Letters to the Editor
The kiwifruit structures at 383 Parallel Road.
On our radar
I wish to assure Liz Stolwyk and Waipā citizens that kiwifruit is definitely not “off the radar”.
A group of affected neighbours from three different areas of Waipā is working with the council regarding the plan change. The group had a very full and open discussion at a meeting with the council in November. The group is continuing to work with council as issues raised in the past still remain. The plan change will be notified to the public later this year and submissions will follow.
Carole Searle
Cambridge
Rules ignored
Part of the shade cloth at 582 Parallel Road.
The recent article by Mary Anne Gill about Plan Change 25 (The News, February 20) highlights the ongoing issues around non-compliance by those establishing kiwifruit orchards and having to create new rules to accommodate those new to Waipa ignoring the rules already in place.
We ratepayers affected by these rogue operators have had their radars firmly fixed on them, along with the support from Waipā council staff. But these new orchards, ignoring current rules, are busy planting shelterbelts and getting shade cloth structures built before the new rules are confirmed.
Grant Walker
Cambridge
Fight for us
Don’t burn Waipa
I find it a bit rich that one Alistair Brickell who hails from Whitianga is allocated half a page in this paper (The News, February 9) to explain his submission in favour of the proposed “waste to energy incineration plant”.
This plant to be built in a town 214km from where he lives. This plant is to be built in the centre of what is to be a large residential development once the Waipa Racing Club land is sold to developers. I find it difficult to understand why the Whitianga community are not fighting tooth and nail to have the incineration plant built in their back yard given the huge tourist benefits to follow its completion.
How does this “expert” from a town which will not be subject to any negative effects of an incineration plant get to place a submission in favour of the plant? Unbelievable.
Brian Derbyshire
Te Awamutu
Editor’s note: The story was one of a series which review views and comments made in the submission process on the proposed plant, which is open to the public
Contact made
Michael Connett
I just want to thank The News. I have had a response from Waipā council (Letters ‘No reply’ February 6). Julie Kitchen from customer support contacted me and assured me the issues I contacted all councillors, and the mayor about will be looked at.
As you know it was about fluoride in our water. I went to the meeting in the town hall, with Michael Connett lawyer who won his court battle concerning fluoride in USA water supplies. The supreme court in the US deemed fluoride in water supplies an “unreasonable risk”. I was thrilled to see some councillors there.
Since last week, things have changed. New Zealand First have put forward a referendum, which when passed will resolve this issue once and for all. When we have choice, the council cannot put fluoride in our water because too many people object. Choice also means, if you want fluoride, you can use fluoride toothpaste, problem solved.
No government agency can persecute or prosecute any council over this issue anymore. Thanks Winston. And a big thank you to The News for prompting some action from Waipa council.
Deborah Harper
Cambridge
Letters to Editor. Photo: Pixabay
