The obesity/diabetes scourge is now an alarming global issue - let’s not make it a racial issue as well.
Judy Anderson, Remuera.
Health win-win
Our health budget is worth over $5000 per person. However, an UltraCare health plan from Southern Cross for a 54-year-old male non-smoker will cost almost $1000 less. I imagine most of the non-smoking population would cost substantially less.
With over 5 million potential customers, why does the government not negotiate a plan with Southern Cross? By bringing so many customers to them, I’m sure they could include smokers and those with issues insurance companies won’t insure.
If the insurance companies insist on an excess for smokers, the smokers could pay for the excess from tax cuts to tobacco due to the reduced health costs from the insurance plan.
It would be a massive win-win for everyone. The government will save about $5 billion from the health bill. Southern Cross will have a massive increase in customers.
Everyone would have the kind of healthcare only insurance can bring. Those who already pay for health insurance will get money back in their pocket to spend elsewhere.
Kent Millar, Blockhouse Bay.
Aggrieved Aussie
Listening to Parliament Question Time I have heard, regarding the removal of te reo Māori from Paul Goldsmith’s invitation to the Australian Minister for Multicultural Affairs, our Prime Minister declare that “in my dealings with Australians you need to be incredibly clear and simple and use English”.
Did Mr Luxon intend this as “friendly banter” akin to that addressed by Trade Minister Todd McClay to Ricardo Menendez March about his Mexican background for which he had to apologise, or, as it sounded to this Australian, an insult far worse and which should require reprimand or, as far as most Australians will feel, resignation.
To belittle your closest ally in such an egregious fashion deserves nothing less for someone who claims to be building sound relationships across the globe. He has just confirmed how ill-equipped he is to hold such a responsible diplomatic office.
This quote will be heard and remembered by all Australian politicians who will now treat Luxon with the disdain he and his comment deserve.
Jeremy Coleman, Hillpark.
Boosting Kiwibank
Yes, Kiwibank should be able to grow its share of the NZ banking market, but not through a fund-raising partial privatisation (NZ Herald, Aug 7).
Such would be inconsistent with Kiwibank’s important role as a “disruptor”, keeping the big Aussie-owned banks honest. A disruptor is supposed to earn a low rate of return on capital as a result of its aggressive competition on pricing. There’s a much easier path to expansion.
The NZ government is itself by far the largest purchaser of domestic banking services in the country. At present, this lucrative business is parcelled out to a cosy oligopoly “panel” of Westpac, ASB and ANZ.
Government could commit to moving, say, 10% of its business to Kiwibank this year, and then an additional 10% next year, and so on.
Among other benefits, this would whittle away at the $8 billion of easy profits currently shipped across the Tasman every year.
Tim Hazledine, Freemans Bay.
On boot camps
Like all New Zealanders, I abhorred the outcome of the recent report on abuse of children. However Chloe Swarbrick’s article (NZ Herald, Aug 7) seems to miss, or gloss over, the most important issue. The problem rests solely upon the shoulders of parents.
Parents have children, not the government or its agencies. Until parents are made accountable for the actions of their offspring, and, indeed, their own actions, the problem will never be resolved. Other agencies will become involved in an attempt to rectify the various problems involving family violence, crime, truancy, and so forth.
This interaction may not be perfect but will, in all probability, be better than being home alone.
Ian Doube, Rotorua.
