Podcasts about kerre woodham

Bowel Cancer NZ's new report lays bare the realities of 350 people under 50 living with the disease. It's the second deadliest cancer in New Zealand, and the leading cause of cancer death among people under the age of 50. Every year around 3,300 New Zealanders are diagnosed and 1,200 die from the disease, despite it having a cure rate of over 90% when caught early. The Never Too Young report found more than half of those surveyed didn't know the symptoms prior to diagnosis, and many faced delays in diagnosis. Bowel Cancer NZ Chief Executive Peter Huskinson told Kerre Woodham if the screening age was lowered to 45, it would go a long way to catch the majority of people with early onset bowel cancer. He says that way they'd be caught by the screening, rather than waiting for symptoms to develop. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Business NZ Chief Executive Katherine Rich says the Supreme Court's ruling that Uber drivers are in fact employees of Uber, not contractors, could have far-reaching implications for businesses that hired contractors, and she says it could collapse the gig economy. What's the gig economy? Well, when we're talking about the gig economy, we mean people who work on single projects or tasks, gigs, on demand. They're often hired through a digital marketplace, think Uber, Airbnb, and gig workers can be anyone from part-timers looking to make extra dosh from a second job that they can work around their own hours, to full-time freelancers. They can also be from a range of backgrounds across a range of industries. On the plus side, if you're a gig worker, there's more flexibility for hours and remote work, high earning potential —the keyword there is potential—, the option to work for various companies, you're not tied to one, and the ability to become your own boss. On the downside, there is the potential to make very little. The gig economy is unsteady, and for many it's an unsatisfactory alternative to a secure and stable full-time job with all the associated benefits, sick pay, annual leave, and the like. Now, a lot of young ones say they want the flexibility that comes with having a gig and a side hustle and doing a bit there. The idea of turning up and working 9am to 5pm is absolute anathema to them, until they get sick or until they realise that they need to set aside money for holidays or until say they want parental leave. And then all of a sudden, a secure job doesn't look so bad after all. Now, with the Supreme Court ruling, in effect, contractors can have their cake and eat it too if it flows on to other industries. The drivers who brought the case against Uber said they were seeking fundamental human rights in relation to the work they did for the company. Uber says, "Oh, come on, you knew what you were getting into when you signed the contract. Drivers are in control of business decisions in a manner not typical of an employee situation. They can decide whether, when, where, and for how long to drive, or whether they want to do other work instead." They also had the ability to and did make decisions around assets, business costs, and organize their own tax affairs. Uber accepted in court that drivers didn't have input into the structure. For example, when Uber decided to slash the fares in Auckland and Wellington, it was a bit of a promotion, drivers had no say over that. But they say the drivers know what the platform looks like, they accepted and they use it. They enter into a service agreement, and they act accordingly. Workplace Minister Brooke van Velden told Mike Hosking this morning that the Government's looking to make changes to define exactly what it means to be a contractor. She outlined it very, very clearly, and we will get that to you. Basically, she says that the law hasn't really kept up with the new economy. The workplace law hasn't kept up with the new economy. That, you know, the way Uber wasn't around 10 years ago. Airbnb wasn't around 10 years ago, and workplace law hasn't kept up with it. But can you really have your cake and eat it too? If you don't like turning up to the same employer 9am to 5pm, you know what your job is, you know what your hours are, the very regularity of it that makes a job like that so attractive to some people, Makes it a turn off to others. They don't want that regularity in their lives. They want to be free to work when they want to. It doesn't seem right that you have your cake and eat it too, does it? Brooke van Velden says she'll make changes. The Supreme Court says Uber has to treat its drivers like employees. Would love to hear from you on this one, especially if you've worked for Uber. I know a number of people have. I ran into an old film director of mine from Television New Zealand days who was driving an Uber. Really enjoyed it. Loved the in effect retired, but still really loved meeting people, kept them out of the house, enjoyed driving, really enjoyed it. All sorts of people have done a bit of Uber. Do you feel like an oppressed member of the working classes with the corporate boot on your neck? Did you know what you were getting into when you signed up? And what implication does this have for employers who do use contractors? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand produces enough food to feed 40 million people. Some of it we consume and some some we export. But a staggering 30% of the food we make or grow goes to waste. Fruit and vegetables need to look a certain way to make it onto supermarket shelves – or they get tossed. Angus Simms and his partner Katie Jackson wanted to tackle that problem - so they started Wonky Box three years ago. This is the subscription food box full of wonky fruit and veg that's delivered to your door. Their business has grown way bigger and faster than they ever thought, but it hasn't been smooth sailing along the way. Angus joined Kerre Woodham in the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered to share his story. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand produces enough food to feed 40 million people. Some of it we consume and some some we export. But a staggering 30% of the food we make or grow goes to waste. Fruit and vegetables need to look a certain way to make it onto supermarket shelves – or they get tossed. Angus Simms and his partner Katie Jackson wanted to tackle that problem - so they started Wonky Box three years ago. This is the subscription food box full of wonky fruit and veg that's delivered to your door. Their business has grown way bigger and faster than they ever thought, but it hasn't been smooth sailing along the way. Angus joined Kerre Woodham in the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered to share his story. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As you'll have heard in the news this morning, the Retirement Commissioner has called for a 10-year roadmap and cross-party agreement, following the release of its review of New Zealand's retirement system. More Kiwis are living longer, working differently, and facing pressures around housing and care. We're facing a huge rise in the number of older people. At the same time, we're facing fewer working Kiwis who can pay for the associated costs of aged care. Current data shows that right now, for every 100 people of working age, we have 28 retirees. Those numbers are changing quickly. By 2050, just 25 years away, we're looking at 38 retirees per 100 workers. By 2060, we'll have twice as many retirees compared to workers. In 2019, those older than 65 received $13 billion more in government services, mainly super and healthcare, than they contributed in taxes. I mean, that's just the way it is. You end up using the health system more when you're young, very, very young, like under five, but mainly when you're very, very old. And in the middle, you shouldn't really be accessing it at all. Of course, we're seeing those numbers going up as well, but that's just the way it is. It's the Western world over. It's just life. Treasury has been screaming for more than a decade now that we simply don't have enough money coming in to keep the lights on. Last week it gave another warning. Debt is not only being used for capital expenditure, but to cover operating costs. So it's like using your credit card to pay the necessary bills. It's unsustainable. And this is occurring as the books haven't yet recovered from Covid and Cyclone Gabrielle, and as the costs associated with an aging population are set to soar. As I said, we're not alone in this. The Western world over is struggling with this. Japan's been staring down the barrel of a shrinking workforce and a rising number of oldies for years now. The Prime Minister Fumio Kishida made an interesting point in January 2023 that Japan is standing on the verge of whether they can continue to function as a society, facing as it does the twin threats of falling birth rates and an ever-increasing elderly population. And when I say elderly, they live a really long time – they've got really healthy oldies who are regularly hitting 100. In 2022, almost half of Japanese firms relied on workers over the age of 70. So they're trying to encourage older people to still participate, to continue if they're up to it, if they can. So we could work longer. We could make use of the technology and the digitisation and the AI if you want to continue working. We could shift health to be rather than end-of-life care, try and put an emphasis on preventing people getting health issues and try and keep people out of hospital with preventable illnesses. We could prioritise health and well-being to ensure we stay healthy for longer. When it comes to providing a broader tax base, we'll be competing with every other Western country to import workers, because I think it's pointless telling young people, and certainly other countries have found this, to have more babies. There's financial incentives for young couples to have more babies, but a couple of 100 bucks here and there is not going to make people have children. What makes young families want to have children is a belief in the future, a belief in the society in which they live, a belief that they can support the children and give them what they need in terms of and it's not just financial things, it's time. If you're working seven days a week to provide for your family, you're going to limit the number of children you're going to have. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A warning New Zealand needs to act quickly on strengthening our retirement income system. The Retirement Commission's income policy review has found a longer-term political focus is needed to ensure future generations' certainty. It makes 12 recommendations, including moving more quickly to implement KiwiSaver reforms, and harder strategies such as a new cross-party accord. Policy and Research Director Patrick Nolan told Kerre Woodham we now have people over 65 than we have under 15, so we need to act now. He says New Zealand is going to look very different into the future, so these conversations need to be had. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How common is it for people to be living double lives? Former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming is awaiting sentence after pleading guilty to having child sexual exploitation and bestiality material on his work devices. An IPCA report also found complaints of McSkimming being a sexual predator were ignored, the emails the woman sent instead being used to prosecute her for harassment. Private Investigator Julia Hartley Moore told Kerre Woodham that the number of people living double and secret lives is an epidemic. "I think they just do it because they can,” she said. “People have an endless capacity to deceive each other – I think that certain people will never and there's certain people that will, and there's a hell of a lot that do.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How is it that the woman, who's at the centre of a cover-up by top brass within the Police, still has to go to court to defend two charges of causing harm by posting a digital communication? She's charged with harassing a police officer who was apparently investigating her accusations against that pervert McSkimming and with harassing the investigating police officer's wife. She was charged in May of last year with causing harm by posting digital communication in relation to over 300 emails she sent to McSkimming's work email address between December 23 and April 24. That charge against the woman was withdrawn in the Wellington District Court in September because McSkimming did not wish to give evidence. You bet your bippy he didn't. It would have been all shades of Oscar Wilde, bringing a court case against someone and having it spectacularly backfire, and then you are the one who ends up in strife. When Richard Chambers spoke to Mike Hosking yesterday, he said the charges against the young woman had been withdrawn. RC: The matters that resulted in her being charged in the middle of last year, no, that is now, that is no longer in the court. MH: So that has been taken out of the court and resolved in some way, shape or form. Is there a cheque being written? How does that being, or how is that being handled? RC: I reached out to her legal representative late yesterday to express an apology on behalf of New Zealand Police for what had occurred, and I did say to him that I had no doubt there would be further conversations at an appropriate time in the future. So no mention of further charges and that they were still before the court. If you were listening to that as I was, you would be left with the clear impression that any charges against the young woman had been wiped, that the Police were very sorry, and that they would be compensating her for what she'd been through. No mention of the further charges. We approached the Police Commissioner, and this is the written statement from the office: "The matter is before the court. Police has instructed a senior criminal barrister in this proceeding. It would be inappropriate for me to comment about the merits, including public interest of any case that is before the court. However, what I have done and what I can say is that I have assured myself that proper process has been followed in bringing this case." Reading between the lines, if he interfered now that it's before the court and asked for it to go away, it would be shades of a cover-up. Because it's underway, because the presumably policeman and his wife have not dropped the charges, it must go before the court and due process must be followed. This statement's attributable to Assistant Commissioner Mike Johnson: "Ms Z is the defendant in a prosecution in the District Court. In these circumstances, it's not appropriate to comment publicly on the merits of the prosecution, including the public interest." So I kind of vaguely, if I'm being generous, and I'm not particularly feeling all that generous, but as a as an intellectual exercise, I'll try and be generous, I can see that to interfere with a matter that's before the court, making something disappear and go away, is shades of exactly why the top brass have been cleared out. But come on. I'm sure it was very distressing for the police officer and his wife to be inundated with emails, and goodness knows what was said in it. They were, what was that lovely word that Jared Savage used about the emails that he received? Incoherent. So there was a lot of high drama and emotive language used in the emails. God only knows what was said but she'd been driven unhinged by what had happened to her in terms of not being spoken to, not being listened to, not being regarded. Surely there has to be an element of mercy in this. I mean, even if she has to go through the whole process of appearing before court any kind of conviction against her name would be a gross miscarriage of justice. