How sad Green Party list MP and Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage has decided not to allow the use of 7 per cent of the reserve land between the Fish and Dive Club and the marina as a marine research facility when our city council voted 9-2 in favour of it.
Tauranga needs to support the university's growth in every way it can and a world-class marine research facility on the water would be an excellent way of doing so.
A new venue must be found but given the minister's decision it's hard to see how it can be a waterfront one.
Somehow such a facility in town and away from the water just doesn't have the same attraction.
Maybe after the election, a new minister will reconsider the proposal.
Transport fiasco continues
For revitalisation, Tauranga's CBD must itself become a main hub for visitors, locals, businesses, commuters, workers, inhabitants, shoppers and be a commercial centre free of traffic congestion and parking problems.
The obvious answer is a Tauranga central railway station on the Strand as the main destination and transit centre for passenger rail regionally from Katikati, Aongatete, Ōmokoroa, Te Puna, Ōtumoetai, Bureta, Tauranga, Matapihi, Bayfair, Blake Park, Mt Maunganui, eastwards to various Pāpāmoa stations, Te Puke, Paengaroa and even beyond Whakatāne, utilising the rail corridor which passes parallel to, or through most of these centres.
City-wise from CBD central station, light rail/trams could run along Cameron Rd to Kennedy Rd, Pyes Pa, branched to Welcome Bay, all having a different return loop would complete the transportation plan harmoniously blending commuter hubs to housing areas, an asset advantageously benefiting all future scenarios.
Now in 2020, with the admission that the flawed roading model will not solve the problems, authorities shortsightedly continue expanding outmoded roading ideas, yet absurdly expect a different result.
Examples in June 2020 are the $19.5m on a failed transport hub and $2.5m for an updated transport report, which incredibly defers passenger rail for 30 years.
Lamentably, but predictably, the transport fiasco continues.
Should be easier to dismiss people
Has anyone thought about how circumstances alter cases?
Suppose a person or company wishes to dismiss or remove an employee from their position.
They must follow a specific pathway. It is quite a rigmarole.
It takes quite a long time to complete this process.
However, if a person holds a public position -- boof! They are gone within the hour. (Ask our recent ex ministers).
Of course, this is rightly so.
Why are employment laws so complicated for the private sector to negotiate?
I believe that dismissal from a position should be much easier than it is at present. An employer will not discharge a good employee, because they are worth their weight in gold.
The Bay of Plenty Times welcomes letters from readers. Please note the following:
• Letters should not exceed 200 words.
• They should be opinion based on facts or current events.
• If possible, please email.
• No noms-de-plume.
• Letters will be published with names and suburb/city.
• Please include full name, address and contact details for our records only.
• Local letter writers given preference.
• Rejected letters are not normally acknowledged.
• Letters may be edited, abridged, or rejected at the Editor's discretion.
• The Editor's decision on publication is final. No correspondence will be entered into.