I'd really like to vote for Labour because of their courage on 3 waters, management of Covid and some other issues, but boy are they making it a hard sell with some of these stunt policies!
3 waters is just another variant to this stunt - based on blatant fiction, riddled with vested interest and decisions made by a bunch of clowns who have no experience in infrastructure management.
"Hipkins portrayed the projects yesterday as a way to improve congestion and to spread the cost out over decades".
He's right about spreading the cost out. Our children's children will pay the biggest price. And congestion...for sure that will improve, but probably not for the reasons that Hipkins has in mind.
I'm not worried that the tunnels with cost $65B I'm worried they will cost us ecological stability.
If 200,000 people now cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge daily, and it has been suggested that 5000 would cycle over the bridge daily if they could, only a very irresponsible cycling enthusiast would advocate dedicating two bridge lanes for walkers and cyclers as the first step rather than the final finishing touch to expanding Auckland harbour crossings.
However, I do sympathise with the Greens' argument that the light rail from Wynyard to Albany should be the one part of Labour's proposal that ought to take priority.
for that sort of money you would think it would be more sensible to create a second CBD on the northern side of the harbour and maybe they could plan that one properly??? (Fat chance of that happening!!) - doesnt it seem really stupid to have everyone live on one side of the harbour and work on the other. '
And what about the future of work. I live in a small rural town in southern NZ and work from home. Both of my professional staff live in similarly rural settings =- they also work from home, made simple with fibre/wireless/starlink. Two of us have electric vehicles so cost very little to drive to anywhere we have field work. We routinely work with people located all over the country - many are really familiar with but have never met.
All of these hallucinatory election promises are not simply delusional they are so yesterday. We urgently need radical investment in renewables and energy self sufficiency and in workplace transformation - even thinking of wasting so much money on such a useless investment should be criminal offence in tomorrows world.
Hi Bernard. I have seen nowhere over the years a cost comparison of a new "high" bridge over the Waitemata and a relatively low bridge. A "low" bridge leaving enough space underneath for ferries to Northcote, Birkenhead and Hobsonville but not ships carrying sugar to Chelsea, would seem to have significant cost advantages, but over the years it does not seem to be considered. As a long time north shore resident, the harbour bridge was built in the days when Sunderland flying boats were part of the harbour scene and things have much changed since then.
Quite the juxtaposition on the news yesterday to see these eye-watering sums followed by coverage of the Greens dental policy, $1.9 billion per year, which TVNZ turned into a piece about the wealth tax needed to pay for it.
if a tax of $5 per kilo of sugar was imposed it would pay for it - this would both reduce demand for sugar and also reduce the burden of dental ill-health. How is it any different to tobacco and alcohol??
maybe a nuanced tax on all foods with sugars (in the encompassing meaning of the word) present in any food or drink above natural levels - so fruit juices too
I'm of the opinion that unprocessed fruit and vegetables should be cheap, maybe even subsidised at certain times of the year.
Precisely which fruit and veg we should be growing is a whole other conversation, but I'd be gunning for the consumption of as much Aotearoa NZ locally grown, organic, seasonal f and v as possible.
Tax all " identifed as non-essential " PROCESSED and imported food. A minefield but not impossible to work through.
Ie you wouldn't tax baby formula - essential. But you might tax tinned baby food if it contains one of the "identifed as non-essential and therefore taxed foods" like sugar - buy baby food that doesn't have sugar added. To be honest, I'd be telling the producer of baby food that contains additives to do better.
I wouldn't tax food just because it is in a tin or frozen. These, especially frozen, can be just as nutrient dense as fresh.
But I would phase out harmful packaging fast - there are so many better alternatives now, and I'd re-use and recycle every last piece of paper, cardboard, wood, glass and tin.
Throw away the food pyramid and every fad diet and let people come back to eating locally grown, free from pesticides and fungicides seasonal kai.
I'm a big beleiver in locally grown food and community based gardens as a mechanism to reinstate community resilience and agency.
One thing that concerns me about the bidding war to build new houses - people are being forced into housing that divorces them further from the natural environment and particularly, the ability to provide for themselves and their families.
I would be assigning allotments to every new home built. Allotments that were within walking distance of peoples homes.
If people don't want to grow food then their share in the allotment is used by the wider community.
Communities could share / trade / sell produce and knowledge and employ gardeners.
If I was the dictator.....dairy, eggs and meat would be rationed (to include everyone) and considered a luxury item at certain times of the season - I can't bare the harm done to animals, farmers and environment.
There's too many people and not enough land and natural resource to farm animals on a large scale ethically.
If you want KFC grow the meat in a lab. We know we can.
Just wanted to say thanks Lynn for the photo at the top of today's piece. Almost comical in appearance with heads cocked to one side. I had to laugh, imagining that they didn't understand what was being asked. Wrong language?
It immediately made me think of the Men In Black movies. At first I thought it was because of the black suits. But it was because they look like people being told to look into the neuralyzer...
Did you pick one up on your travels to Europe, Agent B?
