Letters to the Editor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel
Woolworths and Foodstuffs are effectively the only two players in New Zealand's grocery sector. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi, Simon Rogers
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including bullying language from Pākehā males, supermarkets rorting the public, and Israel's "vibrant democracy".
Outrage fair response to response to column
I cannot stand by in silence after reading letters from Pākehā males (Russell Garbutt and David Tackney) responding to the May 30 opinion column by Metiria Stanton Turei.
We could choose to think with respect about the experience of our tangata te whenua, our Māori brothers and sisters. Quite simply, and it is simple, could we not take a moment to put ourselves in their shoes.
The Treaty Principles Bill had the potential to reduce our first peoples to be stamped upon again; to arrest memory of taking their land — only five, six or seven generations ago. Not to mention the shutting down of te teo — their language, through the numbers of their people lost by way of influenza and war, by government policies including the punishment of school children for utilising te reo, and by integration policies designed to stamp the Māori way out.
Imagine having our generationally owned farm taken off us, along with our language. How might we feel? Undoubtedly, enraged. A haka could be considered to be an appropriate way to express their rage. More appropriate than some of the behaviours we have seen previously by others in the Parliament.
Mr Garbutt's letter was an outright personal attack on Mrs Stanton Turei, both as a person and on her professional life using very patronising language. His reference to "Mrs Stanton and her ilk" and then stating that he has "no desire to see this country return to tribalism" is unsavoury.
Mr Tackney's dramatic language referred to anarchists and Māori radicals and further referred to Māori's need to "grapple with the darker aspects of their culture instead of trying to bring this country to its knees". This is bullying.
Frances Anderson
Alexandra
Inquest coverage
Recently the ODT reported on the inquest into Ian Loughran's death. I, and many others were dismayed at the level of detail that was reported. A family member who I spoke to discussed their distress when the article appeared on the ODT Facebook page in a subscriber-only article that they could not access.
When the family member queried the ODT, the response was that it was in the public domain. While I understand that it is news that should be reported on, I implore the ODT to reconsider how it is reported. What we need to know is how the system failed him.
Holly Aitchison
Mornington
[The Otago Daily Times recognises that coronial proceedings can canvas material which friends and family may find distressing. We attempt to report these proceedings carefully and responsibly as part of a public judicial process. Editor.]
Dastardly duopoly
For many years now we have put up with supermarkets rorting the public. Likewise we have all seen numerous insipid reports, investigations, recommendations and consultant's opinions on how to deal with the public perception of being ripped off. What has happened? Nothing.
If this or any government is serious about stopping us being ripped off, the solution is simple. To solve our being overcharged for any supermarket offerings, simply force Foodstuffs and Woolworths to sell off all their supermarkets to the highest bidder, ending this insidious duopoly, making sure of excluding anyone or any entity that has any connection to aforementioned businesses.
Suddenly, you have something not seen here in an age, competition. We all have a right to be able to eat and feed our families at a price we can all afford.
Graham Bulman
Roslyn
I've lived there and trust me, it ain't that great
A. Levy argues with Mark Hammond (29.5 and 6.6.25) whether "happy Israel" is a contradiction. Hammond wonders how Israelis can be happy and at war; Levy gives us typical Zionist propaganda on this "vibrant democracy".
I have lived in Israel most of my life and can assure you it is neither. Israel is an apartheid state that derides international law, where open racism is the norm, and expressing your opinion can land you in prison.
Israelis are, as a rule, tense, unhappy, aggressive and rude to each other. I am still regularly struck by New Zealanders' kindness and generosity.
My family and I are happy here, and were deeply unhappy in Israel.
It is no wonder a million of its Jewish citizens left "happy democratic" Israel in the past 10 years.
Rod Pik
Dunedin
Smiles per capita
According to A. Levy, a country that has militarily occupied and displaced another people for decades somehow holds unique moral clarity. This, we're told, is confirmed by its high smiles-per-capita — as if national happiness somehow absolves systemic oppression. Oppression that has been recognised by humanitarian organisations and the International Criminal Court as a form of apartheid.
Levy also presents Israel as a uniquely persecuted victim, surrounded by enemies and unfairly maligned by criticism and rhetoric.
But a recent Penn State University poll shows that this very population overwhelmingly supports actions many scholars and legal experts have described as ethnic cleansing, or even genocide.
So is Israel really unfairly targeted by criticism?
