Flowery words but a very dark aftermath
Your article on the Santana gold mine prospect at Bendigo (ODT 1.6.24) is full of flowery words and visual imagery and the caption to the photograph of an on-site drilling rig describes the auriferous locality as "the land of opportunity".
However the photograph itself shows some of the actual reality; bulldozed landscapes, crushed rocks, deafeningly noisy machinery, poisonous water ponds, and hardly any piece of natural ground remaining for any soil or vegetation or place where any creature of the natural world might exist.
This is what will replace what was described as "those barren untamed rugged hillsides".
There is in reality no other industrial undertaking that is as devastating to the natural land environment as large-scale open cast mining.
The impact , plus the massive infrastructure and heavy equipment, will be no less pervasive and overpowering than the controversial and thankfully mothballed Tarras Airport proposal.
Is all this what the local and regional communities would wish for? Ten years of mine life in exchange for permanent destruction of the land and landscape?
Santana say that they are committed to engaging with the local community, but at the same time are seeking consent under the new Fast-track Approvals legislation, which in its current form has no provision for any environmental considerations or protections. Once this project gets engaged under that process, the community and regional wishes will count for nothing.
Meanwhile this affront to the natural world will be taking place within our iconic landscapes.
Does this mine really represent "a land of opportunity" as described in the article? Give me merino wool, wine, and cherries any day.
[Abridged — length. Editor]
Fast catching up
Re the article, "Thousands of pensioners paying off student loans," (ODT 27.5.24), more detail is needed.
If a pensioner is still working in salary or waged work then this is correct, irrespective if they may also be receiving the pension. If solely relying on superannuation it is not correct. But they can still make voluntary repayments.
Once this pensioner is deceased then any outstanding student loan is written off by the government. It does not become part of the decease’s estate. If in doubt then contact the IRD for their comment.
However, with the way this government is making quick and large monetary changes the original heading may be correct in a few days/weeks/months’ time.
Please remember
Referring to the proposal by Māori to protest both their increasing marginalisation and threats to the status of Te Tiriti O Waitangi by this government, Mr Luxon has called citizen protest a "weekend sport".
He even went as far as to say it would not be legal for this protest to take place on a working day.
Apparently, Mr Luxon feels it is appropriate for him to trivialise all citizen protest including that calling for an end to the genocide in Gaza. To him, citizen protesters are merely people short of imagination regarding their choice of leisure-time activities.
There is something very wrong with a PM who treats the concerns and voices of citizens so contemptuously. Perhaps, Mr Luxon has forgotten that New Zealand is a democracy?
Expressing view about possible radical change
Prof Hayward in her view (Opinion ODT 29.5.24) misses the whole point about the reason the coalition government is requiring councils to hold a binding poll on the establishment of Māori wards. It has nothing to do with "Māori interests struggle to get elected because the majority of voters have different interests and objectives".
The same argument could be said for the Green Party or Te Pāti Māori interests who "struggle to get elected because the majority of voters have different interests and objectives". It is called the democratic method of establishing representation for the citizens.
With local and regional councils a microcosm of our parliamentary representation, she then concludes that Māori wards should not only be mandatory for local government but by implication mandatory for our whole Parliament. In effect Prof Hayward is advocating for New Zealand to abandon our unique democracy for a dual council and by implication dual parliamentary system — part elected and part appointed .
It is perfectly acceptable for the learned prof or any citizen for that matter to have her/their personal view for such a radical change. New Zealanders surely are also entitled to express their view about such a change and that is the prime reason that the government is putting this Bill in place .
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
