Jones laser-focused on various very finite assets
In the news we hear our wonderful cycle trails contribute a billion dollars a year to the New Zealand economy.
Since Resource Minister Shane Jones is concerned about our economy, he should be paying attention.
This is a permanent ongoing resource that we can pretty safely rely on for years to come.
It’s our beautiful scenery and landscape that the cyclists come to enjoy while pursuing their sport, but that very asset is under threat.
I don’t suppose Mr Jones will ever use or even see such a trail. He is laser-focused on a very finite asset. The exploitation of finite resources is the purview of shortsighted and greedy profiteers.
I keep repeating the word finite because that resource, unlike our scenery and landscapes, will eventually be gone. Shane Jones will also eventually be gone.
The damage and ugly scars from the gold mine he is so eager to see rip up the landscape will remain.
Kevin Burke
Mosgiel
Upping and leaving
I cannot recall if I ever really understood what this was about, but I had a fruitful discussion with a young medical technician from a culture different from mine about it recently, and we both agreed as long as we had enough reasonably clean water to have a glass of water, shower and flush the loo, that was all that was important.
The current Dunedin City Council estimates of water costs of $1.7 billion over 10 years are the correct amount to put people out of their homes whether they are mortgaged or renting.
I have seen examples of this on a series of very enjoyable (because of the countryside) videos entitled Joe and Nic’s Road Trip, of small town America, much of it derelict.
Commenters ask why don’t people fix up these abandoned houses. The answer is simple.
The property taxes (their version of rates) are $US10,000-$US15,000 ($NZ17,800-$NZ26,800) a year. In the poorer towns, the annual income is often $US20,000-$US30,000 a year.
People just get in their car or on the bus and leave. There is plenty evidence of them just leaving their cars.
Do we want this?
George Livingstone
Roslyn
Deferred maintenance
Reading Electricity Networks Aotearoa chief executive Tracey Kai’s comment that the October wind event had ‘‘huge impacts’’ on PowerNet’s network (ODT 20.11.25), we are about to see yet another unforeseen consequence to Max Bradford’s poorly thought-out restructuring of the power supply industry.
Power boards, who installed the majority of the distribution network, had a co-operative relationship with the community.
Now the power lines are companies seeking to make a profit and, often, the easiest way to profit is to defer maintenance.
Maintaining clearance from trees is a cost of business. Obviously, trees planted near existing lines need to bear some the cost of that maintenance.
However, power companies have been taking the cheapest possible option for lines clearance, doing as little as possible without identifying actual hazard trees.
The proposed changes to regulations are draconian, a one-size-fits-all poorly drafted piece of legislation that puts profit before trees, the environment and the communities that built the network.
Tracey Kai concentrates on the forestry companies, but it is, in her words, ‘‘the mum and dad owners’’ who will cover the burden and/or lose their trees.
Jerry Lynch
Mosgiel
Brave to have an opinion in this hot climate
I have been interested in global climate change for over 30 years, initially because I was asked to develop and teach a course on environmental physics. Much of that course was informed by Sir John Houghton’s book, Global Warming: The complete briefing.
Given this background, I think John Drummond is very brave to write about climate change (ODT 10.11.25). The science of climate change is unlike much of science, because we do not have multiple replicates of earth on which to test different theories.
So it’s quite easy to write negative letters about John’s opinion articles, such as that by Mike Hayes (19.11.25). I have to say I admire John for his contributions and he has my support, but I don’t expect any helpful political responses in New Zealand in the near future. There are simply too many people that support the views of Mike Hayes in this country.
Gerry Carrington
Glenleith
[Gerry Carrington is an emeritus professor, University of Otago.]
Not a raceway
In reply to Paul Hurley (19.11.25), cyclists would get more sympathy if they followed the Code for Cycling and the Road Code. Showing some respect for other users on shared pathways would be a great step forward; they are shared, not cycle raceways.
David Tordoff
Dunedin
Cricket tragic
Jim Sullivan’s column (17.11.25) reminded me of an Andy Capp cartoon. Andy’s wife was bemoaning the fact that he was cricket mad. ‘‘He has to listen to it on the radio before he reads about it in the paper before he sees it on the telly.’’ I could sympathise living with an avid cricket fan at the time while having no interest in the game.
Ann Charlotte
Waikouaiti
‘Surely anything better than the current mess’
How does Parliament after Parliament make such a mess of the basics? It does not seem to matter whether we have a left or right coalition - they simply fail to get the basics right and we as Kiwis suffer the consequences of that universal failure.
Let’s look at the basics.
It was known more than 15 years ago that there would be a shortage of general practitioner doctors. This was clearly communicated to Parliament by multiple sources. Where was the planning to support this need? No bipartisan approach across the political parties.
Hospital emergency departments are overcrowded with people who cannot see a GP. How many are dying from literally not being able to get a referral from a GP?
Where is the third, and preferably fourth, supermarket chain so we can have the competition needed? Not on the horizon.
Housing shortages. Education. The list is daunting.
If the parties in Parliament cannot get together and make cross-party policy decisions and laws to benefit all New Zealanders, then we as Kiwis need to look at a change in how they as MPs work. They appear petty, often fractured, and leave a poisoned chalice behind for the next pre-determined to fail Parliament.
Do we need an upper house, or a president with real power, not just a puppet? MMP might deliver representation, but it does not appear to bring results. Maybe we would be better off with a much smaller Parliament of say 59 members?
Surely anything must be better than the current mess?
Brett Smith
Waikouaiti
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: letters@odt.co.nz
