Podcasts about kerre woodham

A hit for the Taranaki region, with dwindling gas supply forcing a potential short-term shutdown of a local fertiliser plant. Ballance Agri-Nutrients may have to cease operations at Kapuni for up to four months if it can't secure more gas before its contract expires next month. The company manufactures about a third of the country's urea fertiliser each year. Federated Farmers Arable Chairperson David Birkett told Kerre Woodham it's been an ongoing issue that has just been getting worse and worse. He says that plants like that in Kapuni was built around the gas supplies nearby, and to convert it to another fuel source would be a huge and expensive process. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the face of it, the announcement from Transport Minister Chris Bishop yesterday makes good sense. It's been signalled; it was National Party election policy to move away from a fuel excise duty to road user charges (RUC). Simeon Brown, who was the transport spokesman at the time, said it would be a fairer way to charge for the distance people drive rather than the amount of fuel they use, given the different nature of the way we drive these days and the vehicles we drive. So the current fuel excise duty is expected to be abolished in the coming years, all vehicles moving to road user charges. These are currently paid by owners of diesel, electric, and heavy vehicles. Last year the Government said the transition away from the so-called petrol tax could happen as soon as 2027. Yesterday, Chris Bishop said no date had been set, in order to make sure the changes aren't rushed. Which put this rather in the category of an announcement of an announcement. What was announced yesterday is: Removing the requirement to carry or display RUC licences, allowing for digital records instead. Enable the use of a broader range of electronic RUC devices, including those already built into many modern vehicles. Supporting flexible payment models, such as post-pay and monthly billing. Separating NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi's (NZTA) roles as both RUC regulator and retailer to foster fairer competition. Allowing bundling of other road charges such as tolls and time-of-use-based pricing into a single, easy payment. Currently, the system is mostly paper-based and drivers have to monitor their odometers to check what distance they have driven. It also requires owners to buy RUCs in 1000km chunks. The Automobile Association is broadly supportive of the changes. AA Transport policy director Martin Glynn spoke to the Mike Hosking Breakfast and believes moving to an electronic system is a good idea. MG: “I think absolutely long term, as vehicles become more fuel efficient and people start, you know, there's different ways of powering vehicles, as we all know it's just not sustainable. So yeah we actually do need to make the shift. MH: "The electronics behind it, is the transfer easy? If you get an app or you get a sensor in your car or whatever that turns out to be, is that easy? MG: "The announcements been a little bit vague. Certainly for new cars the Minister's been clear that a lot of that data and the systems are already available in the car itself, so that should be fairly straightforward. But I think that what he seems to be signalling is that we're moving to electronic devices to measure distance, and base, and weight. So that would be actually something in vehicles like we have the heavy vehicles now. And the National Road Carrier Association CEO Justin Tighe-Umbers spoke to Early Edition this morning, and they also think it's a good move. “It's a once in 50 year change. Every country around the world is actually facing this problem where you've got EVs and far more efficient petrol engines just reducing how roading's paid for. New Zealand's actually in, we're in quite a good position because we're world pioneers in road user charges. We were the first to bring it out in the late 70s and we're still a world leader on it with electronic RUCs for how trucks pay for it, so we're actually in quite a strong position compared to other countries.” Who knew? I did not realise that we were world leaders in road user charges. At first glance, it makes sense. The Minister said that as our vehicle fleet has changed, so too must the way we fund our roads. It isn't fair, Chris Bishop said, to have Kiwis who drive less and can't afford the fuel-efficient cars paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often. He said the intent is to make paying RUC user friendly and similar to paying a power bill online or a Netflix subscription. The thing is though, if you don't pay your power bill or your Netflix subscription, the service is cut. You don't get it anymore. You don't pay, you don't get it. You can't do that with roads. It's not as though all of a sudden a barrier is going to appear at your driveway, and you're not allowed to go onto the road because you haven't paid your RUC. And according to number of mechanics, the number of vehicles that turn up where the RUC have not been paid is extraordinary. So the system will only be as good as the technology that can isolate the people who are not paying. I'm sure you'll be able to fiddle the electronics if you can fiddle odometers, and people have been doing that ever since there's been the buying and trading of vehicles. The technology has to be as tamper proof as we can make it. It's the right move, but we just have to ensure we have the technology to ensure that users do indeed pay. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I get texts on the daily from people saying “you're so negative about Labour”. “You never have anything good to say about the last government. You're so critical of Labour.” And I say to them, how can anyone with a brain not be critical of Labour?! The gut feeling I had at the time that the previous administration was out of their depth and hopelessly incompetent has been proved with hard data, time and time and time again. The failure to deliver any kind of transformational reform, the failure to deliver on the absolute basics, the arrogance around co-governance, the breathtaking and utterly tragic waste of taxpayer money, more on that later, Treasury's report that came out yesterday slamming the governments spending during the pandemic just confirms everything we knew – but now this. Labour's absolute refusal to even acknowledge changes taking place within NCEA. The Herald has the story and its a good one. The Government offered Labour multiple opportunities to be briefed on the NCEA change process, but the party's education spokeswoman Willow-Jean Prime initially didn't respond to these invitations and then flat-out declined them. This after Hipkins said to the Herald last month that the Labour Government consulted with the then-Opposition to ensure changes were “going to be enduring” and expressed a desire for the current Government to do the same. A text message appears to show Stanford reached out to Prime about NCEA after the Labour MP took over the education portfolio from Jan Tinetti in March. “Hey Willow-Jean, congrats on the new role! Will need to get you up to speed with the NCEA change process. Jan and I had started working cross-party on this given the importance of our national qualification,” Stanford wrote, according to a screenshot provided. “Would be good if we could meet first and I can run you through where we are at and what the process is. There is a policy advisory group of principals who are working on the details and you can have access to them when they meet as well as my officials and also NZQA.” The Minister said her office would get in touch with Prime's “if that's ok?”. Nothing. Tumbleweeds. Now I get that she doesn't have to like the changes. She doesn't have to agree with the change. But a letter along the lines of 'Thanks Minister, but I am philosophically and intellectually opposed to the changes you intend to make and I will be rolling them back once I am Minister. Nga mihi, Willow Jean' would have let everybody know where they stood. Nothing? No response at all?! Stanford's office reached out again in May. Again, nothing. In mid June, Stanford reached out personally and then when again, there was no response, Stanford emailed Chris Hipkins office on July 1. “I've sought on multiple occasions to get input from your education spokesperson on NCEA curriculum reform, with no response,” Stanford wrote to Hipkins on July 1. “It is important to have cross-party collaboration regarding a national qualification, and the offer remains open to arrange a briefing from officials or from the Professional Advisory Group.” The next day, an adviser for Prime emailed Stanford: “I acknowledge your email regarding NCEA curriculum reform." “Willow-Jean has considered your email and declines the invitation." That is Labour's education spokesperson. Some one who is so rude, so out of touch, so out of her depth she refused to be part of transformational change. But no, this is not just Labour's education spokesperson, this is Labour. Out of touch, out of their depth, and while Chris Hipkins remains as leader, they should never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power ever again. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Prime Minister's blaming New Zealand's rising unemployment on the last Government's economic management. The rate's hit a five-year high of 5.2%, just shy of Treasury's predicted 5.4%. Christopher Luxon told Kerre Woodham when inflation rises, interest rates go up, the economy shrinks, and people lose their jobs. He says Labour had a lovely big spend-up party, but it's left a significant hangover. Luxon says we have to work our way through the economic cycle, which is what we're doing now. China's doubling down on its deal with the Cook Islands. Ambassador to New Zealand, Wang Xiaolong says China wants to co-operate on seabed mining research, an inter-island cargo ship between the two countries, and infrastructure. The partnership has prompted backlash from New Zealand, which has a special relationship with the Islands, including the withdrawal of aid. Meanwhile, Luxon told Woodham the Governor-General is visiting the Cooks to celebrate our 60 years free association. He says he's proud of the people, but has an issue with their Government's moves. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Economic recovery is taking longer than many hoped. Unemployment's risen to a five-year high of 5.2%, up from 5.1% in the March quarter. New Zealand officially moved out of recession last year. The Herald's Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham the job market is taking longer to catch up, so many people may not be feeling better off. He says economists can tell us numbers are improving, but it takes longer for life to improve. Dann says anxiety about job security and AI is having ripple effects across the economy. He says a lot of professional people are uncertain about the future, and that's putting them off spending money. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

An artificial intelligence expert says the tech will always need human input for marking school exams. Education Minister Erica Stanford says AI's already partly used to grade assessments, and it could do most of them by 2028. It's alongside Government plans to replace NCEA with entirely new qualifications. New Zealand AI Founder, Justin Flitter, told Kerre Woodham the tool should supplement a teacher's process, not become it. He says the teacher should apply the AI assessment to their lived experience and knowledge of the student. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You might remember a month or so ago we had Justin Flitter, an AI expert, in the studio for an hour talking about the fact that AI is here, it's already being used by numerous early adopters, it's not going away, and you'll have to get on board or you'll be left behind. And as you can imagine, the calls were a mix of oh no, it's a disaster, stop it now and King Canute trying to turn back the tide, and others who were saying it's brilliant, already using it, been using it for over a year. A woman in her 70s who was working with disadvantaged kids found AI enormously helpful in terms of teaching tools. So some people are ready, willing, and able to embrace change, technology, advancements. Others don't see it as an advancement, they see it as taking jobs, as concerning, as worrying and I get that. But it is here, and it would be pointless to bury your head in the sand and say I don't want it to come. It's already here. It's already being used. Job seekers are using AI to write their CVs and cover letters. AI's being used by employers to screen job applications. It's being used in job training. It's being used in research and now, Education Minister Erica Stanford says the use of AI as a marking tool will be expanded over the next few years. It's already been used for the literacy and numeracy corequisite exams. Now, she says, it will be used as the education system moves away from NCEA Level 1. She says AI is as good if not better than human marking. It will undoubtedly be as good, if not better, at setting exams. Remember 2016? Late changes in a top-level school exam math's paper led to a mistake so bad that students could not answer the question. It was unanswerable because of a mistake made by a human, leading to students walking out of the exam doubting themselves and beside themselves. That same year, it was revealed for other external NECA maths and stats exam papers were affected by mistakes, but they weren't considered as severe. Now if you can iron out those kind of glitches, all well and good. And if AI can free up teachers to teach, not doing the boring admin tasks, again, so much the better. It's not perfect. It's only as good as the human input it receives, but like automation it is brilliant at doing the basic repetitive jobs. So for those of you who are on board, love to hear from you, those of you who have had bad experiences too love to hear from you on that as well. And is it suitable to be used for setting exams, marking papers? The sort of admin that takes up so much of a teacher's time in school. I would say absolutely get on board. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Economic recovery is taking longer than many hoped. Unemployment's risen to a five-year high of 5.2%, up from 5.1% in the March quarter. New Zealand officially moved out of recession last year. The Herald's Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham the job market is taking longer to catch up, so many people may not be feeling better off. He says economists can tell us numbers are improving, but it takes longer for life to improve. Dann says anxiety about job security and AI is having ripple effects across the economy. He says a lot of professional people are uncertain about the future, and that's putting them off spending money. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Big players in the energy space are putting forward a new 10-year deal they say will secure supply at Huntly Power Station. Genesis, Mercury, Meridian and Contact have agreed to co-invest in a strategic energy reserve – pending Commerce Commission approval. It includes adding up to 600-thousand tonnes of coal to current stocks. Meridian Energy CEO Mike Roan told Kerre Woodham that although some may find it surprising, it's more cost effective to import coal than it is to mine it in New Zealand. He says the Huntly deal will give them 10 years of confidence in thermal fuel that they can use to continue investing in renewable generation. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the wake of the changes to NCEA, you would have to ask whether the Knowledge Economy is the biggest political bust of recent times? Back in 2001, then Prime Minister Helen Clark launched the Knowledge Wave project. Like many ideas, it came from a good place. Helen Clark had a vision for a nation which was confident, progressive, more prosperous, tolerant and which cared for its people. She said New Zealanders would ride to the Knowledge Wave because they too sought a society capable of sustaining its first world status with well educated, innovative citizens who choose to stay in New Zealand because it's the best possible place to be. Do you remember back to those times? They were hopeful, and she was a great Prime Minister, and it sounded fantastic. Educated, prosperous, tolerant, reasonable people. It hasn't worked out so well. In a nutshell, the government believed that New Zealand's economy and its society would be driven far more by knowledge, skill, technology, and innovation. They looked across government to see how all policies could contribute to that end. Obviously, she said at the time, education was critical. She said by addressing the worst features of the student loan scheme and stabilising tertiary fees, we aim to improve access to education for all. We will have to invest more as fast as we have the capacity to do so. So, educate the people, they'll become more prosperous, they'll become more tolerant. We'll have a better place to be. We'll be living in Utopia. Twenty-four years on, how are we looking? Have we ridden that Knowledge Wave to the shores of prosperity and tolerance? Hardly. Young people were steered into degrees they weren't particularly interested in. They were saddled with student loans and some of them now feel they were sold a pup. Universities went from centres for critical thinking and academic excellence to factories that churned out degrees for people who were barely literate. And far from tolerance and critical thinking, they became bastions of intolerance and Orwellian thinkspeak. I think the Government's decision to reform NCEA is a step in the right direction. Instead of steering people into degrees they're not particularly interested in and they don't really want to do, there will be more options, more choices about what sort of future they can have. Not everybody wants to sit in a classroom, regurgitating a lecturer's opinion. Some people actually like to get out there and do stuff. The MTA, the Motor Trades Association, James McDowell, was talking to Mike Hosking this morning, and he reckons the changes to NCEA will be an overdue step towards a more relevant practical and future focused education system for young Kiwis. JM: What we would very much like to see now, and it's part of the consultation process, is saying look okay, we're going to do these big core subjects, let's say in our case, an automotive subject, and we all work with the polytechs and providers like MITO that do the on job training and start them early. MH: So I want to be an engineer in F1. Is that how it's going to work for me? I'll do my maths, I'll do my English, and I'll do something that channels me towards that? JM: Yes, it's a lot like the old days. It's a lot like the old system. Or perhaps more contemporarily, more like Cambridge at the moment, where you have your core subjects. There'll be much less choice for sure. I mean that's the problem with NCEA – there's just far too much flexibility. You've got something like over 11,000 unit standards you can choose from that make up these qualifications. That's just a complete mess. You know, you might get a few credits for learning how to put oil on a car – that does not make you an automotive engineer, unfortunately. Absolutely. Skills Group, New Zealand's largest private vocational training provider, concurs, saying the major overhaul of NCEA will hopefully create more robust and coherent vocational pathway options, ensuring that young people can pursue valued industry related learning and develop the real-world skills demanded by industry. I just wonder how many bright young things we have lost to the trades because they've been stared into doing a meaningless degree where they get a B- pass, which means absolutely nothing. There are some occupations, some professions, some vocations where you will need a degree and you will enjoy it. You'll love doing the research. You'll love doing the reading. You'll love the learning. It'll be great. But not everybody is meant for that, and I think we saw back in 2001 this utopian vision that Helen Clark had, that everybody would be able to sit around and having Socratic debates with one another and intellectual discourse about theories and ideologies, that's not for everybody. Now I think we're seeing a recognition that not every young person is cut from the same cloth. We need all sorts of minds, all sorts of abilities, all sorts of passions and all sorts of interests. And I think by giving the trades a greater focus, the idea of vocational education a greater focus, we will have a more tolerant society. I'm all for it. How many of you have degrees that you think is absolutely worth every cent you paid for it? How many of you think “if only I hadn't done that degree”? How many employers are thinking “yes, we're finally going to get the right people motivated, inspired, capable people coming into our trades and adding value”? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I was struck by a story from Radio New Zealand. North Shore Hospital, it has revealed, has an entire ward of people who are stuck in hospital, but they have no medical reason to be there. The 20-bed ward was created in May for patients who were effectively medically discharged but didn't have anywhere to go, such as an aged care facility. This shouldn't be happening. The chain of healthcare should include post hospital stay. But, as we know, there's been a hold up. There's been a clogging in the system when it comes to releasing people from hospital. Good on North Shore Hospital for setting up this ward where they're not in the direct care of doctors but are looked after by nurses and allied health staff, such as physiotherapists and social workers and some of them are there for weeks. And this is the chain of care that I remember Dr Shane Reti talking about when he was health minister. He said we needed to ensure that GPs are properly funded so people don't end up in emergency departments because they can't access a GP - or they can't afford a GP. Then you need to receive operations in a timely manner, you need to receive the hospital care you need as expeditiously as possible, then you need to be discharged. If you no longer require hospital care, then out you go and the health workers along the chain will look after you there. The physiotherapists, the at home nurses, that sort of thing. If any one of these stages along the health care journey becomes congested, then that impacts the whole healthcare system. All parts of the healthcare system become affected. So I think, in the absence of anywhere for these people to go, this ward makes sense. Deborah Powell, who represents allied health care workers, says it's not ideal. But, it is a good, practical decision to have them in one place rather than dotted around the hospital. She said it would be better to have them in the community, but we don't have that capacity right now. And the reason it's better to be out in the community was explained by the head of the senior doctors union, Sarah Dalton. She said you are much better off to be in the community where you can get dressed, you're out of the hospital gown, you're walking around, you're doing your daily things, you're doing exercise, you're getting fresh air. You're getting rehab. All of these are good and all of these will help for a faster healing, which is quite true. So, what do you do if you have a parent who's in a retirement village and they've bought one of the villas or the apartments where they're independent living, they're perfectly fine when they buy it. Absolutely dandy. Love their new life, living their best life, and then all of a sudden, they get ill and they have to have hospital care. Where do they go when they come out? It's exactly that kind of congestion that Shane Reti, and I'm sure other health ministers, have talked about before. It's all interoperable, we need to take responsibility for our health. When things happen or if we're going through a bad patch or need health care we need to be able to see a GP. If we can't afford to or we can't get access to one in a timely fashion you went to the hospital system. Everything needs to flow smoothly from there. You're in that hospital bed. You get the treatment you need. You're out of that hospital bed and into community care. You can see what happens at any point if that gets congested. The whole system is under strain. How do we fix it? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government's intends to entirely phase out NCEA within five years. The proposal would require students take English and Maths in Year 11 and sit a test in numeracy and literacy. NCEA levels 2 and 3 would be replaced with two new qualifications in year 12 and 13 - a Certificate of Education and Advanced Certificate of Education respectively. It's the most significant update to secondary school assessments since NCEA was introduced more than two decades ago. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Civil Defence Minister is staunch on the need for mobile emergency alerts. An alert sent at 6.30am warned people to stay away from water, beaches, harbours, marinas, and estuaries - with uncertain sea conditions triggered by yesterday's massive Russia quake. It applies until further notice. But many received multiple messages, and others got none. Mark Mitchell told Kerre Woodham they'll be looking into it, but early warning is important. He says in the past emergencies with fatalities, it's because of optimism bias, but New Zealand doesn't have that luxury anymore. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Let's face it, civil defence coordinators are damned if they do, damned if they don't. Fail to give people sufficient warning of a natural disaster and they're accused of having blood on their hands. Too many warnings of something that doesn't happen, they're accused of alarmist scaremongering, and they become the boy who cries wolf. The reason for all of this, a magnitude 8.8 earthquake struck off the eastern coast of Russia yesterday morning. Why would an earthquake in Russia yesterday trigger four, three or two, if you're lucky, emergency alerts for New Zealanders 18 hours later? It's the long delay between the earthquake and its ripple effect here. It will arrive here, but it's got a long way to come. Apparently, tsunamis travel at speeds equivalent to an Air New Zealand Boeing plane, but it that still gives you plenty of time when you're in New Zealand. Your Boeing still takes a fair while to get to the eastern coast of Russia. Different story if it was a magnitude 8.8 earthquake off the coast of New Zealand - then you'd need an emergency alert. But in this particular case, we have the benefit of being a very long way away, and a Victoria University geophysicist quoted in a Stuff story, John Townend says that distance gives our experts time to do the calculations, do the assessments and work out what's likely to come before it arrives. So what are we being told? Well, the NEMA director John Price was on with Ryan Bridge on Herald Now this morning and despite the fact that nothing has happened in any of the countries that have been in the tsunami's path as it makes its way here, he repeated that it's still very much an alive threat, a hazard for New Zealanders and the last thing we want, he says, is anyone to be harmed, injured, or killed as a result of going near the coastline. He said the rationale behind the alert at 6:30am this morning was that the commuters going to work and people preparing for school and the like, it would give them time, it would give them knowledge, don't go to the coastline. If normally you would go for a morning walk or you'd go for a morning surf, you might be intending to set out to go and catch some fish and have them for breakfast - don't do that today. The activity, he said, is seen as surges in the water rather than a typical wave formation, so you might think you know the tides. You might think you know the waves, but you don't know the way a tsunami works. He said in the Chatham Islands there's been up to a 40cm wave. To people who say that a 40cm wave is nothing to be worried about, NEMA Director Price said that's just an indicator of what could come, it could be a lot worse. I hope it's only going to be that high, he said. You've also heard internationally that there have been other sizable waves that have occurred in other parts of the world. The last thing we want is to be complacent. We know complacency, he says, puts people at risk and may kill people. But nothing happened. And I think that's what the geophysicist John Townend was saying, is that is vastly different to having an 8.8 earthquake off the coast of New Zealand. This happened in Russia, and it gives us time to assess what the possible threat might be. If Hawaii was wiped out. You'd think, crikey, this is serious, and you take all possible precautions. When nothing has happened in Japan or Hawaii? When the danger has passed, you would assume we don't need that same level of urgency when it comes to warnings. If there are too many warnings of things that don't happen, then that makes people complacent, too. There are a heck of a lot of texts to ZB this morning, not from grateful consumers of NEMA's emergency texts, but this is sort of representative: "Mike, for the love of God, make the emergency alerts for a non-existent emergency stop. I've just received my 4th in 12 hours. It really is the boy who cried wolf and does nothing but stress out my young children. If anyone knows how to disable them, please let me know," said Matt. Well, you know I got one at 4pm yesterday. As I looked over the mud flats, across the water to a narrow channel, I thought crikey, I don't think we need to put the life jackets on just yet or evacuate the house. But you know, good to know. But 6.30am this morning, by then, surely we would know if this was building in strength? That is the advantage of distance. I get it, you know, damned if they do, damned if they don't. Complacency is dangerous, I agree. But I would argue when you have too many emergency alerts of things that do not happen, that is going to inculcate complacency and that will be dangerous. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Gang membership is on the rise, but if you believe Assistant Police Commissioner Paul Basham, an increase in numbers is not necessarily a bad thing. Gang numbers have climbed past 10,000, up from 9,200 in 2023, but that might be, he says, because they're keeping a closer eye on gangs, their intelligence is better, they know who's in and who's out, the record keeping and the data is better. He told Mike Hosking they have a laser focus on gangs and since the Gang Act was passed, they've launched more than 9000 charges against gang members. “Our staff are awesome, and I don't think we've ever been better. You know, there's been lots of reporting about the work we're undertaken against gangs like the Comancheros, last month, we were operating against the Greazy Dogs in Tauranga, two weeks ago we took out a chapter of the Hell's Angels in Whanganui. And that's pretty significant in policing terms because they don't make that easy for us, and to take out the Hell's Angels from a law enforcement point of view is significant and reflects the fact that our staff are doing awesome work. “You know, we're operating in a way that the government and the community would want us to be in the way that we're tackling organised crime and gang criminal behaviour. You know, we have the ambition for our communities to be safe and feel safe and I think the gang legislation that dropped last year has had a significant impact out there in terms of community feelings of safety and the feedback that we're getting is very positive in that regard.” Absolutely. You could also look at the rise in unemployment too and see correlation and rise in gang numbers. Smart people know that gangs are nothing but evil pyramid schemes. The only ones who make any money are the ones at the top and the favoured area managers. A bit like Nutrimetics on speed. Those at the bottom, the ones doing the door to door selling and the deliveries are dumb grunts who do the dirty work and pay the price. There were ten Mongrel Mob members, defendants in a murder trial in Tauranga earlier this year. They are prime examples of dumb grunts. Google them. I don't think I've ever seen a more hopeless, hapless, pathetic group in my life – they are just collectively woeful. Smart people don't join gangs, they start them. So if you're someone in a small town with few options for employment, you have few options in life, then you might find the idea of gang life attractive. You've got very little else going on in your world and your brain and your life. Being a grunt in a gang when there is very, very high unemployment and few options in your town, might seem attractive. But the good news is that police are acting – 9000 charges against the gang members since the new gang legislation was brought in. And I don't know about you, but I am not seeing the swaggering, posturing arrogance that I used to see on the streets, on the roads in my neighbourhood. I know the gangs are still operating as business as usual. That hasn't stopped. But what has changed is that the police are really inconveniencing them. They're making it difficult for them to do business. The legislation means that police can target gangs, they can target gang members, they can ginger them up, annoy them, make it difficult to go about their day-to-day business. I don't have to watch the gang members in my neighbourhood patched up strutting around the neighbourhood like they own it. And that that suits me. I know that they're still out there. I know that they're still doing what they can because they think they're untouchable. It's going to take a wee while – it has only been 18 months since they were given the keys to cities, the keys to towns, and the keys to the open roads. So it's going to take a bit of a moment to shift that. Rising gang numbers, sure. I guess if you want to see it as a bad thing, you will, it's certainly not good that 10,000 people feel they have little option other than to join a gang. That life is better for them in a gang than it is within the community. That's sad. That's a damning indictment. But police bringing 9000 charges against gang members. It's a very good start. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

