The City Rail Link that has caused huge disruption to businesses along Albert Street, forcing many to close. Photo / Dean Purcell
I want to comment on the City Rail Link being constructed in Auckland and the drastic effect on businesses because of it. This week I found myself walking up from the waterfront past some of them and was struck immediately by the near total absence of customers. I actually bought an item from a souvenir shop which I didn't need because I could not walk out without feeling guilty. It seems to me the powers that be who started this grandiose scheme give no thought whatsoever to the hardship endured because of the day-long noise and dust and, just as importantly, virtually denying pedestrian access and potential customers. The Prime Minister and Mayor have both pushed aside requests for compassionate or financial assistance, yet there does not seem to be any shortage of money when it comes to yet another billion-dollar flag-waving opportunity.
Ted Partridge, Mangere
The Business (Thursday, July 25) carried a lead story about the Turner brothers' hopes and aspirations for a new future direction. Ohinewai was to become virtually a suburb of Huntly (yeah right!) and awaken from a century of slumber and begin manufacturing beds.
Andrea Fox reported lots of warm, fuzzy statistics and logical reasoning on the whys and wherefores by the Turners. I see nothing but positives for the venture. Job creation, "affordable" worker housing and new infrastructure all seem positive to me.
What baffles me, though, is the paragraph: The proposal has been publicly notified with two objections received. One was from Mercury Energy which noted the development would be on a flood plain, and the other from Fish & Game.
Why would a power authority be concerned about a development being flooded? I imagine the Turners' original land agents would be aware it doesn't flood in that part of the Waikato River and I'd be interested in what Fish & Game object to. Are those objecting just another example of "more snots in the trough" when someone initiates progress?
Rex Hohaia, Huntly.
With electric vehicle subsidies becoming available, Vince West asked: 1) What is the manufacturers' battery life guarantee, 2) What are battery replacement costs, and 3) What will the government and councils do with dead batteries? Vince missed out a key question — what will the road-user charges be? With no such charges, should EVs be allowed?
Ian McTavish, Herne Bay.
Contrary to the impression given in the Herald's series on the heart-rending stories of failures in cancer treatment, New Zealand has a good record in this area. Last year The Lancet, a top UK medical journal, reviewed cancer survival in 71 countries. It concluded: "For most cancers, 5-year net survival remains among the highest in the world in the USA and Canada, in Australia and New Zealand, and in Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden". In other words, we are among the best in the world, though could do better.
I understand none of these countries has a single independent statutory cancer-control agency, as advocated in your article, although all have energetic cancer charities. We already have 20 DHBs and dozens of primary health organisations for a country of fewer than five million — but perhaps we could revive the cancer-control advisory body disestablished by the previous Government (on the grounds cancer services had improved sufficiently)?
Peter Davis, University of Auckland.
We should all be grateful Bernard Orsman is investigating where our rates go. His figures (or rather those given to him by Auckland Council) raise some further questions. Each tabulation of "how the running costs are funded" has provision for depreciation. It is doubtful that depreciation is a running cost in the sense addressed by the articles, but more importantly, a footnote explains depreciation as "putting aside money to replace assets in the future". Where is it "put aside"? Does it mean, for instance, that when the council's offices need to replaced in the future, there will be no need for ratepayers to service a new loan or pay yet another "targeted rate", as the council will simply slip its hand under the mattress and pull out a wad of money? Doubtful.
Much worse, the "running costs" for parks, pools and libraries show an item called "accounting adjustments". What can that be? Should we bother asking? After all, it's only $62 million, not quite 10 per cent of total "running costs". If a sensible, strong mayor were in office it would not be the costs that were running but rather some profligate managers.
Peter Newfield, Takapuna.
Graeme Easte claims that most firearms-related deaths and injuries are a result of the actions of licensed firearms owners rather than unlicensed criminals.
According to the police, about 1 per cent of firearms-related crime involves a licensed owner — 1 per cent is not "most" of anything.
As for his comparison of guns and cars? You only have to register a car to drive it on a public road. You can freely drive an unregistered car on private property. Firearms usage is not the same as car usage.
Our system of firearms licensing worked for 27 years. Rather than tighten weaknesses in that system, Labour completely changed it, placing a huge financial burden on taxpayers and demonising the most law-abiding sector of our society, taking away our farmers' main means of pest control and destroying our ability to compete in international sport.
As a Government they are not fit for purpose.
Jason Clark, Auckland.
Come on Phil (Goff) and Phil (Twyford), how about showing a little Phil-anthropy for the businesses affected by the rail project?
Glennys Adams, Waiheke Island.
I cannot understand why anyone would attack any hospital worker who is simply trying to help them. I have had several hospital visits in recent years, in various departments, and can't think of anything to say except "thank you for your caring and help".
Roger Stewart, Te Atatu.
I think it's absolutely appalling that our medical/nursing staff in hospitals who are trying their best to save us from our own human idiocy can be assaulted without consequences for the perpetrator. It's about time we stepped up and jailed them. Not home detention. The same should apply to those who assault firefighters, St John staff, etc.
Debi Buxton, Taupō.
A leading article (July 25) on attacks on hospital workers and not a mention of alcohol. Perhaps time to have controls on some fundamental factors.
D.G. Woodfield, Hamilton.
Another day of destruction and horrific injury on our roads probably caused by a stolen vehicle, people's lives destroyed forever. I blame the lawmakers, the so-called leaders of our society. It happens every week — stolen cars, lives destroyed. Until we have laws that treat this theft as serious criminal activity these events will continue with regularity. At present we have a huge focus on gun laws as the result of a once-in-a-lifetime tragedy. Every day we have another loaded gun among us, the stolen car, death and destruction a heartbeat away. Do they have this sort of criminal activity in Singapore?
Douglas Anderson, Glendowie.
Now that Tweedledum (US) has been joined by Tweedledee (UK), the world has much more to worry about. But no longer does either have to tell us how much they are loved and respected, they can now heap praise on each other.
Des Trigg, Rothesay Bay.
Two peer-reviewed journal articles by Christine Neill and Andrew Leigh analysing the Australian gun buyback scheme after the Port Arthur Massacre found that 200 lives per year have been saved in the ensuing 15-year period. Australia is around 5 times the size of New Zealand so we can expect our gun buyback programme to save 40 lives per year. NZTA estimates a human life to be worth $4.15 million which means we save $166m per year. It turns out the majority of lives saved in Australia were suicides so we can expect the New Zealand suicide rate to also drop. History will look back on the gun buyback scheme as a tremendous success.
John Caldwell, Howick.
An Auckland man with Down syndrome has won a change of rules that will allow anyone with a life-shortening congenital condition to access their KiwiSaver funds before they turn 65.
Weekend Herald readers share their views.
Catherine Gordon
If someone needs to access their KiwiSaver funds earlier then they should be able to do this. It's your money and you should be entitled to use it when you see fit, not be bullied by draconian rules set out by the government.
Krisc Putaranui
You should be able to access KiwiSaver if you have a debilitating or life-threatening disorder, condition or disease. KiwiSaver's your money that gets taken from your wages automatically so you should be able to get it when you fall ill. Good on him and I hope it's a lot so he can enjoy it.
Dianne Rangi
Well done, so very pleased for you, it's a shame you had to fight for this money but was well worth the fight. Hope you have a wonderful trip to visit your brother in Italy.
Viv Cotter
Good on you Tim, you've trailblazed a path for so many who might not have your courageous voice.
Early findings already delivering valuable insights that could transform soil health.