Letters: Will Act’s ‘national debate’ conflict with royals? And more on smoking, budgets and infrastructure

Britain's King Charles III (front) and William, Prince of Wales. A reader fears New Zealand will become a republic without proper debate. Photo / Getty Images

I wait with bated breath for the national debate that Act intends to start soon, according to the article “Act sets stage for national debate” (NZ Herald, December 4). In particular for the debate centred on “New Zealand is a multi-ethnic liberal democracy where discrimination based on ethnicity is illegal”.

I am not a constitutional lawyer, so I cannot say categorically that such a statement conflicts with the New Zealand Royal Succession Act 2013. But I can make some educated guesses. And I am guessing it will conflict with it — the head of state is not elected but succeeds to the status of head of state due to an accident of birth — and all the fancy footwork around the conflict won’t make it go away.

My fear is not that New Zealand will become a republic — that’s inevitable — but it will become a republic in a hurry, without proper popular consultation and constitutional discussion.

Wesley Parish, Tauranga

Take on smoking

Te Pati Māori has demonstrated an impressive ability to organise a protest over the new government’s policies. I wish they could apply the same dedication to reducing Māori smoking rates.

Chris Elias, Mission Bay

Minimising ‘fooling around’

All new governments come across surprises. And start to blow them out of proportion and blame the previous governments. There is an element of hypocrisy in these positions when taken in Opposition and while in power. That is what politics is. Budgets hide more than they reveal, fact of life. Having said that, it is a good thing to consider the Public Finance Act to minimise such fooling around. Will National have a deadline on passing the amendments ?

Sivaswamy Mohanakrishnan, Auckland

Legalise it?

By extension of his libertarian approach to antismoking regulation, David Seymour should immediately seek to decriminalise, nay, even legalise, all recreational drugs such as cannabis, methamphetamine, and opioids because a) people should be free to make dangerous choices, b) it’s not the Government’s role to inhibit said choices, c) their illegality creates a black market to obtain them and fuels crime, and d) if legalised, they could be taxed to fund his coalition’s beloved tax cuts. Who knew that beneath the hard exterior of the Act party leader beats the heart of a true progressive?

Dr Art Nahill, Meadowbank

City Rail costs

If the new City Rail Link costs $220 million a year just to maintain as forecast, it will require 120,550 commuters a day on a $5 ticket just to fund the maintenance. That’s not sustainable infrastructure, that’s an economic catastrophe.

Ian Brady, Titirangi

Why so late?

I am wondering how I missed any earlier indication that the CRL would cost $220 million a year to run. Have the experts just realised this, and if not, why haven’t ratepayers been alerted to this much sooner, not when the project has reached the point of no return?

Graham Edwards, Sandringham

Infrastructure woes

I’d like to nominate Nigel Meek’s contribution (NZ Herald, December 4) regarding NZ’s small size and the costs of infrastructure, as the Herald’s “letter of the year”.

In the same issue, the front-page headline is that the CRL will be costing ratepayers $220 million a year. Has no one yet realised that those of us north of the bridge will be contributing annually a massive amount for something we cannot use? We’d happily use the ferry from Birkenhead to get into town if there was anywhere to park. But there again, who really wants to go into the CBD these days anyway?

Ray Green, Birkenhead

‘Grey area’

I find it extraordinary that Kiri Allan is on a mission to test a so-called grey area of the law following her crash into a parked car while she was our justice minister. If there is such a “grey area”, why didn’t she address it while she was minister?

Bill Capamagian, Tauranga

Phone fine not fine

I was recently ticketed on my motorcycle for using the emergency left-hand lane. My fine is $150. If I had been using my phone whilst driving, the fine would be $150. Which do you think is the most dangerous? In Australia, the fine for phone use is up to $1161. It should be that here. I was completely safe; the policeman saying “I was setting a bad example to car drivers”.

Chris Blenkinsopp, Beach Haven

Lack of vision

New Zealand’s unfortunate lack of vision on how to support actions that help alleviate climate change, is encapsulated in a nutshell in the first couple of pages of today’s Herald (December 4). That is, the negativity about how much the long-overdue city rail public transport infrastructure project, deferred for more than 50 years with opponents regularly citing cost. Then there is the fact that the New Zealand Government is not among the more-than-100 countries making the Cop28 pledge and seemingly with no ideas on how to move forward on renewable energy.

Neil Anderson, Algies Bay