Letters to the Editor: landfill, hospital cuts and spouting
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including the new Smooth Hill landfill site, another round of cuts to the hospital, and just how important is spouting? Message to Lee: keep rubbish close to home
As a resident of Winton I would like to inform Cr Lee Vandervis that many of us here do not want refuse from other centres outside our province coming to AB Lime's site.
Build your own. We don't want to be the dumping ground for other provinces' refuse/waste.
Dunedin has been dithering for 32 years. Just imagine what could have been done with the $85.4 million if action had been taken all those years ago when $7m was mooted. Consultancy fees have cost Dunedin ratepayers huge sums too.
Anyway, why on earth are you talking landfill when very efficient incinerators are available and are multifunctional? Contradictory votes?
Dunedin City Council just voted to go ahead with the Smooth Hill landfill.
So on one hand they want to dig a big hole on Smooth Hill, so we can truck our rubbish there. But on the very same day they debated carbon-friendly projects.
The landfill in Winton could be accessed by rail, so no need to burn tons and tons of diesel to build a new landfill that will never be accessible by rail. Looking for carbon-friendly projects? Being dumped on
Many Dunedin councillors today (27.5.25) in their meeting say they don't support "at any cost dumping landfill waste on other regions".
Good to hear but I'm a bit confused over their values when they support dumping diverted sewage waste from the hill suburbs on South Dunedin? Which side are you on?
Last Friday, another round of cuts to our hospital was revealed: after five long years of construction, the government will deliver a facility with 26 fewer beds than the current hospital, which is already over capacity.
This would plainly be a disaster for the South. If this plan goes ahead it will increase waiting times for ED and for life-saving surgeries, and will ultimately force many who need frequent care out of the city. Our honorable Mayor, Jules Radich, has welcomed the announcement as "a great result".
Even ignoring his ethical and democratic responsibilities, this is an election year; Jules has little to lose and everything to gain by opposing these cuts. I cannot fathom why he is assenting to this plan which will plainly cause great harm to the city. Which side are you on, Jules?
[Mickey Treadwell is a Green mayoral candidate.] What He says
Re "Claim hub sale call guided by God" ( ODT 24.5.25), I would have been surprised had it been otherwise: the decision to sell was made after "the local churches in the region discerned the mind of Christ together over a long period of time . . . together they felt this was the decision God would have them make."
Is it likely that after consultation among a group of like-thinking people strongly desirous of selling the property, they would not get the desired response from their God?
A neutral arbitrator would have been equally persuasively informed regarding current claims of rightful use of the property, and history of the provision of the land, buildings and improvements over the time it has been used both as a religious and community facility. Good try but China can be seen another way
Mercy Fonoti's article on the rise of China (Opinion ODT 23.5.25) was an admirable attempt at trying to be evenhanded, but it still failed.
This is because it views China through a Western minority world lens, which has at its core a deliberate omission of historical context, painting the actions of China as either capricious acts or interpreting their motivations as if they are the same kinds of imperialistic motivations that Western nations have had for 500 years.
The 'contradictions' of China's behaviour she cites are not contradictions at all. Their actions in the South China Sea are solely in response to the Obama administration's initiation of 'The Pivot to Asia' in 2011, which has at its core the military containment of China. As part of this, the US and its allies conduct an annual naval exercise, explicitly practising the closure of the Straits of Molucca through which the huge bulk of China's exports and imports transit.
At the same time on the eastern side of the SCS, America and its allies began ramping up relatively dormant diplomatic and military relations with Taiwan in contravention of agreements going back 50 years, that recognise the island as Chinese sovereign territory, to a point where the Biden administration actually stated they would militarily defend Taipei from invasion – an explicit abandoning of five decades of strategic ambiguity.
In response, China activated its long but disputed claim to the SCS (and built its own equally illegal Diego Garcia type island base close to the Straits of Molucca) and conducts naval exercises off Taiwan (and in the Tasman Sea).
These are defensive acts in response to obvious provocation, not signs of any kind of expansionist agenda. Mushrooms, ridge lines, and mould
Re the recent article on the MBIE inspection of student flats.
I have the greatest sympathy for the tenants suffering damp and mushrooms as I did almost within the photograph where Liam White is standing, in an old masonry house where the damp proof course had failed, some decades ago.
I went to extreme lengths to replace the foundations and damp proof course and was thrilled when I managed to persuade the next door neighbour to do the same much more efficiently than I had via a masonry saw.
