Podcast appearances and mentions of John Macdonald

A couple of advisors at the Christchurch City Council have ripped into the Government's plan for regional councils and have said to councillors that they reckon there's a better way. Or more correctly, two better potential ways. Instead of having local mayors run regional councils for two years and, during that time, work out how they're going to get by without a regional council. At a briefing meeting yesterday, two principal policy advisors put two options on the table for councillors to think about. Option 1: Amalgamate the Christchurch, Selwyn, and Waimakariri councils to create a new super city. Which I've been a fan of for quite some time now. And Option 2: Keep all three councils and have the city council take over ECAN's regional council functions. The reason these two council advisors have put these two options up for discussion is that they think having local mayors run ECAN for two years and work out a new structure for local government is a “weak” idea, which wouldn't do any favours for Christchurch ratepayers. And I get what they're saying, because as soon as you get three mayors around the table, they're just going to be interested in what's in it for them, aren't they? Which is the same approach these policy advisors are taking. They're on the city council pay roll and so they have to think about what's best for Christchurch city. And I like their idea of a supercity. But every time a supercity is mentioned, some people are quick to point to Auckland as an argument against it. The Auckland supercity brought together seven city and district councils and the regional council back in 2010. But a supercity in the greater Christchurch area would be nowhere near the same scale. We're talking here about just three councils: Christchurch, Selwyn and Waimakariri. We've done amalgamation before on a much smaller scale. Back in 2006, Banks Peninsula Council amalgamated with Christchurch city. The issue then was that Banks Peninsula didn't have a big enough population to get the rates it needed to operate properly. Selwyn and Waimakariri don't have that problem – they've grown massively since the earthquakes. Selwyn, especially. But half of the people living in Selwyn come into Christchurch every day for work and school, and they contribute nothing towards the cost of the running of the city. They're using the city's roads and so many of the other facilities that they pay nothing for. Add to that the relatively small distance between Selwyn, Christchurch and Waimakariri, and amalgamation is a no-brainer. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You might recall a poll result that came out back in September which proved that 75 percent of us are idiots. It's these idiots that the Government is pandering to with the council rates cap it announced yesterday. And the 75 percent of people who said in that poll that they support the Government forcing rates caps on councils will be very happy today. Because, from mid-2029, annual increases won't be allowed to be any higher than 4 percent. Unless a council manages to get a special dispensation. As a ratepayer, a rates cap sounds like a great idea. But it's not. One description I've seen of the Government's move is that it's lazy politics. Which it is. Because of the 75 percent of people who support it, as the poll a few months back would suggest. I suspect the only complaint the pro-rates cap people will have is that it isn't planned to start for another three-and-a-half years. In mid-2029. By which time there could very well be a different government in power and, if Labour (for example) is true to its word, then the whole thing could be history. Labour's local government spokesperson Tangi Utikere is saying today that they'll vote against the rates cap law when it goes through Parliament. He says: “We've made it very clear that we won't expect local government to continue to work and take on additional responsibilities without the funding. So we don't support this rates cap.” Nelson mayor Nick Smith has been very careful not to bag his old National Party mates. But he does admit that it's not going to be easy. Rates caps have been brought-in in Australia and it's created severe financial difficulties for some councils over there. What's more, Christchurch city councillor Sam MacDonald is already talking about the council selling assets to make up for the money it won't be getting because of the limit on rates increases. All this is, is another placebo policy. Something that might make us feel better for a little while. But it won't last long.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is it time to have a re-think about what's done with the residential red zone on the east side of Christchurch? I think it's fair to say that mayor Phil Mauger thinks so. And so do I. Phil's saying today that he wants to see red zone land used for housing as soon as possible. With the first cab off the rank being land on the edge of the area already zoned for it. This includes land the city council is going to lease to a housing trust so it can provide affordable housing on the east side of town. Ten hectares is already zoned for housing and another 24 hectares is earmarked for trial housing areas. But, with a total area of about 600-hectares all up, why stop there? I reckon that, rather than nibble around the edges, we should have a proper technical investigation to find out whether much more of the red zone land could be used. At a time when we have more and more housing developments chewing up more and more land, shouldn't we be opening our minds to the possibility that some - if not all - of that red zone land could be a better option? I think so. But it would require a serious commitment and some serious expenditure. Because it would involve some pretty intense investigative work. But when you think about when that area was declared a red zone, that was at a time when the land was still moving with all the aftershocks and when it probably just seemed easier to move everyone out and to think about what to do with it afterwards. The thinking was done and, at that point, it was determined that the last thing to do with that area was to put more houses on it. Which I think most of us were willing to accept at the time. But it does seem strange that we are supposed to be behoven forever to decisions made more than a dozen years ago. When not only time has moved on, but so too has our technical capabilities. I'm no expert in any of the areas that would need to be factored-in to any decision to have more housing in the red zone, so I'm not demanding that houses be built there tomorrow. But Phil Mauger's comments have got me thinking. If we did go ahead with what I'm talking about, there'd be no guarantee that the outcome would be any different to what it was after the quakes. But what's wrong with opening our minds to the possibility? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How interested are you in the quality of your drinking water? For example, would you like to be able to look up your address and get credible, reliable information from an official source about the nitrate levels in the water coming through your taps? I would. Because I just don't know whether to believe some of the alarming stuff that's been coming out of Greenpeace this week about the nitrate situation or not. Let's bring in Associate Professor Tim Chambers from the University of Canterbury - who is saying today that it is a government responsibility to provide up-to-date information on nitrates in the water. He's been involved in a large study looking into the link between nitrates and premature births, which has compared birth records with nitrate levels in drinking water supplies where these kids have been born. He can't say too much about the findings because they're still being peer-reviewed. But he is saying that we deserve to know more. He says: “We have advocated for this for a long time. Lots of other countries do this. You can type in your address and it takes you to the supply you're on and the latest readings.” I think this would be a brilliant thing to do here. In fact, I think it's an essential thing to do here with all the noise - and, potentially, exaggeration - that's coming from Greenpeace. Or is it an exaggeration? If it is exaggerated, then we deserve better access to information. Here's one example of what Greenpeace has been saying this week. It says it's tested 110 water samples and has found that the Darfield water supply is above the levels that are considered safe for pregnant women. “Absolutely unacceptable,” is what one of its campaigners is saying about that. If it's true, I'd agree. But I heard about someone who had their water tested by an independent lab and it was fine. But their neighbour had Greenpeace test theirs and the levels were through the roof, apparently. This is why I think the Government and councils are obliged to give us free and open access to data. Because we are at risk of being unnecessarily spooked by scaremongering by the likes of Greenpeace. At the same time, we're also at risk of being misled by councils telling us that everything's fine and there's nothing to see here. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's taken 46 years and we've still managed to stuff up the decision as to where to have a memorial for the 257 people who died in the Mt Erebus air disaster. It was 46 years ago today when the Air NZ DC-10, flight TE901, ploughed into the side of Mt Erebus. And, yes, nice job making the memorial announcement in time for the anniversary, but Cracroft Reserve in Christchurch is not where it should be. In fact, it shouldn't be in Christchurch full-stop. It should be in Auckland. I'm not the only one who thinks so. I'll get to that. But I will never forget the night of the Erebus crash – if you were around at the time, you probably won't either. I was 11-and-a-half, and I remember being allowed to stay up late and listen to the 10 o'clock news on the radio. I went off to bed afterwards knowing it wasn't good. And it seemed that everyone knew someone who was either on that plane or knew someone who lost someone close to them on that plane. A mate of dad's lost his wife. Simone Bennett was one of those people affected directly. She lost her father. He was one of the 257 people on board who died – 237 passengers and 20 crew. She is furious that the memorial is going to be built in Christchurch. She says she's furious and disgusted because she lives in Auckland and she can't believe the memorial is going to be so far away. I get that and good on her for calling out the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, because it feels to me like they have just given up on Auckland and gone for the next best location. You'll probably remember the stoush when they wanted to build the memorial at Dove Meyer Robinson Park in Parnell, in Auckland. But there was major push-back on that one. The anti-brigade claimed that it would “change the tone of the gardens”. They eventually got their way when the cyclone went through Auckland and made the site at the gardens in Parnell unsafe to build on. After that, 50 different sites in the greater Auckland area were looked at but none were considered suitable. Hence, it ending up in Christchurch. Not everyone is unhappy with the decision though. Andrew McKeen is president of the Airline Pilots' Association. He's not only thrilled it's finally going to happen, he also thinks Christchurch is a good spot for it. He's saying: “Christchurch serves as New Zealand's gateway to Antarctica and was the intended stopover point for TE901's return to Auckland." Which it was. I remember someone telling me once about all the airport staff waiting for the plane to land in Christchurch 46 years ago tonight. I get the connection to Antarctica with the Antarctic programme being based in Christchurch. But the Air New Zealand headquarters is in Auckland and that's where the memorial should be. The majority of family members live there too. And I'm conscious that there could be someone reading this right now who was affected by Erebus in the most direct way and who may very well think Christchurch is a good choice. But I don't. Simone Bennett, who I mentioned earlier, doesn't either. But what about you? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This move by the Government to change who is ultimately liable for repairs to defective building work on new houses up to three-storeys high and renovation jobs worth more than $100,000 makes me very nervous. At the moment, all parties involved in a project are jointly liable for any defects and repairs. Which means, sometimes, if one of them can't pay or if they've all gone under since the work was done, the local council that consented the work ends up carrying the cost to fix things up. The Government doesn't want that falling on ratepayers anymore, so it's making changes. But I think it runs the risk of homeowners being thrown to the wolves when things go wrong. So what's happening is that if you're building a new house or getting a decent-sized reno done, you're going to have to buy a warranty which must include a one-year defect repair period and a 10-year structural warranty. Which all sounds great. But as Carl Taylor, who is chief executive of the Combined Building Supplies Co-op says, there aren't enough warranty providers in New Zealand. There are two connected to the trades and one independent. And he's not so sure about our chance of more options becoming available in New Zealand. In theory, the benefit of these changes is that it will mean people responsible for the problems will be the ones who carry the can instead of everyone who worked on the project. And instead of ratepayers if things really go pear-shaped. But here's where I see there being big problems. Let's say there's an issue with water tightness and that falls on the builder who did the cladding and the flashings – what if that builder isn't around anymore? If the builder isn't around anymore, none of the other parties involved in the new build or the reno are going to be liable under these changes, and with the local council no longer the backstop, where does that leave the homeowner? It leaves them in the lurch. I remember a few months back talking with someone about the experience they had getting a house built and what happened when the builder went under. Someone else has been in touch with us today saying that they had a certified builders guarantee for a new build after the quakes, but the scheme went bust and now they have no cover for any of the problems that have emerged. How can you make homeowners buy warranties which may not even be worth the paper they're written on. and, at the same time, limit the backstop options available to them? There is no way councils should be completely out of the picture because, even though it costs ratepayers, it's way better than nothing. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour Leader Chris Hipkins says he's not clear what the Government's aiming for in its plans to change local government. It's proposing replacing the country's 11 regional councils with boards made up of local mayors. Hipkins agrees there's an obvious need for change. But he told John MacDonald he thinks this looks like an attempt to make councils amalgamate. Hipkins says if that's what they wanted, they should have told councils to go away and amalgamate. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Christchurch City Council's been selected to act as a one-stop consenting authority for large-scale supermarket developments. Finance Minister Nicola Willis says it's the latest step in the Government plan to make New Zealand attractive for new operators. She says developers previously had to navigate up to 66 different councils, processes and responses. Willis says the aim is to boost competition in a sector dominated by Foodstuffs and Woolworths by letting new entrants deal with just one authority. Business Canterbury CEO Leeann Watson told John MacDonald that the intention of having a one-stop shop regardless of the number of sites you're operating on is sound. She says that they've heard from businesses who operate across multiple sites that there's a real inconsistency across the local authorities, which can be incredibly painful to deal with. But, Watson says, whether or not this plan creates the right incentives is still yet to be seen. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You know how at work you can get people leaving and, instead of hiring new people, they just dish out the work to other people? Then it gets to the point where the other people look up and realise they're overworked, overloaded, and burnt out. I wonder if that's how mayors around the country are feeling about the prospect of them not only running their own councils but taking over their local regional council, as well. That's what the Government is proposing, with the ultimate aim of pretty much getting rid of regional councils as we know them. Which I think is the wrong way of going about it. I think the Government should instead be focussing on all the other councils we've got. We have 67 local authorities in New Zealand. So work on having less city and district councils because that's where the genuine overlap and duplication happens. But the Government sees this as an easier sell. I know that from hearing Local Government Minister Chris Bishop say that people have got no idea what regional councils do, so let's get rid of them. I think it would be very easy for me to fall into the trap of cheering the Government on on this front because —trust me— I'm in no doubt that we have too many local councils. But I'm not cheering on this proposal because, in the long run, I don't think it's going to mean much. If it was me telling the Government what should happen, I'd be saying unitary authorities are the way to go, which are basically councils that are regional councils and city or district councils all rolled into one. Because why does somewhere the size of Timaru, for example, have two councils? The district council and the regional council. It shouldn't. That's why I think the Government is all a bit backside-about-face on this one and should be focussing on us having less of the smaller councils and keeping the regional councils. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I'm with the KiwiSaver providers who are saying we need to go further than just increasing contributions and we need to make them compulsory. This is after the announcement by the National Party yesterday that one of its election policies next year will be increasing contributions to 12 percent (6 percent from employers and 6 percent from employees) by 2032, to bring us into line with Australia. KiwiSaver providers are saying today that they're liking the policy - but the calls are already coming for it to be made compulsory. Across the Tasman, it's compulsory for employers to contribute - but not for workers. National says it's not in favour of making any contributions compulsory. NZ First is, though. So does Sam Stubbs, who is managing director of Simplicity. He's saying that it has to be compulsory because we have to make sure everybody is saving for their retirement while they're working. And the only way to do that is to make it compulsory. Who can argue with that? He says: "Those people who aren't saving into KiwiSaver are going to be much worse off later on in life. So if we want to remove inequality in New Zealand, and we don't like inequality in New Zealand, we have to make sure that everybody is saving for their retirement while they're earning.” Compulsory KiwiSaver contributions are also going to be essential with any changes to the contribution rates, as National is proposing. Because some people who are paying three percent now won‘t want to pay six percent and so they'll pull out. And the only way to stop that, is to make it compulsory. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour says the Government shouldn't be celebrating record high prisoner numbers. Earlier this week Prime Minister Christopher Luxon declared it was a good thing the prison population was nearing 11 thousand people. The Government is also celebrating a reduction by 38 thousand in the number of victims of violent crime since it came into power. Labour's Duncan Webb told John MacDonald that while locking people up may provide short term relief, it doesn't last. He says they eventually get out and will cause more harm unless they've been rehabilitated. National's Matt Doocey told MacDonald that he disagrees with Webb framing the situation as locking them up, but not fixing anything. He says you can actually do both, and there is a duty to ensure there are rehabilitation programmes for incarcerated individuals. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hutt Zone with John MacDonald focuses on the people, issues, events, and music that shape the Hutt Valley community.

