Ten million population debated
In We can take 10 million, with planning (May 25), Lana Hart writes that New Zealand is the envy of the planet. Instead of doing what we can to maintain this, she seems to want to double the population.
Human beings are currently on a fast track to destroying what remains of natural habitats and the Earth’s climate. The simple reason for this is that there are too many of us. More people bring more trash, more pollution, less space for wildlife and more consumption of natural resources.
There are too many people in Auckland so there are clogged roads, air pollution and decaying infrastructure. The solution? Spread the problem out by increasing the population in ‘‘the regions’’ necessitating more roads, schools and hospitals there. I wonder what happens next, once the regions are clogged and polluted? Will this problem somehow be solved by introducing even more people?
Why would tangata whenua want more congestion and pollution in the regions? Is that in accordance with kaitiakitanga?
What is it that makes New Zealand one of the world’s finest taonga? It is the fact that we have managed to conserve large areas and keep them free of human beings and everything that comes with them. Let’s keep it that way.
Hordur Thordarson, Khandallah [abridged]
Who is this Lana Hart? For years I have been saying ‘‘If we had 10 million people by next Monday, this country would really come alive’’.
And here she is saying the same thing, We can take 10m, with planning – well, in 20 years’ time, which is probably more realistic.
With a land mass roughly the same as Japan, the United Kingdom, and Italy, we have only a tiny fraction of their populations.
No-one is suggesting we should match their populations, but we could certainly greatly increase the numbers we have, for all the reasons which Lana Hart has set out so well.
I have no doubt her ideas, and mine, will raise a storm of protest and you will have a flood of letters telling you all the reasons why this would should not happen. But perhaps now is exactly the right time to be having this discussion? Good on Lana Hart for putting her head above the parapet.
David Marshall, Karori
Letters
Email: letters@dompost.co.nz
No attachments. Write: Letters to the Editor, PO Box 1297, Wellington, 6040. Letters must include the writer’s full name, home address and daytime phone number. Letters should not exceed 200 words and must be exclusive. Letters may be edited for clarity and length.
Media Council
The Dominion Post is subject to the NZ Media Council. Complaints must be directed to editor@dompost.co. nz. If the complainant is unsatisfied with the response, the complaint may be referred to the Media Council, PO Box 10-879, Wellington, 6143 or info@mediacouncil.org.nz. Further details at presscouncil.org.nz
I do feel compelled to respond to Lana Hart’s article. We do indeed live in very privileged circumstances but very, very importantly these must be preserved for future generations.
Of course this also applies to the rest of the planet. A fundamental issue that is rarely discussed is that the United Nations has determined that the sustainable population for our planet is about one-third of what it is now.
The further that we go down a present consumption route, the lower this number will be.
The causes and means for population reduction are too horrible to think about. The prevention is a medicine that carries a very bad taste particularly in many societies.
If the planet does not take its medicine, the pending disease will be shocking.
Covid-19 has given us a tiny taste of what it could be.
Warren Pettigrew, Lincoln
It was in the 1970s that I was first told that what this country needed to achieve economic critical mass was another million people. Now we have that extra million, plus another for good measure. Can I look forward to economic utopia or will that now require, as Lana Hart proposes (May 25), another 5m people? Graeme White, Christchurch
Nikki Kaye’s election wins
In Will the Nats’ new broom be enough? (May 23), you state that National Party MP Nikki Kaye ‘‘wrested the seat of Central Auckland from Labour in 2008 and has held onto it since.’’
For the record, in the four elections she has ‘‘won’’ (2008, 2011, 2014, 2017) her share of the vote has never exceeded 46 per cent. In each of those elections the combined Labour and Greens vote exceeded hers and in three elections their combined vote was over 50 per cent. Yet like Trump becoming president despite losing the popular vote, she somehow ends up representing the people of Auckland Central in Parliament.
She is only one of 21 out of 71 electorate MPs who are bizarrely in Parliament with less than 50 per cent of the vote in their electorate. MPs such as National’s Chris Bishop in Hutt South, ACT’s David Seymour in Epsom and Labour’s Phil Twyford in Te Atatu are part of this group.
This undemocratic situation arises because even though we’ve had Proportional Representation since 1996 the 71 electorate MPs are all elected under First Past the Post voting. A move to single transferable voting would ensure that no electorate MP enters Parliament with less than 50 per cent of the vote. Brendon Bonner, Island Bay
Hope for the future
New National Party leader Todd Muller sounds a positive note when he states he does not want to criticise Government just for the sake of it. He commends the Government’s handling of Covid-19 while indicating his party will be focusing very much on economic recovery.
Such cross-party spirit is of the essence in dealing with national emergencies. We have seen it already in near unanimous support in Parliament for the Zero Carbon Act, and the commitment to end child poverty.
There will be debate along the way but a Parliament that is able collectively to make progress in dealing with a pandemic, reducing carbon emissions and ensuring all New Zealanders have a decent home to live in, food on the table and access to robust health and education systems will do much for future Kiwi wellbeing.
Dutch historian Rutger Bregman wrote recently that ‘‘the age of excessive individualism and competition could come to an end, and we could inaugurate a new age of solidarity and connection . . . I am not optimistic, but hopeful, for hope propels us to action.’’
Richard Randerson, Hataitai
Footpath war zones
So the nuclear option of e-scooters travelling at 15kmh are to be allowed in the war zone that used to be called footpaths in our city, 15kmh speed limit for city waterfront (May 22).
The WCC does not enforce the current ‘‘rules of engagement’’ in this war zone. Nor doe the WCC realise that not all pedestrians walk at a constant 5kmh, let alone in a straight line (think children), and nor do walkers have eyes in the back of their heads the better to deal with selfcentred, discourteous speedsters passing far too close from behind.
And I used to think that Wellington had declared itself to be nuclear-free. Yeah, right.
Frank Wall, Hataitai
Former MPs’ perks
I notice that a lot of letters refer to Covid19 and what the Government and others have done. In ways they have been magnificent. In others I believe they could have done more.
The whole of Parliament could have taken a six-month pay cut to show solidarity with those who lost all their salaries and shown how the system was working by staying in lockdown and working from home and not travelling long distances under the pretence of essential business.
If the prime minister thought about it she could have introduced a bill cancelling all the perks that retired MPs get and put the money saved to a better purpose. When in Parliament they were paid enough to put aside a lot more for their retirement than those on minimum wages who struggle to survive comfortably.
J Wyse, Wainuiomata