Letters to Editor: Treatment of medics shameful

Treatment of medics shameful
I write to you with shame and disgust that we in Hastings sit silent and inactive whilst out-of-control youths, not only terrorise our medical staff, but take up the time of our police who are always stretched to their limit to maintain law and order in our community.
To hear that medical staff have to put up with daily abuse when trying to treat patients is unbelievable. What is the DHB's CEO and board doing to alleviate these unacceptable actions causing so much stress to doctors and nurses?
What are our local MPs, mayor, councillors, and Minister of Health doing, as this is a national problem? I would suggest very little. If I had my way, I would have a special area where these low-lives could be constantly hosed until they came to their senses.
We have many genuine and grateful patients out there who applaud those working in the emergency department of the main hospital. We do not need these drunks and druggies threatening our overworked medical staff. Enough is enough. Let's get together and force our local MPs and dignitaries to do something useful at Government level.
E W Duffill, Hastings
Parity, Mr Key?
I fully support John Akers' letter (HBT 4/7/11), but what are we going to do about it? The last superannuation increase was a mere 2.01 per cent, which in no way covers various increases in prices, GST and the general cost of living.
In respect of superannuation, I received a letter dated 22 June from the Rt Hon John Key that purports to explain the recent Budget but went on to make other statements that highlight National's political platform over the next few months. This letter stated: "We remain committed to maintaining the married rate of Super at 66 per cent of the after-tax average wage from age 65."
We now have the National Government's, and John Keys', promise that superannuation, which has been under the 66 per cent mark for many years, will be maintained at 66 per cent of the after-tax average wage. Is this confusing? Yes, it is! Currently, the married rate of superannuation is less than $13,600 per year after-tax, whereas the after-tax average wage is about $23,900 if one works from $45,000 mentioned by John Akers.
An even more sobering comparison is the fact that a person on the new minimum wage of $13 per hour earns about $21,800 after tax. What 66 per cent parity are you writing about, Mr Key, given the existing $8000 and $10,000 disparity to either the minimum or average wage respectively?
A Thomas, Taradale
Poor Bay at bottom
I hope many view with horror the bickering about the amalgamation issue. The point is lost in myriad claims and counterclaims about potential cost saving and rate increases.
To those that argue that cost saving is the reason for, or parochial interest the reason against amalgamation, I say you have misunderstood the point. The reason you worry about cost saving or parochial interest is that you are too poor. The reason you are too poor is that economic development is absent in Hawke's Bay, so your community is stagnating. Hawke's Bay is at the bottom of the economic heap.
Hawke's Bay is not a region - it is a series of fiefdoms run by chiefs and tribes in their own interest.
On any given point the tribes and chiefs will argue vehemently with one another, try to undermine one another, make disparaging remarks about one another, fail to support one another and generally demonstrate to all New Zealand and particularly the Government that Hawke's Bay is not worthy of consideration for anything of importance.
That holds back our economic development more than any perceived cost increase might do.
If you want some examples of our bickering and achieving outcomes badly as a divided community try any of these: Hospital, Airport, University, Regional Sports Park, Velodrome, McLean Park development, Splash Planet, tourism promotion, Museum redevelopment, economic development agencies, and now the amalgamation debate.The consequence is that Hawke's Bay with a population just short of 148,000 gets the attention that an individual city of 50,000 might generate, not the attention that the fifth largest urban area in New Zealand is entitled to expect. Only Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch and Auckland are larger. Individually however we are just the size of Whangarei or Invercargill.
We cannot afford to lobby Government and market Hawke's Bay economically with discordant voices, even if it costs more to amalgamate. The long term power of one and what it brings is much more important. If we endlessly bicker about whether Hastings owes $10 more than Napier, what might happen to the rates and whether our identity will be lost, then forever we will be treated as two provincial towns of no account.
I am for amalgamation for one reason, leadership - forget the costs, the savings, all the parochialism, and get on with it. We need to change the dynamic of Hawke's Bay for something more unified and progressive.
G J C Ferguson, Havelock North