Christchurch's Mayor is suggesting the city's temporary sports stadium could be redeveloped for housing. Addington's Apollo Projects Stadium opened in 2012 when the quake-damaged Lancaster Park closed permanently. The City Council's confirmed structures including the grandstand will be removed when Te Kaha opens in April, but the future of the Addington site remains unclear. Mayor Phil Mauger told John MacDonald it should be intensified and turned into housing, so people can jump onto a bus and head into town easily. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For me, one of the best things to come out of yesterday's announcement about the Cook Strait ferries has nothing to do with the ferries themselves. There's still a bit of smoke and mirrors about the numbers and what it's going to end up costing. Because what it still comes down to is that the Government poured $671 million down the drain when the Finance Minister pulled the plug on funding for the old ferry project. Which some —Nicola Willis included— thought was too Flash Harry with too many bells and whistles. They were, generally, the bells and whistles for the portside infrastructure. That's where the concerns about the cost blow-outs came from. And that's the side of it that could still blow out. Nevertheless, Rail Minister Winston Peters says it's still a better deal. Even though it's going to mean we get smaller ships, lower spec portside facilities, years later than planned. Nevertheless, I really like what he's saying about the Government getting the experts in to provide advice and guidance from the get-go. And I want to see a lot more of this from the current government and future governments. Because one thing that's always got me about politicians is how they can end up in government and find themselves in Cabinet and be put in charge of things they have absolutely no clue about. And politicians being politicians, full of ego and bluster, they plod along faking it and hoping they make it – without asking people who actually know stuff for help. We saw this with the last government when Jacinda Ardern invited senior business leaders to give their input into the COVID response planning, but they were left feeling ignored. I remember people like former Air NZ boss Rob Fyfe talking about it and how frustrating it was. But if this ferry project is back on track because the Government has actually asked people who know what they're on about for advice and guidance and has actually listened, then that has to be a good thing. And I think politicians need to get out of the way more often and let experts have more of a say on big infrastructure projects, if it means things being done more efficiently and without the kind of cost blowouts that now seem to be par for the course. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand is about to become a dumping ground for dirty vehicles. That's what the electric vehicle people are saying today about the Government's urgent changes to the clean car standards for imported vehicles. Of course they're unhappy. Because I reckon they are seeing and we are seeing the EV bubble about to burst. I'll tell you why. I'll also tell you why you're not going to hear me ripping into the Government for doing what it's doing. Reason 1: imported petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles are going to be cheaper, and we would all be complaining if the Government wasn't doing anything about it. Reason 2: penalising car importers for importing the types of vehicles that people actually want to buy makes no sense to me. And what I'm getting at there is I reckon most people still want to buy petrol or diesel vehicles or hybrids. In fact, with imported petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles likely to be cheaper because of this move by the Government, why would you even bother with an EV? That's why the EV people are so antsy. And reason 3: I'd be a complete hypocrite if I said otherwise, because I drive petrol cars. One of them is a Toyota Prado that's been around the block a few times and is a real gas guzzler, and probably isn't that great for the environment. Not to mention the Vespa 2-stroke nightmare. I have never had any interest in having an EV. I can't tell you exactly why, it's not a protest of any sort. It's not climate change denial. It's none of that. And I think most of us are the same. If we can get our hands on a decent petrol, diesel or hybrid vehicle for a decent price, then we'll do it. So, as of the end of this week, the penalties car importers get stung with for bringing high-emitting vehicles into the country are going to be slashed by nearly 80%. Which will be music to the ears of the 86% of car importers that Transport Minister Chris Bishop says are facing penalties already. How the scheme works, is car importers have to meet annual emissions targets. And when they balance things up at the end of each year, if they've brought more dirty cars than clean cars into the country, then they get hit with a penalty, or a charge. Which, of course, gets passed on to customers. At the other end of things, if they bring-in more clean cars and less dirty cars, they earn credits. Which sounds great in theory. But, as it stands, most of the importers haven't been meeting their targets and so they're facing charges. So the Government is slashing the dirty vehicle charges by 80% to stop that happening. But the electric vehicle people aren't happy. Kirsten Corson is the chair of Drive Electric —which is an advocacy group that wants more of us driving EVs— and she's saying today that this move by the Government is “embarrassing”. She says: "If you look at us compared to Australia, in Australia you're paying $100 as a penalty and now we've just slashed that to $15 in New Zealand. So we are going to become a dumping ground for high emission vehicles." She says: "We keep our vehicles on our road for two decades. The average car is 15-years-old in New Zealand, so the decisions made today are going to impact our transport emissions for the next three decades." But what do you make of this move by the Government? Do you think the EV bubble is about to burst?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I hope people are sitting-up and paying attention to what BusinessNZ is saying today. Especially the people who have their heads in the sand about our ability as a country to keep paying for things like healthcare and pensions. Because, as BusinessNZ puts it, we don't have enough people to keep on doing that and we need a lot more people. As one headline today says, New Zealand needs 10 million people to stay afloat. BusinessNZ says we need twice as many people just to keep the lights on. For several reasons. For starters, in 20 years' time we'll have a labour shortage of 250,000 people. And unless we bring a truckload more people into the country, we won't have enough workers to do the work. But also, we won't have enough workers paying tax to pay for the likes of healthcare and the pension. That's why I hope people are paying attention. Because, if we think we can keep on keeping on, providing the same services and doing things like dishing out the pension to anyone and everyone just because they turn 65, then we have to either stop doing that or somehow find a way to keep doing it. If BusinessNZ was a political party, it wouldn't last five minutes, because the stuff it's saying today is the stuff that doesn't win elections. But it's the stuff we have to listen to and accept. Example: raising the retirement age. If we are going to be five million people short of being financially viable as a country, we're all going to have to keep on working longer. Most politicians are too scared to say that, but it's true. Or if we still want to retire at 65, we're going to have to pay for it ourselves. Again, most politicians are too scared to say that, but it's true. Now I'm not talking about this happening next week or next year. I'm saying that it's inevitable that, at some point, we are going to have to accept that everyone retiring at 65 and everyone getting the state-funded pension is a thing of the past. Because we can't afford it. Which is why BusinessNZ is also saying today that we're going to have to start putting more into our KiwiSaver. That's another no-brainer. Because, if we're in a position where we need to double the population just to keep the place running, then we need to change how we do things. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The city is back mingling with the country at New Zealand's Royal A&P Show in Canterbury. Thousands are set to descend on the Agricultural Park over the next three days. This year's event has re-gained its royal status for the first time since 2010. Canterbury A&P Association chair Sir David Carter told John MacDonald that the Royal Agricultural Society approached them after they saw them put on last year's show, and asked if they were prepared to run under the Royal Show status. They agreed, he says, because it gives prestige to the show, and means livestock people are prepared to enter more animals and travel further to attend. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hutt Zone with John MacDonald focuses on the people, issues, events, and music that shape the Hutt Valley community.

