May Israel destroy Hizbullah

Israel's current campaign against Hizbullah has the most honourable and moral of objectives - to destroy a murderous organisation, which has as its goal the destruction of Israel.

.

Israel has my complete support.

.

Hizbullah launched its attack on Israel, abducting two soldiers and launching rocket attacks on Israeli cities and towns. It has been attacking Israel for decades, it supports and sympathises with Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and its suicide bombing attacks on Israel.

.

Here are the facts:

.

1. Hizbullah – a radical Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organisation has been using bases in Lebanon, including residential areas, to fire rockets into Israeli territory. ISRAELI territory, not the occupied West Bank or Gaza, but northern Israel.
2. Hizbullah abducted two Israeli soldiers in order to force Israel to surrender Hizbullah prisoners. Prisoners arrested because they are terrorists and planning attacks against Israel!
3. The government of Lebanon, through its own internal weakness, is completely incapable of controlling Hizbullah.
4. The Israeli government has a choice – either sit back and let its villages and houses of its citizens be bombed by terrorists lobbing rockets at them, or resist.
5. Hizbullah is backed by Iran and Syria, and has a stated goal of eradicating the state of Israel. Iran ships by air the weapons it supplies to Hizbullah. It aims indiscriminately at military and civilian targets, and shields behind civilians by locating its rocket firing operations in densely built up residential areas.
.
So who is responsible for Lebanon being bombed? Would Lebanon be getting bombed had the Lebanese government fought against Hizbullah’s gang using the country as a base for attacking Israel? Would Lebanon be bombed if Hizbullah ceased attacks?
.
There is your answer.
.
You can choose to apologise for terrorists who would kill you in an instant, who want a UN member state wiped out, who want an Iranian style Islamist regime in Lebanon and Palestine. You know, the type of regime that sends kids to wars, that applies the death penalty for homosexual acts and adultery, that stones men, women and children for unIslamic behaviour. The type that simply does not tolerate atheism, Christianity, Judaism, women wearing what they want, or people writing or reading what they like. Or you can support a country defending its territory from attacks. What side are you on?
.

Rape and little boys

Maia’s post about a friend’s little boy and this conversation between her and the friend has created a lot of reactions. Insolent Prick has provided an excellent response to the strange fear that your baby might become a rapist. However, first let’s get a flavour of the kind of thinking in this different “world view”:
.
“we didn't know whether it was worse to raise a girl and be afraid that when she grew up she'd be raped, or a boy and be afriad that when he grew up he might rape someone.”
.
Now we know that it is more likely that a girl will be raped than a boy, and more likely that a man will be convicted of a violent crime than a woman. This is a world where boys are not victims and girls are never violent, but let’s just pause for a moment to figure out where they are coming from.
.
Imagine being that little boy or indeed a little girl around such adults, and taking in the message that “I am innately capable of hurting people” or “I am innately capable of being a victim”. Now both are true. Feminists who haven’t lost the plot completely acknowledge that all initiation of violence against people of any sex or age is wrong. Funnily enough, that’s what libertarians and objectivists think too. However, what thinking causes one to “fear” the victimhood of your daughter or the “latent violence” of your son?
.
Psychosis. Transferring your own issues onto the child.
.
Your children will become whoever they are due to many reasons. Your parenting will be the dominant influence, their genes will play an important part too. Their peers and other family members will influence them for better and for worse, and the older they get, the more responsible they are for their own behaviour. Adults are fully responsible, and the world doesn’t make them do things – assuming their brains are physically fully functional, adults decide whether they rape, beat up their kids or abandon them.

Take this “Right now he's amazing and beautiful.” The baby boy is amazing and beautiful because he is totally dependent, totally helpless and barely an individual. Imagine telling him in 13 years time that he “once was amazing and beautiful”, now he has an erection and thinks about girls all the time – better watch out, he might rape. Maybe, just maybe, if he is brought up respecting other people, their bodies and their property, he wont even think about using force to get his own way.
.
After all, if you thought this, wouldn’t you simply not breed and turn yourself in for therapy about how scary the world is:
.
“I'm so scared of what this world will turn him into. That's one of the things that the US soldeirs who have raped Iraqi women makes me think about. How our world in general, and the army more than anything, makes men into monsters. At the moment we can protect him from all that. I can sing him songs of hopes and struggle and there ain't nothing can harm him. But that only works so long.”
.
Time for a reality check. The “world” doesn’t make anyone into anything. People become victims and people choose how they react to that. Who made Rachealle Namana or Tania Witika the evil abusive women they are? Well feminists might say they were abused too - much like how many male sexual abusers were also abused. How can that possibly excuse it?

