Auckland Transport (AT), in particular, has inflicted significant damage on the city over the past 14 years. AT has taken a closed approach: cars are the enemy and we should all cycle or use public transport.

Simon Wilson’s article from March 19 this year reported a survey launched by Auckland Council which found 81% of Aucklanders found public transport “much less convenient” than cars; 74% consider it more stressful than driving; 58% consider it less safe from crime.

The same survey found more than 80 per cent of Aucklanders considered bikes less practical than cars – 58 per cent said they would never cycle.

The investigation proved what Aucklanders already knew when they looked at Auckland’s empty cycle lanes built at great expense: AT has pursued policies that are contrary to what the majority of Aucklanders want. Auckland. The massive cost of this unnecessary spending has put the council’s finances in jeopardy.

Please, Mr. Mayor, abolish the AT and reform the other CCOs ASAP.

David Schnauer, Milford.

Hidden dangers

It appears that the bill proposed to define the principles of our founding document and enshrine them in law has hidden dangers.

What might be a current issue might not be relevant at all at a later date, with issues still unthought of. It is far better to live with a little uncertainty and apply the terms of the Treaty in each era, as interpreted by the citizens of that era.

The United States’ constitutional straitjacket and its now outdated Second Amendment on the “right to bear arms” serve as a clear warning.

Tony Parlane, Waiheke Island.

Modern decor

In the comments following the haka in Parliament last week, various positions were taken on whether or not it was appropriate.

Much of this has revolved around the inclusion and expression of tikanga Māori within the Westminster structure and order of our Parliament. It’s a reasonable discussion to have.

There is, however, an asymmetry in this discussion that is not taken into account. All institutions, for example the judiciary and places of worship, have their own standards that are enacted to ensure respect and decorum. For example, entry into a marae and who is allowed to speak is dictated by the tikanga.

It would be completely inappropriate and offensive for anyone to break the established rules of practice and order on a marae. The same standards and expectations must also be accorded to Parliament.

The challenge for Parliament is to ensure that its practices and its order are protected. This should ultimately incorporate aspects of tikanga Māori. But whatever the outcome, order, respect and decorum must be protected in the highest court in the land, even on the marae.

Paul Hamilton, Timaru.