Posts by Rich of Observationz
-
Speaker: Party Central, structures and silos, in reply to Sacha,
I see the council talking about education and economic development - things they have very little control over.
If they feel the frameworks should be changed so that these things are devolved they should say so = otherwise they're just producing a collection of platitudes.
-
Hard News: Towards the Truth, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Tim O'Reilly says the protesters are scruffy. And probably smell. Can't the revolution be made invite-only?
-
while they drink heavily, they do not get aggro or stupid when drunk
Firstly, I think it's down to perception of what "aggro or stupid" is. For this event, TPTB have obviously decided on a fairly high tolerance level. For a music event (or the one-day cricket), less so. It's interesting that the liquor laws (as interpreted) require rigid segregation of 18+ drinkers from under 18's at Big Day Out, but not at a sporting event.
Secondly, NZ has a violence problem much more than it has a drinking problem. Even anti-violence advertising is often steeped in the implied threat of violence (e.g. posters with a big bloke looking staunch). If one's conditioned that violence is ok (always under defined circumstances) then it's more likely that one will become violent when in an altered state.
-
Speaker: Party Central, structures and silos, in reply to BenWilson,
I've never seen the point of that check. Surely any trucky that knew they were overweight or overhours would go the other way. Or do they get a docket or something to go there when they leave the port?
Also, I've never understood why Symonds St didn't get weight and height limits after the the link road was built?
-
Speaker: Party Central, structures and silos, in reply to BenWilson,
You think it would really be a good idea to have spent another billion dollars of public cash? I guess the only benefit would be to have further stuffed things up for the Nats.
(the other downside of a big stadium is the way it looks when Auckland are playing Taranaki to a crowd of 6,000 in the pissing rain).
One day, there'll be enough money to put the wharves under a huge concrete roof after the fashion of U-boat pens. Or move the docks to the other side of Waiheke, linked by a big bridge.
-
Speaker: Party Central, structures and silos, in reply to Graham Dunster,
Well, Helensville is centred on a town 90 minutes drive from Auckland, so is only partially an Auckland electorate. Both seats are National fiefdoms in almost any circumstance - any human candidate could win, in fact any earthly creature would stand a reasonable chance. (I am aware of Dr Brash's exceptionalism in this regard).
This just illustrates the fallacy that electorate MPs are in any way more accountable than list ones - Key & McCully have guaranteed seats in parliament whatever happens to their local popularity, or that of the party.
-
If efficiency were the only criteria, NZ doesn't need local government. We have less population than many cities, and could run all services and regulation on an NZ-wide basis.
The reason for local government is to provide accountability. Different communities have different wants and needs. For real democracy, communities (which might not even be geographical) have a right to decide on matters that affect them at their own level - not have these decisions imposed from above.
Of course, there are areas where a community's decisions can impact those outside. If a wealthy area were to opt out of service provisions (as happens a lot in the US - see Beverly Hills) then that impoverishes other communities.
Is the RWC one of those wide-impact areas? I'd say not. If Auckland wants to make a hash of it, people from outside the city can choose to participate elsewhere. If Aucklanders don't like the way their councils efforts have turned out, they get a remedy at the ballot box.
Which says to me that central government should get out and leave Auckland to sort it, or not.
-
I'd take the general sycophancy and incoherence as par for the course, but what are the journalists of the NZ media doing missing this story?
(hat tip: Juha)
-
the government would be taking control of ... two working commercial wharves
Do they have any idea what this will cost? As noted, there are ships booked to dock on those wharves with maybe over a billion dollars of cargo in the next five weeks.
They'll have to be rescheduled, port users compensated, freight trucked from Wellington and Tauranga, compensation paid, workers paid to sit idle.
Even if they wanted to, I'm not convinced it would be legal for POAL to just gift the use of the wharves to the government. Fiduciary duty and that? The alternative is that the government underwrite a huge and open-ended bill.
I don't undertand the ideology - can anyone explain why our government believes that an essential service such as electricity supply is most appropriately provided by the private sector, while running a glorified bar is an essential state function?
-
Steve & Sasha: your bickering session is going ok, but I'd suggest taking a few lessons from the real pros at this.