Be careful what you wish for. That's how I'm feeling about the Government giving Christchurch an exemption from the new housing intensification rules, which would have enabled three, three-storey properties to be built on single sections anywhere in the city. Instead, that level of intensification is going to be limited to certain parts of town, including the city centre, Church Corner, Riccarton, Hornby, Linwood, Shirley, Merivale, Edgeware, and Papanui. But I think the Government is just letting Christchurch shoot itself in the foot. Because we will, eventually, come to regret it. Mayor Phil Mauger is delighted though, because the city council pushed back and claimed we were doing enough already on the intensification front. A few months back, the council agreed to extend the areas where it would be happy to have medium density zoning with three, three storey buildings per section. Then wrote to the Government saying it thought it had gone far enough and requested an exemption from more intensification in other parts of the city. The council has got what it asked for, and I think we will live to regret it. Because it's only going to mean one thing: the city expanding beyond where it is now. Which is why I've always said that we need to get over ourselves and accept that greater housing density is the only way forward, especially when we consider the population growth happening here. And, with the city growing, the options are either growing outwards or upwards. Whether we want to keep chewing up land and building more to the south, more to the north, and more to the west; or whether we do more with the space we're occupying at the moment. Unfortunately, the lack of foresight at our city council —and the government buying-into that lack of foresight— means we're going to continue expanding. Chewing up good land. All because we have this old-hat idea that everybody needs and wants the quarter-acre section. But we've got a housing affordability problem in this country and, if you want your kids to be able to afford to buy their own place, it's not going to be somewhere with a big backyard. So we need more apartments and townhouses – the places you get with greater housing density. What's more, putting limits on housing intensification in Christchurch is going to mean more and more houses being built in places like Rolleston and Prebbleton. Which are not in Christchurch, they're in the Selwyn district, and that will mean more and more people travelling into the city every day, using Christchurch's roading infrastructure and not paying a bean towards it. Another reason why this limit on housing intensification in Christchurch is a bad move.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Whatever you thought of Andrew Coster as Police Commissioner, you probably felt you could trust him to do the right thing. To be upfront, honest, and certainly not hide stuff. And if you thought the attitude within the Police towards women had changed from what it used to be – well you might be having a bit of a re-think on both of those. Because I certainly am after this damning report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority on the way Police handled accusations of sexual offending by former Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming. It's become a bit of a cliche in recent times to describe reports as “damning”, but there's no doubt how damning this one is. It is so damning that we had the Police Minister and the current Police Commissioner doing a live media conference at six o'clock last night as soon as the report came out. And no wonder. Because, in my mind, this could prove to be one of New Zealand's biggest public sector scandals. And it tells me that despite all the talk from the Police after the experience of Louise Nicholas back in the 1980s with cops involved in sexual misconduct, it seems the memo about a culture change hasn't yet reached some of the top brass either still working there or who worked there until very recently. Including Andrew Coster. Let me quote a comment in the IPCA report from one of the country's most senior adult sexual assault investigators. Named in the report as “Officer D”, they said: “You know what's the worst thing – if you make a mistake, the only worse thing that you can do is then cover it up. You can paint all sorts of nice words but to an outsider looking in, and I mean even me, this looks like a cover-up." So what happened is Jevon McSkimming got into a relationship with a woman in her early 20s. He was in his early 40s. After that, she started writing dozens of emails to the police, accusing Deputy Commissioner McSkimming of being a sexual predator. But instead of investigating the allegations, the emails were used by police as evidence to prosecute her under the Harmful Digital Communications Act last year. All of that overseen by Andrew Coster. His successor, Richard Chambers, is livid. He says there were about five or six senior leaders in the Police —including Coster— who were responsible for what looks to me like a cover up. Some are still with the Police, others aren't. The Commissioner says these people were too quick to believe that the complainant was a spurned woman out for revenge. As for Andrew Coster, how ironic is this comment he made when he was commissioner? He said: “We rely on the support of most of the community to be successful and that depends on the way we operate and on the extent to which people feel that they can trust us and that what we're doing is appropriate.” Oh really? Coster, these days, is chief executive of the Government's Social Investment Agency. He's on leave at the moment. But now that we know what we know, should he be allowed to stay on the government payroll? I'm in no doubt that he shouldn't. Because he presided over what I think could prove to be one of New Zealand's biggest public sector scandals. And, for that reason and that reason alone, he should be toast. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At least they're doing something. But I don't rate the chances of it working. That's how I'm feeling about the Government's declaration of war on methamphetamine, with this new plan that will see spy agencies working with customs and the defence force to target ships carrying drugs in the Pacific. It's also going to work with ports and the shipping industry. The feature of the plan that I like most is this $30 million increase in funding for addiction services. Because, as the Drug Foundation is saying, we can't arrest our way out of the meth problem. Sarah Helm is executive director and she says help for people caught up in meth addiction has been significantly under-funded for many years. She says: “It's clear to everyone that we can't arrest our way out of this issue. Spending on treatment and harm reduction is also a better investment of taxpayer money than criminalising people, because it results in savings downstream in health, justice and social costs.” And we know about the cost - $19.4 million a week. That's what the National Drug Intelligence Bureau estimates is the value of the harm caused by methamphetamine use every week in New Zealand. That's the cost of things like people ending up in hospital, dying - all the social harm. Just under $20 million a week. The Government's plan also includes a four-year advertising campaign to educate people about the dangers of meth use. Which I'm not convinced will be effective. Because everyone knows how bad meth is already - and still we're using more of it than we ever have. It's been about 25 years since methamphetamine - as we know it - really took off in New Zealand. And it's turned out to be a great market for the suppliers. Some numbers I've seen the police refer to is how someone can bring-in 600 kilos of the stuff for a couple of million dollars, sell it and make a profit of around $120 million. So who is going to turn their back on that kind of opportunity? But, even though I don't see it changing things greatly, good on the Government for trying something. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Just as punters hoped, showers have cleared in Christchurch in time to fling open the gates at Addington Raceway before the 122nd running of the New Zealand Trotting Cup. The grey start's made way for some blue skies and enough sun to fry off rain that fell this morning. Race caller Matt Cross told John MacDonald the track's in good order. He says the afternoon forecast is pretty good, so by the time the Cup comes around this evening, we should be in pretty fine form in terms of the weather. The Trotting Cup is the richest harness race in the Southern Hemisphere, with a million dollars on offer, and Cross says that while he might be a bit biased, he thinks it's the greatest harness race in the Southern Hemisphere too. It's the history that makes it special, he told MacDonald, and every year this is the race people talk about. “It's the pinnacle. It's the race that not only defines horses, but it defines people as well in terms of where they sit in the pecking order within the industry.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hutt Zone with John MacDonald focuses on the people, issues, events, and music that shape the Hutt Valley community.

A reminder mental health crises don't follow timetables. Long-time support service Lifeline will now go unanswered between midnight and 7am. It's asking the Government for help after reducing hours because it has a $2 million annual shortfall. Labour's Reuben Davidson told John MacDonald help's needed at all hours and mental health crises don't work office hours. Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey says support is available elsewhere, with other helplines. He told MacDonald that they set an extra $9 million aside for telehealth lines in the 2025 Budget, but it's up to Health NZ to make the decisions on who to fund. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Slightly ironic, don't you think, that on the day people up and down the country are turning up at work and school wearing their gumboots for Gumboot Friday, we've got Lifeline saying it can't keep running on the smell of an oily rag and has to cut back on services. Which means no one answering the phone or replying to text messages between midnight and 7am. Call them then and you'll get a message saying you've reached them out of hours and to call back later. Which is not how Lifeline has done things for the past 60-odd years. It's become known, hasn't it, as a 24/7 option for people needing help on the mental health front night and day. And you've got to say that if a service has lasted more than 60 years and gets the number of calls for help that it gets and genuinely helps the number of people that it helps, then they know what they're doing and what they're doing is valuable and needed. Needed not just 17 hours a day, but needed 24 hours a day. And the numbers show it. In the year to June, Lifeline responded to more than 40,000 calls, 182,000 text messages, and created 4736 safety plans for people in need. Break that down and that's about 110 phone calls every day, 365 days a year. About 500 text messages every day, 365 days a year. And, on average, that's 12 safety plans written for people every day of the year. It's the 12 safety plans every day that shows why Lifeline is such gold. Because, when someone is at the point of needing a safety plan, they are really desperate aren't they? Shaun Greaves is chief executive of Presbyterian Support Northern, which runs Lifeline. He's saying today: “Lifeline saves lives every week and remains a critical frontline service New Zealand's suicide prevention network. “Without immediate government support, Lifeline's ability to deliver the critical service New Zealand desperately needs is a serious concern.” So, let's say the Government did come to Lifeline's rescue – how much would the taxpayer be up for? Two million dollars a year. That's the funding gap that is forcing Lifeline to cut back on services and ditch its overnight operation. This is at the same time as the Government, through Tourism NZ, is spending $6 million getting the Michelin Star people to come over here to eat at our fancy restaurants and see if they're worthy of being ranked up there with the best restaurants in the world. The Government spending $6 million on restaurant reviewers and not spending $2 million on Lifeline is nothing short of moral bankruptcy. Part of the problem is NZ First and its non-negotiables, because it said before the last election that it would fund Mike King's Gumboot Friday. That's why Winston Peters was crowing after last year's Budget when Gumboot Friday was given $24 million in funding. Which really must stick in Lifeline's craw when you consider the difference $2 million would make to its service, let alone the difference it would make to the people who need Lifeline. Especially the people who need it between midnight and 7am, but whose calls and messages won't be responded to. “You've reached us out of hours” is the last thing Lifeline wants to be saying to people. And it's the last thing desperate people need to hear. But, unless the Government does something, that's what's going to happen.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are two types of people in this world. There are the ones who have no qualms calling in sick, when they're not. The ones who feel no guilt at all pulling a sickie. And it seems there is no shortage of them, with this report out today saying that New Zealand workers are taking more sick leave, costing the economy $4 billion. Then you've got the other type, who only use their sick leave if they really, really have to. And I'm in that camp. If I ever have to have a sick day, I hate it. I know “hate” is a strong word, but I don't like it. I was crook a few weeks back and needed a couple of days off and hated it. Same when I was unwell at one point last year. Hated it. Not because I was unwell, but because I was off. And I've always felt that way. I don't know if it's because I feel like I'm letting people down or feeling bad for being a no-show. Or fear of missing out. Or good old Catholic guilt. I don't know what it is, but that's just me. So don't go blaming me for these new numbers out today, showing that we are taking way more sick leave than we used to. Because I'm not one of your “pull a sickie” types. And maybe that's why, at various points during my working life, I've looked a bit sideways at some people who seem to take sickies at the drop of a hat. The Southern Cross Workplace Wellness report out today is blaming the increased number of sick days on the Labour government for increasing sick leave entitlements from five days to 10 days. Health experts aren't so sure about that. They say Covid has made it unacceptable to go to work unwell and there are a lot more viruses around. But I think it's inevitable that if more sick leave is available there'll be people who will take the mickey. The report is based on 2024 data and says the number of sick days taken last year —if you add them all together— was 13 million. Up from a combined total of 10 million in 2022. The average number of sick days for manual workers was 7-and-a-half days and for non-manual workers it was just under six days. That's probably no surprise, given the chance of someone doing a manual job getting physically injured and needing time off work. The report also says workers in the public sector are having more sick days than people in the private sector. That's probably not surprising either. Because, from my own personal experience, the public sector seems to be a lot more forgiving or encouraging of people to take sick days. Either way, people are calling-in sick more than they used to. Does that mean we are sicker or slacker? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Saturday night I was in Lyttelton for a gig and saw a guy sleeping on the bench outside the local supermarket, which took me a little bit by surprise. Maybe I need to get across to Lyttelton more often. But that's the kind of thing we will see way more of if the Government goes ahead with this idea of banning homeless people from congregating and sleeping rough in central business districts. Because instead of being an answer, it just raises another question: where would they go? We know where they'd go. The suburbs. They wouldn't go away. And even though I can't stand being asked for money all the time when I walk through town, some sort of CBD ban isn't the solution. It would start in Auckland apparently and eventually be implemented elsewhere around the country. This hasn't come from the Government itself, which is being all mealy-mouthed about it. It's come from Newstalk ZB's senior political correspondent, Barry Soper. He says the Associate Housing Minister, Tama Potaka, has been talking to community housing providers and has suggested to them that such a law is on its way. Now I'm a realist and I know that we are never going to get rid of homelessness. That's because there are so many things that lead to someone not having a roof over their head. And I reckon most of us are only two or three steps away from being homeless ourselves. It wouldn't take that many setbacks in our life before we looked up one day and realised we were sleeping under a blanket on Hereford Street or Queen Street. But banning rough sleepers from downtown areas is not the answer because what happens when the rough sleepers start moving into the suburbs? I know the Government will say “aww, we're not just kicking them out, we're providing the old wraparound services.” But this isn't a solution, it's just moving the problem elsewhere. And, if I had to choose where in town the rough sleepers should be, give me the CBD any day.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The automotive industry has come a long way from three-piece suits and mechanical production lines. Twenty-five years ago, manufacturers weren't thinking about EVs, tool changers, or the complexity we see today. Those who weathered 2008 will tell you: when the next downturn comes, it won't be your sales pitch that saves you, it'll be whether you were a true partner to your customers.This episode was recorded Oktoberfest-style at RAM Solutions, featuring eight industry leaders discussing what's transforming automotive manufacturing. Mitch Yencha and Scott Hunter share timeless lessons from surviving 2008, while Tanner Boyko and Jim Marlowe highlight the insane amount of innovation happening right now, from the safest cars in history to new EV players entering the space.Paul Otto and Andy Johnson reveal how AI is finally unlocking value from terabytes of welding data generated daily, while John Macdonald and Markus Weckbach from STÄUBLI explain why you need proactive planning with Plans B and C ready. They also cover why technologies like AMRs, AGVs, and gigacasting have finally crossed the adoption threshold.In this episode, find out:How team culture and customer empathy helped manufacturers survive 2008Why automotive has been having the supply chain conversation since Henry Ford's assembly line daysHow AI is analyzing terabytes of welding data daily to optimize qualityWhy cobots, camera programming, and automated forklifts are creating new job opportunitiesWhat gigacasting is and how it's eliminating spot welding by casting car bodies in 3-5 componentsWhy trade roles like maintenance and electricians are seeing a resurgenceThe proactive vs. reactive approach needed when running hundreds of jobs per hourHow RAM Solutions trains hands-on with STÄUBLI equipment to fully support customersEnjoying the show? Please leave us a review here. Even one sentence helps. It's feedback from Manufacturing All-Stars like you that keeps us going!Tweetable Quotes:“You have unbelievable technology coming into the automotive industry. It might be perceived as stagnant but that's just not true. There's a wide range of opportunities for anybody with any type of background to participate in this space.” – Scott Hunter“We talk about AI, but you still have to know the basics and know how to work with your hands. You need to know how to weld or operate a robot. You need to know the core foundation principles before you can take the next step.” – Paul Otto“We've always had a ton of automative data but the next step has been how to get it into a format so data scientists can use it and draw conclusions from it. Now the number crunchers can use AI tools to drive decision making on the manufacturing's floor.” – Andy JohnsonLinks & mentions:RAM Solutions, LLC, providing specialized automation solutions and 24/7 technical support across North America, with expertise in robotic tool changers, collision sensors, pneumatic systems, and overhead lifting equipment.STÄUBLI, a global mechatronic solution provider delivering robotics, electrical connectors, fluid connectors, and textile solutions across nearly every industry with long-term support in 28 countries.G.E Schmidt, a global leader in resistance welding solutions providing complete spot, seam, and projection welding systems with proprietary technologies for automotive and industrial manufacturers across the U.S., U.K., and...

