Podcast appearances and mentions of Grant Robertson

Unions charge like wounded bulls for their services. And they claim they're in it for the workers. They care about workers' pay and conditions so much, they're worked their way up the union ranks to help those at the bottom. But then once they get a bit of profile. They jump ship to the Labour party, their good mates. Craif Rennie - flits between the CTU and Grant Robertson's office - has been selected to run in Wellington Bays. Fleur Fitzsimons - who tried but failed to get elected for Labour. She's surely trying to weasel her way back on to a list. Michael Wood - he wants back in. You see, Unions are simply not the premiere league. They're the equivalent of the bench for Labour's caucus. It's the place you go to keep your profile up while you wait for another turn at sucking from the public tit. There's nothing particularly wrong with this. But if you're a low-wage worker who believes these people are your champions and are in for you. For negotiating hard with your employers. For doing the mahi. And then you realise, actually, they've just been using your plight to feather their nest at the beehive, wouldn't you be a bit pissed off? Not all union members are Lefties. Sure, many of them are. But most just want a fair deal and decent spokesperson. Not a bunch of political wannabes doing dress ups waiting for their time in the national spotlight. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A little bit husky, a little bit hoarse, not as bad as Heather, but a little bit husky from belting out the classics at Eden Park last night with Metallica. Oh my god. Oh my god. What a show. What an event for the city. If you were there, you know, and you'll still be buzzing, and you will still think that is one of the best concerts you've ever been to. I used to quite like Metallica. I mean, you can't grow up in the 80s and not know who they are and not appreciate them as a consummate as consummate performance, but I wasn't a die-hard fan. I went down after work yesterday to get some merch because I was taking my eight-year-old grandson to the show last night because he loves them. I thought I like them, I'll go, I'll get him a T-shirt. A three-hour queue to get the merch! And the town was heaving with people in Metallica T-shirts, and I thought, wow who on earth would queue for three hours? Who would travel from the far ends of the country and from across the Tasman to go to Metallica? After that show last night, I'll tell you who will be queuing for three hours, me, I will be. I've gone from they're good to oh my god. And I've got all of these years of music to catch up on. How fabulous. And just for the vibrancy it brought to the city. And I have to say Eden Park, and a number of us at ZB were invited along by Eden Park, so bear that in mind when I say what I say, but Eden Park is a fantastic venue. Everybody it seemed had great seats. The show itself, the stage was amazing. There were no problems for us getting out. We walked for 15 minutes, got picked up by his dad and out we went. The crowd was lovely. Honestly, I could rave all morning, but I'm not going to. I shan't. It was amazing and perhaps we can compare notes a little later. We do have news to talk about. And finally, finally, finally after years of wrangling, and after years of cost blowouts, and after years of political infighting, ladies and gentlemen, we have two new ferries. Well, not exactly – we have a contract for two new ferries. And yes, wait, yes, we did have a contract for two new ferries with the South Korean shipyard. That contract got torn up. Now we have a new contract for two new ferries with a Chinese shipbuilder. Port infrastructure will have to be rebuilt to accommodate the larger ferries while much of the Wellington side infrastructure can be rebuilt and upgraded. Picton they'll need new stuff, Wellington they can make do. And that's where the real savings are to be had for the taxpayer. The new ferries will be hybrids, able to switch between using diesel and electric power, and will have more capacity for trucks and rail wagons that exist at present. Winston Peters, who's been all over this from day one, said the new no-nonsense infrastructure programme was helping save the taxpayer money when the two ships enter service in 2029. The iRex project, that was the one ditched by the Coalition Government when it came to office, which included substantial costs for landside infrastructure, had ballooned to approximately $3 billion at the time of its cancellation. In 2023, Treasury officials said, yes, we know it looks like $3 billion, we think it could be more like $4 billion when we look at the cost overruns, when we benchmark it against average cost overruns and other similar projects. When even Grant Robertson, the former Finance Minister, says, oh no, we're spending way too much money, this is very concerning. When he says that, you know that it's getting out of control. There was no guarantee it was going to be around $4 billion. And the problem seems to have been, rather than delivering the much oft-quoted phrase of Nicola Willis', a Toyota Corolla, under the spell of the former government, there were consultants and officials going, oh my god, we can build a state-of-the-art shipping infrastructure within New Zealand, and it's going to have all the bells and whistles and the very latest technology, and yes, we do have to build completely new infrastructure to service it, but my god, can we look what we can do. And they were given full rein to go off and design something and create something really beautiful that just kept getting more and more expensive. The new ferries are expected to replace the current fleet by the end of 2029, and possibly there will be cost overruns, and possibly it won't be 2029. I spoke to the chair of Ferry Holdings, Chris Mackenzie before we came on air, wait till you hear the attitude he takes, the pragmatic, no-nonsense, no-frills, let's just get the job done approach. That's what was needed and that's what we've got. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour released some policies yesterday. Very late in the piece, and you can kind of see why. Just like that, we're back to 2017 with a cut and paste of lofty rhetoric, promises to spend lots of money, and little to no detail. It's a dud, I think it's fair to say. And it's not just me saying that. Oh, we'd expect you to say that, you hate Labour. No, I don't hate Labour. I just hate really, really dumb ideas. I hate the fact that they think that we're all idiots. I hate the fact that they're relying on the fact we have short memories. I hate the fact that apparently, they have been working on this idea since 2017, and this is all they can come up with. When you have Radio New Zealand's political analysts calling it a flop, it's a flop. You know, they are about as sympathetic as you can possibly get. Basically, if you missed it yesterday, it was the announcement of a Future Fund. The Future Fund will sit alongside and be operated by the New Zealand Super Fund, with the Minister of Finance acting as the sole shareholder. Chris Hipkins (and this terrifies me), Chris Hipkins said the policy would be one of the cornerstones of the next Labour government. We want to back New Zealand businesses and invest in New Zealand. We need to see more of our wealth being invested back here in New Zealand rather than flowing overseas. So by using some of our existing public assets, our existing state assets, putting them into a Future Fund, using the returns from them to reinvest in growing New Zealand businesses, we can create jobs and keep more wealth here at home. You're putting in $200 million in cash. Are you also putting in assets? That's right. So we're not being specific right now on which companies, which, you know, existing companies would go in because there are market disclosure issues and so on. Some of those are pub, you know, partially publicly listed companies. But we'll set all of that out in government. Set all of that out in government. Just trust us. We're not going to give you any detail. We'll just trust us to fix it in government. There is so much wrong with this thought bubble policy, I don't know where to start, so I'll let Chris Bishop do it. I thought it was a bit of a brain fart put to paper. I mean, honestly, like I had a read of it. Like my like there's more detail on my Uber Eats order than there is in what they've put in their document. I mean, honestly, it's just it's 11 pages - three of them are photos. One of them is like something that you take out of a clip art manual and chuck on the front page. I mean, honestly, it's there's nothing there. No, there's not. As Nat Rad said, Labour is most vulnerable to the criticism around the thin details, as it feeds National's well-established attack line that Labour is all slogans, no substance. The policy documents came with no figures and no list of assets. And that glib Chris Hipkins, ‘I will fix that in government', really? How did that work out last time? Not so well. To think that Grant Robertson began work on the Future Fund in 2017. Even allowing for the COVID years, that is the best they can do. Another concern is, as the PM pointed out, those crown assets provide profits that fund health and education. If the money is being diverted to the fund, where will the shortfall in funding come from? Probably increased taxation. And that's fine, but give us the details so that we can then make an assessment on it. If you're going to get the extra funding through a capital gains tax or through raising income tax or whatever - tell us, and then we can decide whether that's where we want the money to go. Is there even a need for this fund to back New Zealand businesses? What is this trope that, plucky little New Zealanders have to have a stake in amazingly successful New Zealand businesses? The CEO of Icehouse was on with Mike this morning, and he pointed out that capital investors are always available for good ideas. There is no shortage of professional investors awash with money who know a good idea when they see one and will pay for it. Is it the government's business to be picking winners when it comes to SMEs? Didn't work with the DFC, which was created in the 60s, the Development Finance Corporation, to support industrial development in New Zealand through loans and equity. It failed spectacularly in the late 80s, costing the country billions. Pattrick Smellie from BusinessDesk says Labour's claim that their future fund is comparable to Singapore's state investment house Temasek is completely and utterly unsustainable. Temasek has a mandate to trade in its