Meaningless long-term objectives

The art of setting meaningless long term objectives – and a pat on the back for the Department of Conservation.

OPINION: This is something that only seems to have come to the fore recently although I suspect it has always been something that politicians particularly are aware of.  Increasingly it seems politicians are not shying away from setting objectives – which is a good thing – but they are setting them in time frames which make them virtually meaningless.  I think this habit always been present in the climate change movement, eg aiming to not exceed a temperature target of a 2 degrees increase in 50 years time, but seems to be popular in other areas as well.

The most blatant recent example was the commitment by the National Party of starting to raise the age for National Super in 20 years time. Well really!  By then half of the interested parties may be dead and the rest will have largely forgotten.  Another example came in this morning from a commitment to establish a light rail link from Auckland city to the airport within 25 years.  Same comments apply.  And there are also elements of this is the announcements that have been made on meeting standards for water quality.

This is a classic example of the old public services saying “delay is the most deadly form of denial” ie if you don’t really want to do anything, set a ridiculously long range target for its completion.  The reality is that it is very difficult to give commitments more than 5 to 10 years ahead and that is simply because of the unknown but inevitable impact of changing circumstances.  So anything that has a time frame longer than that should be automatically viewed with suspicion.

This contrasts with the very tight timetables that are set for projects for which there is a genuine commitment and for which planning has been done.  I am very taken for example with the target that has been set of completing the Transmission Gully Highway by 2020 – only 3 years away.  Given the complexity of the project, this seems very ambitious but I bet that it will be achieved –  I never thought I would get to ride the Transmission Gully Highway in my lifetime but I guess I was wrong.

Talking Transmission Gully, one likely effect it will have is already evident based on the completion of the MacKays to Peka Peka link, and that is a drastic reduction in the volume of traffic on the old road that runs in parallel to the new motorway. I guess that was expected but it is still a pleasure to be able to use the old road without waiting in long queues to get access.  However, motorists now face very bad holdups in getting through the roadworks at the Raumatic South end of the motorway, and I guess that will continue until Transmission Gully is up and running.

And finally, a pat on the back for the Department of Conversation which I am sure has had a significant impact on the environmental aspects of the new motorway.  However, that is by the way.  The pat on the back is for the new walking track running from Paekakariki to Pukerua Bay – I have heard few bad words on the project, except that you do need a good head for heights on some of the steep sections.  As someone who lives for much of their time in plain sight of the track, I can verify that it is in continual use. A real regional asset.  And there are people who have done the track several times already and they will be joined by lots more.

 

Bas Walker

This is another of Bas Walker’s posts on GrownUps.

Please look out for his articles, containing his Beachside Ponderings.