Letters: Parliament - people of all cultures should express themselves; the future of Ports of Auckland; and politicians’ behaviour

Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi at the swearing in of Parliament. Photo / Mark Mitchell

The Te Pāti Māori Party did well with their colourful theatrics at the opening ceremony of Parliament. They continue to make people aware of Māori culture and language which is a good thing in a culturally diverse society such as Aotearoa.

However, therein lies the problem.

Why shouldn’t other parliamentarians of other cultures be allowed to do something similar, otherwise they may feel marginalised? Our parliamentarians come from various backgrounds such as Sāmoan, Tongan, Chinese, Korean, Filipino, Vietnamese, the Middle East, Denmark and Britain. Their ancestors or they themselves have made New Zealand their turangawaewae so why shouldn’t they be allowed to express themselves in a similar manner so as to have a sense of identity and independence associated with having made New Zealand their home base whilst making people aware of the diverse background of all our citizens?

Surely this is the embodiment of the Te Tiriti O Waitangi and if not why shouldn’t it be?

Bernard Walker, Papamoa.

Ratepayers should vote

Regarding Auckland Council’s long-term plan, I consider only ratepayers should be eligible to vote for or against the plan as they are the ones who will have to foot the bill

Arthur Moore, Pakuranga.

Name changes

Greg Cave (NZ Herald, December 7) noted Nicola Willis said “It won’t cost much to change the naming of Waka Kotahi” then wrote, “It won’t cost anything if left alone”. Cave should have asked the question “How much did it cost to change the name of the NZ Transport Agency (as well as all the other Government departments) in the first place”.

P. Harlen, Tauranga.

Criticism misplaced

Criticism of the release of a letter from Police Minister Mark Mitchell to Commissioner Andrew Coster is totally misplaced. Mitchell has chosen the highest level of visibility and exposure of the terms and conditions of Coster’s responsibilities. We, the public, are now fully in the picture and are able to judge the outcome for ourselves.

Larry. N. Mitchell, Rothesay Bay.

Build a dyke

Oh dear‚ not another deferred Auckland Harbour Crossing. Why don’t we follow the Dutch example and build a dyke under the existing bridge. Then build an eight-lane highway on top of the dyke. Imagine the prospects of future reclaimed land and solving transport issues. Call it the Dove-Meyer highway.

John Reece, Manurewa.

Poor behaviour

Why do we continue to put up with the childish, boorish, pathetic, cheap point-scoring behaviour of our politicians? Surely they should realise by now that this achieves very little and voters deserve better?

Bruce Tubb, Devonport.

Ports of Auckland future

Council has now taken the first step to selling Ports of Auckland as proposed by Mayor Wayne Brown. Subject to public consultation, port company operations are to be leased out for at least 35 years, enabling council to establish a regional wealth fund.

But we have been here before. In 1998 Infrastructure Auckland (IA) was created in place of the Auckland Regional Services Trust, owner of regional assets such as Ports of Auckland. IA was to manage these regional assets and use any surplus generated to fund infrastructure projects. The biggest IA grant was a $45 million contribution towards the Britomart Station (which otherwise might not have happened). IA was disbanded and its assets returned to the ARC in 2004, and then passed to the new Auckland Council in 2010.

Assets can only be flogged off once, and then they are gone. John Banks sold the council’s pensioner houses and half of its airport shares 20 years ago. Brown wanted to sell all the remaining airport shares last year, but was forced to settle for 7 per cent.

Hopefully, we will have a well-informed debate on this latest suggestion.

Graeme Easte, Mount Albert.

Church and state

Bill Capamagian (NZ Herald, December 6) wants to know why Kiri Allan didn’t do anything while in Parliament about the “grey area” of the law she wants tested. One factor would be that case law is the responsibility of the judiciary, not Parliament; constitutionally separate branches of Government that operate independently.

Morgan L. Owens, Manurewa.

Protests and motorways

Peaceful protest is acceptable but blocking highways is not. Preventing people from getting to work or school, medical appointments, and so on, is incredibly selfish and can only bring discredit to the cause being promoted.

Anne Martin, Helensville