assets and to invest offshore. Labour's proposal doesn't contemplate, he says, either of those things. He writes, the party remains wedded to an approach to public ownership that traps New Zealand in restricted choices about capital deployment, constrained returns, and a strategic straitjacket that says if the state already owns something, it should automatically continue to do so. The real concern here is that Labour is not worried about what informed commentators, like Pattrick Smellie, have to say about its policies. They don't care. Because they know that the vast majority of the voting public don't care. They're backing on people having short memories of its complete and utter ineptitude and failure to deliver on almost every metric the last time it was in government. All people know right now is that they're hurting. They're still hurting. This coalition government isn't setting them a fire. This coalition government promised a lot and really has yet to deliver. And I, you know, I know it's going to take time. But Labour is quite right to back on the fact that the vast majority of people just don't care. They won't read the detail. They won't even know that there is detail to look for. They won't even know that there is no detail. I think Pattrick Smellie put it brilliantly too. “The Labour proposal of the Future Fund suggests either that the party is economically illiterate or that its target audience is presumed to be”. Which is so true. The Future Fund criticises New Zealand Super Fund for only investing 11% of its assets in New Zealand. As Pattrick Smellie points out, the reason for that, and you know and I know, but the vast majority don't, is that the Super Fund's job is to fund pensions and get the best possible results from its investable capital, which means not overexposing itself to a small, vulnerable economy like New Zealand's. It is basic risk management. But no, this cornerstone of the next Labour government criticises the Super Fund for not investing all of the funds in New Zealand. It is really concerning if this is the best they can do. They know that everybody who cares has been waiting to hear what its policy is going to be so we can compare and contrast. The coalition government has not set us on fire -okay, let's see what Labour can do. Wow. That's it. That is simply not good enough, and it is quite frankly, for those of us who care, terrifying. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Grant Robertson on Anything Could Happen: In Conversation at Dunedin Writers and Readers Festival 2025 by Jack Knowles on Radio One 91FM Dunedin

Now, we need to talk about the Reserve Bank's excuses for how it completely stuffed up its job and let inflation get away on it during Covid. We spoke about this on the show yesterday, it's done the review and it says, quote, - "in hindsight, an earlier and more aggressive tightening might have reduced inflation sooner." Yeah. Really, Sherlock? But this would have been difficult given the data available at the time. Now, basically what they're saying is: yeah, we could have done better if we could see what was happening at the time, but we couldn't see what was happening at the time. Which is a crock, isn't it? Because there were people who could see at the time what was happening, and they said so. They said it publicly, they said the Reserve Bank needs to start tightening up - in some cases, months, if not even more than a year, before they did. I mean, the New Zealand Initiative first identified that Covid could cause inflation in April 2022 - that's a year and a half before the Reserve Bank started tightening. Brad Olsen called on them to start lifting the OCR in July 2021, that's about three months before they started. They started in October 2021. Now, that's good on them for - at that point - starting to move, but they were doing it. They were pumping the brake ever so slightly while still pushing the accelerator in a big way, because they did not stop pumping the economy and they kept their cheap money for banks program going all the while. In February 2022, the following year, the New Zealand Initiative was warning them and saying - hey, listen, this inflation is a thing here. But that lending continued, that cheap money to the banks continued all the way through to December 2022. When it stopped, inflation was already at 7.2 percent, which is nutso. Now, to be fair to the Reserve Bank, it wasn't just their fault. Grant Robertson was doing a fair bit, right? He was spending like crazy, and even though he was warned by Treasury, he just kept on spending too. But that doesn't exonerate the Reserve Bank, it just makes their job harder. But they cannot pretend that they didn't see what was happening, because others did see what was happening, and they needed to see what was happening - because that is what they are paid for. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How is it that we are having a conversation today about whether Nicola Willis needs to quit her portfolio because of yesterday's shock GDP number? This is crazy. What happened yesterday is not Nicola Willis's fault. It is the Reserve Bank's fault. It is not a matter of opinion. It is a fact. The Reserve Bank ratcheted up the official cash rate to slow down the economy and engineer a recession, to quote Adrian Orr. It's what he wanted to do. It is what he has actually done successfully. We now have had an enormous recession, and we are struggling to come out of that. That is not Nicola Willis's fault. Now, sure, I can lay some blame at Nicola Willis's feet. I can blame Nicola Willis for not doing enough to fix the state of the government's books.Probably not doing enough to get rundown places like Auckland Central going again, but that GDP number, that is fair and square, largely the Reserve Bank's problem, so she should not quit over what happened yesterday. However, I am prepared to admit that the fact that this discussion is even happening does speak to the enormous political pressure that she is under at the moment, because it is enormous. She is under a lot of political pressure. She is very much playing at a political disadvantage because a lot has gone wrong for her this year. Buttergate was all Nicola Willis pulling in Miles Hurrell for a chat, Gavin the cameras run after him. She created that. She has only just managed to save herself from being accused of being all talk and no action over the supermarkets, redeemed with a Hail Mary at the last minute. And for all the criticism that she lobbed Grant Robertson for spending too much, she spends more than him every single budget, and here we are two years into this administration, still waiting for their big plan as to how we turn this economy around. That is as finance minister and economic growth minister, her job, but she doesn't need to quit over what happened yesterday. Look, the bar for any minister to quit is very high, but for a finance minister, even more so. Just have a look at how badly Rachel Reeves in the UK is stuffing things up and crying in public. She is still in her job. Nicola Willis is nowhere near that, mainly because the GDP figure out yesterday is not her fault. And the fact that this is actually a discussion is somewhat mind-blowing. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How is it that we are having a conversation today about whether Nicola Willis needs to quit her portfolio because of yesterday's shock GDP number? This is crazy. What happened yesterday is not Nicola Willis's fault. It is the Reserve Bank's fault. It is not a matter of opinion. It is a fact. The Reserve Bank ratcheted up the official cash rate to slow down the economy and engineer a recession, to quote Adrian Orr. It's what he wanted to do. It is what he has actually done successfully. We now have had an enormous recession, and we are struggling to come out of that. That is not Nicola Willis's fault. Now, sure, I can lay some blame at Nicola Willis's feet. I can blame Nicola Willis for not doing enough to fix the state of the government's books.Probably not doing enough to get rundown places like Auckland Central going again, but that GDP number, that is fair and square, largely the Reserve Bank's problem, so she should not quit over what happened yesterday. However, I am prepared to admit that the fact that this discussion is even happening does speak to the enormous political pressure that she is under at the moment, because it is enormous. She is under a lot of political pressure. She is very much playing at a political disadvantage because a lot has gone wrong for her this year. Buttergate was all Nicola Willis pulling in Miles Hurrell for a chat, Gavin the cameras run after him. She created that. She has only just managed to save herself from being accused of being all talk and no action over the supermarkets, redeemed with a Hail Mary at the last minute. And for all the criticism that she lobbed Grant Robertson for spending too much, she spends more than him every single budget, and here we are two years into this administration, still waiting for their big plan as to how we turn this economy around. That is as finance minister and economic growth minister, her job, but she doesn't need to quit over what happened yesterday. Look, the bar for any minister to quit is very high, but for a finance minister, even more so. Just have a look at how badly Rachel Reeves in the UK is stuffing things up and crying in public. She is still in her job. Nicola Willis is nowhere near that, mainly because the GDP figure out yesterday is not her fault. And the fact that this is actually a discussion is somewhat mind-blowing. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ask Me Anything returns for a brand new season! And Paula's first guest is fellow former deputy prime minister, Grant Robertson. Once political adversaries, the pair sit down for a candid conversation about their shared experience as student protestors, the dangers of stress eating and why Grant was never interested in the top job. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dunedin uni students who come into conflict with their landlords over the filthy state of their flats, or whose bonds are withheld for no apparent reason, have said the Tenancy Tribunal is not fit for purpose. Among them is second year University of Otago student Zoe Eckhoff, who recently won a Tenancy Tribunal case after finding her newly-leased flat in a shocking state. However, she said she was only able able to do this because she had the support of her parents and was able to hire a lawyer. Now the University's Vice Chancellor, Grant Robertson, is among those calling for change. Bella Craig reports.

