The 2017 Election Thread

[austingtir]

Cogent comment.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/113...-of-the-budget

What about when the Nats are back in after the next election and they knock labour/NZfirst's Train Set on the head again like they did last time?

Basically what labour is doing with this budget (other than mental health which I support) is all a complete and utter waste of our money!!

[Swoop]

Cogent comment.https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/113...-of-the-budget

Surely the socialist solution to the housing question is simple?
Do what the communist utopia espouses and put FOUR families into a four bedroom apartment.
Gotta love that socialism.

What about when the Nats are back in after the next election and they knock labour/NZfirst's Train Set on the head again like they did last time?

Basically what labour is doing with this budget (other than mental health which I support) is all a complete and utter waste of our money!!

I'm trying to fathom why liarbour want to have a heavy rail system to Dargaville and also some unknown place north of Whangarei?
Are there that many tourists wanting to go there, or is it a waste of taxpayer's money?
Or... is the rail union being supported somehow...

[pete376403]

Surely the socialist solution to the housing question is simple?
Do what the communist utopia espouses and put FOUR families into a four bedroom apartment.
Gotta love that socialism.


I'm trying to fathom why liarbour want to have a heavy rail system to Dargaville and also some unknown place north of Whangarei?
Are there that many tourists wanting to go there, or is it a waste of taxpayer's money?
Or... is the rail union being supported somehow...

Because Auckland harbour is pretty much at maximum capacity and they want the freight to go though a Northland harbour? Keep the tourist boats coming to AUckland and send the freight north.

[Grumph]

Because Auckland harbour is pretty much at maximum capacity and they want the freight to go though a Northland harbour? Keep the tourist boats coming to AUckland and send the freight north.

Some years back now, when I was working for the Waterfront Industry Commission, I participated in a debate about future policy for NZ ports.
There were only two of us from the WIC in a room full of shipping industry people. Almost invariably right-wing of course.
The company guys wanted to keep Auckland supplied from Tauranga and Auckland port - but conceded that there was going to be a bottleneck between Tauranga and Auckland. About the one thing we all agreed on was that there was no easy fix for that bottleneck - and even then Auckland port was approaching maximum capacity.
But as good Nat supprters they couldn't bring themselves to support rail...

The Northport option is a good one. A deepwater port which has land adjacent. Upgrade the rail link and the job's a good'un.

[Laava]

I'm trying to fathom why liarbour want to have a heavy rail system to Dargaville and also some unknown place north of Whangarei?
...

Could it have anything to do with the enormous amount of export timber and dairy products that at the moment has to be trucked on the piss poor roads that people also bemoan having road funding because it is the far north? At a guess?

[Ocean1]

Some years back now, when I was working for the Waterfront Industry Commission, I participated in a debate about future policy for NZ ports.
There were only two of us from the WIC in a room full of shipping industry people. Almost invariably right-wing of course.
The company guys wanted to keep Auckland supplied from Tauranga and Auckland port - but conceded that there was going to be a bottleneck between Tauranga and Auckland. About the one thing we all agreed on was that there was no easy fix for that bottleneck - and even then Auckland port was approaching maximum capacity.
But as good Nat supprters they couldn't bring themselves to support rail...

The Northport option is a good one. A deepwater port which has land adjacent. Upgrade the rail link and the job's a good'un.

I had a bit to do with cracking containers for an inspection service provider back in the WIC days. We got involved initially for custody transfer purposes, for dangerous or sensitive cargoes. But clients quickly noticed that where inspectors were involved their losses were much, much lower, so they started to employ our services for the more mundane freight too, and for a few years it was an ongoing battle between WIC staff and our inspectors us as to who got to be present during de-vanning. Not sure who would have won the battle had the WIC not been disbanded, but the end user certainly benefited most from the winning of that war.

Having said that rail is a good answer to some urban distribution issues. Or it would be if the relevant sidings and real estate hadn't been long since flogged off. As it is the biggest lesson from the on-again, off-again rail bandwagon is that politics is no substitute for adequate asset management.

[husaberg]

But as good Nat supprters they couldn't bring themselves to support rail...

