In good standing Thank you, journalists of New Zealand, for articles on the attempt to make New Zealand ungovernable. If local body election candidates are now hiding their backgrounds it seems critical to look at what candidates say they are not standing for, including: Not standing for equitable water infrastructure for all of New Zealand that will be managed with input from tangata whenua. Not standing for rates (some freed up by not having to maintain expensive water infrastructure) to be applied to whole-of-community projects - just their own pick-a-problem pothole projects. Not standing for community domestic violence programmes to help women and children because they might impact the “alpha male”. Not standing for local and central government health programmes that have helped, and continue to help, look after the most vulnerable. Not standing for fluoridation that may save dental health for years to come. Not standing for restrictions on the “freedom” to show images of children being abused or even shot - supporting those who continue to show the mosque attack video. Not standing for restrictions on freedom of language that incites violence and hatred. Not standing for whole-of-picture media... just “trusted” media. Thanks again. It is up to us voters now. Lori Dale, Mission Bay.
Curve crushing Cecilia Robinson (NZ Herald, September 5) is downplaying the real cost of Covid and its ongoing impact on the community. We need only to look across at one of our nearest neighbours New South Wales, which yesterday reported 1689 in hospital, with 40 in ICU. Last week it was reported that many downtown businesses in Sydney were on the verge of collapse. And the reason for all this? Well, one major difference is that masks are not mandatory. Once again, we seem to be crushing the curve, and once again leading the way in this region. Paul Tudor, Sandringham.
Facing facts Now that the question of mask mandates has arisen again, it is important to remember what is behind the mandates. The experts advised a long time ago that mask-wearing was a good way to slow down or prevent the spread of Covid (and other diseases). In a perfect world, everyone would have followed the advice of the experts voluntarily and there would have been no need for mandates. Unfortunately, a number of New Zealanders have seen the mandates as an infringement on their freedom. I often wonder whether these same New Zealanders follow expert advice and wash their hands after visiting the toilet. Unless you are an expert yourself you cannot pick and choose which experts to follow. Greg Cave, Sunnyvale.
Mesh options In Her Head (NZ Herald, August 29) highlights the contested space of our bodies and whose wellbeing takes priority. Not all choices offered are equal or long-term. We have different treatment choices for stress urinary incontinence depending on affordability. We are not told how the medical gauze, along with proper training and credentialing, rationalises the risk ratio for any potential suffering or harm that may result from mesh sling insertion. Without regulation of medical devices, do we just continue responding to the voices of the clinical hierarchy alone? What happened to "do no harm" or formal reviews when adverse outcomes occur? An ACC claim and the new Code of Consumer Expectations will be just a pipe dream without a commitment to transparency and action for change. Barbara Holland, Greymouth.
Get my GST I find the protests about GST being applied to financial management fees interesting and the Government's reaction to these protests even more interesting. The fees directly relate to a service provided by the financial organisations, including KiwiSaver so is there any logical reason why GST should not apply? If I employ a lawn-mowing service, I expect to pay GST. The Government's reaction is absolutely in response to the protests. I would have thought if a government had the justification to correct what was clearly a loophole then it should have been able to justify that action to the wider community. How will it fill the income gap this backdown has created? It must be by using the "Robertson technique" of either borrowing or printing more money, an approach which can only be inflationary and with an impact probably much more than applying GST on financial fees. It is also interesting that if legitimate GST on services can be exempted why can essential food items not be exempt from the GST? This would certainly have a much greater impact on those struggling to make ends meet today, let alone saving for the future. Rod Lyons, Kumeū.
