Stuff reports that it seems that the much maligned Mana highway upgrade has done the job – morning and evening peak congestion has been eliminated. After much criticism that the $24 million upgrade was a waste of money and it should have been spent on the cargo cult called Transmission Gully – the $24 million upgrade works! A bit cheaper than the $1.1 billion price for Transmission Gully, but then the advocates of Transmission Gully have almost a social credit view of economics. The Mana upgrade had a benefit cost ratio of over 5:1, Transmission Gully is around 0.5:1 - it is obvious which project is a good investment.
The upgrade was based on a simple premise – the problem is that two lanes of free flowing traffic merge into one for several kms. So the solution was fairly straightforward – ensure two lanes flow between those points. The bridge was duplicated to create two lanes each way, and the road widened from Mana Esplanade to the 4-lane highway north of Plimmerton. In between those points parking is banned at peak times so an extra lane can operate in one direction. Five sets of traffic lights ease the flow from side roads, improve local and have not hindered the flow. In fact, the cops are concerned about speeding along the road now!
Who needs a 27 km hilly 4-lane motorway to fix this problem? Only stupid central and local body politicians addicted to spending other people's money promote this, along with a small number of local residents who will benefit from their properties not being on such a busy highway.
Now this wont be a long term solution, Transit says ten years and traffic growth will have filled up the road capacity. In the meantime, some consideration can be made about how to plan to fix that - a bypass at Mana is the best answer at around $220 million.
Ten years saving $1.1 billion on Transmission Gully (or $220 million on a Mana Bypass) is worth a good bit of money – at 5% interest a year, minus inflation it is still over $200 million in net savings from NOT building Transmission Gully. It is time to stop building roads well in advance of them being needed – if Transmission Gully or a Mana Bypass are to be built they it shouldn't be before 2015-2020 – and by then there may be congestion pricing, which could mean nothing need be done. The money can be used for something else.
So the pressure should be off – Paremata is no longer a traffic bottleneck, for now – another reason why politicians shouldn’t decide road building based on media driven popularity contests – I doubt if any Members of Parliament given a list of roading projects could decide what are the best ones.
19 November 2005
18 November 2005
Post Election Departmental Briefings
Having been involved in a couple of these over the years, they are interesting exercises. Departments/Ministries choose whether to give free and frank advice that may – to some – show ideological colours – or they dish out pablum - something plain and boring, which doesn’t represent a challenge to the status quo. Some of these briefings have been out this week and reported. A GOOD department will step aside from current policy and talk about outcomes, the current situation and what should be done to improve outcomes. This is a carefully calculated briefing about moving forward, rather than criticising past policies. Government departments can’t be seen to support or oppose previous policies, but simply advise on what they believe – professionally – is best.
Now the cynics amongst you will say this is highly political – there is no way that Treasury will NOT say cut spending and tax, or that the Minister for the Environment wont say tax pollution, regulate activities and spend money on green things. There is some truth to that – but I think that is the difference in flavour among many in the public sector. The difference between the statist and the economic rationalists, and each government department has a greater or lesser number of these.
For example, you are less likely to find some socialist statist nutcase working for The Treasury than an Austrian school free-market advocate – some would say like attracts like, I would say that this is simply good old fashioned commonsense. Treasury also, mostly, attracts highly skilled intelligent hard working people – the crèm de la crem of the public sector. This is one reason why Treasury gets involved in most areas of the public sector – not only does it have to advise on spending, but it actually contains high quality analysts generally. New Zealand could do worse than have the government run by The Treasury (though it could do better too). See much of what Treasury does is stop money being wasted and stop bad ideas from being implemented – so it attracts people who have the brains and the balls to say “wait- why are we doing this? What’s the evidence this is worth doing? Prove it!”. I can say that, on average, 4 out of 5 Treasury officials I dealt with were very smart people who I could engage with intellectually about issues. They had to go to Health, Education, Te Puni Kokiri, Environment and Social Development and say no – or ask questions of those who wanted to spend your money on their ideas. Treasury provided a brake on spending, and many times it would offer alternate recommendations in Cabinet papers which opposed what other departments were proposing- and it was really up to Dr. Cullen to take or leave that advice, and convince his colleagues if he took it.
