-
-
-
Patrick Reynolds is very much a PT advocate. His solution would be to throw billions at the rail line now. He is very anti-car pro cycling. So he's not against Te Huia but the fact that it is done on the cheap.
I often disagree with Reynolds' positioning but in this instance I agree that this is a pilot set up to fail.
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
Patrick Reynolds is very much a PT advocate. His solution would be to throw billions at the rail line now. He is very anti-car pro cycling. So he's not against Te Huia but the fact that it is done on the cheap.
I often disagree with Reynolds' positioning but in this instance I agree that this is a pilot set up to fail.
I never understood how this got past the sniff test. I would have gone along with the idea of the pilot (build it and they will come) but insisted that it would only go ahead if the service went all the way to the city. Schedules/stops/speed all things that could be refined later. A 2 hour train to Auckland would be the tipping point I reckon.
As for the tweets most employment contracts or employee expectations these days have something about not making public comments that could appear to be on behalf of the business.
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
I often disagree with Reynolds' positioning but in this instance I agree that this is a pilot set up to fail.
Yep, and $90M down the drain. This is an ideologically driven political boondoggle.
@crucial said in NZ Politics:
As for the tweets most employment contracts or employee expectations these days have something about not making public comments that could appear to be on behalf of the business.
If you're on a board, criticising the Board decisions is a short term move. He was an interesting choice, with little (no) governance experience
-
@nzzp said in NZ Politics:
If you're on a board, criticising the Board decisions is a short term move. He was an interesting choice, with little (no) governance experience
but, but Twyford said "Patrick Reynolds brings much needed expertise in urban and public transport to the NZTA Board".
Based on Twyfords criteria we should all be shoo in's for everything from AB coach to Minister of Finance. Reynold's expertise starts and finishes with being an avid self-promoter and busy poster on the Greater Auckland blog site.
Memo to Mark Robinson - I'm still available!!!!!
-
I'm laughing except not laughing cos nzta is such a permanent clusterfuck, but seriously, who in their right mind would opt for a three hour diesel train with baggage cart switcheroo included commute. And only twice a day. It's bloody 2021. We are supposedly a green and innovative nation, but are several decades behind everyone else in rail transport. It should not be this hard or this slow to get people from Hamilton to Auckland.
-
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@mokey so what you're saying is they are doing it on purpose
The application to put gates at the bottom of the Bombays to DNA test for inbreeding was disallowed.
-
@paekakboyz masochism 101
-
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@mokey so what you're saying is they are doing it on purpose
The classic NZ planning approach to transport (and some other things), do such a half pie job of something so that it "proves" that it was the idea itself that was bad.
Sometimes it feels like 'do anything to avoid doing something well'...
-
@donsteppa said in NZ Politics:
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@mokey so what you're saying is they are doing it on purpose
The classic NZ planning approach to transport (and some other things), do such a half pie job of something so that it "proves" that it was the idea itself that was bad.
Sometimes it feels like 'do anything to avoid doing something well'...
there's the other approach, which is if uptake isn't what was expected, it's because we didn't do enough, or spend enough. Ideology trumps pragmatism and real world testing of ideas.
-
@donsteppa said in NZ Politics:
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@mokey so what you're saying is they are doing it on purpose
The classic NZ planning approach to transport (and some other things), do such a half pie job of something so that it "proves" that it was the idea itself that was bad.
Sometimes it feels like 'do anything to avoid doing something well'...
I'm reminded of a saying of an old colleague of mine: it's not an Engineering problem, it's a money problem. You can fix any problem by throwing enough money at it
We don't want to spend the money to do it properly, so end up wasting what we do spend by not doing it properly.
-
@booboo said in NZ Politics:
@donsteppa said in NZ Politics:
@paekakboyz said in NZ Politics:
@mokey so what you're saying is they are doing it on purpose
The classic NZ planning approach to transport (and some other things), do such a half pie job of something so that it "proves" that it was the idea itself that was bad.
Sometimes it feels like 'do anything to avoid doing something well'...
I'm reminded of a saying of an old colleague of mine: it's not an Engineering problem, it's a money problem. You can fix any problem by throwing enough money at it
We don't want to spend the money to do it properly, so end up wasting what we do spend by not doing it properly.
We should be pound wise. But we are penny foolish. For a country renowned for innovations we just fail to see the big picture on major infrastructure more often than not
NZ Politics