Podcasts about plessis allan

Either Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is telling porkies, or he's the most out-of-the-loop person in Wellington. His claim that there's “no talk” of rolling Chris Luxon is complete nonsense. There is talk—serious talk. I can tell you for a fact that senior National Party ministers believe Luxon can't continue in the job. MPs are actively discussing whether to pull the pin and replace him. If they do, the most likely successor is Chris Bishop. But—and this is crucial—they haven't decided to do it yet. Why? Because it's risky. Rolling a sitting Prime Minister has only happened once before, with Jim Bolger, and that didn't end well. MPs know that sticking with Luxon might pay off if the economy improves next year. Better economic conditions could lift National's polling and save seats currently at risk. But there's a flip side: if the polls don't recover, Luxon's unpopularity could drag National down further. Like it or not, modern elections are presidential in style—voters focus on who they want as Prime Minister. Jacinda Ardern boosted Labour's vote in 2017. Luxon is part of why National's vote has fallen. Would Chris Bishop do better? Maybe. But it's a guess. He could also do worse. And the instability of rolling a sitting PM could make things even worse for National. So MPs face two high-risk options: stick with an unpopular leader or gamble on an unproven one. It's a call I wouldn't want to make—but they're making it right now. It may never happen, but trust me: the talk is real.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Following the death of a two-year old baby in Manawatū earlier this year Midland Community Pharmacy Group chief executive Pete Chandler co-ordinated an audit. The audit found 1,200 prescription mistakes in one week- 26% of the mistakes posing 'high risk of harm' to patients. Chandler told Heather du Plessis-Allan that the days of doctors' handwriting causing issues are over, but electronic systems have introduced a whole new range of problems. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trump is set to meet with recently elected New York mayor Zohran Mamdani at the White House on Friday following months of public conflict. The US President announced the meeting in a Truth Social Post which said the "communist mayor" requested the meeting. US correspondent Charles Feldman told Heather du Plessis-Allan, "Trump is at heart a New Yorker, and I think he's going to want to present himself as somebody who does have New York's interests at heart." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There have been no signs of easing anxiety in the stock markets despite record Nvidia results. Investment director for Craigs Investment Partners Mark Lister told Heather du Plessis-Allan that the apprehension is a result of not wanting to overestimate the appropriate levels of optimism. "It's more of a case of a healthy pullback, a healthy correction rather than something that's going to develop into anything more sinister," he said. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rumours have been swirling of Prime Minister Christopher Luxon getting rolled by his party. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith denied the rumours saying no one in National's caucus had raised with him the idea of replacing Luxon. In recent polls National has lagged behind Labour with 33% versus 38% in the Talbot Mills/Anacta poll conducted between November 1 and 10. This has fanned the flames of conversation regarding the likelihood of National's re-election next year. Although, Barry Soper told Heather du Plessis-Allan, "essentially you've got Labour on the ropes, whereas you've got, the coalition government headed by National in a much stronger position." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I've got a possibly controversial opinion about standing up at concerts. Last night, I went to see Metallica. Incredible show - way better than I gave them credit for yesterday. But here's what happened. We were in the stands, seated tickets. A few rows ahead, there was this guy who, the second Metallica hit the stage, jumped to his feet. Everyone else stayed seated, but not him. Hands in the air, devil horns flying, head-banging, air guitar, singing every lyric. He was having the best night of his life - and honestly, watching him made the rest of us enjoy it more. Not everyone agreed. People behind him started throwing cans. They hit him in the back; he ignored it. Then a couple of women clambered over seats, smacked him on the back, told him to sit down. He ignored that too. Eventually, a guy from way back stormed down, leaned across rows, got into a shouting match, even tried to physically drag him into his seat. After a few minutes, the head-banger gave in and sat down. But he couldn't help himself. Every time a new song started, he popped back up - horns up, air guitar blazing -before remembering he was “supposed” to sit. This went on until he finally squeezed into the stairwell so he could thrash without blocking anyone's view. You could tell it wasn't the same; cramped space, less freedom. Here's my take: If you're at a concert, you should be able to stand up and have the best time of your life - even if you bought a seated ticket. If someone in front of you stands, sorry, you're going to have to stand too. It's not okay to demand someone sit for the whole show. It's music, not a movie. And it's Metallica, not the Symphony Orchestra. I'm with the metal-head from last night. He paid good money to enjoy himself. If that means horns up, air guitar, and head-banging - let him do it. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There would not be a drama today about the Breakers basketball team not wanting to wear the rainbow flag on their jerseys if the basketball league had stayed out of politics in the first place. Now, if you haven't caught up on this, there is unnecessary upset today because it's emerged that the entire Breakers team will not wear that little rainbow Pride flag on their jerseys during Pride Round next year because some of the players don't want to. And it's for religious and cultural reasons, apparently. So because some of the players don't want to, the whole team won't. Now, as you can imagine, this has absolutely blown up and it has led to accusations of homophobia, accusations of bigotry, accusations of cowardice. And look, I don't know, maybe all those accusations are right, but this didn't have to happen. They didn't have to have this drama if they hadn't tried to get all of the players to wear a symbol that you can guarantee some players wouldn't want to wear, because statistically that had to be a possibility when you had 150 players rostered on for any particular season.Now, I don't think that this kind of rainbow-washing helps anyone. There is no need for a random sports league to run any kind of a week, whether it be Pride Week or Indigenous Week, or Women's Menstrual Rights Week. I don't know what kind of week, you just don't need it. Maybe it sells a few tickets - probably not a lot - but it can backfire and it has backfired in this case. So now instead of looking inclusive to the rainbow community, the NBL looks the complete opposite and has accusations of homophobia coming at it. Now, you would have thought that everyone under the sun would have learned from the massive rugby league debacle three years ago when those seven Manly players refused to wear the Pride jersey. And yet, the basketball league decided to start up its own Pride Week the very next year, having learned nothing. Now, I say this all of the time, and I will say this again - sports needs to stay out of politics. There is no real upside in it and there's way too much downside, and this is a case in point. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A law group wants to see a culture shift at Police - while also welcoming an Inspector-General. The new position was announced, in response to a scathing IPCA report. It identified a number of issues around how Police's senior leadership team failed to deal with complaints about then-Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming in a timely and respectful manner. Defence Lawyers' Association co-Chair Elizabeth Hall told Heather du Plessis-Allan the culture at Police needs to change. She says if people don't feel they can talk or raise complaints that will be listened to, then information flow will not take place.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour's climate spokesperson says she's attending the UN's annual climate summit to become better informed. Deborah Russell will join Climate Change Minister Simon Watts and a New Zealand delegation at COP30 in Brazil. Climate scientists have warned the world's likely to blow past 1.5 degrees of warming. Russell says we'll be faced with absolute disaster if we can't pull this back somehow. She told Heather du Plessis-Allan that she wants to learn more about methane - and some of world's solutions around agriculture. Russell says that's a pressing problem in New Zealand and it helps if as many of us as possible know as much as possible. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

An Australian Mayor is warning of the unforeseen consequences of a rates cap. Minister of Local Government Simon Watts says he will advance rate cap policy discussions before the end of the year. Sue Heins, mayor of the Northern Beaches Council in New South Wales, told a Local Government New Zealand conference it leads to councils making impossible choices. She told Heather du Plessis-Allan it leads to things like delayed infrastructure repairs and sports grounds with outdated facilities. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So it turns out the woman with whom Jevon McSkimming had an affair, whose warnings police ignored and who police charged instead of investigating McSkimming, is still facing charges. This is the news today. And the police are having to defend this. Now, the charges don't relate to messages that she sent about McSkimming. Those charges have been dropped. They relate to messages that she allegedly sent to another policeman - the officer who originally arrested her - and the emails she allegedly sent to his wife. Now, this is undoubtedly going to look bad for police because it will look like they are still persecuting a victim. But how about we take the emotion out of it and look at it again? Just because Jevon McSkimming is a creep and clearly the villain of the story doesn't mean that she is necessarily innocent. I mean, look at the allegations. Allegedly emailing a police officer is one thing. Allegedly emailing his wife is something else. And this is after some pretty bunny-boiler behaviour, including sending 300 emails to McSkimming and others over a series of years. Now, there will be some people who have