Third trip and still unlucky

I recently finished my third visit to your lovely island. My first was almost 40 years ago, on the cruise ship Fairstar. We hit the worst storm the ship had experienced in five years while crossing the Tasman. My second (booked six months ahead) was a flight to Christchurch for a three-week trip to the South Island, a few weeks after the 2011 earthquake. My latest trip was a three-week tour of the North Island, flying in to Auckland on April 10, just in time for the huge storm to close the airport.

I ended up trying to sleep with 2000 other people at Christchurch airport.

I was planning on visiting next year, but maybe the good people of New Zealand will crowd-fund me and send me somewhere else. I could always go to America and visit Trump.

Steve Currie, Repton, New South Wales. refreshing to see the operation of the commerce that makes our lives possible.

Perhaps we should be realistic about the future of our port. There is no obvious place for it to move to and there is plenty of nocturnal motorway and train capacity for it to continue to serve our needs.

Set boundaries on what it may do, by all means, but let it do its thing and let us continue to enjoy seeing it at work. Not many largish cities are blessed with a downtown operating port. Maybe it can become a tourist attraction in its own right.

Bob Doran, Beach Haven. The congestion now experienced in Auckland has been building for the past 50 years. Most of the blame can be laid on central Government. Remember that until 1989 Auckland consisted of more than 20 “villages” ranging in size from Auckland City to Newmarket Borough. From 1989 to 2010 this became four cities, three districts, and one regional council.

Auckland grew with almost no planning at all, and is now spread over a vast area with low population density.

In Wellington, for the past century, the policy has been “plan today, build tomorrow, for yesterday’s problem”. The concept of “build now for the future”, and “it will never be cheaper than now” is beyond the bureaucratic imagination.

If infrastructure had been funded and build in a timely manner, it is likely our current “social” cost would be a lot less.

Derek Paterson, Sunnyhills. The Government will have to be very firm with petrol suppliers if either localised or national taxes are applied to petrol to assist needed urban expansion and transport. Suppliers have a history of adding a couple of profit points every time the Government bumps up its tax on a litre of petrol, right from the get go. Sorry, but petrol suppliers need to share the pain of the long-suffering motorists.

Still, it could have been so much worse. Were it not for the Marsden Pt Refinery and the forethought of the late Rob Muldoon and his Government’s “Think Big” policy, we would be importing refined fuels. Imagine the cost of that . . . Ouch!

Dennis Pennefather. Introducing GST to online purchases is nothing more than a tax grab and will do nothing to even the playing field for New Zealand businesses. Last week, I purchased a sweatshirt from a Britishbased online fashion retailer. It cost $46, including postage. The same item is available in New Zealand at Smith & Caughey and Ballantynes for $149.

Even if Revenue and Small Business Minister Stuart Nash makes me pay an additional $7.50 in taxes, my sweatshirt still works out almost $100 cheaper than buying it locally. Adding GST to my online purchases may well persuade me to stop buying so many clothes, but Kiwi retailers still won’t be seeing a dollar from me.

Nash needs to understand that many online purchases are luxuries, not necessities. If online prices are raised, I’ll simply stop buying so many pairs of shoes and sunglasses. It doesn’t mean I’ll buy the same items, only from local retailers.

Andrew Stevenson, Mairangi Bay.