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At what point, when you're a business owner, do you decide that you've had enough? There was Covid, then there were the boom times, then there was the recession that seems to have gone on and on, there's a crisis in consumer confidence, there's global uncertainty that too has gone on and on. There are problems finding staff, there are problems keeping staff, there are problems finding work, problems with cash flow. At what point, which 3 in the morning wake up do you think, "I can't do this anymore?" Do you look at your life and realise that for the past five years you haven't had a life, and you call it quits or do you look at your books, and find yourself hoping for a good summer, then realise that hope is not a strategy, and decide to pull the pin? Business liquidations hit a 10-year high last year, with 2,500 companies folding, and that's the highest annual figure since 2014. Retail and construction suffered the most. But this year it's even worse. The number of companies put into liquidation so far in 2025 has surpassed last year's total for the same period, as economic pressures and low consumer confidence impact business viability. Dry words to describe heart palpitations, terror, dry mouth, sleeplessness, fractiousness. Very dry words to describe a terrible time in your life. Analysts say the recent rise in liquidations can be attributed to an increased focus on enforcement by Inland Revenue, as well as a lag of companies that were in distress during Covid but were propped up with government money, so it gave them a false second life. There's a long-held belief that recessions and shocks like Covid clear the dead wood, that there are many companies that shouldn't be in business, that fall by the wayside. But behind that, every business that closes its doors are people who put their hopes and their dreams and their labour and their hard work and their life savings into it. But does deciding to call it quits bring its own freedom? If you have been in a lather, desperately hoping that you're going to turn the corner for years now, not months, but for years, can deciding to call it quits be liberating? If you've had to make the tough decision to call it, it's done, can it be a relief? There are many people who, you know, through the GFC, it was similar. There were businesses that went by the wayside as people suddenly found they had no spare cash in their pockets. The stock market crash in New Zealand. Now that saw people with astronomically high interest rates, mortgage interest and business interest rates. Again, people with no disposable, lack of consumer confidence, a time of austerity. There were plenty of businesses that went under in the 80s as well. '87 was the stock market crash, and then from, I think it was really about 1990 that I remember that it was just a very, very grim, grim, austere, brutal time. So people have been through it before, and if you have, is there life after insolvency, after a liquidation, after closing your doors and saying, "I cannot do this anymore. I just can't?” There are more important things. My health is more important, my family is more important. Is there, and this is where I'm going to need you to tell me because I've never owned my own business, but I've certainly heard from a number of you over the years who love being your own boss. You can't imagine working for anybody else, but by God, that comes at a price, especially in times like these. So, if you've made the decision to call it, does insolvency mean the end and a new beginning? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The revelation that the Deputy Commissioner of Police Jevon McSkimming was a predatory pervert was one thing. To find out that our most senior police officers were complicit in not only covering up his inappropriate behaviour, but then prosecuting, persecuting his victim is quite frankly horrifying. I knew, many of you knew, Andrew Coster was an ineffectual toadying eunuch. Does anyone remember his one and only hour in the studio when he spoke in slogans and was completely incomprehensible? I couldn't have been more delighted when Police Minister Mark Mitchell moved him on and replaced him with a proper cop, Richard Chambers. The fact that Jevon McSkimming came so close to the top job defies belief, given the accusations swirling around him. And he only came so close to the top job because Coster, Kura, de Wattignar, and Basham needed him to be in the top job to hide their moral and professional failures. This is absolutely appalling. McSkimming is a sick pervert. He needs help, professional help. The rest of them were just motivated by saving their sorry skins and were willing to throw a vulnerable young woman to the wolves to allow her to be prosecuted to save themselves. The young woman in question sent multiple emails to ministers, MPs, the media, she wrote on LinkedIn, she phoned the police complaints line. She might have appeared to be obsessive, but nothing makes a woman more unhinged than being gaslit, than being ganged up on, than being not believed. You can imagine McSkimming – ‘mate, she's a bunny boiler. Yeah, crazy'. If they were any sort of cops, any sort of people, they would know that is manipulation 101. Dismiss her as a lunatic. You know, confess, yes, what was I thinking? I was 40, she was 21. I shouldn't have had the affair, but, you know, I ended it and saw the error of my ways. And now she's trying to ruin my career. You've got to save me. You've got to help me. And they did. Not one of those former top cops, the very top cops in the country, ever thought to have a chat to her, or to get one of their staff to have a chat to her, to hear her side of the story. Did they not find it odd that McSkimming didn't say, look, talk to her, you'll see for yourself? No. Not only did they not do anything, they prosecuted her. They put her through hell. It's appalling, it's horrifying, it adds grist to Tamatha Paul's anti-police mill. Richard Chambers has a hell of a job ahead of him in rebuilding faith in the Police, and he knows that. “My job right now is to ensure that I take on board all the recommendations and work swiftly to put everything in place to ensure that this never happens again. “And, you know, in terms of other stuff out there, well, I only know what I know. I'm not aware of anything else, and God, I hope that's not the case because, you know, the people of New Zealand, when they reach out to New Zealand Police, deserve the best possible service they can get, and they need to be taken seriously. “And I've been very clear about that since I took over as the Commissioner. Our priority is supporting the frontline staff of my organisation who do this work day and night. And, and I'm really proud of that. And, you know, my focus now will be putting a new leadership team in place, and they will be working with me to help steer New Zealand Police, in the right direction and ensure that these appalling situations never happen again.” Oh, hello 2007. Police Commissioner Howard Broad, after the Royal Commission of Inquiry, after the ghastly Scholllum Shipton cover-up there. “I will now ask all serving members to join with me to make the changes necessary to prevent this sort of behaviour ever happening again. The work's already started. We're moving quickly on this. A draft code's been fully consulted. There'll be a reform of the 1958 Police Act”. At the heart of the issues looked at by the Commission of Inquiry has been abuses of power. Yes, policies, processes, and sanctions can only go so far. That's quite right. There were processes in place that were circumvented by these abusers. Abusers of the woman and abusers of power. What happens to people that they become like this? Coster's on the record as saying he entered the police because of his Christian faith, his Christian duty to serve. I feel for the good, honest men and women wearing the blue uniform who turn up to work every day trying to make New Zealand a better, safer community. They have been so badly let down by their bosses. But a number of them knew how hopeless Coster was. The number of texts and emails I received over the years that he was Commissioner were extraordinary. I'm not sure if they knew the depths to which he would go to save his skin and his salary, but they knew he was a wrong'un. They had a copper's nose to sniff out when something was wrong. I would love to hear from you on this one. I still trust the Police. I still back the Police. My faith in the Police hierarchy was shaken with Coster in the top role, and it's been absolutely rocked with the revelations of yesterday. With Richard Chambers as Commissioner, the ship has been righted. The oversight being introduced will help ensure corrupt officials won't be able to circumvent the processes designed to prevent and detect wrongdoing. But by bloody crikey, the Police will not be able to endure another scandal like this one, that's for sure. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The BBC is facing accusations of bias, as well as a lawsuit, after a leaked memo suggests the Panorama programme edited one of Donald Trump's speeches to imply he encouraged the Capitol Hill riots of January 2021. The US President is demanding a full retraction and is threatening to sue for nearly 1.8 billion New Zealand dollars in damages. The incident is doing nothing to raise trust in the media, or dispel concerns of media bias. NZME Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie told Kerre Woodham that a reporter's job when covering the news is to report the facts accurately, fairly, and in a balanced view, and some of the criticism that's been directed towards the media is that a lot of reporters have been allowed to inject their own opinion or analysis into those news reports. “I think we're getting to a point now where you'll see much more clearly differentiated, this is news, this is opinion, this is analysis.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

At what point, when you're a business owner, do you decide that you've had enough? There was Covid, then there were the boom times, then there was the recession that seems to have gone on and on, there's a crisis in consumer confidence, there's global uncertainty that too has gone on and on. There are problems finding staff, there are problems keeping staff, there are problems finding work, problems with cash flow. At what point, which 3 in the morning wake up do you think, "I can't do this anymore?" Do you look at your life and realise that for the past five years you haven't had a life, and you call it quits or do you look at your books, and find yourself hoping for a good summer, then realise that hope is not a strategy, and decide to pull the pin? Business liquidations hit a 10-year high last year, with 2,500 companies folding, and that's the highest annual figure since 2014. Retail and construction suffered the most. But this year it's even worse. The number of companies put into liquidation so far in 2025 has surpassed last year's total for the same period, as economic pressures and low consumer confidence impact business viability. Dry words to describe heart palpitations, terror, dry mouth, sleeplessness, fractiousness. Very dry words to describe a terrible time in your life. Analysts say the recent rise in liquidations can be attributed to an increased focus on enforcement by Inland Revenue, as well as a lag of companies that were in distress during Covid but were propped up with government money, so it gave them a false second life. There's a long-held belief that recessions and shocks like Covid clear the dead wood, that there are many companies that shouldn't be in business, that fall by the wayside. But behind that, every business that closes its doors are people who put their hopes and their dreams and their labour and their hard work and their life savings into it. But does deciding to call it quits bring its own freedom? If you have been in a lather, desperately hoping that you're going to turn the corner for years now, not months, but for years, can deciding to call it quits be liberating? If you've had to make the tough decision to call it, it's done, can it be a relief? There are many people who, you know, through the GFC, it was similar. There were businesses that went by the wayside as people suddenly found they had no spare cash in their pockets. The stock market crash in New Zealand. Now that saw people with astronomically high interest rates, mortgage interest and business interest rates. Again, people with no disposable, lack of consumer confidence, a time of austerity. There were plenty of businesses that went under in the 80s as well. '87 was the stock market crash, and then from, I think it was really about 1990 that I remember that it was just a very, very grim, grim, austere, brutal time. So people have been through it before, and if you have, is there life after insolvency, after a liquidation, after closing your doors and saying, "I cannot do this anymore. I just can't?” There are more important things. My health is more important, my family is more important. Is there, and this is where I'm going to need you to tell me because I've never owned my own business, but I've certainly heard from a number of you over the years who love being your own boss. You can't imagine working for anybody else, but by God, that comes at a price, especially in times like these. So, if you've made the decision to call it, does insolvency mean the end and a new beginning? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Many businesses that limped through the pandemic are now going under. Insolvency practitioners have been reporting a sharp rise in the number of insolvencies since mid-2022. Smaller retail, hospitality, construction, transport and manufacturing operators are failing far more now than they were before the pandemic. Waterstone Insolvency Principal Damien Grant told Kerre Woodham a lot of businesses are subject to economic winds, which are outside of their control. He says we as a country are getting poorer, which means disposable income and things like hospitality are dropping, which is why you see a lot of pain in the hospitality sector in particular. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Many businesses that limped through the pandemic are now going under. Insolvency practitioners have been reporting a sharp rise in the number of insolvencies since mid-2022. Smaller retail, hospitality, construction, transport and manufacturing operators are failing far more now than they were before the pandemic. Waterstone Insolvency Principal Damien Grant told Kerre Woodham a lot of businesses are subject to economic winds, which are outside of their control. He says we as a country are getting poorer, which means disposable income and things like hospitality are dropping, which is why you see a lot of pain in the hospitality sector in particular. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So the government's Sunday sessions this year have involved announcements of all sorts of policies, ranging from ho-hum to meaningful.The announcement yesterday of the action plan against organised crime comes under the meaningful. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith released what he called a bold and comprehensive action plan that aimed to disrupt supply, go after those who profit from the drug trade and rebuild communities afflicted by meth, as he outlined to Mike Hosking on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning. This is a scourge on society that we need to keep on battling against every day, finding new ways to combat the organised criminals who are doing this, but also dealing with the you know, better rehabilitation and actually for the first time sending a clear message through a hard-hitting media campaign, this is not a good idea to get involved with in any way, shape or form. Paul, in all honesty, is a hard-hitting media campaign to your average, you know, dare I suggest unemployed, go nowhere meth addict. Is that going to make one jot of difference? No, but it may stop some people taking the risk. And no single thing on its own is going to solve the problem. Of course, a campaign's not going to deal with a hardened sort of meth addict, but there may be a young person who's thinking about it, who if they get a clear message, this is not something you could use moderately, it's not something just to have a bit of a dabble with, it's something to avoid at all costs because some people, just one shot's enough to lead to a decade-long spiral of chaos and destruction, and that's what we want to send a clear message about. I don't know how you can not know that there's a very high chance that dabbling in meth can bring about ruin. Of course, not everybody who tries meth will see their life fall apart, but the odds are not great. Any drug, any misuse of a drug can bring about ruin. But meth seems to be particularly high in terms of getting its claws into people and consuming them, taking them over completely. You're not consuming the drug, it's consuming you. And it's not, your no-hopers that Mike Hosking referred to that end up destroyed by meth. It's all strata of society. You might end up a no-hoper, but you started off with jobs and businesses and companies and families and friends and a great lifestyle, gone. How can you not know that? I mean, in the early, early, early days, maybe what, 20 odd years ago, you might have thought, oh, okay, it's a new drug, I'll give it a try. I've tried other drugs and I'm on top of that and, you know, all the go-ask-gala scare campaigns that people try to use - I'm sophisticated, I know what I'm doing, you know, and then people come a cropper because they didn't know what they were dealing with. Now you do. You know exactly what harm it can cause and you're still going to give it a try? Really? The media campaign, while it will probably bolster our coffers, seems a waste of time. The rest of it, well, it makes sense. Policing, border security and addiction services will join forces to combat importation, distribution and demand. Customs, Defence and the GCSB will run a series of maritime operations across the Pacific, partnering to collect intelligence and identify drug smugglers on the water.They'll try to find, deter and disrupt shipments before they reach New Zealand. Well, good luck with that, because the drugs come in from Central and South America in a corridor down through the South Pacific where traffickers will use tiny atolls and islands that are part of the Cooks or Tonga or Samoa as refuelling and staging points. Back in 2019, I talked about this with Jose Suza Santos and he talked about the corridor that was well established in 2019 and about the damage being done to Pacific nations with this drugs corridor because of course they'll try it too. They will take the drugs, they'll take their cut, everybody takes a cut along the way, and drugs are apparently a huge problem in Fiji, taking a hold in Samoa, Tonga and the like. So six years later, this government is finally doing something in an attempt to disrupt the drug smugglers.The more aggressive stance will be supported by plans to strengthen search and surveillance powers. There'll be the expansion of electronic interception (hello GCSB), and speed up asset seizures under the Criminal Proceeds Recovery Act. There'll be a new police money laundering team to chase the cash behind organized crime and offshore police liaison officers looking at the syndicates logistics and banking networks. The plan puts $30 million out of the mental health and addiction budget over four years into treatment and early intervention services in communities that are hit hardest by meth, and there'll be a nearly $6 million national prevention campaign paid for with the seized proceeds of crime. We've seen a sharp rise in drug harm. Wastewater testing showing meth use roughly doubled between 23 and 24. And officials estimate the social harm from meth and other illicit drugs at $1.5 billion in 2024. We know this. We know the harm it causes. We know that meth is a really, really dangerous drug to dabble in. Why are people still running that risk? What is what do you need to block out, numb, void from your life with meth? Is it worry over your business, worry over your job, worry over a relationship? Just opting out of being a parent, opting out of life? It's miserable, it's hard. You can have a couple of hours of oblivion and you'll do whatever it takes to get outside of your own head. I don't know, I just cannot understand why you would do it. And why would you would put money in the pockets of these people? So the recommendations come from advice received from an expert ministerial advisory group that was tasked with advising on how New Zealand security agencies could better respond to organised crime and work together to do so. So the recommendations such as the maritime patrols, the greater powers to go after the proceeds of crime, the electronic surveillance, come from the Ministerial Advisory Group's report. Other suggestions weren't picked up on. A Minister of Organised Crime, for example, was recommended to coordinate the 13 agencies that will be charged with battling the cartels. It's a start. It's I mean, I would almost say that the horse has bolted. That corridor is well established. I don't know how you would go about patrolling the many, many islands and atolls of the South Pacific. But why? why? why? why? when you know what's happened to the to people who thought they could try it and control it and just use it as a bit of harmless fun, why would you put money into the pockets of these people?W hat is so awful about your life that you're willing to dance with the devil? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government's announced its methamphetamine action plan, calling the drug a 'scourge on our society'. Methamphetamine consumption doubled from 732kg in 2023 to almost 1,500 kilos in 2024, according to police wastewater testing. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says the prevention campaign will address importation, distribution and most importantly demand. NZ Police Acting Assistant Commissioner: Investigations, Serious and Organised Crime, Corrie Parnell told Kerre Woodham that 'we've got to tackle it and tackle it hard and front on.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What do you do, when you have invested all your money into an idea you thought was going off, and then the whole world shuts down? Do you try to fight on? Or do you completely change your business to survive? That's the decision Aidan Bartlett faced. He's the co-founder and chief Executive of online marketplace Designer Wardrobe. It was, once upon a time, a designer rental shop. Covid-19 wrecked the business but also gave it a new life. Aidan Bartlett joined Kerre Woodham in studio in the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand has the third highest adult obesity rate in the OECD, and the rates are going up. One in three adult New Zealanders is classified as obese, and one in 10 children. Even if you take into account, yes, yes, yes, a lot of the All Blacks front row are considered obese if you use the BMI. And yes, you might have a slow metabolism or it's your hormones and there's nothing you can do about it, that's still a lot of fat people and a lot of associated health issues. The cost of obesity in this country is estimated as being between four and nine billion dollars per year. It's a huge range, four to nine billion, but it's where you classify the different illnesses, and it depends on which survey you look at. Even if you go at the lower limit, $4 billion is a hell of a lot of money to spend on something that doesn't need to happen. Cardiovascular disease alone costs more than three billion. The human misery too that comes with being obese for many kids and adults is another intangible cost. But now we have a drug for that. GLP-1 is the magic ingredient. It regulates blood sugar levels and slows down the rate at which food leaves the stomach, thus making people fuller for longer. And apparently, according to those who've used it, it turns off the chatter in your head, the constant thinking about food. Well, if I have this and then I walk for an hour and then I'll be able to have something else. Ooh. Ooh, I'm not hungry now, but ooh, imagine what I could have for dinner. Planning the next meal before you've actually finished the one in front of you. It's that constant food chatter. I think Oprah was the first one to talk about it, how she never realised until she took the magic drug, that you didn't have to listen to that noise in your head, that other people didn't have it. So the GLP-1-mimicking drugs seem to be a powerful tool. They're actually effective. And after decades of research and money being poured into weight loss drugs, this one seems to work. More importantly, this one doesn't have the side effects of the speed drugs that were given out in the 70s as diet pills. It was basically methamphetamine. Some people are losing around 15% of their body weight or more after just over a year on the semaglutide. Wegovy became available to New Zealanders in July. It's not publicly funded. It's a weekly drug and comes at an ongoing cost of about $500 a month. Should it be funded? David Seymour, the Associate Minister for Health, seems to think so. In the past he said, well, if you spend a buck to save five, why wouldn't you? Although as he points out, Pharmac's decisions are independent of any ministers. The NHS in Britain has done the sums. If the weight loss drugs were prescribed to everyone who needed them according to the stringent criteria, the prohibitively expensive cost would bankrupt the NHS even after taking into account the cost of the health problems that they would inevitably solve. So you would have to do the sums for this country to work out whether it would pay off in the long run. If that's what it does, if, you know, one buck is going to save us five long term. If a huge cohort, in every sense of the word, of New Zealanders is going to live a better life, a healthier life as a result of the investment, surely it's worth it? But to get buy-in, you would have to get the support of the majority of New Zealanders. One in three adult New Zealanders is classified as obese, two in three aren't. And they might say, well, I'm doing everything right for my body. I'm doing the exercise and I'm not greedy. Some might well see obesity as a moral failing. Throughout history, it's been seen as a moral failing. One of the seven deadly sins is gluttony. In Dante's Inferno, the gluttons are consigned to the third circle of hell. Gluttons are people with uncontrolled appetites who worship food as a kind of God, according to Dante. Therefore, the gluttons' punishment in the third circle of hell, instead of eating fine delicate foods and wines, they're forced to eat filth and mud and be rained upon by foul smelling rain. Cerberus, the dog, ravages them and mauls them. It's a miserable punishment. Gluttons have always been seen as moral failures. Which may, I think, have been fair at a time where resources were scarce, and if you were wealthy, you got other people to get food for you and you ate it at the expense of the poor. But these days, when the food industry is making money out of processed food designed to hook you in and give you an insatiable appetite for more, I think we can take the moral failing out, can't we? Most people know what to do. There's far more to it than just calories in, calories out and more exercise, and even the makers of Wegovy and Ozempic and the like understand that too. They say it's not going to work on its own. It's the same with bariatric surgery, you have to do so much more than just stop the food going in. There is much, much more to it than that. If we do the sums, the NHS says they've done them and the cost is too high. But if we do the sums for this country, and ultimately, we spend a dollar to save five, why wouldn't we? Why wouldn't we put everybody who wants the Wegovy onto it? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What do you do, when you have invested all your money into an idea you thought was going off, and then the whole world shuts down? Do you try to fight on? Or do you completely change your business to survive? That's the decision Aidan Bartlett faced. He's the co-founder and chief Executive of online marketplace Designer Wardrobe. It was, once upon a time, a designer rental shop. Covid-19 wrecked the business but also gave it a new life. Aidan Bartlett joined Kerre Woodham in studio in the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Publicly funding weightloss drugs may not be the answer to the country's obesity problem. New Zealand has the third highest adult obesity rate in the OECD, with one in three adults classified as obese, and one in ten children. Associate Minister of Health David Seymour believes publicly funding things like Wegovy would help save money in the long run. But community leader and Founder of Butterbean Motivation, Dave Letele told Kerre Woodham that we can't prescribe our way out of this issue. While he's not against weightloss drugs, he says they don't change habits, mindsets, and they don't break cycles for children. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's one of those circular discussions, really, where people are extremely staunch in their opinion and no amount of debate can bring them over to the other side. A bit like the secondary tax discussion – you either think you're paying more tax, or you don't, you understand that it all comes out in the wash. Sick leave is a bit like that. People either believe it's an entitlement and you use every single day of sick day every single year, whether you're sick or not. Or you're one of those people who will only take a sick day when you're like the Black Knight in Monty Python, down and out, completely incapacitated, no limbs left, bellowing, "Tis but a scratch," as you're dragged out of the workplace snuffling and sneezing and feverish. The latest workplace wellness surveys say New Zealand workers are taking more sick leave. The average rate of employee absence of the organisation surveyed in 2024 was the highest since the survey began, 6.7 days per employee compared with 5.5 days in 2022. The report blames it on Labour's 2021 increase in legal sick leave entitlement. You'll remember it went from five to ten days, but it's also down to a change in attitude as Katherine Rich, Business NZ CEO, told Mike Hosking this morning. “It certainly has been a change in the workplace culture, and in some cases, employees are doing exactly what they've been told to do – if you're unwell, don't come to work and splutter all over your colleagues. But certainly with the rise in leave entitlements, we do think that it's reflected in the jump in the average absence of, you know, 6.7 days per employee per year, and that's a big jump since 2012 when it was about 4.2.That has a material impact on the economy and of course productivity of not just businesses but the whole economy. “Post-Covid, people really think about their wellness and they're less likely to soldier on like the Codral ad. They're more likely to think, am I going to be productive? If not, I'm going to stay home.” So the old Codral soldier on mentality is very outdated since Covid made it socially unacceptable to turn up at work with the slightest sniffle. But sick leave isn't just used because people are sick. It's also down to people using it because they have children who are home from school and they need to look after them. They have elderly parents, and you need to look after them as well. The sandwich generation needs to be looking after kids who are unwell and parents who have hospital appointments or who are unwell. So it's not just you who is sick, that you'll be the one taking the sick leave. Where do you stand on this one? It's really interesting because when you have that mentality of this is my entitlement and I will take it whether I'm sick or not, there's no getting around it. As a boss, you just have to accept that's what this particular worker with this particular attitude will do. It's interesting too to see the split between government workers and those working in the private sector. Guess who takes more sick days? Yes, you're right, it's the government workers. They take an average of nearly two more sick days than people who work in the private sector. An average of 6.5 for those of us working in the private sector, 8.4 for workers in public sector organisations. Now, why doesn't that surprise us? You know, it's because you can. When it's a private sector employer, I suppose everything's run leaner and tighter. You don't take the piss when you work for the private sector. If you are working for a boss and you know that she or he has put everything into this business, that the house has been put into the business, you're less likely, I think, than taking a couple of sick days off the government, because you can, because it's nobody's money. And that attitude would be pervasive right across the public sector. The idea of taking mental wellness days – I guess if you're in a job you don't enjoy, it's going to be hard to summon up the enthusiasm to get to work. Apart from Covid, the few times during the Covid years, I've never not wanted to come to work, and I appreciate that's a privilege. When I first started in the workforce in antediluvian times, the idea of ringing up the boss and saying, "You know what? I'm just not feeling it today. I might need just a couple of days to reset my equilibrium," or whatever it is you do, unfathomable to me. I'm not saying it's wrong or right, I just cannot imagine doing that. And maybe we should be more proactive about mental health. One thing I have noticed the bosses clamping down on, the people who ring in and go, "Yeah, feeling a bit poorly, might just work from home.” And the bosses, quite rightly, are now saying, "a bit poorly? Right you are. Don't worry about working, take a sick leave day," because they know that when you ring in and go, "Yeah, you know what? Not so good today, a bit of a scratch, bit of a tickle, might stay in and work from home." That's not what's going to happen. They're not going to be as productive. They've probably got a haircut or I don't know, an appointment at a nail salon or whatever it is. You're either sick or you're not. You're either working or you're not. And I totally accept that is an old school view, and may not be the right one. I'd love to know what your policy is. As bosses, it must be an absolute minefield trying to navigate your way through people who are genuinely ill, might be something far more than a sniffle. They might have something a little bit more complicated. They're a good worker. What do you do? You've got people who are having a bit of a slump, a bit of a downtime in their life. It's there's a lot going on. They're not technically sick, but they're not right either. Might be a relationship breakup. What do you do with them? Tell me how you navigate it and as a worker, what's your attitude towards sick days?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The events calendar at Auckland's Eden Park could soon be a lot busier. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has asked Auckland Council for feedback on a proposal to increase the number of concerts it hosts from 12 to 32 a year. It's recommending the venue should be allowed to host up to 12 large concerts of more than 30 thousand attendees. Eden Park CEO Nick Sautner told Kerre Woodham they've been hamstrung by so many regulations, and this is about simplifying and modernising the rules so the national stadium can be utilised. In the last five years, he says they've invested $45 million into the stadium and redefined their business model, so they need to be able to continue evolving. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A month ago to this very day, Heart of the City, the business association for Auckland City Centre, released a scathing report that found store owners and offices believed homelessness, too few police, neglect and disorder, and frightening anti-social behaviour were crippling their businesses. Amongst the most dire findings was 91% of those surveyed saying rough sleepers and begging were affecting their business. 81% believed the city centre was not in a good state to attract significantly more people and investment. The findings came from 102 business owners in and around the Queen Street valley area in late September who were asked about the state of the city centre and what factors were hindering their financial success. This isn't news. There have been problems with rough sleepers for years now. But the business owners I've talked to in Queen Street say although there was always the odd person around before Covid, it was when Labour turned the inner-city hotels and motels into emergency housing during Covid that things became absolutely dire. Because when everything was freed up, the people stayed. They'd made a home there, they'd found a home there, they weren't going to be moved on, they'd found their people. In Ponsonby, when I was living there, there were about three or four characters, men and women, who were either sleeping rough or living in halfway houses. But they were part of the community. You knew them by name, you greeted them. They were they were different. They were odd, but that was okay. We're all different and odd at different times and perhaps not quite as odd as these ones, but they were there first, and they were part of the community. And I think we all do have empathy for those who are doing it tough or are going through a tough period in their life or who are just wired a little bit differently. But when you are swamped with people in need, when you are one district, one area that is overrun with people who are odd, who are wired differently, who don't behave as you would imagine civilised humans would behave, who quite literally crap on your empathy, inevitably you will start to take a tougher stance. And I think that's what's happened to the store owners and retailers in Queen Street. It's back in the news again. As I said, homelessness is seldom far from it because Labour has suggested that the Government is looking at introducing a ban on rough sleepers in the city. Well, as Chief Executive of Heart of the City Viv Beck told Mike Hosking this morning, bring it on, something needs to change. VB: What I'm seeing is we need a game changer. We can't just keep moving people around. As long as there were really good solutions for vulnerable people, I think a majority of the people that we represent would support a scenario where you don't lie on streets or you house people. MH: I don't know if you were watching Parliament yesterday, but they seem squeamish about it. Why don't we just be a bit blunt about it? And the cold hard truth of homelessness is that it ruins central cities, and we need to clean it up and clear it out. I mean, it's that simple, isn't it? VB: I believe so. And what's been really pleasing in the last four weeks is that there has been constructive debate and people are recognising these are real issues. We need to be bold about this. We do have to care for people. We've got a track record of caring for people. The reality is though, we cannot leave it the way it is. It does need a game change and I really hope the politics don't sabotage a really important issue that needs resolving. Oh, I think it probably will. Politics generally does, especially when there's an election looming. I was listening to Ginny Anderson and Mark Mitchell this morning, on the Mike Hosking Breakfast. Ginny said, "Well, where are they going to go? People don't want the homeless outside schools or their homes." Well, no, they don't, but they also don't want them outside their bloody businesses either. Hairdressers and cafe owners and accountants and clothing retailers and the like in Queen Street have had enough of looking after them. And I don't think many of the retailers would have a problem with rough sleepers if that's all they were doing. Looking for a warm, safe, dry place to sleep, then packing up and moving on. It's the detritus and the bodily fluids and the aggressive, pugnacious attitudes that most retailers have the problem with. Sleep in the doorway, but it's the associated issues that come with it that are the real issue, the real problem. We have got people out of motels. There are no children on the streets, and that's got to be a good thing. There are places, as Mark Mitchell referred to, for people to go. It's the associated issues, the problems that they have that mean they don't feel either safe staying there, they don't want to stay there, they don't feel comfortable being within four walls, they're quite claustrophobic, especially those that have done time. It is a huge issue, way beyond just putting a roof over heads. If only that billion dollars into mental health had actually done some work. So, I don't blame the retailers for saying, okay, make a law, move them on. At least if they are in communities, 24/7 communities, not retail areas, they might become part of the community. They're dispersed throughout the community. You can adopt a homeless person, a bit like it was in Ponsonby back in the day. I don't know what the answer is. I really don't. With so much money going into mental health, it doesn't seem to be affecting the very people that you would hope would be benefiting from that massive contribution of taxpayer money. Those who are living on the edge, those who are wired differently, those who do need extra help, and those who are making it almost impossible to run a business in the central city. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's rise in unemployment isn't unexpected. Latest Stats NZ data shows the unemployment rate has reached an almost nine-year high of 5.3% in the September quarter. 160 thousand people have been looking for a job, while another 138 thousand have been wanting more work. The Herald's Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham today's figures are exactly as forecast by economists. He says the labour market will remain tough for a while yet because companies are nervous to hire, and some are still having to let staff go. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Five years ago, Port of Auckland was struggling with a shocking health and safety record. Three people had died and many more had been injured at work. Financially, the company was dealing with a costly but flawed automation project, and COVID added plenty of headaches for the global shipping industry too. The company needed a complete turnaround, and Roger Gray was picked as the new chief executive to get on with the job. With a background of 20 years in the Australian Army and roles at Goodman Fielder and Air New Zealand, Roger came with experience in leadership, but this was a big job with big problems. Roger Gray joined Kerre Woodham in studio for the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

They say when one door closes, another one opens. That's certainly been the case for Lisa King. In the same breath she closed her first business Eat My Lunch and started a drinks brand AF Drinks. AF stands for alcohol free - and it's a range of booze free cocktails. The brand has picked up on a huge rise in people who want to drink less or not at all. It's a change not just seen in New Zealand, but across the world. Within two years in the US market, AF Drinks are now available in 4000 stores in America. Lisa King joined Kerre Woodham in studio for the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rod Duke has been selling things since he was 16. First shoes, then appliances, and eventually homewares and sportswear. Born in Adelaide, Duke came to New Zealand in 1988 to spruce up a flailing Briscoes for sale. Two years later he scored the best Briscoes deal ever, he bought the whole company himself for $2. He ended up with 12 shabby stores, where dusty wine glasses were sitting on the shelf for $2.71 each. But it didn't take long for Duke to turn the business around. Today, there are almost 100 Briscoes and Rebel Sports stores around the country, and Briscoes is a listed company that's been defying the odds of the economic downturn. The Briscoes boss unpacks it all with Kerre Woodham on the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dame Wendy Pye is one of the most successful businesspeople in New Zealand. She’s a rich-lister, her publishing company Sunshine Books has sold over 300 million books worldwide, she's met countless more world leaders, and she was the first living woman to be inducted into the New Zealand Business Hall of Fame. But it hasn’t all been easy. Dame Wendy has gone through a life changing redundancy, legal battles, and had many deals that couldn't be closed. She joined Newstalk ZB's Kerre Woodham in studio for the first episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand's drug laws are in the spotlight again and with good reason. Despite record police busts, we're still seeing record methamphetamine use, we're seeing increasingly dangerous street drugs, and rising overdose deaths, three a week from drug overdoses. There have been calls to overhaul the 50-year-old Misuse of Drugs Act and the call comes from a number of different organisations. The Drug Foundation wants drug use decriminalised and the law rewritten to make it a health issue, not a criminal issue, and they have been very consistent in their approach on this. Also this week we had a survey from the Helen Clark Foundation conducted by the University a University of Otago researcher, Rose Crossin. And that found that half of New Zealanders support shifting investment from policing to health. Rose Crossin told the Elephant News show right now two-thirds of what we spend on drugs goes to law enforcement. And the people surveyed would prefer that money to go on to prevention, treatment and harm reduction. The report shows that just 1.4% of the annual drug budget is for harm reduction. 1.4%. That does rise to 30% when you look at treatment and prevention, but it's still when you see the vast majority going towards policing, surely it should be flipped on its head. Green's co-leader Chloe Swarbrick also raised the issue, again, launching an online platform yesterday, which asked for public suggestions on better drug regulation, in particular cannabis, as a step towards legalisation. Now, with the use of medicinal cannabis, we haven't seen a huge upswing in the numbers of people taking cannabis. I venture there are some of you who have used medicinal cannabis, found it works for you. You've never used cannabis before, but when the opportunity came available for you to use it, you did so, and found it didn't turn you into a raging drug addict lifting your skirt on the streets to pay for your habit. And in fact, helped you with pain, helped you with sleeplessness, whatever it is that medicinal cannabis is supposed to do. So certainly, there needs to be more opportunity for people to rehab, for those who've tried drugs, found it doesn't work for them and need to get off it. There are clinics around the country, but hey, good luck getting into the taxpayer funded ones. Pretty much it seems you have to be court ordered before you can get into those rehab clinics. If you go private, prices start from around $17,000 for a couple of weeks to a month. Most 30-day residential rehabs charge more than $20,000. And you can have ones with all the bells and whistles and the nice sheets and the nice meals and the yoga instructor. But who the hell can pay for that? The trust fund babies, sure. Wealthy business people, sure. But where do you go if you're an average, ordinary, everyday Kiwi who tried drugs, be it meth or coke or booze, and thought you could handle it, and found that the monkey on your back was the one in charge, you need to get off. You have to. - you're going to lose your family, you're going to lose your soul. How do you step out of your life for a month? How do you find the 30-odd thousand for the month? How do you re-enter your life and stay clean? Policing plays an important role in thwarting people who make money from peddling misery. Having drugs criminalised stops some people from using them. I know that when I was growing up in the media,and I really was, 17,18, 19 years old, a big reason I didn't use drugs that were around, the cocaine and the cannabis, was that I would lose my job. If I was found in possession of any of these drugs, I would lose my job. I would have a criminal offence against my name, so the legalised drug, booze, became my drug of choice. So I understand how having drug use criminalised can be useful in stopping people starting. Bbt surely reducing demand is a really vital part of the process as well. People choosing not to use alcohol and other drugs will have a much bigger impact than the occasional high-profile bust. And surely then making drugs just another product with all the health and safety regulations around the production of these drugs, having taxes applied at source, turning it into just another commodity would be the most effective of all at emasculating the gangs and the cartels? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Power is still out to many rural South Island properties. Just under six thousand are still cut off in Clutha and Southland, where States of Emergency continue. More than three-thousand weather-related insurance claims have been lodged so far. Federated Farmers Southland President Jason Herrick told Kerre Woodham that, 'people were helping one another and I'll tell you what, I'm hearing some stories out there of some real unsung heroes.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Five years ago, Port of Auckland was struggling with a shocking health and safety record. Three people had died and many more had been injured at work. Financially, the company was dealing with a costly but flawed automation project, and COVID added plenty of headaches for the global shipping industry too. The company needed a complete turnaround, and Roger Gray was picked as the new chief executive to get on with the job. With a background of 20 years in the Australian Army and roles at Goodman Fielder and Air New Zealand, Roger came with experience in leadership, but this was a big job with big problems. Roger Gray joined Kerre Woodham in studio for the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I thought I'd start with the idea, the initiative, if you will, coming out of the think tank, the New Zealand Initiative. I love generally the work that they produce because even though you might not agree with the ideas that they put forward, there's generally a good discussion to be had. You hear the pros, you hear the cons, you think, mmm, okay. This one though, I'm not so sure. More MPs. Increasing the number of MPs in our parliament from 120 to 170. Oh, I don't think so. Our parliament may be small compared with other countries with similar populations, but until the New Zealand voting public has a seismic shift in the understanding of civics and civil society, and refocuses itself, if we all have to refocus on responsibilities over rights, then the fewer politicians, the better. Senior fellow at the Initiative, Nick Clark, says though that we need more politicians because the ones we have are stretched too thinly, they're doing too much work, and that means there's a very real risk of poor legislation being drafted.We have difficulty with select committees in terms of the ability for them to properly scrutinise legislation, and that's partly because the MPs that we do have available are so thinly stretched. We have MPs that end up on multiple committees. They can't give a good handle on what's going on, as much as they perhaps should. They get inundated with submissions. It's a good idea, I think, to just spread the load a bit more by having some more MPs. Also, the electorates that we have are very large, both geographically and in population terms, and they're becoming increasingly difficult for MPs to service the rather complex and intense needs of the constituents. So these extra MPs will be electorate MPs, not list ones. Some will be, yep, yep, ... we'd be looking at the 50/50 split. That was Senior Fellow at the New Zealand Initiative Nick Clark talking to Ryan Bridge this morning. So a few more electorate MPs, but also more list MPs. No, thank you. No, thank you very much at all. Maybe if every MP who was being paid by you and me, by the public purse, was pulling their weight, you could argue a case that they're overworked. But while a large number take the job very seriously, there have been many instances of MPs across the house calling out others for laziness, for not understanding the job and not doing it. I think when we have MPs who are accountable to an electorate, there is a far greater sense of ownership. So if you had more electorates, perhaps I could consider the case for it, but certainly, no. No more list MPs. And in another New Zealand Initiative report, Dr James Kierstead says there's a disconnect between politicians and the people they represent, just as there is in many other democracies around the world. And his report, he says in recent years, governments have enacted a number of policies that were clearly opposed by most Kiwis. Three Waters legislation was forced through despite multiple polls consistently showing that a majority of New Zealanders opposed it. Only a year after Three Strikes legislation was repealed, a poll suggested nearly two-thirds of New Zealanders wanted it to stay on the books, and only 16% of them wanted it repealed. Nonetheless, when Labour came in, they did that anyway. And despite polls showing clear majorities of Kiwis supported the actual wording of the Treaty Principles Bill, it failed to progress beyond its second reading. Dr Kierstead says we need more direct input from citizens as the solution. Again, I'd say no, not until we have a better educated voting population. If you're listening to the show, I'm assuming you know a little bit about politics, you know a little bit about how parliament works. Some will have a greater understanding than others, but you have an interest in politics. You understand how legislation is enacted. You understand why we have a parliament. You understand the roles of MPs. But there are so many who don't. They won't look at policies. They'll either vote tribally or they'll vote because somebody looks better than somebody else does. They won't be looking at what policy is going to mean further down the track. They'll just look at how it directly impacts on them, and that's okay if that's their interest. I just don't think that we are intelligent enough to be either represented well, because let's face it, MPs are drawn from us, and we are an imperfect pool of people. And I don't think we know how to keep them accountable. I don't think we know what to expect of them. I don't think we pull them up when they're making grievous errors of judgment when drawing up their list MPs, looking at you, Greens. Somebody said yesterday that the biggest threats to our society are apathy and ignorance, and I would agree. Increasing the pool of MPs by another 50? We're going to have to do a lot better than that before I'd even remotely concede to discussing that one. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Early this morning, the Labour Party made a surprise Capital Gains Tax announcement. The targeted tax would raise funds for the health system, including three free doctors' visits per year. The tax wouldn't apply to the family home, farms, KiwiSaver, shares, business assets, inheritances, and personal items. Dentons Tax Partner Bruce Bernacchi told Kerre Woodham that, "people will call it a capital gains tax when it's actually not, because it's extremely targeted just on property." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I was looking last night at things we could talk about, and there was plenty to talk about, all of which got superseded by Labour, Labour, Labour - having to release their capital gains tax, which is targeted to three free doctors' visits. Labour's been playing peekaboo with a capital gains tax for some time now. Oh, will we, won't we? Oh, what's it going to look like? Can't tell you. And now they kind of have. We finally get to hear the detail on what that CGT is going to look like, except #notreally. Because the release was made early because it was leaked, and so nobody got up to speak to the policy. Chris Hipkins, Barbara Edmonds, and Ayesha Verrall are doing that at 10:30am today, despite their press release having been out for the past five hours. With all news media going, what the dickens? What does it all mean? Does nobody actually talk to one another in the Labour ranks? Last week a health policy was announced and Chris Hipkins was taken by surprise. Today there's been the leak, not ideal. Anywho, from the press release, Labour will set up a Medicard for all New Zealanders, giving you three free doctors' visits per year, whether you need them or not, and will pay for it with a targeted capital gains tax. There was some detail included in the release. The tax will exclude the family home, Kiwi Saver shares, business assets, inheritances, and personal items. And the tax will only apply to gains made after July 2027. I heard Mike reading out a text saying, "Oh, I bought the batch in 56,1956. It's been in the family and now I'm going to have to pay a million dollars in tax." Well, no. The tax will only apply to gains made after July 2027. Back to the press release we go ... currently most profits from selling commercial property or residential property are tax-free. A new targeted tax would apply only to the sale of a commercial property or residential property, excluding the family home, and only on the gains made after the 1st of July 2027. There would be no tax on any gains made before that date. I don't think that was very clear this morning in the discussion. The tax would be set at 28% to align with the company tax rate. So some detail. So many more questions. I have some, and hopefully we'll be able to put them to Chris Hipkins, Ayesha Verrall, or Barbara Edmonds at some point. How much will three free visits for every New Zealand cost the taxpayer? Anybody? No. Related to that, how much does Labour anticipate collecting from a targeted capital gains tax? Anybody? Nope. Does it include dental, which is what a lot of primary healthcare researchers have been calling for, or just the GP visits? Why does everybody get three free visits? If one in six New Zealanders can't afford GP visits, why are taxpayers paying for the five in six who can? What if I don't need to visit the doctor three times a year, but my neighbour needs to visit 10 times? Surely it's better to look after people who are born with poor health or develop poor health over a lifetime, and look after them and keep them out of the hospital system. And not specifically related to the policy, but why are you having so much trouble releasing policy, Labour? Seems to be a bit tricky. You've had quite some time to develop it. Anyway, hopefully we can put these questions to them, but there has been much talk about a capital gains tax. We've been waiting for the other shoe to drop, waiting for Labour to release this. It's so targeted, so specific in terms of how the CGT will be applied, and then to tie it in with free GP visits, three per person per year, when five in six New Zealanders don't need free visits. What's the point? You might think it's amazing. If so, I'd love to hear from you. If this is an absolute game-changer for you, I'd love to know how and why. To me, it's a complete and utter head-scratcher. And I'm trying not to be biased against Chris Hipkins. But I am a bit, a little bit. But I'm open-minded to Barbara Edmonds and Ayesha Verrall, I quite like them in terms of the policy they announce. Chris Hipkins is a likeable chap, but I just think he's been a failure when it comes to delivering any kind of policy. I'm willing to keep a relatively open mind to Barbara Edmonds and Ayesha Verrall, but they're not doing much to convince me. Why give something to people they do not need? That's been a criticism of National with the tax cuts and the landlord rebates. Why give something to people they don't need? Why not target it to the people who do need it? And what's the point of bringing in a capital gains tax if it's going to be put into harness with three free GP visits to people who may or may not need them? I give this one a two out of 10. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

They say when one door closes, another one opens. That's certainly been the case for Lisa King. In the same breath she closed her first business Eat My Lunch and started a drinks brand AF Drinks. AF stands for alcohol free - and it's a range of booze free cocktails. The brand has picked up on a huge rise in people who want to drink less or not at all. It's a change not just seen in New Zealand, but across the world. Within two years in the US market, AF Drinks are now available in 4000 stores in America. Lisa King joined Kerre Woodham in studio for the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Extreme winds are battering Wellington, Wairapa and the South Island. Winds of up to 150km/h are expected today as red strong wind warnings are in place for much of the South Island's eastern regions and southern parts of the North Island. More than 100 flights have been cancelled, along with some of the planned strikes in tehe affected areas. Transpower Executive General Manager of Grid Delivery Mark Ryall told Kerre Woodham that three the Canterbury to Nelson power lines 'trip out' due to the extreme weather. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Talkback isn't really the place for good news. Generally, it's a forum where we can vent our respective spleens, express our frustrations, have a good old moan, and yes, we do share stories and we exchange information, but mainly it's to bristle about things that we feel aren't going right and could be better. Good news, we tend to think that, oh, good, yes, things are back on track. They've listened to what we have to say, and things are as they should be, and then you don't bother phoning in because you just think, well, that's as it should be. But the news that youth offending has come down dramatically is simply too good not to share. Especially given the amount of bristling that went on when it was at its peak. There has been a 16% reduction in children and young people with serious and persistent offending behaviour. And if you take that number and think of it as children, as young people, whose lives are now not going to be blighted and off course and may stay off course forever, these are lives that have been saved, pretty much. Minister for Children Karen Chhour said in her press release, "I am proud to announce that the government's target has not only been achieved but surpassed." The target's been reached four years early in terms of bringing youth offending down. She should be proud. She really should be. As should the government agencies involved in short-circuiting the trajectory of these young people's lives. Youth crime, you will recall, was an absolute blight back in 2022/2023. Prior to then, it had been steadily declining both here and the Western world over, over the past decade, and nobody really knows why, but youth offending had come down. But then along came Covid, and post-Covid, with all the isolation that was caused, all the rules being up in the air, lack of consequences for anyone at the time, given the be kind, be nice attitude, schools being closed,parents going quietly mad in some parts of the country, child offending went nuts. It was a campaign issue. People were absolutely fed up to the back teeth with youth ram raids, with parents taking their kids out in the middle of the night to steal and rob other people's homes. Remember all that terrible footage of the time from people's home security cameras where you'd see the cars pull up and these littlies of 9-10 years old, in their pyjamas, getting out and doing the robbing for their gutless, malevolent, evil caregivers? It was absolutely shocking. And the waste of young lives was just cruel. But now, and to be fair, it is building on what the previous government started with the multi-agency approach. Youth crime has come down and it's come down dramatically. The Minister for Children Karen Chhour was on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning explaining just why it's dropped. Some of it is young people no longer believe that they can avoid this accountability. I'm hearing it all across our communities, that they know that there's going to be consequences if they're caught. Other parts of it are better coordination between courts, Oranga Tamariki and police. And then we've taken some of the learnings from the military style academy pilot and put better investment into transitional support for young offenders coming out of youth justice. And we're investing in a number of safety and quality improvements to facilities in youth justice residences. So there's a lot of work that's been going on in the background, all around rehabilitation and making sure we are helping these young people be the best versions of themselves. This is good for them, and it's good for our community. Absolutely. I could not agree more. And when you think of the flak that poor woman took from Māori MPs in Labour and Te Pāti Māori, who accused her of not being Māori enough and being a traitor to her race and all. She has done more to help children , to help because unfortunately Māori children were overrepresented in the youth offending stats. She has done more to help them than they have done with their posturing and their infighting and their race baiting. She has made more practical difference to the lives of kids who didn't have a show when they're born to parents who just use them as tools in their offending because they know, and knew then, that there wouldn't be any consequences. Now there are. So bloody hats off to her. And good on her for staying focused on the kids, which was the reason she got in to Parliament, rather than being distracted and put off . She stuck in there because she believed in what she was doing and she believed as a child of state agencies herself, she wanted to make a difference for the kids, and she really has. And again, there's many reasons for that. It's building on what was started under the previous government who thought, bloody hell, we can't go on like this - the multi-agency approach proved to be very effective and that is continued. But if you also look at truancy - the data shows rising attendance every term since David Seymour made it his mission to get kids back into the classroom. In term two of 2025, 58.4% of students attended school regularly. In 2022, that was 39%. There's been a huge increase in the number of kids going to school. It wasn't the school lunches that got them there. That was the carrot. I thought it would. I really did. I thought, yes, go the school lunches, starving kids, desperate kids will go to school and they'll turn up and they'll learn because they'll be fed and they'll see school as a safe place. No, didn't happen. What happened was a a carrot and a stick approach. An expectation that you will turn up for school. And if you're behind your desk, you're not behind the wheel of a stolen car, are you? This is good news. It's not perfect. There's still room for improvement. I'm not entirely sure about the boot camps, we haven't seen any figures from those, but that multi-agency approach is working. The expectation that kids will be in school is working. The fact that there are consequences for offending is working. This has got to be good news. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Annual inflation has risen to a 15-month high of 3%. Economists had been expecting inflation to reach or surpass the 3% upper limit of the Reserve Bank's target band. The central bank's expected to look past this current spike when it reviews the OCR next month. New Zealand Herald Business Editor-at-large Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham that, “this this drip feeding of the rate cuts means that everybody just waits.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand's first sports school will open next year, in a partnership with Wellington Phoenix. The New Zealand Performance Academy in Upper Hutt will operate as a charter school for serious aspiring sportspeople. The academy will initially offer elite football training alongside the Wellington Phoenix Academy, as well as rugby training. New Zealand Performance Academy Aotearoa Board Member Brett O'Riely told Kerre Woodham that, “a lot of the momentum came from the students and parents.” LISTEN ABOVESee 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.

