The NZ Herald report that the government expects Kiwirail to be financially self sustaining is a relief rather than a joy. It's the bare minimum I should hope for.
Meanwhile, the Labour Party, which destroyed $330 million of taxpayers wealth by buying this ailing business, after already letting it off the hook for not paying all track access charges that were owed, is desperately wanting you to pay more of your money to subsidise the freight movements of businesses. Labour can't give a single good reason why the users of rail freight deserve privileged treatment, and besides which, farmers are NOT dependent on Kiwirail. Fertiliser can go by road, and the milk that goes by rail is for Fonterra.
The economically illiterate lobby group "Campaign for Better Transport", which is largely aligned to the Green Party in terms of policies, goes further.
It is a relentless assault on the English language, that combines illiteracy of the language and punctuation with economic illiteracy and a strong hint of paranoid conspiracy theories. It is so damned ignorant that it is no surprise it isn't taken seriously by transport policy makers. I know, since I used to be one.
For starters, who can take seriously the following failures at English:
"Steven Joyce has come out swinging today against Kiwirail, as he says it will loose $1 million per day." Loose what??
"the Campaign For Better Transport (CBT) is questioning the Ministers figures" How many Ministers?
"Recently Joyce said KiwiRail was worth around $360 million dollars which we all know is unbelieveable" Unbelieveable? No, this preteen English standard is unbelievable.
"If I was a business owner I certainly would not put Steven Joyce incharge of quotations, Reeves said." incharge? Another new word. Comma missing too.
"In recent months is has become clear" is what?
"some unusal right wing groups have been producing reports with unusal facts and figures against Kiwirail" unusal? How creative, another new unusual word.
"yet it moves over 15% of the countries freight" What are all the countries?
"the nations rail network" Again, what are the other nations?
"The Campaign For Better Transport would like the Minister of Transport like" Like, whatever?
Poor Jon Reeves, he obviously did so badly at English at school (and CBT doesn't do spell checking) but wait, there's more. He can't even get his facts right.
He claims it is "ridiculous" to value Kiwirail at $360 million. Why? Because he puts forward the ludicrous implication that it be valued at replacement cost. As if anyone would pay replacement cost for it. As if Telecom, or any power lines company could be sold at replacement cost. Jon, it is called a "sunk cost". Money has been put into Kiwirail's assets that can never be recovered. You're no market analyst or businessman. By implication, Toll Rail was stupid to sell it at such a low cost and the sharemarket so badly wrong at undervaluing it, except for one point. It is worth $360 million because that's the value it might generate either in net revenues over time, and by implication, if sold on the open market.
Oh the Kaimai Tunnel? It is 8.879 km long, not 9.5 km long. Doesn't take much to check that fact, but then you're as good with facts as you are with spelling and grammar.
You wouldn't put Steven Joyce in charge of quotations if you were a business owner? Well he was a business owner, he was a millionaire at age 38 thanks to a business he set up at age 21. I don't think he really could give a damn what you think about his business acumen. Do you?
You claim that unusal (sic) right wing groups have been producing unusal (sic) facts and figures against Kiwirail. Who are these? What evidence do you have that the trucking lobby has been "working hard" on him, when he rejected their call to abolish road user charges?
You say "The Minister is throwing $8.8 billion dollars at roads so trucks can take away rail freight business", which is a complete non sequitur. The money for roads came from road users, who pay for road maintenance and capital expenditure, and besides, most roads don't compete with railways. Besides it isn't $8.8 billion a year yet you then say "giving Kiwirail only $90 million per year yet it moves over 15% of the countries freight"(sic). The money Kiwirail gets does NOT come from rail users, but from taxpayers. The link is illogical. Coastal shipping moves a fair proportion of freight but gets no subsidy, so what?
I might suggest that besides getting some literate spokespeople, the CBT might start having even a paucity of knowledge about economics and how the transport system is funded and financed, and throw away the paranoid conspiracy theories.
A better approach would be to read this article by Luke Malpass from the Centre for Independent Studies where he says:
"the present Government has only one policy option - the reform, rationalisation and resale of KiwiRail. The difficult reality is that many of the unprofitable lines must be closed while the Government prepares to sell off separate parts of rail to interested parties in the private sector. The rail system needs to shrink substantially to become viable in the long term. Only then will taxpayers be insulated from further political expediency and foolishness.
Without such bold action, rail is going to continue to be a drag on the economy and a constant cost for taxpayers, who have already spent a billion dollars on the business in the past year."
