Fear

That is what terrorism is about. The murder is simply the means to that end. Today exactly one year after I have posted this, 3 bombs went off within 50 seconds of each other here in London. One each on two Circle line trains, going off between Liverpool Street and Aldgate, and another at Edgware Road. A third bomb went off on the Piccadilly line between Kings Cross and Russell Square. A fourth went off an hour later on a bus in Tavistock Square. 52 people were murdered, hundreds more injured, around 20 seriously. I catch Piccadilly regularly, as my alternate route to work. The location where the bus bomb went off is also the location of the bus route I sometimes catch as well, if the tube is closed. This morning I took the usual convenient tube route that was not bombed, but I still thought about it. It is one thing to live in New Zealand and watch the news, another to remember that every single day, London faces a terror threat. A real one. The million people who catch the tube every day, the other million who catch the buses (some the same people), those who work near major political, economic or social landmarks, like I do (right next door to one), think about that bag that lies there, the people who get on the tube and look nervous and Arab/South Asian. It is inevitable. It is about your life after all.
.
I wasn’t here when the bombings happened, but I was here when the second lot of attempts happened. I work very close to a well known building that could maybe be a target, but damn them to hell. London has gone through worse.
.
The blitz was perhaps the scariest time for this city, and 43,000 people were killed in Britain during it. During the first phase of the blitz, every night for three months, 200 German bombers bombed London. There are plenty of people alive who can remember that, and they didn’t run – they didn’t try to “understand the German point of view”, and didn’t apologise.

.

They didn’t blame the victims, they fought back. Nazi Germany was defeated, unconditionally. Germany today bears little resemblance to the totalitarian war machine that it once was, it is now the fourth largest economy in the world (China recently nudged it out of third) and a force for peace and stability.
.
London also suffered under IRA bombings through the 70s and 80s, although the casualties were low in number. Fear was the main driver. Fear removed rubbish bins from the tube, saw CCTV cameras installed and fear saw thousands avoid the tube one year ago after the bombs.
.
Today London is defiant. The evil of the terrorists, who happily see the blood of hundreds of innocent people, of all political beliefs, faiths or no faith and nationality, is not winning in London. The city thrives, it thrives with one of the most diverse populations of any major city in the world. There are probably about 7,000 people in this city right now who supported the bombings and would commit more – that represents the proportion of adult Muslims who in the most conservative polls endorse the terror attacks. I simply wish they would leave, they are not welcome.
.
However, perhaps the best statement I have seen comes from no other than Mayor Ken Livingstone. Livingstone was in Singapore at the time, at the International Olympic Committee meeting, following London’s successful bid for the 2012 Olympics:

.
“Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life. I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail. In the days that follow, look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential. They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don't want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail.”

.
For one of Britain’s most renowned/notorious leftwing politicians, Livingstone has set an example. He was right, they will fail and they have. May they go hide in their pathetic little warrens of hate, or go where hatred is glorified and live in the dry dusty dirty heat of it all. Go live in your caves, form a little society of reason hating, anti-individualist primitives, enjoy the life of pre-civilisation – you add nothing to the modern world.

.
I am slightly nervous I must admit, but I am not changing my habits to suit Al Qaeda, which released a video to Al Jazeera yesterday of one of the suicide bombers for the 7/7 attacks. Al Qaeda should be defeated, as Nazi Germany was – and nobody who believes in freedom or civilisation, across the political spectrum, should rest until the last member of Al Qaeda surrenders or is killed. The people of London, let alone New York, Madrid, Baghdad and elsewhere, deserve nothing less.

.

They certainly don't deserve the excuses seen in the Guardian this morning.

.

Faces and obituaries of the victims. BBC

Events of 7 July BBC

Grief, Fear, Hope The Times

He's just ronery

.

“Hey Bush, look over here, I wanna play! Damnit Bush, obsessed with Ahmi… Ahme…. the Iranian guy yeah and Saddam. Hey Brair, BRAIR, ohhh broody Brair, he aint looking so good now. Hey Koizumi, damnit Koizumi he’s retiring, what’s with the guy, he looks so cool too, what’s with these people not wanting to be Readers anymore. Hey Putin, rook at me, its Kim Jong Il, remember I came on the train and came see Russia? We did party dude and I brought my radies with me and whoa you got some hot bronde radies in Moscow woooo hooo. Yeah. Putin PUTIN! Why you not come visit as you say you would? Grrr hey Hu, Wen, yeah I want some of your investment, I wanna cool city with tall buildings and electronics and stuff you know? I want some. Hey stop ignoring me you guys. Why is everyone ignoring me? Hey Iranian guy you wanna party? Stop worrying about Israel, they just friends of United States – heyyyyyy stop giving me the Isram evils Iranian guy, I been the Dear Reader ronger than you man and I got me my nucrear weapons. Grrr Chirac? *sigh* he don’t notice me neither.
.
Damned CNN, BBC, NHK, I watch them all the time and I not been on them for agesssssss. What's wrong? Aren't I still the scary guy who runs a country the way half of you wish you COULD? Right... I gotta do something.
.
Damn you rot, NOTICE me, I’m Kim Jong Il, the Dear Reader, the peerressry great man. I might not be Arab, or Musrim but I’m GREAT. I want presents, I want visits, I want bronde radies from Sweden.
.
That’s it. You’ll pay attention now. I got missiles. Yeah you know it baby. I got missiles, they are BIG missiles, better than that stupid Saddam, he don’t know how to run a dictatorship, the wuss. You don’t go round attacking countries, you just threaten to and make sure your missiles work buddy.
.
OK here we go………. *fizzzzzzzzzzzzz* fire ONE. Woooooooooo this one is for the sea near Japan… there you go wooooo. Party dudes, hey lets do another *fizzzzzzzzzzzzzz* fire TWO. That show you Koizumi, you shoulda come over with your best chef and we have a sushi party night in Pyongyang. Right me on a roll now, *fizzzzzzzzzzzz* fire THREE…. Yeah I can show Japan, show Putin too, show the South Korean puppets that I can KICK some ass yeah… gimme another Cognac right another? *fizzzzzzzzzzzzzzztzttttt* fire FOUR. See I can make GOOOD missiles, come on Ahme baby you wanna gimme some oil for my missiles? Hey Assad baby, your dad and my dad were buddies baby, you wanna gimme some oil for my missiles too? Come on, you see they work. OK Bush – this is for not giving me the Xbox I wanted and the Vegas porn babes, get out the big one. OK I’m gonna show you I reach Araska baby. Right *fizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz tzfr tzt tzt* *kick* *Fzzzzzzz* see it go near America. Ohhhhhhh *fzz* *fzzzt* *fzzzzzt ppupp* ooops .. that virrage not important anyways, it full of imperiarist rackeys of the Americans. Hey army dude what happened? *shot fired* he wont be embarrassing the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea again. OK last one.. *fzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz* yeah Japan, so there woooooooo. Yeah ok radies, I go for a rie down now.

.

Hey someone get me the internet, I bet I’m on the CNN front page now I wanna pray with my radies while watching me on the news and all the dumb western journarists who think I’m a scary guy. It’s so funny, hey I bet they all wanna talk with me now, and they all gonna threaten me but do nothing – and then give us some money to buy more cognac, cars and Louis Vuitton. Dumb asses hehehe. Love that movie about me too, it's so true! I'm RONERY, someone important visit me damnit!

Another domestic airline?

An old joke about how you create a millionaire - find a billionaire to invest in an airline.
.
Well, some entrepreneurs are going to pour money down a blackhole in the hope they can make a buck out of flying from Auckland to Wellington and Queenstown at least. Fares to be as low as $12 Auckland-Queenstown, $2 Auckland-Wellington, with a start up sale of 10,000 seats at 2c each. (Of course you’ll have security levies etc to pay on top of that).
.
The website is here, it is called FirstJet.com and it intends to fly before the end of the year using a Boeing 737. It says it can do it cheap by using planes as billboards (though most of the time these billboards are out of sight) inside and out. I think it will try to be a Ryanair, without the volumes of traffic.
.
Hmmmm, interesting. A trial website, without even using the domain name, sounds like bollocks to me. On the one hand, routes like Auckland-Wellington make Air NZ a bucket, so there may be room for a third player, but on the other hand the money is mostly made from business travellers, filling up planes, many paying fully refundable fares with corporate discounts. Those travellers want:
- Frequent flights;
- Connections to other destinations;
- Koru Club.
Tourists get the leftover seats, particularly at off peak times, but without that core business traffic, the airline business is dead unless you can maintain consistent high volumes of traffic.
.
Remember, Qantas doesn’t make money on NZ domestic routes, Origin Pacific is barely breaking even. However, good on them for having a go, without taxpayer money – if it succeeds, thousands will be better off, if not, then the market was not there to make it pay. Nevertheless, I doubt that this will be off the ground - it looks like the professionalism of teenagers.