Former finance minister Grant Robertson opened up about his life in politics in his new memoir, from his beginnings in Dunedin to the toll of the Covid years. The new book, Anything Could Happen, came out earlier this month - and it unpacks the stresses that came with taking on a high-profile political role. Robertson joined the Afternoons team to discuss further. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

More than 20 thousand secondary teachers are walking off the job today to strike over the lowest pay increase offer in a generation. Post-Primary Teachers Association members will picket outside dozens of schools and MP offices after rejecting a 3% pay increase over three years. Opposition Leader Chris Hipkins told John MacDonald teachers deserve more than the Government's offering. He says that if they accept this offer, they'll effectively be taking a pay cut as it's below the rate of inflation. Hipkins says they at least deserve a pay increase that keeps them at the level they're at now. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Opposition leader Chris Hipkins denies that the Labour Party will lose support over his refusal to give evidence in a public session for the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19. Dame Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Grant Robertson and Dr Ayesha Verrall had refused to front up publicly. But, Hipkins told Nick Mills on Wellington Mornings that he doubts it will affect his party's reputation. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on Politics Wednesday, the Covid Inquiry is still at the top of mind for many. Chris Hipkins, Dame Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, and Ayesha Verrall have declined to publicly answer questions for the Royal Commission's second Covid Inquiry. Labour's Ginny Andersen and National's Mark Mitchell delved into the situation, as well as touching on Trevor Mallard's ousting from the role of Ambassador to Ireland. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Former Finance Minister Grant Robertson has opened up about his early life, and his political journey in a new memoir.

The Act Party leader talks beer, lefty haters, collateral damage, Dad Dancing and twerking, Grant Robertson's denial over Covid spend up, bike helmets and fiddling while Rome burns when there are bigger fish to fry. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tonight on The Huddle, Trish Sherson from Sherson Willis PR and Child Fund CEO Josie Pagani joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more! There's growing calls to change the working holiday age limit from 30 to 50 to boost tourism. Is this a good idea? Would you go on a working holiday in your 40s? Volodymyr Zelenskyy - alongside a group of EU leaders - are set to meet with Donald Trump at the White House tomorrow. How do we think this meeting will go? David Seymour reportedly asked the Ministry for Regulation to look into removing bike helmet requirements. Should we change the rules? Will any of us be reading Grant Robertson's book? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Grant Robertson takes a seat with Jake Tame on Q+A as his memoir drops and the Royal Commission into C19 ramps up again.The decisions of Luxon's govt are not favoured by the business community with a scathing article released in the Sunday Star TimesMajor building consent changes and Seymour goes after helmets, all in the name of cutting red tape.=================================Come support the work we're doing by becoming a Patron of ⁠⁠#BHN⁠⁠ www.patreon.com/BigHairyNews⁠=================================Merch available at www.BHNShop.nz Like us on Facebookwww.facebook.com/BigHairyNews Follow us on Twitter.@patbrittenden @Chewie_NZFollow us on BlueskyPat @patbrittenden.bsky.socialChewie @chewienz.bsky.socialEmily @iamprettyawesome.bsky.socialMagenta @xkaosmagex.bsky.social

Grant Robertson retired from politics in early 2024 to take up a new job as Otago University's Vice-Chancellor. He was back in the headlines this week after declining to show up to in-person hearings for the Covid-19 inquiry's second phase. The former Finance Minister spoke to Q+A about that decision and why he doesn't regret the Labour Government's spending decisions during the pandemic. Robertson, who is about to release his memoir Anything Could Happen, also reflects on the impact his sexuality had on his political career.

With former finance minister Grant Robertson, 1News US correspondent Logan Church, Young Farmer of the Year Hugh Jackson, and Whena Owen on the Cape Palliser coast.

Chris Hipkins, Ayesha Verrall, Dame Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson have refused to front at public hearings for the second phase of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 response. Are they dodging accountability, or have they answered enough questions? Also, Kiwirail have paid nearly $150 million to Hyundai over the cancelled iRex ferry deal. Is this better than expected? To answer those questions, Infrastructure NZ chief executive and former Porirua mayor Nick Leggett and PSA national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons joined Nick Mills for Friday Faceoff. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A constitutional lawyer says the Royal Commission of Inquiry has the power to summons ex-ministers to front for its Covid enquiry. It's called off its second week of hearings after Chris Hipkins, Dame Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, and Ayesha Verrall declined to appear. It says it shouldn't diminish the inquiry - as all have privately given evidence. Lawyer Graeme Edgeler says the Commission just needs to consider if it'll miss out on key information without a summons. "If the answer to that was yes, then they should exercise it. They seem to think at the moment that they don't need need to have the summons, but it's something they have in their back pocket." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I think what many of us are experiencing right now, re: Jacinda, Grant, Chippy and Ayesha not fronting publicly for the COVID inquiry is not disappointment, because disappointment requires us to have had a higher expectation of them. And I don't think that we did, because I think we got the measure of these people a long time ago. I think what we're experiencing right now is a sense of injustice, because these people had the power, and they used that power to do things to our lives that no other politicians in the history of this country have done. They told us not to leave our homes, they shut the border so that we couldn't leave the country or come back in. They ended some businesses through their rules, they effectively forced people out of jobs for not taking a vaccine that I would say most of us don't even bother with now. Now, we can argue about whether any of that or all of that was justified, but I don't think we can argue about how massive that was. It was huge, unprecedented power. Now, with power comes responsibility and accountability - and that's where they're letting us down because they are refusing to be held accountable, even if just in answering questions in front of us, for us to be able to see it. Now, right or wrong, their actions during Covid caused so many people to lose faith in Government. This was their chance, I think, to restore that a little bit. Instead, what they're doing is they're causing us to lose even more faith in Government. If these people ever tell themselves or us that they are here to serve, it is utter BS. They're not here to serve. If they were, every single one of them would put their country's expectations of answers ahead of their own ambitions, but they're not. It's more important for Jacinda to keep managing her brand and living her best international life of glamour. More important for Grant Robertson to keep pulling in that $630,000 a year at Otago. More important for Chippy to try to have another go - deluded - at being Prime Minister again and more important for Ayesha to preserve whatever credibility she has left as a health academic. But they should know, they can delay accountability, but they cannot prevent accountability. And they will be held accountable. Maybe through a future Commission of Inquiry one day or maybe just through the history books that eventually trash their reputations like history has trashed so many other politicians, including Muldoon's. Either way, add to the long list of unpleasant things that we've learned about them, we can now add cowardice to that list too. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I can recall a conversation I had about a month ago with Labour leader and former Covid-19 Minister Chris Hipkins about Part 2 of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into his government's pandemic response. And he was saying that he was waiting to be invited to appear, and wouldn't be asking for an invite, and wouldn't be gate-crashing. That was around the time that he was also saying the Inquiry was a platform for conspiracy theorists. And I said at the time that, if Chris Hipkins was eventually invited and he declined, then he could forget about being Prime Minister again. Since then, it turns out he has been asked to front-up to the inquiry in person - and he has declined. Dame Jacinda Ardern, former finance minister Grant Robertson and former health minister Ayesha Verrall have also been asked to appear. And they've all declined as well. All of them, on the basis of advice from lawyers who are being paid by the taxpayer, that appearing at the Inquiry could attract abuse towards family members and that images and recordings from the Inquiry hearings could be “tampered with and misused”. All of that's probably true. But, even then, this is nonsense. Maybe Hipkins, Dame Jacinda, Robertson, and Verrall need to be reminded that former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson fronted up in person to the Covid Inquiry in Britain. He didn't hide behind written responses. Which, as we know, are always full of weasel words that go unchallenged. It wasn't a holiday for Boris, but he fronted. And because Chris Hipkins, especially, isn't fronting, he is political toast. Imagine if he had said to the others, “Okay, you guys aren't going, but I'm still the leader of the Opposition, so I am going to front”. If he'd taken that approach, he would've had a few days where it might have been uncomfortable for him, but it would be over and done with. Because if you have a very low opinion of the way Labour handled the pandemic, your low opinion isn't going to get any worse if Hipkins is grilled in-person at the Inquiry, is it? In fact, you might even admire him for fronting up. You might even give him credit for it. But he's not. And in doing so, he's written-off whatever he chance he had of leading Labour to victory next year. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's an old saying, one generally used by mothers: I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed. Yesterday, hearing that the unholy Triumvirate of Ardern, Robertson, and Hipkins —Ayesha Verrall doesn't count— were choosing not to appear publicly at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 Response, I was both angry and disappointed. The second set of public hearings for the Royal Commission has been axed after key witnesses, including the aforementioned, refused to appear. Chairman Grant Illingworth has the power to summon people to appear before the Inquiry, those living in New Zealand, but said he would not use it. On balance, he said “we are of the view that a summons is undesirable given that the former ministers continue to cooperate with the evidence gathering of the Inquiry”. The writing was on the wall back in early July that Hipkins would not be showing his face publicly, when I asked him about attending to give his evidence in person. You could hear on the 8th of July that there was no way he was going to show his face. It may be true that government ministers have in the past given their evidence privately to Royal Commissioners. The Covid-19 response, I would argue, is different. The “most honest and transparent government ever” relied hugely on the trust and faith of the public to implement the nationwide wholesale measures that they did. We all sacrificed to varying degrees, and with varying degrees of willingness, personal freedoms, livelihoods, children's schooling, mental wellbeing, because the government engaged with us, talked at us, cajoled us, threatened us, reassured us it was a relationship. Every single day those people were up in our grills, in public, telling us what we needed to do, how we had to do it, and giving their reasons for why we had to do it. Enormous sacrifices were made by many, many people, and many of them are still counting the emotional toll. Ardern, Hipkins, and Robertson used their public profiles to ensure compliance with the decisions they were making, which grew ever more ridiculous and unworkable as time went on. I believe they have a moral obligation to front the public and answer the Commissioners questions publicly. Without manipulating the public trust, for better and worse, they couldn't have got away with what they did. Their objections to appearing appear to be Dentons', the law firm's, objections to appearing, but their objections include the convention that ministers and former ministers are interviewed by inquiries in private, and departing from that convention would undermine confidence. In what exactly? I hope I've put up a case that they do have an obligation to answer publicly because the Covid-19 response was unlike any other event where there's been a Commission of Inquiry. They were also concerned that the live streaming and publication of recordings of the hearing creates a risk of those recordings being tampered with, manipulated, or otherwise misused. For heavens sake, any time you open your mouth in public your words and image can be manipulated and misused. Look at Neil Finn's erections for heavens sake. Anytime you appear talking about anything, AI can use your image, your words – it's not exclusive to the Commission of Inquiry. They have form, these people, as spineless decision makers, so it should be no real surprise they haven't showed publicly. They never once ventured to Auckland during the pointless, unreasonable lockdowns of 2021. So no huge surprise that they're not willing to stand by the decisions they made then, now. Ardern and Robertson have moved on. They don't need the New Zealand public. They don't need the New Zealand public to have confidence in them, Hipkins does. He wants to be Prime Minister again. He wants another bash at it. He'll point to the polls and say he's a third of the way there, that most New Zealanders have got over Covid, moved on. Some of us haven't. We are living with the decisions the economic, medical, and social decisions that this unholy triumvirate made every single day. And our children will live with those decisions, and our grandchildren. The very least they could do is appear before the same public, whose faith and trust they exploited and explain how and why they made the decisions that they did. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins says he's already answered the Covid Inquiry Commissioner's questions, negating any need for him to appear publicly. Hipkins and former Ministers Dame Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, and Ayesha Verrall declined open hearings, leading the second part of the inquiry to be called off. Hipkins says lawyers raised several issues around them appearing, including setting a precedent and possible abuse. He told Mike Hosking he doesn't see the point in repeating the process. Hipkins says the Commissioners themselves have said former ministers have answered every single question put to them and they are seeking no further information. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I'm assuming the instigators of the second Covid Inquiry are deeply disappointed in what is unfolding, in terms of accountability. Inquiry Part 1 was a Labour Government stitch up. It was an exercise in smoke and mirrors. Inquiry Part 2 is a coalition deal driven by ACT and NZ First, and was designed to look into areas not touched on in Part 1: access to vaccines, lock downs, economic damage, and so on. I have argued since the start that we needed an advisorial approach. In other words, we do it like the Brits, who called people to a witness stand and held them accountable. We didn't do that and now we're paying the price. Ardern and Hipkins, along with Robertson, have declined to appear. No kidding. What a surprise. I wonder why? Grant Illingworth KC, who is in charge of the current work, has the power apparently to pull them in. He is choosing not to do so, hence my assumption of disappointment at political party level. The Illingworth justification is the aforementioned operators are cooperating with proceedings. That's not good enough in my book, or indeed anywhere close. Simple question: is there a broad expectation among ordinary, everyday New Zealanders that those who made life-changing calls in a life-changing period of New Zealand owe it to us all to front and be questioned under oath about why they did what they did? Another question: what does it say about the morals and characters of said people, who seek public mandate and public support and approval, that when things get a bit awkward they are nowhere to be seen? Where is the courage of their conviction? Where are their spines and gonads? Can a person like Hipkins, and indeed Verrall, who I also understand is refusing to front, possibly present themselves to the voting public next year with a straight face and ask once again for the power to run the land, having been the same people who in august of the year before ran for the hills when accountability came calling? The rules of engagement were lacking. We were let down. As the head of this with power to do better, Illingworth is letting us down. But nowhere near the level of Ardern, Hipkins, Robertson, and Verrall, who should be ashamed of themselves. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Current and former Labour leaders and ministers deciding not to appear at the Royal Commission's Covid inquiry is being described as 'disgraceful'. Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Grant Robertson and Ayesha Verrall, who were all involved in Covid decisions - have declined invitations to appear. They say it would have been performative - not informative - and there's a risk livestream recordings could be manipulated and misused. National MP Chris Bishop says they should front up because New Zealanders deserve answers over the scale of Covid spending, which is still having impacts. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tonight on The Huddle, Auckland Councillor Maurice Williamson and Jack Tame from ZB's Saturday Mornings and Q&A joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more! Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Grant Robertson have all declined to be interviewed publicly by the Covid inquiry. Should they have fronted? Did Chlöe Swarbrick deserve to get booted out of Parliament today? Should she have apologised? What did we make of Debbie Ngarewa-Packer dropping the C-word in Parliament? The Education Minister is cutting Māori words from five-year-olds' school phonics books. Is this a bad look? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The ACT Party's laying into the former Ministers who lead our Covid-19 response for refusing to front public hearings. Labour leader Chris Hipkins, and former Ministers Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, and Ayesha Verrall have declined to appear as part of the Royal Commission's Inquiry. Commissioners are confident it won't hamper efforts. Act's Brooke van Velden, who's in charge of the inquiry, told Ryan Bridge these Ministers stood publicly and made huge decisions about people's lives. She says it's confusing for many members of the public who are still feeling the effects of the Covid lockdown. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Yesterday they wheeled out three excuses for not fronting up and answering questions about why they went so hard on lockdowns and mandates which they then papered over with $66-billion in spending - second in the world only to the US - thereby helping fuel the inflation we're all now paying the price for taming. 1. First we heard they wouldn't attend the public hearing and give public evidence because they were worried about how the public might react - that some might use their videos to spread misinformation. The Inquiry itself basically said this was nonsense because the public interest in them appearing outweighed the risk of some nutter altering their testimony video and sharing it on Facebook. 2. Then Hipkins fronted for a stand-up with another reason - I already answer these questions on a daily basis. Which, again, makes no sense. If you were worried about videos being doctored of misinformation being spread, would it not apply as much to those comments in the media - which are - of course videoed and published - as you would be about video livestreamed from a public inquiry? 