Hard News: What Now?
914 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 21 22 23 24 25 … 37 Newer→ Last
-
Sacha, in reply to
if central government is going to argue (correctly, IMO YMMV) that the national infrastructure spend needs to be focused on Christchurch for a long time, then give regions the ability to do it themselves.
I'd agree, but major policies enacted by Joyce and co like their roads of national party significance and national resource consent call-in provisions are headed firmly in the opposite direction. Local government doesn't set the rules; central does.
ECan shows what this government is prepared to do if local is about to gain the upper hand and the interests of its prime constituents are threatened. Imagine the arm-twisting from the trucking and construction industries if Joyce were to tip the balance back away from roads.
-
Sacha, in reply to
The neanderthal attitude toward big-budget public transport projects wasn't on display by Joyce until after Brown adopted the rail link as a key policy.
It was pretty apparent right after the 2008 election wasn't it? The unseemly begging to fund already-approved projects like Auckland rail electrification was needed early and as you noted ended up with us being allowed to *borrow* the money (thanks, guvnor). Only after stuffing around for ages, of course.
Much like Joyce's prolonged backroom dealing over broadband which again looks set to transfer large amounts of public money into the same cosy private pockets that have fucked us for decades. And now we're seeing the same approach in broadcasting policy - better buy shares in Sky.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
The neanderthal attitude toward big-budget public transport projects wasn’t on display by Joyce until after Brown adopted the rail link as a key policy.
It was pretty apparent right after the 2008 election wasn’t it?
Not quite so significantly. We knew that he wasn't a fan, but the revocation of the regional tax was couched in terms of "Funding major transport projects is more properly the job of the Government" so it wasn't patently obvious how much he was in the pocket of Big Trucking.
The CBD rail tunnel didn't really penetrate public consciousness, or the mayoral campaign, until the middle of last year. Nobody knew how National was going to jump when it first started getting significant coverage, and the usual suspects amongst Auckland's public transport commentators were fairly universally surprised at just how anti Joyce turned out to be. His initial position wasn't in any way moderate. -
US expat Tracey Barnett writes about what our response to the quake shows us all about being New Zealanders.
If John Key gets the political guts to tax us to help Christchurch, I will write my cheque without hesitation. Not because I believe it will ever replace the history of what we have lost, but because in one short week, since I came to this country from America seven years ago, I have finally begun to understand what being a New Zealander means.
...
Almost immediately, independent water tanker owners like Stephen Bleeker called officials to offer help. When they didn't hear back from swamped Civil Defence staff hours later, they took initiative, sourced water from farms and processing plants, then phoned Federated Farmers, who immediately joined with Fonterra to co-ordinate a fleet.You want everyday heroes? There are lists of diesel suppliers who gave petrol, massive efforts by vendors headed by the Grocery Council, the entire thousands-strong army of volunteer students who are doing everything from shovelling silt to spending the night assembling wheelbarrows, to the "Farmy Army" of machinery now entering the city.
Let me introduce you to a country you may never have realised you know, one I see with eyes different than yours. Eyes that saw what New Zealanders who have lived here their entire life will never say outright, because you prize understatement like a national value.
You think you just got on with it. You're wrong.
As individuals, as a community, as a nation together, your response to this earthquake has been nothing short of astounding excellence. New Zealand may have experienced its darkest day, but it was followed by its finest moments.
You are so used to the unspoken strengths of your national character, you don't see how remarkable it feels to outsiders.
-
Sacha, in reply to
so it wasn't patently obvious how much he was in the pocket of Big Trucking
Skillful campaign management, yes. I really must read The Hollow Men..
The CBD rail tunnel didn't really penetrate public consciousness, or the mayoral campaign, until the middle of last year. Nobody knew how National was going to jump when it first started getting significant coverage
True. I forget sometimes what an advantage you get from following transport blogs and having worked with planners.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
US expat Tracey Barnett writes about what our response to the quake shows us all about being New Zealanders.