EU is the bad guy in world trade

Latest OECD data on agricultural subsidies shows that by far the greatest culprit is Europe. In 2005, the European Union spent nearly US$134 billion on propping up its agricultural sector. These subsidies generated around one-third of the average farm’s income. Don’t forget most of these are sucked up by large farms, including ones owned by the British Royal Family and others who can hardly start to argue they deserve to money taken from others.
.
The United States, typically pointed out to be the bad boy spends LESS THAN ONE-THIRD what the European Union spends, at just short of US$43 billion. This is 44% of the EU’s budget. Although the US is the third biggest agricultural subsidiser, after Japan which spends US$47.4 billion on securing votes for the Liberal Democratic Party by propping up inefficient rice farmers. Fourth is South Korea, spending US$23.3 million on pretty much the same as Japan. Interestingly the only OECD country to significantly increase subsidies since 1988 has been Turkey, which has seen the proportion of farmer’s income supported by subsidies increase from 15% to 25%
.
So why doesn’t Oxfam storm Brussels? It does call for reform, but it is muted compared to its call for aid. Why isn’t Bob Geldof and Bono damning France, the primary culprit in this? The Bush Administration is very keen on cutting subsidies as long as it is done multilaterally, and France in the EU says it has “done enough”. No it hasn’t, not by a very long shot.

.

It is time for all those give a damn about reducing poverty in developing countries to tell the EU and France in particular to move – to abolish export subsidies, cut subsidies for the “old” EU states by 70%, to the same level now offered the new EU accession countries (Hungary, Poland etc) immediately and abolish non-tariff barriers to agricultural imports. Do that, it would challenge the US to do the same and it would almost certainly wake up the developing world to open up its markets in manufactured goods.

.

and yes, New Zealand does have the moral highground on this, as subsidies in New Zealand are comparatively non-existent.

London at 32 degrees celsius

I have the following observations:

1. British media are weather obsessed;
2. Transport is designed for winter, the tube is hot and stinky, Victoria and Bakerloo lines are by far the worst as they are the deep level lines with the worst ventilation and oldest rolling stock. The best thing is, a lot of people know this and are using it less.
3. Women go to work wearing essentially weekend clothes (tanktops dresses and jandals), men wear suits not lava lavas. No shorts, socks and sandals.

4. Combine 2 and 3 and some women get on the tube wearing little – like the 8 inch high shorts, that means from top of the waist to the leg, NOT leg length. Why does this never happen in New Zealand?

5. Homeless people sleep in parks out in the open.

6. The sun comes up between 4 and 4.30 and down at 9pm - bliss!

Blog searches and the World Cup

Weirdest google/blogger search terms finding this blog:

masturbating using toothpaste (someone in India)
French samoan race pictures
Sexy blow yobs
Dirt on rob fyfe
Penis size images (someone in Sioux falls, South Dakota is interested)

OK so now with Germany knocked out, go France...

Celebrate the United States

For me, the 4th of July is a chance to celebrate the founding of the United States. Why? Because it was, in modern history, the most profoundly radical leap forward in human civilisation.
.
For today I will ignore the naysayers and those who will point out, many with good reason, the failings of the USA in terms of liberty, the mistakes of the past and those who tarnished the American dream. Today, because this is a chance to celebrate what is great about the United States, and to note why Americans, far more than the British, New Zealanders or Australians, feel pride in the USA. That pride is not a form of tribal knuckle dragging nationalism, of the kind that has left the Balkans dripping with blood, but a pride in a migrant nation of people who fled tyranny, judgment of religion and inherited privilege - to forge something new. 300 years ago many would have laughed at the idea that the migrant colonies in the New World would eventually come to be the greatest military and economic power on the planet. The Cold War saw the USA and its allies demonstrate, profoundly, the difference in both material wealth and personal happiness between capitalism (albeit tarnished) and cold, heartless, authoritarian bullying of the state.

.

The US Declaration of Independence was the beginning of this - the unshackling of people from monarchy and feudalism, and changing the nature of government - from something done to people by those who knew better than the people, to something to serve people, to protect their rights from the infringement by each other, and by outsiders. It would form the basis for the US Constitution, and the words "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". Life being the foundation of all that is humanity, liberty being the oxygen by which humanity lives, grows, learns, invents, discovers and builds and the pursuit of happiness - the purpose of life. This compares to the naysayers, who saw life as being owned by the King, or God, or the tribe - with rulers deciding that men should sacrifice and be sacrificed for some good "greater than they".

.

No. America is built on the pursuit of happiness - what could be more glorious than that?

.

So today, have a drink and toast "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" - and for a moment think of the thousands who have died for this, and the millions who can not even speak of it.

Transmission Gully not a sure thing by a long shot

Like I said a few days ago, Peter Dunne is full of it on how Transmission Gully is a top priority. Not only is it listed third for unapproved major projects on Transit's State Highway Forecast (after the Dowse to Petone upgrade and Basin Reserve Interchange), but no provision has been made for construction to begin in the next decade.

.

Transit's Regional Manager has made this clear in the latest Dominion Post report, where the insane idea of closing the old Paremata Bridge when Transmission Gully is built, is being mooted:

.

"Mr Taylor said it had yet to be decided whether Transmission Gully would be built at all. Transit recently won funding for $80 million of preliminary work, which included doing geotechnical surveys of the proposed route, completing road designs and applying for resource consents. Only then would the true cost of Transmission Gully be known and a decision made about whether or not it would go ahead.Mr Taylor said it had yet to be decided whether Transmission Gully would be built at all. "

Quite right too. Only a fool would say built it at any cost or regardless of priorities anywhere else. $1.5 billion, $2 billion, $3 billion? The decision to proceed with a very very expensive investigation and design of Transmission Gully has been done because of a loud campaign by those wanting their property values enhanced by a highly subsidised uneconomic road - backed by National and ACT MPs (and Labour and United Future) who only care for popularity, not economics. Transmission Gully may continue to prove to be not worth it.

Latest Green fascism - compulsory recycling

GMTV has reported that Barnet Council - North London - has made it illegal to put glass bottles, tins, jars, paper and magazines in the rubbish instead of recycling, with £1000 fines. Harrow and Bromley are about to do the same.

.

Quite how this works is beyond me. Contaminated paper isn't worth recycling, because once you get rid of the fat or other fluids the fibre has degraded too much. I wonder if some decent investigative reporting would discover how much recycled material is dumped.

.

People feel good about recycling, because what you don't want is going to be used again and that is rational. Indeed it is, recycling isn't new. The car industry has been recycling the metal from car bodies for decades, so has the aviation industry for planes.

.

However, this approach by councils is simply fascist. Who gives a damn what you do with your rubbish as long as you aren't dumping it on someone else's land without their permission. The answer to concerns about waste involves two steps (New Zealand is part way along this path already):

.

1. Charge for rubbish collection. In NZ this is done with council rubbish bags that cost enough to pay for the collection. Rubbish collection could then be operately privately, and revenue generated by the number of bags collected. The incentive to produce less rubbish comes from paying for the cost of collection (if it is free, as it is in the UK, it doesn't matter), the privately run rubbish collectors are incentivised to keep the cost down and collect frequently - making the local environment more pleasant. If landfill space is scarce, then let the private sector find more and charge for using it.

.

2. Run recycling commercially. Recycling is not good per se - it depends on whether it is more economic to recycle than to source materials as new. Remember paper is a renewable resource, and glass comes from sand - hardly that scarce! For both it is whether it is cheaper to pick it up, transport it and refine it from paper and glass to fresh materials, than to source it directly. Metals are the same, it may or may not be cheaper to recycle aluminium, tin and steel, depending on the price. If it costs more to pick up, store and reuse, then it doesn't matter if it is rubbish. You could reuse all your clothes again and again too.

.

and don't give me arguments about externalities. The externality is that land is used for rubbish dumping - as long as it is privately owned and there is no resulting trespass of pollutants from that land onto neighbouring properties, it is not a problem. The world is not running out of resources.

To hate America is to hate mankind

Hat tip to Julian Pistorius for pointing out this Daily Telegraph article, also pointed out by Samizdata.

.

"To dislike a country as diverse as America is misanthropic: America, more than any other state, contains the full range of humanity between its coasts. What binds its people together is an ideal encoded in America's DNA. Conceived in a popular uprising against autocratic government, the United States has a natural sympathy with self-rule, personal freedom and representative government. To this day, it is guided by the Jeffersonian ideal that decisions should be taken as closely as possible to the people they affect."

.

Yes the US is inconsistent with this, but it still is light years ahead of the brutal brainless autocracies of North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Cuba and China. Stereotyping the USA is like stereotyping humanity - it is as diverse - but the difference between the USA and so many other countries is that somewhere in the USA, that diversity is embraced. Remember it is Europe that has been the source of the two greatest totalitarian tyrannies of the 20th century - Marxism-Leninism and Nazism.

