I did like Mr G’s July column regarding a waterfront stadium. A brilliant idea to sell off Eden Park and the land surrounding the North Harbour Stadium, before money is spent on Eden Park. It’s soulless and atmosphere-free; the seats are too far from the pitch, troublesome neighbours – Ms Clark, for example – and it’s too far from the CBD. Even after selling Eden Park and the stadium land, a huge amount of funding would be required, so what about a dedicated Auckland Stadium lottery, like they did for the Sydney Opera House? This raised around $1.2 billion in today’s money. A beautifully designed, world-class, 60,000-capacity stadium right beside the Waitemata Harbour; what a magnificent asset for Auckland and a wonderful legacy for future generations. Auckland is our largest city, and we deserve something better than the underwhelming and far-flung stadiums we currently have.

Everyone will be aware of the angst in some sections of the community over the proposed Devonport Lanes development. The $400 million development, which includes five new buildings with residential apartments, a boutique hotel and building heights ranging from four to the controversial eight levels. Six heritage-listed buildings with retail space on Victoria Road will also be refurbished, plus laneways will be constructed with additional retail space and will interconnect the whole development.

The idea of Fast Track is to avoid unnecessary delays and additional costs caused by excessive application of red and green tape and wider public consultation. A good example of this is the Ports of Tauranga, where critical wharf extensions and dredging were delayed for six years, amounting to millions in legal costs and restricting vital port operations.

There is nothing untoward about seeking Fast Track approval; this has already been used to progress a range of infrastructure and housing projects from a West Coast hydro dam to Precinct Properies' downtown redevelopment. Importantly, Fast Track is not an automatic rubber stamp either, as we saw with the Pegasus housing development, which didn’t meet the criteria for Fast Track of having significant regional or national benefits. It’s true – groups and individuals can't make direct representation, but the wide range of opinions within local communities will be a determining factor.

The proposed Devonport Lanes development has been accepted for consideration, and now will go through the consenting process by an independent panel of experts, who will ultimately make the final decision and may well seek specialist input in specific areas during that process. In principle I like the idea, but agree that eight levels are too high for Devonport. Let’s assume consent is granted based on four levels and the economics still work, then I’d say we’ve got a pretty reasonable outcome where all sides are able to walk away with a result that everyone can live with.

The truth is Devonport was once a bustling little suburban shopping centre that had just about everything you needed, but times change, and today it’s a rather tired shadow of its former self and in desperate need of rejuvenation. Should this development proceed, hopefully it will be the catalyst to inject new life and vibrancy into Devonport, attracting a range of new businesses while also boosting existing businesses. Done well, it will certainly be an attraction for people from outside of the immediate area and also give tourists another reason to visit and spend.

After the omni-shambles left by Ardern and Hipkins, this year’s election shouldn't even be a contest, but there are some polls suggesting a change of government could be on the cards. However, at the time of writing, the polls appear to be all over the place. As they say, the poll that matters is the one on 7 November. I do think the outcome will be close, but the Coalition will be returned, perhaps with a reduced majority and maybe a reshuffle within the coalition itself.

Against all the speculation, they have been a stable government and have done some great work in education, RMA reform, reduction in crime, tax reforms and bringing some degree of fiscal restraint into Government spending and borrowing – although still not nearly enough.

Do they deserve another term? Yes, I think they do, essentially to finish the job they started and to properly address the issues many of us expected them to undertake in their first term. However, this time we need to see a clear, unambiguous plan to take the country forward; we have simply been treading water for too long, and it’s time for bold initiatives, fresh ideas and action, not more talk.

I understand why people are frustrated and grumpy after six very tough years, but I don't think a Labour government potentially supported by three parties of the far left would necessarily be the answer at any time, especially not right now, just as our fragile economy is finally showing signs of recovery, and with several major banks now predicting strong economic growth over the next two years.

And internationally, it’s a time of extreme global instability and uncertainty; we definitely do not exist in a benign environment any longer.