanatics will continue to use it.

I have had the pleasure of running over the Harbour Bridge. It’s not an easy feat and I was exceptionally fit when I did it.

This Prime Minister is a serious procrastinator and I have watched her quote numbers on many occasions and the numbers never add up with what is actually happening in the real world. Like the Hamilton train, it will be another failure for this Labour Government on top of all their other failures.


Don T

Send your letters to the Editor to sb at

Please put Letter to the Editor in the subject line.

Share this letter so others can discover The BFD.


Help Support Conservative Media

The BFD is truly independent News & Views.

We are 100% funded by our audience.

Support the Conservative Media you love today by subscribing or donating.


Letter to the Editor: The Cycle/Walking Bridge over the Harbour


Letters to the editor are published to encourage debate and are offered for discussion and for alternative points of view. Content does not necessarily reflect the views of the site or its editor.