3. Then there's the excuses provided to inquiry itself. They were worried about blowback from the public online - that it might turn into some sort of which hunt. This is, perhaps, the most egregious and insulting one. During the Covid years, they were more than happy to troll members of the public from the podium of truth. They were more than happy to engage in a little witch-hunting of their own. Be it Charlotte Bellis. The border crossers. The river of filth. They used the media to hammer their opponents as conspiracy theorists, anointed many public enemy number ones while they were in control of the narrative. And that's really what this is about. Controlling the narrative. The wall-to-wall coverage and 1pm podium sermons cynically helped secure them an historic majority in 2020. As the old saying goes, you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. These guys know they've been found out - most recently by that embarrassing Treasury report. And now that they can't control the narrative, it looks like they're running for the hills. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I said earlier this week that the Government will be re-elected next year because, all things being equal, history tends to show you get two terms. Plus, the Opposition remain the same people who stuffed the place a year and a half ago and the pain of that, the closeness of that, is still real for too many of us. Unless of course they rejuvenate the party or say sorry – none of which is going to happen. This was all backed up by Treasury who, in one of their latest papers which is well worth reading, basically says the Government overspent. They were told not to overspend. And whatever spending they were doing should've been targeted and directly linked to Covid. None of that advice was followed. They sprayed money at a rate that equated to $66billion, or 20% of GDP, and when the worst was over they kept spraying. And here we are a couple of years later bogged down in their economic incompetence. The politics of it all is in full swing as Labour tried to blame the current Government for the mess. What's making that argument slightly complicated is the ongoing criticism, which is justifiable if you ask me, that for all the announcements and noise, this is a timid Government that really had licence to go for broke and they have largely chickened out. They have dabbled and poked and prodded and done some decent, common sense stuff. In just the past few weeks we've had changes to building products, garden sheds, speed limits, RUC's and NCEA. There is no shortage of bits and pieces but it's not transformational, hence the slow progress and the opening for Labour to have a crack. Labour are praying you forget all this is on them. But it is and the Treasury paper very clearly says so. They told Grant Robertson to tighten it up, to be disciplined, but socialists with majorities and egos are not for turning and so the ruinous money party was on. Writing about it doesn't fix it. But it is proof positive that this lot inherited one of the most ill-disciplined, ill-advised, arrogant, bungling, fiscal messes of the modern age and if you don't believe the National Party, believe Treasury. Labour don't have a leg to stand on. And the same people who did that to us are still there wanting you to forget and give them another crack in a years time. That is why they will not win. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Michael Reddell, who appears on this show a fair bit, has put the Adrian Orr resignation back in the news. He has a source close to the action that, in simple terms, suggests that Orr packed a sad at a couple of meetings, one of which was with Nicola Willis, the chair of the Reserve Bank Neil Quigley wrote to Orr with a list of concerns over that behaviour, and Orr quit. The underlying issue appears to be the fact the Government were determined to cut the Reserve Bank's budget, which ultimately, they were successful in doing. Why? Because like everything else under the Labour Government, too much money was spent, things blew out and the Reserve Bank had wandered off into new and expensive areas they didn't need to be in. The main point being: essentially what we thought happened, did. Adrian Orr has a short fuse, a fairly elevated sense of entitlement and importance, and didn't like what was unfolding – which is fine. He didn't have to like it and if he disliked it so badly, he could walk, which he did. But, and here is where this is important, he held a critical role in all our lives. People in jobs like that need to exemplary. Exemplary in execution and exemplary in person. He wasn't. He was a failure. Which then takes us back to how he got the job: through Grant Robertson. Not only did Robertson appoint Orr, he reappointed him. Bad people make bad decisions, and those bad decisions go on to have consequences. By way of contrast what do you reckon the pressure on Jerome Powell is like right now? Is Powell yelling and packing a sad? Is Powell going to quit in a massive hissy fit and vanish from the face of the earth without a word? I have a dollar with anyone who wants it that the answer is "no". Maybe Orr doesn't give a monkey's. Maybe Orr is that sort of bloke who's so inflated and mesmerised by himself that he is well past any reputational reflection. Maybe Grant is too. But the damage still sits in our bank accounts and rates bills and economic funk to this day. The bloke who stuffed the joint, packed a sad and stormed out, never to be heard from again. It's a sad indictment on a role and influence that should have been handled a great deal more elegantly and with a mile more professionalism.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's start with the positives in the news that the Government is pressing ahead with a new medical school at Waikato University. 120 new med students every year. You can't argue with that. But that's about it for me. I'm not going to criticise the Government for doing something to get more doctors, because we need them. Especially in rural and regional areas, which look to be the main focus of this new school. But I think it would have been way better for the Government to invest more in the existing medical schools at Otago University and Auckland University. Especially Otago, when you consider all the money that's going into the new hospital down there. I see that Otago University is saying the same sort of thing. But I suppose with former Labour cabinet minister Grant Robertson running the place, it would say that. Auckland University seems to be a bit more diplomatic on it, but both universities have put up the same argument in the past: that, rather than starting something from scratch, it would be better to put the money into training more doctors at the medical schools already up-and-running. The main concern for me though is the finances. The Government is putting-in less money into the Waikato medical school than it said it would, relying instead on the university and its financial backers to make up the shortfall. Before the last election, National campaigned on a $380 million medical school, saying it would spend $280 million, and the university would chip in $100 million. But yesterday the Government announced it would be contributing just over $85 million, and the university would be putting in $150 million with help from its donors. Which has got the opposition parties asking questions too. Green Party tertiary education spokesperson Francisco Hernandez says Treasury has already raised concerns about Waikato University's ability to contribute to the costs. He says: "The Government got advice that approving the Waikato medical school would raise the risk profile of Waikato University from medium to high.” And, like me, he reckons the budget's going to be blown. "The cost estimates have shifted so much, I wouldn't be surprised if there's scope creep down the line and Waikato Uni ends up having to come back to the Government with a begging bowl, because the cost ends-up being more than what they thought it would be." And that's where I see this thing at risk of falling over – either falling over or needing more government money down the track. Because as soon as anyone starts using the “ph” word, I get suspicious. And the government's using the “ph” word. Philanthropists. People with money to donate to causes they believe in. The cathedral in Christchurch – that was going to get truckloads of money from philanthropists, wasn't it? Canterbury Museum – the philanthropists were going to be writing out cheques for that project too, weren't they? And, as someone with a bit of experience in universities and philanthropy, I can tell you that getting money out of people is way easier said than done. Although —not wanting to be a complete downer— I've always said that, post-covid especially, philanthropists are much more likely to put money into things that help people, as opposed to just building something for the sake of it. But raising money this way is a long haul. And anyone being asked to contribute will want to see a business case. They'll want to see who else is on board. And that won't happen overnight. And I bet you that all the high rollers that the university might approach will look at the Government's reduced investment and ask how committed it really is. But here's my prediction: It won't be long before the university is knocking on the Government's door, saying it needs more taxpayer money. And at that point, we'll all accept that investing more in our existing medical schools is a way better option. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When there's an election campaign happening, how much do you care about the cost of the policies the political parties are pushing? Or, more to the point, how willing are you to trust the politicians when they say they've done the numbers, and they all stack up? My willingness to trust them is very low. Which is why I think we will be all the poorer for ACT and NZ First voting down the plan for a publicly-funded outfit that would have done the numbers and worked out the actual cost of election policies. Because until now, all we've been able to do is take the politicians on their word. And it's going to stay that way. Not that the concept of a separate costing agency is an overnight thing or a new thing. The idea has been around since 2016, when Green MP Metiria Turei first raised it. In fact, what she wanted —and what the Labour Party wanted too— was broader than what Finance Minister Nicola Willis eventually proposed to Cabinet. But which is now history thanks to the two minor coalition parties. Nicola Willis' version would have made the government of the day's financial information available to political parties when they were putting their policies together. But even that watered-down version was too much for ACT and NZ First, with David Seymour saying that it isn't warranted, because he doesn't think it would stop messy election-year debates about how party policies might be paid for. But it raises the question about election promises and whether us voters are still sucked in by the political promises on their own, or whether we are more discerning and whether we think it would be good to have more transparency. More scrutiny. I want more scrutiny. Because without it, all we have to go on is gut instinct. Or the believability of politicians. All politicians of all stripes and colours