Posts by Matthew Poole
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And on public transport matters, especially things related to the money, Josh Arbury's blog really is the last word on explaining NZTA's numbers. As one example, he suspects that the true benefit-cost-ratio for the Puhoi extension could be as low as 0.19, based on info from NZTA.
-
Where Auckland's rail network screws up is that it doesn't go anywhere. There are no trains to the airport or North Harbour or Howick. Aucklanders don't use rail because they mostly live and/or work far far away from any rail line. If we are going to expand Auckland's rail network we should try to do it somewhere useful.
Rail to the Shore is a long way off into the never-never. Just getting it across to Devonport or Takapuna will be at a cost to make Joyce's wet-dream highway to Warkworth look cheap, never mind out to North Harbour.
And you want rail to go more places, but on what network capacity? Britomart, with a single line in and a single line out, cannot take much increase in service frequency from current levels. It's almost at capacity, due to the moronic design, and now you want to add more rail lines around Auckland? The tunnel would double capacity, as others have said, by providing a through-route. Two lines in, two lines out. For any expansion of the network, the tunnel must happen. The addition of the Onehunga Line next month will just about completely take up what little slack remains in Britomart's capacity until we get the electric trains in 2013 along with decreased turn-around time due to their faster acceleration.
If you're going to argue for expansion of the network, at least understand what the current limits are before pooh-poohing significant capital works in favour of something else. I agree that the network needs to be expanded out to the Airport and through Pakuranga/Botany, but that can't happen while Britomart can only have one train come in and one train go out every five minutes.
-
DR, I don't think diplomacy is ever effective when you've got an ideological justification for introducing something. Unless one takes the Will Rogers definition of diplomacy: Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
-
Islander, I'm more disgusted that Granny is asserting that he's not going to go to prison. What a pathetic country we are, when you can rip off charities and the taxpayer in a manner that could attract a seven-year jail sentence and still not see the inside of a cell. No wonder we have problems with white-collar crime.
-
I do wonder whether someone with sufficient money might bring an appeal before the High Court as to the CSC's registration as a charity. It's allowed for in the law, assuming that someone associated with NIWA might argue that they're aggrieved by the Commission's decision to allow charitable status to a lawsuit manufacturer, but the time to lodge such appeal is rapidly running out.
-
Those I met on the other side of the tracks had very firm views about those who laid claim to being from the first ships.
A memorable quote from one of the supporting characters in Archer's Kane and Abel was along the lines of "If everyone whose descendants claim that they were on the Mayflower was actually on board, it would've sunk hundreds of times over." I imagine it's a not-dissimilar situation with Christchurch's first settlers?
-
I'm imagining that the first application from NIWA in response will be a request for summary judgement, seeking to have the judge dismiss the entire case with prejudice (cannot be amended and re-filed). Whether that happens depends largely on the judge to whom the case is assigned but, unless they can wheel in some hefty scientific resumes to counter the pages of post-nominals and publications that will be appended to the names of anyone cited in NIWA's application, I suspect CSC may well find that, as IS says, judges tend to be fairly deferential to demonstrably-expert witnesses in a field.
-
If they're aiming for a breach of statutory duty by NIWA, it'll be this section of the Crown Research Institutes Act 1992 that they're hoping to use.
At a guess the allegation will be that NIWA has failed to "comply with any applicable ethical standards" (s5(1)(d)) because an adjustment is unethical (their implication, not mine), and maybe that its climate change research is not being "undertaken for the benefit of New Zealand" (s5(1)(a)) and/or is a failure to to exhibit "a sense of social responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which it operates and by endeavouring to accommodate or encourage those interests when able to do so" (s5(1)(f)).The catch for all of those sections is that they're suggestive ("should") rather than mandatory ("shall"), which is a hurdle in the first place unless there's case law (Graeme?) that says that "should" is equal to "shall".
-
DR, that's very true. And with the economy showing every sign of going back into recession (not that I consider a claimed 0.6% growth-rate to be proof of anything), people will be even more wary of anything that could become their reality in the near future.
-
I've noticed the tone of several opinion pieces on the swing
The welfare thing seems to have been the tipping point. Mining raised eyebrows, but wasn't hugely scandalous amongst the Herald's intellectual luminaries. Maybe because they didn't see a problem with it, or maybe because the immediate public backlash was so loud and ferocious that they didn't want to be seen as being cravenly opportunistic in fomenting rebellion.
Now, though, the welfare issue, particularly the oh-so-trite-and-predictable results from the WWG, looks like it could be the step too far. Whether or not we agree with their political leanings, they're not stupid. They can see an ideological whitewash with the best of them, and unlike mining National has firmly lashed its colours to the mast of dumping on bennies. A flip-flop at this point, especially when National's most ardent supporters firmly believe that there's a huge class of bennies-for-life, really will shred whatever remnants of clothing the credibility emperor has left.