Temporary roundabout raises questions around need for new traffic light. Photo / File
Temporary roundabout raises questions around need for new traffic light. Photo / File
Traffic lights vs roundabouts saga continues
It seems we have yet another unnecessary ongoing saga in our community.
Not altogether unusual.
I would have hoped that the lights vs roundabouts debate would be settled beyond doubt by now.
I also might have expected that a full and final statement ofcosts be released along with evidence that one or the other is obviously safer, cheaper, more user friendly or undeniably a better solution.
Maybe we need to see for ourselves the benefit, or not, of roundabouts.
We have all had our experience using a number of traffic light controlled intersections around town, and we have all had the opportunity to use a roundabout at major intersections.
Both ends of Dublin St Bridge, London St/Carlton Ave and of course the Heads Rd/Liffiton St intersection are handled very well by a motionless round shaped lump of concrete and dirt.
And there are other options to provide pedestrian safety.
Maybe a moratorium on any future installation of traffic lights should be made with a view to installing a roundabout instead. If a problem arises then we fix it.
Ray Brightwell Chairman, Whanganui Ratepayers Association
Breaking promises
Reading this morning's Chronicle (November 2) article about the Minister of Finance and his Bright Line promise difficulties reminds me that breaking a promise not to do something seems worse than breaking a promise to do something.
For too long now Labour has allowed National to dominate the conversation about raising money.
With its fine performance over Covid-19 Labour had no need to make promises not to look at new taxes. As a supposedly left wing government it would be expected to look to people with strong finances to pull their weight in solving the tremendous problems of poverty, social housing and Covid recovery.
As it is wild promises not to look for more taxes outside of PAYE appears to be not only giving way to National but also to indicate more concern about securing a win in the next election than doing the right things in this term.
I expected more courage after the brave work for all the crises of the last three years.
The question might be rhetorical but Rob Rattenbury (Chronicle, November 30) gets it right asking why not the state being our major landlord when it comes to rental houses.
He reminds us of this being the policy of the first Labour government. But he neglects to point out that the rapid roll-out of state dwellings was not funded by rented money.
John A Lee and Bob Semple insisted on Reserve Bank funds at a minimal charge – something Grant Robertson derides as "Muldoonism", preferring instead to authorise Kainga Ora (Housing NZ) to borrow $7.1 billion on the private debt markets.
This was quietly announced in the NZ Gazette last January – another indication that the PM's declaration about governing for all the people includes the profiteers from public debt.
Business commentator Rod Oram suggests the Reserve Bank buy up US Treasury bonds. Heavens above! The RBNZ is perfectly capable of purchasing our own Treasury's bonds, as advocated by several well-known economists, but by only one political leader – Social Credit's Chris Leitch. Where are the others?
They all bemoan the housing crisis while timidly avoiding financial solutions. The latest Salvation Army report on poverty calls for courageous policies. Who is up for the challenge?