I'm talking about here – all we can do is take them on their word. Before I hold up National's tax cuts as an example of why we need a publicly-funded agency to go through political policies with a fine-tooth comb, let me remind of you of that daft idea Labour had before the last election of taking GST off fruit and vegetables. At first blush, it might have sounded like a good idea. But I wasn't sold. I don't think many of us were, because we had no idea how effective it would be. Not just from the perspective of whether it would actually make fruit and veggies more affordable, but also what it could mean for government coffers. Grant Robertson always poo-pooed the idea but then, somehow magically, came around to the idea just before the election. And there he was, telling us that he'd done the numbers and he'd realised that, actually, it would have all stacked up financially and we'd all have kiwifruit and broccoli coming out of our ears. But without the proof, it was all hot air. Same thing with National's tax cuts. We were told it was going to mean more money in our pockets, but not a lot was said about how out-of-pocket the Government might be because of it, and what that would mean down the track. And what happened? The tax cuts went ahead, and government revenue dropped. That foreign buyers tax was another one. The only expert analysis we had to rely on was what all the so-called “independent experts” roped-in by all the parties had to say about the policies they were roped-in to comment on. And all that did was create all the usual noise and confusion and we were back to voting on gut instinct because who knew what the hell to make of what was being said left, right and centre? How different things would be if all of these brilliant vote-catching ideas were put through the wringer by an independent, publicly-funded agency. How better informed we would all be. And how careful the politicians would be about selling us snakeoil policies that we only end up regretting falling for. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I can see that this idea of forcing rate caps on councils is taking off. So can I just express my concerns about this early on? I personally love the idea of stopping councils from continually jacking up what they charge us, but I worry that this is not going to fix the situation, because it's not the actual problem, is it? The actual problem is that councils spend our money on stupid stuff. A la, the light up toilets in Wellington even when they've got no money. Wellington has got no money, but they keep on doing this stuff. So even if you stop them having much money because you put on a rate cap, they will continue to spend the money on the wrong things. A la, Wellington. So what will then happen if you put the rate cap on - is that after years and years and years and years of deferred capital expenditure, the pipes will break down cause Wellington hasn't spent money on them, and the roads will be in disrepair because Wellington hasn't spent money on them, and the buildings will need earthquake upgrades cause Wellington hasn't spent money on them. And then they will say - oh, look at all the trouble we've got. We need more money. And then some Government run by somebody like Grant Robertson will go - yeah, cool, we'll lift the rate cap. And they'll just make up for lost ground and go hell for leather and jack it up. Or what they'll do is for years and years and years and years, they will just run everything on the credit card and then they'll say - oh look, it's a debt crisis. We've got to pay back our debt, we need more money. And some Government run by somebody like Grant Robertson will go - oh yeah, that's cool. Let's lift the rate cap, and then off they go. And they'll just make up for lost ground. See what I mean? It'll make you feel good about it in the short term, but they will get you eventually, because the problem is that they aren't spending money properly - and that is actually what we need to fix here. Now, I don't know how. I think getting rid of some of our councils by canning the regional councils or canning the district councils or canning the local councils or the city councils may help limit the costs. But I'm not sure. Ultimately, I think we just need smarter people on council - and we need to hold their feet to the fire. But as long as you have numpties and council officials who are shady - and you're not watching them - a rate cap will only delay the problem. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This morning, the Prime Minister was asked about the 2000 public servants that had lost their jobs. 2000 are out but 64,000 remain. Chris Luxon saw nothing wrong with that. That right there is part of the reason why this Government is polling so poorly, because it's all talk, isn't it, bugger all action. Now I'm sorry. I realize this is a lot to start the week with - we're starting strident. I don't mean to continue like that - but were you as surprised as I was to hear that we've only cut 2000 public servants? And were you even more surprised that the Prime Minister's explanation is no more than a verbal shrug? This, I think, will be profoundly disappointing to a lot of people who expected this Government to get public spending under control. And cutting public servants is part of getting that spending under control. There is no reason why we have as many public servants as we have today. 63,000 - there is no reason why we have more than double the 30,000 public servants that we had in 2001. Our population hasn't doubled since 2001. It's gone up about 37 percent. If you adjust accordingly, then we should have 41,000 public servants, not 63,000 public servants. Now, I would have expected that the Prime Minister would have a better explanation than simply saying - at least it's not as bad as Labour. Well, maybe so, but I hoped for better. I hoped for a Government that was gonna actually turn this around. Certainly more than a Government that just feels like it's actually Labour dressed in blue clothing. And isn't this just the latest example of talk from this Government that is not being matched by action? They promised to cut spending every year, and they spend more than Grant Robertson. They promise to get on top of debt every year, and they add more to the debt. They promise to stop the race-based policies - and we just keep finding them. They keep waving them through unless we bust them at it. I think this, in part, answers the question that we were asking last week, which is why is it that 3 polls in a row were so tight that it wasn't actually clear if this Government would win an election if an election was held today. This is why they're not brave enough. They should be braver. In fact, if they were braver, they might be more popular. It's worth remembering that for all the hard decisions that were taken by the 4th Labour Government, which is definitely the most transformational that we can think of, right? For all those tough decisions taken in the first 3 years, they actually came back with a bigger majority in 1987. So maybe, you get rewarded for doing what you say you'll do, tough as it may be, rather than just talking tough and then doing very little. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What I hope for today is a sign and a sense that what we are facing economically as a country is real, and it's real bad, and the Government see it, accept it, and chart a path forward that gives us some sort of hope. The damage done by Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson, Chris Hipkins, and Adrian Orr is now years long. You can't invent money in that volume without spending the ensuing years trying to dig yourself out of it. The start has been made. The cutbacks have begun and the screaming, wailing, and upset has ensued. But there is a lot more where that came from. The seeds of recovery are real, manufacturing is expanding, and has been for several months, but services aren't. Sentiment isn't. The farmers have struck gold, but the weather has been exceptionally kind, as have Americans with their passion for burgers. Our debt is shocking. We are not running a surplus on an annual basis and still won't be for years. The Finance Minister today has virtually nothing to play with; no excess, no lolly, and no largesse. She has, I hope, found a fortune in savings and she will redirect that to better places. I pray she isn't borrowing on top of what we have already incurred. If she has, she may well be making a generational mistake, given Treasury says 50% debt by way of GDP is it, and we are close enough to that to worry the conservatives. In a sense today should wrap some numbers and forecasts around the rhetoric, being we are open for businesses, we are pro-growth, we are big on infrastructure and most importantly, fiscally as well as economically, we are not going to die wondering. Today is not a day for a dollar here and a dollar there. It is not an itch-scratching exercise. It should be a document that lays an ongoing foundation for the major project that is the economic resuscitation of the New Zealand economy. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Why has it taken us so long to get serious about forcing people to pay back their student loans? Last month, IRD had someone arrested at the border. They have now paid back their loan. Isn't that amazing? They had been chased and chased and chased and chased - and you know that they had, because the IRD only arrest you at the border as an absolute last resort, but suddenly they were arrested at the border and despite presumably years of not paying back their loan - they pay it back. Isn't it incredible what a little bit of pressure can do? We've got more on this, by the way. The IRD has got in contact with more than 12,000 people who are living overseas who owe money on their student loans. 960 of them have paid back everything that was overdue, 1300 of them have started repayment plans, and 89 people have been warned they will also be arrested at the border if they don't start paying up. 11 of them, as a result of that warning, have started dealing with their debt - either by paying it back or by applying for hardship provisions. Now, why I'm telling you this is because it's nearly a year since the Government threw extra money at the IRD to chase down these bludgers. And the IRD has put out a press release with the latest figures to show that actually, yeah, putting that extra money in for the enforcement is bearing fruit. The only question we now have is - why didn't we do this earlier? I mean, it is not like this is a new problem, is it? We have complained about this for years, about these people freeloading on the ever-generous New Zealand taxpayer and then getting a free education over here, going off overseas to live their best lives, paying taxes somewhere else, helping out some other country, and then leaving us holding the baby in their debt. Now, I suspect our lack of action in the past - but I probably can't answer the question on this - comes down to a general attitude towards taxpayers, which is a lack of respect for our money. It's been treated like it's never-ending for too long. We've simply handed out to all without actually really requiring them to pay it back. We say you've got to pay it back, but we don't actually mean it. And this is not a historic problem - it's a current problem. A recent case in point is the small business COVID loans that were handed out by Grant Robertson in 2020. Unsecured, right? They are now due to be repaid. At least $800 million is outstanding and a lot of that will never be repaid. We have to get used to that idea. We handed it out and we're not gonna get it back. It is probably too much to wish for - but wouldn't it be great if we could carry on getting money back like the IRD are with student loans at the moment? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I think I'm encouraged by the numbers of submissions into the Covid inquiry. This is Covid inquiry part two. The second part is to try and rectify the stitch up that was Covid part one from the previous Government, who were determined to set criteria that would not expose the true damage they wrought upon most of us. 31,000 have had their say this time. It is pointed out they came from all ages, all locations and were both positive as well as negative. Given Health NZ submitted on whether Wanaka should have a McDonalds, do not underestimate the establishment's ability to spend an indecent amount of time and money in putting a best-case scenario forward in a butt-covering exercise. This part of the inquiry looks into masks and mandates, vaccines and lockdowns, and 31,000 submissions tells me we are still very much exercised about the historic nature of the event and our keenness to try and come up with something that sees nothing like a repeat of the last exercise. I note the other day poor, old Chris Hipkins still tries to walk that very fine line between admitting they were in charge of a balls up and pretending it went mostly well. He is in an unwinnable place. As the last sap left standing, given Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson are long gone, he has the sorry task of defending what really were some astonishingly poor decisions. But that doesn't mean the inquiry will come up with answers. Answers such as will a pandemic be the same, or similar, or not similar at all? What sort of Government will be in? Will that Government be competent or experienced? What roll will the public service play? Will epidemiologists become household names again? Will New Zealanders sink into a myopic funk again waiting for a leader to tell them what sort of stuffed animal to put in the window? What made last time so bad was the control, and out of the control, followed the anger and fear. I'm not sure an inquiry can dictate answers or solutions around emotion. But 31,000 submissions tells you the emotion is still very, very real. At least in putting the second part of the inquiry on, we attempt to recognise how profound those dark and troubled days really were. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I want to talk a little bit more about Nicola Willis' tight budget - I haven't changed my position from yesterday and I'm impressed at how little she's giving herself to play with. But the truth is, it doesn't go far enough - at all. Because understand this - that $1.3 billion that she's given herself in her operating allowance is new spending. As in, take last year's budget and now increase it by $1.3 billion. For context, Nicola Willis spent more money last year than Grant Robertson ever did in any of his budgets - and now she's adding another $1.3 billion to it. Now I understand that this is conventional politics - budgets increase every year. The last time it didn't, the last time we had a zero budget where we didn't add any more money was Bill English's 2011 budget - because we'd had the earthquake. But what that tells you is it's possible to not increase the spending - and I would argue that is exactly what we should be doing at the moment. Because we are in big financial trouble as a country. We are running structural deficits - that means we are spending more every year than we make. If it was a household, we'd be talking about a family spending more than they earn and running up the difference on credit cards every year - but still deciding every year to spend more. That's what we're doing. I think we need to cut big things. Now, I don't want to be accused of being a racist, so I'm reluctant to say publicly that we should cut the Ministry for Māori Development or the Ministry for Pacific Peoples - but I am a woman, so I'm very happy to say we should cut the Ministry for Women. Why do we need it? Why do we need a Ministry for the Environment and also a Department of Conservation? I could go on. But if we don't get real and start running smaller budgets where we spend within our means, something will have to give. And the thing every commentator out there seems to want to cut is your pension - because it's very expensive to the country. Now if I had a choice, I'd keep the pension and cut out nonsense like ministries we don't need and stop spending more every year than we did the last. Like I said, I'm impressed. Nicola Willis is going further than I thought she would - but not far enough if we're actually going to fix the country's books. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Now, listen, I hope that this ACC business is a Scott Simpson problem and not a National problem, but I'm starting to get a little worried about it - because this is at least the 3rd case of race-based stuff still happening under National when we thought National was going to put a stop to it. I mean, with the free GP visits in Hawke's Bay for Māori and Pasifika kids and no one else - at least that stuff could be blamed on rogue public health staff, and it was killed as soon as we discovered it was happening. And at least with the co-governance stuff that's going on in the Waitakere Ranges - at a stretch, we may believe that the Government didn't know about it. Maybe. But this ACC stuff, the minister knows about. And even though he was told about it, he's not gonna stop it because as I told you in the Newsroom article, he stands by ACC - and he thinks it's okay.Now, I reckon this is gonna be just a little disappointing to a whole bunch of voters who put this Government in power to stop this race-based stuff that Willie Jackson and the Labour Party were pushing. And who would have thought that that directive to the public service that went out last year telling the public servants to stop the race-based stuff was actually going to stop the race-based stuff? National needs to cut the stuff out. They need to stop this. They either need to stop it themselves or they need to go along to to Scott Simpson and tell him to stop it, because otherwise, a lot of voters are gonna wise up to exactly what ACT was warning us at the election - which is that National is not actually going to change anything. National is just Labour in blue clothes. And if you think I'm going too far saying that, just take a look at what is going on. I'll remind you, Nicola Willis has spent more in her last budget than Grant Robertson ever spent. Scott Simpson clearly loves himself a little race-based target. Now, what did we complain about ad nauseam with Labour? We complained about too much spending, but we've still got that going on. We complained about too much racial division - we've still got that going on. So how is this any different currently? As I say, National needs to cut this out, or it needs to risk losing voters to its coalition partners, because the coalition partners at this stage are actually taking a tougher line on this stuff. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The fact Adrian Orr is leaving is excellent. It shows a level of accountability and responsibility for what has been a ruinous period for the New Zealand economy. The receipts and reviews are in, and the story is stark. We have been hit harder than any other country in the OECD. We had three recessions while most countries, as a result of the Covid plan, had none. Grant Robertson carries some blame for encouraging and endorsing Orr but, more dangerously, reappointing him so close to the last election. The new Government could have/should have sacked Orr, although that would have set a fairly disturbing precedent given the Governor is supposed to be neutral. Orr made the Governor's job a household fascination. Yes, Don Brash got well known, but really only when he went political. The others came and went. I might have interviewed Allan Bollard a couple of times. Before Spencer Russell, who you also never heard of, the job was called the Chief Cashier. Russell was your first Governor. Anyway, the upside of Covid and Orr was we at last took an interest. We had a view, and we know about cash rates and inflation and quantitative easing. But we learned the hard way. We paid an enormous price and are in fact still paying the price. Orr has years to run on his contract and clearly the pressure was on. The Government is currently negotiating a budget with the bank, and I assume they were twisting arms, hard, behind the scenes. By the way, the bank staffing numbers have ballooned. Orr has come across as haughty and arrogant, unable to really express any level of regret, if in fact he has any, for all the damage he has done. Giving banks money for free and not putting restrictions of where that money went was the height of incompetency. Still handing out money when we knew a lot of what we thought would happen during Covid didn't, was a scandal. The onerous banking restrictions he placed on the retailers with his “just in case” thinking was needlessly restrictive. The conclusion has to be that although everyone flew blind during Covid, no one flew more blind than us. And no one was led by a more ideologically driven, fiscal ransacker than Adrian Orr. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In July, there was a recall on two brands of plant-based milks, Silk and Great Value, after a listeria outbreak that led to at least 20 illnesses and three deaths. Public health officials determined the same strain of listeria had been making people sick for almost a year. When Globe reporters began looking into what happened, they found a surprising fact: the facility that the bacteria was traced to had not been inspected for listeria in years.The reporters learned that in 2019 the Canadian Food Inspection Agency introduced a new system that relies on an algorithm to prioritize sites for inspectors to visit. Investigative reporters Grant Robertson and Kathryn Blaze Baum talk about why this new system of tracking was created, and what went wrong.

