Posts by Angus Robertson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
You know there aren't 13 Maori seats at the moment, right?
Heh.
You know MMP is a system of proportional representation, right?
And we do have stats.
The fraction of NZers in Maori electorates multiplied by 120 equals 12.4 (practically 13).
There are also 2 overhang seats from the Maori electorates.
Assuming Maori electorates have equal turnout* as general roll:
13 + 2 = 15
* Turnout isn't equal and demographics are an issue.
-
The 1993 election – our last under FPP – had 99 MPs, and a fixed 4 Maori electorates. We’re not going back to this. A prospective FPP system will have 120 MPs, including 12 (probably 13) Maori electorates. All we need is Sandra Grey to dog-whistle.
The Maori electorate votes tactically and in 2008 under MMP effectively elected 15 MPs (13PR + 2 overhang).
-
Interesting, in that it suggests Holmes uses cocaine as a downer, rather than an upper.
Could imagine Sherlock Holmes using Adderall nowadays - killing off his flights of genius to make him happy in the mundane world.
-
How frightfully right-wing of you, Steven. Unacceptable degree of moral hazzard and let the market red in tooth and claw take its course? Would you include folks like our host's mother in that general anathema?
Craig,
That's anarchist clap trap Steve is spouting, it is not mainstream right-wing.
Any faithful right-winger will tell you greedy solo-mothers with supposedly sick children need to find their way to affordable childcare through experiencing "the market red in tooth and claw", but respectable people who unwittingly hit a snag with $250,000 (they farmed out as car loans, third mortgages or short term credit) deserve total protection in the same damn market.
-
And if somebody did check them out, who is it who does the checking?
Reputable credit rating agencies, their reputation is legendary.
-
I see where you're going but I already have dibs on The Grouch. Choose quickly, no one wants to get stuck with Big Bird.
Heh, if Oscar's taken guess I'm stuck with Elmo.
-
Furthermore, the high quality transport network can be extended into the areas where B and C live.
If this were indicated by any sort of staged transport plan to extend high quality services to the majority of Auckland, we wouldn't be having most of this discussion.
Creating half-arsed transport corridors to all of the population doesn't really make anyone happy...
It is however equitable, as in paying towards an effective transport system (through rates or rent or fuel tax) should benefit all of us aucklanders with an equitable access to PT. It should not just benefit a select few land owners whose capital is set to go up. Or have I missed the point again and this will all be paid for by ticket price increases and not through taxes?
...and just leads to more sprawl.
Pinehill/Browns Bay and Papakura/Ardmore - extending highly efficient PT to one of these locations will encourage urban sprawl and providing it to the other will result in a compact Auckland city.
-
Furthermore, on the subject of North Shore Rail - what's wrong with the brand spanking new busway?
Buses get stuck in traffic jams caused by cars. Being stuck in a traffic jam on a bus is qualitatively worse than being stuck in the same jam in your car.
-
To illustrate my point I am going to provide a theoretical example using a place with a good public rail service (when the trains don't break down) all of us will have visited.
As a thought exercise I am going to ask us to imagine we are Wellingtonians* in an alternative reality where there is no rail line up the Hutt Valley. Way back when the railway planners looked at the Rimutaka Ranges and decided not to bother.
Now us Wellingtonians have a problem we are approaching capacity on the existing CBD - Porirua - Paraparaumu - Levin line.
Should we:
A - put in tunnel loop subway, perhaps include a spur out to the airport, thus doubling the amount of trains able to use the PT corridor and appreciating that a good subway will genuinely make Wellington a nicer place to work.
B - build a railway line to the Hutt Valley.
* I do apologise. -
Or, to greatly simplify the argument, if X number of people currently travel to work in the city and I build a PT system so that X+Y people can travel to work in the city with the same effort, it makes sense that the city and the area along the new PT corridor will intensify to take advantage of this. The car traffic may stay at the same level, but the city grows by Y people and those people use the PT to commute.
Or to greatly simplify my argument, the majority of Auckland does not live on this enhanced PT corridor. If we are going to shift Y jobs to the city for each job we will have potential applicant A, B & C. Applicant A will live on a preferred transport corridor whilst applicants B & C will not. Intensifying development in Auckland CBD will make commuting worse for more people than it makes commuting better.