Before Too Long

...before too long, the words will be spoken, I know all the actions by heart...

In a week or two, John Key and Gerry Brownlee will be in Christchurch to announce the outcome of CERA's 100 day blueprint for the CBD.

They will, of course, provide fulsome praise for the plan, hail its visionary nature, enthuse over the multitude of opportunities it provides, emphasize the need to progress with haste and spill over with so many truisms and so much hope for the future.  But then ,they have to, it is not just what is expected of them, it is necessary, there is no alternative for them.

What will it really be like?  Fiona Farrell wrote an opinion piece in The Press and I think she hits the nail on the head.  The scope of the brief was limited, and the outcomes will be, in her words, hollow.

Christchurch will, by definition, head down the right path, in the fullness of time.  The plan that will be released in two weeks time, with full support from the PM, could easily turn out to be expensive and irrelevant.  As often things can be when central government stray beyond their areas of competence.

Paul Kelly - Gossip, 1986

Slave

Puddleglum has written about unemployment and motivation.

As usual, it's a comprehensive, thought-provoking piece.  Have a read.  I'll be there to comment once I can get my head together and (hopefully) make a comment worthy of the post.

Silverchair - Freak Show, 1997

Coming Up For Air

Recess is usually either exceptionally dull or exceptionally lively.  This recess has been dull, though I have enjoyed a discussion with the next Earthquake Recovery Minister.
I'm still waiting to hear back from my local MP in response to the terse letter I sent him about asset sales.  I'd say he's busy, and in any case it's the fourth letter I've written to a National MP in ten years.  Given the terrible response rate (I've had one reply, and it appeared to be a form letter), I have low expectations.
To provide balance, Labour have a 100% strike rate (two from two, both quite comprehensive).

---

The main excitement this recess has been with the Maori Party; they are stamping and snorting about the slight made upon the Waitangi Tribunal by the PM.
It's all for nought.  Tonight John Key is "totally confident" that the Maori Party will continue to support the government.  And I agree with him, that's exactly what the Maori Party will do, because there's nothing else they can do.  Theodore Roosevelt's advice to speak softly, and carry a big stick, could well be heeded by Mr Key.  Once again I'm in awe (and not in a good way) at Key's command of the language.
We'll hear the "we think it is better to remain at the table" line, but that's not even faint praise of the government.  The question is "what are you doing at the table?", and the answer is painfully obvious.  Mrs Turia and Dr Sharples, as the faces of the Maori Party, are in the unenviable position of having no positive influence in government, and no way of contributing to an effective opposition.  They are between Scylla and Charybdis.
The perception that they have prioritised a couple of years with ministerial perks over following their principles will continue to gain traction, and contribute to the end of the Maori Party.

Able Tasmans - Shape of Dolls EP, 1993

UPDATE - My MP sent me a thorough and considered reply.  Not considered enough to change his mind, or his vote on the asset sales legislation, but credit to him.

Now Like Then

I took up a subscription to the Herald again, recently, for a few reasons. One was because they offered a trial free subscription, another was because we could use the paper to light the fire (I usually read it online before the paper version is delivered).

The third is that the experience with a newspaper is different to a news website. I find viewing news on websites allows me to look only at the extremes; news I strongly agree with and news I strongly disagree with. I suppose that's to do with the self-selecting nature of websites. Somehow with paper news I find myself compelled to skim every item on every page and decide whether to read it based on the first paragraph or two, rather than the title of a hyperlink.

Enough musing.

---

What struck me is the strong and consistent anti-rail tunnel campaign the Herald is running. Clearly I've not read Auckland Transport blog enough recently. In the last few days there has been a cartoon and on Saturday two opinion pieces, taking a full page, with anti-rail loop sentiment.

The cartoon first. Credit to the creator, Emmerson. It shows two people in a Jetson's style aircraft (at some stage in the future) commenting on the rail loop funding being approved, with a rejoinder of "whatever 'rail' is". The clear message is that rail is obsolete.

That's a fundamentally flawed message. Flight, especially flight for individuals in a car-like manner, is most certainly not the way of the future until at least two fundamental problems are solved. The first is the ability of people to fly personal aircraft. We lack the culture to do this en masse (the flight rules we have at the mpment rely on uncrowded skies and extensive training), and we don't yet have the automatic systems needed to take the human factor out.

More importantly, we don't have the energy required to power the aircraft, and with energy likely to become more expensive, the scenario put forward in the cartoon is fantasy. Without removing the human factor, and much cheaper energy, rail is much more likely to be the future of urban transport than personal aircraft.

In his opinion piece, Jim Hopkins also suggests that rail is obsolete. The first thing I asked myself is "how would Jim Hopkins know?". As far as I can see his claim to fame is, well, once I find something, anything, I'll post on it.