"According to the authors, the reason for such poor performances is that many of the participants in the process have incentives to underestimate costs, overestimate revenues, undervalue environmental impact, and overvalue economic development effects. The authors argue that central problems are lack of accountability and inappropriate risk sharing, which can be improved by reforming the institutional arrangements of decision making and by instituting accountability at the project development and evaluation stages."
you will find that much of the argument for even justifying these projects will be infested with vested interests as well - it starts long before the contracts are let.
Yes this morning in the thread you said 'sometime in the vague and unfunded future' it seems like both National and Labour are presenting ideas that will only exist there. Somewhere separate and distinct from the reality we'll find ourselves in but the pressure is such that anything goes right now.
This stuff is fiction - severe climate change events will suck away all the $ and the tunnels will never be built; ditto for National’s super highway proposals.
Add electric regional rail passenger services and the need for cars to get to Auckland to help clog it up reduces further.
And upgraded rail network for a world class passenger service benefits rail freight = moar trucks off the road. Maybe we could then get the harbour bridge down to one general traffic lane each way and add a two lane light rail service across the bridge.
The "immediate steps" you suggest would make a difference, are doable right now and are low cost. Thank you for including such pragmatic solutions. They make for refreshing reading amongst the expensive policy madness.
all of which is only necessary because these idiots want to keep the rest of us subsidising the migration and housing supply crisis driven excuse for an economy they have created - and completely disregarding the fact that our balance of payments ie where our real wealth is made (or not) has just taken a severe turn for the worse with the recent dairy price crash. At some point the idiots in charge will need to confront the fact that Auckland is a cost centre not a profit centre. It is dragging the rest of the economy down.
Publicly funded dental care? No, can't, too expensive.
Guaranteed 30 years state housing build programme? No, can't do it, we will have to burden wealthy people with some more tax (or some such lame excuse).
Paying nurse, doctors, teachers more so they wouldn't move to Australia? No, too expensive, can't do it.
Oh, look, roads! In a tunnel! Yeah, sweet as, no problem sure we can fund it.
Brilliant Sarah - just brilliant! If i could, I'd give you a bucket full of likes for that. So earth connected. Do you write more like this somewhere?
Please share Bernard
Agree.
I'd really like to vote for Labour because of their courage on 3 waters, management of Covid and some other issues, but boy are they making it a hard sell with some of these stunt policies!
3 waters is just another variant to this stunt - based on blatant fiction, riddled with vested interest and decisions made by a bunch of clowns who have no experience in infrastructure management.
"Hipkins portrayed the projects yesterday as a way to improve congestion and to spread the cost out over decades".
He's right about spreading the cost out. Our children's children will pay the biggest price. And congestion...for sure that will improve, but probably not for the reasons that Hipkins has in mind.
I'm not worried that the tunnels with cost $65B I'm worried they will cost us ecological stability.
Cities need affordable and efficient mobility or they become...Wellington?
The anti-road/car zealots mostly argue from an identity group concept, and thus are doomed to both failure and a huge opportunity cost.
If 200,000 people now cross the Auckland Harbour Bridge daily, and it has been suggested that 5000 would cycle over the bridge daily if they could, only a very irresponsible cycling enthusiast would advocate dedicating two bridge lanes for walkers and cyclers as the first step rather than the final finishing touch to expanding Auckland harbour crossings.
However, I do sympathise with the Greens' argument that the light rail from Wynyard to Albany should be the one part of Labour's proposal that ought to take priority.
for that sort of money you would think it would be more sensible to create a second CBD on the northern side of the harbour and maybe they could plan that one properly??? (Fat chance of that happening!!) - doesnt it seem really stupid to have everyone live on one side of the harbour and work on the other. '
And what about the future of work. I live in a small rural town in southern NZ and work from home. Both of my professional staff live in similarly rural settings =- they also work from home, made simple with fibre/wireless/starlink. Two of us have electric vehicles so cost very little to drive to anywhere we have field work. We routinely work with people located all over the country - many are really familiar with but have never met.
All of these hallucinatory election promises are not simply delusional they are so yesterday. We urgently need radical investment in renewables and energy self sufficiency and in workplace transformation - even thinking of wasting so much money on such a useless investment should be criminal offence in tomorrows world.
Hi Bernard. I have seen nowhere over the years a cost comparison of a new "high" bridge over the Waitemata and a relatively low bridge. A "low" bridge leaving enough space underneath for ferries to Northcote, Birkenhead and Hobsonville but not ships carrying sugar to Chelsea, would seem to have significant cost advantages, but over the years it does not seem to be considered. As a long time north shore resident, the harbour bridge was built in the days when Sunderland flying boats were part of the harbour scene and things have much changed since then.
Quite the juxtaposition on the news yesterday to see these eye-watering sums followed by coverage of the Greens dental policy, $1.9 billion per year, which TVNZ turned into a piece about the wealth tax needed to pay for it.
if a tax of $5 per kilo of sugar was imposed it would pay for it - this would both reduce demand for sugar and also reduce the burden of dental ill-health. How is it any different to tobacco and alcohol??