Can you believe the bean counters at ACC are taking the knife to its funding for Water Safety NZ? Their reasoning is that they've poured all this money into Water Safety NZ but they're not seeing a return on that investment. Which would be a reduction in drowning-related claims. But I'm with Water Safety NZ, which is saying today that good progress has been made, and this funding cut will put everything at risk and make a hard job even harder with $1 million less to do its work. Gavin Walker is its head of partnerships and funding, and he says there have been 54 drownings so far this year – five fewer than the 10-year average. Which, apparently, is not good enough for ACC. But it can quibble as much as it likes about the numbers and the return on investment and all of that, but the fact is water is a huge risk to people's lives. To every one of us. This claim by ACC that it's cutting the water safety funding because it's not getting the return on its investment doesn't stack up when you consider some of the other things it puts money into. ACC also part-funded the doomed “Road to Zero” road safety campaign which, I think we can agree, was hardly a glowing success. I don't recall ACC pulling the plug on that one. But its deputy chief executive of engagement and prevention, Renee Graham, is defending the decision, saying they've been putting $1 million a year into Water Safety NZ but drowning-related claims are costing it $3 million a year. My response to that: so what? The thing about water is that it's accessible to anyone and everyone – you don't need a swimming licence. Which means people can be clueless when it comes to throwing themselves into the water and not always thinking whether they might be overestimating their abilities. I'm probably at the other end of the spectrum because water terrifies me. Even though I've sailed for years —and even though our kids have grown up around water— the potential for things to go drastically wrong in water terrifies me. I suppose “respectful” might be a better word to use than “terrified”, but even though I love getting out on the water, I know it will never be my friend. That was something I always said to the kids when they were young. Water can be fun, but it's not your friend. Which is why I was determined, from the get-go, that they were going to have swimming lessons – but that costs money. We were very fortunate that we could afford it. But, if we'd been in a different financial position, then perhaps the swimming lessons would've been one of the first things to go. Which is what Gavin Walker from Water Safety NZ is saying today. He's saying: “There's a whole lot of kids who are actually missing out on good quality water survival support”. Which is going to get worse with ACC pulling its funding. And that's why ACC needs to have a hmmm moment of its own. “Hmmm…if we pull this funding, who gets harmed?”See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mike Hosking's interview this morning with reinstated Silver Ferns coach Dame Noeline Taurua could only have gone one of two ways. She could have spilled the beans. Or she could have danced around the legalities of a gagging order. She could have spilled the beans and made Netball NZ look like a bunch of incompetents. Or she could have played it safe. Funny thing is, she didn't spill the beans - but still managed to make Netball NZ look like a bunch of incompetents, when she said she was never informed why she was stood down and that there was no investigation into the claims made about her. That was the point where the interview was getting really curious and then, bang, she was being ushered away to a TV interview and had to end the call - promising to call back later. It was probably the point too where text messages full of exclamation marks started flying between the honchos at Netball NZ. Prior to that, Dame Noeline had said to Mike that she felt somewhat vindicated being reinstated. She said she was elated to be back but described the last few months as being “very horriffic”. Dame Noeline also confired to Mike that she was constrained in terms of what she could say. She said she could have taken legal action to get her job back - because she believes most of the players support her - but she didn't want Netball NZ money and taxpayer money being blown on lawyers. If I was a suspicious person, I would say that Dame Noeline and her PR minder realised she might have crossed the line talking about the lack of an explanation and the lack of an investigation, and that's why she ended the call. But I did check the TV and she was on-screen a short time after she spoke with Mike. Either way, I think Netball NZ is looking worse today than it has during this whole saga. To stand down its head coach without telling her why and without conducting any sort of investigation screams “Mickey Mouse” to me. And shows why chief executive Jennie Wyllie couldn't explain last week why Dame Noeline was back. This has turned out to be more of a cluster than we thought. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Global Societies of Evidence Based Policing Conference Time & Location: 21 Jul 2025, 08:00 – 22 Jul 2025, 17:00 https://www.sebp.police.uk/event-details/national-evidence-based-policing-conference-2025-1

Ever since the 1930s, when American soldiers were based all around the world, people in many countries have been antsy about foreigners getting what appears to them to be special treatment or privileges. The phrase people used back in the day about the US soldiers was something along the lines of them being overdressed, overpaid, oversexed and over here. And the Government seems to be tapping into the same kind of sentiment with this crackdown on employers not following the rules when they want to hire workers from overseas. That some employers are going straight to taking-on migrant workers without even trying to find locals to do the work first. Which they're supposed to do or required to do. Immigration Minister Erica Stanford is saying today that, if employers don't follow the rules and don't prioritise hiring New Zealanders, then they can forget about being allowed to hire anyone from overseas ever again. She says, since we started giving out accredited work visas to migrant workers three years ago, there are 20,000 more unemployed New Zealanders. “We have New Zealanders who are desperate for jobs and they need to be given the first opportunity for those." Which I think will go down like a cup of the old proverbial with some employers, who will say they should be allowed to employ whoever they want from wherever they want. And that's a view I agree with. It's something they've been pushing back against for years. But where the Government's current concern stems from, is the number of employers who aren't telling Work & Income that they're on the lookout for staff. When they should be. That's because they're not even interested in hiring locals and just want migrant workers. Erica Stanford says more than one-in-six employers just want to employ migrants without considering local workers. From the perspective of someone who is unemployed and needing work, I can see how that would be frustrating. But does that mean that we should be forcing employers to give locals work over people from overseas? It's a bit rich of the Government to say that we need to turn the education system on its head so young New Zealanders can grow up and be ready to work anywhere in the world; but then, when it comes to people from other countries coming to work here, we go all protectionist on it. Employers themselves certainly think they should be free to hire whoever they want. They've been saying that since 2016, when the-then National government announced changes to “put kiwis first in line for jobs”. Anne Tolley was the social development minister at the time and she said: “The Government is committed to getting more New Zealanders into work by ensuring they are first in line for jobs.” Which is the exact same thing Erica Stanford is saying today. But I bet it won't sound any better to employers today than it did nearly 10 years ago. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Do we need more MPs? The NZ Initiative thinks we do - saying today that, instead of 120, we should have 170. It says the number of MPs in New Zealand is low compared to other countries with similar populations and we need 50 more to keep them accessible to voters. Another thing it's calling for is a four-year parliamentary term. That's a no-brainer, as far as I'm concerned. But 50 more MPs? No thanks. However, I do think some change is needed because of the size of some of our electorates. Which is essentially why the NZ Initiative is advocating for more MPs. But I think a much better option would be to have less list MPs and more electorate MPs. Because, you think about the size of some electorates - the West Coast is a prime example - I've always thought it's crazy that one electorate MP has to represent and cover such a huge area. The Te Tai Tonga Maori seat is another one. One MP has to cover the whole South Island - as well as Stewart Island, the Chatham Islands, Wellington City and the Hutt Valley. The reason the NZ Initiative is making this call today, is because it's reviewed the last 30 years under the MMP voting system. And its two key points are the parliamentary term and the number of MPs. Senior Fellow Nick Clark says the three-year term is too short for effective long-term policymaking. He says: "By the time a government finds its feet and starts implementing policy, it is already thinking about the next election. A four-year term would give governments time to develop coherent long-term policies." No argument from me there. He also says our parliament - with 120 MPs - is about 30 percent smaller than international benchmarks say it should be. So he says get 50 more. He also thinks we need less cabinet ministers and reckons 15 would be enough. But I reckon he's going to be pushing it uphill to sell his idea of more politicians. I'm not sold. Far from it. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So another ham-fisted announcement from the Labour Party. In fact, it wasn't even an announcement. Because of a leak, it was forced this morning to confirm its plan to include a capital gains tax in its policies for next year's election. Which looks to me like a very watered-down, scaredy-cat version of a capital gains tax that won't impress many. Because, if they were serious, they'd apply it to everything. None of these exclusions. Which I'll get to. Another fly in the ointment - aside from all the exclusions and the leak - is what the money from the tax would be used on. Three free doctor's visits a year for all of us. Which I think would create more problems than it would be worth. So, if Labour forms the next government, it will introduce a capital gains tax that, if it's to be believed, would only apply to what seems like a very short list of things. There'd be no capital gains on the sale of the family home and there'd be no capital gains on the sale of farms. But there would be a capital gains tax on the sale of rental properties and commercial properties. So the farmers would be happy and the landlords - residential and commercial - would be brassed-off. There would also be no capital gains tax on KiwiSaver, shares, business assets, inheritances, and personal items. Which, Labour says, would mean 90 percent of us not paying any tax on any property we own and all of us getting three free doctor's visits a year. That's because the revenue from this new tax would be funnelled straight into the health system But has Labour really thought it through? Because, as soon as you start telling people they can go to the doctor for free three times a year, what chance do you think they'll actually be able to get an appointment with everyone doing the same? What's more, Labour says “one in six New Zealanders cannot afford to visit their doctor when they are sick.” So why aren't they targetting those people? Why would you give free doctor's visits to the five-out-of-six who can afford to go to the doctor? That's why this tax proposal is Labour's second-worst policy idea in the last few years, coming a very close second to the non-sensical, last-minute GST-off-fruit-and-vegetables idea it cooked up before the last election. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour had their Capital Gains Tax policy leaked earlier this week. The tax would only apply to residential and commercial property sales, not any other taxable areas. A decision which has led some to question if this is really a Capital Gains Tax. Labour leader Chris Hipkins had previously said that there would be no Capital Gains Tax under his leadership. However, he told John MacDonald that, 'after the election when we lost, I said, well, everything goes back on the table.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hutt Zone with John MacDonald focuses on the people, issues, events, and music that shape the Hutt Valley community.

What happened to the emergency mobile alert system ahead of and during yesterday's wind storm? One explanation for the absence of text alerts from one government MP is that, with the power out in places, the cell towers weren't working. But the power wasn't out in Christchurch city and there were still no alerts on my phone. What's more, the power only went out once the wind hit - well after the Emergency Management Minister pre-emptively declared a state of emergency on Wednesday afternoon. So, there are questions to be answered. I also think that, from the outset, the state of emergency shouldn't have been limited to Canterbury. If you look around the South Island, there are areas that have been hit just as hard - if not worse - than some areas in Canterbury. The Emergency Management Minister declared an emergency in Southland this morning. But it should have happened sooner. Then there are the people who question the need for such a response. I'm not sure if it was just the state of emergency that made things so quiet in town yesterday or whether it was the state of the emergency plus the mega-strike. Odds on, it was the state of emergency. Which one Christchurch business owner isn't happy about. They think it was overkill including Christchurch because the city wasn't as badly-affected as other parts of the region and their takings were down 50 percent because of it. It was like a tale of two Canterburys yesterday. We had trees coming down and that fire at Hanmer Springs. Whereas, in Christchurch, I think a lot of us were wondering when it was going to hit. The wind picked up at times. But, overall, Christchurch got off pretty lightly. Nevertheless, I disagree that the city shouldn't have been included in the state of emergency. Because who knew the wind was going to behave the way it did? With that wall of wind that was heading towards the city yesterday morning splitting into two and skirting around the city. That's why I'll always support the “better safe than sorry” approach. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on Politics Friday, National MP and former doctor Vanessa Weenink, and Labour's Tracey Lee McLellan join John MacDonald to delve into the biggest topics of the week. They discuss the Government response to yesterday's wind storm, the mega-strike, the end of home economics and outdoor education in schools, political involvement in the Netball NZ debacle, and Labour's future funding policy. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Minister for the South Island is ducking for cover. I probably would be too, if I was him. Because he knows it's going to be very difficult to defend the pitiful share the South Island is getting from the Government's latest $1.2billion funding round for new roads and roading upgrades. The south island has been virtually shut out, with just 6 percent of the money going to projects here. The Hope Bypass, near Nelson, is the only one south of Cook Strait. With no mention of making State Highway 1 north and south of Christchurch four lanes, which regional leaders say is needed. Leann Watson from Business Canterbury is saying that, considering the South Island's contribution to New Zealand's economy, it doesn't sound fair. And she's spot on. In fact, I think she's being generous. It's a rip-off. Tell that to Transport Minister Chris Bishop, though, who says the Government can't do everything at once and needs to prioritise roading projects. But there's at least one road in the South Island that needs to be given much higher priority - which everyone seems to have been banging-on about for ages. State Highway 1 between Christchurch and Ashburton is an absolute shocker. It's a stretch that South Island Minister James Meagher will know only too well. How many times do you reckon he's driven on that road since becoming an MP and since becoming the minister who's supposed to be in Wellington advocating for us? The guy who seems to have gone to ground and who hasn't been available to respond to media inquiries about this South Island road funding debacle. No wonder he hasn't been available. Because it is indefensible. At least the transport minister is fronting. Not only saying that the Government can't do everything at once but also saying that the roads that have got funding - 94 percent of them in the North Island - are getting the green light because they are what he calls “top priority corridors”. He says they're top priority because they will boost freight movement, increase safety and lead to economic growth. But let's just test that. Would a 4-lane highway between Christchurch and Ashburton already boost freight movement? Of course, it would. What about safety? Would a 4-lane highway be safer, compared to the 2-lane goat track we've got at the moment? That's a no-brainer. And what about economic growth? Would a 4-lane highway between Christchurch and Ashburton do good things for the economy? Do I even need to answer that one? The Government's argument for 94 percent of this new road funding going to the North Island doesn't stack up. LISTEN ABOVE Note: Minister Meager did issue a statement - however it was not initially reported. See below the Minister's full statement: “I'm very pleased with yesterday's confirmation of a near $1.2 billion for the next stage of our Roads of National Significance (RoNS) programme. “The Hope Bypass project is significant for the South Island. SH6 is a vital connection for our people and goods to get around, and this bypass will help boost economic growth in Nelson Tasman. It will also bring wider economic benefits for the region; through the jobs the project will create. “It's important to note yesterday's update is just one part of the Government's ongoing infrastructure work programme. “Developments continue on the Belfast to Pegasus and Woodend Bypass (a RoNS), with a FTAA application being worked through currently. “The South Island is also well-represented with six projects in the Roads of Regional Significance (RoRS) work programme, with the Queenstown upgrade package and five Canterbury RoRs: SH76 Brougham Street Upgrades S75 Halswell Road Improvements SH1 Rolleston Access Improvements The second Ashburton Bridge “We've also committed to important South Island roading infrastructure outside of the RoNs and RoRs programmes, like a replacement bridge for Christchurch's Pages Road, which I announced $38.5 million of Government funding for in August.” See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Waimakariri Mayor Dan Gordon joined John MacDonald to get the latest from their district on storm preparation and damage. There are also reports that people set off fireworks in the area last night. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Canterbury Civil Defence Controller James Thompson joined John MacDonald on Canterbury Mornings with the latest information we need to know ahead of today's expected damaging wind storm. The region is under a red wind warning locally, along with parts of the Southern North Island. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What do street lights, tree cover, and public art all have to do with criminology? According to the data, these small initiatives can move the needle on the prevalence of neighborhood crime. In the fourth special edition of the Ampersand Podcast, Mark Trodden, Dean of Penn Arts & Sciences and Thomas S. Gates, Jr. Professor of Physics & Astronomy, talks with John MacDonald, Professor of Criminology and Sociology, and Director of the Master of Science in Criminology, about crime prevention through design, big data and technology, and how the Cambridge inspired a new program at Penn.

Some days you hear about something which absolutely beggars belief. Today is one of those days. You hear about something that makes you wonder what the hell has happened to society. Sometimes it can be overseas. Or it can be something here in New Zealand. Today is one of those days. Because I am blown away by this coroner's report which has just come out, into the death of a four-year-old girl in a public fountain in Tauranga in May 2023. Coroners are quite measured in the words they use and coroner Matthew Bates is no different, saying today that he's “troubled” by a particular aspect of this tragedy. I'm reading that as code for “appalled”. Because, even though four people could see four-year-old Nia Lohchab lying face down in the water, not one of them did anything to get her out. The coroner knows that because CCTV footage shows there were four people near the fountain, but not one of them did anything. One of them got on their phone - presumably calling emergency services - but then left her in the water. The coroner says it's unlikely that the outcome would have been any different if they had got her out. But what does it say about our society? What does it say about us? To put it bluntly, it tells me that we've become a bunch of lamos. What other conclusion can you come to? So Nia was at Memorial Park, in Tauranga, with her grandfather and her younger sister just over two years ago. It was three days before her fifth birthday. She ran towards the fountain and her little sister ran in a different direction. So the grandfather went after the younger child first, as most people would. That was just after 20-to-10 in the morning. At 9:49AM, a member of the public called emergency services saying there was a child face down in the water. But neither that person, nor three others in the area, did anything to get her out. Four minutes later, police arrived, found her motionless, got her out, started giving CPR, but they couldn't save her. In his report, coroner Matthew Bates says - of the four people near the fountain at the time - at least three of them were clearly aware that NIa was there and that she was lying face down in the water. And they left her there. What the hell have we come to? He says he is “troubled by the fact that none of the members of the public who observed nia face down and motionless in the water removed her from the fountain immediately”. Maybe we shouldn't be surprised. Because here's another example of how lame people have got when it comes to helping out. A chap was driving near The Palms shopping mall, in Christchurch, the other week and was T-boned by another driver. After the crash, not one person came to check he was ok. Some people in the gym came outside to have a look. Then went back inside. No one came to help or, at the very least, check if he needed any help. So maybe we shouldn't be surprised that people who saw this little girl lying face down in the fountain did nothing to get her out. But it is appalling and it shows how we have become a society that doesn't care as much as it used to. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government is really spooked by this week's mega strike. With about 100,000 people expected to walk off the job on Thursday. If it wasn't spooked, we wouldn't have Public Service Minister Judith Collins writing this open letter to patients, students and families affected by the doctors, nurses, teachers, prison staff and other healthcare workers going on strike. It's a letter which, I think, ups the ante on the serve Health Minister Simeon Brown gave doctors last week over their involvement. Because what Judith Collins says in the letter, aside from how much the Government regrets the impact the strike is going to have on people - which it is, she's encouraging parents to do, what I would describe as, harassment of teachers. She's saying to parents - especially those with younger kids who are going to have to make alternative arrangements for the day because they can't leave the young ones at home on their own - that they should quiz teachers about the timing of their action. Why they're striking in a week when many schools already have teacher-only days and on a day so close to the Labour Day holiday on Monday. And I think this is so wrong. Because, if you've ever had kids at school, you will know that quite a few parents don't need any encouragement to have a go at the teachers. You always hear stories about parents hounding teachers about this and that. And, every now and then, you hear stories about people quitting teaching altogether because of the relentless hassle they get from parents. And the Government, with this open letter, is just encouraging more of that. It's calling the mega strike “politically-motivated”. But the Government stands accused of the exact same thing with this open letter. As well as the outburst last week from the Health Minister. One of the reasons the Government thinks it's politically-motivated is the secondary teachers union wanting to discuss Palestine when it met with the Education Minister. That was just dumb and didn't do their cause any good. But the Government just needs to accept that the mega strike is happening and it needs to stop this attack on people who are doing nothing illegal. They're fully within their rights to strike and this harassment has to stop. If you heard me last week criticising the firefighters for striking, because I thought it put us at unnecessary risk, then you might think it's a bit rich of me to be having a go at the Government today. The difference is, I'm not a government minister. More importantly, though, I wasn't encouraging anyone to confront the firefighters. Far from it. But that's what the Public Service Minister is doing. The teachers shouldn't have to defend themselves to nagging parents and the Government shouldn't be egging them on. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hutt Zone with John MacDonald focuses on the people, issues, events, and music that shape the Hutt Valley community.

Isn't it weird that, in the past 25 years, we have spent millions and millions and millions of dollars on road safety campaigns, but there have, generally, been no changes in that time to the penalties handed out for bad and dangerous driving? I tried to find out exactly how much has been spent, but I realised that was quite ambitious. Nevertheless, I can safely say that it's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, ChatGPT reckons it's somewhere between $2.5 billion and $3.5 billion. It's probably way more than that. Either way, we've spent billions over the past 25 years trying to make people aware of the consequences of bad and dangerous driving, but many of the fines and penalties for drivers breaking the law haven't changed. And the AA wants that rectified. I'm not saying don't do it, but I'm not convinced that that would make much difference when it comes to what actually happens on the roads and how drivers behave. Aside from the money spent on road safety campaigns, let's also not forget the gazillions spent on cleaning up the mess after road crashes. ACC, hospital costs, ongoing care for people – it's estimated that that comes to about $10 billion a year. So, in the past 25 years, billions have been spent trying to educate drivers and dealing with the consequences of road crashes. But in that time, not much has changed when it comes to penalties. Which is why the AA's road safety spokesperson Dylan Thomsen is saying today that, at the very least, fines should be doubled across the board to make up for inflation, and fines automatically adjusted for inflation on an ongoing basis. He says: "We need to bring these penalties back up so they work to make drivers think twice about taking risks on the road or breaking the rules because right now they're not doing that." I agree that they're not working, but I don't agree that harsher penalties would make a difference. Because when people are muppets out on the road, they don't even think twice about the penalties, let alone the consequences. The AA thinks differently, and reckons the changes need to focus on the types of offences that cause the most carnage on the roads. Which are: people driving drunk or stoned, people not wearing seatbelts, people driving too fast, and people being distracted by things like mobile phones. Dylan Thomsen is saying that the AA, generally, wants fines to double but thinks the penalties for these particular offences might have to be increased more than that to really make a difference. The fine for using your phone while driving would certainly need to be more than doubled if we were to get anywhere close to the fines dished out in parts of Australia. In New South Wales, if you're caught using your phone while driving, you're fined $350 - or $470 if it's in a school zone. In Western Australia, it's a $1,000 fine. Here, it's $150 and 20 demerit points. Dylan Thomsen points to a recent survey of AA members which found that most of them don't think our fines are effective. Less than 50% said they thought the fines dished out for things like speeding and using a cellphone driving were tough enough to change behaviour. But do you really think harsher fines would change these behaviours? I don't. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Opposition Leader's again expressing concern about Te Pati Maori, but not yet ruling out working with them. Toxic culture claims by Eru Kapa-Kingi were followed by the party releasing documents accusing him of threatening Parliamentary staffers. They also show his mother, recently demoted Whip MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi, was warned about risking budget overspend. Chris Hipkins says it's clear Te Pati Māori has some internal issues to work through before they'd be in a position to form a government. Chris Hipkins told John MacDonald any decisions about whether or not they'd form a coalition with Te Pati Māori will come closer to the election, as an awful lot can happen between now and then. However, he says, if there was an election today, he'd say they're not in a position at the moment to play a constructive role in future government. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I'm right behind the call being made today for helmets to be made mandatory at recreational ice skating and roller skating rinks. For it to be a legal requirement that if you want to go and have a skate with your mates, you have to wear a helmet. Because if it's good enough for helmets to be compulsory on bikes, then why isn't it good enough for helmets to be mandatory when someone's on a set of skates? When you think about it, you are far more likely to ride a bike than go to an ice skating rink or a roller skating rink. Which, surely, means that skating is way more risky. So helmets have to be non-negotiable. In fact, I'd go beyond just ice skating rinks and roller skating rinks, I think we should be doing the same at the likes of ski fields and skate parks. But back to the tragic death of 13-year-old Kymani Hiley-Hetaraka during a school visit to the Alpine Ice Skating Rink in Christchurch 15 months ago. Her sister was also on the trip and the two of them were skating together when Kymani —who wasn't wearing a helmet— fell and hit her head. She was, initially, able to speak and she asked her sister to get her some Panadol. But she then started having a seizure, was taken to hospital, and died two days later after being taken off life support. Since the tragedy the rink has voluntarily made helmets mandatory. But there is no law requiring it and Kymani's parents —Curtis Gwatkin and Maraea Hetaraka— think that needs to change. They're saying today that they want the Government to make helmets mandatory at all recreational ice skating and roller skating rinks. And I couldn't agree more. They're speaking out because, initially, they wanted to wait for WorkSafe to do its investigation, thinking that someone would be prosecuted. But that didn't happen. WorkSafe found that there were no health and safety breaches by the ice-skating rink. No breaches by Kymani's school. And no breaches by the external organisation contracted by the school to run the trip. But that's not good enough as far as Curtis and Maraea are concerned. They say it's left them feeling frustrated and angry, and who can blame them? They're determined to keep fighting on this one and plan to start a petition to try and force the Government to make helmets mandatory at all ice skating and roller skating rinks. It's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Send us a textGary pays a return visit to the Restitution contest held on Raasay in early September, and explores the contribution that island has made to Scotland's creative culture more widely.PlaylistAngus Nicholson with Barabel Phadruig, The Eavesdropper, Waulking the Floor and John MacDonald's Exercise from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording. Decker Forrest with Siud an gaol a bh' agad orm, Janet tyed the bonnet tight, St. Anne's Reel, 'S e mo ghaol an gille dubh and Mrs. MacKenzie's Reel from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording.Hazel Whyte with Fhuair mi Pog from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording.Finlay Cameron with Inns Dhòmhsa Cà'il Thu Cadal, The Tothiemurchus Rant, David MacIsaac's, An t-seann Cailleach, Mary Thomson, Lochiel's Rant and Jenny Dang the Weaver from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording. Martyn Bennett with Hallaig from Bothy Culture Hamish Hepburn and Jack Houston with The Mull Wedding  Ciar Milne with Drover Lads, Boys of Ballymote, The English Gardens of Munchen from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording. Brendon Eade with Unknown, Captain Horn, Devil in the Kitchen, Unknown,  High Road to Linton and General MacDonald from the Raasay Restitution Contest 2025, EYP Recording.   Support the show

Send us a textGary chats to Bede Patterson, one of the new generation of Australian pipers blazing a trail in fresh and exciting approaches to piping.PlaylistMatt MacIsaac with Gaelic Air, The Old Woman's Dance and the Firedrill from The Piping Album P/M John D Burgess with the Baldoozer, Center's Bonnet, Cork Hill and John MacDonald's Jig from King of the Highland Pipers The Whistlebinkies with Inner Sound from Inner Sound Fraser Fifield with The Piper's Premonition from Piobaireachd Bede Patterson with Atude in E flat from a Private Recording. Martyn Bennett with Karabach  Bede Patterson with Theme from a Private Recording Matthew Welch with High Street 2005 from Welch: BlarvusterLinksNational Piping Centre Clubs Producer PostBede Patterson The Nexus Project Info and FundraiserSupport the show