P. Maloney
Dunedin
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
8 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
The leadership clearing the air
A new documentary shows what leadership can look like. I seem to have dodged addiction to nicotine in my life, unlike many of my peers growing up. Just as I don't blame those who are addicted, I cannot take the credit for not having this addiction. The absence of nicotine addiction in my life has been through a variety of accidents of birth and opportunity. For young people today it is different. Those who manage to avoid the lures of the tobacco industry can, to a considerable extent, thank the community leaders who took on big tobacco and made the air cleaner for all of us. I've written about leadership in this column before, at that time focusing on a few inspirational people profiled in an excellent book, Te Kai a te Rangatira , during a period when the general electioneering was downright horrible. Sadly, the neoconservative and individualistic values of those spinning the right-wing rhetoric are now driving our central government leadership. We hear and see their beliefs in the economic approach of "trickle down". An obvious place where their leadership will be responsible for harm in Aotearoa New Zealand, is associated with nicotine and tobacco use. So, in times like these, it's worth remembering the foresight and leadership of others who have long fought to reduce that harm, through initiatives such as Tupeka Kore, undertaken by a collective of Māori organisations and advocates. I was lucky enough to attend the world premiere of a documentary that shares that history, Tupeka Kore: The Whakapapa of Māori Tobacco Control in Aotearoa NZ . Through the documentary, I had a glimpse into the globally significant leadership by the late, great kuia and Te Tohu Kairangi/Dame Tariana Turia, and others. There were key points in this documentary that people who hold positions in our current central government would do well to heed. Key people and key events have stood up, stood tall and stood firm. In 2006, then-MP Hone Hawawira introduced a private member's bill to ban the sale of tobacco and initiated an inquiry into the tobacco industry. The subsequent 2010 report was vociferous in its demand to hold the tobacco industry accountable for its harms. Tupeka Kore, a collective demanding eradication of nicotine from our lives, was born at this time too. Matua Shane Bradbrook was key in its creation and is still one of the leaders of the resistance movement. The documentary ensured that we heard the voices of the Minhinnick family, as they told the story of their kuia going from marae to marae, seemingly a one-person change agent: he mana wahine toa ia. The government destroys our social science research environment, insisting we need more STEM, not arts, yet ignores that science, technology, engineering and maths provide overwhelming evidence against tobacco. Science tells us the product, in all its forms, is evil. Perhaps they should have added economics, making "steem", to understand that a healthy population, not ill from nicotine and tobacco-related illnesses, will produce better outcomes for Aotearoa New Zealand into the future than the short-term gains from being in the same bed as tobacco companies. We heard from my colleagues, Anaru Waa and Lani Teddy, as they epitomised generations of researchers. Work such as theirs should mean making the right choice is the easy choice. As researchers, we know our maths, and the numbers demonstrate that, for the first time in a decade, tobacco use rates in Aotearoa New Zealand have plateaued. We know that vaping was one of the responses of the tobacco companies to declines in smoking rates, their vape devices delivering "new customers" for the industry, while helping to keep their old ones. As scary as vaping has proved to be, even more disturbing is that the tobacco companies and their co-conspirators are continuously creating the next generations of nicotine delivery. In the documentary, we heard from the rangatahi pressure group Hashtags that they don't want nicotine in their lives, and that the repeal of the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 2023 was a very clear sign that the current government is not listening to them. I was heartened to hear from Hashtags member Pōtatau Clark, as they stand up, stand tall and stand firm, being vocal in Parliament, in their councils, in their communities, that nicotine has no place in their lives. The Hashtags are nearing voting age; heed this call. Finally, I was privileged to hear from our kuia, Catherine Manning, representative of those who have pushed and pushed against the tobacco industry. We should never forget that this is the industry that lied and lied, knowingly hiding their evidence that smoking tobacco causes cancer. The documentary, Tupeka Kore , is a celebration of Māori leadership, demonstrating the strength of the collective, the strategy and the persistence of many, for the betterment of all, not just Māori. As was said in the 2010 Inquiry into the Tobacco Industry report presentation to Parliament, "the tobacco industry is a killer of whakapapa". Legends were lost along the way. Moe mai rā e kuia, e koro. The documentary demonstrated that although we've been here before, and we shouldn't have to be here again, we can take on the unsupportive and actually obstructive current government and take on the tobacco companies. We have our old people, our communities, and our young people keeping us in Tupeka Kore. Tū mai rā. Kia haere tōtika. Kia kaha haere.
