Is time up for the haka before rugby games? Photo / Getty Images
No justice for scam victims
With the ever-growing and disturbingly common online investment scams facing us on a daily basis, and the major perpetrators seemingly “out of reach” and untraceable, the detailed report in the HoS (Mar 17) of one such shrewd scam artist being identified and caught was, at first glance, wonderful news.
That initial sense of elation I felt at the capture of this Auckland woman — who went to great lengths in facilitating the theft of over $1 million through fake online investment schemes in cahoots with her then-Auckland-based Nigerian lover — soon left me totally gobsmacked as our utterly ineffective police prosecution brigade deemed her “a mere victim and won’t face criminal charges”. Give me a break.
A very diligent private investigator and the HoS’ investigative reporter detailed how Aimee Rodda was gung-ho in setting up a phoney shell company and opening accounts with numerous NZ banks to smoothly facilitate the laundering and rapid offshore transfer of significant, fraudulently obtained funds from innocent Kiwis.
With scammers virtually impossible to pin down and bring to justice, it beggars belief that justice has not, and apparently will not, prevail in this instance — even when it’s handed to you on a platter.
Peter Cook, Lynfield
Hospital hygiene
So Health Minister Dr Shane Reti is making comments about the hygiene conditions in our hospital system (HoS, Mar 17).
Labour recognised this and I don’t believe that Reti could be so naive that he would assume this all happened under Labour’s watch.
Prior to Labour coming in, the hospitals, along with other public institutions, had undergone nine years under National where all money for hospitals had been frozen and no investment had been carried out during that period.
Labour took over a system on its knees thanks to National. Hospitals were found with major problems, ie faeces running down the walls. Labour was well under way to fixing the problem, but then Covid struck and exacerbated the problem even further.
I have been to Waikato Hospital on a number of occasions and inside the emergency entrance leading to the wards, the first set of toilets have been out of paper and in a poor condition and over a period of months have not improved; it is like they have forgotten this toilet even exists.
Instead of the blame game, it would be better if they just get on with getting things going as they should.
Tom O’Toole, Taumarunui
No more haka, anthems
Amid all the recent hoo-ha attendant to pre-game hakas — bolshy or otherwise — references are made to the “Pākehā haka”, the national anthem, asking why this, too, isn’t criticised.
But many people object to the pre-game haka not because it’s making some point or other, but simply because they’re bored rigid with the plethora of pre-game haka. Just as they’re bored rigid with pre-game national anthems.
They’re there for the game of rugby — with the emphasis on “game”. They’re particularly not there to fight World War III.
The only difference is that a couple of generations’ exposure to the national anthem being played at every bug-house in the land prior to every film screening built up a certain immunity, which at some point entered the national DNA.
But most people’s exposure to pre-game haka usually used to be only once annually if you got to watch a rugby test live in your home city, with no chance for similar immunity to develop. It was a brief, good-natured display, respectful nonetheless.
But then some bright spark — Buck Shelford, I think it was — decided the haka had to revert to the eye-popping affair it used to be in the days of his ancestors preparing to meet their enemy and possibly also their maker on the battlefield. In short, it got re-weaponised.
Alas, it’s been all downhill from there.
Be they haka or anthems, ban all of these silly pre-game tribal exhortations and get on with the real haka — the game itself.
Even the illustrious Olympics seem to manage perfectly well without them.
Frank Greenall, Whanganui
What’s the point in voting?
What is the total value of perks to MPs? Why do they not negotiate for a salary increase like hard-working teachers nurses and cops?
Surely as David Seymour frequently says, some deserve more and others less — his theory for teachers and the wealthy.
We’ve heard about tax-free accommodation supplements. What else do they get? When they leave what do they continue to receive? Are these “essential” to attract quality MPs?
What qualities do they need, or do we pay for absolutely none? Should we pay the same for an experienced lawyer, doctor, teacher, businessman, tobacco or alcohol or car salesman, farmer or student?
Should we pay for whether they answer the question? That would save a fortune and make Parliament’s Question Time efficient for once. Could the Speaker be replaced by an AI computer — totally knowledgeable of standing orders, totally impartial and costing far less? Would Gerry Brownlee’s rulings confuse or elucidate a trainee AI speaker or be better suited for a joke module?
We see empathy from Penny “Pincher” Simmonds as she removes choice from the disabled with drastically limited choice, and David Seymour saying “good” as jobs are cut — as extremely desirable qualities that these two exhibit, should we pay more for that?
We see that Christopher Luxon knows an entrance-level cop gets $92,000, but in reality it’s $51,000. This trait, complete ignorance or living in a different world of entitlement, is clearly desirable and deserves a knighthood when he leaves. Is that an unwritten perk? What’s that worth to all those cops with PTSD?
Is Parliament just a wasteful example of cynical hypocrisy? Ramming through laws under urgency giving extreme power to ministers to rule on issues beyond their comprehension, just to get things done?
What’s the point in voting when all promises are dependent on coalition agreements anyway? Exercising your democratic choice is a fundamental right to achieve proportionality, a fair society. Worth dying for, isn’t it not?
Steve Russell, Hillcrest
Defending Golriz
Your columnist Heather du Plessis-Allan is clearly lacking in compassion when she defends those media that are harassing Golriz Ghahraman during her court appearances (HoS, Mar 16).
It is like justifying to kick someone who is down, ill with multiple sclerosis and who has suffered a mental breakdown due to work pressure and social media persecution.
I recommend you read Golriz’s book Know Your Place and you might show a little more respect and kindness for this formidable woman.
Susanne Whale, Whakatāne
Real-world experience
Shane Te Pou’s opinion piece on Christopher Luxon’s lack of leadership, particularly over financial issues that affect all New Zealanders, is very telling.
The only thing I can imagine is that Luxon, holding no portfolios of his own, feels he can’t be blamed for any failures on the Government’s part. He has lackeys he can target for those.
Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to understand that, unlike life in corporate ivory towers, life in the political realm is very different. Companies have staff, maybe up to a couple of thousand, who have to answer to him.
In government he has to answer to a population of about 5 million who are fast running out of tolerance for the board’s incompetence. Until he can separate the two and leave corporate thinking behind, he should be sent back to the bench to learn how things work in a “real world” (his words) he has very little experience of.
Jeremy Coleman, Hillpark
Former Act president's lawyer claims sentence was too harsh, calls for home detention.