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.