Fatal crash hardly police fault

A 15-year-old who was breaching bail conditions had a 12-year-old girl in a stolen car and decided to try to run from police who had asked them to pull over. They lost control and killed themselves. How can this be the fault of the police and why aren’t we holding the parents to account? Both deaths were minors.

Frankly the kids in that car, had they not been seen by the police, may have crashed anyway. Statistically, it was very probable and it was luck that no innocent driver was caught in the consequences of their behaviour.

If police decide to simply wave to drivers suspected of stealing cars or other crimes, we will have a spree of crashed stolen cars with stupid people driving from their crimes.

People who steal from society are a blight, they do not deserve free passage from police and when they’re kids, it’s the fault of parents, not the police. Michael Howell, Mt Roskill.

Phone set-ups

In a news item, we were offered comment and video of a police officer punching a 13-year-old male for failing to use a helmet while riding his bicycle.

The police were jeered and laughed at by a group of youths standing about videoing on their mobiles.

On Facebook, recently, was a video of a young male in USA pulled over by police. He conducted himself in a manner that can only be described as passiveaggressive. He was completely uncooperative.

After much exchange and requests by police, which he declined quoting his “rights”, it ended in the police breaking into his car and violently dragging him out, all recorded. I judge it was exactly the result he wanted.

Are there parallels? I judge there are. Do we want the same sort of police-citizen relationship as they have in USA? Police are not the enemy, bad people are the enemy. There are bad people in the police but if we cannot find respect for what police are required to do, and adopt a cooperative manner, then expect escalating violence in clashes with police, which I am sure will be well recorded on mobiles.

Together we tread the path to escalating social violence. Your call.

Cattle cull

Can someone please explain to me why we need to slaughter 126,000 cattle when the illness does not prevent the beast’s meat or milk being fit for human consumption? Providing the animal is not in pain I see no reason to carry out this draconian “remedy”. The result will be the elevation of the cost of replacement and total disruption to the industry.

We hear that there is only one country known for its primary production that is not affected by the disease and I am unsure how much Norway contributes to the world’s meat and milk total.

As a result of this wholesale slaughter what will happen to the retail cost of beef to the consumer? So why the hurry to take the beasts to slaughter and try to eradicate the disease. A. D. Kirby, Papamoa.

Sad but necessary

It is very distressing for farmers to have to cull their cows. A similar experience happened when TB was discovered in our herds and all cows had to be checked and those who were infected were slaughtered.

Thanks to the eradication of TB in our dairy herds, New Zealand milk has maintained a reputation for being disease free and sells at premium prices.

Britain faced a similar crises with “mad cow” disease.

If we are to maintain our reputation, sadly we need to eradicate this new threat to our dairy industry. My hope is that farmers will set in place much more stringent controls and safeguards to ensure this does not happen again. J. Hansen, Hastings.

Striking inequality

Bus drivers regularly striking, nurses soon striking, teachers in crisis. Meanwhile a

New Scientist inequality article reports that the world’s richest eight people own as much as the bottom half of humanity, 3.5 billion people. Millennia of history has proved the only greed cures are war or revolution. What a pity no government will fix tax evasion so that we can pay our bus drivers, nurses and teachers appropriately. What are they afraid of? Jim Carlyle, Te Atatu Peninsula.

Life without plastic bags

In response to the question, and this is not the first response of this nature, “does the public really know what they are going to do without the plastic bags?”, I say categorically yes. Our family have managed since our children were born (14 years ago) to survive in a tidy and hygienic house without plastic bags.

Our food goes in our compost (or we have a food waste bin collected) and the recycling is separated at council request, so there is nothing wet in the rubbish. Hopefully the council will speed up food waste collection for households too.

The white dedicated rubbish bin in our kitchen still looks new.

If schools ask for plastic bags for camps or events the kids just take a drawstring swim bag.

Rather than continue with old solutions try to dedicate some time to new ways to organise household waste and don’t be afraid to change old habits!

Why so many children?

While not minimising the impact of homelessness, I do question the lack of responsibility of some parents having more children than they can reasonably afford.

Krystal Heke and her partner are a case in point. Surely four children would have been more than enough yet they went on to have twins.

With contraception and the “morning after” pill readily available there is no excuse for such profligacy. Additionally, with the environmental impact globally of over-population, even those families who can afford more children should be encouraged to limit the size of their families Ray Gilbert, Matamata.

Taking over rubbish

If the Auckland Business Chamber is wrong about the Auckland Council wanting to expand its waste management services in competition with the private sector, why didn’t the council say so when we made our submission weeks ago and followed up to reinforce our submission to a panel of councillors chaired by Councillor Hulse? Why haven’t they told the five or six major waste companies who made similar submission that they too are wrong?

And why hasn’t the council adopted the advice given to them by a review undertaken last year that they would be wise to undertake a robust economic and enviro cost-benefit analysis before embarking on any push into areas already serviced by the private sector with no market failure?

Why come out now? I suggest it’s because they can no longer hide from their bad processes.

Meanwhile your reporter Bernard Orsman has it right in his article the same day: We are calling for a shared councilwaste industry partnership setting out what each other’s role and responsibilities are. Michael Barnett, chief executive, Auckland Business Chamber of Commerce.

Studying studies

How fabulous that Phil Goff sees fit to waste a million dollars on a pre-feasibility study. In the world of medicines we have had the silly notion of pre-biotics, it seems that it is spreading to consulting. The purpose of a feasibility study is to determine if something is feasible, presumably a pre-feasibility study is to determine if the feasibility study is feasible. Presumably PWC will have a prepre-feasibility study to make sure that the pre-feasibility study is feasible too. Where will this madness end? Neville Cameron, Coromandel.

Timber please

Well done Sir Bob Jones on his initiative to construct a 12 storey building using laminated timber, but please Sir Bob (and many others including some architects) don’t use the word “wood” unless you intend to start up a woodstove business or you are commenting on firewood. The headline says, “Timber Tower”, timber being the correct terminology when talking about buildings.

I started my carpentry apprenticeship in 1961 and using the word wood used to bring a very quick growl. Thanks Sir Bob. Rob Sunkel, Napier.