England mad over World cup loss

Well the English World Cup dream is well and truly over. England played pretty much like it has for the whole World Cup, in which it has always just sneaked through due to the incompetence of the other side in most cases. This time, Mickey Rooney lost his temper and got red carded, then it was extra time and finally penalty shootout. However, in the first half I went to the supermarket – it was wonderful, virtually empty. The only other people there were a tiny handful of well dressed Europeans (note British is not European, for good and bad reasons – they are different, very different). It was the right thing to do, when I got back home it was nil all still and so I did some housework while it was on. The penalty shootout was good to watch without volume on though. When England got one, I could hear cheers from several directions. When it missed, there were “ohhhhhhhhh”s , when Portugal got one there were “nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo”s and when Portugal finally won it was a painful extended series of moans.
.
At that point, it is reported that the M2 motorway was seen to be strewn with discarded England flags from cars, when drivers heard on the radio that it was over.
.
The Sunday newspapers reported it as national tragedy – the Express headline being “End of the World”. The madness continued with the England team flying back home yesterday (you’d think men who were dedicated to the game would want to hang around to watch the semi finals and finals, but no they go home to sulk like babies) and both BBC News 24, Sky News and Sky Sports News channels interrupting regular broadcasts for continuous coverage of their BA plane sitting at the airport waiting for them – then they arrive – plane takes off. Then after an hour or so, plane lands at Stansted, plane sits on tarmac for ages, some of them get out, into cars and drive off. I switched channels and came back later to see news, and the plane was in Manchester!
.
How fucking boring!! Seriously! Does anyone really give a flying fuck if you watch their plane – you know a BA Airbus A320 they chartered, like dozens that fly every day – and watch them get on and off it, into cars with their WAGS (wives and girlfriends). On 3 channels? With running commentary about what is going on and what is going to happen, repeated again and again.
.
The real World Cup news was Brazil being defeated by France, and it was beautiful. The football superpower and several times champion, showed that it couldn’t hack it – it has played Croatia, Australia, Japan and Ghana, and only against Ghana and Japan did it really show what it had. So England will get over it, Brazil will be crying for the rest of the year. This is because Brazil has nothing else that it has pride for internationally. It is known for crime and environmental degradation, football is symbolically the only known path of social mobility for young men. Maybe Brazil will figure out that it needs a better totem to worship?

.

Meanwhile, roll on the semi-finals, and may Germany defeat Italy.

Ticketing for revenue or safety?

Several rightwing bloggers (DPF and New Zeal) have reported the NZ Herald story about Police having to meet productivity targets – which could include ticketing for the sake of it. This is a typical talkback radio issue and one that annoys many because it appears the cops are being bloody minded.
.
This sort of thing pisses off Ministers no end. Transport Minister Annette King isn’t amused, and I know that previous Transport Ministers, Labour and National have also been furious with reports like this. Ministers have denied it, and it has certainly not been policy of any Labour transport Ministers under this government, or recent National ones. In other words, this is NOT a political driver for money (it is pittance regardless and the Police don’t get the money as a kickback). The Police are funded for safety enforcement from the National Land Transport Programme by Land Transport NZ – it comes from your road taxes, and the targets the Police are meant to achieve are about reducing crashes in areas and on roads that have poor safety records. This isn’t about revenue collection (and the National Land Transport Fund does not receive fine revenue). Unfortunately, there is no competition for this. Nobody else has the powers to undertake the Police traffic enforcement work, although in the UK the trend has been for the Highways Agency to have its own unit to cope with non-enforcement activity that the Police often do, like directing traffic. I am sure more of this could happen in NZ too.
.
NZ First is calling for a dedicated traffic enforcement unit, which has some merits, although we’ve been down that path before where someone would drive like a maniac past some cops and nothing would be done about it.

.

No reason why the Police couldn’t also have a contract purely to catch dangerous drivers when they are observed, with a separate Transit contracted highway safety police for day to day activities. The answer to the Police is not a simple one, but it should be the responsibility of the road owner to contract.

New Jersey state government shutdown

The state of New Jersey isn’t working anymore – well that’s not true, the state government isn’t (except to protect people from crime and keep mental patients locked up). You see the governor and the legislature can’t agree on a budget, and that has meant that no money is now legally available to pay state government employees, state parks are closed as are historical monuments, and even road building projects are halted. It’s not even a partisan difference, both the governor and the legislature are democrats. Fortunately police, prisons and state mental hospitals can still operate, but that’s about it.
.
Even privately owned casinos are being ordered shut down by Wednesday because they require by law state monitoring. Why they couldn’t remain open and gamblers warned that there are no state monitors and they gamble at their own risk (!) is beyond me.
.
It’s a perfect example of how much COULD operate properly if it wasn’t run by the state. Road building, for example, should be about the road owner and its contractors, and the money would come directly from road users. Parks and monuments could be privately run, charging entry fees or with sponsorship and donations.
.
The main point in dispute is that the Governor wants to raise the state sales tax by 1% point, the legislature doesn’t agree. No guesses as to what side I’d be on!

.

This sort of thing happens in the US regularly, and is amusing. "Non essential" government services get shut down first, which makes you wonder why they are performed by government at all?

Dunne full of it on Transmission Gully

Remember his only policy? Well, setting aside the debate about the Western Corridor plan – which exists. Peter Dunne has told a few porkies about the State Highway forecast just released by Transit. Check out the Wellington section (42kb) or the whole document (3.5mb) to see that I am right.
.
He says “the Gully route is now at the top of Transit New Zealand's Wellington roading construction programme” No it’s not. Table 2 of the Forecast indicates that next year $5.12 million is being spent on investigation of this project. It also indicates that the Dowse to Petone Interchange on SH2 is at the top of new projects for construction – in fact it is the only major new project that is likely to get construction funding in 2006/07. So Dowse to Petone is at the top, followed by Basin Reserve interchange, then investigation and design for Transmission Gully. They are listed in priority order. There is no construction funding in the next ten years. Why? Because there isn’t the money for it, and Transit wont know the costs with enough certainty until it has finished the $10 million investigation phase.

.
“He confirmed with Finance Minister Dr Michael Cullen in Parliament today that it was the confidence and supply agreement between United Future and the Labour-led Government that enabled the Government to set aside the necessary funding in the last Budget.” That funding was $80 million for investigation and design – not construction, except the finishing of the environmental tree planting to avoid runoff, but as I said, that was approved five years ago – United Future wasn’t part of the government then. The necessary funding for construction does not exist.

.
“Dr Cullen further confirmed that the Wellington Regional Council's view that there would be no decision on constructing the Gully motorway for at least five years was not consistent either with the confidence and supply agreement nor Transit's announcement.”
Actually it is consistent with Transit’s announcement. Read the 10 year State Highway forecast Peter, there is nothing in there specifically about construction of Transmission Gully – and given the size of the project, it will take about five years of investigation and design to get a billion dollar motorway costs and specifications sorted out to go to tender. Although Transit has said “The construction of Transmission Gully Motorway has been included in the corridor plan, but is subject to a funding plan being finalised by the region. Funding for investigation and preliminary design has been included in the 10-year forecast. Initial work on this will begin immediately but full development will be contingent on a funding plan being approved.” The tables do not show a construction symbol within 10 years. So you will be waiting at least that long.

.
Sorry Peter, Transmission Gully wont be getting built at the next election, and it wont be built at the one after that. It certainly is impossible to get it started within five years, as this would be the largest most expensive roading project in the country’s history – and the big risk is cost. It is $1 billion now, what if, as is likely, it is $1.5 billion in 5 years? Then the current level of funding will only buy you a third of it – and tolls 5% of the cost. Then what Peter? Might you start to admit that your single highest profile policy obsession needs rethinking?

.

Oh and by the way Peter, the regional council has next to nothing to do with this, unless you want it to raise regional rates or be responsible for introducing congestion pricing - and if it that happened, why would you need Transmission Gully?

Darnton v Clark

Helen Clark and the Labour caucus are being sued by Bernard Darnton, claiming breaches of the Constitution Act 1986, Public Finance Act 1989 and Bill of Rights 1688.

.

Bernard has a blog with all of the details here, which PC and David Farrar have also blogged about.

.

When governments elsewhere use taxpayers money to fund party political material, money unavailable to other parties, it is called corruption. It is not best practice in a modern liberal democracy. However, the Labour party is happy to go along with it. Quite simply, had the boot been on the other foot - and National had done this before winning an election, Labour would be baying for blood - and rightfully so.

.

Integrity in New Zealand politics is what MMP was meant to bring. That's why Labour uses your money to sell its vote to you, but wouldn't let the other parties do the same. Furthermore, this is why Winston says he believes in one law for all, but then votes against it.