Annual inflation has risen to a 15-month high of 3%. Economists had been expecting inflation to reach or surpass the 3% upper limit of the Reserve Bank's target band. The central bank's expected to look past this current spike when it reviews the OCR next month. New Zealand Herald Business Editor-at-large Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham that, “this this drip feeding of the rate cuts means that everybody just waits.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Beneficiaries who break the Government's job hunt rules face more intensive sanctions to prove they are hunting for employment. From today, they will be required to report on at least three job search activities a week and participate in four weeks of training courses. Minister for social development and employment Louise Upston told Kerre Woodham that the rules are for people, “who aren't doing their best, who aren't fulfilling their responsibilities, and this is a non-financial consequence of their inaction.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New rules come into force for job seekers today, as the government continues efforts to get more young people off a benefit and into work. It's a very worthwhile enterprise. Do not let young people drift onto a benefit because there they will stay for around about 18 years, which is a hell of a life to condemn any young person to. Hang on a minute though, weren't there sanctions announced in May? You're right, there were. They targeted beneficiaries with money management and community work sanctions if they failed to meet one of their obligations, which involved preparing for or looking for work. But wait, there's more. Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston has announced that from today, beneficiaries failing an obligation for the first time will face two new rules. They are to undertake and report on a minimum of three job search activities every week for four weeks. There is now a requirement to attend and participate in one or more employment-related training courses or programs for a minimum of five hours per week over four weeks. Lot of numbers, lot of stats, but it's basically saying you've got to show that you're looking for work, you've got to show that you're willing to train yourself up to be ready for work. The two non-financial sanctions will operate under the traffic light system. If you're at green, you're on track and meeting your obligations. Orange, you move to orange if you don't meet your obligations and you don't have a good reason. And if you don't contact Social Development agencies and get back on track within five working days when you're on orange, you move to red, and once you're at red, your benefit will reduce or stop. Upston was at pains to point out that fewer than 2% of beneficiaries are on orange or red light settings. That's a tiny proportion of people who are on benefits, and the overwhelming majority of job seekers are meeting their obligations. So that's the info around the new standards, the new expectations of people who are receiving a benefit and looking for work. And I have no problem with people being expected to look for work when they are able to, and when they're receiving the dole. My only gripe is that these sanctions would have been really good when our borders were closed and employers were screaming for workers to do anything and everything. Remember the number of employers from all over the country that were phoning and saying, "Please, for the love of all that's holy, if you can stagger out the door and to our front gate, we'll offer you a job. We'll offer you all kinds of incentives and bonuses to come and work for us." They were being crippled because they could not find workers. That would have been the time for the sanctions. In '21 and '22, you could have had your choice of jobs. But now our unemployment rate is the highest it's been since the Covid shutdowns, 5.2% in three months ending June. Unemployment has been rising due to the weak economy and the lack of business confidence. Employers are nervous about expanding their operations, growing their business. The uncertainty over a consistent affordable power supply has seen manufacturers shutter their businesses or scale them down, meaning more people looking for work. And some regions of the country have been absolutely savaged. Looking at you, the Central North Island, Tokoroa, Nelson. Let me be perfectly clear, to channel the Prime Minister. These sanctions are only going to affect the very worst of the malingerers, and precious few of those. People who have been in work want to be in work again. They know the value of earning their keep. But getting back into work right now is not entirely the responsibility of the job seeker, I would argue. The government has to give employers sufficient confidence to grow their businesses and to therefore grow their workforce. To paraphrase, build the economy and the workers will come. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rod Duke has been selling things since he was 16. First shoes, then appliances, and eventually homewares and sportswear. Born in Adelaide, Duke came to New Zealand in 1988 to spruce up a flailing Briscoes for sale. Two years later he scored the best Briscoes deal ever, he bought the whole company himself for $2. He ended up with 12 shabby stores, where dusty wine glasses were sitting on the shelf for $2.71 each. But it didn't take long for Duke to turn the business around. Today, there are almost 100 Briscoes and Rebel Sports stores around the country, and Briscoes is a listed company that's been defying the odds of the economic downturn. The Briscoes boss unpacks it all with Kerre Woodham on the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I can't think of much worse than being labelled a child abuser, a child pornographer. It's such an abhorrent, vile, aberrant perversion of a crime. All crime is evil. But when it involves children, there's something particularly sickening about it. Those who collect images of babies and children being sexually abused, in my opinion, are as culpable for the torture of these children as the men and women who actually inflict the damage. They deserve a special place in hell. And let's face it, the next world may be the only place where true justice will be delivered, because justice doesn't often get delivered in this world. Last month, a member of an affluent New Zealand family convicted of having extreme child abuse material gave $50,000 and a bit of change to charities days before he was due to be sentenced. The judge worked out his sentence this way: a starting point of five and a half years imprisonment with no mitigating features to his offending. So five and a half years, I think that's a bit light, given that without sick creeps like him, there wouldn't be an industry in child abuse, but there we go. So five and a half years is the starting point. Then we get a 25% discount for the early guilty plea, 5% for remorse, 10% for rehabilitation attempts. He's had 50 one-on-one counselling sessions, and isn't he lucky he comes from an affluent family, so he can afford them, there was a further 3% reduction to represent the donations he made, for previous good character, there was another 5% discount. And the judge also outlined his long history of mental unwellness. ADHD and referred to a traumatic incident the man had suffered. For these factors, his sentence was reduced by a further 8%. An overall discount of 56%. He ended up with two years and five months imprisonment. He'll be out in no time. The man was automatically placed on the child sex offenders register. So that's good, isn't it? Because then you'll be able to find out who he is and if he's going to be working around children again, or if you decide to take up with him because he seems like a well-presented educated man and you're single and he's single, and oh, then you find out he's on the child sex offenders register. But no, the man's name, his family's name and their high-profile company were permanently suppressed. As we all know, nature abhors a vacuum, and human nature abhors a vacuum when it comes to information on offenders from prominent families. So, if the court won't name him, the internet will. And it doesn't matter if they get the wrong person because the internet's the wild west and no one's accountable. If the court's not going to give us the right person, well, bugger it. We'll just go out and we'll name everybody. Anybody and everybody, even if they're not 46. Even if they're not in prison. We'll just name them anyway. I simply do not believe anything I read or see on the socials. Mainstream media gets it wrong all the time, but at least we are accountable. If we go out and name Wayne Wright Jr or Matt Mowbray as the prominent New Zealander with child abuse material, we have to retract, we have to expunge the content off the internet, we have to apologise, we have to pay enormous fines. Spreaders of disinformation on the net don't have to do a thing. And so anyone and everyone can be named and shamed, and if you come from a prominent or an affluent family, and a member of your ilk, your social cohort has received name suppression, well, you're in the firing line. Same if you're a prominent sportsperson. They use the term prominent sportsman or prominent sportsperson, if you've once played pickleball for a masters age group tournament in Noosa. They use it for just about everybody and everything. So anybody who's ever played sport at any level, could be included as a prominent sportsperson. In the case of this child abuser, Wayne Wright Jr and Matt Mowbray have already had to come out and declare they are not and have never been in any way linked to anything to do with child harm. They've got nothing to do with it. Both of them have been named through social media, despite the fact that neither of them is in fact 46 and neither of them is in fact in custody. You think that might be a stumbling block for those on the net, but no. Both of them have also come out and said people convicted of sexual offenses against children should never ever have name suppression, and they should not. They are quite right on that. I think name suppression is used far too often. I can understand it being used in the early days of a trial when somebody has been charged. It gives people time to tell the family or do whatever it is they have to do, but then once they're sentenced, no. I think the bar is very low for permanent name suppression right now. And if you are convicted of sex offenses against children, why? Why should you have name suppression? There are far fewer affluent families than there used to be, given the cost of living crisis that, you know, brings it down to a very small pool of people, so the wild speculation will continue. So the courts have got it wrong when it comes to suppression, but people should also have a really healthy scepticism of anything that is said about anyone on social media, I simply do not believe anything until I've tested about three or four different sources, or until I'm stepping over the people who are supposed to be involved in the illicit act or you see the court papers. It's getting harder and harder to trust anyone or anything. And while we have the name suppression being applied willy-nilly, way too liberally, this kind of rank disinformation is going to be spread. You know, and it's fine when it's somebody else, but what about when you, you're the subject of the TikTok rumours, how do you defend your name when you haven't done a thing? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Fewer state houses, more private rentals. The New Zealand Initiative believes that giving tenants vouchers to spend on rent could help more vulnerable people and save taxpayers money. And Sir Bill English agrees. In a rare interview on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning, the former Prime Minister says providing state housing is not just about putting a roof over the head of a vulnerable family. You know, the point of social housing is to change lives. And that means focusing on the people more than the houses. And it means who owns the houses is less important than what you're doing to support the tenants. All housing solutions are local, and all housing solutions are about individuals and families. So, you know, how many houses should someone own who is supporting and understanding the needs of tenants and taking part in a community? Well, you need a bit of scale, you know, probably a few thousand houses. I think Tāmaki Redevelopment Company has got about 5,000. That looks about a good scale. What we found though, was impressive energy and innovation with everyone from Autism New Zealand to Iwi and NGOs, private developers who can do a better job of this than Kāinga Ora. Well, yes, this is not new, but it's been spelt out fairly explicitly in the New Zealand Initiative report, “Owning Less to Achieve More”. In the report, the authors said the large-scale government housing ownership was problematic, wasteful, and not the most effective way to help people into homes. On the evidence, it is plausible that both taxpayers and tenants could be better off if the government were less dominant as a landlord, and if its subsidies empowered tenants by giving them a greater choice of landlord. That's according to the report author, New Zealand Initiative senior fellow Dr. Bryce Wilkinson. The report went on that state housing agency Kāinga Ora's maintenance costs were nearly twice that of a private landlord, and it had not been good at managing rent debt or dealing with troublesome tenants. We know that. We've heard from contractors during the Labour years of the absolute rorting that went on when it came to invoicing for work done. As soon as the job came in and you knew it was a job for KO, you simply inflated the invoice. Nobody was going to be checking. They told us that was going on all the time across every division of Labour. Matt Crocket, who's running KO right now, is doing a good job of getting back to basics, but the point remains that there will be people and agencies who can and do a much better job, not just of housing people, but as Bill English said, of getting people into a position where they can get into their own home, or when that's not possible, of helping them live truly meaningful lives. I remember Bernie Smith too, the former Monte Cecilia Housing Trust CEO, saying that the reason they didn't have as many problematic tenants in their social housing was because they had case managers who knew the tenants. Their case managers weren't overwhelmed with tenants and problematic tenants. They knew the tenants' trigger points, they could head off trouble before it started. The report says government issued vouchers for people to spend on rent would give people more choice and empower them. And according to the report, that way the government could help people without having to own the houses and give money where it was most needed. The report author says the person uses it to find the best trade-off for themselves. If they've got extra expenses for children with disabilities, they might choose a cheaper house at less rental and use the cash to help pay for their education or medical services or vice versa. Empowerment. Now, there's a thing. Choice. There's a thing. But it will come down to an absolute clash of ideology. The idea of giving vulnerable people choice and empowerment is completely alien to the previous ethos, which was, we will look after you, don't think for yourself, we'll make sure that everything is done for you. Which has got to be the most patronizing, expensive in terms of money and in terms of human potential, way of dealing with people. And I cannot see the current Labour government agreeing in any way, shape or form to going down that ideological path of actually empowering people and giving them choice, saying to agencies, okay, you do a great job. Here's the money, you house these people, you know them, you know what they need. You're passionate about seeing them live full and meaningful lives. Go for it. Personally, I think that's the way to go. I have not lived in a state house. My dad came from a state house, his siblings grew up in a state house. Nobody from that family ever needed a state house again. It was a launch pad for all of them, and for all of us, for the kids and the cousins. Nobody's ever needed it since, and that's the way it should be. Empowerment, choice, you're not a victim, you do not need to be looked after for the rest of your life. Yes, you might have had problems, yes, you might be going through problems, yes, you might have disabilities, it does not mean you're worthless. It does not mean that the state has to look after you for the rest of your life. You have choice. I love the message in this, but I can only see it lasting as long as a centre-right government in power. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What do you do if you want to leave a gang? A coroner has found that Napier Mongrel Mob leader Neil Angus Benson, otherwise known as Heil Dogg, felt trapped in his position in the gang in the months leading up to his suicide in December 2024. In his report, Coroner Wilton said Benson appeared to be under "psychological strain of his leadership position in the Mongrel Mob gang". “He also described an internal dilemma: wanting to exit the gang lifestyle, but recognising he was too deeply involved for a straightforward exit.” So if you want out, what can you do? Police Minister Mark Mitchell told Kerre Woodham that from a government perspective, there is a significant amount of support they can provide. He says if someone makes the decision to leave and has the fortitude to follow through, the Government will get alongside them and help them. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A report by The New Zealand Initiative finds the Government's ownership of 77,000 state houses has maintenance costs nearly twice that of a private landlord. It finds it also doesn't respond quickly enough to issues like rent arrears, and troublesome tenants. CEO of community housing Paul Gilberd told Kerre Woodham that the top priority for government housing is to support society's most vulnerable people. 'We're seeing huge surge in, youth and older adult and women's homelessness, which is very much hidden because women in particular are not safe on the streets.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Do you want another example of Labour's ideology over pragmatism? I really, really hope that the previous Labour ministers have learned from their previous terms in government that thought bubbles and bright ideas do not sound policy make. Remember Fees Free? The policy was introduced in 2018 and was a key part of Labour's election campaign. The first year of tertiary study would be free for students. It would progressively roll out to cover three years, which never eventuated. We, the taxpayer, provided up to $12,000 in tuition fee payments for the first year of provider-based study or the first two years of work-based learning. The idea behind the objective was sound and worthy. The Labour Government, Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, et al, billed it as improving equity and opening the doors to higher learning for disadvantaged people for whom the doors would otherwise be closed. Labour expected to see a first-in-family effect. There would be students who would be the first in their families to attend higher education, now a significant cost barrier would be removed. Did that happen? Thank you for asking, no, it didn't. Over the years 2017 to 2022, European, Māori, Pacific, and Asian participation rates stayed relatively steady. The failure to shift the dial, the New Zealand Herald reports, was so evident that in 2020, Labour shifted the policy's purpose to reducing student debt levels. All right, well we can't get disadvantaged kids to university, we can't get first in family. Oh, I know, we'll use the taxpayer money to reduce student debt level. The failed objectives were to increase participation in tertiary study, expand access by reducing financial barriers, and support lifelong learning. Nope. First year fees-free was limited to learners with little to no prior study, limiting lifelong learning support, the analysis said from the Ministry of Education. It described the scheme as a lot of money for little behavioural change, or as they put it, a high deadweight cost. From this year, the Coalition Government has changed the scheme so it applies to the final year of study, with payment following the completion of studies. The policy has three objectives: to incentivize learners, particularly disadvantaged learners, to finish their studies, to reward learners who complete their program of study, to reduce the overall cost of study. The Ministry of Education officials say this is going to fail too. Particularly for degree level study, once a learner reaches their final year, they are already far more likely to complete than those first entering study. So basically, they said it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. By the time you reach your third year, you're going to finish whether the taxpayer is paying for your final year of fees or not. You're motivated enough to stay. They say the second goal is essentially meaningless. Of course there's going to be a completion of qualifications. And the third objective, will most likely succeed, to reduce the overall cost of study. And it will at least help the government's books, the trade-off being an estimated $230 million a year in student debt or more debt repayments than would otherwise occur. So thought bubbles don't make sound policy. The thing that really concerned me in the early years of Labour was that they were ideas I'd think of – ‘Oh, I know, let's do this'. Which is great, but you have to think it through, and you have to listen to your advisors, and you have to listen when people say, "Mm, I'm not entirely sure that we're going to be able to build 100,000 houses." "Yeah, yeah, yeah, but what about if we do this?" And we just throw as much money as we possibly can at it. And on the face of it, taking away that first year of paying your fees – "Hey, gang, I've got an idea. Let's take away that first year of fees so that disadvantaged kids will see university as a great option." I mean, it doesn't take much scratching beyond the surface to see that's not going to work. And we all said that at the time, didn't we? We discussed it. And now it looks like according to the analysis that fees-free final year won't work either. At least not for getting disadvantaged kids through degrees. For those who are highly motivated and have families that go to university, it's like, "Hooray!" Excellent. We'll take the $12,000 off our student debt, thanks very much, and good. If it helps motivated kids get through their study with less of a financial burden around their neck, it makes it easier for them to move onto the next phase of their life, buying a home, starting a family, this is all good. You know, but in terms of the objectives, it's going to fail. But they have to keep it because of the coalition agreement with both NZ First and ACT. So they might have to do what Labour did and just rewrite the objectives. Our objective is that we reward kids who were going to go to university anyway, who are motivated, who are successful, who we want to keep in New Zealand. We'll take $12,000 off their overall student debt, so they'll stay here, buy a house, and have a family. And on the face of it, that's not a bad objective. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Former New Zealand Prime Minister Jim Bolger has died at the age of 90. He was New Zealand's 35th prime minister, in power from 1990 to 1997. After leaving Parliament in 1998, Bolger became New Zealand's ambassador to the United States and later Chancellor of the University of Waikato. Clare de Lore is a journalist who was Chair of the Press Gallery at the time Jim Bolger was Prime Minister, and a close friend of the family. She told Kerre Woodham that, 'it was a really happy environment in which he was until very recently when he had to go to hospital.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.