Solid support on the doorsteps of Dunedin yesterday for the right for Dunedin’s Hillside workshops to bid for the work to build Auckland’s electric trains. Even people who identified as National Party voters signed the railworkers’ petition.
Steven Joyce made a mistake this week when he dismissed the capability of NZ’s rail workers to build locos and units for Auckland.
NZers do have faith in Kiwi skills and Kiwi ingenuity. This government doesn’t and they aren’t interested in creating Kiwi jobs.
If you support the railworkers at Hillside and the Hutt to get this work, download the petition here, print and get as many signatures as you can.
Indeed. There is a clear and very good case for real ‘step-up’ change that would deepen and broaden capability and capacity at Hillside/Hutt.
You’re right about Steven who is being more like ‘kill joy’ Joyce.
So all the rest of the tax payers have to pay the voters in your electorate and Trevor’s mega bucks to do a job that can be done cheaper (and possibly better because they are trained to do it) else where
For what
Your re-election
Talk about self interest
What are they going to do when that job is finnished , make them for export to China or may be reassemble big screen tvs and electronics so we can all buy them for over inflated prices
The railways are a vital part of New Zealand’s infrastructure. With constraints forced on us by our exploitation of the environment, we will be forced to become more and more reliant on them. It is therefore vital that we have the “in house” skills to maintain and expand that network. An operational manufacturing and repair industry is an essential part of that, and it is vital for the long-term national security of our infrastructure.
It is not just a question of where we can make a short-term buck.
Vik :v)
Raymon said:
I am amazed that some people remain so negative on their fellow kiwis and our ability to actively influence the local economy for the better.
Raymon has a valid question however, despite its sarcastic tone. The leadership of engineering firms up and down the country need to plan for the future. An injection of work, machinery and money today will allow a great deal many capabilities to be developed which can then be put to use on a multitude of projects. Winning a large part of the trains work is not a license to sit back and get fat at the nations’ expense. It is an obligation to get productive NZ industry up and ready to earn for the country over several years, and certainly beyond the initial delivery of the rail cars.
Don’t forget NAVMAN, 4RF and others, in case you are underestimating NZ’s ability to work in the field of complex electronics, thank you.
Well I can see that from Raymon’s reply he is anti Kiwirail and so that means he isnt intrested in what happens. Hillside have a very good case for building Auckland’s new trains. The Government are seriously stupid to let a chance like this go overseas when we can do it in NZ and at Hillside of all places.
I was sitting on the train-replacement-bus on the way home today and heard two completely separate conversations about this – the public are noticing and want the trains built here!
“Hillside have a very good case for building Aucklands new trains.”
If Hillside can put in a competitive price let them have a go,I doubt that they will be able to without having some form of subsidy.
It will be difficult to be competitive on the labour rates alone.
Sideoiler – if you widen your perspective to Total Cost of Ownership, as well as factoring in financial benefits to the local community and returns in terms of tax take, I think that Hillside has a good shot.
@ Loota
I seriously doubt that the buyer of Aucklands trains is going to “widen their perspective to Total Cost of Ownership” and nor should they.
As I understand it there is nothing to stop them putting in a quote,it just needs to be competitive in the global market place, and not be propped up by taxpayer money.
Just so were clear Im not saying they are not capable of doing the job, Im saying that I doubt that their price would be competitive
Yes they should build the damn things here!
This is a wider issue than purchase price alone.
There is huge return available in taxation and infrastructure development. At the end of this contract there is the opportunity to export rolling-stock, or maybe another New Zealand city, Hamilton for instance, may require commuter trains to Auckland.
New Zealand will benefit by the ongoing training of a skilled workforce, already approximately 10% of Hillside’s staff are apprentices. But this isn’t solely work for Hillside, and Hutt, 40% of the value of Hillside’s current project is spread amongst other New Zealand companies, in Dunedin and through out New Zealand.
I question the logic of investing borrowed money in another countries economy when NZ workers can compete, or nearly so. Adding to our overseas debt for no taxation return isn’t acting commercially as Minister Joyce repeatedly asks of KiwiRail. It makes more sense surely to add this money to our economy and reap the tax and up skilling benefits.
Can we build them … of course we can. Come on NZ get behind our workers.
Sideoiler says:
As I understand it there is nothing to stop them putting in a quote,it just needs to be competitive in the global market place.
Well actually there is!
KiwiRail CEO Jim Quin won’t allow KiwiRail to register an Expression of Interest, blocking the way forward for the workshops.
Hillside isn’t asking for any handouts, just a fair go.
@ Les Ingram
Then I would hope that Jim Quin has considerd the business case.I cant imagine that Kiwi Rail have decided not to guote just to be bloody minded.
They have obviously decided that they would be unable to put in a competitive bid.
The days of the old union attitude of the work should come to us regardless of the costs have long since passed.
Sideoiler said:
Not to be bloody minded, but probably because they were advised not to by the Minister.
Hi Loota
Hey Spud. Nice to see ya
Raymon A Francis
How short term and market driven is your view. There are much bigger issues than a few bucks for the trains. The actual purchase cost is minuscule compared with the longterm service they are to provide as well as the building up of NZ capability and self sufficiency.
Vik Olliver, Les Ingram
You have a longer term view and also one of a more sustainable platform.
Financiers and the commercial sector show no responsibility for the nations long term community good.
There is no leadership from the NACTS as long term is not their playing field. They are not equipped in this srea and never venture near it in their policies.
Those who vote them in also appear to have little interest or perhaps just swallow the “economic” BS the are fed through the press.
Good debate about long term sustainable goals, social infrastructure and the changing world resources just doesn’t get aired.
The trains are not just another throw away car designed to last but a handful of years.
Trains are about infrastructure including the large supporting network of employment, expertise, maintenance and innovation based design and development into successive generations of replacements.
We have a home based demand that can generate a home based response. NZ has built trains before.
Yes sure some internationals business group can shoe horn NZ into buying their wares. Whats new there.
We can buy trains from anywhere but that won’t fulfill our need.
We did manage to successfully build four very complicated Inshore Patrol Vessels in Whangarei, with no labour stoppages, as I remember. I can’t see that a railway set could be too much harder at all. Perhaps the time frame is the problem. Then we remember that our Railway Workshops never had the best reputation for completing projects on time or within cost due to Trade Union interference. Perhaps the Union chickens have come home to roost, with nobody actually trusting what remains of these workshops to do the job.
If this requires subsidies, mightn’t that be disallowed by the free trade agreement with China?
I’m still amazed that everyone is still thinking along the lines of old fashioned 1970′s, 1980′s “subsidies”. Get over it, today Government needs to provide incentives and resourcing for industry to grow and develop, but the goal is for those industries to become world competitive and fast. These are not the ongoing for-no-good-result subsidies of the 1970′s Muldoon era that your parents are used to thinking of.
These are programmes to create new advanced capabilities assisting NZ to become competitive on a global scale. Of course, since NACT won’t do it, Labour must.
Providing money to ‘re-tool’ (if that’s what they want to do) is still a subsidy, I would’ve thought.
If Labour really cared about keeping kiwi jobs in kiwi hands why did they sign up free trade agreements with countries that pay their workers less than here?
Why is NZ the only country to sign up a free trade agreement with China?
All it’s done is driven down quality of life of kiwi workers as employers try to compete.
I have noticed the quality of Chinese goods to be very poor.
Why dont people read the BERL report! Kiwis are competitive! We dont ask for subsidies. I beleive there is no political will in the current government.
Can Auckland afford to buy the cheapest EMU’s and risk them being unreliable?