.

The case basically says that Labour used taxpayers money for purposes for which it was not appropriated.

.

The PM has sideswiped this for far too long. I hope that at least National and ACT will support this.

.

I'm placing it on my blogroll - it will be worth watching. PC says all the details about the case will be in the first copy of the relaunched Free Radical, which you can subscribe to here.

Racism in Parliament and Winston's betrayal

"The purpose of this Act is to amend the principal Act to remove the
Government’s exemption in respect to discrimination on grounds of race or
ethnicity in the provision of goods and services."
.
Radical isn't it. Imagine it as being a Bill to abolish apartheid in South Africa, or in the 1960s in the USA. No.
.
It was the Human Rights (One Law for All) Amendment Bill, a private members Bill introduced by Rodney Hide. I bet if you polled New Zealanders, you'd get a majority in favour of it.
.
Now you expect the Maori Party, Greens and Labour to vote against it. All are long time advocates of state racism. As much as Labour has tried to refashion itself as being about need not race, few truly believe this.

National supported the Act Bill. Good.

United Future didn't - so Peter Dunne remains the conservative extension of the Labour Party and little more. Statements about race based legislation before the election were for nothing.
.
However, most hypocritically, NZ First didn't support it. Remember one "reason" Winston is a Minister outside Cabinet, is so NZ First can actually criticise the government according to its policies and principles. Remember also that this Bill was not a matter of confidence and supply, and that it would have been defeated anyway with the Labour, Greens, Maori, United Future numbers.
.
Let me quote this from Winston Peter's speech on 31 July 2005 last year "New Zealand First is the only choice for change when it comes to tackling race based funding." or when he said "At the next election voters will have a choice of uniting as one nation or continuing down the present path of racial separatism." at his speech to the party convention 31 October 2004 .
.
Winston is so full of bullshit.

Dummies guide to the National Land Transport Programme

Various journalists HAVE published in the morning papers about how this region and that region are about to get certain roads built in the coming financial year because Land Transport NZ - the government's land transport funding body - has just released its National Land Transport Programme. Invariably they will get things rather wrong.

.

So here it is:

.

1. In the next year, the government intends to net $1.81 billion from your road user charges, motor vehicle license/registration fees and the fuel tax dedicated to the National Land Transport Fund. It also intends pumping in another $538 million from the Crown account - this is equal to all the rest of the petrol tax that you pay that used to get spent on everything else. So as of 1 July, you can actually say, for the first time ever, that all of the money collected from road users is being spent on land transport. The total funding being spent is now 90% more than it was 4 years ago - while you may say this is good, the growth has clearly been inflationary in the construction sector as road project prices go through the roof.
2. Land Transport NZ decides how this money is spent based on bids from Transit and local authorities. Transit and local authorities cannot make Land Transport NZ fund anything, and both get turned down from time to time, or get less than they ask for. So Transit actually funds nothing, virtually all of its money has to be approved by Land Transport NZ.
3. The National Land Transport Programme is Land Transport NZ's INDICATIVE allocation of funding, by activity class, for the next year. Most projects listed in the Programme are either already approved in the past year, or MAY be approved in the coming year. Approvals are made on a case by case basis for projects over a certain. It is NOT approval for big state highway projects, it does NOT mean certain projects are definitely going ahead - but it does mean that they COULD be funded, if the final bid is up to scratch, costs haven't blown out and there aren't other pressing priorities (i.e. natural disaster sucking up emergency road funding).
4. For the first time it now integrates funding for Police traffic enforcement and safety education campaigns, so that tradeoffs can be made between building roads or improving safety through education or enforcement of traffic rules.
5. About $324 million is allocated to public transport, walking/cycling, rail/sea freight and travel demand management (i.e. not roads), around 16% of the total. The Greens will say it is not enough, but this is over three times the proportion that used to go into those activities when the Nats were in power. Half the reason it isn't more is because in some cases councils are bidding for crap projects, or they want a higher proportion of subsidies Remember also that most of that funding only cover half of the cost of the subsidy, the other half of the subsidy comes from councils, and there are costs paid for by users through fares. Road users fully pay the costs of state highways - the majority of public transport users are subsidised by those road users.
6. Almost everything local authorities get funding for from this has to be part funded by them, which means your rates. Your rates may be paying from anything between 55% to as little as 13%.

Now compared to other countries where politicians decide ever project that gets funded, this system is a vast improvement - but with the Crown money being inserted, specifically to go to specific regions, with Ministers saying what that money is expected to fund, this is getting a bit blurred. The Greens will say that road building is pointless and the roads will be empty soon - noticed that happening have you? Labour will think this enormous spend up is fulfilling all everyone ever wanted.

So will the National Party or ACT criticise the politicisation of funding? Maybe they will criticise the end of benefit/cost ratios as the determining factor for funding projects (it is now only one factor). Maybe they will suggest it would be better if the highways at least were run by the private sector, as is starting to happen in the US, with a direct relationship between what road users pay and what they get in service, or maybe they'll just moan that certain porkbarrel roads they think are important aren't getting funded quickly enough. *snort*

.

Get the National Land Transport Programme in full or for regions here.

Get Transit's State Highway Plan for the next year here.

.

UPDATE 1: I am disappointed again at the shoddy journalism. For starters:

Rebecca Quilliam in Stuff said "For the first time Transit's funding includes $224 million for police road enforcement". Um no, Transit doesn't allocate the funding and hasn't for ten years now - sheesh learn about what you write - and it doesn't have anything to do with "police road enforcement". The NZ Herald makes exactly the same mistake.

and "Auckland's roads are to get 26.7 per cent – or a $558.7 million cut." Really? Given that this figure comes from a table that includes $146.9 million for passenger transport (and lesser amounts for other non road activities) it is more like $400 million - in fact had you taken 30 seconds to read up the table, you'd have SEEN that figure. The NZ Herald makes the same stupid mistake.

and "A significant amount of funding will be spent on projects including the Manukau Harbour Crossing " Actually no money for that has been approved, and what has been indicated that MAY be approved, is a tiddling $17.4 million on investigation and design - not construction.

and "At least $33.46 million has been put aside for construction of new state highways, which will include helping to build the Transmission Gully motorway. " She means for Wellington, and she means upgrades not NEW state highways, and no - virtually nothing about construction for Transmission Gully, but around $10 million MAY be approved for investigation. Not construction, unless you count the $400,000 for finishing the long approved tree planting along the route to contain runoff. Sorry Rebecca, nothing dramatic there.

In the Dominion Post, Adam Ray and Colin Patterson make similar mistakes saying:

"Work worth $80 million investigating Transmission Gully, a proposed new inland motorway to enter Wellington, will begin straightaway. " Um no. Investigation costs $10 million, the other $70 million is detailed design. The $10 million is likely to be approved this year, but has not yet been approved, it wont be happening straightaway. Transit at best is putting together a bid for the $10 million identified as likely to be funded.

So where did this all come from? Easy. Reporters (not fucking journalists - journalists do more than parrot what others say) have taken, for example, this statement:

"A particular focus is on high priority Auckland projects such as the SH20 Manukau Harbour Crossing which is part of the strategic Western Ring Route."

and said instead that "A significant amount will be spent on projects including the Manukau Harbour Crossing ".

None of them understand that this is an indicative programme and actual funding is decided on a case by case basis. Wellington's Inner City Bypass was in the programme for three years, before it actually got funding, so was the ALPURT B2 motorway bypass of Orewa. The Manukau Extension of SH20 had funding approved two years ago and has yet to have a sod turned on it. Why? Don't ask me - get one of the "journalists" to ask these questions. You rely on them so much else information, tell me now that you trust them.

World Cup - sad loss of Aussie

Tomahawk Kid Graham Clark has said a lot I wanted to say on this - the refereeing was bloody awful in the Australia-Italy game, and the penalty called for which cost Australia the game was outrageous. Graham suggests that there be a video referee, as in one day cricket, who could be called upon to rule when the referee on the ground isn't certain. Italy did not deserve to win, its performance was abysmal. Australia on the other hand has gone from strength to strength, and would have been a marvellous upset - but there were certain lapses of concentration at critical moments.

.

Now we are into the quarter finals and there are some reasonable bets here. Hopefully Ukraine will manage to sneak a victory this Friday against Italy - lets face it, Ukrainians need something to cheer themselves up. While if I had to, I'd put money on Italy, its performance hasn't been great. Germany vs Argentina will hopefully go to the hosts, who deserve to go foreward - plus geographically who wants a blood spat between Brazil and Argentina. Brazil will smash France, as is natural, but on Saturday England will stop and watch it play Portugal. England have gotten this far through skin of their teeth, and by being in groups where, with the possible exception of Sweden, the team has not been evenly matched - but then again, has really only scraped through. I'd be betting on England to do the same again against Portugal. Portugal won its group convincingly, defeating Mexico (and the less important Angola and Iran thankfully - who wanted the mad holocaust denying President to come over to Germany) so will not be a pushover.

