Waits for treatment in health system untenable
It is common knowledge that our health system is in disarray due to successive underfunding by governments going back decades.
People who need surgery or access to a specialist are denied this, as it should be a basic right of living in New Zealand.
This cohort of people sit there and watch their health deteriorate before they can get access to the "system".
Often their health condition deteriorates to a point where they can no longer be productive members of society, and they become a burden to the taxpayer.
Some even die waiting for treatment. This is just not good enough.
Dunedin was supposed to get a world-class Rolls-Royce hospital promised for years.
Now that moment has arrived, and we are getting a Trabant in its place.
Don’t get me wrong, the current staff at the Dunedin Hospital are just plain awesome, but there is not enough of them, and they are certainly not getting paid enough.
Case in point.
My single friend needs two new hip joints.
She is in agony and taking strong pain relief. She cannot even get on the list to see any specialist and has been told she may have a four-year wait for her operation.
The amount of trips and falls she is having at this time is causing other issues and she is currently on ACC after a recent fall when one hip just gave way.
She will most certainly be in a wheelchair by the time four years are up, or even before, at just 68 years of age.
She owns her own home and has looked at taking out a reverse mortgage to fund the operation.
The cheapest she can get the procedure is $22,000, but it will cost her $5000 to apply to the bank.
This is wrong on every level. The amount of money she will cost the taxpayer over the next four years does not bear thinking about, plus she will go into debt on her home.
She is a hard worker and deserves to be looked after better than she has been up to this point.
I would like to ask our current Minister of Health, Shane Reti, just what his government are going to do for people in this position, as for her and others in the same position, to wait four years is untenable.
Climate protest
I am very pleased the arresting photo organised by Climate Liberation Aotearoa has grabbed the attention of J. McCormick and Ewan McDougall (ODT, 11.3.24 and 14.3.24).
Despite their "wasted Sunday" view the protesters cause and efforts, much like Springbok tour and women’s right to vote protests, will eventually fall on the right side of history.
This protest was about the gross carbon emissions that cruise ships contribute to climate change and pollutants that threaten our sensitive coastline. Your arguments about the petrochemical makeup of wet suits/surfboards and giving tourists a memorable Dunedin experience are minor distractions against the bigger issue.
Buying elections
Your headline "Nats spent most on campaigns" (ODT,13.3.24) says it all. National poured $2 million into electorate seats, with 80% coming from party-affiliated coffers, and 9% from businesses or individuals. Donors such as coal company Bathurst Resources were obviously donating in their own interests. Donations to Labour candidates were 50% from local electorates and 35% from individuals. So which party is the more democratic? New Zealand elections are being bought by the rich.
People need to accept personal responsibility
It is a great shame that Ann Charlotte (ODT 12.3.24) misrepresents the facts around the repeal of what is known as Section 27 cultural reports as part of a sentencing process.
I watched the passage of this repeal in the House, and it was very clear that relevant material can still be introduced in the sentencing process. What this government has rightly done is to get rid of the rapidly growing industry of "cut and paste" voluminous reports — many composed and provided by gangs with no personal knowledge of the offender — at huge cost and little benefit. I would remind Ms Charlotte that in 2017, Section 27 reports cost the taxpayer $40,000. With the encouragement of the last government this led to this cost rising to over $7 million in the last financial year. The only people to benefit from this were the gangs and their report writers. It could be said that offenders also benefited by the forced reduced sentences, but of course this only means that offenders are out to continue repeat offending in the future sooner rather than later. Reports on victim impacts were of lesser concern to the last government and seldom led to increased sentencing.
Personal accountability and responsibility is again at the core of much of our societal problems. Whether it be health or crime, all people need to accept that responsibility without resorting to having gangs write reports on why accountability needs to be ignored.
Paradox or incongruity?
Why isn’t Contact the phone company and Spark the electric company?
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