.

However, remember in a philosophical environment where you surround yourself with female victims and talk about the vile men who abused you, you can find the world a bit skewed. You probably don’t associate with female offenders and male victims. You may not even associate with women who have not been abused or men who don't abuse - after all you probably can't trust any man who says he has never raped, because so many get away with it (which is true, some men rape and get away with it, but many don't rape).
.
It is a little as if someone was badly assaulted by a young Maori male, and suddenly fears all young Maori males (which is a natural instinctual, albeit irrational reaction).
.
Now I don’t think Maia is a man hater “all men are rapists” feminist, and it is too easy to dismiss someone for such views. I read her posts to test my mind, and find she blames capitalism for all that is bad in the world, but has no alternative. It is like blaming planet earth for having tectonic plates that cause earthquakes and volcanoes, but not suggesting somewhere better to live.

.
I don’t minimise rape, anymore than I minimise any form of severe violence. It is unconscionably evil, no matter who perpetrates it. It is revolting that in the not so distant past the Police wouldn’t believe the victims, and today the Police, depending where you are can either be helpful or make things worse. However, there are many many men who abhor rape, and abhor violence against women, children and men. You don’t need to have a vagina to feel that way. Men are as likely to be attacked in the street as women, because idiotic drunk louts are more likely to get aggro towards other men than women, for no reason at all. Most men have encountered them, but they are often so drunk they can be ignored or knocked over easily enough if they attack.
.
The solution to rape, sexcrimes and violence is a culture that values being human, and what is great about being human. It respects people’s bodies and their property, and enjoys the joy that is life. It abhors the use of force as the tool of the barbarian, and instills the use of the mind as the driver of the heart and hands as being what is great about being human. It is not a culture of fear, but one of confidence and believe in oneself. It is not a culture of victimhood, but of strength – strength in mind and body. It is a culture that is benevolent towards those you love and towards your fellow human being. It is the kindness of strangers, not the guilt of unchosen obligation. It is a culture of honesty, friendship, good will and acknowledgment of excellence, effort and being creative.
.
You wont find that culture in Islam or Christianity either.

Small local government will take some hard work

PC has blogged about the Nomorerates.com campaign, and I agree with him. It isn’t a campaign I can wholeheartedly support.
.
The only good side is that it promotes restraint in council spending. Something that was going to get worse with councils getting the “power of general competence”, a major change in local government legislation that came about with the Local Government Act 2001 – a Labour/Alliance/Greens concoction. You see before then, all local authorities could only do what legislation empowered them to do, specifically. Regional councils were essentially restricted to emissions under the RMA, public transport contracting and water catchment/pest control – now they can do what they want, subject to “consultation”. Consultation means that they ask you regularly, but you don’t have the time to tell them to “fuck off”. Instead the little lefty lobby groups who claim to represent “the community” agree to any expansion of activities as long as it never involves user pays – because they want to use it for nothing.
.
There were warnings at the time. The Business Roundtable through the Local Government Forum said:
.
“The proposals contained in the Bill place unwarranted faith in the efficacy of democratic processes at the local level. The activities that councils may engage in should be tightly circumscribed and enumerated in the new act. The deliberate specification of limited powers is a vital constraint on local government. A power of general competence is inconsistent with New Zealand's longstanding constitutional arrangements and the common law, and is a threat to personal and economic freedom.”
.
Libertarianz also opposed the Bill. Many of you voted Labour, Alliance or Green, and voted most of them back in again in 2002 and 2005. Many of you voted for councillors and Mayors who are growing their councils. So what are you complaining about?
.
The nomorerates.com campaign is supporting Rodney Hide's Rating Cap Bill which is a useful first step, but there needs to be more. Even that Bill wont be supported by the government, which has its local government footsoldiers happily pillaging your pockets for more money every year. Local government is where petty fascists go when they can't get elected to central government.
.