.

On something a little different - the official Fifa World Cup site has something called Fan of the Match. This is awarded to the passion shown of fans there. I put photos of the highest and lowest rated ones at the top, I think I can guess how they are being rated.

What to do with North Korea?

Capitalism is so awful isn't it, far better to totally reject it and adopt an approach where the profit motive is eliminated, there is full employment, everything is owned "by the people" and everyone works for the "common good". Well this photo is the result - this the success of complete socialism - North Korean style. Malnourishment of children. Meanwhile, it is developing missiles. It is of mindblowing hypocrisy that the left condemns the US for poverty and militarism, when Americans do not starve, do not get thrown in gulags at the slightest hint of opposing the regime and are not prevented from leaving, but pays little attention to the utter horror of North Korea.

.

While Iran remains the number one focus of concern with nuclear proliferation, North Korea remains the biggest puzzle. 56 years ago on Monday, North Korea launched its overwhelming attack on South Korea following the US withdrawal of troops from the South, and with the egging on of Stalin and Mao. It continues to deny that this is what happens, despite Soviet archive evidence confirming it. North Korea has admitted that it has nuclear weapons, whether or not this is a bluff is unclear, and will remain so until North Korea conducts a test. Hopefully that will not happen.
.
North Korea is an enormous threat to South Korea, Japan and the US. It has a standing army of 1 million vs 650,000 in South Korea, and you can be sure that after the top echelons of the leadership and the secret police, the armed forces get fed and looked after. Sure it does not have the high tech weapons systems that the US possesses, but it does not really need them. It would take half an hour for North Korean troops to reach Seoul by road, and under ten minutes for missiles to hit it. It possesses large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and one of its biggest exports is arms. There is little doubt that North Korea has the potential to kill millions in South Korea in days, either as a first strike or in response to any military attack.
.
That is why an attack on North Korean military facilities is out of the question. It would almost certainly start a second Korean War, and you can be sure that not only South Korea, but Japan and possibly Alaska or Hawaii would also be subjected to attack (although I would bet on US ABM capabilities over North Korean missiles anyday). The cost in lives in South Korea and Japan would be enormous, and hardly worth it. North Korea has sabre-rattled for decades, launched minor border skirmishes, attacked boats and engaged in terrorism (although that ended after the Cold War) , but has not launched another war and its number one motive is survival. Kim Jong Il is no fool - he knows that if he launched any attack on the south, he is finished if he launched a nuclear attack, the US, south Korea and a substantial coalition of the willing would finish off North Korea. China would not step in to save him.
.
He is using nuclear weapons to do two things. Firstly, to deter an Iraq style attack by the US. While the odds of the US attacking first have always been very remote, nuclear capability rules it out. Remember this nuclear capability was being pursued well before this Bush administration, and reflected more the end of security guarantees from the USSR and China, and the evidence from the Gulf War of US military superiority over the 1960s era military of Iraq.
.
Secondly, North Korea wants to be noticed. Its economy is virtually bankrupt, the majority of its GDP is sucked into the armed forces, which keep a significant portion of the population mobilised against the pretend foreign threat (keeps them from local issues) and much of the rest is sucked into propping up the elite (Kim Jong Il has been the world's largest individual buyer of Hennessy), and the resources poured into monuments and propaganda. It wants aid, it wants technology and it wants investment. If it did not pose a military threat, most of the world would quietly ignore it and wait for the regime to collapse.
.
So what can be done? If you cannot attack North Korea, you can either maintain an icy Cold War against it, attempting to undermine it, or engage and try to reform the regime through incentives. The former means letting it gradually fall over, with the possible risk that in its dying days it lashes out with the military to bring down the south with it, the latter means using government aid to, inevitably, boost the wealth of the oppressors, rather than the oppressed.
.
The first priority is to retain a tough defence and deterrence, making it clear that any North Korean first strike will mean the end of North Korea's regime. Following that needs to be espionage, to infiltrate the regime, assisting dissidents, dropping radios into the country on balloons so that the people can listen to south Korean radio and engage in a quiet process of undermining the regime. Thirdly, it is aid on our terms. Let non government agencies enter North Korea to deliver aid personally to those who need it so it is not diverted.

.

Finally, dialogue. Dialogue that is not like the statement at the end of this post, but is about being realistic, behind closed doors, about the regime's long term future - this means opening up, trade zones and closing the gulags. Remember, virtually none of this dialogue will be with Kim Jong Il directly, but with others who could be a great asset if they believe the West has good will towards Korea and Koreans. The only future for North Korea is to change, to open up, and allow its brutalised, oppressed people to be freer, and to be re-educated in how to function in such a society. Give them property rights, give them choices and give them a chance to learn about their various areas of expertise/interest - instead of spending time each day learning turgid bullshit about Kim Jong Il and propaganda about the regime.

.

A plan has to be developed to allow them to become free - the worst options are military attack or to wait until it collapses to respond. An attack will be unbelievably costly while it is so heavily armed and so capable of killing millions - a collapse will risk the mistakes of parts of the former USSR- anarchy dominated by the emergence of organised criminals (ex party/army) with the means to impose order.

.

Oh and you think the regime cares? Well read this - it is most of a press release from the Korean Central News Agency, commenting on a high level defector's remarks about the human rights abuses in the country - the language is hilarious, and says a lot about how bizarre the world view in Pyongyang actually is. Imagine any other government using such terms to describe anyone, I have put the most outrageous in bold. Hwang Jang Yop was once President of Kim Il Sung University and Chair of the Supreme People's Assembly:

.

"U.S. hard-line conservatives were reported to have arranged the visit of ugly-looking Hwang Jang Yop to the U.S. from October 27 to November 4 for such anti-DPRK burlesques as "hearing", "interviews" and a "lecture." They took him to different places to let him make malignant remarks such as "dictatorship abusing human rights" and solicit the U.S. not to offer any "security assurances" so that the political system in the DPRK may "collapse."

.

As already known, Hwang, by nature, is human scum as he defected to the south in quest of profligacy and his own pleasure leaving behind his own family and relatives and unhesitatingly betraying his own motherland that had protected his own life. It is not hard to guess what such a runaway would say as he has inveterate bitterness towards the system in the DPRK. His jargon is the shrill cry on his deathbed.

.

What matters is that the neo-conservatives in the U.S. earnestly waited for him and arranged all sorts of "interviews" almost everyday during his visit to hear that dirty and silly guy talk nonsense. Leading members of the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives, senior officials of the State Department and leading officials concerned of the Department of Inter-Security and other neo-conservatives in the U.S. vied with one another to hear him just as bluebottles gathered around rotten meat.

.

They seemed to have nothing to do. They arranged "hearings" one after another to listen to Hwang who can hardly be considered as a human being as he is unable to make an objective judgement of reality, bereft of faculty of independent thinking. This is really enough to make even a cat to laugh. It is deplorable that those who puff themselves up in the political circle in the U.S. behaved so. This proves that they are worse than Hwang, the human trash without an equal in the world.

Death of Aaron Spelling

Aaron Spelling died on Friday following a severe stroke he experienced on 18 June.
.
He produced hundreds of TV series and episodes, including Starsky and Hutch, Charlie’s Angels, Fantasy Island, Hart to Hart, Dynasty, The Love Boat, Melrose Place and most recently, Charmed.
.
Now none of these will ever be seen as brilliances of drama or comedy, but he was instrumental in creating a genre of storytelling with drama and comedy that was immensely successful and popular. That popularity was due to it being light entertainment – who can forget Mr Roarke and Tattoo on Fantasy Island (pictured), which I remember watching as a child, or the cheesy Love Boat.

