No second crossing Canada’s fix

Assisting more traffic to enter the Auckland CBD by constructing a second harbour crossing may not be necessary. The reality is that the city centre cannot cope with more incoming traffic than current volumes. Perhaps road pricing is the better option.

Overseas experience shows us that you cannot build sufficient road capacity to have a free flow of traffic during rush hours. If there is a fee of, say, $5–$10 for private cars crossing the bridge into the city from 6.30-9.30am, the traffic pressure may well abate. There is no need to charge for going out of the city as if the cars don’t come in they will not need to go back in the other direction.

This needs to be backed up with improved public transport. These measures would save many billions of dollars by avoiding a second crossing. Frank Olsson, Auckland

Having lived 25 years in Canada, I’m aghast at the disproportionately high cost of New Zealand housing relative to average income.

With no capital gains tax on property and the ability to write off real estate investment losses against personal income, governments are encouraging investing in non-productive entities.

The Canadian federal government’s visionary approach to housing encourages investment in their capital market/Canadian infrastructure and simultaneously assists retirement savings. Their measures included a capital gains tax.

It significantly reduced the demand by aspiring landlords and benefited a vibrant Canadian capital market.

This has application and merit in New Zealand. It needs a government with political foresight to enact similar legislation here.

Tony Fellingham, Tauranga