However, I am wary of the campaign. For starters this press release seems to claim that user pays for water and sewerage is unfair, because it isn't eligible for a low income rebate.

.

Why should you pay for water or sewerage or rubbish collection through tax, instead of the services you use? Why aren’t environmentalists, like the Greens, supporting user pays for waste disposal, such as rubbish and sewerage, and user pays for using reticulated water? Why should you be forced to pay for libraries or swimming pools you don’t use?
.
The problem of local government profligacy requires two approaches.
.
First, confront local authorities. Prepare submissions opposing their big spending plans and support candidates at the next local body elections who want council to do less. Good luck finding candidates, although Libertarianz did stand a handful of candidates last time. Remember, the left gets enthusiastic (ick) about local government, and the conservative right is often not much better - so it is time to ask candidates what they will CUT from council spending. They will look at you bewildered - since most moaning minnies who go to local government meetings have their hands out for more money, not wanting their own money back.
.
Second, change the Local Government Act 2002. I don’t mean tinker with it, I mean constrain local government. This means voting for parties that will cut the size of local authorities, get them out of business and out of social welfare, get them out of providing services that nobody is willing to pay for, and make them start charging user pays for those that people want - then sell them.

.

Libertarianz Leader Bernard Darnton announced a first step along that path last year with the party's local government policy:

.

"A Libertarianz government would permanently cap all Council rates; require Councils to implement user pays where possible; and divest all activities that can either be provided or maintained by private organisations and individuals. Libertarianz would also scrap the RMA and regional councils"

.

That would cut everyone's rates bill by a long margin. Yes, you might have to pay for what you use instead, but do you use everything council provides? And, if you do, why should everyone else pay for you?

The Free Radical - bigger, better, revamped

PC, Julian Pistorius and Trevor Loudon have all said this, but it is worth repeating.
.
The Free Radical - New Zealand's only consistently pro small government, libertarian and objectivist publication has been revamped, expanded and improved. The latest edition is now out, so subscribe to a hard copy or pay only US$6 for a downloadable PDF version. A subscription is less than what you pay every year to NaZis on Air to feed you statist nationalist nonsense on TVNZ, Radio NZ and Maori TV and radio.
.
All those who are sick of Nanny State and big government, give it a go, you wont regret it.

Noise about poverty - do you do anything about it?

Several have blogged (DPF, about the Ministry of Social Development New Zealand Living Standards report, either saying that it is the fault of government for not taking more money from richer people and giving it to the poor, or because it takes too much from people already and many of the poor are irresponsible (or make "poor life choices" in PC speak).
.
Well, for all the harping on about it, go through the following questions:
.
1. Do you care about poor people in New Zealand? If no, then move on. If yes, then answer the next question.
2. What do you do, personally, to help people less well off than yourselves? Examples could be:
- Supporting family members who are needy;
- Supporting friends who are needy;
- Supporting neighbours who are needy;
- Participating in charities that actively help the needy;
- Giving to charities that actively help the needy;
- Donating money to the government to spend on welfare.
.
In other words, shut the fuck up if your only answer is to whine and moan saying “it’s the government’s fault”.
.
Whether or not the government takes more money from some people and hands it out to others, or lets people keep more of their own money, chances are you are not going to change that for around two or so years.
.
So go do something now. Given that those on the left want more spent on welfare, why don’t they spend their spare change on giving the government more money to do just that? Maybe they think it is better to spend it on charities? Why would that be? Maybe they would rather spent it on themselves if they can’t make others care too? Maybe there is something in not helping those who wont help themselves?

.

Oh and if it angers or upsets you that some people don't care, then convince them why they should. Put a case, on whatever moral basis, that others should do something. By the way, you might find that people who have already started businesses from scratch and employed people in the process have done far more than any welfare benefit could have.

.

by the way, those on the left who think that the rest are exploiting the poor, might take a look at this post and the excellent letter to the editor attached to it. Some people, after all, hold off having children because they can't afford to have them - what a remarkable concept - personal responsibility, so capitalist and exploitative.

