NZ First seems to have a bottomless pit of bottom lines in election campaigns.
Last election: The comprehensive list of Winston Peters’ bottom lines
I think this is the first one this campaign:
NZ First bottom lines begin – moving Auckland’s port
Posted in General
Posted by Pete George on 9th June 2020
https://yournz.org/2020/06/09/nz-first-bottom-lines-begin-moving-aucklands-port/
Previous Post
So we’re on Level 1
So we’re on Level 1
-
Posts
- Moving on
- Big election night win for Labour
- Open Forum Sunday
- Election night 2020
- Open Forum Saturday
- Message from the Electoral Commission
- Reid Research pre-election poll
- Little change in latest 1 News/Colmar Brunton poll
- Roy Morgan September poll
- Open Forum Friday
- Covid surging in Europe
- National, Greens may boost Labour vote
- Claim that Peters was briefed on NZ First Foundation operations
- Open Forum Thursday
- National’s desperate attacks
- UMR poll
- Open Forum Wednesday
- Long campaign but still a fairly predictable outcome
- Open Forum Tuesday
- Open Forum Monday
Search this blog:
Recent Comments
- Blazer on Moving on
- traveller on Once, twice, Thrace
- Corky on Moving on
- Alan Wilkinson on Moving on
- Corky on Open Forum Sunday
- Cat on Open Forum Sunday
- Fereni Ete on The white tangata whenua
- Corky on Open Forum Sunday
- Corky on Open Forum Sunday
- Patzcuaro on Open Forum Sunday
- Corky on Open Forum Sunday
- traveller on Moving on
- Griff. on Moving on
- lurcher1948 on Moving on
- Alan Wilkinson on Moving on
Meta
Archives
RSS Links
NZ Politics
- Act Party Andrew Little Auckland Australia Bill English Brexit budget Cameron Slater cannabis China Chris Hipkins climate change Colin Craig Colmar Brunton Conservative Party David Clark David Cunliffe David Farrar David Parker David Seymour David Shearer defamation dirty politics Donald Trump Dunedin election flag GCSB government Grant Robertson Green Party Greens Hillary Clinton housing immigration Jacinda Ardern James Shaw John Key Judith Collins Kim Dotcom Kiwiblog Labour leadership lprent media Metiria Turei National New Zealand Nicky Hager Northland NZ First NZ Herald parliament Paula Bennett Peter Dunne Phil Twyford police poll referendum Roy Morgan Russel Norman Russia Shane Jones Simon Bridges The Daily Blog The Nation The Standard TPPA Trans Pacific Partnership Trevor Mallard UK United Future USA Whale Oil Winston Peters
Gerrit
/ 9th June 2020So much for private ownership. Port is owned by the people of Auckland and they will decide (though the board) to move the port, not NZ First.
With the socialist (Ihumatoa), and now NZ First, riding rough shod over private property ,how long before your home, your business, your income, your thoughts, etc., belong to the Orwellian state?
Duker
/ 9th June 2020Private property ?
Ask the people of Christchurch about King Gerry VIII and Nationals over riding of property rights or time in 2016 when Nick Smith desperately trying to talk up Nationals failed housing policies wanted to force private land bankers to sell to big developers.
As for the port shift , its absurd nonsense from Jones trying to win a seat in Northland. Auckland has a second port on its back door – The Manukau. Just inside the entrance has deep water and the problem with the bar is an easy job with those colossal Dutch 75,000 ton suction dredges to create a large channel
Gerrit
/ 9th June 2020No, the Manukau is no good. The channel entrance might be deep but it is not wide, you need at least an 500 metre (better still a 1000 metres) “turning” circle clear of the dock to spin vessels around. Next you have a land transport problem Who is going to dig up the Waitakere Ranges to create the flat land, the rail and road access required to service the port. Greenies would have a fit. Lot of Aucklands drinking water comes from there as well. Dig up a hundred plus acres plus a wide transport easement (to Onehunga) and there are major ecological and environmental issues to confront. Not sure who owns the land either, local iwi, DOC or Auckland Council.
Then you have to get resource consent to dredge. Good luck with that (especially where to place the dredging tails). You are entering the northern region of the Hector Dolphin territory. Greens wont allow mining the huge ironsand deposits on the sea floor, let along dumping mud and silt anywhere near here. And much like local iwi wont allow tidal power generation in the Kaipara Harbour entrance, unless they can count the dead fish killed by the turbine blades for three years on a pilot scheme, dredging in not going to be an option.
