Letters: Voting should be made easier, not more difficult
Seymour's style
David Seymour may not physically resemble Donald Trump, but his insulting, dismissive attitude towards those unlikely to support his party is strikingly Trumpian.
Last month Seymour personally attacked eminent scholars who opposed his Regulatory Standards Bill, labelling them individually as 'victim of the day'. This week he calls New Zealanders who do not enrol to vote well before election day 'dropkicks'.
The Act Party is the tail that wags this dog of a coalition and Seymour's divisive methods threaten our democracy in the same way as Trump's behaviour has brought the United States democracy into disrepute.
Andrea Dawe, Sandringham.
Food safety
If Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard signs off on proposal P1055 by food authority FSANZ to redefine gene edited foods as 'Non-GMO', it will be a betrayal of consumers' basic right to know what we are eating.
The minister says that removing tracing and labelling of GE food will make food cheaper, but the promise rings hollow. New Zealanders are paying record prices for butter because other countries are willing to pay more for quality products. How does taking away labelling of GE food and the right to choose change that?
Jon Carapiet, Sandringham.
Price of butter
If 'Nicky no butter' sounds more annoying than 'Nicky no boats', Nicola Willis enigmatically reminded us she wasn't an expert on pricing at Fonterra but ... the price of butter is expected to fall. Really, how would she know?
Funnily enough I thought her only expertise was in English literature not financial stuff. If 80% of the price is global pricing and 15% is GST then how can the 5% be even significant from retailers like supermarkets?
More like a dropkick's chance of landing in a cow pat in 'footy' terms.
Willis is an 'expert' at disguising the truth. Let's be honest it's her forte - not playing footy. The Nats are proud of how fast they've satiated the farming lobby shopping list of requests. Nine of 12 ticked off in half a term. Hasn't she done well.
They're not going to put downward pressure on the local butter price any time soon. How idiotic you think they are claiming they would actually bring down the cost of living?
Buttering up farmers is in a Nat's nature. Butter literally lubricates the electoral process. All you 'dropkicks' that don't vote know that.
Steve Russell, Hillcrest.
The real cost of food
The angst over the increased food prices exposes the social expectation – something akin to a divine right – that food must be cheap. In New Zealand there is an unreasonable argument that because we have a strong agricultural sector then, somehow, we deserve cheap – even subsidised – food.
In one of his last papers, renowned geographer, the late Professor Tony Allan (of King's College, London) persuasively argued that the price of food does not cover the true cost of food production. All political ideologies, Allan says, 'have imposed a system in which farmers deliver food at well below its real cost'. As a result, the price of food fails to cover costs incurred by the environment and public health. These costs, in economic speak, are 'externalised' outside the food price and are ultimately paid by the taxpayer.
When we demand 'cheap food', we are selfishly saying that it's okay for the real cost of food to be borne elsewhere. Whether that is borne by farmers not being able to cover their input costs or tolerating environmental degradation or having poorer public health due to an inadequate diet. Don't be fooled; cheap food is a misnomer. We all pay the real cost of food – one way or another.
Dr Murray Boardman, Dunedin.
Passport changes
I read with interest the decision to list English first on New Zealand passports, ahead of te reo Māori. This seems like a return to common sense.
Wasn't it established some time ago that English should take precedence on official documents and government department signage to reduce confusion and ensure clarity for the majority? While te reo Māori is an important part of our heritage and deserves recognition, it is simply not widely understood — either within New Zealand or overseas.
There is certainly room for Māori language to be included, but not as the primary language on key documents like passports, which are used internationally. English has long served as the clear, functional language for nearly all New Zealanders and for global communication.
Unfortunately, some of the recent language and policy changes seem to complicate matters rather than make everyday life easier. It's worth asking: what is actually being achieved by introducing such confusion into areas where clarity is essential?
Alan Walker, St Heliers.
Vape regulations
I cannot believe that a Government with the power to pass laws without due process has thrown themselves prostrate before the might of the vape industry and dropped the 2023 vaping regulations.
This retraction as the 'best way to resolve the legal case' taken by Mason Corporation against them smells rotten. Casey Costello used the argument that the regulations were based on limited evidence to justify their withdrawal. I would have thought regularly sucking something into your lungs that is not meant to be there is sufficient, until evidence can be supplied to confirm or not the safety of these devices.
Alan Johnson, Papatoetoe.