You are so yesterday afternoon. I linked to that five posts into page 21 :P
-
Sacha, in reply to
Doh (my word o the day)
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
I forget sometimes what an advantage you get from following transport blogs and having worked with planners.
If "you" means me specifically, I haven't really worked with planners. My brief experience with ATA was ahead of 1 November with a very limited scope around readiness for "day one", and I've not touched the Megatropolis Council since.
I do plead guilty to following transport blogs, however. -
Sacha, in reply to
If "you" means me specifically
Really not my day. By 'you' I meant me. And I'm acknowledging the difference between mine and prevailing public knowledge. Yours too.
Interesting you tangled with ATA though. Imagine we'll be seeing the impact of their work for some time - worth considering for those trying to pin decisions on the new Council still constrained by those big previous decisions and assumptions. Not that I'm saying you made any.
-
Official reports show concern about the stability of the ground under the CTV and PGC buildings, despite both being found OK after the September quake.
The two buildings that claimed the greatest number of lives in the earthquake were built on soft soil prone to a "large increase in shaking" and with high susceptibility to liquefaction.
The risks are outlined in Quotable Value property-hazard reports which reveal common features of concern for the sites of the Canterbury Television and Pyne Gould Corporation buildings, in which more than 100 people were killed.
...
Mr Key said yesterday that a third of the buildings in central Christchurch might have to be demolished.
Before they could be replaced, geotechnical work would have to be done on the land, and deep piles could be needed to reach solid ground.
"We are talking two years before you see much," he told NewstalkZB. "In five years you will see quite a bit, in 10 years you will see a lot."
Rebuilding Christchurch would be "a 15-year job".
And an implication from Key about shaping the city:
He suggested that because of the number of central-city buildings under threat of demolition, Christchurch might develop as a city with large satellite business districts.
-
Commissar gagging to flatten heritage buildings.
The Minister, Gerry Brownlee, told a media briefing this afternoon that if he has his way, most of Christchurch's heritage buildings would be bowled tomorrow.
He says the old buildings have killed people when they toppled during the earthquake and they can not remain.
Mr Brownlee says he would like to see resources go into re-building the Christchurch Cathedral, the Catholic Basilica, the Provincial Chambers and the Arts Centre - "but that's it."
Let's see how reasonable and evidence-based the decison process about this will be, shall we.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
ECan shows what this government is prepared to do if local is about to gain the upper hand and the interests of its prime constituents are threatened. Imagine the arm-twisting from the trucking and construction industries if Joyce were to tip the balance back away from roads.
Greater London Council, anyone?
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
He suggested that because of the number of central-city buildings under threat of demolition, Christchurch might develop as a city with large satellite business districts.
Which, if it's planned that way right from the outset and has all the transport infrastructure to support such a configuration, is not such a terrible thing. Constructing a spread-out city that has designed satellite BDs that're connected with rapid transit networks is not particularly horrible as a concept, especially given that Christchurch's CBD was already dying before September.
The problem, of course, is that the current managers of the national purse see no value in constructing anything that's not a road. Totally bereft of any kind of long-term vision, as witnessed by Double-Dipton's comments about rising petrol prices making no significant difference to the national driving addiction.
-
Paul Williams, in reply to
US expat Tracey Barnett writes about what our response to the quake shows us all about being New Zealanders.
You are so yesterday afternoon. I linked to that five posts into page 21 :P
I'd missed it so thanks; really wonderful insights.
-
A follow-up about a sideline dear to my heart. Paul Holmes writes about the highly-visible presence of NZ Sign Language interpreters during #eqnz media briefings.
The amount he admits not knowing despite his long-time involvement with the Paralympics just shows the silo-ing that's common in disability circles - and the crying need for investment in widespread public awareness.