Manukau is a large shark nursery and you would upset them by dredging.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020The wharves wont be near the entrance, but rather nearer the airport, some more dredging required but that fill can used for the cargo handling area behind the wharves. That also will be required at Marsden Pt, which is like the Manukau in many ways , deep entrance and shallower harbour . Except it has no bar across the channel entrance.
Waitakeres problem solved as it never existed.
The reason why the Manukau entrance is closed is because of the bar and small vessels . This port wont be for small vessels full stop. That was over dramnatising as the small NZ coasters used Manukau for a long time , and they only waited – timed for arrival -at high tides. These were 700 tons or so. Where did Griff get the idea of ‘waiting weeks’
Dredging solves that problem. Sure it might be a rough transit on some occasions, but have you seen what vessels that come and go at Napier have to do and they turn broadside to the swell as they leave. Manukau will be straight out
.jpg)
The dredging will probably be a 25 m depth , thats not going to change day by day as the deeper main channel will channel the tidal flow as well
Sure the manukau entrance bar will required regular dredging , but show me a NZ port that doesnt need this , some every 5 years others more often.
Griff.
/ 9th June 2020The manukau bar moves around on a daily basis . The chart you posted is a snap shot of where the bar was at one point in time. I can guarantee it is significantly different today and will change again in the next storm
Dredging work to keep any channel open would be considerable and on going.
The Tasman wave height and shallow water means the manukau is closed to even small coastal vessels regularly .
The expense of having large ships waiting for weeks to get into or out of harbor makes it uneconomic even with out the cost of building infrastructure to support a commercial harbor and on going cost of significant dredging .
Signed.
Captain Griff with over 100 logged crossing of the manukau bar.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020The coastal traffic never had to ‘wait weeks’ and they were only 700 tons. Until the main trunk railway opened it was the fasted way to Wellington, by ship out of the manukau to New Plymouth and then the train to Wellington, and they wernt big ships either
Capt Griff clearly has never herd of Port Nicholson waves and Cook St. I hear the airport is just as diabolical on occasions.
These sorts of comments are typical of anything new for NZ , not founded on facts, strangely barmy and essentially only opposed to anything ‘new’
There may well be difficulties , but using a perfectly good port on Aucklands back door is sensible way to go.
Im not really in favour of moving port anyway, but the pro Northland crowd and their weak anti Manukau ideas are easily demolished
Griff.
/ 9th June 2020I do not think you have any idea about the west coast conditions.
Port Nicholson does not have extensive shifting sand bars and is not totally exposed to the full force of the Tasman sea.
You could still use the chart from 1860 to safely navigate Port Nicholson .
You can not safely use a chart from last year to enter the manukau harbor.
When I was crossing the bar regularly we would get an updated chart from the harbor master at the beginning of the season and shift our approach lines as conditions changed over the next few months of game fishing .
What Channels there are can totally disappear in a few days of stormy weather .
NZ biggest maritime disaster
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Orpheus_(1860)#:~:text=Orpheus%20sank%20off%20the%20west,occur%20in%20New%20Zealand%20waters.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020Heard of Wahine ? Plenty of other ships have struck Wellingtons reefs too. Wanganella, inter islander Maori
Yes it doesnt have sand bars but looking at more detained Manukau Chart on my tablet shows its 30m to the end of the North head sand dunes and then 7m over the ‘shallow bar’- roughly 2km ( spot depths may vary) and after that its 13 m to 17m to 20m plus quickly enough.
Dont worry about Tasman waves , ships are designed to manage that easily for the size of ships the port will be designed for, ( 30,000 t plus?) especially as they can head straight out into prevailing winds.
Capth Griffs little tinny not so much, so we can discount your tiny ship experience
Pink David
/ 9th June 2020Do you really think that a single incident 150 years ago prevents any serious re-evaluation?
Will a few billion on the table, there is a lot that can be done and plenty of experience around the world doing it.
Kitty Catkin
/ 9th June 2020The billions are borrowed money; we ought to be spending as little as possible at the moment.
duperez
/ 9th June 2020I think Jones trying to win the Northland seat with the port shift is far less absurd than thinking that the Manukau could be the port of Auckland.
