Agree. It needs to benefit NZ. While royalties is great, the Taranaki oil industries is evidence how the country can benefit from high paying jobs and flow on secondary industries.
Maybe but I still don't trust anything he has anything to do with.
Then change the royalty percentage, the Queensland government change it all the time to take a larger clip of the ticket.
Ask Port of Tauranga if it’s back door access? They’re all still going through a detailed & lengthy consent process. It’s not Shane Jones ticking off projects. Geez you try to spin some crap at times.
And it’s these same fuckwits that are the first to complain about the unemployment rate & the lack of GDP growth. Just a bunch of whinging, offended at everything, dickheads.
Your self awareness in this comment is remarkable. Great observations about yourself
You are missing my point
then the effects on the environment need to be considered and only if the economic benefits out way by a significant margin the environmental damage should it be approved.Nor lefties or righties!
Uhhh… yes Lefties, the greens have announced a policy to overturn fast tracked consents.
Nah looks like we’re on the same page. I’d guess that most of the fast track projects easily meet that threshold although I’ve only looked at 2 in detail so perhaps it’s not the case.You are missing my point
There will be “lefties and righties” who would like mining banned completely.
In answer to your question directed to me - I’m of the view that if an economic case can be made for
Exactly my point .Jones was on TV this morning saying he will look at this issue after the election.Why after ? Donors?
You would think that the election should be irrelevant aye, I could understand waiting till the projects are up & operating & then lifting the royalty. But then perhaps this just underlines the issue of 3 year election cycles. Key always said you only get 1 year to do stuff & the rest of the time is either planning for or reacting to elections.
I dont know anything about mining but round where I live there has been a bunch of new housing projects but not additional infrastructure so roads are gridlocked, sewerage has to be trucked away as no pipes in place, one area in a flood zone flooded (wow, what a surprise) so now they have to relocate 100+ houses (government pushed that subdivision through despite local and council pushback?
I am concerned about some of the things that this government is pushing through without due diligence.
What I find interesting about this is that developers, including KO, can be asked to contribute to future infrastructure such as large interceptor pipes such as the two outlined in the article which are required for the subdivision. But, something like a pedestrian/cycle bridge would be the responsibility of either the local authority or NZTA/Waka Kotahi. So, if there was a saving to the developer because the interceptor drains were less expensive, the bill to them should be smaller and not instead used to pay for a bridge.
Queensland I think have no WOF’s?
I think you will find that in Queensland you need a RWC or similar to a wof only when you sell a vehicle. I haven't lived there for a while now but I can remember some absolute shit boxes on their roads.
