PGF anti-competitive
I find it utterly repugnant that Shane Jones has taken millions of dollars of tax paid by the self employed and small business owners and handed this over, under the pretext of assisting Southland, to large and well-established private businesses.
This needs to be seen for what it is, anticompetitive behaviour initiated by the government that the Commerce Commission should investigate and stop.
A well-established boat manufacture given $225,000 of taxpayer monies to bring more processes in house. Will the current supplier of these services see this as a good investment of his hard-earned tax dollars when he is told by the boat manufacturer that his work is no longer required?
How can manufacturers be competitive when their opposition are handed a $500,000 gift to purchase new equipment while the others must purchase theirs out of tax paid profits?
It is not the role of Governments to take the tax from one business and give this to another private business competitor so they can purchase new equipment and thus give them a competitive advantage over all others.
The engineers, electrical firms, window and door manufacturers in Bluff, and Invercargill not on Shane’s list may as well just take their next tax payment and post it direct to their opposition and save Mr Jones having to fly down at extra expense to disadvantage their business.
I am not opposed to helping the provinces but distorting the playing field and creating anticompetitive behaviour is not the way to do it.
Mr Jones could have helped every engineer, builder and farmer in Southland by funding one position in each of the City, Southland and Environment Southland Councils whose sole function would be to assist the client in the application of and timely processing of all consents.
This is holding back Southland growth more than any other single factor.
Likewise, Southland could have been assisted if he left SIT to train more apprentices or funded Southern Group Training Trust to foster more apprentice training.
The Commerce Commission states on their own website, ‘‘One of our central purposes is to safeguard the integrity of competitive markets to ensure businesses and consumers feel confident they are not being unfairly disadvantaged.
I call on every employer and self employed with similar views to look up the Commerce Commission website and protest this anti-competitive type behaviour in the hope that this unfairness will be reversed.
However, be prepared like the farmers to be branded ‘‘A Bunch of Bloody Rednecks Mr Jones.
R Short
High-quality angling water is scarce worldwide, and even in Southland the surviving fishable streams have become crowded to such an extent that Fish & Game are currently investigating new methods of spreading the load.
The problem intensifies season by season, and in these circumstances the imposition of a whole new level of crowding could hardly be more inappropriate.
The multiple use of recreational resources is always problematic, but it is generally accepted that a single commercial user should not be permitted to seriously undermine the enjoyment of multiple and long-established participants.
And this is exactly what the rafting enterprise is set to do.
The Mataura and Oreti rivers are angling rivers, first and foremost. They are protected by Water Conservation Orders obtained on that foundation, and any activity affecting the angling must clearly be considered much more than minor.
The Southern Rivers Trust (now in the process of incorporation) intends to mount a legal challenge to the SDC’s controversial decision to exclude the public from normal due process. The applicant might do well to delay extensive rafting purchases until the outcome is known.
Dave Witherow