On the flipside, the kooky useless nano-kleptoMinistries (Pacific Island Affairs, Youth Affairs, Women’s Affairs) tend to attract, mostly (I say this because I get surprised when the occasional intelligent rational person I know somehow gets hired by these agencies), lefty post-modernist deconstructionist types, or simply the vacant “I wanna help people” crowd who sleepwalk their ways from largely useless university degrees. These are the ones who see government as this great moneybin which Uncle Scrooge (Treasury) guards, and they want to save the world- they think that with the money taken from the productive, they can someone make a difference. They think that the country would be worse off without these little tags on the skin of the country, when in fact many of us can remember before they existed and would be happy to see those tags surgically removed. It would hurt the people there, but we would all be better off. These nano-kleptoMinistries could all be gone tomorrow, and virtually nobody in the country would be worse off, or miss them.
More disconcerting are the mega-kleptoMinistries – Education, Heath, Social Development, and many others, which constantly suck up large amounts of money, and play on the political heartstrings of MPs. They are driven almost entirely by socialists of some variety, who think what they do is so important and the only reason it isn’t done as well as it could be, is lack of money. Having convinced most New Zealanders that their health care and education is a matter for nanny state, they want to spend more, intervene more and regulate and tax more. They are the ones living it up under Labour, and they hate National governments. They are from leftwing academic, professional or union backgrounds and have every excuse in the world as to why they shouldn’t be accountable for performance – after all health is about people dying, and education about children – and what heartless soul would cut money for that!
I recommend you read post election briefings from The Treasury at least, and any other department you have a particular interest in. The media wont report on these critically – as New Zealand has precious few journalists, just reporters that take as given what departments say – except Treasury, because journalists are wary of anyone talking economics – they don’t understand it.
Now the cynics amongst you will say this is highly political – there is no way that Treasury will NOT say cut spending and tax, or that the Minister for the Environment wont say tax pollution, regulate activities and spend money on green things. There is some truth to that – but I think that is the difference in flavour among many in the public sector. The difference between the statist and the economic rationalists, and each government department has a greater or lesser number of these.
For example, you are less likely to find some socialist statist nutcase working for The Treasury than an Austrian school free-market advocate – some would say like attracts like, I would say that this is simply good old fashioned commonsense. Treasury also, mostly, attracts highly skilled intelligent hard working people – the crèm de la crem of the public sector. This is one reason why Treasury gets involved in most areas of the public sector – not only does it have to advise on spending, but it actually contains high quality analysts generally. New Zealand could do worse than have the government run by The Treasury (though it could do better too). See much of what Treasury does is stop money being wasted and stop bad ideas from being implemented – so it attracts people who have the brains and the balls to say “wait- why are we doing this? What’s the evidence this is worth doing? Prove it!”. I can say that, on average, 4 out of 5 Treasury officials I dealt with were very smart people who I could engage with intellectually about issues. They had to go to Health, Education, Te Puni Kokiri, Environment and Social Development and say no – or ask questions of those who wanted to spend your money on their ideas. Treasury provided a brake on spending, and many times it would offer alternate recommendations in Cabinet papers which opposed what other departments were proposing- and it was really up to Dr. Cullen to take or leave that advice, and convince his colleagues if he took it.
On the flipside, the kooky useless nano-kleptoMinistries (Pacific Island Affairs, Youth Affairs, Women’s Affairs) tend to attract, mostly (I say this because I get surprised when the occasional intelligent rational person I know somehow gets hired by these agencies), lefty post-modernist deconstructionist types, or simply the vacant “I wanna help people” crowd who sleepwalk their ways from largely useless university degrees. These are the ones who see government as this great moneybin which Uncle Scrooge (Treasury) guards, and they want to save the world- they think that with the money taken from the productive, they can someone make a difference. They think that the country would be worse off without these little tags on the skin of the country, when in fact many of us can remember before they existed and would be happy to see those tags surgically removed. It would hurt the people there, but we would all be better off. These nano-kleptoMinistries could all be gone tomorrow, and virtually nobody in the country would be worse off, or miss them.
More disconcerting are the mega-kleptoMinistries – Education, Heath, Social Development, and many others, which constantly suck up large amounts of money, and play on the political heartstrings of MPs. They are driven almost entirely by socialists of some variety, who think what they do is so important and the only reason it isn’t done as well as it could be, is lack of money. Having convinced most New Zealanders that their health care and education is a matter for nanny state, they want to spend more, intervene more and regulate and tax more. They are the ones living it up under Labour, and they hate National governments. They are from leftwing academic, professional or union backgrounds and have every excuse in the world as to why they shouldn’t be accountable for performance – after all health is about people dying, and education about children – and what heartless soul would cut money for that!