A question

If ACT's Vice President Trevor Loudon can publicly support Libertarianz Leader Bernard Darnton's court case against Labour, why can't Rodney Hide?

90 years of Hard Labour

Not PC and DPF have said much which I would want to say.

.

However, I have two simple things to say about the Labour Party.

.

On the one hand, if it never happened we would be better off. NZ's Parliament would have had liberals vs. conservatives, and the "tell you off" culture of modern statism might well have been less. Labour is not liberal. Question the role of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation and you're branded "racist" to shut down debate, instantly. Question the welfare state and you are branded as "hating the poor". Labour today is not interested in this - it is dominated by three lobbies all on the left: unions, gay/lesbian and Maori. Confront any of those at your peril. Stan Rodger, Richard Prebble and Dr Michael Bassett know this only too well.

.

On the other hand, it has more of a sense about what it believes in than National. Labour can write a Manifesto about what it wants, and what it will and wont do. Some of it will be socially liberal, tiny bits economically liberal (e.g. trade), and some of it statist and interventionist, and proudly so. National still struggles, and when Don Brash tried last time, he was being battled by those who want to betray its principles.

20 years of sexual freedom

DPF and this story on Gaynz.com (hat tip No Right Turn). This doesn’t concern the Bible bashing Taliban of our day, but is horrendous, and shows how readily the Police were willing to clamp down on ANYONE the state deemed as “perverted”. If you wonder how fascism can come to pass, then look – because it existed, for gay people until 1986.
.
I give a damn because no other Bill in recent times represents the most fundamental personal liberty that any adults should have. The right to consensual sexual interaction in peace. You see, the same people who still oppose homosexual law reform (one is doing time for molesting young girls and stood for Parliament several times), basically believe you do NOT own your body. They believe your body should be regulated by the state, by their churches and that it is moral to imprison people for doing what they want in their own bedrooms. What gives them ANY right to tell any other adult what to do? Nothing does. Interestingly, the law at the time had no prohibition against adult women engaging in sexual behaviour with each other, as the traditional view had been that having such a law would encourage women to experiment!!
.
Homosexual law reform was the last great bastion of sexual liberation, and it required enormous courage. It isn’t just about sex (of all kinds) between men, it also legalised sodomy generally (between men and women as well).
.
A number of individuals stand out at the time. Fran Wilde for having the courage to introduce the Bill in the first place. That is, in my opinion, her greatest political achievement, and no small one. George Gair, as the National MP with the casting vote. He had hesitation in supporting the Bill because it set the gay age of consent at 16, he preferred 18. However, he decided to vote yes on the final reading at 16 – that was something for a former National Cabinet Minister, one of the most liberal ones in a very old fashioned male dominated caucus.
.
There were those who campaigned actively against the Bill. Graeme Lee National MP, who later went to the Christian Democrats, which is now part of United Future (Peter Dunne voted for the Bill). Geoff Braybrooke, Labour MP for Napier, campaigned loudly against it, as did fellow Labour MP Allan Wallbank, Norm Jones the Invercargill National MP. John Banks may choose to forget it now, but he was a loud campaigner against it as well. Those old dinosaurs are long gone from Parliament, but their bigotry was the centre of the battle between liberals and conservatives. Bigotry where the word sodomy would be thrown around like old southern baptist preachers harping on about "fornication".

.
The Bill was passed broadly on Labour/National lines, with most Labour MPs supporting it and most National MPs opposing it. Labour’s Maori MPs opposed it, no doubt because the Ratana Church was conservative. Many National MPs who would have been thought of as being liberal, voted against it, such as Lockwood Smith, Doug Graham and Simon Upton - the courage of mice. Jim Bolger and Rob Muldoon voted against it. National MPs Katherine O'Regan and Ian Maclean voted for it.

