We’re pumping cash to Govt
How very sad I feel that, as of November 2018, the wonderful, loyal, friendly and most helpful staff at Marton NW fuel are to be replaced with “faceless, automated fuel pumps” as a cost-saving measure. No thank you.
Did you know that every single day our greedy NZ Government now steals 69.98c fuel tax on every single litre of 91/95 octane fuel sold right across NZ . . . with Auckland motorists being robbed even more.
In 2017 this Government overfilled its coffers by collecting $1.9 billion in fuel taxes alone from motorists . . . and then had the cheek to grab GST on each and every total fuel sale as well.
Surely motorists have already paid their vehicle registrations and road user charges to use and help maintain our highways — and it’s city motorists benefiting at our rural expense.
It only takes a drive from north Marton to Bulls to see how much our provincial highways have been neglected (an uneven, dangerous, patched-up affair).
This Government has just announced a $5.5b surplus combined with the biggest tax take in 10 years
. . . yet expect Hunterville people to pay $2.57 per litre for their 95 octane fuel. Youch!
These exorbitant fuel taxes are “creating child poverty” because parents need fuel to get around; before food will be placed on the table.
This past week in Taupo, motorists were driving away without paying, and I noted abandoned cars on the Desert Rd which had probably run out of fuel.
The time is ripe for a “peasants’ revolt” targeting this greedy Government — not the fuel companies.
CLARE WISHART
Marton
Muddled words
If I had written a love letter to a loved one in the way the Chronicle printed the love letter to Castlecliff in Saturday's paper, the recipient would have thought I wasn't mentally organised.
The out-of-order columns made for not very fluent reading.
Once sorted out, it was a nice love letter.
DOUG PRICE
Castlecliff
EDITOR’S NOTE: Our apologies to all readers (and particularly those from Castlecliff) as the columns on page B3 last Saturday were in the wrong order.
Waste survey slanted
Since my last letter on this subject it has come to my attention, from a more astute ratepayer than myself, that the kerbside recycling survey contains “subliminal” colouring to push for option three.
Option one is coloured red — Stop: Council’s least favoured option.
Option two orange — Warning: Council’s other non-favoured option.
Option three green — Go: Council’s preferred option
This type of “traffic light” programming just shows the depths that council will go to get their way.
Reinforcing my views that the survey has already been decided, councillor Josh Chandulal-Mackay has already come out on social media saying that, no matter what the ratepayers want, he is going to vote for option three. So much for asking the ratepayers for their views.
Council has yet to make a decision about what types of products will be collected, as this will depend on the recycling markets at the time. Currently, there is no market, and plastics are being either baled up and stored or just sent to the dump. This is highlighted by the picture from this paper of councillor Vinsen standing in front of bales of plastic waste.
This survey is a fiasco and will not give a decisive view of what ratepayers want. While the status quo is working, the council should hold off until they can give us definitive answers to what will or won’t be recycled. The councillors should justify their position on the effectiveness and cost of this proposal as an election issue next year.
JIM WHITE
Castlecliff