BNZ is taking advantage of the Government's ban on in-store card surcharges to promote its new banking platform. Payap, an open banking platform, allows customers to pay directly from their bank account. It provides a lower-cost alternative with transaction fees of just 0.39% or 0.59%, and is compatible with all major NZ banks. BNZ Head of Payment Development Jonathan Dale told Kerre Woodham with yesterday's surcharge announcement, it's good to highlight some alternatives in the market that will leave businesses in a good position for both them and their customers. Payap, he says, creates an even playing field, and the small transaction fee creates an opportunity for small and large businesses alike to keep on growing. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There is much that this coalition government is dealing with that is not of their own making – they are mopping up, cleaning up the mess. Then there are the own goals that should not be happening 18 months into office – and I would argue that the announcement trumpeted yesterday afternoon is an example of an own goal. The Government is planning to ban merchants from adding surcharges to in-store card payments, a change they say that will save shoppers from the unwelcome surprise they get at the till. Go the Government for protecting the consumer! Well, no, hang on a minute. My first thought was well, surely the retailers will simply pass on the cost that they have to pay to the banks for the privilege of having debit cards, contactless payments, and credit cards. The bank charges them because the credit card companies charge them, the banks certainly aren't going to absorb it. The retailers say, well, if you want the privilege of contactless payment if you want the convenience of that, then you can pay the charge. But now they're going to have to absorb it. My second thought was now I'm going to be paying more. I don't Tap and Go. I very seldom Tap and Go. I've got a business account and a personal account, and when I pay for something, I'll insert my card, select the account, and pay that way. It's supposed to make things easier for the accountant, and I avoid the surcharge. So when the retailers pass on the cost of the surcharge, anyone else who inserts and pins or swipes and pins will be paying too. Heather du Plessis-Allan covered most of my objections when I was listening to her interview with Scott Simpson last night. How can this possibly be trumpeted as a boon to consumers when all that happens is the price of goods will go up to cover the surcharge? Why not go after the credit card companies? And the banks? I could certainly understand charging a surcharge in the olden days when we had the zip zap credit card machines. There would undoubtedly have been a cost involved in processing all that paper. But now? Come on. Sure, there are costs in terms of fraud protection and there'd be other costs involved if you want to use your credit card and have that added protection, then you pay the surcharge. I don't see why the retailer should pay it, and I don't see why I should pay it when I'm not using that facility. Why didn't the Government go after the Ticketmasters, and the Air New Zealands, and the hotels of this world that charge processing fees and service fees, and “you've looked at our website so now we're going to charge you” fees. The Coalition Government did not cover themselves in glory yesterday with this announcement. And then there was the announcement of the announcement from Brooke van Velden around scaffolding safety requirements. That was another unwelcome reminder of Labour's modus operandi too. No, she was a day to forget for the Government yesterday. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

BNZ is taking advantage of the Government's ban on in-store card surcharges to promote its new banking platform. Payap, an open banking platform, allows customers to pay directly from their bank account. It provides a lower-cost alternative with transaction fees of just 0.39% or 0.59%, and is compatible with all major NZ banks. BNZ Head of Payment Development Jonathan Dale told Kerre Woodham with yesterday's surcharge announcement, it's good to highlight some alternatives in the market that will leave businesses in a good position for both them and their customers. Payap, he says, creates an even playing field, and the small transaction fee creates an opportunity for small and large businesses alike to keep on growing. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There is much that this coalition government is dealing with that is not of their own making – they are mopping up, cleaning up the mess. Then there are the own goals that should not be happening 18 months into office – and I would argue that the announcement trumpeted yesterday afternoon is an example of an own goal. The Government is planning to ban merchants from adding surcharges to in-store card payments, a change they say that will save shoppers from the unwelcome surprise they get at the till. Go the Government for protecting the consumer! Well, no, hang on a minute. My first thought was well, surely the retailers will simply pass on the cost that they have to pay to the banks for the privilege of having debit cards, contactless payments, and credit cards. The bank charges them because the credit card companies charge them, the banks certainly aren't going to absorb it. The retailers say, well, if you want the privilege of contactless payment if you want the convenience of that, then you can pay the charge. But now they're going to have to absorb it. My second thought was now I'm going to be paying more. I don't Tap and Go. I very seldom Tap and Go. I've got a business account and a personal account, and when I pay for something, I'll insert my card, select the account, and pay that way. It's supposed to make things easier for the accountant, and I avoid the surcharge. So when the retailers pass on the cost of the surcharge, anyone else who inserts and pins or swipes and pins will be paying too. Heather du Plessis-Allan covered most of my objections when I was listening to her interview with Scott Simpson last night. How can this possibly be trumpeted as a boon to consumers when all that happens is the price of goods will go up to cover the surcharge? Why not go after the credit card companies? And the banks? I could certainly understand charging a surcharge in the olden days when we had the zip zap credit card machines. There would undoubtedly have been a cost involved in processing all that paper. But now? Come on. Sure, there are costs in terms of fraud protection and there'd be other costs involved if you want to use your credit card and have that added protection, then you pay the surcharge. I don't see why the retailer should pay it, and I don't see why I should pay it when I'm not using that facility. Why didn't the Government go after the Ticketmasters, and the Air New Zealands, and the hotels of this world that charge processing fees and service fees, and “you've looked at our website so now we're going to charge you” fees. The Coalition Government did not cover themselves in glory yesterday with this announcement. And then there was the announcement of the announcement from Brooke van Velden around scaffolding safety requirements. That was another unwelcome reminder of Labour's modus operandi too. No, she was a day to forget for the Government yesterday. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Politicians rely on voters having short memories. They all do it. Politicians and governments get swept out of power, they fester away on the opposition benches, and then a year before the next election, they make sweeping statements and promises about what they'll do if voters have the good sense to put them in. Chris Hipkins is no different from every other party. A lot of people might nod along with his comments and look at the price of butter or the whopping amount on their power bill and think ‘well this lot haven't fixed things the way they said they would, maybe I should vote Labour in 2026.' In the Herald's Front Page podcast, the Labour leader said he wants us to have a look at how MP works, so smaller parties don't call the shots. There should be some concessions and some trade-offs with the other parties to form a government, he says. That doesn't mean you should be doing things you specifically told the electorate before the election that you weren't going to do, Chris Hipkins said. The Treaty Principles Bill, he says, is a good example. The Regulatory Standards Bill. Some of these things no one knew they were voting for at the last election. And now they're being inflicted on them. I don't think that's the spirit of MMP or democracy. And amazingly, a bolt of lightning didn't strike him. Because can I remind the Labour leader, that Labour lost the last election - and absolutely tanked it. After their landslide win in 2020, ministers felt they could implement un-signaled projects and projects that arose because of agitation within their caucus - from Three Waters to a social insurance scheme - and didn't bother taking the public along with them. That was one of the main reasons that Labour tanked it. After their historic win, it was a historic defeat. ‘Bugger it', they thought to themselves. ‘We've got a mandate, we'll do what we like', which is not so very different from allowing minor parties to implement un-signaled projects, is it? A lot of people who voted Labour last time did so because in 2020 National was a complete disaster as a party. A lot of people were very grateful to Labour for getting them through Covid. There were still some people who believed the rhetoric, despite clear evidence that they had no idea how to implement a lot of the more progressive and visionary policies. There was no evidence they could actually implement them, but some people still believed it. But then they came and there were policies that nobody knew existed, even those who had done their homework. Where did this come from? Well, it came from an antsy Māori block within Labours caucus who said,' Well, if you don't do this, we'll go to Te Pati Māori!' and Labour caved. So, I am all for some reform around our electoral system. I think the party that wins the most votes on the night should be obliged to enter into negotiations with the minor parties. And, perhaps more pertinently, the minor parties (looking at you Winston) should be obliged to begin negotiations with the party that wins the most votes on the night. Forget about your petty power politics and your hurt feelings and your personal grievances. That's not what you should be there for. You should be there for the good of the people. So, the party that wins the most votes on the night should have the minor parties knocking on their door, by law. And if they cannot reach any kind of consensus, if they cannot agree on the principles that could help them form a government then by all means, shuffle the deck. Let's see what kind of government you can come up with. I would love to hear before the election from party leaders on who they will work with, which parties they will rule out, and which policies are non-negotiable. And again stressing, I would love to see petty power politics taken out of the equation too. New Zealand voters have said have reaffirmed MMP as the system by which they want to be governed. Incomprehensibly to me, but there we go, we live in a democracy. They've said yes, MMP is the way to go, that's the form of proportional representation we will have. But that doesn't mean that we can't tinker with it, make it better, or reform it. We don't agree on much Chris Hipkins and I, but on that, I do agree. Let's have a look at MMP and see how we can improve it. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A late night safe zone has found success in Wellington, and is being brought to Auckland. For the past eight years, Take 10, an initiative run by Vulnerable Support Charitable Trust (VSCT), has been offering a late-night safe zone on Wellington's Courtenay Place. Now, with the support of Auckland Council, the volunteer-run initiative is launching a 10 week pilot in Auckland's city centre. Operations Manager Leigh Keown told Kerre Woodham that they get a lot of students and young people on their night out, but it's for anyone who wants to have a break, get a glass of water, or charge their phone. She says everyone is welcome, and rather than walk around the streets, not knowing what to do, people can come to them for shelter. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Education Minister's stressing schools can still be flexible as the Government pulls the plug on open plan classrooms. It was introduced by John Key's Government in 2011. Erica Stanford announced yesterday all new builds will now have more traditional layouts. She told Kerre Woodham there are good examples in the best modern learning environments. She's also looking into helping fund schools to modify existing open-plan rooms. Stanford told Woodham she's tasking the school property agency to look into ways to help schools revert their teaching spaces. In the meantime, she says, schools have five year property budgets, with a category for classroom modifications they can use. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Around about 30 years from now the AI bot, who will be presenting the 9am to midday show, will announce breathlessly that single-cell classes are to be done away with and open plan classrooms are planned for future school builds to allow greater collaboration between students and teachers. A more relaxed style of learning, yadda yadda yadda – what do you think? 