We need tax reform, so why our UN no vote?
Invariably when it comes to large-scale projects — e.g. hospitals — we are told that budget constraints mean that we cannot have what is needed.
Our government is funded through taxation. Any need for constraint is invariably finance related. This would indicate a need for more tax income.
New Zealand domestic consumers pay GST on everything and then income tax. Most of us realise the benefits of a fair and equitable tax system, yet it seems we cannot afford to pay for many of the things that a modern society would expect.
With this in mind l was very surprised to learn that our government voted against the latest UN tax reforms in November 2024. We were one of only nine countries that did so.
One of the main tenets was that multinationals pay tax in the country the income was earned in. In voting against this reform our government has clearly shown its hand in who it truly represents.
The silence of the Labour Party is also telling.
Compulsory viewing
The recently televised encounter between the heads of state of the US and Ukraine resembled an episode of The Apprentice. It seemed that the fate of those absorbed into a resurrected Soviet state by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the dismal future ahead of the remainder means nothing as long as you can have good television.
Dodgy articles
Reading Thursday’s editorial (27.2.25) I was yet again annoyed by the modern trend to rail on about the highest standards being their highest priority just after they’ve made a complete mess of things and/or harmed people. Don’t they understand how infuriating this is to the people who have been wronged ?
Christopher Luxon’s election campaign, where he endlessly answered every question, tax or other with the advertising jingle "We’re rock solid" still won’t leave my mind. From about the fifth to the 150th time I heard it I thought there goes a dodgy article.
Would it be any surprise that he should choose to associate with other dodgy articles?
Smoking in port
In the 1960s Cape Town had a coal-fired power station on its foreshore. It belched large clouds of sulphur dioxide into the air, the same gas produced in abundance by tour ships visiting our ports.
The effect of this on the public was noticed by those parking vehicles in the recently developed foreshore area; paint was corroded, and windscreen wipers and rubber sealing of windows started eroding. Then, many young women working in the foreshore offices were alarmed when their nylon panty-hose and blouses started disintegrating.
The problem was that sulphur dioxide plus water vapour produces sulphuric acid, and still does. When the Cape Doctor wind did not blow the pollution out to sea, it fell on the land and its people. The same effect produced what decimated European forests at that time as acid rain. These ships are also spreading this poison on our shores.
Besides damaging and contaminating the physical environment (vegetation, water), inhaled sulphur dioxide is known to damage the human respiratory tract and cardiovascular system. Need I say any more?
Beloved, venerable track needs some TLC
Having done a quick inspection on the most popular section of the Kepler Track in Fiordland, after 35 some years of popularity maybe the old trail could do with a makeover.
Especially for the day walker, the years of wear have exposed many roots and stones for older feet, and many of the charming geologic viewpoints are ignored or overgrown
It is a shame the Manapouri Te Anau multipurpose trail construction can't yet be allowed in our national parks because it could deliver high-standard trails and maintenance.
People travel across the world at great expense to visits our amazing natural places that should be a source of pride not an emotional burden for its caretakers. Give them a break.
Wakey-wakey
The visit of Chinese warships in our proximity is a wake-up call, showing our vulnerable position. If Australia is talking of spending $30 billion on new fighter jets we should co-operate as allies and spend $7b on similar planes so maintenance is collaborative. We will have to make sacrifices so we can continue to enjoy our freedoms.
Lowering the voting age is fair thing to do
I firmly believe that the voting age should be lowered to 16. People under 18 already shoulder considerable responsibility and are impacted by government decisions just like those aged 18 and older.
At 16 you can work full-time (paying significant income tax), leave school, hold a firearms licence with parental permission, get a passport without parental consent, take out a student loan, consent to a sexual relationship, consent to medical procedures, move out of home, and join the defence force.
It is unjust to discriminate against 16 and 17-year-olds by denying them the right to vote, especially when section 19 of the Bill of Rights guarantees protection from discrimination, and section 21 of the Human Rights Act 1993, subsection (i), explicitly protects against age discrimination for individuals aged 16 and older. In 2021 the Court of Appeal agreed, stating that the government could not justify the voting age being set at 18.
Research had shown that countries allowing 16 and 17-year-olds to vote have higher voter turnout compared to those countries where the voting age is set at 18 or above. In Scotland’s first election after lowing the voting age, more than 75% of 16 and 17-year-olds voted, compared to only half of those who started voting at 18.
Age does not determine a person’s intelligence or understanding of politics. A person’s right to vote should not depend on their life experience or education level. Voting is a fundamental human right, and 16-year-olds are developmentally capable of making informed decisions.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
