SUPREME COURT PROVES NAYSAYERS WRONG

Law expert Bill Hodge suggests convicted double murderer Mark Lundy has an ‘‘uphill effort’’ in his bid to get the Privy Council to clear his name (Nov 29). On radio, Mark Lundy’s brother Craig suggested Lundy should ‘‘get over it’’ because any publicity around the case adversely affects his and Christine’s families years later.

Nine years ago, arguments were advanced that we had limited commercial expertise in the higher reaches of the New Zealand judiciary, and that the talent pool for top judges was small; that the chances of political influence over the judiciary and of judicial activism would both increase without the anchor of the Privy Council.

It was also said no moral justification existed for our continuing to have the British taxpayer fund our final appellate court.

In 2010, our Supreme Court dealt with about 150 cases. This favourably compares with about 12 New Zealand cases each year dealt with previously by the Privy Council.

In our clamour for better access to justice, I believe our Supreme Court has, since 2004, proven the naysayers wrong. Were Lundy to instead appeal to our homegrown highest court, then everyone could move on. M LAURENCE WITHY

Lowry Bay see an accompanying teacher or parent suggest the children do so. Wellington needs the cruise trade and this isn’t the image we want. Instead of being ‘‘the coolest little capital’’, we’re in danger of being the rudest. It’s time to smarten up. Perhaps The Dominion Post or the mayor should initiate a manners campaign. MAUREEN MILNE

Kelburn