Planning disaster has many people to blame
Thank you for your ongoing reporting on challenges associated with the Dunedin hospital.
I had the privilege of visiting Oulu in Finland last year. They were just completing a €1.6 billion hospital for a population not too dissimilar to ours and our region. It is Europe’s most advanced and digitally enabled hospital.
They told me it took a long time to build. How long I asked? Four years.
They said it took a long time because they changed their mind around the design partway through. It was going to be a flatter structure and then they decided to build a more vertically integrated structure. The planning took two years and the building construction a further two years.
When I asked how they managed to do this and explained what was going on in Dunedin, the simple answer was that they had an alliance governance approach.
I don’t believe we have ever had this approach here. We have had healthcare alliances for service delivery across all of our regions in New Zealand but these have gradually fallen apart through lack of political support or commitment.
The alliance structure of course is critical to large construction projects and it is incredible that we have never thought this governance and planning mechanism through properly when it comes to Dunedin hospital. It seems to me this is probably the missing link and an appalling project failure has subsequently resulted that is likely to go down in history as a textbook case of a great planning disaster.
Who is accountable? Our political leaders: every single one of them for failing to come together and facilitate an alliance approach.
An overlooked option?
Amid the numerous proposed cuts to the new Dunedin hospital, one option seems to have been overlooked: upgrading one or two floors of the existing hospital for short-stay patients while using the current operating theatres alongside the new facilities.
This approach would provide a full complement of theatres and patient rooms. The future of the current hospital remains uncertain, but it still has functional facilities and space that could be utilised for a few more years until additional funding, donations, or resources become available.
I also question why so much was spent on the new hospital's flashy exterior. A simpler, more cost-effective basic concrete design could have saved a significant amount of money.
The architectural embellishment does little to benefit the patients inside who are there to heal, and not to admire the building's expensive exterior facade.
Allegedly biased
In response to Dave Tackney's invitation to deliver facts instead of my allegedly biased opinion (Letters ODT 31.8.24). It's a fact the New Zealand public has never owned the coastline, and various Māori groups won't own it either if they gain Customary Marine Title (CMT).
Anyone can see what CMT actually means by visiting www.tearawhiti.govt.nz. No-one will be prevented from accessing beaches or fishing or sailing etc.
It's therefore my opinion that the Hobson’s Pledge advertisement, which clearly implied the opposite was true, was a dishonest and dangerous piece of populist propaganda, designed to stir up resentment and division. Regardless of how we vote, it’s in no-one’s interests to tolerate social poison.
What news we really should be reporting
Re: "Accusations fly as climate protesters trespassed." (ODT 30.8.24). It is disappointing to see climate protesters depicted as violent and unreasonable, not just in this article, but in recent reporting on the court case in which climate protesters stopped a train full of coal destined for a Fonterra milk plant.
Not one climate protester has ever been charged with a violent offence but over the years many climate protesters have been attacked themselves.
As for being unreasonable, a large amount of lobbying work with both local council members, Port Otago and other industry players is going on but it seldom makes the papers.
Climate protesters are trying to save lives. The luxury emissions from cruises will kill people.
A recent paper provides evidence that for every 1000 tons of fossil carbon burned, by the year 2100 someone will die from heat-related causes.
On average, a large cruise ship can use up to 250 tons of fuel per day and the typical cruise from Australia to New Zealand and back lasts around 10 days. This means that your average trip might use around 2500 tons of carbon-heavy bunker fuel. That’s enough to kill two people, just from that one cruise.
The industry promises to be net carbon zero by 2050 but unless we take immediate steps to drastically reduce emissions the world will be well over 2°C above the average global pre-industrial temperature by then and billions of people will be dead.
This is what the media really needs to be talking about.
Modern medicine
It was good to see (World Focus ODT 2.9.24) that the children of Gaza are receiving the polio vaccine. What a pity that they cannot be vaccinated to protect them from bombs and bullets.
Congratulations and criticism of crisis article
I would like to congratulate John Drummond for his opinion piece on the climate-change crisis in the ODT (27.9.24). The inconvenient truth and climate denial is certainly lingering to say the least.
His explanations for people’s avoidance rings true and I would add "it’s not us it’s them, it’s not me it’s you". Imagine if we had a similar number of people as the UK (68 million and a land area slightly less than New Zealand), when our environmental care is probably as regrettable as theirs.
It’s not enlightening to suggest that politicians are desperate to remain in power as long as possible and if it means policies to satisfy the moment delaying even life-saving ones that require immediate attention.
Could it be that they think they know more than the scientists, as suggested by John Drummond, or just a case of patch protection?
John Drummond believes his doctor's advice as he's an expert, and similarly believes some climate scientists. Consider, the Journal of the American Medical Association recommended smoking as healthy. 1960, thalidomide anyone? 1999, FDA-approved painkiller Vioxx kills 60,000 in the US.
Similarly, the scientific consensus was the sun and planets orbited earth. Copernicus and Galileo proved this wrong. Kepler proved planetary orbits were eliptical contrary to scientific consensus they were circular. Mid-20th century eugenics was the way to a perfect society.
IPCC said 97% of scientific studies support man-made global warming. The figure arose from a survey of scientific papers 66% of which took no position. Of the remainder 33% supported a weak human contribution to global warming. 33 divided by 34 gets you 97%.
There isn't even consensus on the consensus. The work of science has nothing to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics.
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