.
More notable was the campaigning by the Salvation Army, which collected signatures and petitions against the Bill. This burnt much goodwill that many gay and lesbian people had towards the Sallies, as they revealed themselves to not be the objectively kind people they always had been thought of as being. A Salvation Army that happily would see you imprisoned for sex with another man was hardly kind. (Hat Tip Maia for pointing out that the Sallies have apologised). The Catholic Church opposed it too. It is not true that this is because it retained an age of consent.
.
Other notable New Zealanders including Sir Keith Hay and Sir Peter Tait, both opposed the Bill. Old fashioned fascists who forgot separation of church and state.
.
So it is 20 years on. NZ is not full of boys bumming each other, catching HIV and the population is not in inexorable decline. The alleged communist plot (odd given how homosexuals faced enormous bigotry in the former Soviet bloc) behind the Bill failed, with the collapse of the communist bloc 3 years later. The “Coalition of Concerned Citizens” who outlined in incredibly graphic detail what homosexuals did (including fellatio!! Incredible!) moved onto Graham Capill and Brian Tamaki - and together got less than 1% of the vote in the last election. The National Party of today is predominantly liberal, and Labour is in coalition with a party that includes the remnants of the Christian Democrats, led by a former Labour MP who supported the Bill. How much times have changed.

.

FreedomNZ on this

Maia here and here

Uroskin here

How Green is the market

Well high fuel prices have done something that the Greens can't achieve with their interventionist nanny statism - it has seen a shift to public transport.

.

The Dominion Post reports that Intercity Coachlines has ordered four new double decker coaches to provide more capacity on its Wellington-Auckland coach service. The coaches will carry between 65 and 76 passengers, 30% more than standard coaches, while using 15% less fuel. It seems that demand for long distance coach services is rising because it is becoming more expensive to drive. So the more fuel efficient coaches are now cheap enough, compared to driving, to be more competitive for more people.

.

This is great, and a gamble. After all, coaches have an efficient life of no more than 15 years, so it is a reasonable capital commitment by a private company to buy new larger coaches. On top of that, the coach bodies will be built by a Tauranga company - and there is no protectionism making it more expensive to import bus bodies.

.

Don't forget Intercity was once government owned. It was the long distance part of the former Railways Road Services that the fourth Labour government privatised as part of its deal with SOE New Zealand Rail Ltd to wipe its $1 billion of restructuring debt which it had built up over the seven years since it had previously had its debt wiped. Railways Road Services used to have over $1 million in subsidies (in 1990 dollars) a year, now Intercity runs it as a commercial operation and business is growing.

.

Now the Greens might complain that the trains aren't getting the same investment - well maybe people aren't catching trains in sufficient numbers to make it worthwhile?

Bad Girls

So teenage girls are going on websites and showing off and meeting people for sex. Yes it has been going on since the internet has been around, and it shouldn’t be a surprise. It isn’t to me. I used to moderate an adult website chatroom, that chatroom would have, from time to time, teenagers under 18 accessing it. Sometimes adults would roleplay being younger, which is fine, as long as it is clear. Sometimes, there were boys and girls from puberty up gaining access. The messageboard associated with the website purged anyone who gave a birthday on registration that meant they were under 18 – so they just lied. You couldn’t tell until you caught them, and when there are thousands of people registering online and lying, you can’t do much about it other than be as vigilant as you can be. Search yahoo profiles and you're find them there too, pretending to be 18 or over.
.
In other words – teenagers are interested in sex online, they look at it, chat about it and meet others for it. Most of those they meet are in their peer group, but no doubt some meet those much older than them. The question that needs asking is not how to block them from doing it, because if you can't control your net access then it is almost futile - but to ask why they do it in the first place.
.
Check out this report:

