There is a consequence in restricting staff wages and sacking good public service staff to save money.
There is a consequence to cutting or stopping funding for social and volunteer agencies like food banks and disability care.
Remember the claim that “No front line staff or services will be affected”? That seems to be far from the reality.
Many of our best and brightest have gone offshore because our government is unwilling to pay decent incomes to provide them the lives they deserve, but which other countries are happy to give them.
I was so proud when Labour lifted the wages of nurses and others, but very disappointed that our current government have frozen wages or given very minimal pay increases.
That isn’t how you should act in a global employment market; 131,200 people departed New Zealand in the year ended June 2024.
We couldn’t afford tax cuts, especially as most of us got just a couple of dollars, yet costs have risen much more for bus fares, rates, insurance, vehicle registrations - with ACC levies and RUCs soon to be increased.
It has only taken 10 months for our government to take us back to 2017 - to be back on the same cruel track as the previous National government, with preference given to landlords and the wealthy instead of all New Zealanders.
Public services are failing to fill our needs because our government has made senseless ideological choices. It’s simply not good enough.
Mary-Ann de Kort
Time for a ‘facelift’
Re: Forget Grey, honour Dame Kiri instead - September 17 letter.
Time to discard all the old colonial street names as well as Poverty Bay.
It’s interesting to note how we now describe people and their representative organisations such as the physically or mentally challenged, yet we still have the ball and chain “Poverty Bay”.
It may have been a difficult time for Cook when he arrived, but the store has new owners now and we need to give it a “facelift”. A name change would be a great start.
Lance Stopford
Plan for whole region?
Re: Regional economic plan ‘one of best I’ve seen’ — PM, September 14 story.
Seems bizarre, but perhaps par for the course in Tairāwhiti, that a regional economic plan would be given to central government before there was any opportunity for the public to even see it, let alone comment on the contents. Though I guess that strategy makes sense if it was written by Trust Tairāwhiti in the interests of certain sectors and businesses instead of the interests of the region as a whole.
Manu Caddie
Fawlty at Pinehurst
Re: Basil?! We’re taking the show to Gisborne - September 19 story.
I remember years ago when they had Fawlty Towers nights at Pinehurst Manor when it was operating in Clifford St. You never really tire of good British comedy.
Bevan Moore
Farm developments
The introduction of precision fermentation will destroy our dairy and beef industry at best within five years. The Government should allow farms to have subdivision status and allow farmers to keep their shirts on their backs.
Ian Gaskin, Waikaremoana
Public interest lacking
Re: How cops caught up with Kiri Allan, September 17 story.
It must be a slow news day at NZME when someone decided that this was in the public’s best interest. Surely that is the first question - is it in the public’s best interest? I am not seeing it. What has happened has happened and those involved should try to move on.
Dave Henderson
It’s called democracy
Re: Divisive Treaty Principles Bill: Anything is possible - September 17 letter.
What is so offensive about the three coalition parties following through with policies they campaigned on?
Even David Seymour admits the bill has little chance of success beyond the first reading.
In the meantime the country, via the select committee, will have an in-depth discussion about what is being proposed. What could be fairer than that.
My guess is that Bruce and his mates prefer that the democratically elected Government operates in the clandestine manner made famous by the Ardern mob.
At least Seymour’s bill is providing the people an opportunity to have their say.
Who knows - once they get to know a bit more about the bill, the public may force the naysayers to change their mind and allow it to go to a full referendum.
How democratic would that be? Actually, that possibility is the thing Bruce and his ilk are really scared of.
Go figure.
Clive Bibby
