Your views: Readers' letters

Work under way on part of the stopbank in Kowhai Park, in March 2014. The job still needs to be completed, says an Anzac Parade resident.

Let's finish the job

It seems everybody but anybody has a view regarding the stopbanks and their effectiveness/ineffectiveness in managing the direction of the river's water flow during high rainfalls.

Rachel Rose's article in Saturday's Chronicle really was the last straw.

As a resident on Anzac Parade who was affected by June 2015 events and everything that followed, ie, flood clearing, garage, under/inside house, garden, working with insurers, loss adjusters, etc. The list of things that needed to be done was seemingly endless and at times quite daunting.

But with the help of many friends and good tradespeople we got there. And, really, it was not that difficult. Just needed to be focused, stay focused and get on with it.

Raising the stopbanks at this stage is not really necessary, finishing the work started before the June 2015 event would be better, and by this I mean raising all vehicle and footpath access where it breaches the stopbank level to allow access to the river. If that isn't feasible, reduce those widths to single-vehicle access and install flood barrier gates that can be closed during a predetermined weather alert.

Council, Civil Defence and others rushing around with giant empty water barriers that take hours to fill and do not form a cohesive barrier with the stopbanks are a complete waste of time.

I know -- I stood on the stopbank in June 2015 and watched it not working.

Only when the stopbank level is the same height along its entirety during flood alert conditions will we be able to tell whether they work or not.

"Managed retreat". Is that how my father and tens of thousands of others before him built this great country? I think not.

So, Whanganui and Horizons councils, please work together and let's get the job finished.

PETER J BEDBOROUGH
Whanganui

Moutoa Monument inscription

I can assure you, Dr Keenan (Chronicle Opinion, June 29), that I am not "excited" about the Moutoa Monument wording, nor was my article (June 22) aimed at demeaning Maori, as you imply.

In fact, a careful reread would reveal the opposite.

My interest is the accuracy of our history, a very biased version of which was written by our colonial forebears but which underwent a necessary revision over the past generation by scholars such as James Belich.

Unfortunately, we now seem to be undergoing a further revision, which could perhaps be termed the "cultural cringe" phase and which seems intent on sanitising the bits we're not comfortable with.

The extreme religious practices and post-battle activities of the Hauhau, which led to the monument's "fanaticism and barbarism" inscription, are well enough documented to not require repeating here.

My contention is that diluting the wording to suit our modern sensitivities is actually demeaning to the Hauhau and a denial of their culture.

If they were here today they would, I am confident, insist on sticking to the original.

Personally, I wouldn't care to have come face to face with a Hauhau but should I meet, say, Titokowaru in the flesh today, I'm sure he'd be horrified at the idea of installing an "interpretation panel" on the monument.

"But Murray," he'd gasp in dismay, twirling his taiaha Te Porohanga (concussion utensil) menacingly. "We once were warriors!"

"Sorry, Titoko, old chap," I'd reply. "I did my best, but the 21st century is a foreign country. We do things differently here."

MURRAY CRAWFORD
Wanganui

Sanitising the past

I'm not sure if Dr Danny Keenan thinks the words "fanatics" and "barbaric" should be removed from the Weeping Woman monument, but being a historian I presume not. He writes "some Pakeha argue they should stay ... "

Well, I for one think they should stay. It shows how racist thinking was the norm in 1864 and yes, Pakeha should be ashamed of that. But to remove those words from the monument, I believe, is to try and make our past clean and pretend it wasn't like that.

This wording on the monument shows the world what we were like and how we have changed and been enlightened enough (well, some of us) not to let this sort of thing happen again.

Interesting to read the history, though, and think an interpretation panel is a good idea.

KHADY HARVEY
Whanganui

God's people

Nick Ander has perhaps forgotten that Jesus was born a Jew, lived as a Jew and never left the Middle East.

Christians are reminded in the Bible that God's "grapevine" of believers begins with His revelation to the people of Israel. Into that grapevine, Christian believers are grafted, and though not under the demands of the Torah (Jewish law), believers remain because of God's grace, not their own efforts.

Not all of God's chosen people reject Him; many consider themselves "completed" Jews and accept Yeshua Hamashiach as their Messiah.

God reaches out to all people everywhere, but many choose to ignore or reject Him. I pray Mr Ander may not be one of them.

MANDY DONNE-LEE
Aramoho