Lakes or ponds?
I refer to the Whitby Lakes director’s response ( KMN, Letters, June 21).
Ms Foster’s persistence that because she calls them lakes, they are, reminds me of the Emperor’s New Clothes argument.
‘‘There are . . . two large duck ponds,’’ says Mr Gimpel, reflecting the emperor’s predicament.
With local government minister Rodney Hyde calling for a decision on the ‘‘super city’’ amalgamation of the eight local bodies, Porirua may become a non-city.
Akin to local hapu (decisionmaking bodies of an iwi tribe), PCC may find itself being consulted after the event.
Whatever the rule for defining a lake or ascertaining and meeting the needs of a community, evolution co-operation is a way forward for the region.
I see the benefits of amalgamation if values are defined and shared, goals are environmentally sustainable, communities are valued, inclusive and transparent, and hapu have an equal responsibility in all facets of decision development, implementation and outcomes. TIPENE TE ORO MAKATEA,
Takapuwahia. (Letter abridged) enthusiasm for destroying many large, apparently healthy trees, was heartbreaking.
I can’t understand the appeal of these open, denuded areas, where before, nature reigned freely.
I returned to Bothamley Park on June 26 after a surgeryimposed absence of eight weeks. My heart sank. Even more beautiful, large trees had been destroyed and the road/ track was a sea of mud after being cut up by earth-movers.
I feel disinclined to return, in fear of what the next round of control will result in.
SUSAN BULTITUDE, Papakowhai. have been prevented through primary healthcare services, such as Pacific Health Service.
Taking such crucial services from vulnerable communities in low socio-economic areas is narrow-minded and selfish.
The Porirua community at least should have had a say upon proper community consultation, which in a democratic country is poorly practised.
On a positive note, I had a fantastic day on June 23 on Parliament grounds as I joined Pacific Health Service and community on a parade to Parliament. Many Pacific Islands represented, flags, drums and all. It was heartening to see all the mamas and papas of Pacific Island nations marching from Pipitea Marae to Parliament.
Georgina te Heuheu accepted the petition on behalf of the government.
It was great to see all Pacific Island MPs there in support from both sides of the house – Sam Lotu-Iiga, Carmel Sepuloni, Sua William Sio, Charles Chauvel and Mana MP Kris Faafoi.
Well done to all staff of Porirua Pacific Health Service. Thank you to Toetu, Tovila Foma’i, Kitiona Tauira, Eleni Mason and David Isaia for your leadership and stewardship and deputy mayor Liz Kelly for the tautoko.
I believe the campaign to keep Pacific Health Service is not over, and it is now up to government officials and Capital & Coast District Health Board to do the right thing for Porirua City and its people.
To follow my blog on this, visit: timmanu.co.nz/pacific-healthservice.
TIM MANU, Cannons Creek. in the canopy area. If Canopy Connection is paying a total of $10,000 towards the $50,000 cost, who is paying the rest?
Canopy Connection is said to be funded by a targeted rate against canopy properties (although PCC gives a much larger sum to the Chamber of Commerce).
The $10,000 therefore will be found from money paid by PCC to the Chamber (which may or may not be from the targeted rate). However, it seems the remaining $40,000 is to come from general ratepayers’ pockets. If not, would someone please say so?
If true, why should the general ratepayer pay for the protection of business premises? How can this be accommodated within existing budgets without cuts to other services – or is it to come from the chief executive’s slush fund in a similar manner to the mayor’s trip to Chicago last year (and seven months later, where is the benefit from that $50,000?).
Given that the existing cameras are said by police not even to have been maintained, why does Canopy Connection deserve more money?
BRIAN COLLINS, Papakowhai. Porirua City Council chief executive Gary Simpson responds: Canopy Connection is funded by a targeted rate levied on building owners in the canopy area and does not receive funding from general rates. It has undertaken to contribute to upgrading the city centre cameras by paying up to $10,000 over three years.
The Chamber of Commerce does not receive a grant from the council but is contracted to provide services in support of the council’s Economic Development Strategy for an annual cost of $125,000. The project is expected to cost $50,000 and the council will fund the remaining $40,000 over three years, with the money coming from existing services and savings. It will not be an additional cost on rates.
The upgrading of the cameras in the city centre will not solely benefit business owners but will assist the police and the general community in improving the safety of the area and aiding the identification of anyone committing crimes in the area.
As such, the whole community stands to benefit from the camera upgrade project.