Meanwhile, the Labour Party, which destroyed $330 million of taxpayers wealth by buying this ailing business, after already letting it off the hook for not paying all track access charges that were owed, is desperately wanting you to pay more of your money to subsidise the freight movements of businesses. Labour can't give a single good reason why the users of rail freight deserve privileged treatment, and besides which, farmers are NOT dependent on Kiwirail. Fertiliser can go by road, and the milk that goes by rail is for Fonterra.
The economically illiterate lobby group "Campaign for Better Transport", which is largely aligned to the Green Party in terms of policies, goes further.
It is a relentless assault on the English language, that combines illiteracy of the language and punctuation with economic illiteracy and a strong hint of paranoid conspiracy theories. It is so damned ignorant that it is no surprise it isn't taken seriously by transport policy makers. I know, since I used to be one.
For starters, who can take seriously the following failures at English:
"Steven Joyce has come out swinging today against Kiwirail, as he says it will loose $1 million per day." Loose what??
"the Campaign For Better Transport (CBT) is questioning the Ministers figures" How many Ministers?
"Recently Joyce said KiwiRail was worth around $360 million dollars which we all know is unbelieveable" Unbelieveable? No, this preteen English standard is unbelievable.
"If I was a business owner I certainly would not put Steven Joyce incharge of quotations, Reeves said." incharge? Another new word. Comma missing too.
"In recent months is has become clear" is what?
"some unusal right wing groups have been producing reports with unusal facts and figures against Kiwirail" unusal? How creative, another new unusual word.
"yet it moves over 15% of the countries freight" What are all the countries?
"the nations rail network" Again, what are the other nations?
"The Campaign For Better Transport would like the Minister of Transport like" Like, whatever?
Poor Jon Reeves, he obviously did so badly at English at school (and CBT doesn't do spell checking) but wait, there's more. He can't even get his facts right.
He claims it is "ridiculous" to value Kiwirail at $360 million. Why? Because he puts forward the ludicrous implication that it be valued at replacement cost. As if anyone would pay replacement cost for it. As if Telecom, or any power lines company could be sold at replacement cost. Jon, it is called a "sunk cost". Money has been put into Kiwirail's assets that can never be recovered. You're no market analyst or businessman. By implication, Toll Rail was stupid to sell it at such a low cost and the sharemarket so badly wrong at undervaluing it, except for one point. It is worth $360 million because that's the value it might generate either in net revenues over time, and by implication, if sold on the open market.
Oh the Kaimai Tunnel? It is 8.879 km long, not 9.5 km long. Doesn't take much to check that fact, but then you're as good with facts as you are with spelling and grammar.
You wouldn't put Steven Joyce in charge of quotations if you were a business owner? Well he was a business owner, he was a millionaire at age 38 thanks to a business he set up at age 21. I don't think he really could give a damn what you think about his business acumen. Do you?
You claim that unusal (sic) right wing groups have been producing unusal (sic) facts and figures against Kiwirail. Who are these? What evidence do you have that the trucking lobby has been "working hard" on him, when he rejected their call to abolish road user charges?
You say "The Minister is throwing $8.8 billion dollars at roads so trucks can take away rail freight business", which is a complete non sequitur. The money for roads came from road users, who pay for road maintenance and capital expenditure, and besides, most roads don't compete with railways. Besides it isn't $8.8 billion a year yet you then say "giving Kiwirail only $90 million per year yet it moves over 15% of the countries freight"(sic). The money Kiwirail gets does NOT come from rail users, but from taxpayers. The link is illogical. Coastal shipping moves a fair proportion of freight but gets no subsidy, so what?
I might suggest that besides getting some literate spokespeople, the CBT might start having even a paucity of knowledge about economics and how the transport system is funded and financed, and throw away the paranoid conspiracy theories.
A better approach would be to read this article by Luke Malpass from the Centre for Independent Studies where he says:
"the present Government has only one policy option - the reform, rationalisation and resale of KiwiRail. The difficult reality is that many of the unprofitable lines must be closed while the Government prepares to sell off separate parts of rail to interested parties in the private sector. The rail system needs to shrink substantially to become viable in the long term. Only then will taxpayers be insulated from further political expediency and foolishness.
Without such bold action, rail is going to continue to be a drag on the economy and a constant cost for taxpayers, who have already spent a billion dollars on the business in the past year."
