Kerre McIvor Mornings Podcast

How big is his hole? Nicola Willis was asking Grant Robertson back in 2023, where are you going to find the money to fill that Government's financial fiscal hole? And now yesterday, she says that Labour has another fiscal hole to fill and it's a beauty. She told us yesterday when she was a guest in studio that there is no way Labour can afford to fund their pay equity promises, far less many of the other promises they're making to voters. Labour in response has said, well just taihoa, all will be revealed when our fiscal plan is produced sometime soon. Now some of this is electioneering and there's a surprise given we're in the middle of an election campaign. For example, National says that Labour's promise to fund public transport for many parts of the country, up to a certain point, will come out of the Crown balance sheet. Labour says absolutely not, they'll take the money from the Land Transport Fund. They won't pay for something that's been promised out of the Land Transport Fund. They won't pay for that, they'll pay for their public transport fares. It's called reprioritisation – the money does exist for the public transport fares, they just won't pay for something else. Some of the funding though is a mystery. I have no idea where they think they're going to get 11, 13, 14 and counting billion dollars for pay equity. Chris Hipkins, opposition leader, is adamant the money can be found within the budget as he told Mike Hosking yesterday. CH: We're going to set out in our plan, you know, we're going to demonstrate in our fiscal plan, you know, when we set out our breakdown of numbers that we have room there to pay for pay equity. What I said yesterday, and you know, there's a bit of divining tea leaves has been going on here, is that we're not going to have a specific line item, but the, our fiscal plan will clearly demonstrate that there is money in there to be able to meet the cost of pay equity. MH: So why isn't it a line item? CH: Because you don't basically, when you're going through a bargaining process, you don't tell the other side what's in the envelope. And you know, we wouldn't do that with any other process of bargaining. We've never done that with pay equity. The Crown has never put a line item in the budget that said here's how much we're setting aside for pay equity, but it has been there. And our fiscal plan will be the same. MH: It'll be about $12 or $13 billion. Is that fair though? Within that ballpark, that's what we're dealing with. CH: We certainly expect it to be a big number. Yeah, so it's going to be a big number. If it's coming from the budget, that's 13, 14, 15, whatever billion —billion, not million— that won't be spent on something else. And I don't know that there's that much wiggle room. The free doctors visits aren't going to be funded by a capital gains tax, I think surely even Labour's accepted that, given that Treasury forecasts house prices not going up anytime soon. Something else will have to be cut to fund those. Nicola Willis has accused Labour of fiscal fraud, but until Labour finally comes up with their fiscal plan, it's a bit like waiting for Keri Hulme to come up with a sequel to The Bone People. You should, I suppose, give them the benefit of the doubt. But do you believe it is in any way possible for any party to find —let's be generous— $10 billion from the budget without ripping the guts out of the essentials and without undoing the hard work that we have endured over the past three years? Where the hell do you imagine it's going to come from? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I really like the idea of David Seymour's to turn the old teachers' training college in Epsom into a new co-ed public school. I like even more the idea that it not be zoned. In David Seymour's ideal world, the lovely old 37 acre site that is owned by the University of Auckland and currently lies empty would be jointly operated by two of the top state schools in the country, Auckland Grammar and Epsom Girls Grammar. They're both bursting at the seams with the number of students wanting entry through their gates. If the land that the teachers' training college is on right now was sold and used for more housing, there'd be even more pupils knocking on the door looking for entry at Auckland Grammar and Epsom Girls Grammar. If it was retained for educational purposes, in this case a school, not a teachers' training college, it would also mean there's a bit of green grass in a highly intensified area. I love the idea of it being available to any student across Auckland, no zoning, which begs the question around zoning full stop. Why should your child have to go to the state school nearest you? Why should you not be able to shop around and decide for yourself which school aligns with your child's educational abilities, your child's educational needs, and with your family's values? Is zoning archaic? Being told you have to go there, you don't have a choice. School zones don't just affect education, they also affect property prices too. Zones drive up housing and rental prices in sought after areas, sometimes adding massive premiums to homes near top performing schools, and buying into the area, even if you might have gone to that school and you'd quite like your children to go there, but you can't afford to get there, your family connections count for nothing. Is your child going to the school you want them to go to, or are they having to go to the one that's in your zone? And if you have been resigned to the fact that they have to go to the one that's in zone, are you happy with it, or given the choice, would you send them somewhere else that you think delivers more on your aspirations, your belief about what education should look like? Should families be able to decide for themselves where their children receive their education? Is it time to put an end to zoning full stop and just let parents decide? Are you for or against the idea and the reality of zoning? If you could, would you send your child to another school, or are you perfectly happy with the one you've got now? And for those who are living in the leafy suburb of Epsom, what's the ideal use of the vacant teachers' training college? A school? Sold for more housing? I think I know what you'd prefer. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The idea of a new co-ed school in the Auckland suburb of Epsom came from the schools involved – Epsom Girls and Auckland Grammar. ACT Leader and Epsom MP David Seymour says the idea is to ease pressure on the existing single-sex schools. He'll campaign on acquiring Auckland University's $150 million site, formerly used for teacher training and which currently sits empty. Seymour told Kerre Woodham the heads of EGGS and Grammar have had this idea in the works for months. He says Brenda McNaughton and Tim O'Connor approached him, have the backing of their boards, and are very serious. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Finance Minister says tough choices aren't just made for the sake of it with the Crown books now opened for pre-election scrutiny. It shows we're on track for a good surplus in the 2028/29 financial year, with a much smaller current deficit than expected. But it's not entirely rosy, with predictions slashed on house price growth, more money needed for health, and concerns over Super costs Nicola Willis told Kerre Woodham she's pushed to re-prioritise spending for a reason. She says she's reduced back-office costs and stopped programmes that weren't working, so she could find the money to invest in things Kiwis really want. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The centre-right bloc is at odds over voting strategies. Christopher Luxon and former leader John Key implored voters at National's campaign launch to simply party vote National and ignore any call for strategic voting. The strategy is aimed at creating an overhang and maximising the number of aligned MPs in Parliament. Key told Kerre Woodham for the Coalition, it would result in a lot more ACT and NZ First ministers, trading talented National ministers like Nicola Willis, Chris Bishop, or Paul Goldsmith for people voters have potentially never heard of and don't want. He says if you broadly want a National Government, then vote for what you want instead of potentially ending up with buyer's remorse. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's an old saying, "you're so sharp you could cut yourself". Similar to "you're too clever for your own good", meaning sometimes a person tries to be too tricky or clever, which leads them to make a simple task messy or fail completely. And that is the warning being given by the main parties to voters who are trying to rig the system. To be fair, Te Pāti Māori started it this election with the message to their voters in the Māori electorates to give the party their candidate vote, while leaving the party vote entirely up to the individual voter. The understanding being, of course, that anyone voting for a Te Pāti Māori candidate in the Māori seats will be voting for a party from the left block. That strategy could lead to the creation of an overhang where there are more seats in Parliament, and following the message from Te Pāti Māori, more seats in Parliament for a left block. Now supporters of the Coalition Government are asking their voters to do the same thing, split their votes in order to get an overhang. An overhang happens when a party wins more electorate seats than its share of the party vote should entitle it to. This grows the size of Parliament and skews its proportionality. It means the shape of Parliament does not reflect the overall party vote. Don Brash was the first to call for National voters to give their electorate vote to National and party vote ACT or New Zealand First. Harry Mowbray, father of the rich listers, is trying to get a campaign going to do the same thing. If you heard him on Heather du Plessis Allan last night, you'd have heard him explaining how it works. The maths wasn't mathsing for me when I listened to Harry. My brain was trying to crunch the numbers, and the cogs weren't working when I was listening, but my young boss said, well just look at Te Pāti Māori, there's the overhang. The party vote does not entitle them to any seats in Parliament, but they have six electorate seats. When it comes to National, basically it means that if National's going to, according to Harry's calculations, get all of its electorate seats, the party vote would just entitle it to those same electorate seats, whereas if you party vote for New Zealand First or ACT, it will give them more seats that they couldn't get through an electorate. Henry Cooke in the Post has a piece outlining Harry Mowbray's attempt to game the political system. And I like Henry's writing, but the editorial starts, "there's an attempt, a very nascent one, from a very rich right wing man to fundamentally skew the New Zealand election." Well yes, but there's nothing in there about Te Pāti Māori, who, without resorting to seven-year-old playground tactics, started it. Where's the mention about Te Pāti Māori's call to its party faithful? Come on Henry, be fair. There's also a call, a very nascent one, from very left leaning Te Pāti Māori politicians to fundamentally skew the New Zealand election. You could have started the column just like that. So they're both doing it. The fact that we have a political system that allows this is just a nonsense. It just shows the flaws of MMP. It also, and that was something Willie Jackson pointed out and it's something that New Zealand First Winston Peters pointed out, puts the Māori seats at risk. If you're going to play silly buggers was their message, you'll lose the seats. It's all too complicated for me really. I get where voters are annoyed with National. They might think that National hasn't gone far enough, and that's what happened to Labour. Labour had the opportunity to bring in sweeping reformist change with their absolute majority. They chose not to, they chose to squander that, so their supporters were really grumpy and flounced off to the minor parties. If you're a bit cross, but you like your electorate MP who happens to be National, you vote National and then say, oh, I'm going to give my party vote to ACT, that'll toughen them up, that'll teach them a lesson. But doing that sometimes, as Sir John Key warned, can give you unintended consequences and can mean that you are being so sharp you'll cut yourself, and then you'll be sorry. Is anybody thinking that they're being clever, or is it just pure emotion? You're grumpy with the way your party's performed, be it Labour or National, so you're going to give your party vote to the minor parties like the Greens, like ACT, to give them a bit more grunt in coalition talks, or you're trying to be clever and play the system. