Posts by SteveH
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
3 News coverage (5 minute clip).
Helen Kelly said:
...tonight's meeting was actors meeting to discuss how to move forward, what they wanted in terms of terms and conditions...
They still haven't figured out what they want yet? What have they been doing the last few weeks?
She also says that if it is going overseas it's simply because it can be made cheaper elsewhere. That may be true, but the fact remains that the studio wasn't even considering making it elsewhere until the MEAA called for a boycott.
-
It's a lose/lose situation.
It's a win for the SAG. They might just have managed to kill off a competing film industry that they didn't have much of a say in.
Well, I've had a pretty angry e-mail from a friend suggesting that Ms. Ward-Lealand might want to stay out of Wellington for a while. Not entirely fair, I suspect, but damn it seems there's a lot of very unhappy people who want to get pissed at someone a lot closer to home than MEAA HQ in Redfern...
I suspect that JW-L has been caught in a pretty difficult position due to MEAA's actions. But NZAE made the conscious decision to let the MEAA speak for NZ actors. NZAE enabled this situation and should wear a lot of the blame for it developing the way it has. I can see why people might lay that blame at JW-L's feet.
-
BUT if you look at SAG's site, you can still find it (eventually) under "Hot News" but not under Member Alerts, which is where you'd expect it to be, along with other Do Not Work notices. Looks to me like everyone's pulling their heads in a bit, but no-one's going so far as to formally lift the advisory/ban.
The notice on the SAG site has always been under "Hot News" rather than "Member Alerts" - nothing has changed there. I think they just haven't got around to archiving it yet as the most recent item in "Member Alerts" is from Sept 21 and the Hobbit notice was posted on Sept 24. I don't think you should read anything into the placement of the notice on the SAG site.
-
So not exactly a steady decline, but a fairly significant decline all the same.
Including older data changes the picture a bit I think:
2001 - 150610
2002 - 155260
2003 - 162960
2004 - 161990
2005 - 166126
2006 - 168754
2007 - 165737
2008 - 154925
2009 - 158102It's too soon to be sure, but I suspect that the busway caused a one-off drop of about 12,000 trips per day and that the numbers will creep back up to their previous level. It looks like there was a pretty consistent increasing trend up until 2008 when the busway opened. The numbers increased again by 3,000 in 2009. I'd expect to see it back up to around 161,000 for 2010. I'd be cautious of inferring any sort of ongoing decline.
...there is probably a significant economic advantage to being able to get 25,000 people across the Harbour Bridge in two peak hours compared to say 20,000.
Yes, it's definitely still a winner. Even if/when we get back to 169,000 trips across the bridge per day those trips will carry more people. The bridge will be used more efficiently and there will be per-person savings in fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions.
-
Steve, NZTA show AADT (daily flow averaged over a year) for each bit of state highway. I can't remember the exact figures, but I should be able to find them.
I'd be interested, if they're not too difficult to find.
35% of people crossing the bridge on PT at peak times is pretty good.
Yes, it's certainly impressive. I would not have guessed it was so high. And it's notable that all of the growth in passenger use of the bridge is due to the busway - it is allowing more people to get across the bridge.
Similarly, if we could get CBD-bound PT modeshare up to 75% the effect would be dramatic: far more pleasant inner-city streets and generally much less congestion.
Would it reduce congestion? Or would car numbers remain static like they seem to have with the busway? Not that it really matters if car numbers drop or not, it's just as much a win if they stay static.
-
Traffic flows across the Harbour Bridge have been steadily declining over the past 5 years as employmenr on the Shore grows and as more people choose to bus into town. Around 35% of people crossing the bridge at peak times are on a bus.
Josh, did you get that from this ARTA graph, or is there more data somewhere else? If it's from the graph then I'm not sure I'd agree that traffic flows are steadily declining - car trip numbers look pretty constant to me. And I'd point out that the graph only covers the 7-9am period into the CBD. It presumably doesn't include the northbound traffic (which I suspect is increasing as employment on the Shore grows), and doesn't address non-peak trips. It also doesn't address truck movements. Anyone got a more complete picture?
-
SteveH, thanks I was wondering whether there were any in Sydney which are they though, I can't think of any on the lines I use?
There are quite a few on the Carlingford line. I believe they are planning to build a line from Epping to Parramatta which will incorporate the Carlingford line. That will involve replacing or upgrading those stations to handle 8 car trains.
-
Regarding station platforms that are too short for the trains, that's not much of a problem in the UK.
There are a few short stations in the Sydney network as well. And at night they generally only allow access to four of the (typically) eight carriage trains on all stations. It's just not that much of a problem.
-
It seems to me that the portfolio is a fairly redundant one, and should merge with the Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
Decisions on things like frequency allocations and managing the digital TV switchover seems to require specialist knowledge and seem well outside culture and heritage concerns to me. The US has a massive government agency with a annual budget of a third of a billion dollars, I don't think it's unreasonable for us to have a government ministry.
-
Wasn't it Aragorn's Rangers who turned up originally?
That was Pelennor Fields, at least in the books.