His opinions are fatuous at best, it would be fairer to say they are baseless.  I looked at the ten most livable cities (Auckland is tenth, at present) and found that what the nine higher placed cities have in common is better public transport than Auckland.  At least five of these are completely or, like Auckland, partially underground systems.

But evidently hydrogen powered driverless cars will save us, and be ready before the rail tunnel can be built. I won't beat about the bush - that's not just wishful thinking, it's fantasy.

The last opinion piece was Michael Barnett's. He suggests that the Auckland - Manukau Eastern Transport Interchange, or AMETI, should be a higher priority than the rail loop. As the head of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce, he has undoubtedly had more opportunity to consider the issue than feather-weights like Jim Hopkins, but that merely means his views deserve more respect, not that they are correct.

The basis for Barnett's argument is that freight volumes from Auckland's port to the inland port at Onehunga are expected to double in the next twenty years, from one movement every 14 seconds to one every seven seconds. It's a subtle variation of the "think of the disturbance to the lawyers and bankers with homes overlooking Hobson Bay" argument. On that basis, and accepting that lawyers and bankers are our equals (not our masters), it's not a bad argument.

I'm yet to see a good mode argument on the AMETI, though. If its benefits are for the movement of goods by truck from the sea port to the inland port, surely rail would be more effective. If it's more complex than that, and it seems likely, then another motorway is too simple to be the solution.

However, I'm happy to reduce it to a funding argument.  Ratepayers can fund the rail loop out of general residential rates. Commercial and industrial ratepayers can fund AMETI from commercial and industrial rates, too.  Yeah?

---

Meanwhile we see KiwiRail doing the wrong thing, with the spectre of Stephen Joyce ever present in the background.  Rail is popular and being expanded around the world.  I don't mind going against trends, leading the world, but this  is a step in the wrong direction.

Exponents - Something Beginning With C, 1992

Keine Lust

The clusterf*ck that is the Kim Dotcom case rolls on relentlessly.  And its such a charade.

Kim Dotcom is not a freedom fighter.

The government are in this up to their necks, and if they had any sense of loyalty to the citizens of New Zealand they would be doing their utmost to set things straight.  It would at least make a good distraction from the whole assets sales mess they have worked their way into.

The Police have done a terrible job, acted illegally, and I suspect, on no good grounds, that the main reason the government are not acting is that they are scared of Kim Dotcom, and don't know how to manage the situation.  That's a nice way of saying it's out of control.

About the only party to come out of this not smelling of something vile is the judiciary.

It's unfortunate that it's the NZ taxpayer will be the loser, when the government is sued for an enormous sum.

Rammstein - Reise, Reise, 2004

Disgracelands

Therapy? - Nurse, 1992

Never Enough

At The Standard there's a post up that asks, in its very first line:

Are you keen to buy shares in Mighty River Power with a dividend return of 4% pre-tax?

No, I'm not, but that's not the point.  Once we get into the comments, "Tom Gould" has the sense to ask:

...where does the 4% pre-tax come from?

And it appears the answer is an opinion-piece by Vernon Small.  My googling skills have proved inadequate for the task of finding the article, but that's because I want to get a few posts written and also maybe sleep before work starts again tomorrow.

So I'll carry on, on the suspicion that the 4% is either a red herring, or irrelevant because it's nowhere near what investors expect to make.

One of the companies I expect will be interested in buying shares in almost everything the government is looking to sell is Infratil.  According to their website, Infratil is:

Infratil is an owner and operator of businesses in the energy (mainly renewable), airport and public transport sectors.

Their strategy involves working with the public sector.  From their website again:

Infratil prefers to invest alongside community interests (City Councils and Community Trusts).

One of the community interests they invest alongside is Trustpower, which is what became of Tauranga's electricity department.  Trustpower is listed on the NZX stock exchange, just like Mighty River Power is proposed to be, and it generates most of its electricity from renewables, just like Mighty River Power.  The difference is Infratil owns 50.5% and Tauranga Energy Consumers Trust owns 33%, with the remaining sixth being held by other parties.

I hope I've established that Infratil are the type of company that will invest in the sale of assets under the MOM Act.  So how much money do Infratil expect to make?

What blows the 4% suggestion out of the water is the first sentence in the About Us section of the Infratil website.  They are quite explicit in saying:

Infratil’s primary goal is to provide its shareholders with a consistent return of 20% per annum over the long term.

20%.  OMG, that's massive.
Trustpower customers are paying enough for Infratil to return 20% to its investors.  20%!  Does that mean their prices could be reduced by 20%?  And why shouldn't we expect the privatised electricity generators to do pretty much the same?

Which only leaves the question of how the 20% will be achieved.  The usual suspects are price rises, deferring maintenance and asset stripping.  I'm picking a mix of all three will occur.

The Cure - Mixed Up, 1990