Protest no place for children
I did not know whether to feel sad or angry at the photograph of a barefoot little girl with a small NZ flag on her head to keep the rain off at the protests at Parliament (Herald, February 13).
Sad, because a New Zealand child was spending
her day in a wretched environment — cold, wet, muddy underfoot, inadequate sanitary facilities, inadequate shelter, who knows what food was available. All in the company of folk punching the air with their fists and talking of hanging people.
Angry, because a child is being used to be part of an adult protest on a topic that she would not have any ability to understand, or make her own mind up about. Angry because her parents have put their own beef with the Government (legitimate or otherwise) before the needs of their child on that day. Angry because the right for peaceful protest in New Zealand surely does not include allowing children to be neglected, yet the authorities have done nothing to protect such children except turn on the sprinklers and play annoying music.
I have no problem with adults standing up for what they believe in. But in a civilised, western society our tamariki deserve better. Leave them out of it until they are old enough to make their own choices in life.
Sue Kurtovich, Tauranga.
No example for young
Why do the police not remove the protesters? Yes, everyone has the right to protest, but to disrupt the lives of others and create so much disharmony in the community should be stopped immediately. The disregard for the police and law is no example to our young children. We were taught to obey and respect the police, but now it appears to challenge the law and police is rife in our community. In Singapore, to question or disobey the law results in immediate punishment. The protesters, and not the ratepayers should be held to account for all the damage they have caused.
Mary Bell, Remuera.
Stop mollycoddling
As a Kiwi living in the UK, I have been following with disbelief the heavy-handed and dismissive attitude of Jacinda Ardern and her government towards those protesting against the Covid pass mandate. I fully support vaccination but real-time data shows that infection, hospitalisation or death rates are influenced by latitude, population density, obesity, vaccination rates and most of all, average age.
It is perhaps natural to err on the side of caution but let people choose for themselves how they wish to live and work. With a 95 per cent vaccination rate and Omicron likely to become the dominant strain in the coming weeks, stop mollycoddling people, give people their civil rights back and treat them as adults.
Irene Mears, UK
Rectifying ACC anomaly
Kate MacNamara adds her commentary to the generally unenthusiastic media and interest group response to the Government's proposals on unemployment insurance ("health by stealth"). The tall poppy syndrome is alive and well in New Zealand, but the following should be noted.
New Zealand and Australia are almost the only countries in the OECD without a scheme for unemployment insurance. In other words, this proposal is mainstream.
The income replacement rates received by New Zealanders losing their jobs are among the lowest in the OECD, at about 40-50 per cent of previous income versus 80-90 per cent in many European countries.
Yes, those losing work due to health or disability would have time-limited cover, but they would be required — as under ACC — to be tested for work capacity and undergo rehabilitation and training.
Basically, the unemployment insurance proposals bring New Zealand into the mainstream of OECD economies by advancing an active labour market policy that facilitates employees in and out of work, and rehabilitates and trains them as necessary, rather than leaving them to languish unproductively in the benefit system.
The fact that the proposals rectify an anomaly in ACC, which at present only covers employees suffering an injury, should surely be applauded rather than portrayed as something underhand.
Peter Davis, Emeritus Professor of Population Health and Social Science, University of Auckland.
Soft justice
They say crime doesn't pay but when you read about a money launderer shifting money to and from China to the tune of nearly $9 million and then using the proceeds to buy expensive houses and cars you do wonder, especially when the sentence given is a mere 12 months home detention. Plus the money has come from criminal activity, which of course he has aided and abetted by his activities.
Surely such activity should merit a considerable deterrent such as a jail sentence and deportation where applicable. Very good work by the police whom I believe are let down so often by the soft justice system in this country.
Paul Beck, West Harbour.
