Letters: Let’s unhook NZ from nicotine

Reminder, this is a Premium article and requires a subscription to read.
.Currently, quitting programmes in New Zealand are pathetic, writes Mary MacGregor
The proposed tweaks in the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Act will do nothing to assist lung health of New Zealanders or limit vaping and the other practices where inhaling nicotine is involved.

A government really addressing lung health would help New Zealand quit nicotine and, in conjunction, inhaled
nicotine products, all of which are toxic and primarily benefit offshore tobacco/vape/heated tobacco product corporations.

Currently, quitting programmes in New Zealand are pathetic. A proper government will within six months establish a robust country-wide campaign and facilities to encourage and support overcoming nicotine addiction.
This will put vapes and tobacco out of public view, tightly control marketing and availability of both, including online, and advise New Zealand at last of the nature and the risks of both, not the current Government practice which, regarding vaping, only requires mention of nicotine. That is a huge understatement.
The US and Australian Governments clearly advise citizens of the primary risks of vaping, including serious lung and cardiovascular diseases and cancer due to components in the aerosol in addition to nicotine. Addressing nicotine addiction is not rocket science or expensive.
The Government and industry in New Zealand also make vast sums from keeping NZ hooked but projected health and socioeconomic costs will dwarf this. Vapes are so hazardous the WHO strongly advises tight regulation or banning them (New Zealand is an outlier), the American Cancer Council states they should not be used even to switch from tobacco smoking. Let’s help unhook New Zealand, especially our young users.
Mary MacGibbon, Miramar.
It would be appreciated if the Department of Internal Affairs donated SkyCity’s $4.16 million fine to help fund the Dunedin Hospital project. Seems fair, because that fine money came from the general public anyway, pushing buttons on the machines and tables. Invest it back into a hospital that is needed and make some good.
C Mann, Mt Albert.
You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out why The Warehouse Group has just posted a $54m loss. I would suggest more and more people are buying clothing and merchandise online, which means less people in their stores.
Foodstuffs, who own 140 New World and 58 Pak’nSave stores, by contrast, posted a $559m profit. So one could conclude that food is more profitable than what The Warehouse is selling.
Therefore if it transitioned into supermarkets, it should see profitability restored. The Commerce Commission and others have long advocated for a third supermarket chain so this could be the answer. With their 257 stores already set up in towns and cities across New Zealand all the infrastructure is already in place. They also have the staff. The rest should be easy.
Glen Stanton, Mairangi Bay.
First the most wonderfully good. When filling my car at Pak’nSave Botany I forgot to put the petrol cap back on. While I was waiting at the adjacent traffic lights a young woman raced across from the petrol station and screwed the cap back on. I was amazed and truly grateful.
Unfortunately when I got home my faith in human nature was tested. The cold and flu packet I had bought at the Chemist Warehouse was empty.
Isn’t life wonderful?
Mark Buckley, Botany Downs.
If Susan Grimsdell (NZ Herald, September 27) had done the math, she would have realised that a capital gains tax would not direct investment away from housing towards productive endeavours because the latter would also be subject to the tax. Compared to our competitors, we are still working with tools that Noah could have used to build the ark. Grimsdell’s capital gains tax would just keep us there.
K H Peter Kammler, Warkworth.
It is interesting that the focus is always on the disadvantaged employers and businesses. How about some thought for the employees whose work and time bring the profit and prosperity to the business?
No one seems to consider the extra time a good proportion of the workers/employees put in when working from home, when there is no rush to watch the time and think about that bus or train or parking spot that will be missed, the readiness to jump in and solve any problems or issues that may arise outside the normal working hours.
Nobody seems willing to acknowledge the mental and physical stress caused by the commute to and from the workplace. I spend an average of 90-100 minutes daily on the commute – drive, two buses and walk between Auckland’s North Shore and the CBD. Is it all about control and monitoring employees? I would like to enlighten the readers who are not aware that modern-day technology provides full control of all employees’ movements and activities on the systems and counts active and idle time. Stats and reports are readily available for the employers and managers all the time and are used regularly.
Selam Raoof, Unsworth Heights.
My electricity use is much the same each month. I have a wood burner for heating. Imagine my surprise in opening this month’s bill to find it is almost 30% up on what has been usual. How is this reasonable? How is this fair? How am I going to cope? How, in any sense, is this remotely moral?
John L R Allum, Thames.
Reminder, this is a Premium article and requires a subscription to read.