I recommend you read post election briefings from The Treasury at least, and any other department you have a particular interest in. The media wont report on these critically – as New Zealand has precious few journalists, just reporters that take as given what departments say – except Treasury, because journalists are wary of anyone talking economics – they don’t understand it.
Privacy and the Motor Vehicle Register
I see that it has been reported in Stuff that “thieves track cars on vehicle register”.
You see you can, for a small fee, find out the name and address of any owner of a registered motor vehicle in New Zealand – useful if someone runs you over and you can recall the rego number, but also useful for marketing companies and stalkers. Although in some parts of the country the register is not exactly up to date, because the Police aren’t too keen on enforcing the law on such matters where it is rough.
Transport officials are drafting a Cabinet paper that would stem abuse of the system, including protecting against the disclosure of vehicle owners' personal information.
This is very old news, as Cabinet agreed in 2002 to tighten up privacy of the
Motor Vehicle Register it is about time – it simply hasn’t been a legislative priority since then.
Of course if roads were not run by the government there would still be a Motor Vehicle Register run collaboratively by the road companies, as there would be a need to ensure that there was a consistent level of information for charging vehicles, and enforcing conditions of using roads (currently traffic laws).
You see you can, for a small fee, find out the name and address of any owner of a registered motor vehicle in New Zealand – useful if someone runs you over and you can recall the rego number, but also useful for marketing companies and stalkers. Although in some parts of the country the register is not exactly up to date, because the Police aren’t too keen on enforcing the law on such matters where it is rough.
Transport officials are drafting a Cabinet paper that would stem abuse of the system, including protecting against the disclosure of vehicle owners' personal information.
This is very old news, as Cabinet agreed in 2002 to tighten up privacy of the
Motor Vehicle Register it is about time – it simply hasn’t been a legislative priority since then.
Of course if roads were not run by the government there would still be a Motor Vehicle Register run collaboratively by the road companies, as there would be a need to ensure that there was a consistent level of information for charging vehicles, and enforcing conditions of using roads (currently traffic laws).
North Korea's new soulmate - Turkmenistan
If you thought the North Koreans were nuts then check out the imitator – Turkmenistan under President for life Niyazov, who took the ending of the Soviet Union as a chance to go back to Stalin – he calls himself Turkmenbashi and has written his own philosophy in the Ruhnama The BBC has an article about it here .
Or you can go to the Turmenistani government website yourself here and work it out for yourself. Make sure you have a firewall operating – websites of authoritarian governments are notoriously nosey on people’s PCs.
Or you can go to the Turmenistani government website yourself here and work it out for yourself. Make sure you have a firewall operating – websites of authoritarian governments are notoriously nosey on people’s PCs.
17 November 2005
Bush on China
I read that President Bush has been acclaiming the freedom and democracy of Taiwan, and suggested that mainland China continue to open up and follow a similar path.
There is nothing in this that I think anyone who supports liberal democracy, whether libertarian or even the Green party could fundamentally disagree with. Taiwan and South Korea have both transitioned from authoritarian governments to being fully fledged vibrant and fairly free liberal democracies. Protest and free speech is open in both countries – leaving their counterparts (the People’s Republic of China and North Korea) far behind. Mainland China has made much progress, but it still executes political opponents and cracks down on freedom of expression from time to time.
And I don’t want to see any nonsense about the United States abusing human rights – organise a political party, print a newspaper, run a protest in New York, then try Taipei, then try Beijing – only in the last one will you face a long prison sentence and probably torture.
Bush is right - and only the George Galloways and other sycophants of murderers would disagree.
There is nothing in this that I think anyone who supports liberal democracy, whether libertarian or even the Green party could fundamentally disagree with. Taiwan and South Korea have both transitioned from authoritarian governments to being fully fledged vibrant and fairly free liberal democracies. Protest and free speech is open in both countries – leaving their counterparts (the People’s Republic of China and North Korea) far behind. Mainland China has made much progress, but it still executes political opponents and cracks down on freedom of expression from time to time.
And I don’t want to see any nonsense about the United States abusing human rights – organise a political party, print a newspaper, run a protest in New York, then try Taipei, then try Beijing – only in the last one will you face a long prison sentence and probably torture.
Bush is right - and only the George Galloways and other sycophants of murderers would disagree.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)