Open letter

Dear Minister,

We are very disappointed with your decision to place the colocation project between Marlborough

Boys College and Marlborough Girls College under review.

The previous Government approved the project. The $63 million investment was being considered to

be included as part of a publicprivate partnership arrangement. As I understand it the only remaining

step was to purchase land so the colleges could be built on the same site.

The co-location project will provide students and the wider community with unique educational

opportunities. There are serious problems with the current state of the colleges as both have

exceeded the 50-year life span recommended for schools by the Ministry of Education, therefore

colocation is an effective solution.

Your decision to review the project has now cast serious doubt on the colocation of these colleges,

despite the overwhelming amount of support. The vast majority of submissions were in favour of

colocated colleges and you have left the public in an uncertain position. I would appreciate you

confirming that even if the colocation does not proceed that you will ensure the community get the

$60 million redevelopment investment as promised.

I invite you to attend the public meeting we are holding on May 6 at 4:30pm, with a location to

be confirmed. I believe the community would appreciate hearing from you personally the reason for

the review of the project. STUART SMITH MP

Blenheim, April 19. or CTPI.

Sweden, the country that Minister Genter uses as an example to follow, has CTPI. UK, France and Germany, being visited by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, all have CTPI.

These countries are in the top half of the OECD per capita road safety statistics. NZ, by contrast, is near the bottom.

But NZ has ACC law which it proudly proclaims as unique in the world. Ironically, ACC is giving NZ a unique problem.

ACC works on a ‘no-fault’ basis so if you have an accident resulting in injury or death you’re covered regardless; it doesn’t matter whose fault it is. ACC removes the sense of driver responsibility.

CTPI requires that someone be responsible for a road accident and that someone has to pay for injuries and death. And since compensation for injury and death can run into millions of euros or pounds, those not at fault, ie third parties, must be protected by the at fault driver’s insurance.

Under CTPI, if you cause an accident and your insurance company assesses you as high risk your CTPI premium will increase significantly.

If you are stopped by police for a driving offence and receive demerit points on your licence your CTPI premium can go up.

For an alcohol-related offence your CTPI premium will go through the roof.

Reporting of all offences to your insurance company is mandatory. Don’t even think about hiding it. You want to protect your low CTPI premium so it affects the way you drive.

Of course CTPI requires insurance companies to play their part so they will have to work much harder.

CTPI is the only way that NZ can improve road safety on all roads under all conditions.

The answer looks simple: repeal or amend ACC act Paragraph 35 (motor vehicle injury). But it can’t be that easy or this government or the previous government would have done so already.

I hope CTPI was discussed at the recent summit meeting in Wellington. I hope Jacinda Ardern will see how CTPI works when she visits UK, France and Germany and make it work in NZ too.

Minister Genter’s transport portfolio is a political poisoned chalice. So let’s give her our support. Reducing road deaths to zero by 2020 might be ‘fantasy’. I prefer to call it a dream worth pursuing. EVAN ROBINSON

Blenheim, April 16.