A selection of letters to the editor. Have your say by clicking the link at the bottom of this page. Please also see letters rules at the bottom of this page.
-----------------------------
I find the Kiwi psyche baffling.
According to the opinion polls, the majority are against State-owned asset sales yet they favour the National Party which, if returned, will waste no time in a partial sell-off of those assets.
Is it moral or legal for any party to sell public property without a referendum? This same majority appear to be backing a party whose promises and assurances have historically proven to be less genuine than a $3 note and lowered the living standards for low wage earners, superannuitants and beneficiaries.
Unless there is a radical reform to our political system - the present party system is obsolete - I believe the New Zealand economy will, within 10 years, be facing the same crisis the Euro is now.
JAMES MEGSON
Rotorua
As New Zealanders, through past taxation, we own some very valuable assets, power stations being one of the most important.
By we the people owning them, costs are kept much lower than if they were in private ownership. The National Party will sell these, not to pay the $18 billion of debt they racked up through gross financial negligence, but to finance other existing projects.
Mr English stated he is seeking a mandate from the people regarding asset sales - in other words, he needs the majority of us to say yes we want them sold. However, a recent survey indicated 68 per cent of New Zealanders don't want them sold.
Should National win, it's a foregone conclusion that we all will be paying much higher power prices. This will increase our living costs, cause the elderly to go cold in winter and any profits will go mainly offshore.
However, there is one bright spot here - power stations are powered mainly by water, most of the water, for example the Waikato, is owned by Maori interests, so if they sell the power stations themselves they still have no right to the water which powers them, unless iwi give them the rights. As Maori consider themselves only caretakers of their assets, this would be unlikely.
Basically, it's in the hands of Maori to say no to the water supply. This would stop asset sales in a heartbeat and force a humiliating defeat for Mr English's plans to sell our resources and assets.
DAVID BARNES
Lake Tarawera
Regarding cost over-runs on the Energy Events Centre. It started at $10 million from the Rotorua Energy Trust and $5 million from ratepayers but the final figure was closer to $30 million plus large contributions from local businesses.
The airport extension was opposed by numerous residents on the grounds it wouldn't be financially viable, but their objections weren't heard. Initially council said about $10 million would be spent to test the water. Costs are now close to $60 million with more work to be done.
Spending continued even when the economic writing was on the wall. Places like Hamilton and Palmerston North lost money on their airports.
Following the costs in the 10-year plan, annual plan and budget requires one to be a forensic auditor. Despite Mr Gaston calling my comments bizarre, there have been numerous closed council meetings and now we have closed workshops, excluding media and the public, where decisions are taken, a practice criticised by Audit NZ in the case of Hamilton Council.
Instead of advertising museum extensions, Lake Rd work and success of the Rugby World Cup in the paper, ratepayers would appreciate some financial figures, namely how much is still owed on the Events Centre, airport and museum? What revenue is being generated? How much more has to be spent on the airport wetland, runway development, soundproofing and purchase of homes and tree cutting?
Roger Gordon of the Chamber of Commerce also asked why staff details weren't published this year and for the council to stick to core functions.
A DEVERSON
Rotorua
Rotorua District Council Corporate & Customer Services group manager Jean-Paul Gaston responds:
It's unfortunate that Mr Deverson continues to use this column to make unsubstantiated claims about council activities. Much of what he states in his latest letter is simply inaccurate or untrue and should be refuted. We always welcome the opportunity to respond to reasonable queries from our community. Unfortunately space doesn't allow for each of Mr Deverson's latest accusations to be addressed here in detail. However, in the interests of openness and transparency, I would invite Mr Deverson to contact me personally and I would be more than happy to sit down with him to answer his questions and explain the 10-year plan which he is struggling to understand.
In the meantime your readers can rest assured that Mr Deverson's claims that council decisions are made in closed workshops is incorrect, as are his claims about cost overruns. Elected councillors listen to all views when they make their decisions, regardless of whether those views support or oppose a proposal.
--------------------------------------
The Daily Post wants to hear from you. Please note:
Email letters to editor@dailypost.co.nz or text DP (space) your message to 021 241 4568
He lost an arm and a leg in a crash that killed three friends.