«

.... why passports with a 50 cent chip imbedded in them cost twice as much,
and have to be renewed twice as often (making them effectively four times as
expensive)?

I would really love to understand this one...

BTMO wrote:
> ... why passports with a 50 cent chip imbedded in them cost twice as much,
> and have to be renewed twice as often (making them effectively four times as
> expensive)?
>
> I would really love to understand this one...

Bruce Simpson has asked the same thing over at http://www.aardvark.co.nz
in his column today. I expect there a bit of commentray on this in the
forums there by now.


--
EMB

"BTMO" <> wrote in message
news:l_zaf.613$...
> ... why passports with a 50 cent chip imbedded in them cost twice as much,
> and have to be renewed twice as often (making them effectively four times
> as expensive)?
>
> I would really love to understand this one...

Internal affairs seems to have a culture of passing on all and sundry costs
to the public. For instance they might figure in say all the cost of
upgrading their computer programs, and their computers, their training
costs, a new trainee staff member, extra acc costs, inefficiency costs and
anything like that onto the cost of the new passport. Then the IA minister
will not need to stroke his face on tv when he's telling us his lies. IA did
this with certificate costs for a while but lobbying them worked a little
and they relented. IA seems to be inefficient anyway, I'd question if they
have someone there who could estimate the costs properly.
Joy

On Fri, 4 Nov 2005 15:48:51 +1300, "BTMO" <> wrote:

>... why passports with a 50 cent chip imbedded in them cost twice as much,
>and have to be renewed twice as often (making them effectively four times as
>expensive)?
>
>I would really love to understand this one...
>



As this is a US government requirement they should pay for it, why does the
user, that does not need it have to pay..

"EMB" <> wrote

>> I would really love to understand this one...
>
> Bruce Simpson has asked the same thing over at http://www.aardvark.co.nz
> in his column today. I expect there a bit of commentray on this in the
> forums there by now.

Bruce!

I haven't been to Bruce's site since I quit Telecom (science is a MUCH
better life!!!) - I will just duck over there and...

(-does so-)

Yep. He hit the nail on the head, alright.

Incidentally, I don't think I am allowed back in Australia any more.

Apparently thinking bad thoughts about the Howard govt is illegal these
days...

Great huh?

BTMO wrote:

> Incidentally, I don't think I am allowed back in Australia any more.

That's their loss then.

> Apparently thinking bad thoughts about the Howard govt is illegal these
> days...

Must be a lot of criminals out there then.... hang on, Australia was
already full of criminals.




--
EMB

"EMB" <> wrote

>> Incidentally, I don't think I am allowed back in Australia any more.
>
> That's their loss then.
>
>> Apparently thinking bad thoughts about the Howard govt is illegal these
>> days...
>
> Must be a lot of criminals out there then.... hang on, Australia was
> already full of criminals.

The pricks are welcome to it.

Howard is now, and has always been, a sleazy little scumbag....

Unfortunately, he has taken the country down with him.

BTMO wrote:

> ... why passports with a 50 cent chip imbedded in them cost twice as much,
> and have to be renewed twice as often (making them effectively four times
> as expensive)?

The life of a passport was cut to 5 years a while back.

> I would really love to understand this one...

Another question i haven't heard anyone ask is how they are going to get
that biometric info to put it into your passport.

Is it just a scan of a photo you provide? In which case, the system can be
fiddled and what's the point?

Or is everyone going to have to physically visit a passport office and get
their faces scanned?

That will cost a lot of people a lot more than $150.

BTMO wrote:

>
> "EMB" <> wrote
>
>>> Incidentally, I don't think I am allowed back in Australia any more.
>>
>> That's their loss then.
>>
>>> Apparently thinking bad thoughts about the Howard govt is illegal these
>>> days...
>>
>> Must be a lot of criminals out there then.... hang on, Australia was
>> already full of criminals.
>
> The pricks are welcome to it.
>
> Howard is now, and has always been, a sleazy little scumbag....
>
> Unfortunately, he has taken the country down with him.

Heartily agree with that....and the majority of Aussies have consented to it
- informed or not.

Negligent in charge of a voting paper.

Joy wrote:

> Internal affairs seems to have a culture of passing on all and sundry
> costs
> to the public. For instance they might figure in say all the cost of
> upgrading their computer programs, and their computers, their training
> costs, a new trainee staff member, extra acc costs, inefficiency costs and
> anything like that onto the cost of the new passport. Then the IA
> minister will not need to stroke his face on tv when he's telling us his
> lies. IA did this with certificate costs for a while but lobbying them
> worked a little and they relented. IA seems to be inefficient anyway, I'd
> question if they have someone there who could estimate the costs properly.
> Joy

Peter Dunne was Internal Affairs Minister under National in the 1990s IIRC.