Climate reparations
The historic statement by the International Court of Justice that countries are obliged by international law to tackle climate change, and warning that failing to do so could open the door for reparations, will result in joy for all those who have been spending their lives protesting unsuccessfully for action. It will also see fear for governments and corporations who have been deliberately misleading us about the biggest issue of our time.
Does this mean that protesters will not have to wave their placards to get action on climate issues, probably not, but they will be able to threaten court action as well and climate criminals will be well advised to listen. However, it's unlikely that they will be held accountable as countries have not ceded sovereignty to any UN agency's which means we are relying on moral pressure, and that may not work.
The invasion of Ukraine was a shock to Western nations and illustrated the need to reform the UN Security Council and the first step is to remove the power of veto. NZ could take a leadership role in this as we are vulnerable in all areas, perhaps we could offer to cede some sovereignty to the United Nations if they provide protection from all large countries, who will not be named.
Dennis Worley, Birkenhead.
Why Putin?
Why would one want to make a film about Putin with a list of war crimes as long as your arm and the murder of his critics along the way? It is bound to bring every sadistic man and his dog out of the woodwork and would be better off - much as the case of Adolf Hitler - best forgotten, and for that reason is bound to be a flop.
If the powers to be that make movies were serious about making money which they clearly aren't, why not a film about the life of Donald Trump which would be a guaranteed box office sell out.
Gary Hollis, Mellons Bay.
A quick word
The court ruling found that nations have a legal responsibility to aggressively reduce their emissions, and that failing to do so would open the way for impacted nations to seek reparations. It specifically lists the production, use, exploration and subsidies of fossil fuels— both current and historic. Our continued, bipartisan failure to address our responsibility to our neighbours and our grandchildren now will have financial implications. We must act immediately to meet our Nationally Determined Commitment (NDC) to limit temperatures to less than 1.5C above preindustrial levels.
Ian Swney, Morrinsville.
Wellington councils are considering forming another Super City like Auckland. Can't they see from Auckland's experience it doesn't work and just turns into a huge unwieldy monster that chews up ratepayers' money for no results. Then it splits itself into subdivisions like Auckland Transport (AT), Watercare etc who run their own little fiefdoms and answer to no one and embark on their own pet projects. Don't say you weren't warned.
Jock MacVicar, Hauraki.
We are told that the proposed changes to voter registration will speed up the result of the election. Please remind me how long it took for the 2023 coalition agreement.
Gregory Cave, NZ
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
14 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
Government eyes more spending cuts as patience with economic strategy frays
Seymour said the Government was getting a few 'whispers' about the next Budget. 'Last year, we saved $115 million. [The] year before that, half a billion,' Seymour said, referring to the savings attributed to him personally. 'Let's see if we can't save more next year,' he said. Seymour said Budget 2026's savings exercise would not be 'radically different'. He said there was still wasteful spending to be found, noting the last Labour Government had inherited core public spending of about 28% of GDP and left behind a state spending about 33% of GDP a year. Even accounting for increases in superannuation spending and debt servicing for the pandemic, Seymour reckoned there was still a large portion of spending that could be trimmed. Seymour said Finance Minister Nicola Willis had put pressure on Treasury to 'upgrade the supply of information', allowing better quality budgeting. Finance Minister Nicola Willis said more savings could be found. Photo / Mark Mitchell Willis said funding new spending initiatives by cutting spending the ministers deemed less essential was important, given the size of the Government's deficit, which Treasury forecasts to be $14.1b this year, or 3.1% of GDP. 'The Government's got a great track record of reprioritising funding so that we can put more investment into the things Kiwis care about: schools, hospitals, roads, police,' Willis said. Willis said the Government's first Budget found $23b in savings and the second found $21b. These figures are calculated over multiple years. 'What the number will be in our next Budget is yet to be worked out,' Willis said. When asked whether a similar dollar figure of savings could be found for the 2026 Budget, Willis said, 'we'll see'. Willis said she did not think all the low-hanging fruit had been found when it came to savings. 'There are always areas where we should be demanding better value for taxpayers' money and I always ask myself, 'can I really justify spending that money when a New Zealand household could probably do with it in their wallet?'' Willis said. Willis said each Budget approach was similar. She sat down with the Prime Minister and her associate Finance Ministers, Seymour, Chris Bishop, and Shane Jones. 