
Letters to the Editor: rates, flats and politics
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including the DCC's nine-year plan, how insulation in flats has improved, and a dangerous and deceitful government. Is the nine-year plan a path to rates pain?
The release of the Dunedin City Council's nine-year plan is unfortunate for our councillors, in that it happens to be an election year for local bodies. You could say that this nine-year plan is what they collectively campaigned on.
Sticking out in the plan are the projected rate rises over the nine-year period and in one part 10% is proposed for each of the first three years. In another part it says these rate rises are to be no more than 12%, so is the council giving itself a buffer and will 12% be the norm after year one?
Water is the major cost and a graph in the plan shows the cost of the Local Water Done Well will be 30% for every $100 spent. There is no mention of the installation of domestic water meters at this stage, but if water is to be managed "in house" they could become a reality.
Last year there was a 17.5% increase in rates and if another 30% is added on over the next three years, rates will become unaffordable for a lot of people.
The DCC can borrow money from the Local Government Funding Agency to assist with spreading the cost of the Three Waters and this should be the way to take the pressure off all ratepayers. A landlord replies, again
Liam White's letter shows a marked lack of experience which is perfectly understandable. He is only young and no experienced landlord of 30 or even 20 years would call five years experienced.
I am afraid his prejudices are showing. While I can't say how many landlords are as obsessive about insulation as I am, I can say that in general the vast majority of flats are vastly better than they were 30 years ago. Anyone over 50 familiar with the area would know this .
Also, sadly, the decline in educational standards, in particular reading and interpretative ability, complained about by universities is evident in his letter. If he read more carefully he would have noted I commented on "that minority of students".
His assumption of my lack of empathy with students belies my decades-long fight against the cold on their behalf . Apples, oranges
As a seemingly educated fellow, Dr Robert Hamlin should be aware that his argument ( ODT 15.5.25) equating the Treaty Principals Bill with the movement for women's right to vote in the 19th century is false equivalence, aka comparing apples with oranges. Adding the assertion that "there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Mr Seymour's Bill enjoy(s) the support of the majority of the nation" without providing any such evidence further undermines his case.
The final sentence, regarding Sir Ian's latte and his supposed "elite" status, is, I suppose, an attempt to denigrate the writer, and is thus ad hominum, attacking the messenger rather than the message. Could do better. Positive thinking
The government is dangerous, deceitful and pretty stupid. Dangerous because they insist on increasing speed limits even when this endangers life. Deceitful because they introduced and passed the pay equity clawbacks under urgency – and pretended this would help women. Stupid because they say it will save billions but won't mean women receive less money.
I could go on. However, my mother told me to always look for the positive. Our first one-term government in 50 years perhaps? The primary objection to Green Party editorial
In Friday's editorial (16.5.25) came the statement that "Wapiti density was only two to four per hectare ..." Any farmer would recognise that as plausible stocking density on very good pasture; even two to four per sq km (100ha) would seem high for native bush.
Then in the next day's editorial was the claim that "green is not one of the primary colours", whereas it most emphatically is. Red, green, and blue are the primary additive colours corresponding to humans' photopic vision system. You are seemingly confusing it with the yellow-magenta-cyan system of subtractive colours used in colour printing or paints.
Your worst error, however, is repeating the myth that the Green Party should be or ever was just an environmental party. From its origins in the 1970s' Values Party, of which Jeanette Fitzsimons was a founding member, the party has always put peace, social justice, and equality of opportunity on a par with its environmental mandate. If any reason were needed, it is that you cannot ask people to worry about the environment when they struggle to feed their families, pay their rent, or survive the next assault. That concern, like the environment, is both local and global.
The economic fools are those on the political right who perceive $89 billion to be a high price. The world has been operating at negative environmental balance since at least the 1980s; in greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, pollution, and many other measures. In lost value, and remedial cost, the resulting environmental deficit now exceeds the largest global financial deficits by orders of magnitude.
The Greens are the realists. The irony of road and rail announcements
I feel it stretches credulity to breaking point that Shane Jones claims never to have heard of a rival proposal to one to which he has pledged taxpayer support, when Calder Stewart's project has been a decade in the pipeline.
For several years I lived less than a kilometre from it, the siding where railway trucks of lime awaited addition to passing goods trains. It was hardly an inland port on the scale now envisaged. But the area surrounding was sparsely settled and still is, and it is easy to visualise such a facility causing less disruption, than the transport of logs, likely up to 24 hours a day through or around Mosgiel which already has congestion problems of its own.