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Health New Zealand's adamant health outcomes remain positive and are turning a corner. Health's under scrutiny ahead of the election, with workers and unions calling for more support. The Government's acknowledged struggles, but claims wait times, cancer treatment, and child immunisation rates are getting better. Health NZ Chief Executive Dale Bramley told Kerre Woodham there are other improvements beyond waiting lists and EDs. He says life expectancy continues to rise. Bramley also says he wants every nursing student to find employment, but admits there are caveats. There've been ongoing concerns around students struggling to get work, despite unions and workers crying out for staff. Labour's promising every eligible New Zealand-trained graduate a job from next year if elected. The CEO told Woodham Health New Zealand's recently announced they will take 800 new grads. But he says employment also relates to the ensuring the right mix of skills, and it's not just about Health New Zealand, noting there are other places that take nursing grads. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The election campaign officially kicked off over the weekend with the two main parties, but honestly, it feels like we've been in campaign mode for years now. National and Labour gathered their party faithful in their respective happy places: the swanky International Convention Centre for the blue team, Dew Drop Events Centre in South Auckland for the red team. Both had their party heavyweight champions in their corners: John Key and Bill English in the blue corner, Helen and Peter Clark in the red. Both Chrises had their senior ministers alongside them. Only one party came up with something new, and that was Labour, using the same old election trick that Helen Clark used so well in 2005 appealing to student voters, using the student loans to pull them in. This time Labour promised to cut the loans by 10 percent if New Zealand grads stay in the country for three years. But apart from Chris Hipkins being a bit sweary, trying to get a bit sort of - "wahey, I'm the man" on it in South Auckland, that was it really. For both parties, the launches pretty much reeked of desperation. National knows the parlous state of the economy and so cannot and will not promise election treats. I don't know what's driving Labour. Getting back into power at any cost? Showing that they're not as useless as they were last time? I don't know. ACT, in response to Labour's student loan bribe, released a press release which I think pretty much sums up where we're at. They said paying down debt and returning to surplus is job number one for any Government serious about unlocking New Zealand's potential. We pay $24.8 million a day servicing the interest on our debt. In 2018-19 it was $10.1 million a day servicing the interest on our debt. ACT says this is the 'back to the future' election for Labour: they're promising higher taxes, higher spending, more complicated monetary policy, and billions of dollars of promises without showing how the books add up. That was ACT's response to the student loans. But what else have they got? When everything's feeling a bit blah, you can understand them trying to entice voters, trying to say - "Look, things aren't so bad, we've got this for you." They haven't said how they'll pay for it. The capital gains tax isn't going to bring them in the money they thought it was going to bring them in, and that's besides they've promised that's ring fenced for the three GP visits for absolutely everybody. But they're relying on the fact that voters are just at the end of their tether. So what are you going to do? Go with the party that promises ponies and castles for Christmas, even if they know they can't afford it and you know that Mum and Dad can't afford it, but you still want the pony and the castle? Or do you go with the party that says -"Sorry kids, all I have for you is a lump of coal"? What are you going to do? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's a belief New Zealand First's proposal to slash the tax rate for small businesses could make a positive difference to our business landscape. The party's promising to lower the tax rate from 28% to 20% for firms with turnover under $30 million. Its estimated cost is about a billion dollars a year. BusinessNZ Chief Executive Katherine Rich told Kerre Woodham it would apply to a majority of our businesses. She says it would need to be researched for implementation, but it's bold and could transform business in New Zealand LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The political parties have pressed go on their election campaigns and every morning from now until November 7th, we'll have a full smorgasbord of party promises to pick over. Lucky, lucky us. Of course, most of them aren't worth the paper they're printed on. The minor parties have the luxury of promising you a pony and a castle and fairy bread for the rest of your life, then when it comes time to stump up after the election, they'll be all, "Oh, soz, we really wanted to, but those mean Nats/Labourites wouldn't let us. Sorry." So everything you hear, take with a grain of salt. And everything the two main parties promise, ask yourself how they expect us to pay for it, because they won't be paying for it out of their party war chests. We will be. You and me. So when the policies come out from National and Labour, think like a supermodel – one of the OG supermodels, Linda Evangelista, famously said, "I don't get out of bed for less than $10,000 a day." And that was back in the 80's, that would be serious coin now. Ask yourself when you hear the policies promised by National and Labour, "is this worth me getting out of bed for to do a full day's work and pay my taxes?" Back to the breakfast buffet of election promises. New Zealand First says it will cut the tax rate for small businesses by almost a third, from 28 to 20% The reduced rate would apply to companies with a turnover under $30 million, which sounds like small businesses are pretty big businesses. They say, New Zealand First, it will cost a billion dollars, but that will be more than returned with increased productivity, long term investment, and increase in labour demand, employment, and wages. But what would you do if your tax was cut by 8%? Where would you put that extra money? Because it comes back to the reason why you started your own business, became your own boss. Is it to be the next Bill Gates? There are a number of you that I've talked to over the years who could grow your businesses, but you don't want the hassle. You could take on more staff, but you don't want to. Once your business gets to a certain turnover, you want to kick back and enjoy life, coach the kids' sport, take time off during the holidays. It's the batch, the boat, the BMW mentality. You have enough for the life you want to live. You don't want to invest in new capital or more staff or do more hours or pack your bags and head overseas and hustle for the next contract. Why? You've achieved a level of comfort that you're happy with. You don't want to be a billionaire. What does success look like to you? If you became your own boss, if you set up your own business, what was that for? To give you freedom? To give you independence? To make a fortune? If New Zealand First got this one over the line in a coalition agreement with National or Labour, what would you do with that extra 8%? Do like New Zealand First believes you will, reinvest it back in the business? Or would you use it to just live your best life, get there faster? And I'd love to know the motivation behind setting up your own business. For the people who've phoned me over the years, it's been about lifestyle, about making your own choices, making your own decisions. It's not been about chasing the buck, but I'd love to hear from you. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Time is running out for the businesses that generate billions of dollars worth of GDP and that employ a quarter of a million New Zealanders. They're the businesses that run on gas. Your bakers, your coffee roasters, your wineries, your wood processors, your ag sec. And that's not counting the schools and hospitals dependent on gas to heat their buildings. Time is running out because the gas they operate on is running out. It's a finite resource. And as yet, they haven't found anything to replace it. And yes, we've probably heard about the high profile businesses like Glenbrook Steel Mill and Spates Brewery in Dunedin who've transitioned to electric arc furnaces and electric boilers respectively. But for a huge number of businesses, a shift is not yet technically or financially possible but the gas is going to run out. They can't say, we'll just keep it going until we transfer over because when it's gone, it's gone. And when it comes to making the transition, it's not just the cost of a new electric furnace. If bakers, for example, want to make the move from gas to electric, that will cost upwards of $10 million. And that's just the beginning. There are the connection costs. That starts at a couple of million, just to get the thing connected. And then there's the backup plan. Electricity isn't as reliable as gas. BusinessDesk quotes the country president of Schneider Electric who had a customer that had to dump 19 million litres of milk because they lost energy for 30 seconds. As a result, businesses that are transitioning are spending capital on battery stabilisation just to make the grid usable before they can completely transition over. And it makes for a really uncertain environment and that's reinforced by a Schneider Electric survey. They looked at 288 senior business leaders and found 39 percent of them had delayed expansion or lost contracts due to energy costs or supply issues in the past year. We've talked about it before. I think we've talked about it and about the fact that it's coming, that the end of the gas is coming, and yet people and businesses, don't seem to be able to afford to make the transition or else they've looked at the numbers and thought - we'll have to go overseas because there we'll have a reliable energy source. It won't be as expensive as it is here. It's a shame. But we've still got the business and we can set up offshore. Energy costs have doubled over the past five years. But even though we've complained about the cost of everything going up, the cost of a loaf of bread hasn't doubled. Where are you at if you are one of those businesses? They're big and they're small in terms of those that rely on gas. With the smaller ones, is it even worth transitioning? Do you just shut up shop and start again? With the bigger ones, I mean, you probably can't afford not to. Now, the eventual exit, as BusinessDesk writes, of Methanex, New Zealand's single largest user, would free up some volumes currently used for methanol production, but that's only a temporary reprieve. What are we doing here? I can't even imagine what the future looks like. That is, one day you'll go to turn on the gas and it won't be there. What will you have done before that? Will you be long gone, reading about it from Australia? Will you be in another business entirely? Where do we go from here? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's uncertainty from those whose businesses rely on gas as the Government hits pause on an LNG import terminal procurement process. The Energy Minister wanted to secure a deal with one of two possible candidates before the year's end, but time has run out before the election. New Zealand Association of Bakers President John Cockburn says it's not the news he wanted. He told Kerre Woodham many bakeries are built around a large oven, which would take years to replace if a new energy source was needed. Cockburn says continuing to play ping-pong with this issue means people in his industry don't know where to put their money. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's start with the good news. The annual State of the Thriving Nation report prepared for the Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum says workplace injury claims have fallen 28% over the past decade, and some of the biggest drops have come in the industries with the worst histories of harm, those like forestry and construction and the like. Although the report says rates of harm are still much higher than in Australia or the United Kingdom – that's the bad news. And that work related mental wellbeing is the one area getting consistently worse. One of the reasons for the lower rates of workplace injuries in other countries, according to the Forum CEO Francois Barton, is that it costs businesses more in Australia and the UK if their workers come to grief, as he told Ryan Bridge. "In short, it's more expensive in those countries when we get safety wrong. In Great Britain and Australia, there are much clearer signals, I think, to business and workers alike from the regulatory system, the insurance system is obviously a different industrial makeup over there. So it can sound a little brutal, but in essence it's cheaper to injure and hurt people in New Zealand than some of these other countries." The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill passed its third reading at the beginning of July. Workplace Relations and Safety Minister, as she was then, Brooke van Velden, argued the existing regime was confusing and expensive for businesses without making workers safer, and that attention should go to the risks most likely to cause death, serious injury or serious illness. Labour's promised to repeal the bill and will go one step further, introducing a corporate homicide law that could send employers to prison for life when failures kill workers. The Government's argument is that smaller businesses shouldn't have to go through the red tape and the hoops and hoopla that larger businesses do. But if you look at some of the worst workplace accidents, there was a Timaru lumberyard, which would be classified as a small business, where one of the young workers was crushed to death on a conveyor belt that didn't have a guard on it. And a year earlier, a three-year-old boy was crushed to death after a stack of logs collapsed and rolled on him while he was visiting his dad at the same yard. So this is a small business that presumably wouldn't have to go through the bells and whistles that some of the larger businesses do, and yet it's clearly an unsafe working environment. The young scaffolder, Jaden Nelson, who lost both his arms when he was electrocuted setting up scaffolding back in 2022, that one still fills me with horror, that poor young father of three is having to navigate life now without his arms after numerous surgeries to repair his kidneys and his heart and his organs after a massive electric shock. That scaffolding business would have been a small business too. The Business Leaders Health and Safety Forum says neither more legislation nor lighter rules will fix a system that businesses struggle to navigate in the first place. The report says we need better regulatory practice, not more law. National argues, or the coalition government argues, that the Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill will make things less confusing, that businesses won't have to read through all practice for all business, only that which relates to their particular way of doing things, like an accounting firm wouldn't have to go through the same hoopla as a lumberyard, perhaps. There has been more money for workplace safety inspections, but as Sharmabel Jacob says, who prepared the annual State of the Thriving Nation report, you can't inspect your way to a safe workplace. There just simply aren't the inspectors to do that. You are dependent on the owners of the businesses doing that. Should small businesses carry lighter health and safety duties, or should the same rules apply to every workplace? I would have thought it would depend on the business. If you are a timberyard, it wouldn't matter if you employ three people or 300, you should have the same safety practices, whereas if you're an accountancy firm, surely you wouldn't have to go through the same standards and the same procedures, the same kind of box ticking exercise as somebody working in forestry? According to the report, there's quite enough law already designed to protect workers, it's just the way it's interpreted, it's the way it's followed, it's the willingness of employers to put procedures in place to keep their workers safe and to insist that they use the safety gear they've provided and follow the rules that they've laid out. Because I've heard from a number of employers that they do all they can to protect their workers, who continually refuse to wear the glasses because they fog up, or won't clip themselves to safety harnesses because they can't get to where they need to get to. I'd love to hear from you on this one if you're an employer, and indeed if you're a worker working in an unsafe environment. Are your concerns listened to? Do you feel protected? And in many cases, the workers who have been injured are uneasy about the business and the business practices, they think it's a bit shonky, that they're cutting corners, but they don't feel they can speak out otherwise they'll lose their job. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

National's proposing to scrap the Fire and Emergency board, if re-elected. Under the policy, the agency would be directly accountable to the Minister for Emergency Management. A damning report released last week details delays in procuring new fire trucks and slams the organisation's leadership. Mitchell told Kerre Woodham they feel very strongly the plan will deal with a lot of the issues that have been highlighted through the select committee process. He says he's been through a similar process with the Police —making the back office more efficient, pushing services, investment, and resources to the front line— and it's been very successful. "We want to do the same thing with FENZ." LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Brooke van Velden has officially called time on her political career, delivering her final speech yesterday. Van Velden was elected to Parliament in 2020 and this term served as Minister of Internal Affairs and Workplace Relations and Safety. She was the ACT Deputy until replaced by Nicole McKee when she announced she was leaving. Van Velden told Kerre Woodham it's been an absolute privilege, and she recommends it for anyone, of any age, who genuinely wants to leave the country a better place. She says it's not glamorous or about gaining power or any particular title, but instead about representation and putting other people before yourself. "You have to have an element of resilience and an element of knowing what your values are and being able to back yourself, but recognising that at the end of the day, everything that you're doing is on behalf of other people." Van Velden says she's proud of the work and the legacy she's leaving behind. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Calls continue for better coordination between Oranga Tamariki and Police as an inquest begins into the death of a 12-year-old girl. The New Plymouth girl, who cannot be named, died by suspected suicide in 2017. Two years later, Dana Bernadette Taylor was sent to prison for the physical and psychological abuse of the girl and two other children – their connection is not public. The coroner's heard from a social worker who believes Oranga Tamariki assessed her home as safe and was unaware of violence. Children's Commissioner Jane Searle told Kerre Woodham although each case is individual, the answer is for the organisations to work closer together. She says they need a system which can be relied on to then act on information, which requires better training. LISTEN ABOVE SUICIDE AND DEPRESSION Where to get help:• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 (available 7am to midnight)• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 (0508 TAUTOKO (available 24/7)• Youth services: (06) 3555 906• Youthline: 0800 376 633• What's Up: 0800 942 8787 (11am to11pm)• Depression helpline: 0800 111 757 (available 24/7)• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155• Helpline: 0800 000 053• Samaritans crisis helpline: 0800 72 66 66 (available 24/7)• Aoake te Rā- bereaved by suicide service : 0800 000 053See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There is a story in the media that has got me absolutely furious, and it's not Ashley Klein, the referee in the Warriors game. It's a story that's being played out in the Coroners Court of a 12-year-old girl who took her own life in 2017, and she took her own life because the very agency that should have been caring for her, Oranga Tamariki, failed her. And in the Coroners Court, hearing the evidence of the witnesses, I think we have an understanding now why so many children end up dead and tortured at the hands of their caregivers. This 12 year old should be alive today, she should be 21, she should be making music, maybe in a band, hanging out with her friends because by all accounts, despite the awful, awful state of her "home", she was a popular girl, musically talented. But she had the great misfortune, as did her two younger sisters, of being born into a dreadful situation. Her life sucked, as a family member gave evidence. There were some people who cared about her, not her caregivers, but before the girl took her own life, her teachers were concerned, the principal was concerned, they'd made several visits to her home because they were so concerned about her appearance, her behaviour, and disclosures she'd made about her home life. They were filthy, she and her sisters, the nits were crawling down the back of her neck, they were starving. And what the school witnessed, according to reports, caused them to seek assistance from organisations such as Oranga Tamariki, New Zealand Police, social support agencies, and others. There's a list a mile long of agencies where you can get help, allegedly, that exist, that are funded to help just these sorts of children. She was doing everything right. She couldn't do much about her appalling home life, but she knew that this was not the way she was meant to be living. So she disclosed to teachers what was going on, and it wasn't the first time the agencies had been involved with the girl and those in her home. The counsel, who's in the Coroners Court to assist the coroner, said the girl experienced an extremely difficult childhood characterised by ongoing and severe abuse, as well as a generally unstable living situation. The caregiver was a druggie. Due to the difficulties she encountered in her home life, she spent many nights away staying with friends. She was desperate. She would have known that it was an imposition asking to stay at other people's houses. She'd have known what a real home looked like, and it certainly wasn't what she was going back to. The school principal, a police constable, and the young girl turn up at Oranga Tamariki, and a woman from OT told the Coroners Court she was appointed the girl's key contact. A safety plan for the girl was put in place along with a plan to refer her to other services, and an agreement was drawn up that included her caregiver's commitment to engaging with support. But guess what, the caregiver failed to engage, in a shocking revelation, just as she'd failed to engage the many other times that agencies had been involved in her life. There were reports of her being continually under the influence of drugs, concerns from the school about the girl's behaviour and her continued absence from school. So her safety plan included exit plans like calling the Police and running to the neighbours to seek help. Counsel for the coroner asked the question that most of us would have asked: if a 12-year-old needed a safety plan to live in her own home, what were they doing there? There was no comment from the social worker. The counsel pointed to multiple previous reports of concerns made to Oranga Tamariki relating to the girl and her living conditions and her druggie caregiver. The social worker said she wasn't aware of the agency's previous involvement when she first took on the case, hadn't reviewed any earlier reports. Can these people not read? Would you not think to yourself when a 12 year old appears in an absolutely appalling condition begging for help, supported by police and the school principal, wonder if they've come to our attention before? Wonder if the druggie that's looking after her has popped up on our radar before? Do they not even ask the most basic questions? Clearly not. Didn't read any reports, and that was the same with the Phillips children. An older sister provided an affidavit detailing the severe controlling