Public transport windfall

Greater Wellington has made a windfall of almost a million dollars over recent months, mostly due to lower payments ($693,000) to diesel bus operators, and this saving is forecast to continue until oil increases in price again. The 3 month income statement to 30th September shows a variable variance of $929,000(item 13: http://www.gw.govt.nz/section1159.cfm?MeetingID=6650)
This windfall can be used to extend off peak discounted fares to all services. Rail commuters get a 30% discount between 9am and 3pm….now is the time to extend the discount to bus services and to weekends. People choosing to travel off peak decreased pressure at times when there is over crowding. This increased the efficiency of the network overall and could reduce the need for fare rises in the coming years. The fare structure can be a tool to encourage patronage on under-utilised public transport services and at the same increase profitability. What about some free services
Get around Auckland city on the free red City Circuit bus…
http://www.aucklandnz.com/index.php/content_B/?L1=65&L2=95&L3=&id=620
and Christchurch’s free CBD shuttle operated by hybrid buses

Adelaide – a free shuttle bus in the CBD plus the CBD section of the newly-extended tram line is free. A shuttle tram service in the CBD section is operated to augment the long-distance trams to Glenelg.
Portland, OR: a ‘fareless square’ for streetcar, MAX light rail and buses applies in the CBD
Dallas TX – the McKinney Avenue streetcar (tram) operates a variety of heritage cars on the CBD fringe as a free service supported by local businesses and the regional transit authority (DART) and is being extended.
Free or zero-fare public transport services are funded in full by means other than collecting a fare from passengers, normally through heavy subsidies or commercial sponsorship by businesses. Several mid-size European cities and many smaller towns around the world have converted their entire bus networks to zero-fare. Local zero-fare shuttles or inner-city loops are far more common than city-wide systems….see more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-fare_public_transport

Greater Wellington is investing in real time information and integrated ticketing in the coming years increasing costs further, but this investment should increase reliability making catching public transport a more attractive proposition to everyone.

Greater Wellington must also be conscious of the need to keep public transport affordable for the transport disadvantaged through targeted concession fares.

 

National doesn’t get it.

John Key’s “Five-headed monster” comment is more than just ignorant of the deals he’ll need to do to get into government. (On latest polling trends he’d have his own “four-headed monster”)

It is ignorant of the entire purpose behind MMP. That purpose is co-operative democracy with many factions, where factions can’t risk trying to tear each other apart. It’s a more consensus approach to parliamentary democracy. By having “many heads”, (I prefer “more voices”) we avoid the problem of autocratic leaders who can unilaterally front unpopular policy. There needs to be the conviction not just of the governing party, but also the support parties to pass bills that might potentially be unpopular, but which the government deems necessary.

The system was instituted in Germany partly with the idea to prevent the rise of another autocratic¹ party after World War II. It is highly revealing of the National Party that its leaders fail to understand that parties and coalitions do not need to be autocratic, where more voices are regarded as negative, distracting, and unmanageable.

Instead we can base decisions around consensus: (The philosophy of agreement) The core governing party might have a policy it wants implement. First it asks “Who would support our plan roughly as we propose it?” If enough of their partners sign up, the process of drafting the policy as a formal bill begins, then readings in parliament start, and minor amendments and are proposed and voted on until the bill passes. If not enough partners sign up immediately, the core of the government can then ask: “What would we need to change to get your support?” From there, it is a simple matter of finding a compromise position that suits all of the parties involved. It is easily managed, but requires diplomacy, co-operation, and the acknowledgement that every representative in Parliament is valuable, because they all represent a constituency.

Why is that so hard for National’s leaders to understand?

¹While many people associate totalitarian governments that oppress the people with communism and socialism, “fascism” and “nazism” are the right-wing version of the same trend. All of these types of governments can be umbrella-ed as “autocratic”.

 

Key wears slippery jandals – flip,flop, …splat!

A couple of weeks ago Danyl blogged at the Dim-Post:

Senior National Party staff members were in damage control last night after an embarrassing gaffe by yet another MP. …

Mr Key made a brief appearance before the media this afternoon, flanked by National Party communications manager Kevin Taylor and chief policy adviser Grant Johnston. A sheepish looking Key apolgised to Taylor and Johnston and to the public for the confusion he had caused. National Party insiders say that Key received a furious dressing down from Johnston and Taylor, as well as National chief of staff Wayne Eagleson.

Well, I thought Danyl was just taking the piss back then. But it has actually happened, as JafaPete revealed today (and The Standard also blogged on). Key has had to backtrack on his own statement, presumably under the advice that Peter Dunne’s vote may be crucial post-election.

As JafaPete said:

[Key]…appearing to announce in off the cuff remarks that National would axe the commission.

“He said there was “a ton of money being spent on it”, and he would rather give the money to non-government organisations delivering front-line services.”

Someone must have reminded him later that he might need the suport of Peter Dunne and the United Future Party, whose baby it is (its establishment was a key condition of the Party’s support agreement with Labour after the 2002 election).

Today we have the inevitable backtrack:

“… National would merely “rebalance” the commission and he expected United Future to find the changes acceptable. [Key] refused to comment on the details of National’s policy, but said there was still a place for advocacy for families somewhere in the bureaucracy.”

 

National Monopoly

 

Think Green? Vote Green?

It’s been said before (for example way back here at FrogBlog), but the Political Compass website is still a damn good way to find out where you stand on the political map.

Now it’s a Facebook application you can even test yourself while shirking at work (or, whatever, networking with friends in your leisure time) – and adding it as a FB application allows you to see where your friends are – cool!

Here in the Greens we’ve been noticing that lots of people take the test and discover that they’re much closer to us than they expected. So if you think green, and act green, then why not take the test today -  and see if you need to vote Green!

You can take the test at http://politicalcompass.org/index