Tunnel vision on energy
What has happened to innovative thinking?
The Herald has two articles (April 15) that make us despair about our political leaders’ failure to be innovative with their thinking to help us deal with the climate change crisis. Or is it just that we are captured by the lobbying power of the oil and heavy transport industries?
Firstly, an article about how Transport Minister Simeon Brown has resurrected an idea to spend several billion dollars to construct a mega-tunnel under Wellington to daily take several thousand single-driver cars. He says this will save 15 minutes driving time to the airport.
What about spending the money on a mega-fast reliable public transport system to get all those people to the airport faster? Mind you, that wouldn’t satisfy the trucking and oil lobbies, would it? Then the article about the oil and gas industry desperate to get back to prospecting for more fossil fuels (and assumingly more profits), ostensibly for peak usage electricity generation. The excuse for not pouring the same capital into better renewable energy options is that gas will help us through weatherinduced complications such as dry years.
What has happened to innovative thinking to deal with developing renewable energy solutions to this problem, or is it again the influence of those lobbyists? I suspect the latter.
Neil Anderson, Algies Bay.
Bleak broadcasting future
There is much dismay and angst over the bleak-looking future of television news and programming in New Zealand.
But this was forecast, and addressed, by the previous Ardern-led Labour Government — aiming to merge TVNZ and RNZ to create a non-commercial news and current affairs channel — before Chris Hipkins’ visionless scrapping of the proposed legislation.
We have long needed a proper publicly-owned non-commercial TV channel, like Australia’s ABC. The ABC enjoys a trust rating of 80 per cent-plus for its news and current affairs content. We have no such media bulwark to fall back on in New Zealand. So our TV has been prey to the commercial exigencies of the market, now determining how much of it we are about to lose.
The previous Government saw the danger in this and tried to alleviate it with its initial $52 million funding injection — providing a financial lifeline.
But Hipkins gave this far-sighted opportunity away in the face of aggressive “bribe” accusations by the-then Opposition — now our coalition Government. Hence the media chaos that has now erupted around us. Both Hipkins and the then Opposition are entirely to blame for this.
Establishing a proper public broadcasting channel is not something this current business-friendly Government will want to pursue, given its wholehearted support for “the market rules, okay?”.
National is wary of being scrutinised by current affairs media and has constantly, during its terms in office, frozen funding for our one public broadcaster, RNZ, to restrict its activities in this regard. Why would they add TV to that now? Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.
Clyde Scott, Birkenhead.
housing density
Simon Wilson’s opinion on the council meeting I attended last Thursday is mystifying (NZ Herald, April 16)
If he was there to hear the very reasonable explanation for why a majority of councillors and the mayor voted to pause the housing density plan in walkable catchment areas in line with advice, I didn’t see him.
The housing accord agreed by then Labour minister Megan Woods and
National’s Nicola Willis before last year’s election (later scrapped by National) was a rather open-slather approach to building anywhere and everywhere.
Since Cyclone Gabrielle and floods in January last year, wise people have reconsidered the open-slather approach and think Auckland Council should produce a plan identifying hazard areas before allowing continuation of even what was agreed under the Unitary Plan.
New National Government ministers should approach projects with pragmatism, rather than vanity in order to avoid being labelled just as bad as Labour’s lot.
Coralie van Camp, Remuera.
Dilworth disgrace
Having viewed the TV programme about some of the boys, now broken men, outlining the indecencies and rape of pupils from the disgraceful Dilworth School, I believe none of these culprits have the right to live with normal people again.
Those in charge at the school were clearly only interested in protecting the teachers, not the pupils. They should have been convicted and sentenced to an indefinite period of imprisonment.
A gross failure of the school and its management, and firm evidence of the failure of our so-called justice system, as most of these teachers were never convicted, or left before being investigated.
Bruce Woodley, Birkenhead.