and abusive experience, nobody read it. Nobody bothered to have a look and see if perhaps there might have been reports about his behaviour before. Here's the absolute kicker for me though, and this goes to explain the number of dead and tortured babies and children. The social worker in court said the goal was to work alongside those involved in caring for the girl, honouring them by allowing them to care for her with support. Honouring the druggie caregiver who had failed to engage the last four, five years. Honouring the drug abuser. What about the vulnerable children who are stuck living with that slag? The poor girl did everything right. She knew she and her sisters deserved better. She deserved more. Her school supported her, they tried to do what they could do. And yet that poor child was basically told she was on her own by OT, ring the police or run to a neighbour, but you're stuck there love, because they wanted to honour the caregiver. I'm beyond furious. At the bottom of the story there are ten numbers people can ring if they feel they have nowhere to go and nowhere to turn, but no one could help this young girl. When you've got OT saying you stay there and run to a neighbour's if you really feel you're in safety, fear of your life or being abused. Honouring the bloody caregiver. That Commission of Inquiry into the Phillips children said the children should be front and centre. If that is the culture at Oranga Tamariki, and it certainly seems to be, you've got to shut it down, it is not working. If that is the ethos by which they operate, honouring the caregivers by giving them support, basically turning family homes into social experiments and into social laboratories, let's see how much the kids can put up with before mum comes right, shall we? You've got to change it. We had a story the other day about Pet Refuge where people could put their pets and escape a dangerous situation and the pets stayed at Pet Refuge and they were fixed. Vets worked on them, they were loved, they were nurtured, they were fed nutritious food, they were cleaned, they had their fleas got rid of. We need a kids' refuge where exactly the same thing happens, where these children can go and they can be fed and they can be nurtured and the nits and the fleas can be got out of their bodies and they can have their broken bones mended and their gynaecological conditions fixed when you're 11 or 12 years old because you've endured things nobody should have to endure. We need a kids' refuge. OT is failing them. I've no doubt some of them are doing very good work, but if the ethos is honouring the caregivers who are torturing and abusing so many kids, the children need another option, they cannot depend on Oranga Tamariki because Oranga Tamariki is responsible for so many deaths and so much pain, and if they are the children's last resort then God help the children of this country. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Eden Park's boss says last night's Warriors match was a night to remember - even if it ended in a loss for the Kiwi side. It was our biggest turnout ever for a Rugby League game, with more than 48,000 fans piling into the national stadium. The new City Rail Link was put to good use, with more than 15,000 punters getting there by train, and 13,000 taking the return trip. CEO Nick Sautner says the game was huge for Auckland's economy and international profile. "We made headlines across the ditch, in terms of the Warriors fans and what they did." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Education. I simply do not understand, and I really do want to, how two sides can be so passionate about education and about the curriculum and what is truly important in a classroom and have two sides who want the very, very best for our children and yet be so diametrically opposed. It's a conundrum. Education Minister Erica Stanford announced over the weekend that there'll be a ban on screen time in early childhood education centres, limited use in primary schools, and given the concerns around how devices and social media are contributing to declining abilities for kids to engage with complex texts and analyse data, I mean, surely this has got to be a good thing. "We need to move on quickly to what the rest of the world are doing to help set our kids up with the knowledge and skills they need to be successful in life, and we can't afford to sit down and have another cup of tea. That's what Labour always want to do. They'll do the same with the curriculum. Let's sit down and have a cup of tea and a break and create a group that they appoint members to to have another think about it for 10 years. I mean, 60,000 kids start school every year, we can't afford to wait. And the key thing is, Mike, in all of this, our reforms are working. Why would you want to put that all at risk so Labour can have a cup of tea?" That was Education Minister Erica Stanford talking to Mike Hosking this morning. Yet when I was talking to Chris Hipkins in studio on Friday, he made it abundantly clear to me that National's initiatives would be rolled back should they form a government. He seemed to take absolute personal umbrage that I would suggest that from what I'd seen the reforms were working. Education seems to be as personal to him as it is to Erica Stanford. CH: "The reality here is that any curriculum change does need to KW: "For Ginny to put a halt on what's happening would be a disaster." CH: "That's rubbish, absolute nonsense. Erica Stanford is trying to rewrite the school curriculum in her own image, basically trying to and making it much, much more political than it should be. We're saying that the curriculum should be decided based on evidence of what's going to work, based on what we want all kids to be learning." KW: "It wasn't working." CH: "No, there's no question, there was curriculum, there was a need for the school curriculum to change, there's a need for the NCEA to change, but doing it in the way that the current government are doing it where they're alienating so many people, they're shutting parents out of the process, they're shutting teachers out of the process, they've got school principals up and down the country saying this is going to be bad for kids' education, that is a time to take a pause and say, okay, let's try and get this back on track because there is a need for change." KW: "I couldn't disagree with you more." Clearly I'm passionate about education too, so that was Chris Hipkins talking to me in studio. But you can hear in his voice that he genuinely believes that everything Erica Stanford is doing is wrong, and yet I'm looking at what she's doing and looking at the overseas evidence and looking under my own roof and I can see that it is working. Who's right? I mean, I think the education of our children and the options that a well educated child will have no matter where they start in life, the future of the country depending on a world class education is way too important for politics and shifting ideologies. I would gladly support Labour's curriculum if they could show they'd got it right, but their last session in office did not convince me of that in any way, shape or form. And it's not just me. You've got the Royal Society of Mathematicians saying that it was an absolute disaster what was being proposed. It's not just my reckon. There were academics and there were teachers and there were people with experience of educating children and knowledge of core curriculum subjects who said that Labour's curriculum that had been drawn up, and when you look at the money they spent on the reviews and the reforms and the contracting out, was a disaster. For all of that money and all of that time, disaster. There were probably some bits that were good, so keep those, but when it came to teaching the core subjects, they had got it completely wrong. Then you've got Erica Stanford coming in and the poor teachers are lurched in another direction again with the handwriting and the back to basics and the minimum amount of time spent on English and maths, and it seems to be working. I am so sick of reviews and reports and commissions that we have reports, reviews and commissions up the yin yang. If they propose another one on the education, it'll be a complete and utter waste of time and money, just as it will be with the bloody supermarkets. How many commissions have we had on that? But what Erica Stanford is proposing seems to make sense and it seems to be working and some educators agree with it and some do not, and then you argue that it's because some of the educators are influenced by the teachers' union. I don't necessarily buy that, but what works? It seems looking at overseas data and anecdotal evidence what Erica Stanford is proposing works. So why is Labour so vehemently opposed to what seems to be the best for our kids?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins says smaller parties shouldn't be able to veto National and Labour working together, as he eyes greater bipartisanship. This term, the two major parties have sided together on issues like the Indian free trade deal, a social media ban for under-16s, and modern slavery legislation. Hipkins told Kerre Woodham there's more work to do on issues like infrastructure and climate change. He says it's a bottom line for him that minor parties can't veto any bipartisan work, which he says ACT and NZ First have threatened to do this term. Hipkins is also confident the party will be able to find enough GPs to cover its three free visits policy, should it win government. The party's promising three free visits a year, funded through its capital gains tax on residential and commercial property. The Labour Leader told Woodham the number of medical graduates will rise in the coming years, and the party needs to attract them into primary care. He says the party will offer low interest loans to help graduates buy a stake in local GP practices. He also says GPs will be recruited from overseas, and his Government will grow the number of nurses able to prescribe medications. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Now for some time, I'd say this would be over a number of years, I've been receiving texts from firefighters who are extremely unhappy with the way their organisation is being run. It hasn't just been over this latest pay dispute and the strikes. This has been ongoing for a couple of years now. There haven't been outright accusations per se, but a deep-seated uneasiness, and in some cases anger, about the way FENZ is running the organisation and the way they're treating firefighters. Now a scathing report has confirmed what they have been saying. The board is under fire and under threat of removal, and questions are being asked as to whether FENZ is capable of buying its own fire trucks, sourcing its own materials. Brooke van Velden, the Minister for Fire and Emergency, says she has absolutely no confidence in the chief executive Kerry Gregory, nor indeed of the board. National MP Tim Costley, who's the deputy chair of the Governance and Administration Committee, said the report into FENZ lays bare years of failings. For example, FENZ bought 30 new fire trucks in 2019. Well, that's good, isn't it? That's what the firefighters have been striking for. Well, yes, they're still not being used. They're almost obsolete before they've put a tyre on the road. Costley says the evidence shows FENZ has not been able to deliver. They've consistently had delays, they've consistently had issues with the trucks, and it looks like they have a culture of changing the design halfway through the process regularly, which would be a bit tricky for the manufacturers. Ladder trucks that FENZ bought have also suffered significant delays. Despite a final inspection in July 2025, they're still sitting with the original manufacturers, not yet delivered to FENZ and far from being put into operational use, which puts the firefighters at risk. They don't have the equipment they need to do the job. How the hell can you have 30 new trucks that were bought seven years ago that are still not being used? The pay disputes are ongoing. Every time I go past my Birkenhead fire station between just after midday when I finish work and there they are, standing on the side of the road, placards and horns tooting. Yesterday Brooke van Velden said she had no confidence in the CEO of FENZ or its board, specifically because of a serious breach of the no surprises clause as she told Mike Hosking this morning. BvV: There's always been issues with Fire and Emergency. We've always known that. Lots