Cindy "Stalin" Kiro’s approach to child abuse

There is another world that some people inhabit – a world where the state can solve everything, and everything bad is nobody’s fault, just the system doesn’t ensure that things “fall through the cracks”. It is the world of Childrens’ Commissioner Cindy Kiro, and if ever there was an argument for abolishing this role and keeping Dr Kiro far from any public policy role, this is it.
.
She is rightly concerned about child abuse, but what stands out a mile is her solution and her view of the perpetrators in her official press release.
.
For the solution, she has said:
.
“I am calling for the creation of a plan for every child so that no one falls through the gaps. These plans would mean that educational, health and safety information would be shared and assessed in a consistent way.”
.
Yes, rub your eyes. A plan for every child. The state will now truly be a parent, not only for those on welfare, but for every child. How do you plan a child’s education? How about health? Does this include diet? Safety? Do your kids ride bikes without helmets, climb trees, use electrical devices? Do you have smart kids who are highly responsible, or really stupid ones? Imagine that – a plan. You need a lot of bureaucrats to set up plans and monitor them, though who knows if there will be enforcement? It does mean that all sorts of aspects of parenting could be questioned – do you allow your children to watch adult rated TV? Do you discriminate under the Human Rights Act in front of your children? Do you smoke near them? Do you allow them to taste wine? Chilling isn’t it – a politically correct Cindy Kiro vision of the state planning a child’s life – all for the child’s good you understand. Not quite Brave New World – but do you want a bureaucrat establishing a plan for your child?
.
Then she says: “A key benefit of the integrated framework is that all professionals will be required in their assessments to take account of the child’s life in the context of the families and communities in which they live.”
.
So teachers marking kids’ school work will have to “take account of the child’s life”? “It’s ok, little Johnny comes from a poor semi-literate family, so we will scale up his English marks to a B even though he performed at a D”. What the hell does this really mean Dr Kiro?
.
Finally- you know how violent abusive parents kick and beat their children up, and are cruel and deliberately malicious? Well ACTUALLY how stupid could you be. It isn’t THEIR fault they torture and kill their kids. See Dr Kiro says:

.
“It’s time to stop the blaming and ask ourselves how these children escaped the safety net that was available to their parents.”

So not only DON’T blame the perpetrators – not THEIR fault they are evil, but how did the children escape the safety net AVAILABLE TO THEIR PARENTS? What the hell is that? “Hey kids how did you escape this safety net we abusive violent thoughtless parents have to rescue you”? Imagine if this was describing a man who abducts and rapes a child, and you said “don’t blame him – find out how the child escaped the safety net available to the rapist”. This is fundamentally corrupt of reason and morality.

Dr Kiro – the abusers are to blame, fully and completely. Most New Zealand parents are not like that, they are not to blame. The safety net is not available to perpertrators – these parents are vile, disgusting, lowlife and your failure to acknowledge this minimises this crime, and minimises the responsibility they have for what they do.
.
She concludes “In future we need to put in place a plan for each child from the day that they are born so that children don’t fall through the gaps again.”
.
No we don’t Dr Kiro – leave good parents alone, put abusive parents in prison and prevent them from ever having custody again - stop subsidising bad parents with money taken from good ones – and while you're at it, buy a ticket to Pyongyang – you’ll find your ideas of planning children’s lives working a treat. Please also state how many children you have saved from abuse as Commissioner for Children - I doubt if it is as high as 1.

Why law and the state can only do so much for children.

Cactus Kate has the case of the Kahui twins in one. What pieces of shit.

.

A "closely knit family" who Mafia like are now keeping their mouths shut about who murdered these two. This happens time and time again, and it is only the kids who die that we get to hear about. How many get brain damaged, or get badly injured and just go through life without a chance?

.

Tariana Turia is no better. As Lindsay Mitchell has noted Turia's comments:

.

"She says the case points up the need for better understanding of families under pressure."

.

What evil appeasing nonsense. This is possibly one of the most endemic problems for Maori - the abuse within families that goes unspoken, protected and shielded- the risk of being disowned and ostracised by families for speaking up and talking to the Police about Uncle Charlie the rapist or Aunt Sheila who kicks her kids. Close extended families can be both a blessing and a hell.

.

I understand the Kahui's - they care as much about their kids as any child abuser - this family is not a family, it is a bunch of dysfunctional adults abusing children. The children should be taken away and there should be a sentence which bars anyone convicted of physical abuse of children from having custody of anyone under 16. Remove the children, adopt them out. I want to hear no bleating and cries of "breaking up the family" - the people who procreated these children have lost the right to be parents.

.

A recent commentary on the BBC talking about proposals to introduced Megans law (which would publish names and addresses of convicted sex offenders) mentioned how ineffective it would be - because the vast majority of these cases happen in families, where there is permanent name suppression to protect the victims. In other words, you might know if Bob next door molested a child 20 years ago, but you wouldn't know about it if it had been his daughter or son. It also only covers sex offences - you wont know if Bob used to punch his 6yo boy about, or even battered his ex.wife. If you met him in a pub, you wouldn't know if Bob molested or kicked his sisters.

.

Most child abuse isn't stranger danger - it is family danger (83% of sex offences are not committed by strangers to the victim) - and much of that is in families who don't even give a damn anyway. How can it happen once in a family where the other parent is watching out for the child, or where the child can turn to someone for help? Look at the Kahui family, who of them really gives a fuck?

50 years of US Interstate highways

While New Zealand embarks on its biggest road building binge since the 1960s, it is worth noting that it is 50 years ago this month since President Eisenhower signed the Federal Aid Highway Act which committed the US Federal Government to embark on building a US wide network of interstate highways - and I mean REAL highways - at least 4-lanes, with no intersections (just on and off ramps) and bypassing towns and cities where possible. The Federal government committed to paying 90% of the cost, with states covering the rest.

.

Now the US has 75,440km of interstate highways (and many more thousands of kilometres of state highways and urban freeways).

.

This enormous state spending did several things. On the good side, it spurred an enormous amount of economic growth, allowed the development of logistics and linked the US together in ways the railroad network never did. No doubt the building of large 4-lane highways with median strips and no intersections has saved tens of thousands of lives from the prevention of accidents - although it also encouraged the growth in motoring on a wide scale as well.

.

However, and this should be of particular interest to environmentalists, it was also a subsidy for road transport - a subsidy that helped to precipitate the fast demise of profitable privately owned passenger rail systems (which the federal government bought out in the form of Amtrak in the 70s) and put freight railroads under enormous pressure.

.

Yes, there was a gas tax which was dedicated to the federal highways fund, a tax that from 1983 was increasingly siphoned off for public transport and general revenue, but that only pays 56% of the cost of maintaining and building the network - which is now around US$80 billion a year. Before 1956, toll roads were far more common - and federal funding of highways saw the growth of toll roads come to a grinding halt.

.

So, in essence, users weren't paying. Trucks especially weren't as the gas tax didn't come close to paying for the wear and tear big rigs would place on the system - those trucks competed with the privately owned railroads. The same private railroads that jumped when the federal government bought out their passenger services in 1974, and included a handful which were taken over by the federal government in 1978 with Conrail.

.

In addition, unlike the privately owned railroads, which were required by shareholders to make a profit and pay dividends - the interstate did not make a profit from users paying to use it. So investment in capital upgrades of railroads shrunk dramatically.

.

Now part of Eisenhower's reason for the interstates was defence - providing an easy means to move soldiers, equipment and arms in the event of war, and to evacuate major cities in the event of an attack. The Soviet Union treated its railway system in much the same way. Some highway overpasses were designed to be high enough for ballistic missiles to be transported beneath them.

.

However, it is clear that - for the usefulness and economic return the interstates have delivered, they also represented one of the biggest postwar planned interventions in the US economy.

.

Much of the network might also have been built by private enterprise, had it been allowed to toll, and it may have meant the federal government need not have intervened to save railroads being put of out business by trucking and bus companies paying half the cost of their networks. The Bush Administration's policy is to promote new highways as toll roads with private investment and encouraging the states to privatise sections of highway - which, in the form of long term leases, is now happened in Indiana and Chicago. May this trend spread!

BBC can't get over Thatcher being right

The left doesn't like criticism of the BBC. For they see it as the repositary of objectivity, balance and free speech - because it so often reflects, primarily, their view of the world. The BBC is like the Guardian - except that the Guardian isn't state subsidised, and there is no Telegraph or Times to counterbalance it (ITV News is more leftwing and vapid than the BBC, Channel 4 is closer to the Independent as far as newspapers go).

.

However, the BBC's ability to act, on the one hand like a commercial broadcaster, paying exhorbitant salaries to personalities to stop them being lured by private broadcasters, and on the other re-write history.

.

Simon Heffer in the Daily Telegraph explains how, in a recently produced drama by the BBC, Margaret Thatcher is depicted as "a bellicose drunk, demolishing whiskies and importuning other guests for refills". As Heffer has known Thatcher personally for many years, he testifies to having never seen her drunk or asking for drinks. He claims that there is an ongoing campaign to villify Thatcher, partly through lies (such as claiming her to be a drunkard), partly through only telling one side of the story.

.

He notes the lack of any conservative or free market plays, dramas or comedies on the BBC:

.

"Like many viewers and listeners, I have been beaten into surrender about the dramatic and comic output of our state broadcaster. We accept, with due docility, that Right-of-centre playwrights, scriptwriters and comedians (I suppose there are such people, starving in garrets somewhere) simply cannot survive the commissioning process. "

.

While the BBC claims to criticise Blair as well, that also is from a socialist perspective. He "betrayed" the Labour cause (i.e. made it electable three times), he isn't criticised for growing the state. Blair is the new Thatcher, because he got re-elected by being more palatable than the Marxists the Labour Party used to put up, like Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock.

.

Heffer does offer an explanation:

.

