3 ms·

Now I can't speak for other government systems around the world, but here in Australia a big step forward would be as simple as having open and transparent gove

by jussij 7y ago

Now I can't speak for other government systems around the world, but here in Australia a big step forward would be as simple as having open and transparent government. Currently we have a Federal Government that loves slapping 'secret and confidential' stickers on as many of it's documents, just to keep them secret. Add to that they spends large amounts of time, money and effort fighting to keep these details secret by vigorously challenging freedom of information request. Then we have the problem where all layers of government love getting into bed with big business, while keeping the details of these arrangements secret using 'commercial in confidence' contracts. Just one example of the later is how the New South Wales Government entered into a secret deal with a private toll road company, agreeing to make major road changes (i.e. closing public roads) in an effort to force traffic through the new toll road tunnel. None of this was made public at the time and would never have been released to the public had the toll company not gone into receivership. This brought the matter before the courts and the court forced the government to hand over these secret documents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_City_Tunnel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_City_Tunnel To me this is a classic example of the problems with modern governments, where they are more interested in working for big business, rather than serving their constituents.

jahaja 7y ago
Yup, I agree. I just can't really see how it's possible to incentivize this at all. To _not_ pursue regulatory capture seem to require an altruistic mindset, which I'm not naive enough to expect from businesses. In Sweden we luckily still default to making almost every government document, including e.g. all police investigations that reaches the courts, public for all who requests them. It requires special circumstances to make them confidential and nothing that can be done in the loose manner you're describing.
refurb 7y ago
Reading the Wikipedia article, the lack of government transparency is crappy, but I don’t blame the tunnel company for asking the government what their plans were for the existing roads. You can’t build a traffic tunnel on the hope that people use it. You’d need to figure out what’s happening with the rest of the roads, then make a call to build or not. If the plans for the other roads change, the value of your tunnel might go to zero.
- jussij 7y ago
  > You can’t build a traffic tunnel on the hope that people use it. What you are describing is a level of planning and in this case I seriously doubt this project was planned. The only reason I brought up this one particular example is I still remember it very clearly. I'd walk home from work and I was constantly amazed as to how bad the traffic would flowed. Every street was full of cars and on many occasions I'd notice I was actually walking faster than the cars on the street (i.e. I'd see the same car at multiple intersections as I along the street). But on the day the tunnel opening all that changed and the traffic turn from walking pace to gridlock. The road closure had created a situation where now no cars where moving. Prior to the tunnel, the driving public had faced 40+ minute traffic delays trying to get out of the city but after the opening that delay jumped to 1.5 hours. So obviously, who ever signed off on those road changes was never acting on the best interest of the driving public. If they had been working on some sort of plan on improving the traffic flows they failed miserably.

by jussij 7y ago

jahaja 7y ago

Yup, I agree. I just can't really see how it's possible to incentivize this at all. To _not_ pursue regulatory capture seem to require an altruistic mindset, which I'm not naive enough to expect from businesses. In Sweden we luckily still default to making almost every government document, including e.g. all police investigations that reaches the courts, public for all who requests them. It requires special circumstances to make them confidential and nothing that can be done in the loose manner you're describing.

refurb 7y ago

Reading the Wikipedia article, the lack of government transparency is crappy, but I don’t blame the tunnel company for asking the government what their plans were for the existing roads. You can’t build a traffic tunnel on the hope that people use it. You’d need to figure out what’s happening with the rest of the roads, then make a call to build or not. If the plans for the other roads change, the value of your tunnel might go to zero.

jussij 7y ago
> You can’t build a traffic tunnel on the hope that people use it. What you are describing is a level of planning and in this case I seriously doubt this project was planned. The only reason I brought up this one particular example is I still remember it very clearly. I'd walk home from work and I was constantly amazed as to how bad the traffic would flowed. Every street was full of cars and on many occasions I'd notice I was actually walking faster than the cars on the street (i.e. I'd see the same car at multiple intersections as I along the street). But on the day the tunnel opening all that changed and the traffic turn from walking pace to gridlock. The road closure had created a situation where now no cars where moving. Prior to the tunnel, the driving public had faced 40+ minute traffic delays trying to get out of the city but after the opening that delay jumped to 1.5 hours. So obviously, who ever signed off on those road changes was never acting on the best interest of the driving public. If they had been working on some sort of plan on improving the traffic flows they failed miserably.