However, seeing from a careful read of the article that most of the problems with the flats, apart from three which seemed to be in a bad way, were the same minor home maintenance issues that most home owners of old villas would find if they inspected their own home, I feel that the whole thing is what people refer to as a beat-up these days.
Yes, spouting is important. I have some pulled down twice a year on a flat in that area by young ones trying (and succeeding) to get on to the roof.
I have seen photos of about 20 sitting on the ridge line on numerous occasions.
I would see non-functioning heat pumps as a more serious issue.
Ironically, they have proved the opposite point of view to their own by their survey: that the vast majority of flats in that area despite the beating they get are fine.
The MBIE tenancy and compliance team has made me agree for the first time of the government's slashing of government employees.
It reminds me of a survey done a few years ago when all the houses failed, even brand-new ones.
A house of someone I know failed because the footpath was always wet. They said the concrete path needed dug up and replaced.
Actually, it was the spouting leaking,
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
14 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Building ‘beyond economical repair'
Oamaru House in Hanover St. PHOTO: GERARD O'BRIEN A Dunedin hospital patient accommodation building earmarked for demolition is in such a poor condition it is "beyond economical repair", Foodstuffs says. The supermarket giant said its planned demolition of Oamaru House, at 95 Hanover St, to add "much-needed" car parking at New World Centre City was a decision that had not been taken lightly. It announced last month it had lodged applications with the Dunedin City Council for building permits to demolish the building, as well as another structure at 121 Great King St. Operated by the Oamaru House Trust, the volunteer-run facility provides affordable accommodation for patients and their families, particularly those based rurally. Its lease is due to be terminated on October 31. A Foodstuffs South Island spokesperson said it understood Oamaru House held a special place in the community and some people would be disappointed to see it go. As the landlord, it had a responsibility to ensure the spaces it managed were of a reasonable standard for people to live in, the spokesperson said. "A recent building survey unfortunately confirmed that Oamaru House was in particularly poor condition and was beyond economical repair. "That assessment, along with the fact that two floors have remained vacant for over a year, reinforced our decision not to renew leases and to proceed with plans for its removal. "We truly appreciate the community's connection to this site and hope people will understand why we had to make this difficult decision." The spokesperson did not confirm how many carparks the demolition of Oamaru House was expected to generate. Murray Radka, 77, of Alexandra, said he was "appalled" Foodstuffs planned to demolish the site for additional carparks. "What a huge difference it's going to make for thousands of sick people from out of Dunedin who are going to have to make other arrangements." Mr Radka said he had travelled to Dunedin hospital for treatments, including for permanent lung issues, an aneurysm in a carotid artery, prostate cancer, and a rheumatoid arthritic condition — and more recently a hernia surgery. He was often not strong enough to walk long distances unassisted, so relied on his wife, who had mobility problems of her own. If Oamaru House did end up relocating, he could not think of any other site in the vicinity of Dunedin hospital that was as convenient as the current premises. Before he started staying there, Mr Radka said he would book Airbnbs or other private accommodation. But these could be quite a way out of Dunedin and lacked the support services Oamaru House offered, he said. "You can't put a value on a facility like this, and to think that it will be replaced by a few carparks which I think are going to make very little difference to the operation of Foodstuffs." Oamaru House Trust chairman Tony Caldwell said while the decision was disappointing, Foodstuffs had treated the trust well and he did not begrudge them for it. The trust was given notice on May 13. Unless a "very big benefactor" came along, the trust was not in a position to lease or buy another building, Mr Caldwell said. "In all probability, if we'd found another building, it would have required a reasonably significant refit or fit out or improvements made to bring it up to standards, of which we didn't have the finances to be able to do that."