And while you are at it, add a tax to high frutose corn syrup as well.
maybe a nuanced tax on all foods with sugars (in the encompassing meaning of the word) present in any food or drink above natural levels - so fruit juices too
I'm of the opinion that unprocessed fruit and vegetables should be cheap, maybe even subsidised at certain times of the year.
Precisely which fruit and veg we should be growing is a whole other conversation, but I'd be gunning for the consumption of as much Aotearoa NZ locally grown, organic, seasonal f and v as possible.
Tax all " identifed as non-essential " PROCESSED and imported food. A minefield but not impossible to work through.
Ie you wouldn't tax baby formula - essential. But you might tax tinned baby food if it contains one of the "identifed as non-essential and therefore taxed foods" like sugar - buy baby food that doesn't have sugar added. To be honest, I'd be telling the producer of baby food that contains additives to do better.
I wouldn't tax food just because it is in a tin or frozen. These, especially frozen, can be just as nutrient dense as fresh.
But I would phase out harmful packaging fast - there are so many better alternatives now, and I'd re-use and recycle every last piece of paper, cardboard, wood, glass and tin.
Throw away the food pyramid and every fad diet and let people come back to eating locally grown, free from pesticides and fungicides seasonal kai.
I'm a big beleiver in locally grown food and community based gardens as a mechanism to reinstate community resilience and agency.
One thing that concerns me about the bidding war to build new houses - people are being forced into housing that divorces them further from the natural environment and particularly, the ability to provide for themselves and their families.
I would be assigning allotments to every new home built. Allotments that were within walking distance of peoples homes.
If people don't want to grow food then their share in the allotment is used by the wider community.
Communities could share / trade / sell produce and knowledge and employ gardeners.
If I was the dictator.....dairy, eggs and meat would be rationed (to include everyone) and considered a luxury item at certain times of the season - I can't bare the harm done to animals, farmers and environment.
There's too many people and not enough land and natural resource to farm animals on a large scale ethically.
If you want KFC grow the meat in a lab. We know we can.
Anyway, I digress.
Just wanted to say thanks Lynn for the photo at the top of today's piece. Almost comical in appearance with heads cocked to one side. I had to laugh, imagining that they didn't understand what was being asked. Wrong language?
Don't speak climate sorry
Cheers
Isn't it great?!
Yes, great photo!
It immediately made me think of the Men In Black movies. At first I thought it was because of the black suits. But it was because they look like people being told to look into the neuralyzer...
Did you pick one up on your travels to Europe, Agent B?
https://meninblack.fandom.com/wiki/Neuralyzer
Infrastructure announcements are amazing for politicking, they get headlines without needing details. This is just like high-speed rail in Australia 😆
Classic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaprojects_and_Risk
"According to the authors, the reason for such poor performances is that many of the participants in the process have incentives to underestimate costs, overestimate revenues, undervalue environmental impact, and overvalue economic development effects. The authors argue that central problems are lack of accountability and inappropriate risk sharing, which can be improved by reforming the institutional arrangements of decision making and by instituting accountability at the project development and evaluation stages."
you will find that much of the argument for even justifying these projects will be infested with vested interests as well - it starts long before the contracts are let.
Yes this morning in the thread you said 'sometime in the vague and unfunded future' it seems like both National and Labour are presenting ideas that will only exist there. Somewhere separate and distinct from the reality we'll find ourselves in but the pressure is such that anything goes right now.
This stuff is fiction - severe climate change events will suck away all the $ and the tunnels will never be built; ditto for National’s super highway proposals.
I have to agree. As the talk of digging goes on and on I can't help but see tracks and donkeys being far more relevant
Please share. The more reason and rationality shining on stuff like this the better
Like your immediate actions Bernard.
Add electric regional rail passenger services and the need for cars to get to Auckland to help clog it up reduces further.
And upgraded rail network for a world class passenger service benefits rail freight = moar trucks off the road. Maybe we could then get the harbour bridge down to one general traffic lane each way and add a two lane light rail service across the bridge.
The "immediate steps" you suggest would make a difference, are doable right now and are low cost. Thank you for including such pragmatic solutions. They make for refreshing reading amongst the expensive policy madness.
all of which is only necessary because these idiots want to keep the rest of us subsidising the migration and housing supply crisis driven excuse for an economy they have created - and completely disregarding the fact that our balance of payments ie where our real wealth is made (or not) has just taken a severe turn for the worse with the recent dairy price crash. At some point the idiots in charge will need to confront the fact that Auckland is a cost centre not a profit centre. It is dragging the rest of the economy down.
Publicly funded dental care? No, can't, too expensive.
Guaranteed 30 years state housing build programme? No, can't do it, we will have to burden wealthy people with some more tax (or some such lame excuse).
Paying nurse, doctors, teachers more so they wouldn't move to Australia? No, too expensive, can't do it.
Oh, look, roads! In a tunnel! Yeah, sweet as, no problem sure we can fund it.