The Northport option is a good one. A deepwater port which has land adjacent. Upgrade the rail link and the job's a good'un.

I have to laugh every time someone says that vs road transport is more efficient without even having a basic concept tof the volumes involved, Why is it they claim to know yet you have to explain to them one train of coal equals over 6 fully laden trucks per hour, for 24 hours.
Or over a 700 KM round trip. 136 trips a day with 68 trucks being double shifted 7 days a week. With 136 drivers. but unfortunately as drivers can only do 6 days in a row you need another 40 drivers than that. plus a few few trucks as they are going to need to be serviced every week or so and a decent diesel mechanic is going to take all day to do two so you are going to need at least another 100 of those as well.
Not to even start on the fact trains use far les fuel per ton of freight.
Compared to about 4 train drivers and two engines and 30 wagons. and 30 people on track maintenance.

[pete376403]

Only have to watch the log trains going past my house twice a day - each train has removed at least thirty truck and trailer units from the Rimutuka Hill road. They could probably run more trains if they didnt have to schedule around the suburban passenger units, a good reason for reinstating double tracking from Upper Hutt to Trentham. This was being discussed at the same time the Blenheim street crossing was converted to single track...

[Swoop]

Because Auckland harbour is pretty much at maximum capacity and they want the freight to go though a Northland harbour? Keep the tourist boats coming to AUckland and send the freight north.

Could it have anything to do with the enormous amount of export timber and dairy products that at the moment has to be trucked on the piss poor roads that people also bemoan having road funding because it is the far north? At a guess?

Rail for timber is an option in existance already, yet the trucks seem happy to fill the roads instead.
I spoke with a company involved in hauling logs out of forrestry and the biggest gain they had was to lift the trailer onto the bed of the truck, and return back into the forrest carrying the trailer. The gains from not paying the road user charges on the trailer unit made a huge dent in costs.

The news article focussed on the Dargaville and "north" bit of the line, yet didn't mention the required spur towards Northport.

[Grumph]

I had a bit to do with cracking containers for an inspection service provider back in the WIC days. We got involved initially for custody transfer purposes, for dangerous or sensitive cargoes. But clients quickly noticed that where inspectors were involved their losses were much, much lower, so they started to employ our services for the more mundane freight too, and for a few years it was an ongoing battle between WIC staff and our inspectors us as to who got to be present during de-vanning. Not sure who would have won the battle had the WIC not been disbanded, but the end user certainly benefited most from the winning of that war.

We've had this argument before - and you still get the wrong end of the stick. WIC staff never went near a job. We administered the watersiders, tally clerks and shipwrights. Labour was requested by the shipping companies and stevedoring companies - in writing - according to an agreed manning scale for each port. That labour was supervised by company foremen answering to their management.
If there was a battle as you mention, it was between stevedoring companies and the end recipient of the goods.

Given that post WIC, the local port companies and stevedoring companies took on watersiders etc as permanent staff, the same people were doing the same jobs...Just being paid by someone else.

[Laava]

Rail for timber is an option in existance already,

Where? The majority of the logs harvested are trucked to Northport as the only option. The closest railway yard to Northport is whangarei, even though the railway goes south from there, the next closest yard is probably wellsford or te hana maybe. This push for the northport line is not a new thing, nor is the massive sustainable logging out of northland. Winston has been campaigning for a long time, maybe 20yrs or so. At the moment the lines operate as far north as Fontera Kauri but are mothballed further north to Opua as is the line from Waiotira to Dargaville. The Northport link is long overdue.

[Ocean1]

We've had this argument before - and you still get the wrong end of the stick. WIC staff never went near a job. We administered the watersiders, tally clerks and shipwrights. Labour was requested by the shipping companies and stevedoring companies - in writing - according to an agreed manning scale for each port. That labour was supervised by company foremen answering to their management.
If there was a battle as you mention, it was between stevedoring companies and the end recipient of the goods.

Given that post WIC, the local port companies and stevedoring companies took on watersiders etc as permanent staff, the same people were doing the same jobs...Just being paid by someone else.