If the majority of those logs come from points south of the city, or even if there is a balance, putting them on to rail sooner rather than later would seem to have a great deal of merit, and deliver on the objective of having an inland port, at all.
Yes, some transport operators will lose the extra truck-miles, but for either alternative, the logs will surely be subjected to identical handling. New Zealand has failed to address problems by putting ridiculous and unnecessary amounts of the transport of goods on to the highways.
The irony of Shane Jones supporting the "Wingatui" option, on the same day that Winston Peter was helping us to celebrate the new, revitalised Hillside facility, may not have escaped everyone's notice. Or I would hope not.
[Abridged — length. Editor] Say it ain't so
What? Demolish the Archway lecture theatres? Was this intended to be published on April 1? As a former lecturer at Otago University, I was always delighted to present in this wonderful venue. I suggest that senior management at the university align their views on this issue with the expert views of their own emeritus professor Erik Olssen.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Economist backs new water services model
One of New Zealand's best-known economists is backing the maths behind a move to shift control of Waitaki's water services and assets to a new company, jointly-formed by four Otago district councils. With water charges due to come off rates bills from the 2027 financial year because of changes to government regulations, Infometrics chief economist Brad Olsen has voiced strong support for Southern Water Done Well's preferred water services delivery model, saying it offered the "best pathway" to safe, reliable water services and long-term financial benefits for the districts involved. SWDW's four partner councils — Waitaki, Gore, Central Otago, and Clutha district councils — are consulting on options for the future delivery of water services to meet the government's Local Water Done Well legislation. Their preferred delivery model is a jointly owned council-controlled organisation (CCO) covering all four districts. The other three options being consulted on are a standalone Waitaki CCO, an in-house business unit, and in the case of WDC only, a joint CCO with Mackenzie, Timaru and Waimate districts. At a recent meeting of Southern Water Done Well (SWDW) elected politicians and senior staff, Mr Olsen outlined what he felt were the positives of the joint CCO option. Mr Olsen said one of the "most compelling" advantages was the leap in bargaining power, a media statement issued by the SWDW group said. Individually, the four councils each represent just 1% to 2% of the South Island's population. However, by forming a jointly owned council controlled organisation, they collectively represent 6.6% of the South Island's population. "That shift in scale is transformative. "In a tight infrastructure market, scale gives you options and leverage." SWDW, through Wellington-based consultants Morrison Low, has modelled all of the options, for water charges in 2027-28 and 2033-34 years in the Waitaki district. Mr Olsen noted SWDW's deliberately conservative approach to financial modelling for the jointly owned CCO. While short-term financial gains might be modest, water assets were long-term (20 years+) and by year 20, modelling for other joint water services delivery entities showed potential savings of up to 20% compared with going it alone. "Even under these conservative assumptions, the numbers still stack up." The conservative modelling projects 15% to 16% operating and capital efficiencies being achieved over "roughly a decade, which is a similar timeframe to achieve efficiencies as seen in other spaces". WDC's public consultation on the four options ends today at 5pm. Water options Water options considered (prices per year) Joint ''Southern Water Done Well'' 2027-28 2033-34 Joint council CCO (SWDW) $2168 $2894 Stand-alone CCO $2466 $3754 In-house business unit $2269 $3093 The South Canterbury council's model 2027-28 2033-34 In-house business unit $2041 $2924 Joint council $2269 $3093


Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Scraping the bottom of the barrel
Just when you think things can't get any worse, they often do. That is precisely what we have seen politically this week when it comes to the behaviour of our politicians. As if Leader of the House Chris Bishop's ill-conceived and poorly controlled ramblings at the Aotearoa Music Awards about a Stan Walker performance featuring Toitū Te Tiriti banners and people waving tino rangatiratanga flags weren't enough, the country had to endure even ghastlier behaviour in Parliament on Thursday. The debate about whether to endorse the recommendation to suspend three Te Pāti Māori MPs really showed New Zealanders the worst of Parliament. Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and Rawiri Waititi have now been barred from the House for seven days, 21 days and 21 days respectively for performing a haka in Parliament during debate last November about the waste of time, energy and money that was the Act party's contentious Treaty Principles Bill. Their intimidatory behaviour towards Act MPs then was at the core of the complaints considered by the Privileges Committee. Despite efforts by Opposition parties to reduce the length of the recommended suspensions, the government on Thursday ratified the committee's recommendations for punishments which, in the case of Ms Ngarewa-Packer and Mr Waititi, are the most severe ever handed down to MPs. While there can be little doubt that the behaviour of the three MPs last November was threatening and failed to meet the standards of Parliament, the severity seems unnecessarily vindictive. Interestingly, an RNZ poll of just over 1000 people, with a margin of error of 3.1 %, now shows that most respondents – 37% – think the punishment is 'about right" while 36.2% consider it too harsh. It is 'too lenient" in the minds of 17.2% of those surveyed. Of Labour Party supporters, 8% believe it should have been tougher, as do 3.8% of Green Party followers and, surprisingly, 9% of Te Pāti Māori supporters. The poll shows 54.2% of respondents either support the penalties or think they were too weak, a reflection of the government's view. While the impromptu haka by the three was seen by some as unacceptable and a breach of parliamentary protocol, it was Ms Ngarewa-Packer's foolish mimicry of shooting Act MPs which was the worst and most intimidatory action that day. The second she put her two fingers together, made the pretend gun and pointed it at Act leader David Seymour and colleagues marked the start of this whole sorry saga – though of course it can also be argued the real start came with the introduction of Mr Seymour's divisive Bill, allowed to happen by a prime minister too focused on stitching up a coalition deal with him at the top. The inciting incidents, the response and the reactions this week leave a stain on the reputation of Parliament. Some of the grandiloquence in the House on Thursday was vituperative and unwarranted. NZ First leader Winston Peters went way too far when he likened Mr Waititi's moko to scribbles, though he did apologise after the Speaker's intervention. Mr Waititi also stepped over the line by bringing a noose into the House. It was a bit rich for Mr Peters to tell RNZ it was a sad day in Parliament when he played a significant role in making it that. Parliament is no place for shrinking violets. We have seen that time and time again. It has had more than its share of biffo and nastiness over the years, which never led to suspensions anywhere near the length of those rubberstamped this week. Let us hope we don't see the like of this miserable drama again. Saw that coming It was always going to be a case of 'this town ain't big enough for the both of us". The implosion in recent days of United States President Donald Trump's simpering friendship with Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has been both highly predictable and highly amusing. Mr Musk has become increasingly caustic and is now calling for Mr Trump to be impeached. In turn, the president wants all Mr Musk's government contracts to be cancelled. When two such massive egos meet, there can only be one winner. Who that will ultimately be remains to be seen. In the meantime, let's be honest, the feud provides some much-needed light relief.


Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
Porirua Backs Regional Approach To Water Services Delivery
Press Release – Porirua City Council They voted unanimously to recommend that Council should jointly establish and co-own a new water organisation with Upper Hutt City Council, Hutt City Council, Wellington City Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council. Porirua City Council's Te Puna Kōrero committee has endorsed a joint regional approach for water services delivery. As part of the Local Water Done Well reform, the Government has mandated that councils must review how water services are delivered. Te Puna Kōrero met this morning to deliberate and made a recommendation to Council, after consulting on two options for a future water services delivery model – a new water services organisation, or a modified version of the status quo. They voted unanimously to recommend that Council should jointly establish and co-own a new water organisation with Upper Hutt City Council, Hutt City Council, Wellington City Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council. Under this model, a multi-council-owned water organisation will take ownership of public water assets. The alternative was a modified version of the current Wellington Water model, where councils retain ownership while Wellington Water manages water services. That recommendation will need to be endorsed at the full Council meeting on 26 June. All five councils are independently making decisions by the end of June on how to proceed. Officers will then develop a joint Water Services Delivery Plan and foundation documents for the new organisation, which must be lodged with the Department of Internal Affairs by 3 September 2025. The intention is that Council will transfer its assets, debt, liabilities and services in relation to drinking water, wastewater and stormwater to the new organisation by1 July 2026. In making today's decision, the committee unanimously supported an amendment from Councillor Geoff Hayward, setting out the principles Porirua City wants reflected in the new organisation's foundation documents. These include recognising water as a public good, safeguarding households from disconnection, value for money, fair pricing, supporting local employment, and upholding Te Mana o te Wai. Porirua Mayor Anita Baker said like many parts of the country, Porirua's water networks faced significant challenges. 'We have old pipes that cause water leaks, contribute to water shortages and are a main contributor to pollution in the harbour. 'While we've poured all the money we can into funding water assets, we simply can't address these challenges on our own. Doing nothing is not an option, and we believe the new model is the best way forward for Porirua.'