'We sit down together. We identify key themes where we think that there is room to find value. We also identify programmes of work that we think ministers should undertake to find savings,' she said. Willis said it was 'far too soon' to describe the nature of the savings programme. It is not uncommon for a Government to cut spending it no longer thinks is valuable, to pay for something else. The last Finance Minister, Grant Robertson, also undertook reprioritisation exercises prior to his budgets although these were far smaller in quantum. In 2018, word of Labour's Budget 2019 reprioritisations exercise leaked to National, who accused Labour of covert spending cuts. Asked whether three successive savings programmes in a row risked prolonging negative economic sentiment, Willis accused people who made that argument of being 'fiscally and economically ignorant'. 'We have one of the largest deficits in the OECD, which is to say we are spending billions more than we are earning as a country. Compared to many countries around the world, we are in a more deficit position than they are. 'To say that when we are running a deficit ... is economically ignorant. I have heard that ignorance from our political opponents. They need to get a maths textbook,' Willis said. Labour leader Chris Hipkins compared Luxon and Willis to a washing machine. Photo / Mark Mitchell Earlier this year, the Herald spoke to the big three ratings agencies for their view on the public finances. New Zealand maintains a high credit rating. While the agencies said they were not alarmed with the fiscal situation at the moment, they wanted to see evidence of improvement. S&P's primary analyst for NZ, Martin Foo noted that NZ's general government balance, his company's preferred metric for whether the Government was in surplus or deficit, showed a deficit greater than 6% of GDP - putting NZ in the realm of France and the United States, countries known for running huge deficits. The Government's fiscal and economic strategy is partly to reduce the deficit to help put downward pressure on inflation and interest rates, stimulating confidence and economic recovery. Month after month of gloomy economic data, only partly offset by a recovery in the primary sector, has frayed voters' patience in that strategy, polling suggests. The most recent Ipsos Issues Monitor Poll found voters trust Labour more on the cost of living, the first time Labour has come ahead in that poll since before the last election. Voters still trust National more on the overall economy, according to that poll. In a speech ahead of his post-Cabinet press conference on Monday, Luxon said the Government needed to 'double down' on its economic strategy. 'The most important thing we can do to make you better off is to double down on our economic plan,' he said. 'Spending more, taxing more and borrowing more as Labour and other parties advocate for didn't work in the past and it won't work in the future,' Luxon said. Labour leader Chris Hipkins shot back, noting the length of Luxon's post-Cabinet speech, which he gave alongside Willis. 'I think we should start calling them Fisher and Paykel because they've got more spin than a front-load washing machine,' Hipkins said, referring to Luxon and Willis. Hipkins has come under pressure from the Government for Labour not releasing policy of its own. He defended this on Tuesday morning, saying 'we will be doing policy'. 'But some of those bigger issues around spending, borrowing, taxation, many of those will have to wait until closer to the election,' he said, noting National finalised its tax policy less than two months before the election date in 2023 - although it published a version of its tax policy about a year earlier.
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Amended CMA Oil/Gas ‘Legislative Match' Bill To Pass Today; Leaves Taxpayers On Hook For Decommisioning Gas Wells
Climate campaigners say the government's Crown Minerals Amendment (CMA) bill is a 'golden parachute for polluters—and a lead weight for taxpayers'. The bill is expected to pass today, and clears the way for new fossil fuel exploration while gutting safeguards that ensure existing oil and gas companies pay for their clean-up. The government has jumped the third and final reading of the CMA bill from #21 on the order paper, to #1. This move by Shane Jones comes after climate activists began a dramatic shutdown of Stockton Mine on Monday morning, where Jones responded with a video ( 350 Aotearoa campaigner Adam Currie says, 'This bill is a legislative match tossed into a climate tinderbox. It doesn't just open New Zealand up to new climate-killing oil and gas drilling — it strips away financial safeguards, leaving taxpayers on the hook for future decommissioning costs. Without these financial securities and trailing liability, the government is at a higher risk of having to pay to decommission – or plug – a failed oil well. This is no hypothetical - the fossil fuel industry previously left the taxpayer with a $443 million bill to decommission the Tui oil field. The oil lobby is clearly writing the script— the Government is just reading their lines.' 'As floods and storms ravage across the world and climate scientists run out of adjectives to describe how urgent the situation is, Christopher Luxon's Government is forging ahead with reckless plans to search for new oil and gas, dig up more coal and shelve every initiative to reduce emissions that they can. It's another time New Zealanders can peek through the drawn curtains of this government - a government run by shady lobbyists writing policy and being appointed to key positions.' 