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Speeding towards a sign of the travel times
Are you on the left or right-hand side of the road on the contentious speed limit changes of 2022? The Tackling Unsafe Speeds Programme gradually introduced reductions, lowering many single-carriage roads from 100kmh to 80kmh as part of the Road to Zero goal. However, the present government reversed lots of these. For many, the slower speeds were long overdue — a practical measure to save lives. Reduced speeds decrease both the frequency and severity of crashes while also lowering emissions. Additional travel time lost would be minimal. Critics argued blanket speed reductions unfairly penalised responsible drivers for the actions of a few, reflecting nanny-state overreach. They contended lower speeds unnecessarily restricted personal freedom and driving enjoyment, particularly in rural areas where traffic was sparse. Longer travel times would disproportionately affect freight companies and rural commuters, while safety gains remain minimal. Support for reductions tends to be strongest among the educated, influential, and elite left and centre-left. Thirty-eight sections of state highways are being reinstated to the 100kmh limit, though none of these are in Otago and Southland. The deadline for implementation is the end of this month. Forty-nine other highway sections underwent public consultation in February and March, so "local communities could have their say". Ultimately, only six sections will retain their lower speed limits owing to strong public support (more than 50% in favour), including from the Homer Tunnel to Milford Sound. These changes are also set to take effect by the end of the month. Just as with the overuse of cones, Civis remains in the middle of the road on this issue. It's easy to become over-zealous about speed limits. After all, it's sometimes said that if we were truly determined to eliminate safety hazards, all private driving would be banned. Some highway segments, such as SH1 south of Oamaru, have had an 80kmh limit for years. Given the bends, undulations and proximity to houses and businesses near the road, this feels right. Civis also supports 80kmh for crossing the Waitaki Bridge, a matter of controversy. Traversing the bridge by bike must be daunting, as highlighted in a recent ODT letter to the editor. Waitaki Bridge residents argued the change in 2020 to 80kmh along the 2.6km strip from Glenavy to Waitaki Village should be retained. During formal consultation, of the 1200 responses, 646 strongly opposed the lower limit, while 56 slightly opposed it. Meanwhile, 480 strongly supported the 80kmh limit, with another 28 slightly supporting it. A further 26 were neutral. Tension often arises between the preferences of local residents and those from further afield. In the Waitaki consultation, of the 102 responses from the local community, 83 strongly supported the lower figure. Speed limits will, as they should, continue to be debated in the news. ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ In contrast, the phasing out of Limited Speed Zones (LSZ) in the early 2000s stirred little controversy. They quietly disappeared from roadsides, becoming a matter of curiosity rather than debate. Current regulations sensibly require speed signs to display specific numerical limits, rendering older open road signs – the white disc with a black diagonal stripe — also obsolete. LSZ signs allowed too much leeway. Drivers were expected to slow down in adverse conditions but could legally travel up to 100kmh when conditions permitted. A surviving LSZ sign was recently spotted in west Wanaka — the area beyond Glendhu Bay and across the Matukituki River. You're unlikely to want to drive 100kmh on that dusty road. civis@
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Counting on the census
One of the great pillars on which modern New Zealand society is based has been scrapped by the government in a move which has shocked many. The five-yearly, or thereabouts, census has seemingly had its day, Statistics Minister Shane Reti reckons. He announced on Wednesday that New Zealanders had, for the last time, needed to scurry about looking for a pen to fill out the forms or pray that the more recently online documents would work as intended. Citing the need to save time and money, Dr Reti signalled the census will be replaced with "a smaller annual survey and targeted data collection". This will, according to the somewhat breathless Beehive media release, provide better quality economic data to underpin the government's "growth agenda". In line with this thinking, there will be no census in 2028, with the new approach starting in 2030. The new method of collecting nationwide statistics will sharpen the focus on delivering "more timely insights into New Zealand's population", the minister reckons. Good luck with that. While we should not automatically kibosh something before it has had a chance to prove its worth, it is difficult to see how what may effectively be a scattergun approach will be superior to the system which has developed over more than 170 years. The census has, of course, never been perfect. There were well-publicised issues with the 2018 and 2023 counts, and the five-yearly spacing has been interrupted several times, due to such events as the Depression, World War 2 and the Christchurch earthquake in February 2011. There were also concerns about the robustness of responses when the 2023 census was held the month after Cyclone Gabrielle. Dr Reti also has some justification for being concerned about the cost of the census, which has ballooned during the past decade. According to government figures, the 2013 census cost $104 million, but outlay for the 2023 one was $325m, and the now-ditched 2028 one was expected to cost around $400m. The huge leap in price is certainly concerning. Based on those government numbers, there can be no doubt running a census is a very expensive business. However, we need to remember, and perhaps remind the government, that the policies which are meant to benefit everyone across the country in healthcare, education, housing, transport and so on, actually cost many billions of dollars. The price-tag for a census which informs those policies is definitely not chicken feed, but money generally well-spent. Reaction to this week's announcement has largely been negative and expressing surprise at the move. There is particular concern about how cherry-picking data and using smaller sample sets will affect the rigour of information about Māori and Pasifika communities, and also people with disabilities, rainbow communities, and smaller ethnic groups. Dr Reti's promised land of a "sharpened focus on quality" when it comes to statistics will be extremely difficult to achieve. There are crucial questions to answer around how people's existing data within government agencies will be appropriately and sensitively used, who decides what to use and when, and who will oversee the process to make sure it is as comprehensive and fair as such a potentially fraught new system can be. We are uneasy that this move appears to be another example of this government not being especially interested in the science or data necessary for good decision-making and for making policy which is evidence-based, instead careening ever-more wildly across the political landscape in pursuit of zealotry-driven outcomes. We unapologetically support the census system we had, and believe in the provision of proper statistical data sets for modern-day needs and as a source of valuable information for the historians of the future Beware the old saying: "Garbage in, garbage out."