"A long-time servant of the BBC explained to me, in a moment of stunning insight, why the Leftists in that organisation, and the Leftist contributors to it, are so bilious and angry even 16 years after Lady Thatcher left office: it is because they lost. They were wrong. They were humiliated. They have become bores with nothing else to say. They were not, of course, defeated just by Lady Thatcher: the coming down of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War defeated them, too."

.

Thatcher's reforms saved the British economy, and Britain has reaped the rewards of those reforms for the last decade. She also championed the fight against socialist tyranny (although sadly not fascist tyranny of Pinochet). How many journalists would have thought that by the end of Thatcher's leadership, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia would be on the verge of independence - and by now, members of the European Union. How many would have wished it?

.

However most of all, her legacy has held on by "New Labour" largely not undoing what she did. Blair won by being "Thatcher-lite" - and he continues this. Heffer concludes that the BBC's mates - the Labour Party haven't delivered what the BBC would have hoped:

.

"Finally, why hasn't "their" party undone all the "damage" of Thatcherism? Why do trade union laws remain unrepealed, and industries privatised? Why has there been no uprooting of the property-owning democracy? It is because she was right, and they know she was right. They cannot, however, bear to admit it. All they can do instead is tell lies, call her names and spit with rage. Don't laugh at them. Pity them."

Worship of democracy

The late Bill Weddell said “Democracy is the counting of heads, not what’s in them”. However, the sustenance of this form of government is probably best defended by Winston Churchill “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”.
.
By and large he’s right. Democracies don’t tend to go to war with each other, although a democracy needs a bit more than a vote and competing candidates. After all, Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina all had that. There needs to be “enough” free speech, “enough” open media and “enough” individual freedom that government is not above the law. It has to be genuinely possible for the incumbents to lose, and for the opposition parties and candidates to get a fair amount of coverage. This is clearly not the case in Zimbabwe, and increasingly not the case in South Africa. Because democracy demands an independent judiciary and a certain degree of free speech to function effectively, defence of democracy does provide some defence to individual freedom. Its best defence is enabling people to “vote the bastards out”, removing those who oppress them. However, this only happens if the majority are sufficiently motivated – which is typically rare.
.
The Bush administration pushes democracy abroad. That, in itself, is an enormous mistake. One need only look at the Palestinian Authority and the victory of Hamas to demonstrate that the majority do, sometimes, not actually want to live in peace with their fellow men. History is full of examples of democratically elected bullies – Hitler being the most noteworthy. The Nazis won 43.9% of the vote in their last election in 1933, with their coalition partner the DNVP winning 8% (the pro Stalin Communist Party got 12.3%) Without constitutionally protected individual rights, a democracy is the chance, as PC once put it, for three wolfs and a sheep to vote on what they are having for dinner. You see this in a lesser form, with people voting for more welfare, more subsidies, protection for their business (e.g. local content quotas) or to push around people they don’t particularly like. As philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon once said:
.
“Democracy is nothing but the Tyranny of Majorities, the most abominable tyranny of all, for it is not based on the authority of a religion, not upon the nobility of a race, not on the merits of talents and of riches. It merely rests upon numbers and hides behind the name of the people”
.
That is why minorities are always at risk in democracy, and the smallest minority is the individual.

.

PC's Cue Card Libertarianism - Democracy

Booze and snacks to be sold on Air NZ domestic flights

Peckish and needing a drink when you next hop on that 45 minute flight from Wellington to Christchurch? Feeling that Air NZ's cup of coffee/tea, mineral water and cookie aren't enough? Can't be arsed buying food at the airport or at your destination? Well Air NZ is about to give you another option...

.

According to what appears to be a staff leak on an airline forum, Air NZ is poised to announce that it will shortly start retailing alcoholic beverages, fruit juice, soft drinks and snack foods like potato chips on its domestic flights operated by jet aircraft (most flights between Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin and Queenstown). Presumably, this follows the trend of low cost carriers in Europe, and Virgin Blue/Pacific Blue in Australasia and is expected to be profitable.

.

I remember back in the days of Air NZ having a monopoly on the main trunk (which was actually one of the few deregulatory moves of the Muldoon government, abolishing limits on the number of airlines that could fly on domestic routes), you got some orange drink and a cracker with the legendary unopenable cheese packet. Then Ansett turned up, and it was hot meals on domestic flights. Then alcohol arrived, and it became free on weekday evening flights. The near collapse of Air NZ saw it refocus, and decide to grow the market with cheap fares and elimination of meals (although free coffee/water and cookie is more than you get on Virgin Blue or Easyjet). Now the circle has started swinging around again, assuming this leak is true.

.

I bet Cabinet Ministers miss business class on those flights. There is a website for people fascinated with airline food, just pick your airline and see pictures of what people had placed in front of them.

.

UPDATE: I am betting that the usual bunch of fun-free wowsers will come out decrying this as the end of civilisation, that drunk people will be a problem on flights (ignoring free booze on Air NZ international flights) and will Sue Kedgley say it is bad for your health because there are no fresh fruit available on the flights, and besides the weight adds to aircraft emissions? Please don't - I absolutely loathe the do-gooding naysaying fun police.

Scottish independence now!

While plenty of Scots will be cheering Sweden tonight in the World Cup game against England, it is about time they were set free. Scots don't like the English very much, it is a cultural tradition almost as engrained a bigotry as the Catholic/Protestant divide in Ireland (which also exists in Scotland). So the answer is simple. Scotland should be granted independence.

.

It would be the best thing for the remainder of the United Kingdom, and Scotland - in the long run (although it might pay a price for some years).
.
I have always laughed at Scottish nationalists – as they have largely been a bunch of deluded socialists. The Scottish National Party website is full of specious claims that an independent Scotland would be better off, because "look at how much Ireland has grown" (ignoring that this is due to a winning combo of low tax and EU subsidies for some years). Given my Scottish heritage, my derision of Scottish nationalism has been notable (although my parents' families were Labour and Tory respectively).

.

However, as a resident of the UK, living in London, it has become abundantly clear that I would be better off with Scotland being independent, and the United Kingdom comprising England, Wales and Northern Ireland (and for reasons I am about to explain, the latter two need to be on watch as well). So I am supporting the Scottish National Party in its campaign to win all of the Scottish seats in the House of Commons - even though it is a loony leftwing party dedicated to higher taxes, unilateral nuclear disarmament and a strong supporter of the European Union.
.
Why? Well first there is the argument well put in the Daily Telegraph. Scottish devolution has meant that the Scottish Parliament (the building for which cost £431 million), now has power over the following matters within Scotland:
.
- Agriculture, fisheries and forestry (though Brussels is as important);
- Arts and sport
- Economic development (i.e. subsidies for business, tax breaks and regulation);
- Education;
- Police/fire services and the courts (which have always been separate).
- Environment and food standards;
- Health
- Local government
- Social policy
- Transport
.
Westminster still determines broadcasting, energy, defence, employment, drug policy, foreign affairs, transport safety regulation (you know those Scots would want to cut corners on their brakes!), social security, monetary policy.
.
So with the Scottish Parliament deciding the former, the Houses of Parliament at Westminster decide the former for England as well, and the latter for both regions. MPs in England do not decide on funding or policy for Scottish schools and hospitals, but MPs from Scotland do decide on such matters for English schools and hospitals. This is utterly ridiculous. It is known as the West Lothian Question. The Scottish Affairs committee of the House of Commons agrees. It offered four solutions without a preference:
.
- Only English MPs vote on English laws (which seems a sensible first step);
- English devolution (which essentially means a UK federation, not entirely ridiculous);
- Reduction in Scottish MPs (while some key matters are still decided at Westminster this seems unfair); or
- Dissolution of the United Kingdom.
.
While ensuring English MPs only vote on English laws would be the logical step, it would have some interesting side effects in the current environment. For starters, as some solid Blair supporters are Scottish MPs, it may reduce or eliminate Blair’s ability to continue with his health and education reforms, which would be unfortunate. However, it would also kill off Gordon Brown’s hopes of being Prime Minister. What PM of the UK could be stopped from voting on some matters in the House of Commons? What PM could chair Cabinet deciding on English laws and funding for English schools and hospitals, without being able to vote on it? Well – what Chancellor of the Exchequer can prepare a budget, that to a substantial extent is not relevant to his constituents?
.
So – Scotland should be independent. It would also enable the socialism of so many Scots to come to the fore, and be implemented. You see at the moment, Scottish socialism is subsidised by England. According to the Times 54.9% of Scotland’s total GDP comes from government sector. This compares to 33.4% in London – the capital – and capital cities traditionally have higher proportions of state sector GDP than the rest of the economy. This comparison is all the more stark when you see that the state sector is responsible for 51.9% of GDP in Hungary, 42.6% in the Czech Republic, 41.2% in Poland and 36.3% in Slovakia – all post-socialist economies. In China, the state sector comprises 38% of GDP! Wales and Northern Ireland are worse than Scotland, but one at a time, and Northern Ireland is a bit of a "special case".
.
In short, Scotland is being propped up by the south of England (northeast England is worse at 61.5% GDP from the state!) and it should be paying for this itself. Scotland has maintained “free” university education, the company that operates rail passenger services in Scotland – Scotrail – gets the biggest subsidy, £225 million a year – of any rail operator in the UK. 16.7% of working age Scots are on welfare (which is controlled from Westminster). A relatively high proportion of the Scottish population are pensioners, which is lucky - because the health stats of Scots are shocking. As Michael Portillo (a supporter of independence) points out in the Times, in the Calton District of Glasgow, the average male life expectancy is only 53.9 years. This has everything to do with a culture of smoking, drinking to excess and eating everything deep fried in saturated fat. Scotland has introduced free personal care for the elderly and free kindergartens, and watches its public debt rise- no doubt in the expectation that a Labour government dependent on Scotland for a healthy part of its majority, or Tories keen to get their hands on such seats, wont make Scots face the reality of the cost of their socialist policies.
.
So Scots should be allowed to vote for a socialist government, increase taxes and continue the flight of capital, intelligence and entrepreneurial flair that has seen Scots that emigrate around the world succeed. It may also be stroppy on fisheries in the EU, which would be welcome. Once they have grown tired of it, they may turn their back and revitalise Scotland as a small independent country with lower tax, and encourage the enterpreneurial to return.
.
So I am, ironically, supporting the SNP (not directly mind you), because I reject all of its arguments for independence. It believes Scotland subsidises England. I look forward to the truth hitting Scots with the sort of sense one famous Scot once imparted – Adam Smith.