By the way, the community of people who share a culture and use Sign Language are Deaf with a capital D. Small d deaf means anyone with impaired hearing, most of whom aren't Deaf. Oh, and Sign Language gets capitals like any other language such as English, Samoan or Korean. Now you know more than most editors. :)
But the person I cannot take my eyes off this week is Jeremy Borland, the sign language interpreter at the Christchurch news briefings.
...
If you are deaf and you are arrested you can demand a sign language interpreter in court but that really is the only place officialdom in normal life goes out of its way to recognise our third official language, which it became in late 2005. I had no idea until this week that signing was our third official language.
It seems shameful that only now, five years on, do we suddenly see a sign language interpreter at important emergency briefings. I understand that after the recent Queensland hurricane and the Christchurch emergency, the New Zealand deaf community stood up. They'd seen the service the deaf and hearing impaired got during the Australian crisis.
My understanding is that the media here objected to the presence of a sign language interpreter. Shame on us. They didn't want a signer in the shots. The deaf community went all the way up to the Prime Minister's office and the directive came down.
...
I always imagined signing would have a fairly limited range. Why I always thought that, I've no idea. I wonder whether there shouldn't be a signer at Prime Ministerial press conferences. Why shouldn't there be?
Perhaps in Parliament itself, during Question Time? Probably not. A signer can probably only interpret someone speaking sense.
-
nzlemming, in reply to
it wasn’t patently obvious how much he was in the pocket of Big Trucking
I've thought this too, but I do wonder if he doesn't have a higher allegiance; trucks only use the roads - the real money is in building them. If there's a dearth of big roading projects and all you know how to do is build roads, what are you going to do for cashflow? I do wonder if Friedlander and the Road Transport Forum aren't merely a public decoy for the big infrastructure companies. Joyce is, after all, associate infrastructure minister, with English.
-
Sacha, in reply to
a spread-out city that has designed satellite BDs that're connected with rapid transit networks
I like the idea that existing business and retail concentrations outside the CBD could be beefed up, with integrated transport as you say and fast fibre networks.
I'd add nearby low-rise apartments to intensify populations within walking distance (especially as peak oil bites, making driving a luxury). Many residents of marginal suburbs would have to move in that direction or displace those who do. Future population growth would be around hubs, not sprawling out into the countryside alongside Joyce's big roads.
The gaps in the current cbd could be filled by safe, low-rise buildings containing high-value small businesses (including recreation) and apartments. Together with the surviving current buildings, it would still form one of the city's business centres. Public parks and resurrected wetlands could fill the diciest land both there and further afield. Neighbourhood gardens and orchards everywhere would add resilience, connected to local schools. The balance of the centre's function would shift more towards living and playing than working.
But this would have to make sense to locals. Flipping the city inside-out would take a fair bit of boldness, even if it's feasible. Just the zoning and rating changes would be huge. I for one want to see the current huge sacrifice our friends are making produce a better city for them and their children. But I can also understand the human desire simply to restore what has been there before. And the huge investment in what remains.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
If there’s a dearth of big roading projects and all you know how to do is build roads, what are you going to do for cashflow? I do wonder if Friedlander and the Road Transport Forum aren’t merely a public decoy for the big infrastructure companies.
Possibly, but there's always road maintenance, there's always general civic construction. I don't think any of the major names in NZ road construction only do road construction, and there's always bus-way extension. NZTA has a plan to extend the Northern Bus-way to Silverdale, which is the thick end of a billion dollars. I'm not thrilled by encouraging yet more sprawl, but if we must then I'd rather the support was focussed on public transport.
Plus, of course, I object to throwing taxpayer money at projects simply because it keeps companies open. Adapt or die, and don't expect society to pick up the tab for your failure to adapt. Pay to re-skill your staff so they can remain employed? Absolutely. Pay so that they don't have to, not so much.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
My understanding is that the media here objected to the presence of a sign language interpreter. Shame on us. They didn’t want a signer in the shots. The deaf community went all the way up to the Prime Minister’s office and the directive came down.
