Jump to content

Here we go again!


Recommended Posts

Serious question, does anybody know of any recognised, auditable or otherwise defendable methodology for coming up with these economic impact statements?

I've had vague professional dealings with guys that produce these types of 'economic' reports. i.e .I've been in the same room when a client and one of these guys have discussed this stuff. 

My understanding of these economic reports goes along the lines of:

Economic benefit guy: "so how big a number do you want us to put in the report"

Client (Punuku): "enough to shut up the public and make Phil Goff swallow our story, hook, line and sinker"

Economic benefit guy: "No problem, for a $10mil benefit, my fee is $50k, for a $30mil benefit my fee is $100k, and if you want a GDP boost of 39.5 mil and 779 full time jobs, my fee is $199k plus disbursements"

 

PS, note how a $40 mil GDP boost as been notched down by half a mil to look a tad more realistic, and the 780 full time jobs has been dropped by one as well, so it doesn't look so much like they are just pulling numbers out of their arse.

 

An economic impact report prepared for Panuku says the mooring could provide at least a $30.4 million boost over the next decade by allowing an increasing number of the largest ships to berth.

The report says in the "likely future" scenario , the spinoff could be an annual GDP boost of $39.5m and up to 779 full-time jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be able to help. The way it works is that staff/bureaucrats go to consultant,usually known to them as sympathetic,empathetic,understanding and cooperative. Consultant is informed of required outcome so consultant works back from there that produces a report to order. Pollies backs are covered because they are required to always act on professional advice. Rarely does a consultant produce any other sort of report at the penalty of not getting the next job. Plus the old boy network marks an uncooperative consultant. And that's how it works-- consultant gets huge fees,staff get a free ride and pollies backs are covered. Sad but true in most cases

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also been involved in these economic benefit analyses for Medical devices. Client asked us to prepare reports for 3 EU country health systems to prove that products x and y give positive benefit in terms of increased quality life years and economic saving. 

 

Client provided analytical model (based in Excel...) to "prove" it. 

 

Key variable (quality of life benefit) in model was based on a number published (from small largely irrelevant clinical study with subjective outcomes). Looking into the variable and study publication I found that the client's model used a misinterpretation of that key variable - in fact it was an incorrect application of statistical methods by client to try to generate a the number from two numbers published. i.e. the key variable they claimed was published, was in fact not. 

 

I told them this. 

 

They insisted we use that variable.

 

I quit the project in protest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"the mooring could provide at least a $30.4 million boost over the next decade"

 

So around one thousandth of one percent of current GDP. Sure that seems like a good deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally do not see a problem with a dolphin as it will not have much impact on tide flows,unlike wharf extensions,sure the passengers may not spend a lot of coin while here but the spin off is in provisioning.

 

Look at the money spent at Auckland airport,same scenario,prepaid trips ,supporting fellow countryman only stay at certain hotels only use certain bus companies. Talking the asian market here,only spend in certain shops etc

 

The real tourist market should be aimed at kiwis,would love to do a 10 /15 trip around the south island,but for less $$ can go to gold coast be warm eat cheaply ,rental cars cheaper,more courteous shop owners who make you feel welcome etc 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it not be reasonable to ask Panuku (Maori Language Week - it translates as "Bunch of Thieving F$%^ers") to release their economic benefit workings for public scrutiny.  It would be interesting to watch the cockroaches run for the nearest cover.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I support extending the wharf. By digging a canal on the shore.

I fully support this well thought out comment.

 

The harbour is far more valuable than a few meters of the bottom of Queen st.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Submissions can be made here - https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/have-your-say/have-your-say-notified-resource-consent/notified-resource-consent-applications-open-submissions/Pages/ResourceConsentApplication.aspx?itemId=243&applNum=CST60323353

 

There are also lots of 'reports', knowing the councils style they will be glowing and will prove the Dolphins will cause zero issues and bring an estimated 256 gazillion billion in revenues....... BULL and you know the rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Submissions can be made here - https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/have-your-say/have-your-say-notified-resource-consent/notified-resource-consent-applications-open-submissions/Pages/ResourceConsentApplication.aspx?itemId=243&applNum=CST60323353

 

There are also lots of 'reports', knowing the councils style they will be glowing and will prove the Dolphins will cause zero issues and bring an estimated 256 gazillion billion in revenues....... BULL and you know the rest.

How about posting a response we can all cut and paste into the submission form. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy f*ck. I'm reading the Navigational impact report

 

Page 1  - Executive Summery -

 

Most cargo ships enter the harbour from the east

Really, where do the rest enter the harbour from?

 

 

They have consulted with PoA, 3 Ferry companies and the HM.

No sign of any consultation with the 'stakeholders' who use the harbour the most or in the largest quantity.

 

The Dolphins won't affect yachties at all because we don't go in there due to all the nasty wind in that spot beside the laws exclude it which is why no one does.

 

It's very obvious this report wasn't written by anyone who has spent any time of the end of the wharf watching what really does happen, is a boatie and it was written to justify a predetermined result. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about posting a response we can all cut and paste into the submission form. 

If I could do that why have I gathered AYBA's and a few others submissions to copy :)

 

I'll see what I can do though.

 

Read the navigational report, it is not long and reasonably painless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The numbers and size of cruise ships visiting Auckland has increased dramatically in recent years and are anticipated to increase further. Currently these vessels are accommodated at Queens Wharf and Princes Wharf. The largest cruise ships that currently visit Auckland are not able to berth alongside these wharfs, and so instead must employ a system termed ‘dynamic positioning’ to hold themselves mid-channel in the Waitematā Harbour

 

How many can't berth because they are too big?  I thought there was only one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...