And does this open the door to other businesses, trusts and organisations wanting a loan? It sets a dangerous precedent in the same way council pledged money to schools in the district last year for sports facilities.
Now let's consider the organisational structure of Edale - surely they are more astute. We read that mayor Andy Watson, who sits on the board, also owns part of a multimillion-dollar business in Auckland that employs numerous staff. Why doesn't his business offer Edale a loan?
And what do the trust's own bankers have to say? Or is the ratepayer a soft touch?
Who are the other board members? Why don't they reveal themselves and publish their requirements in the paper for all the ratepayers to see? After all, it is the ratepayer that will foot the bill.
Sadly, there are some serious underlying issues here that we do not know about. All I hope is that councillor Platt keeps beating the drum for the ratepayer.
- Edited
ROBERT SNIJDERS, Marton
Rates setting
Shame on you, Mr Mayor and councillors (except Jenny Duncan).
It seems your priorities are little different from those of Michael Laws that year he and his council passed an across-the-board rates reduction " except for Castlecliff, where rates still went up.
And here was me thinking that one of the best things about Whanganui is our practical compassion for those less fortunate.
In my book, it's what you do not what you say that counts.
KAREN WRIGGLESWORTH, Whanganui
Time to read up
In his recent "Eye for an eye" letter, David Gash "wondered" whether "if even the immense amount of geologic time" would be sufficient for the evolution of fully functioning eyes from a light-sensitive proto-eye patch, with "the only mechanism available being random chance". He is wrong on that.
If Mr Gash were to read Sean Carroll's The Making of the Fittest he would understand that modern geneticists with the recent abilities to analyse and read the present and historical records of DNA can replace wondering with factual answers.
Mr Gash would also be disabused of the notion of evolution being driven by random chance alone. Always there are the three majors - natural selection, time and chance - along with continuing mutations, all in continuous interaction.
Directly from Carroll: "Any genetics textbook would teach you about gene duplication, recombination, insertional mutations, transposition and translocation - all of which can and do produce new genetic information - not to mention point mutations that can impart new functions".
All of the above demonstrates why it was misleading of Mr Gash to cite Alan Hayward (1923-2008) and his 1985 book Does God exist? Science Says Yes.
Hayward, a fluids engineer/physicist and old-earth creationist, was not trained in any of the evolutionary sciences and wrote the book cited before most modern genetics deriving from the discovery and continuing research on DNA.
I hope this letter helps Mr Gash and others to see that more modern reading and research confirm the great and continuing advancements in the fields of evolutionary science.
RUSS HAY, Whanganui
Pleasing Maori
The National Party is at it again wanting the Maori votes and forking out $8.45 million assistance to Maori groups claiming customary interests in our coastline, with a further $33m for covering administration costs of the marine and coastal area claim.
It has been confirmed by minister Chris Finlayson that there are 580 claims that have been lodged.
Any member of the public wanting to oppose these claims will have to pay $110 in fees for each notice they register.
The taxpayers are forced to pay for those groups who want the coastline for themselves.
It's time for the voters of New Zealand to wipe this party off the face of the earth - we don't have to put up with apartheid in this country any longer.
- Edited
IAN BROUGHAM, Tawhero
Who is she?
Port development ... who is Carol Webb?
BERNARD J CORKERY, Whanganui
Evolving friendship
David Gash has responded brilliantly (Letters, June 2) to my letter of May 13.
While we both believe in a god, a May 2 letter of David's piqued my interest for he, like me, had also studied some aspects of evolution in depth. Interesting, I thought, and so "evolved" my own May 13 letter on evolution.
I realised, after sending my letter, that my scientific opinions were perhaps rather unrelentingly critical of David Gash's equally valid opinions.
I almost asked the Chronicle to withhold publication of my letter for I did not wish to cause offence. But in the event I let my letter stand, half-expecting a tirade from a man I didn't know who could have perceived my critique as a number of insults.
But it turns out that David Gash is a "scholar and a gentleman", if I may coin an old-fashioned phrase.
He read my letter as I had intended it, as the opening of a positive debate on the science of evolution. And it turns out that he is somewhat better versed than I in that subject.
I suspect that David Gash and I could possibly have become fine creationist debaters on evolution over a coffee some time.
Certainly a most fascinating mix of genres.
However, it has been a pleasure to meet the man through these columns. Thank you.
STAN HOOD, Aramoho
