Letters: Time for action on kids and social media; Chateau Tongariro solution

Reminder, this is a Premium article and requires a subscription to read.
‘It is also argued that social media helps young people ‘connect’, yet today’s youth are lonelier than ever.’
Time for action on kids and social media
The arguments against delaying access to social media for New Zealand’s youth are alarmingly weak (NZ Herald, Oct 2).

One claim suggests that because social media isn’t entirely bad, we shouldn’t restrict access. We could make
the same argument about smoking – while it may help with relaxation or managing weight, its harms, like cancer and heart disease, far outweigh the benefits. The same is true for social media. The negative impacts on mental health, self-esteem, and social development vastly outweigh any limited benefits.

It is also argued that social media helps young people “connect”, yet today’s youth are lonelier than ever. Hyper-connection online is no substitute for genuine relationships in the real world, which are essential for emotional wellbeing.
Another argument points out the hypocrisy of parents banning social media while struggling with phone addiction themselves. By this logic, we should also allow children to buy alcohol and cigarettes.
The most alarming claim is that the time for action passed 30 years ago. I disagree. The time for action is now.
We cannot afford to give up and allow future generations of children to be harmed. Like with tobacco, we must take steps to change societal norms around social media, which includes delaying access until 16 years, but also educating parents, raising awareness, and supporting teens in pushing back against tech companies that profit from their harm.
Does anyone truly believe it’s a bad idea to start to hold these companies accountable for the damage they’ve inflicted on our kids?
Dr Samantha Marsh, General Practice and Primary Health Care Senior Research Fellow.
Working theory
There seems to be a spate of initiatives in the working lives of many government employees.
In the mid-1970s a backbench MP was on a similar salary to an experienced secondary school teacher. David Seymour, who even as a backbench MP was paid significantly more than a teacher, is now instructing them to attend teacher-only days during school holidays.
This effectively reduces the amount they are paid for hours worked. Also noted is that Parliament does not sit every week of the year.
Along with the chastised civil servants, perhaps Members of Parliament should be clocked in and out of the Beehive every working day to ensure they are being productive and not ineffectively working from home.
I feel a glass house analogy coming on.
Alan Johnson, Papatoetoe.
Fair-weather friends
It was inevitable the Government would yield and fold the MetService into Niwa. In one sense, this is a reasonable outcome so we won’t have the ludicrous situation of two government-owned weather forecasters.
However, this merger should never have been needed. It only occurred because Niwa went outside its operational remit and moved into weather forecasting. Inexplicably, this over-reach was not called out by successive governments.
Yet, do not be fooled. This is less a merger than a takeover, orchestrated from the very beginning of Niwa’s entry into weather forecasting. Ever since then, it has been Niwa’s goal to become the official weather forecaster. The Government has relented. Niwa has its prize.
With this change, the Government needs to ensure that weather forecasting is not distracted by climate research. While meteorology and climatology have a common science, their functions are very different. Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get.
The most logical approach would require Niwa to disestablish its current, yet weaker, forecasting service, with the MetService becoming a standalone unit within Niwa. That would allow government weather forecasting to regain a singular focus.
Murray Boardman, Dunedin.
Professional development
Our Finance Minister would have us believe working from home is killing inner-city hospitality businesses. That trite comment does not explain the reality.
Tony Astle, recently departed doyen of Antoine’s Restaurant (Weekend Herald, Sept 28), bemoaned the death of silver service and hospitality as a respected profession. I’ve eaten out often enough to be in some agreement about standards in his profession.
Nicola Willis’ comment is an obfuscation which conflates the rapid destruction of 6000 civil service jobs, alongside an average front-of-house split-shift wage of $45,000 (where a $1 million home is 22 times that number and where flexible working terms are not uncommon).
All industries would benefit from more time devoted to professional development and less time complaining about whether or not all tasks set can be achieved more effectively and efficiently at the business premises or at a remote location.
The only thing that matters, in a heavily indebted country, is to increase unit productivity – and not while casting aspersions about somebody else’s business model.
Nigel Meek, Raglan.
Chateau solution
I have warm memories of staying at the Chateau Tongariro as a child and viewing Mt Ngauruhoe from the large picture window in the lounge. I have always found it a welcoming sight when I visit the Central Plateau.
However, I think Weston Kirton’s appeal to save the Chateau is misguided (NZ Herald, Oct 2).
