Former pharmacist says rein in Pharmac
I qualified as a pharmacist in New Zealand but spent 25 years in Australia, returning in 1996. I did a few days relieving work over the following years, and even then was astounded at the standard of drugs available to the New Zealand public. Many drugs that were freely prescribed here had been removed from the Australian register of prescribed drugs because of serious side effects.
Over the past decades I have watched with a sense of unbelievable horror at the practices of Pharmac.
As the Otago Daily Times (editorial 1.11.23) and other news agencies in New Zealand have recently pointed out, our taxes are now going to assist in the training of reasonable behaviour by the CEO, Sarah Fitt, at taxpayers’ expense. This ludicrous behaviour by the Pharmac board would bring tears of joy to the script writers of the Monty Python show.
It is not as though the Pharmac chief executive and board have over the past years behaved in a humane manner in authorising newer medications to assist in a variety of conditions from cancer to other autoimmune diseases. They have on occasions changed suppliers for cheaper versions of many drugs causing untold misery and health problems to thousands of citizens.
When questions have been asked of various health ministers as to why they have not intervened, the answers seem to be, they cannot interfere. Why?
I totally appreciate what the ODT has done to bring these matters to the attention of the public. It is now up to the new Minister of Health to publicly state what the National government is prepared to do to re-establish some manner of reasonable behaviour by these CEOs.
Inconsiderate parking
I share the frustration of G & K Paulin (ODT 4.11.23) in regards to the abuse of mobility parking spaces; unfortunately it happens frequently. I am also very disappointed that often holders of mobility parking permits themselves abuse the parking spaces.
The permit clearly states that the permit can only be used if the permit holder is getting in or out of the vehicle, otherwise a standard parking space must be used. The mobility parks at St Clair Esplanade are frequently used by people displaying a mobility card, however they stay in the vehicle to watch the surf. Mobility parking spaces are wider than standard parks to make it easier for people with a disability to get in and out of the vehicle so very inconsiderate of the people who park their vehicles on the yellow no parking lines beside the mobility spaces, often so close that it is difficult to open the car door wide enough.
Guerrilla tactics
In response to G. & K. Paulin's letter, in the 1990s in Christchurch, members of the disability sector carried small cards with the following message: "If you want my car park perhaps you'd like my disability too". These were put under the windscreen wipers of offending cars just like an infringement notice.
I don't know whether it changed the actions of such drivers, but it did give a small satisfaction to those reliant on such carparks. I suggest these could be reprinted and distributed again.
Opinion begs question who will solve problem?
Richard Jackson and John Hobb argue in their opinion column (ODT 1.11.23) that New Zealand should stop what they call "the vengeful and illegal attack on the Gazan people" and accuse Israel of "war crimes".
Firstly, it is naive to believe that either Israel or Hamas will take any notice of what New Zealand’s parliamentarians or diplomats say on the matter.
Secondly, the horrific, brutal and senseless actions by Hamas in their attack on innocent civilians on October 7 was part of their published doctrine that they wish Israel to be destroyed and all Jewish people to be killed. That doctrine is not in any way a pathway to peace.
The concept of a "two state solution" put forward by many world leaders is not part of Hamas’ ideology.
It is clear that Prof Jackson and Mr Hobbs believe that the Hamas attack should be condemned but Israel doesn’t have the right to defend or prevent its citizens from this, or future attacks.
The solution surely lies eventually in a willingness for both Israel and the Palestinian people to accept each other’s rights to live in peace in the Middle East, but that solution will never be reached when one party to the ongoing conflict rejects any such solution.
The inevitable result of such a position is ongoing conflict and the inevitable deaths of thousands of innocent people in the name of ideology.
The United Nations which was formed to ensure peaceful solutions to conflicts has been proven to be both ineffective and impotent, so who can broker a two-state solution is, at least, unclear.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