of historic issues, payroll, the fleet procurement, asset management. But at least when I've known about it, I've been able to actively hold them accountable to their plans and processes and we have actually seen some progress. This was active withholding of information and I think it reeks of people thinking they're above the law. MH: Indeed, what is it about FENZ because as you say it's been going on for years in various different guises. What is it about FENZ in and of itself that's so uniquely hopeless? BvV: Well, I've asked my officials specifically that question, which is is it because it is a Crown entity so at arm's length from government ministers that they are essentially a law unto themselves. And so I've asked for some immediate advice on whether or not there does need to be a better change to the law to allow for better accountability. Is it the fact that it is a Crown entity that is leading to these widespread cultural issues at play? Why are they not under the purview of the Crown? Make them like the Police, have a Fire Commissioner. Ensure that their funding is steady and reliable and within the budget, not dependent on people paying insurance levies. Because at the moment that's how a significant amount of their operational budget is raised: through levies. And when people cut back on their insurance when times are tough, hello, like right now, then that is felt by FENZ. If they were like the Police, then their budget would be assured. They'd always want more, of course, but at least surely to God they'd get trucks on the road and ladder trucks that could be used by the firefighters. And what is it about public servants that they don't understand their very titles? They serve the public. No, they appear to be serving themselves or they appear to be so hopeless they don't know how to do the job properly. We've seen that with immigration and an ongoing case in immigration. We've seen that now with the board and chair of FENZ. Is the job beyond them? Is it so big that they don't know what they're doing? Are they just not being, for want of a better word, are they not being ridden properly? When you're a minister you have to be on top of your department. Given that this isn't a government department per se, would it be better to have them under a good minister? But then the department is only as good as its minister. When you've got weak ministers, you've got lazy ministers, then the public servants know they can get away with anything. Well, I'm not going to call them public servants because a lot of them are not. Some of them are, a lot of them are not. I'll call them bureaucrats. They know they can run rings around their new minister and they do so. So you'd need to have a minister who is on top of their portfolio to get any kind of better outcome than we've seen so far. I imagine too that for those firefighters who've been sending in the texts, this will be vindication for you. I mean, there'll be no great joy in it because you still haven't got the equipment you need. It's still all that money has been invested with little to show for it. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A Morrinsville grocer is disheartened by National's plan to split up Foodstuffs. The party's campaigning on splitting Pak'nSave from New World and Four Square in a bid to increase competition. It would give the Commerce Commission six months after the election to make the final decision. New World Morrinsville Owner-operator Kym Samuels told Kerre Woodham this is heartbreaking, especially coming from National, who is a party that's meant to stand up for business. She says if the Government actually wants to bring down prices, they should look at reducing or removing GST on products like meat and seasonal produce that are impacted by inflation. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I don't know. I've listened to all the commentary; I've listened to Nicola Willis. I'm absolutely perplexed. Stumped. I thought after all this time and having taken a lifelong interest in politics that I understood a wee bit about it. Turns out I know absolutely nothing, because if I was a National Party advisor, and let's face it, a lot of you think I am, but if I was a National Party advisor, I would not be saying to National, "look, you're languishing in the polls. You might have done some good work, you're not selling it well. We need a little something, something, something, something. I know! Let's take a big pet project of the last Labour Government and interfere with private property and manipulate the market and sell off supermarkets. And let's not sell off all supermarkets, not the Australian ones. Let's take the supermarkets owned by New Zealanders, good hard working young couples who go and live in small communities that Woolworths won't touch, and make them less profitable and make them charge less for the goods that they sell. How about that?" I am stumped that they thought this was a good idea and then even more stumped that whoever came up with the idea managed to sell it to the rest of them. Because I assume it's not a brain fart of Nicola Willis'. She's been on one ever since she came into government. She's been on the backs of the supermarkets. But for the love of all that's holy, this is an idea that goes against National's entire DNA. They're having the biggest identity crisis since Bruce Jenner became Caitlyn Jenner. It's an absolute head scratcher. However, Nicola Willis is adamant. This is what she told Mike Hosking this morning: "We believe in competitive enterprise and what the study after study has said about our supermarket sector is that it is a complete outlier internationally and that it is so consolidated it isn't operating like a normally competitive market. I want competitive, strong businesses innovating, offering variety, competing on price and the evidence I have received says that's not going to happen for so long as you have an effective duopoly. So this is not a normal market, there is evidence of market failure. Yes, this is an unusual step, but man oh man, we've got a problem here." Really? You know, it's a mixed up, jumbled up, shook up world in which we live. There are few things upon which you can rely. One of them is that National is the party of small government, minimal interference, a champion of small business owners. Now they're not. And the thing is it might all be for naught. They might be confusing and infuriating what voter base they have left for nothing. Dependent on the Commerce Commission, dependent on coalition partners, might be a Trojan horse. Okay, we'll leave the supermarkets, but we'll raise the age of Super to 68 – I don't know. As I say, I'm absolutely perplexed. We might be a percentage point higher in terms of grocery prices than other countries —to be fair, we have been a lot higher in recent times— but ask anyone in London or Sydney or Stockholm if they're paying too much for their groceries and they'll say, by crikey, yes we are. And although Australia and Canada and the UK among other countries have looked long and hard at their supermarket chains, none of them has taken the highly unusual step of breaking up privately owned supermarkets. It used to be that if you wanted the government to step in and try and fix things to make things a bit fairer, to protect and insulate you from the cruel vagaries of day to day life, you'd vote Labour or the Greens, you had a choice. If you wanted supermarkets broken up to create an artificial competition in the marketplace, you'd vote Labour or the Greens. And now look, you lucky, lucky things. What a choice. Labour, Greens or National. Who'd have thought. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand's economy is continuing to grow but the pace has slowed to a crawl. Latest Stats NZ data shows GDP rose 0.2% in the June quarter after rising 0.9% in the months to March. The growth is driven by construction, public services, healthcare, and wholesale trade. But the Herald's Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham some of it has to do with attitudes, which is affecting sectors like retail. He says tourism and other exporters are doing well, but many consumers are holding off on spending money because they're worried about losing their job. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ACT's Leader is furious at the idea of breaking-up Foodstuffs. If re-elected, and if the Commerce Commission agrees, National would separate Pak'nSave from New World and Four Square to compete with each other and Woolworths. David Seymour told Kerre Woodham it'll make the problem worse, but his party is standing alone. He says just because the focus group polling says people are upset, doesn't mean you do something simple and wrong. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Political parties are being urged to back a plan focusing on a better future for all children. Barnardos Aotearoa and its supporters is gathering at the steps of Parliament today asking for formal and long-term commitment to its Generational Plan. It aims to begin work next year, putting children at the heart of decision-making, so they can thrive as future adults. CEO Matt Reid told Kerre Woodham they've seen through social and community work that giving struggling parents the right support, especially early on, can absolutely make a difference. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's hard to know really where to start when it comes to listing the failings of all those who damn near destroyed the lives of the Phillips children. In the first instance, they were failed by their father and by their immediate family. Then, when those relationships broke down, they were failed by the very agencies that are supposed to be there to protect them, Oranga Tamariki and the Police. How agencies that are supposed to be acting in the interests of the children could think it was a good idea for them to be kept in the custody of a man who had staged their deaths, was an abusive alcoholic, and was motivated to keep the children away from their mother to spite her is beyond me. Police were concerned enough about his mental stability to deny him a firearms license or revoke it, yet they never passed on their specific concerns to Oranga Tamariki, not in detail. Still, OT really didn't need to have the police reports, one would have thought, when you look at all the other information they had. The children's older sisters had real and genuine concerns about the children's wellbeing. One rang the local office dealing with the children frequently, another swore an affidavit detailing controlling and abusive experiences with Phillips, yet the social workers didn't read it, fobbed off the one who phoned, didn't listen, insisted the kids were absolutely fine. How could you draw that conclusion? The inquiry has found that OT should not have closed the report of concern in February 2022, having done so in the face of compelling concerns raised by the children's older sisters as to the risk and harm to the children of being isolated from family and society. The children's four years of living with an alcoholic father in squalid isolation only ended when Phillips shot at and nearly killed a police officer who's had life changing injuries as a result of Phillips shooting at him. Police returned fire and Phillips died on a country road in front of his daughter. He was responsible for the trauma that that young girl experienced. He's ultimately responsible for all of what has happened to his children. But the state agencies that are there to step in when parents fail, failed too. Jill Rogers, the Deputy Police Commissioner, talking to Mike Hosking this morning, said ultimately police achieved what they set out to do. JR: We achieved what we set out to do. Did it take us a long time? Did we miss opportunities? Yes and yes, but at the end of the day we recovered the kids. MH: So if we're looking for blame and apologies, OT carry more of it than you do, fair? JR: The report identifies lessons for all of us in there, so and clearly that information sharing one is one that does stand out and we'll continue to work hard to make sure that we get the right information to the right people. Do you know the last time we had something like this was after the death, the murder of Malachi Subecz, murdered by his caregiver. That was only four years ago and one of the major findings was that government agencies needed to work together and centre children's voices. Four years ago. I have listened to government ministers and heads of department and police officers speak and they acknowledge the findings of this report, they've acknowledged the findings of previous reports, blah blah blah. Everyone's sorry. Everyone's very sorry. OT are sorry, Police are sorry. I'm sure the people that lionised Tom Phillips are very sorry now they know the despicable nature of the man. But I have absolutely no doubt that for all the reports, all the regrets, all the sorrow, all the determination to ensure this will never happen again, it will. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Would it be better to have one body responsible for running political polls? Questions have been raised as to how trustworthy existing polls are, as recent results put both National and Labour below 30%. NZ Research Association's Polling Spokesperson Murray Campbell told Kerre Woodham if there were to be an independent body responsible for three-monthly polls, it would have to be really well funded. He says high-quality political polls are expensive to run, and any one agency can't typically afford to run them with the frequency that's needed. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Political polls with the headlines and column inches they command. A cynic would say it probably depends on whether you're going up or you're going down. There's a story in Newsroom today from Professor Ben Gray that looks at how the different companies poll the population to get their results. And it doesn't give you a great deal of confidence, does it? He cites the New Zealand Health Survey as a good example of a high-quality survey because the selection of households is random from census data, representing the total population by age, sex, region, ethnicity, whether Māori, Pacific, Asian, other, and deprivation. So, if the population is made up say of 20% Māori, then they'll make sure that they have 20% of the respondents will be Māori. If there is 51% of the population that's female, they'll make sure that 51% of the respondents are female. Interviews are in person with multiple callbacks, resulting in a 75% response rate. Interpreters are used for the 5% of the sample not fluent in English and represented in the population. The methodology is approved by an independent research ethics committee and complies with National Ethics Advisory Committee research ethics guidelines. Political pollsters on the other hand, all use panels, online or telephone, who may or may not be paid, from which they claim to select a random sample. None provide any information about how their panel is recruited. It could be people who are self-selecting and they say, well, we make sure that we get 20% who self-select as Māori. I don't think that's true and they don't show you so you can't test it. In the past, apparently, New Zealand had a good reputation for accuracy in political polls when compared to other countries. We couldn't lie to save ourselves. Wouldn't have even occurred to us. You ask us who we're voting for and we'll tell you, without a word of a lie, it will be our absolute intention to vote for this. But declining trust in institutions and the media, as well as the impact of social media, is starting to erode that. We just don't trust the media, we don't trust institutions, we don't trust politicians, we don't trust pollsters. And political scientists point to sensationalist media reporting, bam, kapow, freefall, as being "not very helpful from a scientific point of view", from Professor Grant Duncan. But then when a media organisation is paid top dollar for a survey, they'll want to milk the results for all they can for headlines and by crikey, they do. 1News a couple of years ago pointed out that an analysis of the final 1News poll, the final poll before each of the last eight elections, shows the last survey of the campaign had been with an average of 1.17 percentage points of the actual party vote, according to the accuracy data. They say we're actually pretty accurate. 2020 threw everybody. That was the one that knocked most of the polling companies out of the water because it overestimated how much of the vote National would get, underestimated the love affair the nation had with Labour. But for 1News, they say with their pollsters Verian, the figures covering every election from 2002 to 2023 translate to the poll just being up by one to two seats per party, which they say shows it's pretty accurate, and it is. But do you care about them? They must have an impact. They absolutely must. Because if you see a poll showing the Opportunity party at 3% and you're thinking, oh, quite like the new shiny thing, oh, but at 3% my vote will be wasted, I'll go with the Greens. But then you see a poll showing the Opportunity party at 6% or 7% and you think, oh, oh, that's good. I'll vote for them. I'll vote for the shiny new Greens. Surely, it must have some sort of influence on how you are going to vote, especially if you're not 100% sure and a lot aren't. Now, the latest one that came out, that sort of I suppose it was a fortunate accident that we had the Newsroom story at the same time as we had the Freshwater poll come out, showed that Labour had dropped seven percentage points, which seems ridiculous. I mean, I totally get that National and Labour are unappealing to the electorate. We've seen that over a number of different surveys. People aren't enthused about voting for either of the main parties. They're flirting with the minor parties and having a look at the Opportunity party. But seven percentage points, which either means the poll was overinflated the first time or people are just having a laugh. I have never been asked in a survey. I've never been randomly selected —people want my opinion, they can tune in between 9am 12pm Monday to Friday on Newstalk ZB— but those who have say the questions are so weighted that they are trying to get a response that they want. It's not a "random question, who will you vote for?" Which I imagine a survey would be. No, nothing like it. Do you look, especially if you're flirting with some of the minor parties, at the results of a poll and think, hmm, my vote might be wasted, I'll go somewhere else? Do you look at your favoured party perhaps dropping in the polls and think, right, I'm going to make sure it's two ticks now, not just one? I don't know. I mean, they certainly don't influence me. I get where the political scientists are coming from saying, look, we're just producing a random sample, it's the media who ramps them up and milks every last piece of sensational headline out of them. But do they matter to you? Is there any point in publishing the bloody things other than making it an easy day at work for journalists? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The ACT Party has unveiled their party list ahead of the election - and they've placed Paul Henry in the top five and kept Seymour, McKee, and Hoggard at the top. Paul Henry also indicated that ACT would be looking to bump the retirement age up to 67, but allow people to access their KiwiSavers from age 65. ACT Leader David Seymour says the party would stagger retirement out - meaning people may have to work an extra few months before they reach the threshold. "It's been our official policy for a long time, we'll confirm it when we release an alternative budget. Everybody likes talking about bottom lines, but I'll just point to how much influence ACT has been able to have without setting bottom lines." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

With the election under two months away, questions have been raised over the impact of Labour's proposed capital gains tax. This campaign promise has copped some backlash, with National releasing several AI-generated ads condemning its impact. Dentons tax partner Bruce Bernacchi says it could take some time to reveal the impacts of a capital gains tax, given the current 'flat' state of the property market. "I'm not privy to their modelling and maybe that's why it's been quite narrowly targeted at the free doctors' visits. But there surely must be a mismatch for the first few years." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I hope you'll be phoning in to tell me all about the CRL - because it's trains, planes and automobiles today with the official launch of the long awaited CRL yesterday. This morning it was the hard launch as commuters test the reliability, convenience and time saving potential of the railway line. Tough day to be a bus. Nobody cares, you big stinky diesel thing, even though I know a few of you have turned electric. There the buses are heroically supporting the commuter network, around 70 million passenger trips per year. Where's the gratitude? There is none. It's all, ooh, shiny trains. But honestly, who doesn't love a train? And there'll be some of you thinking, oh, how very Auckland. Come on, you know and I know that when you go to New York or London or Paris or Hong Kong or Singapore, even Australia, it's so exciting to be able to jump onto a commuter line that works, that takes you where you want to go cheaply, expeditiously. It's fantastic. We have our Oyster cards and we've worked out the lines, and we think we're so sophisticated as we jump on and off the trains. The subways, metros or tubes might be old and dirty or smelly, but you can spot a Kiwi, because they're so excited to be on there. There's none of this block yourself off and go into your own mind if you're a resident of the aforementioned cities. You just block yourself out and think this will be over soon, this too will end. We're bouncing around and hanging off the straps, just thrilled to bits to be there. And now we've got one of our own. I would definitely be using a train if the new harbour crossing is built with the capacity to run trains, although I will probably be dead by the time a new harbour crossing is built. My ancestors will rejoice. And the rejoicing yesterday, the Sky Tower was lit up with the CRL map, people of all ages set their alarms to stupid o'clock to catch the first train. People from around the country came to Auckland to ride the first train. I'd probably draw the line at saying, 'Tunnel, tunnel, tunnel' - a group chant as you go through the first tunnel, but then I'm not a rail fan or a trainspotter or a ferroequinologist or an anorak or a gunzel or a foamer or a densha otaku, which is all names from different cultures for those who love trains. But the fact that there are so many names in so many different languages and so many different cultures for people who love trains shows what a fan base they have. But beyond this special group of people getting their kicks, there's hope that there will be a significant return on investment with the building of the CRL. Aucklanders lose millions of hours each year stuck in traffic and removing even a small percentage of vehicles makes travel times faster, more reliable for everyone else and that improves productivity. It is hoped that the flow on effects will go right down the country, it won't just be a fun thing to ride - or to go on the new ale trail, or the ale rail trail, whichever you want to call it. Some friends of mine said they were going to go on the new rail link over the weekend and stop off for a glass of wine at different stations, or water after the first two. But there is an actual ale trail on the rail. Five breweries, independent breweries have signed up for it, so you can Google that and find it. Businesses like our lovely lady with the flowers in Victoria Street will be praying that the disruption and the loss of business and the hanging on by a thread will all be worth it now that the CRL is finally up and running. So I would love to hear from those of you who have ridden the train, who have jumped on board, test driven it yesterday or have taken the chance to come into work today on the train. Does it make much difference? Is it going to be part of your regular commute? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

With just 57 days to go till election day, which is not long at all, most parties are starting to come out with policies. Even Labour. Capital gains tax and free GP visits seems like an age ago, but at least they came out with something. Te Pāti Māori, major constitutional reform by entrenching Te Tiriti into lawmaking, so they've sort of rustled up a couple of election promises. ACT and New Zealand First are giving their party faithful more of the same. ACT are dishing up getting rid of the Treaty, New Zealand First are doling out sanctions against migrants – so far, so appealing to those who are already there. With National, there's nothing to see here, more of the same, stick with us, we'll come right. Look, the economy's improving already, while firing shots across Labour's bow with misleading attack ads around tax. A feeling I'm picking up, and I'm sure you have too, is that people are getting sick and tired of politics and politicians, which is not great with 57 days to go until we make a really important decision about the direction of our country. There seems to be a pox on all their houses sentiment. As a texter put it, they're going to rule out the parties they simply cannot vote for and put a tick next to the party that remains. It's not really a positive vote, it's more a "the others are worse, so I suppose I'll just have to vote for you". So 57 days to go, less than two months. What issues matter most to you? Have you firmed up your vote? Have you danced around the minor parties and thought, oh well, maybe, maybe. The two main parties haven't really delivered much over the past few years, past few elections. Have a little flirt with the minor parties, no, and then you decide no, I'm not going to. No, they look new and shiny, but really, it's all insubstantial. I'll go back to the main parties. Are there issues that are important to you that you feel one party over another is going to deliver on? Are you going to be voting for yourself or for New Zealand? Do you have the luxury of being able to look at a vote for the wider community or are you just hanging in there by the skin of your teeth and voting for yourself? Are any of you so fed up that you simply won't vote? And I suppose more to the point, if you want to vote, have you made sure you're on the roll because you won't be able to do it on the day? There's a lot of you that will swing left to right and right to left – have you reached a level of dissatisfaction with both the major parties that you're ready to join forces with one of the smaller ones? There'll be a flurry, I imagine, of policies coming out, but 57 days to go is leaving it a bit late for Labour. Chris Hipkins said at a public meeting, the first one that he's done for the entire election campaign, and it was only a few days ago, he said, I'm just getting warmed up. Just starting. Has he left his run too late? Or are you still waiting to hear something that might energise you, that might make you think yes, I feel really positive about putting this tick next to this party, I feel certain that they have the answers, that their way of improving New Zealand is the right way. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

An update from Tauranga's Mayor, who says Mount Maunganui won't reopen for a while yet. Six people died when the holiday park at the foot of Mauao in January was swamped by a landslide. It's been closed to the public since. Mahé Drysdale says it's tough on businesses, and they're trying to return to some normalcy. He told Kerre Woodham two summit tracks are closer to ready, but the main slip keeps getting worse despite a lack of normal triggers, which makes health and safety hard to predict. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are concerns the culture of school rugby is distorting the values it's meant to promote. Christchurch Boys' High School's principal is raising flags about the increasingly serious way First XV rugby is treated by schools, particularly regarding recruitment, escalating expenditure, and the culture that develops when winning becomes too important. He believes that winning and playing for their school should matter, but a win-at-all-costs mentality shouldn't be prioritised over the values that team sport teaches. Principal Nic Hill told Kerre Woodham winning matters, but so does disappointment, as you can't have the great elation without disappointment. He says kids get so much out of sport, and the most they get is from the great adults they have with them, but adults are the ones who keep ruining it. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New research by Women's Refuge has shown that more women are disclosing that they are victims of family violence at work, and they are making the most of the domestic violence leave that was introduced by the Labour Government eight years ago. Under the legislation, those affected by family violence are entitled to up to 10 days of paid leave per year on top of their other leave, and they can request flexible working arrangements. The report found that the numbers using paid family violence leave rose from 9% to almost 34% since the Victims' Protection Act came into force, and that more women reported that their workplace response made them safer, not just feel safer, but they were safer. This increased from 40% to 62%. The workplaces that were clued up in their responses were offering victims of family violence practical safety, such as secure car parks and not allowing the perpetrator access to the workplace or the building. I can't imagine what it must be like trying to escape from a partner that refuses to accept that the relationship is over, and not simply that, but who wants to punish you for daring to go against their wishes. And they want to punish you personally, and worse, your children, for daring to defy them. These people —and it's predominantly men who cause the most damage— are narcissistic, manipulative, sly. Some are using sophisticated technology to track down their victims who have left the relationships. They'll hide GPS trackers in kids' belongings, the vehicle, other personal items, and using everyday apps to monitor the family's whereabouts so they can track them down and punish them. They're violent and they're dangerous. About nine women a year are killed by men for daring to leave them. Not for these men, the "oh well, we tried, you know, it's a shame, we loved each other once, but let's go and live our best lives separately and do what we can for the children." Oh no. It's not even "if I can't have you, no one else can." It's the fact that the woman dared to defy him, dared to say no, and that's what puts her and her children at risk. The most dangerous time for a woman is when she leaves. That's when they're most at risk. It's great that women feel they can disclose to their employer that they're unsafe, that they're leaving. It's great that employers are responding and saying "this leave is here for you." But it's a huge responsibility for the employer, isn't it? I would feel an enormous responsibility to my employee and to my other employees if she came to me saying her life was at risk, she needed to pack up and get out and get out quickly, she wouldn't be at work for a couple of days while she tried to find a safe place. Could the employer please be aware that the perp might come looking for her? It's not a workplace health and safety issue, but all of a sudden, it actually is. Remember that case in Māngere Bridge? A man murdered the coworker of his ex-wife. He went round to the workplace because she'd dared to leave him with a knife, tried to stab her, and when her brave coworker intervened, he fatally stabbed her. When it comes to the workplace leave that is available to those who are suffering from domestic violence, how important has it been if you are the victim of that violence to be able to take that leave from work, to be able to use that time to pack up and try to find a safe place? Do you ever truly feel safe unless the perpetrator is behind bars? Do they suddenly have a come to Jesus moment and think, "you know what? maybe killing her isn't the best option. Maybe killing the children isn't the best option. Maybe I let them live their own lives and get on with mine, try to find some purpose and meaning in my own life." Because I can't imagine that would happen very often. At what point do you feel safe? And as an employer, if you have an employee come to you and say "Look, I feel really unsafe, I have to leave this relationship," it'd be more than just giving them leave, wouldn't it? Saying "Alright then, I'll sign you off for five days, good luck." I imagine it would be a whole lot more responsibility than that. So more power to those employers who have been able to do what they can to provide a safe workplace for their employee and the other employees, but it opens a whole can of worms, doesn't it? The fact that more women are using this domestic violence leave to be able to set themselves up in a safe place is fantastic. If it saves a life, it's well, well worth it. But what is the responsibility that the employers feel? I'd love to hear from you. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Some Kiwis are at risk of losing their sight as the backlog for public eye appointments grows. More than 36 thousand New Zealanders are waiting longer than recommended for their appointments, with more than 125 thousand ophthalmology follow-ups outstanding nationwide. Health NZ says its working to reduce the wait times caused by an ageing population, staff shortages, and overwhelmed services. Greenlane Clinical Centre's Clinical Director of Ophthalmology, Sarah Welch told Kerre Woodham they're doing everything they can to try improve things. She says they're potentially starting to turn a corner, but with the number of people waiting, it's not going to happen tomorrow or the next day – it'll take a year or so. And that, Welch says, probably shows we need more capacity within ophthalmology across the country. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I don't know what we're going to do... Good news! How on earth do you make a talkback show out of good news? That's not what we're here for. Indeed, it is very good news, though. The post-Covid collapse in education has halted, and the equity gap is narrowing as disadvantaged students improve at higher rates than their richer peers. That's according to New Zealand's 2025 PISA, Programme for International Student Assessment, results, which is a benchmark for 15-year-olds in the OECD in science, maths, and reading. Oh yes, sure, there are legitimate qualifiers. Results in other countries fell, so it was easier for us to catch up and look good. And no, thank you media, we're not back to the 2009 levels, which is when our schools delivered truly world class results in the PISAs, but come on, this is fantastic news. The Minister for Education, Erica Stanford, believes, as indeed do I, as indeed do many of you, that your socioeconomic circumstances should not dictate your academic achievement. That a world class education should be available to every child in New Zealand, not just those who can afford private schools and tutoring. Education should be a way up, and it should be a way out for those who do not want to live the same lives as their parents. Understandably, Erica Stanford is very, very pleased with the results. ES: To see these kids who are in the bottom quartile who have gained in science a year, in maths three terms, and in reading two terms or six months, that is beyond what we could have expected. And the reason I came to politics and to education was to close the equity gap that has been stubborn for decades, and this is the first time we've seen a turnaround. One of the things I put this down to is actually kids turning up to school. MH: I was going to say, right. So just being at school helps. ES: Well, if you look back to 2022 when we last did PISA, in term two our attendance rate was about 39% 39.6 In 2026 in term two, 64.3 Still a very long way to go, but when kids are turning up to school and our message has been over the last three years every single day counts, this is what happens, and it matters the most for the kids at the bottom who need education to change their lives. You cannot doubt the Education Minister's passion for her portfolio. You also cannot doubt the results that she is getting. I don't know what the teachers' unions are going to do now. How can they complain because our kids are succeeding? And in large part, it is thanks to very, very good teachers who were always motivated, who were always professional, but who had a dog of a curriculum under Labour to deal with. I don't know what the principals who said, "Oh, you can't test children, you know, these give a false result," were talking about. No, they don't. They give an international benchmark. They let us know how we're doing compared to the rest of the world. For a very, very long time, we were world leaders. And for those of us who grew up with an education in the 70s and early 80s—I'm talking the 1970s and 1980s, not the 1870s and the 1880s, just for clarity—it was a world-class education. Erica Stanford's been trying to ensure that no matter if you're in Whangārei or you're at school in