The parents arrived home one night to find a boy in their house with their daughter.
"Then we started finding condoms lying around. We questioned her a bit further and it came out," the father said. He forced his daughter to show him the website, and he was horrified at what he found. She was acting like "something off Manchester Street". "The whole school is in on it, hooking up left, right and centre. They post messages like 'Fancy hooking up?' and they come around to the house when Mum and Dad are out to make whoopy," he said.
.
Let’s get some reality here. So a girl has met a boy off a website (not a man) and they had sex, and his daughter can dress sexy. So this didn’t happen before the internet? Seriously, there is a whole flavour of Victorian prudishness here. It is one thing to protect your kids from predatory behaviour and rightfully so, another to be concerned that teenagers – horror of horrors- are attracted to each other.
.
The internet is not dangerous. There is nothing sinister in itself about a communication network that allows people to access information, images and media from around the world about any topic. The worst the internet can do to you, if you do nothing, is to offend you or something can steal your image and defame and humiliate you. Assuming nobody takes advantage of you, the choice then is how you interact with it. With that come some simple rules that parents can apply to teenagers, like not giving out home addresses or phone numbers. Meeting people online accompanied in a public place. People meet others online daily, thousands, and thousands are no more at risk than meeting people in a bar, at a café, or at a mall. It is no MORE dangerous than anything else. The danger comes from meeting people, and that danger is universal, and part of life no less.
.
Yes there are teenage chatrooms which some adults go to for preying on teenagers. Reputable ones monitor them, which is why some men get arrested for trying to meet underage girls online. You should find those that are monitored and encourage their use. The reputable ones monitor because it is in their interests to do so. However, there is little you can do if you darling daughter (few seem concerned about sons, but boys do it too) shows off her body online with a digital camera. If she owns one and posts images of herself, she is taking a risk – and should be warned. Often sites prohibit anyone under 18 posting adult images, but then there are plenty who lie about their age.
.
The report also said:
.
His daughter "was actually making the first moves".
"They are all talking about sex, who they had sex with or were going to have sex with," he said.
Police, schools and the Government needed to take steps to crack down on the sites before something "blew up".
"I don't think police have picked up on it, but it's obvious to me the websites are dangerous," the father said.

.
Sorry “dad” to burst your bubble. Your image of your daughter as this white virginal pure possession of yours that doesn’t think about sex is as archaic as your attitude. Girls make the first moves nowadays as well. The websites are not dangerous – do you seriously think your young woman (not little girl anymore) is going to stop meeting others she may have sex with because the websites aren’t there? She seeks attention and approval, and your attempt to present her as a child corrupted by the big bad world is nonsense. You want to protect her - yes - but instead you've made the world forbidden fruit, which is only the more delicious because she wants to taste it.
.
You see this is the great unspoken truth about the internet scaremongering. Some teenagers actively search out pornography and adult contact. In fact, most teenagers have probably seen internet pornography, much like earlier generations saw playboy etc. If your daughter or son is posting explicit or seductive pictures of her or his self it is because they are seeking attention – but it may be the least of your worries. Do you know what they are doing late on Friday night? Do you know about the parties they go to? Do you remember what you did at that age? Do you talk to your kids in an open, non-judgmental way about sexuality? Do you know what your daughter wears? Why is this a bigger concern than swarms of 13 and 14yos hanging around major inner city streets at midnight on Fridays? Why is sitting at home online a bigger risk than that?
.
Answer those questions.
.
There is another side as well. The internet allows teenagers who feel different to connect with others. Imagine being gay, lesbian or bisexual and wanting to find others in your town who are – not so easy, but many of the outraged probably think that it would be an illness to feel that way. Imagine also being shy or feeling uncomfortable with the opposite sex, the net provides a fairly secure way of communicating without confronting them head on. So it can be a good thing, a very good thing if otherwise suicidal lonely perhaps gay teenagers don’t feel alone. And sex? Well if they don’t get pregnant, don’t catch diseases and aren’t forced or made to feel guilty for it, then feel relieved. However, think more than that - your teens are responding to some basic instincts, that you respond to as well, and almost certainly did at that age. Find out the facts before exploding, and you might find you get honesty and respect, and you might also find out that things aren't half as bad as you think.

.
Oh and the blogosphere has plenty of people whose websites might corrupt your teens. If you are not at work try:
http://naughtyopath.blogspot.com/

Pathetic

How much of a hero can you feel winning the World Cup through penalty shootouts? Honestly. Whether France or Italy had won, it was still ridiculous. Italy won out of luck, and because of a lousy refereeing decision against Australia several games ago.

Nice for it to remind me of why I don't bother with football. It is a game thoroughly infused by and large with melodramatic nobodies. Half of the game is focused on faking injuries sustained by the opposition. Unfortunately the ones with skills lose the plot when provoked.

So, England played mediocre, Brazil was arrogance without substance, France, Germany, Czech Republic were teams with skills that never quite made it, Australia was perhaps one of the best teams. Played pretty well, enjoyed themselves and did their best.

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.