Posts by Gareth Ward
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
NZI estimates total cost is $4 to $5 billion and Nats are saying $3 to $5 billion.
DPF could you give me a better idea of the rough envisaged model here? (Can't seem to register at your site)
The NZI model was built on a price-regulated monopoly that buys back the existing fibre and copper networks but this doesn't meet the criteria Mr Key put around this. So the suggested NZI model of FibreCo would not be one that National would support?
I can't see how an efficient PPP will work in those criteria but hoping you have a better view of the model?
-
I'm all for an injection of Government money if that's the difference between this happening and not - I think a $1.5b initial investment would see a fairly good "social ROI" within a few years.
But I can't see how this plan is going to work given that these are the criteria:The investment will be made alongside additional private sector investment and will be subject to a series of five principles, said Key. These include the network being open-access; ensuring the investment does not see already-planned investments cut back; ensuring increased broadband services; and making sure the investment does not end up lining the pockets of incumbent industry players.
Since it was announced yesterday I've been trying to work out a model that would fulfil all those and can't really think of one... Anyone with a better take on open-access infrastructure investment planning?
-
So a giant corporate welfare scam then. I should have known...
Well I won't say that personally (due to the lack of any clarity around how it's to be delivered), and to his credit he claims one of the guiding principles will be to NOT line the pockets of existing players. But I could see it being one of their PPP infrastructure investments where a public company tenders to be the delivery partner and receives funding to make up the investment shortfall...
-
I/S - Agreed. At least the NZI take on it actually had a suggestion as to the vehicle for ownership and delivering. However Key refers to "intervention" and "harnessing private innovation" (or similar) so doubt they are angling for a Transit of Broadband, looks more like a government funding of private investors to do it...
-
National is planning a massive public investment in broadband.
Colour me intrigued - very light (in fact, empty) on the mechanism they intend to use to deliver this, but this is basically the NZI broadband plan but presumedly sans a nationalised FibreCo...
-
At the risk of being insensitive, the whole reaction of the Elim church people has seriously creeped me out. Is it just me, or is treating the death of your children primarily as some sort of test from God just further proof that all fundies of whatever religious persuasion have a tendency towards being death cults?
The only tendency in that statement seems to be your reaching for something to bash religion with.
I'm as critical of the one-eyed bigotry that can come with Christianity and not at all religious myself, but in this case the good sides of it have shown through - compassion leading to a refusal to play the blame game without evidence, a community that comes together to support those in their grief, a personal belief that aids in dealing with grief over death etc etc. To be "creeped out" by someone's faith is possibly excusable; to claim that an individuals reasonable personal response to the death of their child makes their religion a death cult is unfortunately another example of one-eyed bigotry to me.
Personally I think all involved in that community have been extraordinary. The principal of that school in particular.Let alone giving front-page credence to one survivor's belief that a deity personally intervened to suspend the laws of nature in order to save him (while neglecting to do the same for his mates and instructor). It's one thing for a survivor to think this. It's another for 'serious' media outlets to lend it respectability.
And sorry, but this is even worst - lending credibility? This was reporting of an individuals experience and response to it. Sorry that it doesn't accord with your views on thing but it was his response and as such is part of the story.
-
Whilst not as all-encompassing as the US 3-strikes, reading the SSTs cut of the possible law, you can still see some pretty extreme outcomes:
- Robbing a dairy with a gun (Commission of a crime while using a firearm) seeing you put away for 25 years.
- Assault with intent to injure - put away for 25 years.Seems a bit over the top to me. Perhaps we need stronger direct sentencing guidelines for serious crimes where there is prior record but the mechanisms are already there and I'm not convinced they're under utilised.
-
That NDU report is extraordinary and I can't believe this is the only place I've seen to bring it up? The DoD's own school of military strategy, chaired by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calls the entire thing a massive balls-up and seem to be setting it up for use as a teaching example of "what not to do", and this ISN'T leading Iraq news? Odd.
Can't get through the link to the actual report though.They do raise this point though, which I agree with:
"Strong majorities of both Iraqis and Americans favor some sort of U.S. withdrawal. Intelligence analysts, however, remind us that the only thing worse than an Iraq with an American army may be an Iraq after a rapid withdrawal of that army."
AKA We fucked this up so badly, we need to get it back to a level of stability before we can, in good conscience, leave them to it... -
Business is flocking to the global warming scenario in droves, but we shouldn't think that that is because they think it's caused by man's environmental mismanagement. They only support it becasue it's in their own self-interest to do so...much like our politicians.
Yes, and that's largely the point of the UNFCCC's market-traded view that is being begun under Kyoto - utilise market mechanisms to encourage self-serving behaviour that leads to desired low emission outcomes. The related view being that reducing emissions is in fact self-serving from a cost perspective once external costs of emitting are internalised.
Plus there's the campaign to make consumers demand it more and again make it self-serving for business. -
Well, sorry Ben but I won't be saying "diddums" if infantile crap like this is going to be on the agenda at the National Party conference in a few months, or we're going to have to squirm through this in the House.
Those were both APPALLING. For the last while I've been a bit of a Labour apologist, tended to claim Cullen's arrogant streak was simply a bearable downside of his intelligence, they were focussing on a good platform of work and damn the media image etc etc but I have turned from that now. The desparate, tired, do-almost-anything-to-cling-to-power-but-with-no- discernably-significant-program-of-work-to-implement-once-they're-there feeling is finally sticking with me over the last couple of weeks. I'll still contend that they've done great work, but I now can't help but feel it's all behind them.
Of course I have no view from the "other side" to make me anything more than "chronically undecided", but that's a cooling from my previous view of "undecided but would vote Labour in a snap election based on no view of the alternative and no particular dislike of the incumbent".