I'm not arguing that the systemic pilfering was done by WIC officials.

And as you say 90% of the staff involved were the same immediately post WIC. Maybe the few that didn't stay on were all prolific thieves, dunno, but it's a fact that almost overnight the losses became much, much lower.

The particular battle I was referring to was local WIC supplied staff refusing to de-van containers if company representatives were present. They considered independent inspectors as company representatives, and the WIC backed them up. The inspectors were legally required to be there in order to be able to report on what was in the container at the time the seal was cracked, and I don't mean contractually obliged, I mean required by act of parliament.

It's the sort of nonsense you get every time the link between goods and or services and the payment for them is broken.

[Grumph]

I'm not arguing that the systemic pilfering was done by WIC officials.

And as you say 90% of the staff involved were the same immediately post WIC. Maybe the few that didn't stay on were all prolific thieves, dunno, but it's a fact that almost overnight the losses became much, much lower.

The particular battle I was referring to was local WIC supplied staff refusing to de-van containers if company representatives were present. They considered independent inspectors as company representatives, and the WIC backed them up. The inspectors were legally required to be there in order to be able to report on what was in the container at the time the seal was cracked, and I don't mean contractually obliged, I mean required by act of parliament.

It's the sort of nonsense you get every time the link between goods and or services and the payment for them is broken.

Again - the WIC staff were never involved in operational matters. If there was a problem as you describe it would have come from the watersiders union.
Waterside workers were not WIC staff. They were workers supplied to us by the union which we administered on the unions behalf. On the job they were employed by the company hiring them.

The WIC would have never got in between the company and the union. We supplied the forum for an independent chairman of a Port Conciliation Committee to hear both sides of any disputes, then all parties abided by the decision.

I find it very interesting that you apparently went for so many years involvement without finding out how the system worked. I worked with the labour bureau manager in Wellington while he was at Lyttelton. He would never have got involved as you suggest. Under the act that established the WIC, he couldn't.

[Ocean1]

Again - the WIC staff were never involved in operational matters. If there was a problem as you describe it would have come from the watersiders union.
Waterside workers were not WIC staff. They were workers supplied to us by the union which we administered on the unions behalf. On the job they were employed by the company hiring them.

The WIC would have never got in between the company and the union. We supplied the forum for an independent chairman of a Port Conciliation Committee to hear both sides of any disputes, then all parties abided by the decision.

I find it very interesting that you apparently went for so many years involvement without finding out how the system worked. I worked with the labour bureau manager in Wellington while he was at Lyttelton. He would never have got involved as you suggest. Under the act that established the WIC, he couldn't.

I think we're talking past each other. The workers supplied via WIC list were called WIC *expletive deleted* by pretty much everyone else on the wharf. When our guys turned up to inspect a container's contents it wasn't unusual for these guys to do everything they could to have the container opened without the inspector present. Mostly they'd just fuck around doing anything else but empty the container. Sometimes for days. And one WIC regulation or another was the most common reason given as to why they needed that inspector to fuck off before they'd do anything at all.

Several such incidences did indeed end up in dispute, as you say. Not being legally interested in any of the involved parties I was never privy to whatever decision was eventually handed down. Neither were most of the rest of the contractors working on the wharf. All we ever knew was that yet another shipment was sitting on the wharf, apparently unable to be unloaded, likely would be for months and there was apparently fuck all anyone was either able or prepared to do about it.

[Grumph]

You've been misled. There were no WIC regulations regarding work practises. There were however awards relating to the work done which were negotiated between the union and the combined shipping companies. The WIC had no part in enforcing these, it was entirely up to the union delegate and the company foreman.

To re-emphasise, the WIC was not the watersiders union - and didn't speak for them. Calling the waterside workforce WIC staff is totally wrong. Both legally - and in operational practise. I'd suspect that your information came from a shipping company rep. In some ports they were working actively to undercut the WIC with the ultimately successful aim of removing it. We saw a little of this in Lyttelton - but Bob Scott (yes, the all black) the local port Conciliation Committe chair kept most of it under control.