If that's true, then I want to know who it was in order to boycott their outlet. That's beyond rude, and beyond shameful. And if it turns out to have been a generally-expressed objection, then a very public "You're disgusting" from the HDC is in order.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
safe, low-rise buildings
I'll point you here, How to mend a shattered city from the ground up, which talks to a large number of senior academics and engineers from various NZ organisations about the engineering involved.
My favourite bit, relative to your comment, is: Beca's technical director of earthquake engineering, Dr Richard Sharpe, who was in Christchurch last week, says there is another narrative in the CBD that has gone almost unnoticed - that, almost without exception, modern high rise buildings have performed extremely well."It really is of concern that people are saying they would never go back into any multi-storey building. I would have felt safer in a building like the PricewaterhouseCoopers building than I would be perhaps in the [low-rise] accommodation I was in."
Tall != unsafe. Tall+old==possibly unsafe. PGC and CTV were both pre-1975 in design, and 1975 was when the standards changed. Hotel Grand Chancellor didn't collapse, and nobody died. That's a pass mark in earthquake engineering, especially when the shake exceeded design standards.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Tall != unsafe.
True. I'm thinking about rejigging the population density.
-
Scott A, in reply to
Commissar gagging to flatten heritage buildings.
The Minister, Gerry Brownlee, told a media briefing this afternoon that if he has his way, most of Christchurch's heritage buildings would be bowled tomorrow.
You know, I sympathise with our commissar. (Gags a little).
I know it's not a zero sum game but, if it comes down to it, and the call has to be made between 'heritage' and 'safe,' I know where I'm going to lend my support. And, sympathetic as I am to the value of heritage buildings, buildings of character, and the spaces and surrounds they can create, it's one of those things where the distinction between "alive" and "living" becomes meaningless when the alternative is "death."
Case in point. I work from an ugly 70s office building in Wellington's CBD, that was earthquake "proofed" about four years ago. I'm honestly glad I'm working there, no matter how ugly it is, rather than the pretty old building opposite that the WCC has listed as requiring improvement work.
Yes, I'll agree with needing a "reasonable and evidence-based" decision process about what buildings survive, both in Christchurch and elsewhere, but I think this is a good reminder that, sometimes "old" just means "old," when it comes to buildings.
-
Sacha, in reply to
And if it turns out to have been a generally-expressed objection, then a very public "You're disgusting" from the HDC is in order.
The Office of the Health and Disability Commissioner has no jurisdiction over services beyond the traditionally-defined health or disability sectors (which don't include CDEM, other local government or police).
They can also only address the quality of services provided, not any refused or absent. This was raised at their last couple of regular legislative reviews, but goverments chose not to do anything about it.
The Human Rights Commission could accept a case about discrimination I guess, but the current ones about sleepovers and family carers should give some idea both of how much sustained effort such processes take and how governments respond to them.
Am looking forward to hearing more about this story myself.
-
Sacha, in reply to
I sympathise with our commissar. (Gags a little)
Heh
if it comes down to it, and the call has to be made between 'heritage' and 'safe,' I know where I'm going to lend my support.
It's a false dichotomy. As others have pointed out, the CTV and PGC buildings that account for most of the deaths are hardly heritage ones.
What's big Gerry going to do, bowl anything he doesn't like the look of? This from a bloke who prefers his conservation areas to be open-cast.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
Yes, I’ll agree with needing a “reasonable and evidence-based” decision process about what buildings survive, both in Christchurch and elsewhere, but I think this is a good reminder that, sometimes “old” just means “old,” when it comes to buildings.
We don’t get to demand a “reasonable and evidence-based” decision process, however. Brownlee can order whatever he chooses, and nobody’s entirely sure what they can challenge. They certainly can’t challenge the order to demolish a building, because the law is explicit on that point, and getting to challenge the process is a hollow victory when the courts will likely uphold the ruling even in the presence of a flawed process. The consequence of rushed, poorly-considered, poorly-debated legislation.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.