'This bill does nothing for New Zealand's energy security. We know that new oil drilling would take over a decade to come online, and the International Energy Agency tells us that global demand for oil, gas, and coal is on track to peak well before then. It doesn't have to be this way. The people of Aotearoa have a historic opportunity to move away from fossil fuels to a clean energy future powered by wind and solar that would mean more affordable, cleaner and reliable energy for New Zealanders. Instead of fiscally irresponsible false solutions, the government should be focused on creating a long-term energy strategy that charts a parth away from this broken, fossil-fuelled system that is responsible for rising energy poverty and workers losing their jobs. Fenton Lutunatabua, Pacific Interim Team Lead says, 'Instead of securing a safe future for all countries in the Pacific, the New Zealand government has decided to hammer nails into our coffins. Many will feel this bill is a betrayal to Pacific neighbours, but it is in fact a betrayal of their own future generations as well. We see the increased flooding in New Zealand, and we mirror that pain in our own storm surge and coastal inundation. How the Luxon government thinks that repealing the oil and gas ban is the right decision for any of our futures is absurd.' Adam Currie says: 'This bill repealing the oil and gas ban has forced NZ out of the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) - an alliance that we were part of creating. Aotearoa once claimed to be a climate leader—today, we are an international embarrassment. Aotearoa helped build the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance. Today, we've walked out on our own future—and become an international embarrassmen. If climate destruction were a crime, this Government would be caught red-handed.' 'The bill also comes less than 24 hours after climate activists began a dramatic climb of coal buckets, effectively preventing coal from leaving Bathurst Resources Stockton Mine, the biggest coal mine in New Zealand. The climbers are opposing this government's fossil-fuelled agenda, and focusing on Bathurst's Fast-Track application to open a 20 million tonne coal mine on the Denniston Plateau that would be the same size as Nelson city.' Notes: 1 Former Tui owner Tamarind Resources went into liquidation just a couple of years after acquiring the Tui oil field, forcing taxpayers to pay over $400 million to decommission the field. 2 The order paper for Parliament's last sitting day (21 July) showed the bill at #21 on the order paper. The provisional order paper for today (29 July) suddenly showed the bill as #1 on the order paper. The link to the full order paper is here: The previous order paper for the last day is here: 3 Bill author and Minister Shane Jones has today also released a last-ditch amendment to the bill, less than eight hours before the debate is due to occur. In a process oddity, the bill is expected to be recommitted to the committee stage for half an hour for the amendment to be made, before the bill is passed. The amendment's exploratory note reads: 'removes automatic liability for the cost of decommissioning from previous permit holders' and 'proposes to reverse the position of both the Bill as introduced and Amendment Paper No 214, so that only existing permit holders (and licence holders and persons with a participating interest in a permit or licence) are made absolutely liable in the Act for unmet decommissioning costs.' That's right - according to the government's own language, the amendment is a u-turn on the government's initial bill wording, reversing their position on that aspect of the Bill. Ending the oil and gas exploration ban was bad enough – but the changes make the bill far worse, dramatically reducing existing decommissioning requirements in a handout to the fossil fuel companies that are the devil in the government's ear. 4 The full exploratory note for the paper reads: The Crown Minerals Amendment Bill (the Bill) as introduced (in September 2024) proposed to limit trailing liability for unmet decommissioning costs to the most recent permit holder or participant who transferred out. Amendment Paper No 214 (released in November 2024) proposed to extend trailing liability to a wider range of people, beyond existing and previous permit holders, by adding various persons having a controlling interest in a body corporate to the list of persons who are currently liable for meeting unmet decommissioning costs. This Amendment Paper proposes to reverse the position of both the Bill as introduced and Amendment Paper No 214, so that only existing permit holders (and licence holders and persons with a participating interest in a permit or licence) are made absolutely liable in the Act for unmet decommissioning costs. This Amendment Paper removes automatic liability for the cost of decommissioning from previous permit holders
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Date of national day to acknowledge abuse in care survivors announced with $1m fund for local events
A national day to acknowledge the abuse, harm and pain hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders experienced in state and faith-based care will be held on November 12. This one-off national day is being held on the anniversary of the Prime Minister's historic official apology at Parliament to abuse