.

Michael Portillo sums it up below:

.

"In contrast to Scotland, Slovakia has enjoyed a growth rate over recent years averaging more than 5%. It has standardised corporate and individual tax at a flat rate of 19%...

today it seems that the thinking of Adam Smith is better respected and applied in Bratislava than in Edinburgh or his native Kirkcaldy. Perhaps Scotland could return to greatness if it severed the apron strings that bind it to England. Given its independence it would need to slash the size of its state and compete for foreign investment. Leadership would surely pass from the trade unionists and former public sector workers who fill the posts now, to those who could display the necessary dynamism. Socialism could not survive there any more than it has in eastern Europe."

Winston launches safe travel campaign

Your beloved Minister of Foreign Affairs - Winston Peters - has launched a safe travel campaign for when NZers travel overseas. This is because some fools don’t get travel insurance, go to dangerous areas and don’t like the risk, and expect the government to fix their problems.

.
Well you DID vote for nanny state after all. I don’t know how I’ve survived leaving New Zealand the dozens of times I have done so.
.
However, it IS slightly funny thinking how applicable this is to Winston. I once sat beside Winston on a plane, it was in business class, he was going from Wellington to Christchurch (I was connecting on international flight on to Europe) – so here is Winston’s REAL guide to safe overseas travel:
.
1. Ensure local embassy/high commission of country you are visiting knows that the New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs is arriving, and full honours are required. This includes accommodation at palace, castle, White House, Blue House, chateau, mansion of the relevant King, Queen, President, Prince, Prime Minister. Don’t want to arrive in a country without somewhere to stay.
2. Check Michael (Cullen) has placed enough money in relevant overseas bank account to pay expenses, shopping while away. Can’t be skint!
3. Make sure only fly safest airlines in safest part of the plane – the only safe airlines are Singapore Airlines, and Emirates, as they are from very low terror risk countries, have new planes and carry less people on the flights (and are the only ones still flying to NZ with a decent first class cabin). Don't ask Helen for her plane, it isn't her plane remember? You've asked before and you can't have it.

4. Make sure enough accompanying officials travel with you, or bodyguards, to shield you from the groupies wanting to ask questions at airports. Officials can also block out seats near you on the plane.

5. Take condoms. There will always be groupies that help to ease the stress of travel. Bill Clinton made the most of this. French cabinet Ministers need this in order to retain any semblance of credibility.
6. Ensure embassy/high commission abroad has limo for safe pickup from airport. Can’t trust local public transport, taxis in such dangerous cities as Tehran, Beijing, London or Canberra. Ensure limo is also available for local trips – high likelihood of being mugged otherwise.
7. Take enough suits and shirts plus one spare for every night of travel. It is dangerous to look beneath your station.
8. Ensure accompanying officials get duty free liquor order very clear. Dangerous for them to have bought the wrong booze and you'll go blind if they buy it at Kiev Airport.
9. Take portfolio of papers to ensure credibility while travelling. Important to sit on plane or in palace looking like you are doing work, when you are actually watching a movie or listening to ipod. Can’t afford to risk media taking photos of Minister not working.
10. Don’t play croquet.
11. Always take interpreters. Foreigners don’t speak properly so it is important to have someone with you who understands it. It’s not their fault NZ is first and it could be dangerous if you don’t understand them.

ARC socialism in action

So the ARC wants to seize control of Auckland’s water off of Watercare Services Ltd. Well, if you ever needed any evidence of the ARC’s slithering slope to socialist Auckland, there is it. Not content with whacking up rates to subsidise expensive train services that are putting commercially viable bus routes out of business, not content with controlling land use, and some lunatic faith that people in the suburbs ought to live in high density housing near railway stations – rather than the affordable family houses they want – and putting up the price of housing as a result. ARC now wants to take Auckland’s water supply out of the hands of an efficient local authority owned company.
.
Rodney Hide is opposing this quite rightly, and so should you. Part of the problem is that the Labour/Alliance/Green backed Local Government Act 2002 gave local authorities the power of general competence. This means ARC can now embark on whatever endeavour it wishes, as long as it consults “the community”. Since you, and most ratepayers haven’t the time to commit responding to ARC’s consultation, it inevitably gets hijacked by lunatic interest groups out to get more money off of everyone else, and the legions of unemployable ex. bureaucrats, engineers and other nutters. The other part is that YOU lot voted in a bunch of socialists.
.
Watercare services should be privatised. It’s shares could be distributed among all Auckland ratepayers, and then it would be truly publicly owned.

.

So what can you do? Start making submissions. Tell ARC you don't want it to grow, you don't want it to take control of Watercare Services. Instead you'd like the ARC to see how it could do less!

.

This page is the ARC consultation website.

.

ARC's socialism through transport also exists through its agency ARTA. ARTA wants $420 million of your money to spend on public transport, cycling and walking facilities. By no stretch of the imagination will this realise ARTA's goals of less congestion, but the mammoth spend up on new roads by the government will help. It never worked overseas, it wont work here.

.

So if you don't want the ARC through ARTA to pour hundreds of millions of dollars of your money into loss making public transport, then click here and make a submission.

BBC - biggest blowers of cash

The BBC, fresh from signing a new contract with talkshow and radio presenter Jonathan Ross for reportedly 18 million pounds for three years ( note this was because Ross is SO popular, there was a "risk" he would defect to commercial TV networks - so he would hardly be lost to the British TV viewing public), now it is revealed in the Sunday Times that the BBC has sent three times the number of people than ITV to cover the World Cup soccer. Three times!! Now the audience for the games isn't "higher" with the BBC - but hey the BBC just wants more money year after year - by force through the TV licence (which is an exhorbitant 131.50 pounds) because it is SO important to public broadcasting.

.

Bollocks.

.

The BBC is the dominant UK broadcaster because it acts like commercial broadcasters. When it starts wasting licence fee extortion on competing with commercial broadcasters (who get money by broadcasting what viewers want), and pay TV (likewise!) for salaries of stars - people who will always be on TV and radio in the UK because of their popularity, it is no public broadcaster. Can you imagine other state broadcasters, like ABC Australia, CBC Canada and PBS in the US fighting to pay celebrity salaries? Of course not. Can you imagine them providing treble the staff to do what is essentially a commercially viable broadcasting job? No.

.

The BBC is out of control. I once suggested on a BBC talk show that with digital TV, licence fee payments could be voluntary. People could have the BBC on subscription, and the insulted response was "how ridiculous, we couldn't do public broadcasting". Yes you could - Jonathan Ross, the World Cup, Chris Moyles on Radio 1, Radio 1 Xtra and local radio has nothing to do with filling a "gap in the market", but about eliminating it and not being accountable for it.

.

The BBC needs putting on a leash. The licence fee should be voluntary and tied to converting all digital BBC channels to a pay only service. It should sell Radio 1 and 1Xtra (both are essentially duplicates of commercial networks), and sell Radio 2 and all of the regional breakout stations. I'd probably subscribe to the BBC, I like some of what it broadcasts, but it is erratic. Sometimes it is innovative and creative, sometimes it produces the same sort of mass commercial programming indistinguisable from ITV, Channel 4 or 5 channels.