In July, there was a recall on two specific brands of plant-based milks, Silk and Great Value, after a listeria outbreak that led to at least 20 illnesses and three deaths. Public health officials determined the same strain of listeria had been making people sick for almost a year. When Globe reporters began looking into what happened, they found a surprising fact: the facility that the bacteria was traced to had not been inspected for listeria in years. So how did this happen?They also learned that in 2019 the Canadian Food Inspection Agency introduced a new system that relies on an algorithm to prioritize sites for inspectors to visit. Investigative reporters Grant Robertson and Kathryn Blaze Baum talk about why this new system of tracking was created, and what went wrong.Questions? Comments? Ideas? E-mail us at thedecibel@globeandmail.com

We knew the Government books were going to be bad, but not this bad. No way we're getting to the surplus we expected in 2028. That is now so far away it's not even in Treasury's forecast period anymore. It's some time, who knows when, in the 2030's. We'll have to borrow another $20b in debt to tide us over for the next four years. That'll push our interest payments over $10b every year. So we'll be spending more on our debt interest than we spend on Defence, Corrections, Police, and Customs combined. Now, this is not the current Government's fault. This is a recession caused by Adrian Orr and the Reserve Bank to deal with Labour's overspending. But National are not doing what they need to. They need to be cutting way harder than they are. There is a measure we use to look at how much the Government is adding to, or reducing from, economic growth. It's called public consumption. They were supposed to cut that by 1.4% this year. They cut it by 0.2%. That's basically no cut. Next year it's supposed to cut by 2.2%. Now, it's by another 0.2%, which is to say they're actually not cutting much at all. We still pay the wages of 14,000 more public servants than we did in 2018. They've only cut one public agency, which is the Productivity Commission. Nicola Willis spent more in her last budget than Grant Robertson ever did. National keeps saying they can't cut more because they don't want austerity, but we are so far from austerity it's not funny. We are spending more and hiring more public servants than five years ago. The trouble with that is we're in a recession, which we weren't five years ago. National needs to treat this like the economic trainwreck it is and cut their cloth accordingly. They might not be responsible for the mess we're in, but they are responsible for fixing it and so far, they're really not fixing it. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For episode 430, Co-founder & COO Grant Robertson joins Brandon Zemp to discuss how Three Protocol is creating fraud-resistant cryptocurrency-based eCommerce tools to make crypto the worldwide form of payment. Three Protocol uses state-of-the-art Zero Knowledge Proof technology and Neural Network AI technology to bring private, fraud-resistant and secure eCommerce and online RWA marketplaces into the AI era. ⏳ Timestamps: 0:00 | Introduction 1:00 | Who is Grant Robertson? 4:17 | What is Three Protocol and what tools does it offer? 5:32 | What is 3Pay? 8:48 | 3Pay Virtual Card & Vouchers 9:12 | 3Pay accepted globally 10:58 | Top-up 3Pay Virtual Card 13:06 | What are ZKi3s? 16:05 | What are Tri-Proof Smart Contracts? 19:43 | How does Job3 work? 22:34 | Three Protocol token 24:25 | Three Protocol roadmap 27:55 | Three Protocol website & social media

Universities are a bit of a minefield at the moment. Grant Robertson has gone to run Otago, Auckland has introduced a Māori-related compulsory course which has received surprise and push back, and AUT has been giving out free points in a race-based travel rort, where if you're Māori you get a better chance at travel funding than if you're not Māori. So when the latest international university rankings were released yesterday the fact Otago is at its lowest ranking ever will come as a good chance to offer a decent serve to old Grant "can't run an economy, can't run a university" Robertson. Auckland was another who fell out of the top 150 for the first time. So, once again, a chance to have a crack. There are other rankings and depending on which ones you look at depends on how they are judged. Overall, you can argue we are not particularly high up in global terms. Auckland as our top facility outside the top 150 doesn't sound very encouraging, because it isn't. Otago is so far down the list they don't even rank them specifically. It's just a band and they have gone from the 301-350 band down to the 351-400 band. They might be 399th in the world. Surely there's some reputational work to be done? I note Otago defended themselves by saying they were disappointed, but no New Zealand university had improved, sort of in a "well we are all a bit useless then, aren't we?", kind of way. Having had a bit of experience with universities these past few years —two of our five have, or are, attending and a third is about to go— the unmistakable reality that smacks you in the face is the wokeness of it all and the stench of indoctrination about the place. They are there to fill your head with the stuff they believe to be correct. You think their way or you are wrong. A lot of it is race-based and it's unappealing. Mind you, I'm older. Maybe young kids lap it up, or think they lap it up, until they mature a bit. But even the teaching brigade at some of these places have voiced their concerns around freedom of speech and when you add the concerns to the rankings, the overall picture painted is not flattering. Because they are so woke my fear is a ranking like this will not be seen as a reason to change, or improve, but yet another reason to dismiss those who can't possibly know what they're talking about. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Grant Robertson is the founder of Three Protocol, creating a series of decentralised marketplaces to open digital commerce to the world, including the unbanked, debanked, and those who value privacy.  Why you should listen Three Protocol aims to establish a network of autonomous marketplaces using blockchain technology. These marketplaces aim to facilitate Product, service and Real World Asset financial inclusion for individuals lacking traditional banking facilities.  Three Protocol uses the latest Neural Network Artificial intelligence technologies to increase marketplace procurement efficiency, to enable the utilization of cryptocurrencies for transactions and to instate equitable governance via a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO).  The first platform, Jobs3, is set to emerge as a decentralized contender to existing employment marketplaces such as Upwork and Fiverr. Central to the project is the $THREE governance token, Neural Network machine learning, and ZKP pseudo-anonymisation Digital IDs alongside smart contract technology, which together will enable secure escrow services, efficient procurement of marketplace products, services, real-world assets, DAO-facilitated dispute resolution mechanisms, and seamless cryptocurrency purchase transactions. Supporting links Stabull Finance Three Protocol Andy on Twitter  Brave New Coin on Twitter Brave New Coin   If you enjoyed the show please subscribe to the Crypto Conversation and give us a 5-star rating and a positive review in whatever podcast app you are using.

Expectations were high for 17-year-old Canadian swimmer Summer McIntosh coming into the Paris Olympic Games. After all the races were said and done, she won a medal in each of the four individual races she competed in: silver in the 400-metre freestyle, gold in the 400-metre individual medley, gold in the 200-metre butterfly and gold in the 200-metre individual medley. These wins make Summer the first Canadian swimmer to win four individual medals at an Olympics and the first Canadian woman to win three individual gold medals at a single Games.Grant Robertson has been watching Summer win from the La Défense Arena in Paris. He explains how Summer approached the Olympics, why she is so dominant and who else made it to the podium on the Canadian swimming team.Questions? Comments? Ideas? E-mail us at thedecibel@globeandmail.com

In this special edition of GBL, the former finance minister and soon-to-be vice-chancellor at the University of Otago chats with Toby Manhire from the nosebleeds at the Basin Reserve. On the agenda: tax reforms lost, the Covid legacy, the lure of Dunedin, and which White Fern Robertson most identifies with. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices