How is this policy fair, sensible?
From April, hopeful owner-occupiers will be going to auctions, bidding against landlords who can bid more as they can claim back mortgage interest.
Those hopeful owner-occupiers may then have to continue renting, paying off someone else’s mortgage instead of their own, paying money to a landlord who is essentially being subsidised by their taxes. How is this fair?
How is it even good for the economy as it makes no sense to encourage landlords to buy up existing housing when we need new housing.
And let’s put a stop to the claim that housing is like any other business. Not only is housing a basic human need, but unlike any other sector of the economy the number of houses has been deliberately restricted by central and local government planning laws, and lack of actual planning to build new infrastructure, resulting in artificially inflated house prices.
This is why the Government is now asking local authorities to make much more land available for housing. No-one has ever claimed New Zealand has a shortage of landlords, but there is a serious shortage of affordable housing. This problem will be made worse by allowing interest deductibility on existing housing.
John Walker, Cashmere
Politically dangerous
Our Government giving itself more power to fast-track legislation while at the same time cutting back on public information TV programmes such as Fair Go and Sunday is politically dangerous.
Increasing its own power to act impulsively is bad enough, but disempowering the Fourth estate is false
Media Council
The Press is subject to the NZ Media Council. Complaints must be directed to letters@press.co.nz. If the complainant is unsatisfied with the response, the complaint may be referred to the Media Council via its website mediacouncil.org.nz economy of the worst kind.
Running a democracy needs much wider vision than running a business, there's more at stake than just the bottom line.
In its rush to get things done, it hasn’t noticed that, historically, all authoritarian regimes increase their own power, and decrease the people’s right to observe those actions. Act in haste, repent at leisure.
Phillip Rex Robinson, Waltham
Please keep it
Oh please, who will we get to help us with scammers and crooks who cheat us if Fair Go goes?
Police do not have the time or resources; the guilty ones just ignore any judgment given against them by the courts, declare bankruptcy, and promptly set up another business.
Please could TVNZ bosses find it in their hearts at least to keep this programme on air?
Yvonne Barnes, Casebrook
Grip of entitlement
I was moved by Donna Miles’ column entitled Fight poverty, not the poor (March 11) and Ian Orchard’s letter yesterday suggesting a way of reducing the apparent wastage of supplied school lunches.
However, the sad fact for this country is that we are in the grip of an entitled Government, whose policies have been taken hostage by two minor parties, who are determined, despite research showing their policies to be ineffective, to push on without listening or considering what the media is telling them on a daily basis. Robin Mackay, Rangiora
Learning fuel matters
For Stuart L Bryant (Letters, March 11) the cost of flat whites might be nothing, but for children with no food at home for school lunches, midday fuel for learning matters.
Yes, there may have been wastage. In the average NZ household there is wastage too.
w Children don’t eat everything and fridges hold food that has been forgotten.
Lunch available for every child in need has been shown to improve health, learning, and social development.
Joy McLeod, Diamond Harbour
Health targets
I am sure that the vast majority of New Zealanders would agree that health waiting lists and waiting times are far too long, and I applaud Dr Shane Reti’s introduction of aspirational targets to bring these down.
What is missing still is any indication of what additional funding and resources will be provided to meet these targets. Without these, the inference is that the health sector nationwide has mismanaged its resources and only needs to buck its ideas up to make everything all right again.
I cannot think of anyone who wants a return to the days when waiting lists were doctored (an ill-advised choice of word) to meet targets set by central government, and so look forward to a detailed programme to help meet these targets. Russell Haigh, Wigram
Balance on decisions
Regarding the RMA fast-track scheme to be created by the National-led Government, since the environment is to be exploited and possibly adversely affected for economic gain, why aren’t either Tama Potaka or Penny Simmonds (ministers for conservation and the environment, respectively) sitting with the three appointed decision-makers?
We already know Shane Jones’ views on species extinction (“goodbye, Freddy”) and Simeon Brown’s focus on roads, so where is the balance? Maybe I’m missing something here.
Richard Pickering, St Albans
Pier posers
In response to the article Biden’s pier plan for Gaza aid (March 11).
At face value the proposal to build a floating port “by Gaza” looks to be an attempt to provide a reliable route for aid to the besieged population.
However, when one reads through the article, we see that at best this will take “between two and three months to set up”.
Questions that immediately come to mind are, why would the United States need to build such a structure, given its position of influence over the Israeli government by way of financial and military support?
Surely a simple “we’re doing this, or else” when determining land access would suffice.
Secondly, given the likely time-frame to complete the floating port, would it be more likely that such a facility would benefit the extraction of gas from the gas field off Gaza, estimated to contain more than one trillion cubic feet of natural gas? Greg Byrnes, Waltham