Alan Wilkinson
/ 9th June 2020Yes, there is a good reason NZ has no west coast ports of any consequence.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020Thats was before 75,000 ton dredgers which can dredge down to 100m+
Gerrit
/ 9th June 2020Where will you put the continual dredged tailing once you have built the port? Harbour by the airport is super shallow. Even at high tide there is less them 500mm of water over the banks between the Onehunga and Papakura channels. There is a large hole at the end of the runway at Auckland AIrport (good for shark fishing) but you will be in the flight path so no good.
Best you change your focus to the east coast and the Firth of Thames specifically. Much better option for far less costs.
The Manukau port option is as practical as the suggested Muriwai one.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020Heard of the tasman sea.?
Same Dredges can created shipping channel through the mud banks – so easy to remove. No one is saying the Manukau as it is right now can be Aucklands port. Why even the Waitemata has had major dredging and channel widening like other NZ ports .
Just because a few ‘cant get their head around’ a major proposal that would have billions to spend doesnt mean it cant be done. The cost is a big reason why it shouldnt move too
Do you think Australian mega ports at mouth of Brisbane river and Hunter River for Newcastle on Australias east coast were easy peasy too.
This was the Newcastle port entrance originally , now it takes 150,000 ton bulk coal carriers. Not much room inside either
Pink David
/ 9th June 2020Duker has a very good point here. If you are going to spend billions, those billions open up other options.
There are major logistical advantages of keeping the port in Auckland, and a ton of the infrastructure already exists to some level in Manukau.
Operating costs too, a port in Northland requires a lot more expense moving everything from Northland south. Every ton/km is a cost. That would offset the cost of maintaining a dredged harbour. That is also an environmental cost too.
If they do not consider this option very seriously, then they are very foolish indeed.
Alan Wilkinson
/ 9th June 2020We still don’t have a west coast port of any significance despite big dredges. Aint gonna happen.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020See above about Australias east coast ports which face the same direction as Manukau
NZ east coast ports , some of which like Napier , Timaru , Gisborne etc were built despite the unfavourable location.
Kaipara is a great habour only limited because of its closeness to Auckland
Manukau entrance is surprising deep , and the bar is easy to dredgeusing modern methods which are a few months. Continued dredging can be done by smaller vessels owned by the port – which happens now in NZ.
Theres the strange idea that existing NZ ports were fully formed as they are now when the first ships arrived 150 yrs ago
Gerrit
/ 9th June 2020Yep all feasible and doable with the mountain of cash Jones can throw at it. But still wont get done as it is in the wrong place. Just like NorthPort is in the wrong place.
Firth of Thames is the only option as it is virtually smack bang in the middle of the Auckland/Tauranga/Hamiton golden triangle. Easy access to points north, west and south by road and rail. Can retire the, at capacity, Auckland and Tauranga ports. Leaving Auckland with tourist, sugar and naval capacity and Tauranga as a tourist, log exporter only port.
Now that makes sense.
Duker
/ 9th June 2020Maritime wise makes some sense ( well moving it doesnt make sense in many ways , do we need more waterfront cafes?)
I think the road rail links are more difficult, especially road , but of course plenty money can change that
Covid has changed the ideas about White Elephant projects like moving port and light rail Dominion Rd- Airport. Some of these ‘new hospitals’ are close to being trophy projects as well. As though medical care news full new hospitals – when its mostly a ruse to lower the numbers of beds and operating theatres
Pink David
/ 9th June 2020“Yes, there is a good reason NZ has no west coast ports of any consequence.”
Yes, that good reason is that the east coast ports are really good, and well established. If you want to remove one and spend billions doing it just for aesthetic reasons, then you have other options.
Conspiratoor
/ 9th June 2020Yes, forget Jones he’s a sideshow. Think, what would the chinese do?
Compulsory acquisition of Auckland’s prime port land from the family saud, build a 21st century waterfront and move the port to Northland’s existing deepwater port with room to expand and a chinese built rail link through to a transport hub in Wiri.
Idle prediction. Northland’s growth from Mangawhai through to Whangarei (ok best we leave out Dargavich, the hydroponics capital of NZ) will go close to exponential over the next decade