On the buses
The Editorial (September
22) on Greater Wellington Regional Council’s (GWRC) bus service wrongly says that only a few councillors have admitted serious errors. Along with councillors Ian McKinnon, Sue Kedgley and Daran Ponter, I have admitted fundamental problems in the new bus arrangements, and we have given our unqualified apologies at public meetings throughout Wellington. Some of us were not councillors when the design of the service was approved in 2014, but the problems have surfaced on our watch and are our responsibility.
People ask, “Why did you change the bus routes?” This is the first major change for three decades. In that time we have had population growth in some suburbs, people starting work earlier or finishing later, and growing traffic congestion. Before the changes, there were 140 buses an hour on the “golden mile” at peak time, which is twice the design capacity. Change is necessary to ensure a sustainable bus service. Cost saving was not the purpose of the review.
What has happened in implementing the change is completely unacceptable. One cause has been the objective of making all changes within the existing budget.
We need long-term solutions and quick wins. Extra commuter services are required on some routes (which will be funded from reserves), buses must connect at hubs, buses must run to time, hubs must be completed, real-time information must be accurate and we must deliver the bus service our customers rightly expect. Roger Blakeley Councillor, Greater Wellington Regional Council
The Editorial about Wellington’s buses hits the mark. However, the perfect storm that led to the wrecking of the city’s bus network began in Parliament’s corridors of power with the introduction of Steven Joyce’s Public Transport Operating Model in 2013 and its aim to cut the subsidy for public transport below 20% and to force competition in bus services.
Fran Wilde, Paul Swain and Chris Laidlaw had no trouble implementing the legislation at the local level and set about breaking up the NZ Bus “monopoly”, with the first casualty being the trolley-bus network, giving Wellington the dubious honour of being the first city since the Paris climate accord to remove sustainable public transport. Gillian Tompsett (Seatoun, Wellington)
JUMPING THE WAKA
The September 15 Editorial tells only half the story of Green Party support for the wakajumping bill.
Politics is the art of compromise, as we all know. The Greens oppose the idea of the bill and would certainly vote against it given the option. However, to oppose what amounts to Winston Peters’ bill would almost certainly mean the Greens would lose NZ First’s support on issues the Greens promote, such as climate change and other environmental and social issues.
It is disingenuous for the Editorial and for Jeanette Fitzsimons to present the waka-jumping issue as a simple betrayal of the Greens’ beliefs. They are reluctantly supporting the bill in order to preserve what they consider more-vital issues. Pam Henson (Nelson)
VITAMIN C FOR SURGERY
The recommendations for successful surgery (“Vital signs”, September 22) failed to mention vitamin C, which is recognised as being involved in all phases of wound healing. It is also recognised that many hospital patients have lower levels of vitamin C than non-patients.
This year, I was fortunate enough to have successful major surgery, for which I am extremely grateful. It was commented on how quickly I recovered: able to stand on
day two, discharged on day seven. Could this have been partially due to my choice to take additional vitamin C and other supplements before and after the operation?
What is puzzling is that in every phase of preparation for the operation, and aftercare, no mention was made by medical staff of the importance of vitamin C levels. No testing of levels was done, no supplements were offered or recommended.
One of the ways in which I prepared for my operation was to drink low-sugar “sports water” (available at supermarkets), which contains 125% of the recommended daily intake of vitamin C per 750ml bottle. It is highly palatable and therefore encourages fluid intake. The hospital’s liquid offerings were confined to water, tea and coffee. Jim Brook (Massey, Auckland)
CANNABIS CONUNDRUM
Cannabis discussions ( Psychology, September 22) raise many dichotomies. Some believe
cannabis is very good and others believe it to be bad. I see it benefiting my patients daily.
Evidence-based medicine is slow to deliver. It does not serve those currently distressed by symptoms of chronic pain, cancer or nervous conditions. But 10,000 years’ use has demonstrated the safety of cannabis.
About half of the 250 people I have treated with the cannabis constituent cannabidiol (CBD, which, unlike THC, is not high-inducing) report very good to excellent symptom relief. Sadly, many stop because of the cost.
Patients in distress ask that the anticipated Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis)
Amendment Bill compassionately remove barriers to cost and care for this safe treatment.
Dr Graham Gulbransen (Pt Chevalier, Auckland)