Keep lagoon’s integrity
Editor,
The wakeboard park proposal for Aotea Lagoon must be stopped.
Aotea Lagoon is the finest small-size, family-friendly passive recreation space in the Wellington region. It may be in need of a bit of TLC but it is far from being ready for the knacker’s yard. We should be proud of it and defend it as vigorously against degradation as we would a beloved daughter from defilement.
We must not allow commercial interests or non-porirua influences to steal this gem of a park for purposes for which it was not intended.
On the previous occasion of public submissions the wishes of Poriruans were overwhelmed and consequently ignored. This must not be allowed to happen again.
My thanks goes to Kapi-mana News for keeping us informed but we need more information. We need skilled leadership and cohesive action to ensure the next round of public consultation occurs and the voice of Porirua prevails.
Such leadership should come from the council but clearly will not, so maybe a ratepayers’ association needs to step forward. I will assist such a group in whatever way I can.
Finally, let it be known that I don’t oppose a wakeboard park as such; only its destruction of our finest asset. There are alternatives but not as financially attractive to the proposers. MARTIN HOLMES,
Papakowhai levy (and compounded by inevitable increases in rates) even though it was promised for a short time, which makes the PCC rates catchment area still one of the most expensive in New Zealand.
Perhaps the mayor can answer the following questions:
When will there be rates relief from the levy, let alone the annual increases we endure and especially an undertaking that the PCC will not plonk more rates on our plate to try to tackle this natural ohenomenon with the inlet?
Meantime, how about the PCC showing their ability to get on with things and on a lesser scale (than any inlet potential disaster cost-wise) do something constructive at a reasonable cost by cleaning up the stream area where it joins the harbour next to Pak ‘n’ Save? N DE GREGORIO, Paremata (Abridged) 31) who takes pride in being the chairwoman of the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee who seem to ‘‘oversee the system’’.
This group is clearly shown to be wanting, as are many others.
My experience of committees and regulatory authorities has shown me that if no one is monitoring the monitors they do not adhere to their own regulations and bylaws, let alone anyone else’s.
Committees are often stacked with ‘‘yes, ministers’’ who are going to do what they are told to by the few in control. So there is no interruption to business as usual.
My thoughts concerning this whole thing were in a similar vein to Dr Schraa’s but probably go further.
If this is how a monitored and professional organisation disposed of the dead dogs, what cruelty was shown to them while they were alive and what heinous experiments took place behind closed doors?
The whole system is cruel and nasty and there are many modern alternatives to this archaic practice. TRACEY WATERS,
Titahi Bay