Podcasts about Duplessis

If your business only works when you're working, it's time to redesign how it runs. In this episode of Sharkpreneur, Seth Greene interviews Lady Jen Du Plessis, DC, The Scaling Architect, who shares how she went from knowing nothing about mortgages to becoming a top-producing leader who helped fund more than a billion dollars in loans. A celebrated Amazon best-selling author, podcaster, and TV host, she's helped more than 8,000 entrepreneurs transition from practitioner mode to scalable companies that don't require daily intervention. She breaks down the mindset shift, systems, and leadership habits that drive real harmony and long-term growth. Key Takeaways:→ Teams can't execute consistently without documented, repeatable processes.→ People struggle when they aren't empowered with clear workflows and expectations. → Scaling a business requires clarity about vision, values, and voice. → AI is useful, but it can't replace the human touch. → Know when to hire using lead indicators and KPIs, not out of desperation. Affectionately known as The Scaling Architect, Lady Jen Du Plessis is the Leading Expert in helping powerhouse business owners create a company that runs smoothly without them - achieving massive revenue growth while gaining more freedom and fulfillment in life with grace and ease. Who would have ever thought that little "Jenny Who Ain't Got a Penny," now Dame Lady Jen, a member of the Royal House of Cappadocia and the Royal Order of Constantine the Great and Saint Helen, would have become a numerous #1 Amazon best-selling author, host of 3 top ranking podcasts, and producer and host of her TV show Business on the Vine. Connect With Jen:Website: https://www.ladyjenduplessis.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/jenduplessis/X: https://x.com/JenDuPlessisFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/JenDuPlessis22LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jenduplessis/

So David Seymour's right about Air New Zealand - but he's also wrong about Air New Zealand. Before we get to why, let me bring you up to speed on what's happened with the airline today, because the news is not good. Air New Zealand has posted a half-year result showing a $59 million pre-tax loss, which is slightly worse than expected. And to be fair to Air New Zealand, a lot of this really isn't their fault. They've had not one, but two engine types in their fleet causing them trouble. And the economic downturn we're experiencing in New Zealand - the worst in most of our lifetimes, you have to go back more than 50 years to find anything as bad - directly affects their earnings. If we don't have money, we're certainly not spending money on flights. But some of this is their fault. They're squandering customer loyalty with poor on-time performance and a tired, diminished Koru Club offering. And this is where David Seymour is right when he says, “Go woke, go broke.” Because part of the reason Air New Zealand is losing customers to Jetstar is that there are people who no longer want to pay for Koru Club. The offering has slid from the good old days. You can't even - and this bugs people more than the airline ever seemed to realise - go into the lounge, ask for a coffee, and take it away like you can at a café. There are no takeaway coffees because Air New Zealand doesn't want paper cups going on planes. Paper cups are bad for the environment… when you're flying planes. They've wasted time and money trialling an electric aircraft they don't actually know how to integrate into their fleet. And they're constantly lecturing the government about sustainable aviation fuel - SAF - which is more expensive than standard jet fuel, and standard jet fuel is already extremely expensive right now. But here's where David Seymour is wrong - he says the solution is to sell down the Government's 51 percent stake in Air New Zealand. We can't do that. We are an isolated island nation. There are only two ways to get here - by boat or by plane, and we all know which one people actually use. We need to own those planes to make sure they keep flying. If we learned anything during COVID, it's that Air New Zealand effectively became a logistics lifeline and repatriation service for the entire country. So yes, David Seymour is part right and part wrong. We do need Air New Zealand to stop the distractions and start doing its job properly. And we do need it to remain in New Zealand hands.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government announced today it wants to shake up the road rules a little - allowing kids under the age of 12 to ride their bikes on the footpath, and letting e-scooters use cycleways. Now, it might surprise you to learn that both of those things are against the rules. Kids aren't allowed on footpaths on their bikes unless the wheel diameter is roughly the length of a ruler or smaller, and e-scooters are not allowed in cycle lanes. And it probably does surprise you, because we do these things all the time, don't we? We've got a cycleway near our house and scooters are on that thing constantly - because frankly, it's the safest place for a scooter to be. I took my boy and his six and nine-year-old cousins for a bike ride to the skate park at the beach during summer. They rode on the footpath. Two of those bikes were definitely against the rules - far too big. So you could probably characterise Chris Bishop's proposed changes as simply updating the law to reflect what people are already doing. But I have a question for you - Why have an age limit for kids at all? We're hardly going to stick to this rule, are we? We're hardly going to tell a 12-year-old that the day they turn 13, they suddenly have to get off the footpath and cycle down Ponsonby Road. In fact, we regularly see older adults riding their bikes along Ponsonby Road, past the cafés. We just step out of the way. It's an adult on an adult-sized bike - they're courteous, they're surrounded by pedestrians and they go slowly. So here's my proposal - when we change the rules, why don't we take the age limit out altogether? Don't have an age limit. Simply say - we'd prefer you to cycle on the road but if you can't do that safely, you're welcome to use the footpath. If you do, please go slowly and give pedestrians the right of way. Our goal is that no one dies on the road and no one gets hurt on the footpath. Maybe we could just pass a rule that reflects what we're already doing - and what also reflects a bit of common sense. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So, the People's Select Committee of former MPs has reported back today and, completely unsurprisingly, has slammed the Government for scrapping the pay equity law last year. Which is fair enough in some ways, it was a shoddy process. The MPs say it offends the rule of law and they're probably right. It was done in a hurry to save last year's Budget, rushed through under urgency and changed the rules retrospectively. It's all really cynical stuff from a Government and too much of that sort of behaviour undermines confidence in the way the system works. But even though they make some fair points and mount some fair criticism of the way Nicola Willis and Brooke van Velden ran this thing out, I can't get past the next question I have, which is: so what? What do these former MPs think will happen as a result of this report? The pay equity scheme is not going to be brought back in the form it previously existed. It's far too expensive. The cost to the Government was estimated at $13 billion over four years. The cost to the entire economy would have been much, much higher. The former MPs want political parties to make it a bottom line to reintroduce the scheme after the election. No party can credibly commit to that. Where would they find $13 billion, other than by making the country's already worrying structural deficit even worse and adding to our already far-too-large debt? Chippy will make noises about bringing it back, but press him a little harder - ask him where he's going to find the money - and you don't get any sufficient answers. Ultimately, that's where the argument ends - where do you find the money? Yes, it was bad lawmaking. Yes, people were hurt by it. Yes, it's fair to criticise. But where do you get the money? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listening to Chris Hipkins' State of the Nation speech today, I found it really hard to take him seriously. The speech was mostly just a list of things wrong with the country right now, most of which anyone who can remember back five, six, seven years, knows were caused by him, Grant, Jacinda and Adrian Orr. Take this line, for example: “I see young New Zealanders - smart, hardworking, full of potential - making calculations that no young person should have to. Do I stay in the country I love, or do I leave to build the life I've worked for? It breaks my heart.” Well, it shouldn't break his heart - because he was warned about this. When he, Jacinda and Grant were contemplating those long Auckland lockdowns at the tail end of the pandemic, Treasury explicitly warned that young people would suffer the most. I quote: “The negative consequences are that low employment and income rates are shown to persist for young people well after recessions have waned.” - Treasury advice, 13 May, 2021. Now, we've already spent more than enough time debating whether the lockdowns should have happened - we don't need to do that again. But the consequences of those lockdowns are there in black and white. Young people would bear the brunt. So he can hardly complain now that young people are leaving the country. It was predicted. He complains about affordability. Well, it was during his Government that inflation spiked to 7.3 percent. Yes, some of it was global. But a lot of it was Grant Robertson allowing Adrian Orr to print billions of dollars. Again - right or wrong - we can debate that. But it was the actions of his Government that created the affordability crisis he now laments. He complains about unemployment. Unemployment is up because of the recession Adrian Orr engineered to bring down the inflation that, as I've just said, was created by him and Grant. Now, I'm not defending the National-led Government - that's not my job. Frankly, I think they could have done a lot more to tidy up the Government's books, that part has been woeful. But they did not create the mess that Chippy is complaining about. And it is beyond ironic to have him standing there saying, “Oh, look what a mess this is,” and proposing to be the man to fix it - when he was part of the team, in fact right up there in the top three of the team, that created the mess in the first place. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's not beat around the bush: the biggest news in the world is the arrest of Andrew, the King's brother. It's huge, not least because the last time a royal was arrested was around 350 years ago, when Charles I was taken prisoner and ultimately executed. What also makes this so significant is that Andrew wasn't, as is usually the case with celebrities, politely asked to come into a police station to assist with inquiries. He was arrested at his home, which was then searched by police for further evidence. That distinction is massive. That said, anyone predicting either the collapse or the survival of the royal family today is being premature — and there's plenty of that going on. The charge Andrew faces, misconduct in public office, is apparently very difficult to prove in the UK because of the way the law is written. So this may end up going nowhere. So far, I'd say Charles has handled both today's developments and the wider scandal leading up to them far more decisively than even the late Queen handled Andrew's previous indiscretions, and that does help the monarchy. Most importantly, the key figures in the royal family — William, Kate and their children — seem far enough removed from anything Andrew may have done to remain safe from fallout. On the other hand, what's happened today is only the beginning. Next may come formal charges, then potentially a prosecution, then possibly a judge and jury. If it gets that far, the risk to the royal family increases dramatically, because it could reveal who knew what about Andrew's behaviour, and for how long. If you're looking for a silver lining, it's this: the system is working. No one is above the law — not even the brother of the King. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, finally Chris Bishop has done the right thing and made the u-turn on the two million new houses he had planned for Auckland. It's not altogether a surprise that he did this and announced it this afternoon, because it's been rumoured for months - for the obvious reason that it's election year. Auckland is a key battleground. Aucklanders are obsessed with houses. Auckland voters who own their homes were already stressed about this plan, and if it turned into a full election issue with proper media coverage, even more of them would've become stressed. That would mean blue Auckland voters heading straight to New Zealand First, ACT or Labour. So it was a political problem for National and Bishop had to back down. But in reality, it's not just politics, is it? It's basic common sense. I think it's reasonable for an Aucklander who has sunk one to two million dollars - maybe more, maybe a bit less, but still a lot of money - into their home to feel stressed at the idea of a multi‑storey apartment block popping up next door, blocking their view, blocking their light, ruining their privacy. Whatever it is. We mock these people as NIMBYs, but actually, I think it's fair for them to want to protect the place they live in. Don't you want to protect the place you live in? This battle, though, is far from won. Anyone looking at this and thinking, “That was a close call, thank God that's over,” - it's not over. All Bishop has done is reduce the number of new houses to the point that it shouldn't impact on suburbs. But whether it does affect suburbs is a decision for Auckland Council, and that decision hasn't been made yet. So while it should, on balance, be okay, nothing is certain until the Auckland maps are released. What this is, then, is one u-turn down, and one more to go. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We've had the first monetary policy decision from the new Reserve Bank Governor, and it's not until you get a new captain at the helm that you realise just how little confidence you had left in the previous one. Now, to be fair, it's early days for Anna Breman. We'll judge her by what she does from here on in. But she does start with a clean slate - without us reading too much into her decisions or second-guessing every move because of a poor track record. And that, I'd say, is a very welcome change from just a few weeks ago before she took over. Her assessment is that inflation is fine. Yes, it's a little high right now - 3.1 percent, outside the target band - but it's expected to fall back within the band by this time next year. The economy is improving. The green shoots that were previously limited to certain regions and industries are becoming more widespread. Households are getting more money in their pockets, but they're still cautious - and that's a problem. Because unless they're confident enough to spend, they'll hold back the economic recovery from what it could potentially be. But - and this is probably the bit you've been most interested in, and waiting for - they will start raising the OCR faster than expected. Previously, the Official Cash Rate projection had it going from 2.2 percent in March to 2.3 percent in December. That's now been brought forward: they're forecasting 2.3 percent in June and 2.4 percent in December. The first increase will still most likely be in December, but the chances of it happening in September just increased. It's not a major concern. It's not a major correction. It's not a game-changer for most people. But it does bring the inevitable a little closer. Still - for now - it's nice to have a change at the top, isn't it? And here's hoping this Governor does a better job than the last one. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We've had the first monetary policy decision from the new Reserve Bank Governor, and it's not until you get a new captain at the helm that you realise just how little confidence you had left in the previous one. Now, to be fair, it's early days for Anna Breman. We'll judge her by what she does from here on in. But she does start with a clean slate - without us reading too much into her decisions or second-guessing every move because of a poor track record. And that, I'd say, is a very welcome change from just a few weeks ago before she took over. Her assessment is that inflation is fine. Yes, it's a little high right now - 3.1 percent, outside the target band - but it's expected to fall back within the band by this time next year. The economy is improving. The green shoots that were previously limited to certain regions and industries are becoming more widespread. Households are getting more money in their pockets, but they're still cautious - and that's a problem. Because unless they're confident enough to spend, they'll hold back the economic recovery from what it could potentially be. But - and this is probably the bit you've been most interested in, and waiting for - they will start raising the OCR faster than expected. Previously, the Official Cash Rate projection had it going from 2.2 percent in March to 2.3 percent in December. That's now been brought forward: they're forecasting 2.3 percent in June and 2.4 percent in December. The first increase will still most likely be in December, but the chances of it happening in September just increased. It's not a major concern. It's not a major correction. It's not a game-changer for most people. But it does bring the inevitable a little closer. Still - for now - it's nice to have a change at the top, isn't it? And here's hoping this Governor does a better job than the last one. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You want some fascinating data about how we've changed in the past 60 years? Have a look at the birth statistics out today - especially the age at which mums are having babies. Last year, 14 percent of births were to mums younger than 25. In 1995, which is just one generation ago, it was double that: 28 percent of births were to mums under 25. And in 1960, two generations ago, it was 46 percent - nearly half of all births. Today, there are now more babies born to mums over 40 than to mums under 20. And I'm one of those mums - I was counted in last year's data. Last January, at 40, I had a baby. Now, if I could do my life again, I reckon it probably would have been better to have my kids about a decade earlier. Your knees at 40 are not what they were at 30. Kids want you to run, you don't really want to run anymore. You're just tired. But at 40, you also understand the value of time. If I had my kids at 40, and they have their kids at 40, I'll become a grandmother around 80. Which means I won't have that long left with them. I probably won't see my grandkids get married or have their own children - something that must be one of life's great joys. Leaving it late means missing out on experiences that previous generations took for granted. But there are upsides too. You are simply a better person at 40 than you are at 30. You're more in control of your emotions - a huge part of parenting - and that makes you a better parent. More importantly, and I reckon this is why so many mums are leaving it later - you're more financially secure. By your late 30s, you've probably bought a house, paid off a decent chunk, and established your career. Your partner's income is helpful, sure, but you're not dependent on it in the same way your grandmother was on her husband. And that's why I don't think the age of mums is ever going back down. Women are more financially independent than they were two generations ago. They have choices - and the choice they're making is right there in the data,They're choosing to have kids later. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Given how much of a tease we've had about the Eden Park news today, it's completely understandable if the excitement levels aren't where they should be. But let's be clear - this is really big news on two fronts. The first, obviously, is the State of Origin game. This is the first time since 1987 that the Aussies have allowed a State of Origin match out of the country, and the first time ever that it's coming to New Zealand. We are a big rugby league nation, and that game - even if it kicks off at some ridiculous hour like 9:30 or 10:00 in the evening - will sell out pretty quickly. Which means I'm not sure how much international money it's actually going to bring in, because surely we're going to snap up the tickets ourselves before any Aussies can get them. But it will be an event. And if it gets New Zealand a step closer to being considered a serious contender for a second NRL team, that can't be a bad thing, can it? The second announcement, though, is the one I think is actually bigger. We get very fizzy about the State of Origin, but the rule changes around Eden Park matter more because they're bigger than one event - they're long‑term. It was always ridiculous that Eden Park couldn't host a sporting event on a Sunday, and that weekday sports events had to be wrapped up by 9:30pm, which would have put a huge 'no' on hosting the State of Origin game on a Wednesday. It was equally silly that Eden Park could only ever have 12 concerts a year, delivered by only six artists, and that any one month could host no more than four concerts. Now, it's 12 big concerts, 20 medium-sized concerts, any day of the week, up to eight hours, and not always needing to go through the full consent process. I understand that residents need to be considered, and I'm genuinely grateful to those who have been so generous. But this change was necessary. If we don't want Eden Park sitting empty most days of the week waiting for a ratepayer bailout like in the old days - if we want it to actually earn its way - then this is how we do it. And it hasn't come a day too soon. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's talk about superannuation – which I've noticed we are doing more and more frequently and which I think will probably become even more frequent as our population gets older over the next few years. It's come up again because the boss of Milford Investments has given a speech warning that this talk of taking the pension age from 65 to 67 is simply not enough. And realistically, we have to lift it from 65 to 72 or maybe 73. Apparently, we aren't taking the unaffordability of superannuation seriously enough, which actually I do agree with, the latter part, that we're not taking it seriously enough. About 60 years ago, we used to have eight workers supporting one pensioner. Today, we've got half of that, four workers supporting every one pensioner. By the time I'm claiming my pension, it's going to be two workers supporting every pensioner. That is completely unaffordable. It will not work. We will not be able to do it. My prediction is that we are not going to take this seriously until we see the government starting to take this seriously because unfortunately, they are the ones who have to lead here. They need to start leading by example. If they want us to save money by giving up years of our pension, which is what the National Party will likely campaign on, then I'd like to start to see them starting to save money as well. No more throwing money at the Sunny Kaushal's of this world-or to, in my opinion, silence possible criticism. No more giving billions to Shane Jones to blow on businesses that can't stand on their own two feet without government funding. No more giving students a year of free tertiary education to buy votes. When they start taking the so-called silver tsunami seriously, so will the rest of us, I suspect. It's called compromise. Until then, the pension remains the way that hardworking taxpayers who don't get all that other free government money, get back some free government money. LISTEN ABOVE.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Right, so in the space of less than a day, a coroner has called for regulations to make corded blinds safe for toddlers, and the family of a little girl who died in one of these blinds has backed that call - and then the Government has said no, there will be no regulation. The whole thing has happened in less than a day. This, by the way - if you don't know what I'm talking about - is a parent's worst nightmare, isn't it? It's the idea that something in the house, something seemingly innocuous, kills your child. Corded blinds are the ones with the loopy cord - the one with the little beads on it. Sometimes what happens is the kids get themselves stuck in it, and they can't get themselves out. The thought of that happening freaks me out. So much so that I've already gone around adding cleats to the windows to make the blinds safe, and after hearing the coroner's report today, I've double-checked every blind just to be sure again. I cannot imagine how awful this tragedy is for this family, and I do realise they have the best intentions, they genuinely want to stop this from happening to another family as it has to theirs. But I think the Government has actually come down on the right side of this, because, as we discuss so often on this show, it is just too easy to write a new rule without realising what unintended consequences it may have for years - potentially decades - before some other Government finally repeals it. Like the well-meaning rules around apple trees in early childhood centres that caused all kinds of headaches. Actually, I would argue that safety is something parents shouldn't be outsourcing to rules. Blinds are not the only things in your house that can hurt your toddler. Heavy furniture that's at risk of falling over should be bracketed back so it doesn't fall on the kids. Pools should be fenced off for obvious reasons. Knife drawers should be locked for obvious reasons. Hard edges should have soft covers put on them. You can go online and find a list of the things you should do - there are plenty of these lists out there - and then you can go through every single one and make your house safer, which you should do. You can buy cleats to fix the blind cords to the wall, and you should. So the fix is out there. The knowledge is out there in the information age. Do you still need a rule? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tell you what—I'm not feeling terribly hopeful about the situation for vulnerable kids in this country after reading the coroner's recommendations following the death of Malachi Subecz. You'll remember the case of Malachi. I'm not going to go through the details again; sufficient to say it happened about four and a half, nearly five years ago, and it fired up public anger because of the number of times his wider family tried to warn authorities that something was going to happen—and yet he was not protected. One of the recommendations the coroner has made today in her report is that Oranga Tamariki—OT, formerly CYFS—run a public awareness campaign to help people identify possible signs of abuse and understand how to take action. To be fair to her, that idea isn't new. It came from an earlier review. She's simply pointing out that it still hasn't happened, and is reiterating that the campaign should go ahead. But really? Is that what we need in this country—a public campaign to tell us what child abuse looks like? I think we all know what child abuse looks like. I struggle to believe that there are people who do not know that breaking a child's bone is abuse. So isn't this just the kind of thing well-meaning people suggest to make themselves feel like they're doing something, when really it changes nothing—because maybe there's very little you actually can do? The problem in Malachi's case wasn't that people didn't know what child abuse looked like. People did see the abuse. They absolutely recognised it as abuse. And they went to OT and said, “Hey, Malachi is being abused. Here's the proof.” By my count, they did that about five times—if not more. And OT didn't stop it. That is the problem. And it's the problem in so many of these tragic cases. When a child dies, we often discover afterwards that OT already knew the family—and yet the child ended up dead anyway. The problem isn't that you and I don't know what child abuse looks like. We do. The problem is that the agency responsible for stopping it apparently doesn't know what child abuse looks like—or at least doesn't act when it sees it. Never mind a public campaign. Fix that fundamental problem at Oranga Tamariki, and you might actually save a lot of lives. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Look, I hate to say it, but it's starting to sound like Winston Peters was right about that India Free Trade Agreement, and that the Government is not being straight up with us about what's in the document. It appears the agreement does stop us from being able to cap the number of Indian students who come here. Now, that's not the end of the world, given there actually isn't a cap on them at the moment - or, frankly, on students of any nationality. The Government also always retains the ability to cap all students by tweaking visa settings. What this trade agreement prevents them from doing, by the looks of things, is specifically targeting Indian students and putting a cap on them alone. But the issue is that Indian students have historically been a particularly tricky area, given previous problems with dodgy schemes sending students here without the required level of funds - or with other issues - and they end up becoming our problem to deal with. Depending on where you sit on this, that might really upset you. You might hate that. Or you might simply see it as the give‑and‑take of free‑trade negotiations - a price we pay to gain access to the huge Indian market we now have. The trouble is, instead of having that debate, we're now on track to have a debate about whether the Government is hiding things from voters. It's becoming increasingly clear that they are withholding something, judging by the way the Trade Minister ducks and dives when asked about this. And I don't know about you, but in an age of online conspiracy theories, declining trust in politicians, and shrinking confidence in institutions, I'm not sure this is a smart strategy for the Government - especially in an election year. Sure, either way, the Government was going to face a gnarly debate. But surely it's better to debate whether we should trade uncapped student access for access to the Indian market, rather than debate the Government's integrity itself. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is it possible that some sporting events are just so big that they can more or less do whatever they want politically without suffering any real consequences? I'm asking this because of what happened during the Super Bowl halftime performance. Bad Bunny was everything the MAGA crowd expected - and perhaps feared - he would be. Some were already threatening to boycott the halftime show because Bad Bunny has been a vocal critic of Trump's ICE raids, having spoken out at the Grammys last week, which was just the latest in a series of comments. A Trump-aligned MAGA group even hosted an alternative halftime show featuring Kid Rock. So expectations were high, and the moment came. At the end of Bad Bunny's performance, standing among flags from various South American countries, he made his point. He said, “God bless America,” and then name-checked countries from across North and predominantly South America - an obviously deliberate provocation, given ICE's targeting of migrants from those nations. And right on cue, Trump took the bait, immediately firing up Truth Social and taking a swing at the Super Bowl itself. My prediction is that the Super Bowl will weather this. It will outlast Trump and the MAGA outrage cycle because it always does. Remember Beyoncé's Black Panther-esque performance 10 years ago? There was controversy. The Super Bowl got pulled into the Colin Kaepernick “taking the knee” debate. There's been low-level drama in the intervening years since. And yet, the Super Bowl just keeps setting records. Even we watch it from New Zealand. Last year, it drew nearly 128 million viewers, making it one of the most-watched US broadcasts ever. I am firmly of the view that you should never mix politics with sport because it simply gives some fans a reason to walk away - at a time when you cannot afford for people to walk away. But maybe some events are just so big they can afford to, and not even Trump can dent their popularity. Maybe the Super Bowl is exactly that kind of event. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hot Topic Topic: Hunger deepens in South Africa, even among families receiving food aid Guest: Andy Du Plessis, Managing Director of FoodForward SA