0800 80 10 80, the AI bot will say, because as sure as God made little apples, this is going to come around again. Anybody who's been around since the 70s, perhaps earlier, will know that the great open plan versus single-cell classes debate has been going on, and on, and on for decades. Honestly, for people who preach collaboration and open minds, academics within education are awfully territorial and guard their own patch. Whole word learning versus phonics is another cracker, but we'll save that for the AI bot of the future. While open plan designs were originally designed to foster collaboration, they have often created challenges for schools. So it was stop the presses yesterday when the Minister of Education announced that open plan classrooms aren't meeting the needs of students and teachers. Colour me pink and call me shocked! Whoever would have thunk it? We did. We all knew it. They were originally intended to foster collaboration, and you can imagine a bunch of pointy heads sitting around a table saying: it'll be amazing – teachers will be able to draw support from one another, and those that perhaps aren't getting results from one student can look to another. Teachers will be able to foster the kind of energy and creativity that we need to see, and the children will be able to mingle. But no, it's been an abject disaster. It was an abject disaster in the 70s. It was an abject disaster in the 80s and it's been an epic disaster since John Key and Hekia Parata introduced them in 2011. Erica Stanford says in many cases, open plan classrooms reduce flexibility rather than enhance it. She says we've listened to the sector; new classrooms will no longer be open plan. But this is the good thing: they're not going back to the future again. They're going to create classes that prioritise flexibility over open plan layouts, so the use of glass sliding doors means spaces can be open when you want to have a wider collaboration, but then they can be closed for focused learning. This idea doesn't mean we're going back to the prefab – the cold, uninsulated prefabs for every class that possibly you went to school in. If teachers want to open up space, they can, when they want to shut themselves off, they can. There is no one-size-fits-all for every class and that is the way it should be. The thing I really liked about Erica Stanford's announcement was the flexibility. This is a good thing. This is a very good thing. And I want to hear positive, joyous, fabulous response to this announcement from the Minister of Education, as one Minister who really understands her portfolio. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Over 8,000 divorces are filed in New Zealand annually, and the process isn't cheap. While the dissolution fee only costs $242, legal costs can reach into the thousands. Many couples fall into the so-called ‘missing middle' — earning too much to access legal aid, but not enough to afford private lawyers. Australian divorce and separation lender JustFund has launched in New Zealand with the sentiment that access to justice isn't a privilege, it's a right. Their Director of Family Law, Lauren Milne, told Kerre Woodham the average cost of divorce in New Zealand is $30,000 – $15,000 per person. She says that most people aren't putting aside a nest egg in case they get divorced, so it can be a struggle to pull together the funds. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Just how well served or poorly served are we by the engineering and the design of our roads? Residents of Waiuku are reeling after a crash yesterday that has left an adult and two children dead. Some locals say they've been calling for safety measures to be introduced on Masters Rd, known as ‘roller coaster road', for years. One poor man who was first on the scene yesterday lost his best mate on the same road two years ago and says he fears for his life every time he turns out of his driveway. He said if they could start focusing those speed cameras on actual known death trap sites, like Masters Rd, instead of on random corners or at the bottom of pretty safe downhills where they're just revenue gathering —please could they put those cameras where it would save people's lives instead of just collecting the tax?— “that would be a great start”. We need them on this road. He described the area where the crash occurred as being akin to an old school BMX jump. I received an email a couple of days ago from a woman whose friend had his house destroyed in May by a speeding driver in a stolen car. She said she'd spoken at a Whangarei Council meeting to plead for barriers to stop this happening again, but they've refused to fund it, despite the fact that 10 years ago the same house was totalled and had to be rebuilt because the same thing had happened. And pleas from that owner to put barriers were ignored then too. Franklin's Whitford-Maraetai Rd has seen crashes every month. Locals say it's a regular traumatic experience to drive the roads, despite efforts from Auckland Council to improve it. There's been road widening along parts of the stretch, resurfacing of some of the bends in asphalt, and it's reduced the number of accidents there, but locals say they still expect to hear that awful sound of metal crunching every time there's rain. What is a dangerous road? It's very subjective, but one indicator is a high number of fatal or serious crashes over an extended period of time. If you look at Old North Road in Waimauku, from 2014-2019 there were 13 deaths and serious injuries in five years. State Highway 2 from Katikati to Tauranga, one of the highest risk roads in the Bay of Plenty: between 2009-2018, 27 people were killed and 77 seriously injured. In response to that, speed limits were lowered in a number of places, and then flexible wire rope median barriers were put in on sections of State Highway 2 South of Katikati. But you'll remember we've had people phoning in about those because they say it's impossible to turn into side streets – it makes residents lives a misery having to drive for kilometres before they can turn around. So yes, it might stop cars from crashing into one another on a dangerous stretch of road, but it also means risky behaviour from those who are looking to avoid travelling many kilometres just to turn around and come back again. State Highway 1 from Kawakawa to Springs Flat, Northland: 14 deaths, 41 serious injuries from 2012-2016. There is the factor of people not wearing a seat belt, that causes deaths, where they've been drinking or drug impaired, of course that comes into play, but at the same time, there are stretches of road that New Zealanders drive that are completely and utterly unforgiving. You make one small mistake, and humans do, a moment of distraction, one small mistake, and the consequences are absolutely devastating because the roads are unforgiving. Many of them are still the goat tracks that they once were. Just had a bit of metal put on them and call them a highway. At what point do you get a road engineered? And again, it probably comes back to the resource management and the RMA and the problems we have with getting permission to reconfigure roads around the country. You would think though, in the case of the woman who emailed me, that putting a barrier up on the corner to stop a car leaving the road and barrelling into a house for the third time - surely a barrier fence wouldn't be a huge cost to ratepayers of Whangarei? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Yesterday we were talking about Chlöe Swarbrick's grand plans for economic reform, and today brings another interesting suggestion for economic reform, this time from Sir Roger Douglas and Professor Robert MacCulloch. I wonder if now is the time to be seriously looking at reforming our taxation system. Over the years, we've experimented with, we've dabbled in various taxes on wealth: estate duties, gift duties, stamp duties on property sales, the sort of things that other countries have and have adapted, but most were eventually abolished. The absence of a general wealth tax, capital gains tax, or inheritance tax has been a recurring topic of debate. No New Zealand government has been able to introduce a wealth tax and maintain it, but it's a staple of the Green Party's proposed Green Budget. Chlöe Swarbrick says we've done really big things in the past and there is no reason why we shouldn't again. She says in the 1930s and 40s, after world wars and the Great Depression, we came together as a country and decided to build a nation which looked at the foundations of public health care, public education, and public housing. Now, Sir Roger Douglas, former finance minister and the architect of the most sweeping economic reforms since the establishment of cradle to grave social Security and the one who did away with the high taxes, and Professor Robert MacCulloch, who you will have heard from time to time on the show, have released their plan for an economic reform. They first developed the plan for economic reform in 2016 but have updated it for 2025. They point out that by 2060, 26% of New Zealanders will be over 65, up from 16% in 2021. Professor MacCulloch and Sir Roger said that income tax on earnings up to $60,000 a year should be redirected into individual savings accounts to fund each person's health care, pension, and risk cover, and that would replace much of the current public system with private provision. This needs to be done, they say, because Treasury and Inland Revenue have both raised questions in the past year about how the government will be able to collect enough tax to fund the increasing cost of NZ Super and healthcare, the Superfund notwithstanding. People who didn't have enough in their individual accounts could still be helped by the public system, which would be funded on taxes collected on income over $60,000 a year. So under $60,000, you pay tax of a sort, but it's for you and it goes into a savings account to fund what you'll need in the future. So this would mean larger numbers of middle and higher income people paying for themselves while the system helped lower income people. MacCulloch said that would mean government costs were reduced, the quality of outcomes would be increased, and the plight of low-income earners would be improved. He says too many low-income people have no savings in KiwiSaver because they're going from paycheck to paycheck, this model would help to address that. And if you look at his model, it shows that an individual could save around $21,000 annually. You'd put $9,450 into a health account, $7,350 for superannuation, and $4,200 for risk cover. And they'd drop the corporate tax rate to help fund employer contributions. Robert MacCulloch argues that savings, not taxation reform, offers the ability to gain efficiencies in healthcare. A drop in corporate taxes would help fund employer contributions and rather than the government dictating where to go, people could choose their preferred public or private supplier. So bold suggestions. Douglas and MacCulloch's more bold than Swarbrick. But does Chlöe Swarbrick have a point that we can initiate institutional reform if we want to? It's been done before. It's bold and it's visionary and it's scary. The bigger question though, is: should we? Is the tax system that we have right now working? Chlöe Swarbrick, Sir Roger, and Professor MacCulloch argue it's not. Unlikely bedfellows, but bedfellows they are in terms of saying what we have right now is not fit for purpose and certainly will not be fit for purpose at all in the future. Do we need to make institutional change around our tax system and the way we pay for health care, the way we pay for superannuation as we get older? The cradle to grave Social Security plan, devised in the 1930s is still pretty much around in the year 2025, nearly 100 years later. Times have changed, does our tax system need to change with it? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Starting with some good news on a good news Monday, Health NZ added 2100 nurses and more than 600 doctors to its ranks since the election in March 2025, according to new figures published. The most recent health workforce data showed that as of March 2025, there were 35,341 nurses, 5188 resident medical officers, and 6419 senior medical officers - both the categories of doctors. Not all of these people are working full time, but they're all on the books. And yet, despite the fact that since the election there's been a major recruitment drive, more than 36,000 Te Whatu Ora nurses, midwives, healthcare assistants have voted to strike for 24 hours later this month - because they say they have safe staffing concerns. They say patients are at risk because of the short staffing, the nurses, midwives and healthcare assistants are stretched too thin and cannot give patients the care they need. And I totally accept this, this is heartbreaking for our exhausted members who became healthcare workers because they want to help people. So what's the story? We've had 2100 more nurses added to the ranks. Can there ever be enough nurses? Was there ever a time when you worked for Health New Zealand, that there were enough staff? That there were enough healthcare assistants and midwives and nurses? Was there a time you can go back to and say, in 1998, - we had so many staff, it was fantastic. You could sit and chat with patients, spend some quality time with them you didn't have to do the administrative work, you didn't have to do the clean up work because there were people who were capable, who were employed, who did that work. If 2100 nurses have been hired and you're still stretched so thin, how on earth did you get through the previous 6-7 years? It is a really tough job and there is so much more to the job than what the average patient sees. In the press release from the union, they say that burnt out nurses have left to go to Australia, where the pay and the working conditions are so much better, and they are. The pay and the working conditions have always been better in Australia. But then in part, our New Zealand nurses going to to Australia are part of a global migration route of health staff. English, Irish, Filipino nurses come here looking to better their pay and their working conditions, looking for a better work life balance. So it's all part of that global migration route of health staff which seems to be particularly mobile. But I'd really love to hear from health staff. You don't strike lightly, I know that. What is it that you need to feel that you can do your job well? How many more staff do you need to feel that you can look after your patient safely? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ray Chung has surely scuppered his chances of becoming Wellington's next mayor, hasn't he? Although, given the way voters in Wellington tend to cast their ballots given their previous form, perhaps not. Chung has sent an email to three of his fellow councillors with the heading ‘A sordid night on the town”, in which he proceeded to pass on a story he heard from a neighbour while out dog walking, trash talking Mayor Tory Whanau. It accused her of participating in an orgy with a couple of young men and taking drugs, and talked about the form of the woman involved, being Tory Whanau, having soft, pendulous breasts. Whanau released the email to the New Zealand Herald as an example of the dehumanising personal attacks she's experienced during her term as Wellington mayor and part of the reason she's not running for the mayoralty again. She said this sort of behaviour (the sending of gossip to fellow councillors), is unbecoming for a public official, it's creepy, it's gross. If he's going to stay in the mayoral race, he needs to commit to a clean campaign. Whanau, who wants to be elected as a councillor but not mayor this election, provided the email to the Herald saying she wanted voters to see evidence of the abuse she and other female politicians endured. This is the thing that stuns me: when questioned about the email, Chung said he had no idea if the contents were true. Absolutely none. He did no fact checking, he just found it interesting, thought his fellow councillors would agree. When pressed maybe three times, he thought perhaps he'd say sorry if it wasn't true, but didn't really see anything wrong with what he'd done. He said I passed on exactly what I was told, I'd call it gossip. And I suppose using the internet is just the modern form of whispering in someone's ear at the village fair. Now the best form of gossip and lying is to feed a story with a grain of truth. Whanau has form in drunken carrying on, it's not a huge leap the way it would be with a teetotalley, happily married young female mayor. Whanau says she can prove she wasn't at this supposed orgy which Chung says took place on New Year's Eve. She was at a function for ambassadors in the city and then went on to a rainbow community party on New Year's Eve. She says she can show that the story is malicious gossip. The scary thing about this is that people think they can say anything about anybody these days and get away with it. For all the faults of the mainstream media, we are accountable for the things we say and write. So if we get it wrong, we are censored. The records corrected and you know about it. We can certainly have opinions you disagree with, that's different, but if we had come out with a story like that, we could be sued for defamation. And in the past this radio station has been Most radio stations have been, because people take it one step too far, repeat something they've heard because they think it might be interesting. Wrong. It's false. It can be proved to be false, and they're censored, and they have to pay a fine, and they have to apologise and correct the record. I'd love to see how much faith people put in alternative media stories and sources, if they were held to the same level of accountability that we are. The internet is amazing, but it has always been an absolute cesspit of misinformation and lies as well. You know for a fact that the story about Clarke Gayford and the nanny, Clarke Gayford and the Whangarei court appearance, Peter Davis, John Key, Tory Whanau, all of these public figures, you know, for a fact that it's true because your neighbour's niece went to school with the nanny, or your wife's brother's best friend was in the police force in Kerikeri, used to be and he knows for a fact that the court registrar... It's utter bullshit. Complete and utter BS, but you want to believe it. It feeds into how you perceive these people and what you want to believe about these people, whoever they may be. There's a grain of truth to it. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that it could have happened. And again, that's what makes it all so dangerous. I just don't believe anything until I am stepping over the writhing forms of the people allegedly involved and trying not to stand on their pendulous soft breasts. I can't just put up a story because I think you might find it interesting, and I think you'll agree with the story, you'll agree with the narrative. You say where's your proof? Where's your evidence? And if I can't provide it, you can sue me for defamation. And that's a jolly good thing. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Lizards living near the Macraes gold mine in Central Otago run the very real risk of becoming lizard skin boots on the feet of Resources Minister Shane Jones. The self-described Matua is on the warpath because hundreds of workers are at risk of being laid off after a decision by the Department of Conservation to reject an application by the country's largest gold mine owner. Macraes Goldman in the Central Otago region, which is owned by the Canadian company OceanaGold, recently applied for a permit under the Wildlife Act to clear grass and vegetation on its current site in order to expand its operation. Last month, the Department of Conservation declined it, citing insufficient information about how the company would manage the relocation of lizards. Shane Jones is beside himself and while talking with Heather du Plessis Allan this morning on the Mike Hosking Breakfast, he labelled the decision makers in DOC a bunch of quislings. “These lizards are as common as acne on a teenager. That's the first thing. Secondly, they are scattered throughout the entirety of Otago. Every time a farmer does something on his or her land, they don't need a special wildlife permit. This piece of legislation is actually older than my good self, but the most important thing is, does the public want jobs in Otago? Does the public want $700 million worth of export revenue? I do. And I'm of the view that the decision makers in this case have just taken the public for a ride.” Well, he's promised he's going to do something about it and he's taking it to cabinet, and he'll override the DOC decision. Quisling, by the way, as a colloquial term for traito Vidkun Quisling was the Norwegian Minister of Defence who collaborated with the Nazis in the Second World War. This is not the first time man has collided with environment. Remember the powelliphanta augusta snail in Westport? Solid Energy wanted to mine the snail's habitat, and there was a real hue and cry over that. Aren't we lucky that we are a country where people will take to the streets for the protection of snails? The snails were moved to different areas. Some were taken under the protective wing of DOC, and if you were a powelliphanta augustus snail you really did have a better chance in the wild because an oopsie at DOC saw the snails frozen one fateful Labour weekend. They were being stored in a refrigerator to be put into a habitat that suited them. After a few ups and downs, it appears the snails have survived the disruption. Twenty years after they were moved, the population has grown to 1884 with an additional 2195 unhatched eggs, and the species had been observed on camera laying eggs for the first time. It was tough but they adapted and good for them. The Northern Expressway. Along with building the highway, NX2 —the coalition of companies that was charged with building the expressway— were also charged with building fishways. So inanga, or native white bait, could swim around the culverts and weirs that were required with the expressway. We've heard from your everyday builders and developers who have to count skinks and lizards before they can move earth on a project. In some cases they have to relocate the skinks and lizards. Sometimes they count the skinks and lizards, and the friendly neighbourhood cat reduces their number overnight by one or two. Then there's the taniwha, who've popped up during the construction of the Waikato Expressway and the Light Rail project. Shane Jones asked the question: do you want lizards or jobs? Do you want a company that's going to get some export earnings in to help us get back on track, or do you not? We're not talking about taking a thundering great excavator and churning up the ground and leaving it a sad and sorry toxic mess. Modern day mining is vastly different to what it used to be. It's not even as if Mcraes said buggar the lizards – they said we will lovingly pick them up and transport them somewhere where they can live like they used to. But DOC said no, that's not the plan we like. Come on. When you get an attitude like this from DOC, then it hardens other people's attitudes. People might have said, love a lizard, if they can move them, that'd be great. But when you've got DOC saying no, that plan's not good enough and they stall, and they ensure that companies have to pay more and more, and that people don't get to sign on to work, and Mcraes/Oceana decide stuff it. They do the sums, they do the number crunching, and they say it's not worth our while to be here and they leave - I don't think in this case that it is the best thing for New Zealand, that the lizards win. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

27-year-old Auckland engineer Shyamal Shah has been sentenced to two years, two months imprisonment for what is believed to be one of the largest public sector thefts on record – a 17-month scheme in which he managed to swindle roughly $1 million from his employer, Watercare. The court was told yesterday that the theft and deception came about through Shah's gambling addiction that started at Sky City Casino, then escalated after three men approached him and invited him to a residence where private games were being held. It was a racket where addicts were targeted and given a significant line of credit before payment is demanded, often through coercion. I mean, if we've ever seen any Good Fellas type movies, you've seen it before. In Shah's case, the court was told the defendant was shown photos of another man who had been violently assaulted after they didn't pay. So he was hooked, he was reeled in, and he turned a promising career in a promising life into a complete and utter train wreck. He will go to jail, his parents, who had taken a gamble and backed that their son was going to be an exemplary citizen, are financially ruining themselves to try and pay back as much of the money as they possibly can. This is what a gambling addict looks like, and it comes at the same time as the nation's independent gambling regulator, the Gambling Commission, has issued a damning report into the Ministry of Health's problem gambling section, saying it is impossible to judge whether the services actually reduce gambling harm. The report recommended Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey and Internal Affairs Minister Brook van Velden reject the Ministry of Health request to increase a levy from $76 million to $92 million over the next three years. The levy comes from the gambling industry, which makes sense. A lot of people can gamble and just have, you know, $5 on the nose of a horse, a pretty chestnut at Race 9 at Te Rapa, but others can't, so the industry helps fund problem gamblers, helps fund assistance and help for problem gamblers. But the Commission's expert reviewer Doctor David Rees said when it came to the money that has been given to the Ministry of Health to help problem gamblers, we don't know if it's enough. We don't know if it's too much. And that's a point made by a number of people. There's a lack of data, a lack of understanding, we don't know what's working, and we don't know what's not working. Sounds like my hero, the Auditor General John Ryan. He said, I don't know this money's been well spent, there's no track of it, no record of. So same again, the Ministry of Health gets millions of dollars from the gambling industry to help problem gamblers, does it work? Dunno! Ddn't really know. Matt Doocey said it's not good enough, symptomatic of what happened under the last Government. Doocey said in mental health and addiction services, increased funding had led to no material difference. And it's true, that's exactly what happened under the last Government. We're seeing lots of ads for the TAB right now: “You know the odds, now beat them”. In the pregame build up before the All Blacks there's always a punters report: what the totes paying for which player to score the first try. You can bet on anything and it's being very, very normalised. As with every addict across every addiction, you start off thinking it's a bit of harmless fun, think you can handle it until you can't, until you've found yourself like Shyamal Shah, in the dock with your promising life and career absolutely ruined. All addicts need help to get the monkeys off their back, but just throwing money to the Ministry of Health and thinking there we go job done, is not good enough. They have to show that the millions of dollars they have been granted have done some good. And this hasn't come out of the blue. In 2019, they were asked to account for the money. They didn't. In 2022, they were told to carry out a major strategic review of its problem gambling strategy and they didn't. And then they had the temerity to come back and ask for more money. Can we have another $11 million? No. If you want $92 million, then you have to show what you're spending it on, not just for the sake of the money and for the sake of proper accounting, but for the sake of the addicts. It's so hard for addicts to know they have a problem before it's too late. I'm talking about any addiction. And when you reach out for help, you need that help to be there. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I've steered clear of much of the sentencing changes proposed by the Government because it's a topic that we do canvas often. The Government campaigned on toughening up on crime and on criminals, and so far they seem to be delivering, so you know, leave them to it. But Paul Goldsmith's proposal that the government could introduce more minimum or mandatory sentences for crimes, meaning less power for the judges and more for the government, couldn't come at a better time as far as I'm concerned. Currently, when penalties are established for different offences, lawmakers normally set out a “maximum” sentence. For example, the Government's newly announced coward punch offence has maximum sentences of either 8 or 15 years imprisonment, depending on the situation. Judges then have discretion to take into account aggravating or mitigating circumstances. So that's the maximum that can be set. A judge can't go right, that was just outrageous, that's 20 years for you - not allowed to do that, there's a mandatory term. Late last month the government changes came into effect, capping sentence discounts that judges can apply. So in most cases now the most they can apply is 40%. If a judge thinks that would be massively unjust, they can exceed this discount cap but that will be the exception, not the rule. Now the Government's looking to introduce more minimum sentences so the judges can't start at a laughably low detention rate or give a remarkably soft sentence. There will be a minimum to which that can apply. So for those who think that's an attack on the judiciary, Labour, or for those like Tamatha Paul, who think this is an attack on the poor, how do you defend these sentences? The 17-year-old knife wielding rapist who had robbed two men at knife point before raping a young woman at Albert Park in Auckland who was coming home after celebrating her 21st birthday. He raped her, threatened to kill her boyfriend. Her life has never been the same since. The defence wanted home detention for a vicious rape at knife point. The judge said oh no, but am going to give you a 77% discount, for his youth, his guilty plea, no priors, and his attempt at rehabilitation. In the sentencing notes, the judge also seemed to take into account that he was criminally stupid. He was an idiot. Like, as in the old-fashioned version of idiot, barely able to string three words together in any language. So she gave him a 77% discount from her starting point. He ended up with two years, two months, and a week for a knife attack and rape and threatening to kill. And oh, sorry, forgot about robbing at knife point the two men earlier. On appeal, Peter Kosetatino's sentence was three years and 11 months. Again, no, no, no, a rape at knife point for a young woman whose life will never be the same? No. Drunk driver Jake Hamlin who killed an innocent young woman? 12 months home detention. He's halfway through home and laughing. Quite literally. The couple who murdered 4-year-old Ashton Cresswell – they were jointly charged with manslaughter. There were only the two of them there, the mother and her partner. Both of them stayed schtum. That's all you have to do when you're a baby murderer, you just shut up. That feral tart protected her partner at the expense of her little boy. The police's hands are tied. They were jointly charged with manslaughter because nobody else could have done it. It was one of them. Police couldn't prove either one of them because both of them were protecting each other, so they pled guilty to reduce charges of neglect. And so for murdering that little boy and then staying schtum, his mother, in name only, got three years. And the partner got four years for basically torturing a child. So many children are being tortured right now, tortured and killed, and for that you get 3 years and four years. Is it any wonder why the Government is interfering with the judiciary? Those are three good examples among thousands, thousands, and thousands of why the government has to interfere with the judiciary. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins says speeding up the justice system is a priority. Recent announcements by the Justice Minister include bigger fines for trespassing and harsher penalties for coward punches and assaulting first responders. Hipkins told Kerre Woodham unlike National, he wouldn't spend the first 18 months in power overturning the last Government's legislation. He says there's been too much flip-flopping around. One of the things Hipkins wants to prioritise is the courts – saying that they have to deal with the inefficiencies in the system, and that justice delayed is justice denied. Chris Hipkins says Jacinda Ardern will be weighing up safety before deciding whether to return to New Zealand for our Covid inquiry. Ardern could be among key decision-makers expected to be asked to speak later this month. Hipkins told Kerre Woodham there are risks to her security in New Zealand. He says they aren't idle threats, and it's legitimate for her to consider the danger to herself and her family. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chris Hipkins was on with Kerre Woodham yesterday, as well as with Ryan Bridge on Herald NOW, and he talked about the Covid inquiry – insinuating it was slanted against Labour because New Zealand First is now part of a National government and had drawn up the scope of the inquiry to benefit them. It also came out that he has drafted written responses to the questions the Commission might ask of him, but he is non-committal about fronting up for a verbal grilling – a good cross examination. Now also on the table is Jacinda Arden, who doesn't look like showing despite the wish of many for her to be held to account. But the thing about this Commission is that it is not a trial, it's an inquiry. It's a show trial, really. It's a political thing and Chris Hipkins is still in the political game, unlike Jacinda Ardern. So he needs to handle this thing well. He was the Minister of Health during the pandemic. In fact, he was the Minister of just about everything, because he was the most competent in his party. So if he wants to be the leader of this party going into the next election, he really must turn up and face that cross examination of what he was part of. But we know what he did – it's already there and black and white. But what we don't know is the thought processes that drove his actions, and we haven't had the chance to question him. And what we don't know is his thoughts, with hindsight, as to what he might have done better. So if he's honest about learning lessons about pandemic management because there's gonna be another pandemic in the future, then he really must turn up and face the heat. It'll be good for him. It'll be good for us. If he doesn't, the conspiracy theorists that he mentioned yesterday will bring all their bias to bear against him next election. Chris Hipkins has choices: face up and tell the truth, stand apart and let speculation by what he calls “conspiracy theorists” run wild, or just quit. Quit his aspiration to become Prime Minister one more time and enjoy a retirement from public life. It's in your court, Chris. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

To start the morning, I wondered about looking at the fairness - or otherwise - of the corporate tax rate. The Finance Minister, according to a New Zealand Herald story, has quietly asked Inland Revenue to look at the appropriateness of the tax settings being applied to banks. Nicola Willis confirmed to the Herald a wide range of options is being considered to ensure the major banks are paying their fair share of tax. She wants advice back ahead of next year's Budget, which is expected to be delivered just months before the 2026 general election. She said, “our work to enhance banking competition is wide-ranging and as part of this of sought advice on whether the major banks are paying their fair share of tax,”. I've been interested, she went on, in how New Zealand's bank tax regime compares with Australia and elsewhere, particularly in light of the significant profits Australian banks make from Kiwi customers. No decisions have been made, recommendations have not yet been taken to Cabinet, so she's not going to comment on specific proposals at this stage. I would have thought if the company tax rate was a set amount and the banks are paying that, then they're paying their fair share of tax. I was listening to Heather talking to Claire Matthews, the banking expert from Massey, this morning. Claire Matthews said the way she thought it might work would be the corporate tax rate would be lowered for all corporates except the major trading banks. Everybody else will be lowered, but banks, so they wouldn't in effect be punished, they just wouldn't benefit from any changes to this tax regime. But as Claire Matthews pointed out, banks already contribute a significant amount to the New Zealand economy. They pay a very large portion, something like 20% of total tax, total corporate tax in New Zealand. So they're paying a huge amount of tax, so if you drop the corporate tax rate but keep the bank's tax at a higher level, you, the Government could manage to avoid the actual impact on their tax take. I think there's a real danger here. Are they going to suddenly make supermarkets pay more because they, too are Government's favourite whipping boys and girls? Why are they being singled out? Sure, I would love it if I didn't have to pay the house price twice over, but I understand that when you're lending money to individuals and to businesses, there is risk involved with that so you have to pay for that risk. I don't imagine the banks would just close their doors, decamp and head back over the Tasman, there's still money to be made. But I just don't understand why banks would be asked to pay more while the rest of corporate New Zealand pays less. I don't want a bank to fail. It's not in the country's best interest for a financial institution to go under. We've seen the damage done when the BNZ had to be bailed out, and then the different finance companies were bailed out, why on Earth would we want to see banks fail if they're paying their fair share of tax? I have no skin in the game other than a hefty mortgage, which I would love to see reduced, but I don't necessarily see it's the bank's fault that they are the ones who profit from lending money. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are a lot of things parents can teach children without schools needing to get involved. Basic hygiene, reading, physical education, even driving – parents should and could teach their children these skills. And I know schools already have a lot to be dealing with as regards to the needs of our children in their classroom, they've got a lot of changes to the curriculum happening. But one area where I would totally jump on my soapbox and say the schools need to be teaching is civics education. It's come to the forefront because while the NSW Government understands the importance of young people having a working knowledge of democracy and the legal system, it announced last year that studying civics would be compulsory in primary schools from 2027. Critics are saying that the subject is too important to be included within a wider syllabus. At the moment, what the NSW Government is doing is putting civics in with human society and its wider environments syllabus, along with other things. Critics argue that civics is so important it should have its own standalone status, with its own standalone support material, and specialist teachers, and the like. I couldn't really agree more, because when you look at everything we talk about on this show, when you look at the subject matters that are dear to our hearts, the genesis of all of the issues that come up comes down to decisions made by people voted by us or people choosing not to vote. So a small number of people get to choose individuals who will make decisions that impact us all, be it local bodies or government. Or we're talking about issues because decisions are made by people who don't understand the social contract and what it means to be a citizen, and that's what civics is all about: understanding that when you are a citizen within a civilized society you have rights certainly, but you have duties and obligations. So if there was a greater understanding of civics, a greater understanding and appreciation of what it means to be involved in a democracy, a greater understanding of the way our governments work, both central and local government, the way our laws work, we would have a more civilised society. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I don't know about you, but I want to know how big our Finance Ministers' holes are. I think it's really important to know what political parties' promises are going to cost us. A nine-year battle to get a publicly funded body to cost political parties election promises, starting with the 2026 election, ended at cabinet on Monday after ACT and NZ First put the kibosh on the plan. Way back when —2016— the proposal came from the Greens, but over time it's been modified, and Nicola Willis' plan would have amended the Public Service Act to allow the political parties access to public service resources up to 10 months before an election, so they had the information they needed to cost their policy promises. A unit in the Public Service Commission would have been created to coordinate those requests, funded with $1.2 million. Which is chicken feed in the scheme of things. But with ACT and NZ First nixing it, we remain with the status quo, which as Stephen Joyce explained this morning, means an awful lot of time wasting and running around for the opposition parties. “You have to go chasing around OIA's and parliamentary questions to try and get enough information to build a policy which stands scrutiny when it gets out to the public, and it's a lot of fun for the government of the day to try and withhold all that information and then go, “ah, it's ridiculously costed policy.”” That really ground my gears this morning when I heard that. Oh, it's all a great lark, it's all such fun having opposition parties running around desperately trying to get the information they needed. And the clue comes from the Public Services Resources. They're ours! Taxpayer money funds those services, it funds those resources. We have a right to know how much is being spent on what programmes, what funding is available, and we have a right to allow that information to be disseminated to opposition political parties so that they can craft their own policies with that knowledge, with that baseline knowledge that they need. Otherwise, they are going to be promising pie in the sky. This should be public information. It's taxpayer money funding services for taxpayers. It should be easy to access, easy to find, and then the opposition parties will be able to craft their policies accordingly. No more silly buggars. It's in the public interest not to have this time wasted. How many staffers are employed by opposition parties chasing after OIAs and chasing after this information, when that work could be better put to spending time with programmes and organisations and departments, and coming to terms with what they need to do the best possible job to deliver for the taxpayer? There is nothing fun about this. There's nothing clever about this. It is expensive time wasting. As for ACT's no because “we already provide a fully costed budget before each election”, stop being so smarmy and teachers' pets, you can't mark your own homework. Each party should have to pay out of their own party funds —not out of taxpayers dollars— for an economist, not to run the ruler over their own budgets because we've all seen that, they should each pay for an economist and the economist names should go in a ballot. Each party draws out a name, and that economist runs an eye over that party's budget. So ACT pays for an economist. The ACT economist goes into the hat, the Māori Party draw him out, that's who runs an eye over their budget. I want to know without having to do the sums myself if what a party is promising is viable, and I don't want them to do their own costings, thanks very much. I do want an independent body to look at it. That information should be freely accessible to all opposition parties. Let's put an end to the fun and the silly buggars, and each party's promises before an election should be independently verified, so we can all cast our vote with the best possible knowledge available. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A new tool can now estimate how fast a person is aging. University of Otago scientists have found a way to use an MRI scan of the brain to quantify the rate of biological aging of middle-aged people to forecast risks of dementia, chronic disease, and death in older adulthood. The technology was developed using data from the Dunedin Study, a decades long health project tracking more than 1,000 people born in the early 70's. Dunedin Study director Professor Moana Theodore joined Kerre Woodham to break down the findings of the study and how the tool works. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the wake of the Motueka valley flooding with warnings that Australia's bomb cyclone is set to bring severe weather conditions to New Zealand, we're on weather watch. Not just the media, although looking at the television screens in my studio —one on BBC talking about the heat waves in Europe and another on Sky News from Australia talking about severe wind, rain and surf in eastern New South Wales— globally we appear to be on weather alert. There will be people living in flood prone areas, people living near streams and rivers, people living in coastal areas, they'll be understandably wary as the heavy rains come down. What used to be a part or seemed to be a natural part of the weather cycle —summer brings sun, winter brings rain— now seems much more ominous than that. The gentle patter of rain on the roof is replaced by a kind of unease in certain areas. Deluges can be devastating, especially when you combine swollen streams with slash, the debris left over after forestry plantations have been felled. For years, rural communities especially have warned of the extreme danger that slash can cause, and in the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle in 2023, the government revised the standard slash management rules. But interestingly, the Hawke's Bay Regional Council found that the piles of woody debris that dammed bridges, blocked riverways and littered beaches in the wake of Gabrielle contained only a small portion of forestry slash. The Council report found the make-up of the debris deposited at more than a dozen sites consisted of a mixture of pine, willow, poplar, and other native timber and debris could not be identified. In all but one of the surveyed sites, there was little evidence of slash, indicating that the majority of pine came from erosion of hillsides and stream banks. It was a different story in Tairāwhiti next door, in Gisborne, where forestry slash was widely blamed for much of the damage caused by the cyclone. The government of the time ordered a ministerial inquiry into forestry practise and slash. So slash can sometimes be blamed for everything, it's the culprit. But as other people have pointed out, it's the fact that it's damn near impossible to dredge rivers to get the silt and the natural debris out of rivers, that also caused problems. It's the fact that we're building near flood prone areas, that are known to be flood prone areas, time and time and time again. But why are we continuing to allow forestry plantations on erosion prone land? I understand why we thought it was a good idea after Cyclone Bola - forestry plantations went into the hills there because that provided employment to locals, and the trees were supposed to hold the hills together. But now we know the dangers of slash and of erosion, where the pine trees aren't doing the job of holding the hills together, where you need different kinds of scrub and bush and grasses and trees to be able to do that. Why are we still allowing them? A) to be grown there and B) to be harvested? When we know that every winter, every time it rains, every time there's the heavy deluge, the local community is at major risk of flooding, again, and again, and again. How have we not learnt from the so many instances of slash and erosion bringing down the trees, smashing the fences, damaging the bridges, causing the incredible flooding events that we see just about every winter? We can't keep doing the same thing time and time again, can we? The farming community around areas that are so badly affected by the erosion, by the slash must get so frustrated knowing that they're having to go out and rebuild fences that will just come down again, if not next one to the winter after. So what do we do? We can't, surely keep doing the same thing again and again, because that in anybody's language is sheer stupidity. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Forestry is a major industry in New Zealand, but the practices involved contribute to the damage left in the wake of cyclones and major weather events. After 2023's Cyclone Gabrielle, the Government revised slash management rules, ruling that forestry owners will have to remove slash if it's over a certain size. They're now consulting on a proposal to further amend the standards due to cost, uncertainty, and compliance issues. Mark Bloomberg and Steve Urlich authored a piece for the Conversation titled “We are one bad rainstorm away from disaster – why proposed changes to forestry rules won't solve the ‘slash' problem”, and in it they say the proposed changes fail to adress the core reasons for slash and sediment discharges. Dr Mark Bloomberg, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the University of Canterbury's School of Forestry, joined Kerre Woodham to break down their thoughts. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Weight loss drugs are becoming increasingly sought after, with Wegovy hitting New Zealand pharmacies this month. It's currently not funded, and people will need a prescription to get it. However, people are warning that weight loss drugs aren't a silver bullet, and lifestyle changes are needed for long term success. ‘What The Fat?', co-authored by Caryn Zinn, Craig Rodger, and Grant Schofield, highlights a low-carb, healthy-fat diet, and is held up as an effective weight loss tool. Dr Zinn joined Kerre Woodham for a chat about her work as a dietician, What The Fat?, and healthy ways to lose weight. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government's harshest sentencing rules begin today. Rules like capping the maximum discount that a judge can apply at 40 percent, with some exceptions. There will be no repeat discounts for youth offenders, those aged 18 to 25. No discounts for remorse, if you're sorry again and again and again, you only get to be sorry once, because Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said repeat discounts had allowed for lenient sentences. A new aggravating factor has been introduced for offences against sole charge workers and those whose homes and businesses are interconnected. So basically your corner dairy and that's part of the National-ACT coalition agreement. A sliding scale for early guilty pleas has been implemented. There's a maximum discount of 25 percent, reduced to a maximum of 5 percent if the guilty plea is entered once the trial has started. I think there should be a discount for early guilty pleas saving us all the cost of a trial, all for that - but once the trial started and you're playing silly buggars and then decide yeah, I did do it, minimal discount. The use of cumulative sentencing for offences committed while on bail and custody or on parole will be encouraged to denounce behaviour that indicates a disregard for the criminal justice system, and this was part of the National- NZ First Coalition agreement. Why have these tougher changes been made? Because that's what New Zealanders in the main wanted. We were fed up with seeing instances like this - a teen mongrel mob member who broke into the home of a pregnant woman, didn't know her, tried to friend her on Facebook, she wasn't having a bar of it - so he broke into her house and indecently assaulted her in the bed she was sharing with her child. This teen (was actually 19), but teen offender was sentenced to 12 months home detention for breaking into her house and for indecently assaulting her in her bed. Judge Gordon Matena said he had to hold Stevie Taunoa accountable but also had to take into account his youth at the time of the offending. He noted that Taunoa had spent seven months in custody, had been on electronic monitoring bail since the charges were laid. He acknowledged that Taunoa had used drugs from a young age and that his offending had been motivated by drug addiction. He also noted his lack of cultural identity and his membership in the Mongrel Mob before sentencing him to 12 months of home detention. Taunoa said “thank you, judge. I appreciate that”, then laughed like a drain as he entered the police cells and yelled out to all and sundry “cracked it”. All that remorse, eh? In the meantime, the poor woman said she didn't want to live on her own anymore. She was terrified of the dark, she was terrified to sleep and because of his youth, because he was a druggie, because he lacked cultural identity, because he was a member of the Mongrel Mob, all of that meant that he got his sentence discounted. I was fed up with seeing things stories like this. This is only one example. There are hundreds and hundreds. And how can you be sorry 3, 4, 5 times? I'm really sorry. I violently assaulted this person. I'm really sorry I sexually offended. Not once, not twice, not three, four times I'm really sorry. No, no, no, enough. Again, if the Justice Department could show me that all of these discounts applied to violent offenders to sexual offenders to young offenders, if these discounts meant that they realised they'd had a lucky escape from prison, that this was an opportunity to look at another direction in their lives and take it, if you could show me that it worked I'd be interested in talking. Doubt that you can. The Government's also looking at longer prison sentences for people who assault prison officers or on duty first responders such as paramedics and firefighters. This is so overdue. The proposals will create a new, specific offence for assaults on first responders. For those who have family who work on the front line, I know a number of you were terrified about your loved ones going to work. You really hope that you got to see them again, fit and healthy when they came back through the door. Does this give you a greater degree of security? Probably not, because the offence has to happen before they're punished. But at least, I hope, it gives you the confidence to know that the first responders are valued, that you're recognised. That we know what you do is walk into danger while other people are running away from it. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I don't know who these people or these organisations would be and what on Earth their motivation might be, but it would appear that Treasury has identified several private operators who have expressed an interest in establishing a commercial competitor to Bluebridge with government help. Which basically means the opportunity to privatise the KiwiRail Cook Strait ferries. I don't know why you would do that, where in the world does any kind of public transport make money? I guess where there are profits to be made, Bluebridge has found them. But in a country this small, could two people, two organisations, two interested groups, make money out of the Cook Strait ferry crossing? Earlier this year, Winston Peters took a paper to cabinet, along with Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Transport Minister Chris Bishop, which confirmed a direction to Ferry Holdings —that's the publicly owned companies set up to procure two new Inter Island ferries— to consider options for ferry ownership and operation that will improve efficiency and recycle government capital. What does this mean? Translated into real world speak, that means the Government's looking at letting private operators into owning and running the ferries that the government currently owns and runs, in the hope that efficiency will be improved, and recycling government capital means using private investors money, not taxpayers' money. All very well and good to open it up for expressions of interest, but what I found really staggering is that there are people who are interested in doing just that. As you may have heard on the Mike Hosking Breakfast, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour is all for allowing private operators into running the ferries. “I have long had the philosophical view that government is not a good operator of commercial enterprises, and there's no shortage of evidence for that. But the reality will be much more persuasive to whoever's in government, you've got to balance the books, and at the moment we own too many underperforming assets. We are really struggling. As a result, the New Zealand people who fund the government as taxpayers are struggling, and there's going to have to be a reckoning. The alternative is people young and talented, keep looking further afield for opportunity and I don't want that.” No, none of us do. But is KiwiRail going to private operators going to be the Great Saviour? I wouldn't have thought so. It's been sold off before and it didn't work then. So he's all for private operators coming in and running state owned assets more efficiently. Equally unsurprising is Winston Peters being against any form of privatisation. He makes the point that NZ First has consistently held the view that taxpayer funded assets should be owned by the taxpayer. As somebody who uses the ferries once in a blue moon, I wouldn't have thought it difficult to have ships that are seaworthy, take people, and cars, and freight over the Cook Strait, and bring them back again. And you need people who can steer the ship, and you need people who can maintain the ships so that they don't break down in the middle of Cook Strait, because that's very bad. If there isn't enough money to be made commercially from doing this as an exercise, as taxpayers we have to fund it because it is State Highway 1. We need to keep it going. So why is it so hard to do that? Why is it so hard to have ships that are seaworthy, captains who can steer them, people who can maintain them? And either we know every year how much it's going to cost us to keep State Highway 1 open, which we have to do, or we allow private operators to run it and make small profit from it. Looking from the outside, I wouldn't have thought it was possible. Bluebridge has been able to do so, but is there room for another private operator? Clearly people think so, but why has it been so troubled? It's a bit like the lovely CEO from Kainga Ora who said really, in effect, the job is quite simple. We build houses for people, and we rent them out. He said it only got difficult when the previous administration wanted to make it a more social enterprise and bring in mixed model housing communities. If you drill down to what the job is, it's actually quite simple. So why have we struggled for decades to run a Cook Strait ferry crossing? It really, from the outside, doesn't seem that difficult. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Two stories today, one from Hawke's Bay, one from Nelson, and they have a horrible, horrible intersection. Motorsport legend Greg Murphy has slammed plans by the Ministry of Transport to remove the full license practical test. Back in April, the Minister for Transport Chris Bishop announced a range of suggested changes to the licencing system, including removing the full licenced practical tests. There are loads of people driving around on their restricted and he wants them to get their full licence. A group of Hawke's Bay teens spoke out, saying they thought removing the full licenced practical test was a really good idea because it would remove stress and anxiety. They argue that the restricted license practical test is already so difficult, so complex, that it leaves the full test unnecessary. One of the young women spoken to, said “I was so worried about having to do separate things right that I wasn't able to do it because I was forgetting other things, it just wasn't natural”. This is the young woman that had to sit her restricted four times before she passed. And she's not alone, there are plenty of young people who've had to do it time and time again because they don't get it right the first time. It is complex, it is difficult. After Greg Murphy read those comments in the local paper, he said driving is possibly the most dangerous thing that people do every single day. He said if you think the test is too hard, you're in la-la-land. The tests are basic and simple – if you do the right amount of preparation, just like you do in a school exam or any kind of test in your apprenticeship or at university, you will be absolutely fine. Greg Murphy, who's a V8 Supercar icon and Bathurst winning driver, says New Zealand has so many drivers who aren't prepared for the roads and who don't have understanding or awareness of their driving environment or the distractions that afflict them. He said we've got this culture and this belief that an accident won't happen to me. I won't be the one who's dead. I'm not going to be the one that's seriously injured. I'm not going to be the one where my life is turned upside down at the age of 18. And in a cruel, cruel piece of synchronicity, there's a terrible story that absolutely underscores his argument. This time last week, a Nelson family was dealing with the news that one of their sons was in hospital fighting for his life, paralysed from the waist down; his good mate and brother-in-law, who was in the car with him as badly injured with a fractured neck, broken ribs, two broken shoulders, facing a long recovery and a baby due in a matter of weeks. Another man, the man that the car smashed into, the sole driver of the other car was left seriously injured. And the 18-year-old driver is at home having to live with the fact that he was driving the vehicle that crossed the centre line that caused so much damage to so many people. As his mum put it, Izayah's got a lifetime of knowing he was driving in an accident that crippled his brother. The 18-year-old was the sober driver, picking up his brother and brother-in-law in the work ute, taking them into town to get KFC. He hadn't been drinking, he was he was doing the right thing, picking up his brother and brother-in-law who'd had a few drinks. So the 18-year-old gets into his work ute, picks up his brother and his brother-in-law, they're driving into town, and then all of a sudden a moments inattention or inexperience, and he's ploughed into another car, seriously injuring that driver, his brothers paralysed and his brother-in-law has got a broken neck, broken shoulders, and won't be able to pick up his baby when it's born in a matter of weeks. I agree with Greg Murphy. For most of us who aren't involved in forestry or farming or a dangerous industry, driving is the single most dangerous thing we'll do every single day. If those kids think that sitting a test is stressful, you try living with the knowledge that you've destroyed another person's life. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A Hawke's Bay-based motorsport legend says a plan by the Ministry of Transport to remove the full-licence practical test is nothing short of “ludicrous”. In April, Minister for Transport Chris Bishop announced a range of suggested changes to the licensing system, including removing the full-licence practical test and introducing safety mitigations for people on their learner or restricted licence. The Government is proposing the changes to make the process “more accessible, efficient and affordable”. Greg Murphy, V8 Supercar icon and Bathurst-winning driver, told Kerre Woodham that nearly 10 thousand people have died on the road in the last 25 years, 2500 of them between the ages of 15-24. He says this discussion with the govrnment has provided an opportunity to reassess and reevaluate the licensing system, and we can't afford to stuff it up. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government has instructed Auckland Council to allow apartment buildings of at least 15 storeys near key train stations as the City Rail Link nears completion. Housing Minister Chris Bishop and Auckland Minister Simeon Brown said the Government would require Auckland to allow even greater housing and development around the CRL stations than had been planned, to ensure that Auckland takes economic advantage of this transformational investment in the city. So at the moment it requires Auckland to allow for greater density around the key stations of Maungawhau (Mount Eden), Kingsland, and Morningside. The bill currently provides that Auckland Council must enable, within a walkable distance, from these station heights and densities, reflective of the higher demand for housing and business in these areas, and at a minimum, no less than six storeys. So it makes sense, you build communities and hubs around the train stations. However, the Government decided these requirements don't go far enough, and therefore they want to see an extension of the requirement to enable heights and densities to two additional stations, Mount Albert and Baldwin Ave, require upzoning, allowing buildings of at least 15 storeys high around Mount Eden, Kingsland, and Morningside, and 10 storeys high around Mount Albert and Baldwin Ave stations. Simeon Brown says Mount Albert and Baldwin stations are ripe for development sitting close to Unitex's campus and Mount Albert's shops and cafes. Bernard Osman has read has written a very good piece in the New Zealand Herald - I was quite surprised to find that Auckland has few apartment buildings of 15 storeys or more. You imagine it's full of skyscrapers, it's not at all. The Metropolis has 40 storeys – I suppose that was the oldest, highest building. Pacifica has 57 floors. The Seascape Tower was going to be 56, they've stopped construction on that. There's a 15 storey apartment building out in West Auckland in Henderson, which looks absolutely lovely. And to me, it makes common sense – you have to build up, you can't keep going out. And building around the train stations makes perfect sense, with a few caveats. I want to know what measures are in place, what safeguards there are in place around design and construction to ensure we do not see a repeat of the absolute monstrosities that were spewed up in the Auckland Central City over the past two decades. They are absolutely hideous – how anyone can live in them is beyond me. They serve absolutely no purpose. They're rotting, they're continually under construction and remediation, they've caused nothing but problems for anyone who's had the misfortune to own them, they are ugly and are blight on the landscape. Just looking at them makes me dispirited, far less living in them. Pigsties have more visual appeal and space, and are better constructed. Apartment buildings can be beautiful and functional – there are plenty of examples of those that are. And there have to be safeguards in place to ensure that that's what people will be getting in their communities, in their neighbourhoods, in their areas. There's got to be green spaces, there has to be parking. Not everybody's going to be on a bicycle, you know, there are older people who love living in the city. They love the vibrancy, they love living within communities, they love living in suburbs. Perhaps they've had the big house in the suburb, they don't want to leave the suburb, they want something smaller but having the train to be able to get in and around and about it makes perfect sense. You've got to have the communities who are going to live in these apartments at the forefront when it comes to design, and close behind, their neighbours. So what are the safeguards? And I want to see those safeguards in place before I'm grabbing my pom poms and my cheerleader skirt and leaping up and down about it. At the moment, I'm taking the cheerleader costume out of storage, ready to put on, but it's not on yet. I want to make sure that those safeguards are in place before I enthusiastically support it. And the second is how do we feel about central government overriding a city's unitary plan? I like what the government's proposing to do. But what's to stop a Labour/Green/Te Pāti Māori government coming in and ordering a city or region to comply with its own version of what is right and proper? What is the point of a unitary plan if central government laws can trump public consultation? And while I agree with the caveats I've mentioned, I think it makes perfect sense, it's certainly not going to happen overnight, even with the best will in the world and a government that wants to make things happen. But what's to stop the next government coming in and overriding the unitary plan in your region because there's something they want to do? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government's instructed Auckland Council to allow apartments at least 15 storeys high near key City Rail Link train stations. Density requirements around the Mt Albert and Baldwin Ave stations require at least 10-storey apartments, while buildings around the Maungawhau, Kingsland, and Morningside rail terminals will be allowed to reach at least 15 storeys. Hamish Firth, Director of Mt Hobson Group, told Kerre Woodham these sites won't be filled up within a week or two – it might take 15, 20, even thirty years. He says it's the sort of planning we need around those areas to ensure the areas and communities are vibrant and happening. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This morning we thought we'd start with the fact that more and more kids, it seems, are bringing weapons to school, And we're not talking about the States, we're talking about New Zealand. Figures released under the Official Information Act show that 526 students were stood down, suspended or excluded for using or having a weapon at school last year. That's 80 percent more than in 2018, when there were around 300 students disciplined. Schools differ from what they define as a weapon. There's no one category for what a weapon might be, or how a weapon is being used, it differs school by school, but nonetheless, things that can be perceived as weapons are being brought to school by our schoolchildren. And we're talking primary aged children as well as intermediate and secondary and there are 80 percent more objects that could be used as weapons being carried into school. Mike, this morning when he was discussing this story, he said - surely this is nothing new. He took a knife to school when he was a boy, ostensibly to peel an apple but it was also to show it off. He didn't mean any harm by bringing it to school. Louise Anaru, with whom he was having the conversation, the principal of Kaitaia College and the President of the Secondary Principals Association agreed with Mike that that may well be the case today and that may well be the reason why a number of these kids are bringing weapons to school, but young people need to be aware of unintended consequences. "In my experience, in the situations I've come across, there hasn't been intent - but I've still taken it really seriously in those contexts because it's important to get the message out that that can cause harm and to take a real strong stance on it, just because of the risk involved. There isn't intent, but in the worst case scenario it can cause serious harm to our young people." That was Louise Anaru talking to Mike Hosking on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning. I would love to think that it is a case of show and tell. Of ‘oh my God, look what my uncle brought me back from Switzerland - a Swiss army knife'. But looking through the Newswires, I wonder. Here's a sample from last year, just when you Google. A teenage boy suffered a serious injury to his face during an alleged assault at his East Auckland School. The attack left him with severe facial injuries that required immediate surgery. Police are seeking a person of interest after a schoolboy was left with serious facial injuries and an assault on a bus in Auckland's Pakuranga. The boy had three teeth knocked out in the assault, while three others were damaged. Here's a third - an Ashburton family whose son is still recovering after being attacked at school, and say they're also dealing with having been exploited as migrants to New Zealand. The Year 9 Ashburton College student was left with a fractured eye socket and neck injury and concussion after being allegedly assaulted in class by another student. These are serious attacks. If these were adults who were perpetrating the acts and the attacks they'd be looking, certainly at a conviction. In the olden days, it would have been a short stint in gaol, but here it would probably be home detention for that kind of assault, an unprovoked assault on an unarmed person. You know you are talking a serious crime. And that's only three of them - there are many, many more I could give you from last year, and there are some this year, way more than I ever imagined, and way more serious than I ever imagined. Maybe kids are bringing weapons to school because they're in fear of their blooming lives. Both on the way to school and while in the playground. If they are being tormented, maybe they feel a show of strength will make the other kids back off. I would love to know more about the circumstances of it, given that there are different interpretations of what a weapon might be school by school. Given that there are different punishments as a result of bringing a weapon to school. These figures are just an indication they don't tell us anything. What do you do when you have a child who is being tormented? Not just bullied but tormented and assaulted to the point that they're concussed, they have skull fractures, they lose teeth. It's boys and girls as well. I could have given you some girl's ones, but I was running out of time. Do we need to pat down the kids on arrival at school, make them hand them their weapons along with their cell phones? I mean addressing the broader issue of bullying in schools - well, good luck with that because there's been bullying for as long as kids have gathered together in one place at one time. As long as adults have gathered together in one place at one time. What's happening in the Middle East can be seen as a form of bullying. But trying to mitigate the harm that angry, fearful people can do to one another would be a very good start. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The world is on fire, World War III imminent, what can New Zealand do? Well, very little. Those were the headlines over the weekend. After telling the world he'd decide within two weeks whether or not to unleash the power of the United States on Iran in support of Israel, Donald Trump and his administration sent B2 stealth bombers into Iran on Friday to penetrate the underground nuclear facilities deep in the mountains of Iran. Israel, of course, has been attacking Iran's nuclear and military structures with very targeted attacks for the past 10 days or so, deploying warplanes and drones that apparently were previously smuggled into the country to attack key facilities and target top generals and scientists involved in the nuclear programme. Israel claimed its attacks were necessary before Iran got any closer to building an atomic weapon. No weapons there at the moment, but apparently the stockpiles of enriched uranium are at a high and unprecedented for a state or a country without nuclear weapons. So there are no bombs as you and I might imagine them, but there is enriched uranium at levels hitherto unseen in a country without nuclear weapons. Initially, the US had a hands-off approach to Israel's attacks - nothing to do with us, nothing to see here. But all that changed when the B2 bombers went in. It was quite the operation as operations go, with the decoy planes being sent to Guam - and they were able to get in to Iran without a shot being fired against them. And you'd hope that one wouldn't be brought down at $2 billion a pop, it's expensive military hardware. The US said it was a pre-emptive strike they were seeking to terminate a threat, that being atomic weapons, not the Iranian regime. After Israel's retaliation for the festival attacks that killed more than 1000 Israeli civilians, Iran's kind of Nigel-no-mates in the middle of the Middle East. Hamas and Hezbollah have been, in effect, nullified. Syria's Bashar al-Assad has had to flee Syria. Russia signed a treaty with Iran but so far it seems to have been very one sided with Iran building kamikaze drones for Russia and working with Russia to build military hardware. And all of a sudden they're in trouble and Russia - goes well this is dreadful, and that's pretty much it. All they've come up with are words and they are busy in Ukraine. There would be very little they could do militarily without weakening their stand in Ukraine, so Russia has its hands tied. So where to from here? The Iranians will close the Straits of Hormuz, which will affect supplies of gas and oil getting to the West, along with other supplies. And there are concerns that you'll see again the kind of terrorist attacks and suicide bombings and hostage taking that we saw some years back. But the Ayatollahs won't be able to rely on an army of dissatisfied young people. They have no particular love for it and a number of them have told journalists that when the Ayatollahs are asking for unity and taking a stand against the aggressors: you have got to be kidding, the aggressor is you. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, told the Iranian people in a video message that, along with Israel thwarting Iran's nuclear programme, we are clearing the path for you to achieve your freedom and some Iranians have gathered behind that call. Others are like, yeah we don't like our leaders, but it's Israel and America. We would love to see a new style of governance within our own country, but it's as well in America who are who are affecting that change. So it's all terribly up in the air. To be honest though, when I saw the headlines saying: ‘the world's on fire, have we reached World War III', I felt more existential dread over the 9/11 attacks. That particular morning, when I woke up to the news that the planes had flown and to the Twin Towers, I really did feel like World War III was on the horizon. That was an attack on civilians, within the US, a strike on home soil. In this particular case - where Iran hasn't got Hamas and Hezbollah at full strength, if at any strength at all, when it's only mates are Russia and China, who have basically done basically done nothing, when it's been weakened with the targeted attacks on the military leaders and on the nuclear scientists, they are not in a position of power. And hopefully, they will realise that and there will be a period of time where the strongest wins and the weak lick their wounds and bide their time. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

GDP figures just out are stronger than economists had forecast. Stats NZ says New Zealand's gross domestic product grew 0.8% in the March quarter – overtaking predictions of 0.7%. It follows a 0.5% increase the quarter before. Herald Business Editor-at-Large Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham it could mean the OCR won't get another cut next month. He says it raises the odds the Reserve Bank will keep things on hold. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Changes to allow over the counter sales of Melatonin in New Zealand alongside relaxing rules on magic mushrooms as medicine. MedSafe's approved Melatonin for sale to adults without a prescription. Psilocybin remains unapproved, but one specifically qualified psychiatrist is now permitted to prescribe it for treatment-resistant depression. Broadcaster Sonia Gray has been trialling psychedelic drugs as an anxiety treatment, and joined Kerre Woodham to speak about her experience. “Nothing is a silver bullet, and nothing is going to work for everybody all the time, but we need more tools.” LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.