Bluff, the core subjects will be the same. There'll be localised differences, there'll be regional differences, but the basics, the standard stuff, will be the same, and that's as it was. We turned out world-class scientists from tiny country schools because we had a great curriculum and brilliant teachers. We've always had good teachers, but they've been dealing with absolute politically motivated, ideologically unsound curricula over the last couple of decades. All parents want is their children to achieve their potential, to have a chance to succeed. I went to school in Pukekohe, Tokoroa, Turangi, and Waihi, and I could foot it with anybody from around the world education-wise. You were allowed to explore what you wanted to explore. I wanted to learn French, for heaven's sake, when I was in Turangi. I found an old, old French dictionary, and French wasn't offered at Turangi Primary, but a teacher found another teacher within the school that was willing to sit with me, show me it wasn't just words, it was sounds that made another language. The number of parents I spoke to who could see their children going backwards under Labour's curriculum – the money that was spent on that, the people who were employed to come up with all sorts of add-ons instead of understanding that the basics have to be there, and then the children will find the add-ons. If they know the basics, they can go exploring all by themselves. And the number of you who rang me having to find money you simply did not have to pay for extra tuition because you could see your kids were failing, you could see your kids were falling behind, you didn't want them to be left behind, so you did it. You got them educated when it is the responsibility of state schools to do that. I've seen a difference with the grandkids. Huge difference. It's so important. This used to be the way out for migrant families since forever ago. It used to be the way out for children who'd had to leave school at 12 or 13, who slogged away, made a life, but then wanted more for their own kids, wanted more choices for their own children. Education was it. I would love to hear from you on this, especially if you are somebody who's seen the difference in your home, especially if you're somebody who was having to find that money for the extra tuition because you were not going to let your kids down. The Government might have been letting the kids down, but you weren't going to let your own children down. And employers, I want to know if you're starting to see the first signs of a truly educated workforce. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Reassurances that life is not over after using methamphetamine as wastewater testing revealed record high consumption. The Herald's obtained a justice briefing showing almost two million doses were detected in testing in a single week in April. That equates to about $40 million in social harm and is 21% above the average amount consumed over the 12 months prior. Whakaronga Whanau Recovery Hub CEO Rhonda Zielinski told Kerre Woodham people absolutely can get their lives back after using meth. She says people tend to dwell on the bad side and think there's no coming back, but there are people in her life that are living testaments of overcoming meth addiction. Zielinski says that from personal experience, there seems to be more success in getting people off meth, than off alcohol. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A group of hunters has turned pest control into a way to feed their communities. Hunt for Good is a not-for-profit that culls wild deer, donating the venison and wild game meat to community groups and food banks. The volunteer group currently provides meat for the Bay of Plenty, Hawkes Bay and Manawatu Regions, and have donated over 20 thousand kilograms of mince. Trust Chair, Bill Osborne told Kerre Woodham they're very careful about how they do it, and have strict processing protocols for farms and a strong hunting doctrine. He says sustainability is really important in this day and age, and they're trying to preserve what bush they can and maintain pastures for production, so it's quite important to get that balance right. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Who the hell is doing all this meth? Yesterday came the news that there were almost 2 million doses detected in wastewater sites over one week in April. One week. 2 million doses. Consumption in the first quarter of 2024 was 15% higher than it was over the previous four quarters. The numbers are big, but beyond the numbers, that is a lot of misery. Just looking at the ODT today, two headlines stood out: 'No way out, mum sucked into major meth trafficking operation,' and 'Fatal crash caused by distressed speeding mum high on meth'. You've seen the same sort of thing. And the scary thing is that those 2 million doses were discovered in wastewater sites – doesn't even begin to cover the septic tanks. The areas where meth is rife, like the Far North and the East Coast of the North Island, aren't even counted. Part of the reason for the massive upsurge might be cost. Apparently, the street price of meth in New Zealand is currently at its lowest level ever recorded thanks to a big intake from the internationals. Data from the Massey University New Zealand Drug Trends Survey says the average retail cost of meth is around about $334 per gram or $74 for a "point" (100 milligrams), so the price has come down by half over the last couple of years. I know people who do recreational drugs. They dabble in alcohol, they dabble in cannabis, they dabble in cocaine, and they do dabble. They appear to be able to pick it up and put it down without their drug of choice impacting their families and their businesses. You would have to wonder, given the amount of meth that's being consumed, can you dabble in meth as well? Is it something you can do on the weekend? I'm probably not the best person to be talking about this, but does it give you energy? Is it one that powers you up or calms you down? I have absolutely no idea. So if you need to be powered up or calmed down, whatever the drug can do, can you take it and then leave it? Because all the stories around meth are very 'Go Ask Alice' and 'Requiem for a Dream' type stories. Horror stories of what happens when you pick up a drug and you cannot put it down. Given I have an addictive personality, I know enough to stay well clear of the illegal drugs. But surely, given the kilos and kilos being consumed, not everybody is a tragic wreck. Why meth though? It's been around for a very, very long time and there have been I mean, easily the past 20 years we've been talking about how it can tear apart families, how it's funding gangs, how it's fuelling gang wars and turf wars. Why do you want to pay that money so that a gangster and his moll can fly first class to Europe? At least the gangsters who own liquor companies pay tax. Now Northland leaders are warning against the arrival of fentanyl in this country. Otangarei Trust CEO Martin Kaipo said it was only a matter of time before the zombie drug made its way into the country as crims looked for new opportunities. And you cannot be confident that people will steer clear of fentanyl despite the fact that there have been so many videos, so many social media stories, so many stories on the mainstream media about what that drug can do to people. The images of the walking zombies, the living dead, makes synnies look like a vitamin tonic by comparison. But if the drug dealers see a new opportunity, they will take it. The drugs can get here, clearly. Your South American route down through the islands is basically a free passage for the drug exporters and importers. Is it a drug you can dabble in? It's just when you look at the people who want to get off it and can't, that's the problem. You might think you might be able to dabble, but what happens when it starts to control you? There simply aren't the beds available if you want to detox. You'll be bloody lucky if you can find one. The damage it does to families, it's multi-generational in the Far North. People are trying desperately to, offer young people an alternative to drugs and drug dealing, but when there's not much up here up there, they see it as the only way they can make a crust. Who on earth is using the meth? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Back in the day, when I first got this job, I was desperate to buy a house. All of a sudden I was earning enough to pay a mortgage, but after years of living on a waitress's wages and being a single mum, I didn't have the deposit. I would now be able to start saving for one, there was a bit left over after expenses, which was a new and wonderful feeling. But it seemed such a swizz to be paying more than a mortgage in rent every week when that could be going towards a house and security for my daughter and me. I was very lucky then that my partner, later husband, now ex husband, had a rental unit in the South Island that could be used as security for us to move into a cottage in Grey Lynn. He had the security, I had the wage, it was a beautiful thing until it wasn't. Um, nobody wanted to live in Grey Lynn at the time, wasn't at all fashionable. And although I thought it was a palace, our home was described in a story I did with a magazine as shabby. But we loved it, absolutely loved it, and it was our home for 20 years, which, to make a short story very long, is why I think it's a jolly good idea from National to increase first home buyers' access to low deposit mortgages if they become government. Their stated intention is to get home ownership rates back to their historical peak of 74% and that was achieved by the country back in the early 90s. Since then, home ownership has fallen to about 66%. Now there are all sorts of benefits for the community, for the country, not just for the young families who own their own homes, if you get home ownership rates up. It's a worthy aspiration. Right now, first home buyers account for nearly 29% of all home purchases, representing the largest single cohort in the current housing market as they take advantage of the correction in the housing market. So will lowering the deposit required make a difference? CoreLogic New Zealand chief property economist Kelvin Davidson was fairly neutral when he spoke to Early Edition this morning. "I don't think it's going to transform things. I mean, it's going to be great obviously for those individuals who were previously shut out because their income was just a bit high, they'll now be able to potentially get in under this loan scheme, but it's not going to flood the market. We already know first home buyers are really strong anyway, um, and and values are still pretty flat despite that demand. So good for those individuals, but I don't think it sort of transforms the housing market for sure." Really? But if you're renting right now, surely the lowering of the deposit would make a huge difference for you. 5% is a huge difference from 10% You genius mathematician, Kerre. But you know what I mean, like trying to get a 10% or a 20% deposit as some people had to do was, you know, it was a Herculean task and it seemed so far, it's a bit like the opposite of what the the student loan absconders are doing. Their debt seems so huge that they can't begin to tackle it. When you've got a 20% deposit to find, it seems like such a huge sum you don't even attempt it. Whereas 10% becomes doable, 5% very much so. If you are renting right now, does the thought of buying appeal and does 5% make it doable? Like really doable. When you look at how much you're paying in rent, have you done the sums to see what a mortgage would look like for your first home? Is it even something you aspire to these days or did the huge jump in house prices knock the confidence out of you when it came to owning a home? I've got friends, young friends, a couple, he's 40 and the other is 34 and they've said no, we'll just rent. They don't have children, they probably won't have children, they'll just rent and use the money to save a bit and travel a bit. They've had a long hard look, big talks about it, and they've decided no. They'll save for their retirement through KiwiSaver and a separate savings account and use the rest of the money to travel. They just don't want to, they've decided they don't want to buy into it. I'd love to hear what you have to say on this. If you're renting right now, does the 5% threshold as promised by National make you think, you know what, I can do it? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.