Here's a question for you: Was your first reaction to the news of sewage pumping into Wellington's water something along the lines of, “Oh well, these things happen”? I ask because I've spent the past 24 hours fighting the urge to wave this away as one of those unfortunate, unforeseen things that just happen from time to time. You know — mistakes happen. I'm glad I resisted that urge, because the latest information actually makes the situation far more concerning.The Moa Point facility is run by a private contractor, Veolia, and there have been years of warnings that it was non-compliant. Since January 2024 — two years ago — it has failed to meet compliance every single month except for two. That's a pretty poor record. The issues have included inappropriate discharges, odour problems, and repeated problems involving faecal bacteria. A review three years ago looked across all four water‑treatment plants Veolia runs in the Wellington region and found understaffing, inexperienced operators, and frontline teams being left to handle complex problems without executive support. Now, we don't yet know exactly what went wrong with the pipe yesterday. We don't know whether the long-running warnings had anything to do with the incident — whether, had the warnings been acted on, this might not have happened. We simply don't know. But what we do know is that what was happening at that facility wasn't good enough. And that brings me to our default reaction — mine, yours, everyone's — which seems to be giving councils a free pass. I don't know why we do that. Maybe it's because we're fair-minded people and try to be accommodating of others' mistakes. Maybe it's because councils are monopolies; if we don't like what they do, we have nowhere else to turn, so what's the point getting upset? So we end up lowering our standards to match the councils' low standards. But we shouldn't. Wellingtonians should be angry about this — just as Christchurch residents should be angry about the Bromley stench that has dragged on for years. Voting for “more competent” people probably won't fix it. It never does. What Wellingtonians, and everyone else, can do — and what the media can do — is get angry, get vocal, and shame the councils and their contractors into doing better. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the face of it, the unemployment figure out today is not good. It's gone up, it's now sitting at 5.4 percent, a high we haven't seen in almost 11 years. The last time we were anywhere near 5.4 percent was September 2015. But actually, there is a recovery story here if you look under the hood. We've added 15,000 jobs to the economy. More people want to work, too. As Infometrics points out, fewer people are sitting on the sidelines. We have fewer young people bumming around, and more of them are in work, training, or education. Most of the people who found work in the last quarter are in part‑time jobs, which suggests employers are taking a cautious chance. They're not totally convinced the recovery is locked in - not enough to offer full‑time roles - but they're confident enough to dip their toes back in. Now, I don't want to be Pollyannaish here, pretending things are fine when they're not. I don't want to oversell good news. But I do think it's worth focusing on the positive signs in these numbers to give this recovery a chance. There is enough data out there now to suggest we are on the right side of things and that the recovery is happening. But there's still a wobble, isn't there? You talk to some businesses and they're still unimpressed by what they're seeing come through the door. And I just wonder if we're holding off a little. Maybe we were spooked by the false dawn in 2025 and want to make sure this is actually the recovery we think it is. Maybe we're still unsure what the Reserve Bank is going to do. Maybe we want to get the feel of Anna Breman in her first go in a couple of weeks before we start investing money. We have good signs: consumer confidence, business confidence, GDP growth, retail spending growth, improved manufacturing numbers - the list goes on. And now add this: the detail under the unemployment number. Put that on the list, step back, and assess what really does look like a recovery, if we just give it the chance. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the face of it, the unemployment figure out today is not good. It's gone up, it's now sitting at 5.4 percent, a high we haven't seen in almost 11 years. The last time we were anywhere near 5.4 percent was September 2015. But actually, there is a recovery story here if you look under the hood. We've added 15,000 jobs to the economy. More people want to work, too. As Infometrics points out, fewer people are sitting on the sidelines. We have fewer young people bumming around, and more of them are in work, training, or education. Most of the people who found work in the last quarter are in part‑time jobs, which suggests employers are taking a cautious chance. They're not totally convinced the recovery is locked in - not enough to offer full‑time roles - but they're confident enough to dip their toes back in. Now, I don't want to be Pollyannaish here, pretending things are fine when they're not. I don't want to oversell good news. But I do think it's worth focusing on the positive signs in these numbers to give this recovery a chance. There is enough data out there now to suggest we are on the right side of things and that the recovery is happening. But there's still a wobble, isn't there? You talk to some businesses and they're still unimpressed by what they're seeing come through the door. And I just wonder if we're holding off a little. Maybe we were spooked by the false dawn in 2025 and want to make sure this is actually the recovery we think it is. Maybe we're still unsure what the Reserve Bank is going to do. Maybe we want to get the feel of Anna Breman in her first go in a couple of weeks before we start investing money. We have good signs: consumer confidence, business confidence, GDP growth, retail spending growth, improved manufacturing numbers - the list goes on. And now add this: the detail under the unemployment number. Put that on the list, step back, and assess what really does look like a recovery, if we just give it the chance. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You know what that Labour and Green Party unity news conference at Waitangi today looked like to me? It looked like desperation. Parties don't generally get other parties to stand next to them and hold their hands in an election year just to convince people to vote for them. Now, having said that, it's obviously not the first time we've seen something similar from Labour and the Greens. You'll remember that before the 2017 election, Grant Robertson and James Shaw did a similar-ish thing. They released their Budget Responsibility Rules to try to convince us they could be trusted with the Government's finances. That was an act of desperation, because they'd been battered by Steven Joyce's 'fiscal hole' allegations for so long they had to do something. And just like in 2017, this is an act of desperation, because Chippy knows his biggest problem this time around -trying to get into Government - is convincing voters that his coalition mates are not just a bunch of nut jobs, but can actually be trusted to run the country together. Which is why he left the Māori Party out of that unity press conference - because that party is chaos on stilts. The trouble for Chippy, though, is that the Greens aren't exactly the picture of internal discipline, are they? What with Golriz the thief, Bussy the awkward parent, Darleen the questionable employer, the spate of staff resignations -and that's not even mentioning the electorally toxic plans to tax us all into poverty. Chippy is off the mark if he thinks this is going to solve things for him, because the truth is his only realistic path to Government this year is with Winston Peters. Winston has said he's not going to go with Chippy, but that is still Chippy's only way back into Government. And that's where Chippy should be putting his energy - schmoozing Winston until Winston changes his mind, because Winston changing his mind is not unheard of. But doing a news conference with the Greens seems not only like a waste of time, but actually an unfortunate reminder to us all that a Chippy-led Government comes with Green-coloured baggage. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Elmero Strauss gesels met Juffrou Sonja du Plessis, graad R juffrou by Pikkie Paradys, oor die belangrikheid daarvan om kinders vroegtydig gereed te maak vir skool - emosioneel, sosiaal en akademies.

So, Fire and Emergency New Zealand has launched an investigation into the firefighter in the video with the Prime Minister. You'll know what I'm talking about, you've probably seen it already. It's been doing the rounds since Friday. It's the video of the PM touring the devastation on the East Coast last week. As he's walking back to a Defence Force helicopter, he stops to talk to a volunteer firefighter who's wearing the old high‑vis with 'Fire' written on the back. He does his political schmoozing - having the chat, getting up in the face, clapping the arm - then he heads off toward the chopper. The firefighter turns around, looks at the phone filming her and makes a crude gesture, which the Hauraki boys would describe as “feeding the birds". I saw that on Friday, I smirked, I thought, “Oh, that's a bit funny,” and then I shut it down and got on with my life. Fire and Emergency NZ, however, does not think it's funny at all. They've completely overreacted to it and, after questions from the Herald, have decided to launch an investigation into this firefighter. If they're open to taking some feedback, I would urge them to drop the investigation here. If there's been a bad call, the really bad call isn't the firefighter doing something silly in front of her mates who are filming - it's the person who put the video online, which was the truly unwise thing to do in this modern age. And it doesn't seem to be the same person, by the way, given the TikTok account is run by a man and the firefighter is a woman. But even if they were the same person, it's just really not a big deal, is it? Politicians should expect - and do expect - this kind of reaction when they go around doing their political schmoozing. And if people have a laugh about the PM doing his schmoozing, who cares? It's not threatening or intimidatory, it's just mocking. We have a shortage of volunteer firefighters in this country. We shouldn't be lifting the expectations of volunteers to the same level as what we expect from professionals to the point that volunteers are dissuaded from giving us their time, which we frankly should be grateful for. And there but for the grace of God, etc, right? Because we all do stupid things - we just hope the people around us don't put it on TikTok. I don't want to live in a world where we get investigated over something as silly as this. Hopefully they drops this investigation because surely - surely to God - Fire and Emergency NZ has more important things to do. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Now, listen — I think it's a little early in the year to be making too many predictions about election year. But having said that, I do think there is a very strong chance that Winston Peters might be the story of the year. If he carries on the way he is in the polls, he could well be in the double digits — well into the double digits — by the time November's election rolls around. He's already sitting somewhere between 10 and 12 percent in the past couple of polls, and generally minor parties go up in polling the closer we get to election day because of the extra attention they get during the campaign. Commentators are already talking about the possibility of the next government being just National and New Zealand First — no ACT in there — with the two of them together potentially being enough. That could happen if Winston keeps climbing the way he is, and obviously if National can get its act together and lift its vote share. If you don't believe it's possible that Winston will climb further, just look at what he did this week. He pulled out that classic Winston trick of whipping up the anti‑immigrant rhetoric again. I honestly didn't think there was much of that sentiment around at the moment — until he started talking, and suddenly the texts about immigrants started rolling in. Winston can sniff out an election platform like no one else. He knows there's probably an increased number of people who are gagging for a conspiracy — like “the government is trying to hide the FTA documents they're trying to roll on us". And what we were also reminded of this week is that he's completely unencumbered by the facts. A lot of what he said was just complete nonsense. Here's a question for you: if it does end up being just New Zealand First and National, and Winston is 81 years old, is this the election where he finally pushes for a turn at being Prime Minister? Like I said, he could become the story of this election year. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The thing we'd been warned about with climate change has now happened - AA Insurance has stopped offering new insurance policies for Westport because of the risk of flooding. At the very end of last year, AA Insurance wrote to the Buller District mayor advising that the company would be putting a - what they call temporary - stop to new insurance policies for properties in the 7825 postcode, which includes Westport, Carters Beach, and Cape Foulwind. If you listen to the experts, this is just the start. It's already happening in flood‑risk towns in Australia, it's now happened here, and it will keep happening until these towns find ways to keep themselves safe through measures like flood defences. You don't need me to tell you what this is going to do to property prices. They're only going in one direction - down. Not least because you need insurance to take out a mortgage. And you know what happens next, people start putting pressure on the Government to bail them out from dropping property values. They want the Government to buy their houses. They want the Government to provide insurance. Because that's what we always do when things go wrong, we turn to the Government to bail us out. But the Government absolutely should not bail out anyone. Not just because the country cannot afford it - if every homeowner who loses insurance cover because of climate change in the coming decades, or who needs to be bought out for the same reason asks for help, it will cost the country billions of dollars we simply do not have. But also because, as harsh as it sounds, if an insurance company will no longer cover your house, maybe your house should not be where it is. Maybe the insurance companies are doing us a favour by forcing us to make decisions we've been avoiding. We've been dragging our heels on this stuff for decades. But you can't argue with the market. We are still building in the wrong places - but you can't argue with the market. If insurers won't cover it, taxpayers absolutely should not. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Right, so the biggest political news of the day is that Judith Collins has announced she's retiring from politics to take up a new job as the head of the Law Commission mid‑year. I, for one, am going to miss Judith Collins being in politics, because she has that thing very few politicians have. Winston Peters has it, John Key had it - the ability to be a bit cheeky and have a laugh, but then get on and do the job. Too many politicians only have one or the other: they're either so serious about their work that they're boring, or they're having so much fun that they get distracted from the work. Collins, though, could crack a joke, smirk, raise an eyebrow, giggle, enjoy firing off a handgun - and still keep a lid on whatever portfolio she was managing that day. It hasn't always worked for her, obviously. Talofa became a meme, and praying in church during the 2020 campaign was probably one of the weirdest things you've ever seen. She was, you'd have to say, a better National Party leader on paper than in reality. But she has been the Minister of Justice, Police, Corrections, ACC, Defence, the intelligence agencies, the public service, Revenue, Ethnic Affairs, Energy, Space, and the Attorney‑General - and that's not even the comprehensive list. You don't hold that many portfolios across two different Governments without being capable, and Prime Ministers know that. But what I think Judith Collins was best at was the comeback. There was the Dirty Politics scandal a decade ago that cost her Cabinet jobs - but she made it back into Cabinet. There was the failed 2020 election campaign as leader - and she somehow managed to come back from that, something not everybody could have done. And now, finally, here in 2026, she has quit on her own terms. There's a life lesson in this for all of us - wait around long enough, do things the right way, and you'll make a comeback. And politics will be just a little less fun without Ju‑Co in it. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Right, it seems there's a very good chance that Tauranga City Council is going to have the inquiry they've launched taken off them and run by the Government instead. The Government hasn't actually said those words out loud just yet. What they have said is that there is a strong case for a Government inquiry. But you can read between the lines here - they're preparing us, and probably most importantly preparing the Tauranga City Council, for the fact that they, the Government, are going to run this inquiry. And they should be the ones running it. The council can't investigate its own actions like it's planning to do. No one is going to believe the council if it concludes the council has done nothing wrong - if you follow what I'm saying. And there are plenty of reasons to think the council may actually have done quite a lot wrong here. From the 111 call they claimed wasn't forwarded to them - until they realised, whoopsie, yes it was - through to reports that council staff were at the campground before the slip but didn't evacuate everyone, to the possibility that they were involved in clearing trees above the slip site. Now that, by the way - the trees issue - is potentially quite significant. It looks very much, if you compare the photos, like trees, probably pōhutukawa, were cleared from the site above the slip sometime between 2017 and 2019, probably to stop myrtle rust. If this is what happened - if the council stuffed up by removing trees and not replacing them, when everyone knows that plants stabilise the ground, and if the council was warned about slips in the hours before they happened and ignored those warnings, then they should carry the can for that. I have seen - and I don't know if you've been seeing this too - but I have seen too many councils, lately, get away with dropping the ball. Auckland Council having drinks while the city was flooding three years ago. Hawke's Bay Regional Council being begged to open the bar to prevent Wairoa from flooding, not opening the bar, and - guess what - Wairoa flooded. If no one is ever blamed for the things they do wrong before an event, then nothing changes. So the Government's on the right track here. They need to take over this inquiry. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We'll talk with State Senator Royce Duplessis about some community meetings he's hosting this week...and about working to help New Orleans in Baton Rouge.

First of all, can I start by offering an apology to TVNZ? I gave them a bit of grief last night for starting the news bulletin with the peaches, but it turns out I was wrong and they were right. This has sparked a flurry of debate over whether we prefer our Wattie's peaches from Hawke's Bay or whether we don't really care if it comes from China or not. It's also prompted a statement from Wattie's asking us to support local growers. In other words, can we please buy New Zealand made? Now, that is a very nice sentiment, but let's be honest, that's all it is. It is a sentiment and it's not going to work. I mean, this is me, this is not me being cavalier about how hard this must be for the Hawke's Bay peach growers who are losing their Wattie's contracts. For them, this must be absolutely devastating and I feel terrible for them. But this is me being realistic about the prospect of any 'Buy New Zealand Made' campaign working. Wattie's New Zealand peaches, according to Pak'nSave's online store, are $3.90 a can. Pam's cheap peaches are 99 cents a can. That's a no-brainer, you're gonna buy the 99 cent can. Who is buying the $3.90 can? Grey Lynn? That makes no sense whatsoever. I mean - look, maybe if I thought about it a little bit, which I don't, but if I did, maybe I would pay 10, 20 cents, 40 cents at a push, more for a New Zealand made product. But I would not pay four times as much, it's far too expensive. And I wouldn't even do it in the first place because buying New Zealand made never works, does it? It never has. If it did, we would still be wearing Bata Bullets and buying Juliet Hogan and eating Sanitarium peanut butter. We wouldn't be reading about the closure of manufacturing businesses every other month, which today, by the way, is the Carter Holt Harvey mill in Tokoroa. I do the shopping in our house 90 percent of the time and I don't even know the provenance of the food I'm buying. I do not know where the canned food comes from, I absolutely do not know where the dried goods come from. And often, I'm not even really looking where the fresh fruit comes from. Yep, I know where the meat comes from, but that's basically a given, isn't it? It's simple economics, it always will be. And even if Wattie's has this tiny little hope that there might be a last-minute public rally for the New Zealand grown peaches, I think they already know the outcome, which is why they've already cut the contracts. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's talk about this business with the pension age. Chris Luxon has said twice today that he wants the pension age to go up to 67. He said it once on Kerre's show this morning, and then at a post-Budget lunch speaking to business leaders, he repeated it and he told them that this is basically going to be election policy for National next year. Now, regardless of how you may feel about this, I mean, you'd have to be coming around to the realisation, wouldn't you, that we are inching closer and closer to this thing actually happening. Especially after the changes that the Government made to our KiwiSaver retirement funds yesterday. It's not long now. I think that the Government will have completely wound down its government support of KiwiSaver, and then it's gonna come after the pension next, isn't it? This is where I think it gets tricky, because this is not just about money for people. This is emotional. Let me lay out the emotional argument for you as it plays out in my head, okay? It goes like this: don't touch my pension. You can touch anything else. Do not touch my pension. I don't care if they take away every other piece of welfare that is available to me and other people. In fact, I would actually welcome it, because I think there is way too much welfare in this country for the middle class who don't actually need it. You get a best start payment for having a newborn. You're having a baby. They give you money. You get the winter energy payment. You get Working for Families, which I think is a crime. You get the subsidised childcare for sending your kid to kindy. You get free tertiary education for the 3rd year, God only knows why. Free government money for your KiwiSaver. Now, as far as I'm concerned, there's way too much of that stuff going on. They can take all of that away. If they don't want to take it away, they can means test it so that actually the most, and only the most needy in this country get it. But I will do everything I can to stop them touching my pension. Because I have earned that money. This is not a question about whether I need that money, it is that I have earned that money. I, like you, have contributed huge amounts of tax to this country, and actually I have not claimed very much back for myself. It's certainly not anywhere near how much I have put in. The only thing that stops me from being very sour about how much money they take out of my pay packet every year and the wasting of that money and the bludging by some on that money is the knowledge that when I hit 65 and want to retire, I will get a little bit back. Call it a goodwill gesture from the government, if you like, a government who I have helped prop up just like you have for donkeys' years, by the time that money comes into my bank account. So, good luck to Chris Luxon getting this one across the line. I think it's going to be one of the hardest fights to win because of the emotional argument that I have just laid out for you. I think they might find it easier to take away a lot of other welfare first. And unless they take away a lot of other welfare first, I am not budging on the pension.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

'Rotten, corrupt': Tiki Taane takes aim at Spotify as Kiwi artists boycott platform Many of New Zealand's biggest musicians are boycotting Spotify and ditching the platform amid accusations of exploitation. Tiki Taane and The Bats are among the big names getting behind Boycott Spotify NZ and other Kiwi bands like Carb on Carb, Synthetic Children and Recitals have signed the statement calling for better treatment. Taane has cited greed, corruption and investment in European defence technology company Helsing as some of the key reasons why he's walking away. "I love music, I love creating music, but I also have to take a stand against corruption, against greed, against war, against murder - the easiest thing for me to do to help support that is to take my music off the platform and cancel my subscription." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Don't forget to Like & Subscribe to GET SIMPLIFIED!In this episode, the Simple Men welcome #5 ranked 185lbs UFC fighter, Brendan Allen to Austin, TX. Join the guys as they discuss Allen's origin story, previous fights, and potential upcoming fights!Find us on Instagram:@thesimplemanpodcast @simplemanmartialarts@bjjdamien@nickyrod247@ethan.crelinsten@nickyryanbjj@b_allen185@allywolskiMerchwww.simplemanma.myshopify.comMarek Health:

We return to the podcast circuit in 2026 to examine Scott Galloway: NYU professor, prolific podcaster, and, more recently, part-time life coach for struggling young men.Joining him on an episode of Modern Wisdom with Chris Williamson, we are invited into one of the few remaining forbidden conversational spaces: men, masculinity, and men's problems. You may have been misled by the relentless popularity of Joe Rogan, Modern Wisdom, The Tucker Carlson Show, Triggernometry, The Diary of a CEO, Huberman Lab, and several dozen adjacent properties into thinking these topics are already discussed at length on a near-weekly basis. Alas, this turns out to be a dangerous illusion.In reality, even mentioning men's issues requires an extended ritual acknowledgement of women, failure to perform which risks immediate cancellation. Braving these cultural headwinds, we wade into manly dialogue about masculinity, sex differences, and male malaise. Along the way, we ponder the intricacies of culture war evolutionary psychology, anthropological wars over Man the Hunter, optimised dosages for manly whingeing, and whether making boys learn French verb conjugations qualifies as a human rights abuse.So get your notebooks ready for some important notes from two of the most masculine men in the modern male podcasting space. Men...LinksModern Wisdom: The War On Men Isn't Helping Anyone - Scott GallowayThe Diary of a CEO: Scott Galloway: We're Raising The Most Unhappy Generation In History! Hard Work Doesn't Build WealthAcademic papers ReferencedChanges in gender-based hiring bias (large meta-analysis): Schaerer, M., Du Plessis, C., Nguyen, M. H. B., Van Aert, R. C., Tiokhin, L., Lakens, D., … Gender Audits Forecasting Collaboration. (2023). On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 179, 104280.Epidemiology of alcohol use disorder by marital status (US, NESARC-III): Grant, B. F., Goldstein, R. B., Saha, T. D., et al. (2015). Epidemiology of DSM-5 Alcohol Use Disorder: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III. JAMA Psychiatry, 72(8), 757–766.Protective effects of marriage on life expectancy (US Medicare sample): Jia, H., & Lubetkin, E. I. (2020). Life expectancy and active life expectancy by marital status among older US adults: Results from the US Medicare Health Outcome Survey (HOS). SSM – Population Health, 12, 100642.Widowhood and well-being (contrary to claims of increased happiness): Adena, M., Hamermesh, D., Myck, M., & Oczkowska, M. (2023). Home alone: Widows' well-being and time. Journal of Happiness Studies, 24(2), 813–838.Meta-analysis of the widowhood effect on mortality (men and women): Shor, E., Roelfs, D. J., Curreli, M., Clemow, L., Burg, M. M., & Schwartz, J. E. (2012). Widowhood and mortality: A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Demography, 49(2), 575–606.Marriage and life satisfaction across the life course (multi-country): Mikucka, M. (2016). The life satisfaction advantage of being married and gender specialization....

Dans cet épisode solo, j'analyse le parcours de Ludovic du Plessis et Champagne Telmont, une maison centenaire reprise avec une promesse aussi simple que radicale : faire le meilleur champagne possible, sans compromis environnemental.Leur secret ? Une mission qui tranche, des décisions visibles (même quand ça bouscule les codes) et 5 leviers concrets que vous pouvez appliquer dès aujourd'hui pour construire un projet solide, aligné… et durable.Au programme :Clarifier sa mission pour qu'elle serve de boussole et accélère toutes les décisionsChoisir le bon véhicule et les bons alliés pour aller plus vite (reprise, partenaires, distribution, réseau)Transformer ses convictions en choix concrets : retirer le superflu pour investir dans l'essentielPiloter sur 3 tableaux : business, qualité, impact avec 1 indicateur clair pour chacunNe pas construire seul : équipe + réseau comme actifs stratégiques pour débloquer des étapesUn épisode 100% actionnable pour tout entrepreneur ou toute entrepreneure qui veut concilier ambition, exigence produit et impact.Bonne écoute !

Le bleu, sans rendre amoureux comme le chante Michel Louvain, c'est quand même la couleur préférée des Occidentaux. Mais, pourquoi ? Script: Geneviève C. Bergeron https://www.facebook.com/genevieve.bergeron.3194 Montage  @DEADWILL  Adhérez à cette chaîne pour obtenir des avantages : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4TCCaX-gqBNkrUqXdgGRA/join Pour soutenir la chaîne, au choix: 1. Cliquez sur le bouton « Adhérer » sous la vidéo. 2. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/hndl Musique issue du site : epidemicsound.com Images provenant de https://www.storyblocks.com Abonnez-vous à la chaine: https://www.youtube.com/c/LHistoirenousledira Les vidéos sont utilisées à des fins éducatives selon l'article 107 du Copyright Act de 1976 sur le Fair-Use. Sources et pour aller plus loin: Pastoureau, Michel. Rouge : histoire d'une couleur. Paris, Points, 2020, p.17. Pastoureau, Michel. Bleu : histoire d'une couleur. Paris, Points, 2020, p. 40 Pastoureau, Michel. Noir : histoire d'une couleur. Paris, Points, 2020, p. 86. Pastoureau, Michel. Blanc : histoire d'une couleur. Paris, Seuil, 2022 Mollard-Desfour, Annie. Dictionnaire de la couleur, mots et expressions d'aujourd'hui, XXe-XXIe. Le bleu. Paris, CNRS éditions, 2013, p. xxix. St Clair, Kassia. Secret Lives of Colour. John Murray Ltd., 2019, p.181. p. 189-192. Pastoureau, Michel et Dominique Simonnet. Le petit livre des couleurs. Paris, Éditions du Panama, 2005, Couleur https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couleur Mollard-Desfour, Annie. Dictionnaire de la couleur, mots et expressions d'aujourd'hui, XXe-XXIe. Le bleu. Paris, CNRS éditions, 2013, p. xxiv-xxv. Explication de l'axe blanc vs noir et de l'ajout du bleu au Moyen Age. Ça vient des Météorologiques: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9t%C3%A9orologiques_(Aristote) Pastoureau, Michel et Dominique Simonnet. Le petit livre des couleurs. Paris, Éditions du Panama, 2005, p. 17 L'art gothique (notions avancées) https://www.alloprof.qc.ca/fr/eleves/bv/histoire/l-art-gothique-notions-avancees-h1285 Les vitraux, symboles du divin LE VITRAIL, UN ART DE LUMIÈRE https://www.saint-denis-basilique.fr/decouvrir/les-vitraux-symboles-du-divin Histoire de la Sainte-Chapelle https://www.sainte-chapelle.fr/decouvrir/histoire-de-la-sainte-chapelle La Leçon d'anatomie du docteur Tulp octobre 1998 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Le%C3%A7on_d%27anatomie_du_docteur_Tulp DIGITAL COLLECTION https://sammlung.staedelmuseum.de/en/work/the-interior-of-the-oude-kerk-in-delft Marc Chagall https://www.marcchagall.com/fr/decouverte/themes/reve/paysage-bleu-1949 Femme en bleu lisant une lettre https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Femme_en_bleu_lisant_une_lettre Jacob Christophe Le Blon https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Christoph_Le_Blon Guillemette, Mélissa. « Le bleu », Les années lumières, Radio-Canada, 15 août 2021. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/ohdio/premiere/emissions/les-annees-lumiere/segments/rattrapage/1672614/chronique-couleur-avec-melissa-guillemette-bleu La société sous Duplessis https://www.alloprof.qc.ca/fr/eleves/bv/histoire/la-societe-sous-duplessis-h1645 Blue Monday (jour) https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Monday_(jour) Heure bleue https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heure_bleue Sang bleu https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sang_bleu Les Schtroumpfs https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Schtroumpfs Mollard-Desfour, Annie, Bénédicte Rivière et Blexbolex. De vert de rage à rose bonbon. Toutes les couleurs de notre langue. Paris, Albin Michel jeunesse, 2006, p. 11. Autoportrait avec palette https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoportrait_avec_palette Période bleue https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A9riode_bleue Salon bleu https://www.assnat.qc.ca/fr/patrimoine/lexique/salon-bleu.html Caron, Barbara-Judith. « 140 ans après son apparition, le bleu de méthylène intrigue toujours », Moteur de recherche, Radio-Canada, 24 mars 2025. Autres références disponibles sur demande. #histoire #documentaire #couleur #bleu #blue #pigment #indigo #colors

It's that time of the year where we pick our politician of the year. For me, it's the same person as last year. Political commentators, myself included at times, have an unfortunate tendency to sometimes choose politicians because they're good at playing the political game. And if you're into that, you might pick Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke for collecting her Time magazine award. Or Chris Hipkins for resurrecting his party's fortunes from a horror 2023 election result. Or Labour's Arena Williams for giving good speeches, or Shane Jones for getting attention. But at a time when we all acknowledge our country is in a bit of a polycrisis, slipping further behind the pack, I think the most important measure is not whether a politician is good at politics, it's whether a politician is making a difference. And no other politician is making as big a difference as quickly, in an area as important, as Erica Stanford. Already kids are learning more than they have been for years. The results from her phonics changes a couple of months ago were so dramatic a staff member in her office burst into tears. She's doing this despite increased resistance from teachers' unions. Parents are raving and teachers themselves are noticing the difference. Nothing is more important than our kids and educating them properly. And on the politics, she can play politics as well as anyone. You watch closely as her opponents learn that lesson. Just ask Willow-Jean Prime. So, Erica Stanford it is. Because nothing beats having a good idea, being brave enough to execute it and helping to turn this country around. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Surely that judge throwing out the election result in Auckland has started the clock ticking on postal voting. This case may not seem a big deal given that it involves just 79 votes, in just one subdivision, in just one relatively small local board election in Auckland. But the 79 may just be the tip of the iceberg. It may be that hundreds of ballot papers in that subdivision were stolen from letterboxes, filled in and sent in as legit votes. Now Ken Turner from the Waitakere's is also considering legal options because he reckons something funny happened with 212 votes in his election too. None of this is a surprise to me because years ago when friends of mine were flatting, as happens, mail turned up for previous tenants. Some of that mail was voting papers. So my friends filled the papers in and sent them all back in as legitimate votes and no one ever got in trouble for it. We all know the mail voting system is ripe for being gamed. But perhaps in our naivety we hadn't imagined it would go from a bunch of silly flatties to what seems like may have been an orchestrated rigging of an election. Postal voting should go the way of the horse and cart. It's not the only reason so many of us can't be bothered with council elections, but it is a significant part of it. You get the mail, pop it on the counter, forget about it, find it after election day is well past, or find it too hard to remember where to find a post box. Not only does it make it harder to vote, it also makes it harder to trust the election outcome. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's no surprise that Nicola Willis has pushed out surplus by another year. That now makes it three years in two years, as in she has delayed surplus by three years in just the space of the two years she's been at the Finance Minister's desk. Had she kept her pledge, the one she made about tidying up this country's books when asking for our votes in 2023, we would be seeing a surplus next year. Now it's 2029 at the earliest. Getting our books back in order is important if we don't want our kids to pack up and leave for Australia when they're old enough to. Nicola can blame everyone from Treasury to Trump if she wants, but she has not done enough to get us back to surplus. She has defended, and kept, Jacinda's wasteful policy of paying for one free year for university students. The policy has been repeatedly criticised as a flop that doesn't actually make anyone go to university. Cutting that would save us in the vicinity of $1 billion over four years. She has given welfare to households on more than $200,000 a year by giving them money for childcare. People on that kind of coin don't need benefits. Cutting that would save $1 billion in a little over five years. She still hasn't cut or income tested the Winter Energy Payment, which is going to people who are still in the workforce and being set aside for nice trips to Fiji. Cutting that would save $1 billion in less than two years. Trimming it would save less, but it would save something. She has cut 2000 public servants when Grant and Jacinda added 14,000. Be in no doubt - money is tight. But there is still a lot of waste that could be cut if Nicola Willis was brave enough. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ludovic du Plessis donne un conseil clé qu'il martèle à ses équipes comme aux étudiants : pour réussir, il ne suffit pas d'avoir une “jambe business” et une “jambe marketing”. Même en courant très vite, il y aura toujours quelqu'un de plus rapide. Ce qui fait réellement la différence, c'est le réseau pas un réseau “pour le réseau”, mais l'intelligence de bien s'entourer, de construire des relations utiles et solides dès le plus tôt possible.Un rappel puissant : un bon network peut devenir un accélérateur de carrière et vous faire “brûler 10 étapes”. À découvrir dans l'épisode complet.

This business of Australia tightening up its gun laws feels like it runs the risk of distracting from the bigger problems over there. I don't think guns were the problem on Sunday. Australia already has some of the tightest gun laws in the world. This is a race relations problem. This attack was predictable. There was no shortage of warnings. Jewish businesses have been set alight in recent years, synagogues have been attacked, obviously Jewish people have been hassled, Israeli people have been denied customer service in Melbourne, cars have been set alight in an anti-Semitic attack and two nurses in Sydney lost their jobs for bragging on TikTok that they would kill Jewish patients. There is a timeline on Time magazine's website of all the events leading up to Sunday that is confronting. The Albanese Government knew there was a problem brewing. They asked the special envoy on anti-Semitism to give them a set of recommendations. For the last six months they've had those recommendations and done nothing. So, tightening up gun laws is never a bad thing. Checking in on a licence holder every few years rather than never must be a good thing. But if the Aussies think that's the fix for what just happened, they are misguided and allowing themselves to be distracted. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you weren't already feeling confident about 2026, I've got two reasons you should. At least two major retail banks see signs of an economic recovery and we have a new Reserve Bank Governor. No pressure on Anna Breman, but she hasn't arrived a day too soon given that the old lot were still managing to stuff things up until literally the last chance they had, with Christian Hawkesby saying the wrong thing and sending wholesale market rates, and therefore fixed term interest rates, up by 30 basis points. To be fair to him, he was only the fill in. And if we're honest with ourselves it's more hope than certainty that the Swedish import will be any better than Hawkesby or Adrian Orr. But then again you could argue it really would be hard to be worse given the last four years. But we're here for the good news. The good news is that Anna Breman arriving as the new broom coincides with ASB, and now Kiwibank, all saying it's on. They're seeing signs of a recovery for 2026. Kiwibank's call arguably matters more than the others because they've been the gloomiest. They were calling for more rate cuts than the Reserve Bank was prepared for. They were warning it was more grim out there than the Wellington bankers realised. They were right. So here's hoping they are right again when they say sales are already up, and when sales go up, everything else follows. House prices are up 2-3% next year. The economy is growing 2.4% and then it's 3% the next year. I don't know about you but that combo - a new person in charge of the central bank and growing consensus that the recovery is now on - is probably the best Christmas present i could wish for. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Time Magazine has just named its Person of the Year for 2025. And it's not a single person. It is "the architects" of AI. The magazine says "no one" had as great an impact this year than the people “who imagined, designed, and built AI". This was the year that we stopped talking about how clunky AI is and instead started sprinting to deploy it as fast as possible. And now the risk-averse are no longer in the driver's seat. Which may be true, but the risk averse are still a really big proportion of us, aren't they? I think there are broadly three categories of people when it comes to AI; 1) The ones using it, 2) The ones apathetic about it and waiting to be convinced that they need it, 3) The ones terrified of it. It's the terrified ones that fascinate me. They're the unions convinced AI will take jobs. They're the 47% of Kiwis who don't trust companies to use AI ethically. They're the rule-lovers who want the Government to set up more rules for AI. They're the artists and musicians who are pretending that they can stop AI learning from (they call it stealing) their ideas. They're the people complaining that AI photos and videos and songs are somehow evil and misleading. Resisting AI is not a strategy. It's happening and it's not going away. Resisting it is like a repeat of the resistance towards the computer decades ago, which even Time magazine called a fad at the end. The way to deal with AI is to accept it's going to fundamentally change everything and then figure out how to make that work for you. A case in point is Disney today giving OpenAI permission to use its characters, like Star Wars characters, to make videos. Like Mark Cuban said on the show yesterday, AI is going to be big, and we have no idea how big yet. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So, to the Nicola Willis v Ruth Richardson debate. Here's a challenge to Nicola Willis: do it this year. Do it next week. I'm hearing that having challenged Ruth Richardson to the debate, Willis' office would prefer to do it next year. I can understand why. By next year the momentum will be gone and we'll all have moved on to other things and it, probably, won't get as big of an audience. Next week though is a big week. The Government is opening its books. It sounds like Nicola might be pushing out surplus, again, for the second time in two years. Then we've got the GDP number and that's coming off the back of the Taxpayer's Union campaign calling her out for her big spending, which kicks off today. So next week there's much more energy around a debate. If it's pushed out to next year, I would read it as the first sign of losing courage. And if I was cynical, it's the first sign of them hoping this will fizzle and die because frankly, it was a political mistake to challenge Ruth Richardson to a debate. Regardless of what you think of her, Ruth can article all the problems with Nicola's big spending budgets and debt gathering in a way that most members of the media can't, which is to say she will mount a case that Nicola is spending too much and taking us down exactly the same path of economic trouble that Grant started us on. And I suspect that will convince a lot of voters that we have a problem here. And we do. We have a problem when we have a government that promised to cut spending and yet spends more than Grant and will, by mid next year, have taken on $45 billion more in debt, which will by then account for almost a quarter of our total debt. This is an important debate, because what is more important for a government to do well than run the country's books? So, next week? How about it? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Cast your mind back a couple of weeks to what the boss of Auckland Port Roger Gray said. He told us New Zealand is a country that says 'no' so often, Miami cruise bosses he spoke to had taken to calling us 'No Zealand'. Yesterday the Government unveiled its plan for how we stop that, which is a rewrite of the RMA because the RMA is part of the problem. It has turned 'no' into an art form in this country. No to your new deck, no to that road, no to you putting a door on the side of the house rather than the front of the house. We are a country the size of Japan geographically, yet we have 1200 planning zones each with its own unique, bespoke set of rules, while Japan has 13 zones. Chris Bishop's proposal is to take that 1200 and drop it down to 17. It's still more than Japan, but about a 98.5% reduction, which can't be sniffed at. So prolific and ridiculous are the stories that we can all tell about our encounters with the RMA that I think you'd struggle to find anyone who opposes change. The trouble has always been agreeing on what change looks like and that is no different this time around. This RMA reform is welcome, overdue, brave, and almost certainly going to help the country grow. But mark my words: it will create all kinds of political problems. Just look at the case of Auckland and Wellington. Both cities need to build more houses but the minute the rules change to make that a reality, the nimbys start complaining. And that will happen with the RMA. Because sure, your property rights are being strengthened so you can do what you want on your property. But it's the same for your neighbour, which means if he wants to build that big whatever you have to look at, you might not be able to say no. None of us want to lose our views, have a road running right next to us or want the infrastructure development to kill the precious, indigenous snail. And those things might happen because we are all losing some of our ability to say no. Now, I think that's a good thing. There's been too much 'no', clearly, otherwise we wouldn't be 'No Zealand'. But saying yes will take some getting used to. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So tomorrow's the big day, isn't it? And it is, I think, not an overstatement to say that the eyes of the world, well, at least politicians around the world, are going to be on Australia and whether the social media ban will actually work. And that is still a live question, isn't it? We're less than 24 hours from the thing taking effect and none of us can totally say for sure that we know it's going to work. For two reasons: one, it's the internet, so there's always a workaround out there. And two, it involves kids, and if there's a workaround, kids will find the workaround. I'm going to call it for you now: it's not going to work, if your definition of working is that 100% of children under 16 get kicked off and stay off until they're 16. But I think it is possible that it is going to work if your definition is a little bit more flexible, which is that most kids get kicked off and stay off because their parents force them to do it. And I think that is the key thing here, like it always is, parents getting involved. Talking about whether it works or not, actually I think kind of misses the point here, which is that this gives parents something that they haven't had yet, which is permission to keep their kids off social media. Because what parents have been finding is it's very hard to keep 14 year old Susie off social media, off Facebook, off Instagram, off TikTok, off Snapchat, because all Susie's friends are on it. And if Susie's not on it, then she becomes the weird kid, and nobody wants their kid to be the weird kid, right? So you relent and you let Susie on it. This has the potential to flip all of that pressure around. Now everyone's off. Now the kid that's on it, little Johnny's on it, Susie comes home and says, oh Johnny's on TikTok, can I go on TikTok? You go, no, Johnny's a naughty kid from a family that has no rules, no boundaries, no discipline. Susie, you've got boundaries and discipline your parents care about, you stay off. It gives permission for the parents to be able to do that kind of thing. And if you're a parent, you know peer pressure is massive, isn't it? Especially in the teenage years. The Aussie government's doing its bit by bringing us to this point. The tech companies are being dragged into doing their bit and ultimately this will live or die in Australia based on whether Australian parents do their bit and actually step up to the plate and parent properly. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

La balado reçoit le professeur-agrégé Jonathan Durand-Folco pour une plongée dans son dernier essai Le fascisme tranquille: Affronter la nouvelle vague autoritaire paru chez Écosociété. La discussion permet d'aborder la démarche intellectuelle qui guide l'auteur alors qu'il tente de comprendre les mécanismes qui préludent à l'instauration de l'autoritarisme dans la vie démocratique américaine et québécoise. 

Originally broadcast November 6, 2025 Intimate partner violence affects more women in the United States than breast cancer and diabetes combined. Health care providers can be a lifeline for survivors, yet many still struggle to know how to talk about it or where to begin. In this Conversations on Health Care episode, hosts Mark Masselli and Margaret Flinter speak with Virginia Duplessis, associate director at Futures Without Violence and director of the National Health Resource Center on Domestic Violence. Duplessis... Read More Read More The post Intimate Partner Violence: Health Care Providers' Role appeared first on Healthy Communities Online.

Brendan Schaub recaps UFC 319 Khamzat Chimaev vs Dricus Du Plessis and explains why DDP will never beat Khamzat Chimaev, how other fighters have only one way of beating Khamzat, how Khamzat's win might seem boring to some but it's no different than MLB pitchers pitching a shutout, how Brendan personally witnessed Khamzat finishing world class wrestlers/fighters in his camp, Aaron Pico's UFC debut being so good but can't get over the heap of fighting top tier fighters, why fighters from other organizations almost always get destroyed by UFC fighters, Dana White saying Jon Jones fighting at the White House is a one in a billion shot, this weekend's UFC China card with Johnny Walker fighting Zhang Mingyang and much more.Shopify - https://shopify.com/schaubMint Mobile - Get your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at https://mintmobile.com/schaubProgressive - https://www.progressive.com/Drive Fast All Gas Giveaway - Enter to win my Custom 800+ Horsepower RAM TRX + $10K cash: https://drivefastallgas.com/collections/new-releasesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We're on the road and we missed Hard Knocks but we're talking some ball with some NFL futures and Michael Porter Jr is addicted to women (00:00:00-00:24:41). Hot Seat/Cool Throne including John Mateers venmo transactions and Shohei getting sued (00:24:41-00:50:46). Mt Rushmore of unsexy things that we find sexy (00:50:46-01:11:13). A Special Guest joins the show to hang out, talk football, hottest guys in Hollywood and more (01:11:13-01:25:12). Dricus Du Plessis joins us in studio to talk about his upcoming fight at UFC 319, trash talking, how long we could last in a fight against him, his style and tons more (01:25:12-02:07:51). Dana White joins the show to talk about the massive deal with UFC and Paramount Plus, UFC 319, getting oiled up and more (02:07:51-02:30:02). We finish with listener submitted pardon your takes (02:30:02-02:42:19).You can find every episode of this show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or YouTube. Prime Members can listen ad-free on Amazon Music. For more, visit barstool.link/pardon-my-take