Have a rethink and spend rates wisely
Like many locals I voted for a new council to have more fiscally adroit members onboard who can see the difference between something more beneficial to a larger majority of residents of Dunedin and something that only caters for a smaller number, some of whom don’t even live here.
We now have a situation where millions are being forked out for another boardwalk that adds only a small addition for the pleasure of a minority. I realise that these amenities are good for us all, but not to the detriment of ratepayers pockets.
Can the council not have a rethink and reallocate that very large sum of our money toward stadium interest/payback? Perhaps further down the track the continuation of the peninsula link can be completed once we have sufficient funds available.
A happy nobody
According to your editorial (21.2.26) no-one is above the law. Someone should tell that to Donald Trump and the fawning sycophants fluttering around him.
The editorial also speculates whether the British really need their royal family any more. Of course they do.
While clinging to the tradition of royalty seems an expensive anachronism in today’s world, the Brits, more than any others, have the knack of turning it into a hugely profitable business enterprise. Try to imagine Great Britain without royal weddings and funerals.
And how could their tabloid press, another peculiarly British institution, satisfy the scandal-hungry public if they were deprived of the misdeeds and failings of royals?
Furthermore, just watching those curious dramas as they unfold in the hallowed circles of so-called upper classes, has certain therapeutic value; it takes the sting out of being nobody.
Justifying crime
Our politicians were asked to comment on Helen Clark’s considered statement that invasion of Iran by US and Israeli forces was illegal.
David Seymour seemed to justify the war by saying (paraphrased) "How bad does an evil leader need to be before it becomes justified to rid ourselves of him?"
1 in 6 Kiwi children (17.8%) live in families earning less than half median incomes. We could well ask him "How hungry does someone need to be before justifying resorting to crime to feed, house and educate their family"?
The cost of war, in both human and financial terms, is infinitely more expensive than feeding everyone and by recognising their right to housing, education and health by earning a living wage.
Not grateful
Personally, I do not represent the "left", as Mr Eckhoff (ODT 27.2.26) might assume. I am apolitical and hope that I represent the majority of decent, law-abiding citizens (right-middle-left), who are not just influenced by the actions/mis-actions of a president, but who also take into account their personal and moral traits, such as integrity, fairness, respect and humility.
Donald Trump possesses none of these qualities. He is foremost a vindictive, self-aggrandising bully. Secondly, he is both a pathological liar and an artful "con-man". Thirdly, he appears devoid of any moral compass.
If chaos, hatred and divisiveness, on a global scale, are what we desired from a Trump presidency then yes, Mr Eckhoff, we should be truly grateful.
[Dr Mackay is running as an independent candidate in the DCC by-election.]
Anything which promotes Town Belt is welcome
I write in support of the Dunedin City Council Town Belt Active Travel Trial.
I attempt to walk the town belt from Mornington to Prospect Park once a month and so I class myself as a frequent user of the Town Belt. I am impressed with the range of users that I encounter: dog walkers, runners (fast and slow) walkers like myself, and tourists enjoying the quiet.
My observation of car users is that the most frequent use of the town belt is for free all day parking and then in descending frequency commuters, speed trialists, fly tippers and outdoor restaurateurs (based on the frequency of KFC and McDonald’s wrappers thrown around). The area of the current trial is a delight. I can walk across the road without worrying about cars and noise, watch children learn skills on their cycles and enjoy the freedom of the space.
I am supportive of any initiative that encourages people to appreciate the Town Belt and encourages people to slow down and literally smell the flowers. The trial should be supported for no other reason than an opportunity to learn about different ways to enjoy the Town Belt.
Thanks to the DCC staff who have developed the idea this far.
Reacting to what could occur and really what has
I am struck by the relative lack of public response, both here and abroad, to recent actions justified on the basis of removing a potential nuclear threat.
There are, as always, competing claims. Some assert urgency and necessity; others point to the absence of clear evidence of an imminent danger.
That uncertainty, one might expect, would invite caution. Instead, it appears to have been used to justify the use of force.
This represents a subtle but important shift. The long-standing principle has been that force may be used in response to an immediate and demonstrable threat.
Increasingly, the argument now rests on what might occur, rather than what has occurred.
That distinction matters. If the threshold for action is lowered from evidence to possibility, then the rules on which smaller nations rely begin to lose their force.
For countries such as New Zealand, which place great weight on a rules-based international order, this should be a matter of more than passing interest.
We cannot expect those rules to protect us if we are unwilling to question their selective application.
I find it surprising that there has not been a more explicit response from those who regularly affirm the importance of international law and humanitarian standards, including in relation to allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Neutrality may be understandable in complex situations. Silence is more difficult to justify.
At the very least, we should be prepared to ask whether the principles we claim to uphold are being applied consistently — and, if not, what that implies for our own position in an increasingly uncertain world.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: letters@odt.co.nz