Otago Daily Times
15 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Debt-funded grants wrong, councillor says
Tweaking rules to enable theatre venues not owned by the Dunedin City Council to be developed with council debt might be "clever", but also wrong, a councillor says. Cr Bill Acklin was not impressed with his colleagues when they changed the council's revenue and financing policy to enable a particular type of grant to be funded through borrowing, rather than rates. The change, approved last week, meant debt-funded grants could be provided to community organisations constructing or upgrading a building. This made it easier for the council to signal in its 2025-34 long-term plan (LTP) political will existed for spending $17.1 million on theatre space and it intended such grants to apply to redevelopment of the Playhouse Theatre and Athenaeum building, and potentially a new venue suitable for professional theatre. "To fund professional sectors using debt is not what council's ability to borrow is for," Cr Acklin said. He had stayed out of debates about theatre space because of a perceived conflict of interest but expressed thoughts after voting had occurred. Using debt for grants was "very clever", he said disapprovingly. Later in the meeting he said he believed it to be wrong. However, he was happy to see support for the Playhouse, which has a strong children's programme. Another councillor who did not take part in discussions, Lee Vandervis, said changing council policy "so that we can reclassify even more spending as capital" was shameless. He was absent because of hip surgery. He slammed colleagues for their "election-year splurge" on debt after the council added $96.9m of borrowing to the LTP during four days of discussion. Cr Sophie Barker said the debt-funded grants issue was "a useful exploration of how to support a non-council organisation to deliver a project in a building that isn't council-owned". "Otherwise, it would have gone directly on rates — this way it's able to be funded over a longer period of time as an 'intergenerational asset'. "There's a lot of checks and balances around the Playhouse and Athenaeum resolutions that won't allow any funds to be released by council until stringent conditions are met." Council debt is projected to rise by roughly $500m in the next nine years to $1.2 billion in 2034. Much of it is aimed at replacing or upgrading key Three Waters assets and transport infrastructure. The council included $17.1m in its 2021-31 LTP for development of theatre space, but removal of the allocation from draft budgets for its 2025-34 plan was controversial. Reinstating the money was one call last week that added to projected debt. Inclusion of some transport projects intended to reduce carbon emissions and deciding to replace the Edgar Centre roof were others. The council made one move late in deliberations to avoid adding to debt. It chose to start running balanced budgets from the first year of the LTP — a year earlier than had been envisaged — rather than posting another deficit. The council had looked as if it was headed for a rates increase of 10.1% for 2025-26, but having a balanced budget pushed the rates rise to 10.7%.
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Four strikes and not out — the Regulatory Standards Bill
The Regulatory Standards Bill — Government Bill 155-1 under the name of the Minister for Regulation — was introduced to Parliament on May 19. It received its first reading on May 23 and has been referred to the finance and expenditure select committee. As alluded to previously in this publication (ODT 4.1.25), earlier attempts to introduce this legislation failed in 2006, 2009 and 2011. In 2021, with the support of the National Party, a Bill to this effect was introduced by the (now) minister, but did not get off the ground. It was condemned as a dangerous constitutional shift undermining public and collective rights and threatening parliamentary sovereignty. Nothing about this Bill has changed except that the National-Act New Zealand coalition agreement provides for support of the Act policy programme by National. In this regard, the situation is different from that of the failed Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, which National and New Zealand First supported only to the select committee stage, then voted it down. Why is this Bill of such concern? The reasons are the same as they were two decades ago, being: — That the proposal represents a constitutional entrenchment of neo-political principles with an accumulation of power in the hands of the minister of regulation; — Tying principles of good regulation to property rights as a fundamental of good lawmaking overlooks entirely the ancillary fundamental of good lawmaking being strengthening communities, enhancement of environmental standards and protection of vulnerable groups. The proposed primacy of free market and individual rights is false as both are reliant on law and order and inherent obligations to protect the vulnerable (persons or environment) and maintain a reasonable balance where equity and justice is accorded the same value. Existing legislative guidelines from 2021 provide that "legislation should be consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi and should reflect the fundamental values and principles of a democratic society". This Bill does neither. Current guidelines identify the principle that "everyone is subject to the law". This Bill changes that to "every person is equal before the law" which reflects the Act party's policy to eradicate equity-based programmes which seek to redress systemic inequality. Equality in this sense is a procedural right, free of class or status. It is not, and never has been, the right to be treated the same. Equating property rights with personal liberty creates dangerous territory, the focus on which will obliterate the duty to preserve the environment and address substantive inequality issues. Going down this path will open the door to compensation claims in the event of any actions impacting adversely on property rights. There are already in place substantive regulatory controls. The advice to the minister in this instance is, in essence, that the proposed legislation is unnecessary. The extent of powers placed in the hands of the minister, the proponent of the Bill, is excessive. The objective of the Bill is to encapsulate more than 20 years of neo-liberal, libertarian dogma, designed to elevate and protect the interest of property above all else. Successive parliaments have soundly rejected this legislation in the past. The prime minister must ensure that the Bill is amended to recognise all of its defects or simply decline to support it on the basis that it is not good law. Act NZ leader David Seymour would be unlikely to surrender his upcoming deputy prime ministership given the patience shown to date in getting this hobby horse across the line. — Noel O'Malley is a Balclutha lawyer and past president of the Otago District Law Society.