A better idea would be to pull the structure down and rebuild it, modelled on the current building, keeping the exterior appearance and shape and the distinct elements that need to be retained, but constructing a modern building with modern fittings fit for the current times.
This would be cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain and relevant for the modern tourist age. No doubt if a long-term lease was provided, an operator would build it at no cost to the public purse.
I think we are too hung up on retaining what is a pile of bricks that don’t know their heritage or that they are an earthquake risk to themselves.
Graeme Berryman, Titirangi.
Boardroom mood
The Herald’s survey of the mood of 100 chief executives shows an alarming lack of understanding of climate change in our boardrooms (NZ Herald, Oct 3).
All the talk was of economic growth and reduced government spending. So obviously the boardrooms are mostly bullish for the Government’s agenda.
The major issues were given as growth and productivity. No mention of sustainability, economic fairness or adapting for major climate change.
I know our boardrooms are inhabited by very well-paid executives, but they seem overly cocooned from reality or any big picture.
Encouraging more wealth in fewer hands, unsustainable growth for its own sake, purely focusing on the bottom line are all ignoring the elephant in the room.
Man-made climate change is already having a significant impact and this is only going to develop rapidly. To simply bury our head in the sand with business as usual is foolish in the extreme.
The singular pursuit of growth and profits as the holy grail has caused enormous damage to our planet and social cohesion.
More short-term self-interest from our boardrooms is a failure of imagination and intellect at the top when we desperately need it.
Jeff Hayward, Auckland CBD.
In all the hoo-ha about working from home, I have yet to hear anyone, including the Green Party, come out in support of WFH because it is good for the planet. If only 10% of the workforce worked from home this would go quite a way towards meeting our greenhouse targets. It would also reduce the need for more motorways, also reducing our carbon footprint. WFH is an example of technology helping us to reduce our carbon emissions, while also improving the mental health of employees.
Mark Buckley, Botany Downs.
“Hospitals around NZ are crying out for upgrades” says Chris Bishop in defending the need for Dunedin Hospital cutbacks. Why then does the Government prioritise tax breaks that require vicious efficiencies at great cost to public services and jobs both private and public jobs? I would prefer to risk a little squandering and even a higher tax policy to keep the health system afloat and to save the important work of many social service agencies.
Barbara Darragh, Auckland Central.
I returned to NZ at Saturday midday from overseas on Emirates Air via Auckland Airport and had to wait 1.5 hours after landing for my suitcase to arrive on the carousel. About 100 passengers were still waiting. The airport was pretty quiet but two other planes arrived while we were waiting. There was a lame duck announcement apologising for the delay “because of the weather” but it was a beautiful sunny day. This is about the worst I’ve experienced anywhere and is not a good look for the primary entry point for visitors to NZ. We should expect better.
Dave Hall, Whakatāne.
This Prime Minister insists his policies are based on good evidence. Yet he is choosing to ignore the huge body of research indicating that using heated tobacco products is more harmful than vaping, in favour of secret contradictory evidence known only to the Associate Minister. Christopher Luxon said that if the decision to remove tax on HTPs proves to be wrong, they will revoke it, but meanwhile, thousands of New Zealanders will have become addicted to this new product. The PM seems quite happy to conduct what amounts to a massive experiment on us, against strong and well-researched evidence that it will be harmful.
Susan Grimsdell, Auckland Central.
The oil crisis of 1979 led to countries coming up with ways to reduce fuel consumption. NZ imposed “carless days” while the US imposed a 55mp/h (88km/h) speed limit. When things got back to normal and the figures were analysed, the fuel savings across America had been impressive. But what shocked everyone was the huge reduction in accidents, especially the number of deaths.
David H Fisher, Howick.
The definition of income is money or value derived by business or individuals selling their labour, services, goods, or investments. A capital gain is income, commonly derived in NZ from selling property investments. It’s easy to legally avoid all tax on such income. We don’t even call it income so that we can pretend we don’t have to pay tax on it. Those whose income is derived from wages and salaries have no option to avoid income tax in New Zealand. Shame on us for indulging such fantasies and accepting such unfairness.
Barbara Callaghan, Kohimarama.
I am waiting for probably the impossible whereby the teachers’ unions actually come out with a headline stating that they support a Government-proposed change in education. However, I suspect not.
Mike Baker, Tauranga.

Reminder, this is a Premium article and requires a subscription to read.