complete sympathy for her in this, who will say that the allegations show that she is a woman driven mad by being ignored and gaslit by the very people that she was asking for help. And that may well be true, and I suspect that it is, and I feel sorry for her, and I feel sorry for the horrible situation that Jevon McSkimming, the absolute creep, has put her in. But I still don't think it justifies alleged lawbreaking as a response, because that logic is the very same logic that is used by the soft judges who read cultural reports about offenders' childhoods and then excuse them for what they did because of what was originally done to them when they were kids. Do you follow what I'm saying? Now, having said all of that, if you're of the view that she only sent a bunch of emails, so who really cares? Then why do we have the law? Now, that's a fair debate. We can have a debate about that law because not everyone loves the Harmful Digital Communications Act. But if the law exists, and if you allegedly break that law and the police, despite realizing how bad it will look for them to charge you, still choose to charge you, then isn't there a case to answer? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I think we can all see how this is going to end for Andrew Coster, and we could see that last night - he's gonna lose his job running a Government agency. No one in charge can say that yet because of employment law, but it is absolutely going to happen - because there is no way that a man can do what he has done at the highest levels of police and then possibly continue to earn an income from the taxpayer. Him losing his job is the right outcome here. But here's the question that I think is up for debate - is Andrew Coster a bad man? Or was he just bad at his job, showing poor judgment, incompetence, naivety, whatever? And I'm going to suggest that it was actually the latter. He's not a bad man, he was just bad at his job. It doesn't seem like he did what he did because he wanted to hide what Jevon McSkimming had done, it sounded more like he tried to make it go away because he didn't believe that it was true. It sounds like he believed McSkimming was just the victim of a really bad breakup - he'd ended an affair, she hadn't taken it well and now she was trying to destroy his reputation online, and so Andrew Coster seemed to have thought, maybe what he needed to do was try to prevent these horrible lies from destroying the career of a good man. So he tried to hurry things up and shut things down and hide emails from ministers and not tell the people appointing the next Police Commissioner that there were complaints against McSkimming, and he got angry at police officers who tried to raise concerns. Except, as it turns out, Andrew Coster was wrong. Jevon McSkimming was not a good man, he was a creep. And that woman's allegations should have been listened to. She wasn't destroying the career of a good man, she was alerting authorities to a bad man. But Andrew Coster was a police officer, and it is 101 of policing to investigate allegations and listen to complaints, not shut them down, so he failed at the very basics of his job. And unfortunately for him, while he may not be a bad man, he ended up doing things that I think we can agree are bad things - misleading, shutting down good police wanting to raise concerns, protecting a creep. Now I don't know, is there really that much difference in the end between being a bad man and being someone who thinks they're doing the right thing - but doing bad things? For him, the outcome is actually pretty much the same, whether he was bad or bad at his job. He has lost his job and he's lost his reputation. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, entirely predictably, the debate about selling state assets has already kicked off ahead of election year - with Winston calling the idea a 'tawdry, silly argument'. And Chris Luxon then shooting back that Winston's view is not surprising, because he's been there for 50 years, for goodness' sake, he's got a lot of entrenched views. I'm actually surprised that Luxon and National are prepared to take this to the election, because you can already see it, right? You know how it's gone in the past, this is going to get heated. And National is not really known at the moment for having the stomach for potentially unpopular ideas, so good on them for doing it - cause this has got to be done, if only to inject some private sector work ethic into these places. I don't even know if I need to lay this argument out for you, but I will: We know that the public sector is slower to get things done than the private sector, we know it's more likely to waste money, we know it's less likely to make money. We got the figures last week, just on sick leave. Public sector workers take more sick days than private sector workers. The partial sale of the power companies that happened under John Key's watch has already proved what can happen if you get some private discipline in there. I mean those four power companies are now worth twice what they were when we sold half of them, so we haven't lost any value. And they pay more dividends, and we got to put money in our pockets. And they've proven that we can do things differently to the way that it was done in the 80s and 90s, which freaked out Winston with the 100 percent sale of things like BNZ, 100 percent of BNZ, 100 percent of New Zealand Rail, 100 percent of Petrocorp. We can sell 49%, less than half and we can still control the business. We get the money out of it though, we get some discipline into it and we make even more money from it. Now, of course, I think the power company sales are an example of it going well. Others will blame those same sales for a drop-off in investment in renewable energy generation or an increase in power prices - which is exactly why this will be a contentious debate, because we all see it differently. So good on the Nats for having the courage, by the looks of things, to go there next election. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, at least someone's resigned at the BBC. In fact, two have resigned, both the director general and the boss of news - and the fact that this bias scandal at the BBC has claimed two of the most senior executives there tells you how serious it is. And it's not just serious for the BBC, it's serious for basically all the mainstream media outlets in the English-speaking world. Because even though the rest of us didn't splice together two pieces of what Donald Trump said to make it sound like he was encouraging his followers to take a fight to the capital, and even though the rest of us didn't hire the son of a Hamas official to voice a documentary about Gaza, many of us take the BBC's content, don't we? Often unchecked. There are some media organizations out there that are so beyond reproach that other media outlets - like ourselves - will take their content and not re-verify it, because it's the BBC and we shouldn't have to re-verify it. And if they're infected by bias, we all become infected by bias, don't we? Whether it's their obvious bias on Gaza, their bias on trans issues, their bias on Trump - which they have been well and truly busted for - their bias becomes everybody else's bias, because we're taking their content. This is the kind of stuff that has crashed and still continues to crash public trust in the media, because if you thought that the media was unfair on Trump, now you've been proven right. And if you thought that the media was soft on Hamas, now you've been proven right. If you thought that there was all this stuff going on where the media had fixed views on trans issues, now you've been proven right. All you need to do is look at that whistle-blower's dossier that was leaked last week. For the most part, that will explain all of it to you. And by the way, as a member of the media, my faith in the BBC has been really eroded by what's just happened - not just because they sliced together two pieces of Trump's speech to make him say something he didn't say, but because they knew it and sat on it for so long. This happened a year ago. It took a whistle-blower's frustration to eventually write a dossier and then to leak it explicitly - because the BBC weren't doing anything about it - for the BBC to actually do something about it, like the resignations that we've seen in the last 24 hours. It's not good enough what's happened at the BBC, and jeez, if this is how media outlets are still behaving in 2025, despite all the evidence that they are losing public trust - it's gonna take a really long time for us all to get it back. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A new three-level luxury department store is set to open on Auckland's Queen Street next year. The new store will be located at 131 Queen St and is set to include valet parking and an espresso music bar. Luxury retailer Faradays is behind the $30 million development. Faradays Co-Founder and Chief Executive Eddie von Dadelszen said to Heather du Plessis-Allan, "the building itself, we're inheriting something truly, truly unique ... it's just an amazing historical embrace to do something contemporary and fresh and modern inside." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I think I am more interested in seeing how Zoran Mamdani goes than any other Democrat that I can remember in a very, very, very long time, because I genuinely am not sure if this is gonna go brilliantly for him. And he's the next big thing, or he's the next big disappointment, because there is no way, is there? Like, no way at all he's gonna be able to do everything that he's promised. I mean, he might be able to do a rent freeze in New York City. Sure, that's an easy thing to do. That's a stroke of a pen. Off you go. But it might backfire. Like it might lead to fewer housing units being added, which ultimately makes the problem worse. He can pick something else to do. He could do free childcare, hugely expensive. He could add a 2% tax on incomes over $1 million, but he may find those incomes start disappearing from his city. Either way, he's gonna have to pick some of his pet projects and go with just a few of them, because doing absolutely everything is just not gonna happen. And that's gonna lead to disappointment surely for the voters who truly believe he can do all these things. My gut though says that the disappointment will not be great, because if there's one thing we learned from Donald Trump, it's that breaking promises doesn't actually really matter that much if you represent something to voters. Donald Trump represented the anti-establishment, so people stuck with him even when he broke his promises. Mamdani represents the anti-Trump, so I think people will stick with him even if he breaks his promises. I actually suspect, by the way, that this is going to be very good for Donald Trump. I think he's going to love having Mamdani around because he will be able to use everything that Mamdani does to berate him and the Democrats. Every time a promise is broken, he's going to, because Mamdani is the opposite of him, right? So Mamdani just becomes the bad guy in all of his stories from here on and he pumps himself up. However this goes for Mamdani, I think we can all agree this is now turning into a must-see show. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

ACT leader David Seymour's controversial school lunch programme is getting a makeover going into it's second year of operation. The changes include catering giant Compass Group no longer providing lunches to primary schools- but they will still provide meals for secondary schools and intermediates. Seymour told Heather du Plessis-Allan, "a subcontractor failed in term one of this year, there was a lot of publicity around that. We fixed it, with the help of Compass, and that's why they continue to supply the bulk of meals." The $3 meal cap is also gone with costs now reaching up to $5 per meal. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donald Trump has announced to reduce the costs of some weight loss drugs, or as he calls them 'fat shots'. The Trump administration claims that Americans could lose 61 billion kilogrammes combined because of this deal. A US$1 trillion pay package, endorsed by Tesla shareholders, could be headed for Elon Musk . Meanwhile, the Government shutdown, which has now reached 37 days, is leading to flight delays and cancellations at US airports. Jonathan Kearsley told Heather du Plessis-Allan, "what this is now doing is spreading the pain far beyond federal workers ... straight into American travellers." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis announced today that the Government will boost New Zealand's screen rebate for the goal of bringing Hollywood back to New Zealand. Overseas productions will now be able to claim a 25% rebate on what they spend here, up from 20%, when they invest more than $20 million. Australia currently offers up to 40% while Canada and the UK offer around 30%. Harry Harrison said to Heather du Plessis-Allan, "I wish we were sort of higher, but it allows us to play in the sand pit." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Heather du Plessis-Allan reveals the details of the report into Dame Noeline Taurua. The report includes the complaints from Silver Ferns players which lead to her being stood down in September. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How good is this idea of bringing Michelin to New Zealand in the hope that some of our restaurants will get some stars awarded? Now, this is not free. We have to pay for it and we have to pay actually quite a lot of money for it. It's costing Tourism New Zealand nearly six and a half million dollars, and that's just for the first three years. And I don't know how much you have to pay after that. But take a look at what the Aussies did when they looked at this last year. It was going to cost them $4 million for the first year, $5 million for the second year, $7.5 million for the next year, and then basically for a few years thereafter, something like another three years, it was going to cost them another $7.5 million. By my calculations, in the space of five or six years, they were going to have to fork out to Michelin about $40 million. Aussies looked at it, said, nah, but we've said yes, and I reckon we are doing the right thing. This is grown-up, first world tourism. I think about the trip that I just did last weekend to Melbourne with a couple of girlfriends. Food was a huge part of it. The one of us who was doing the bookings found the good places to eat. They found the places that everybody in Melbourne is talking about, got us into those places, lunch and dinner. This is what tourists do. They come to a city for an event, then they tag on great food, find all the great restaurants and go try them out. And here in New Zealand, we are really good at food. The entire time that I was in Melbourne, I kept thinking that for all the raving that people do about Melbournian eateries, actually in New Zealand, you can get just as good, if not, in my opinion, a whole lot better. And actually, paying $6 million for this is not really all that much. When you think about what gets spent on tourism campaigns that you can never actually be sure really work. Back in April, the government pumped twice as much as this, $13 and a half million into advertising New Zealand to Aussies. What do you get for that? I mean, you get maybe a guess that some Aussie tourists came here as a result. For this money that we're giving to Michelin, you get actual stars potentially. You get international prestige. You get the sense for tourists that they have landed in a first world city eating international great food. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chloe Swarbrick was on Newstalk ZB today talking homelessness with Heather du Plessis-Allan offending her white lady sensibilities trying to find a solution to those homeless people "who shout" posing that locking them up overnight is the best solutionNicola Willis was on with Ryan Bridge this morning talking unemployment and who is to blame for it,BHB whanau Craig Renny seems to be under a coordinated attack by operatives on the right starting at Chris Bishop and Kieran McAnulty were on Breakfast this morning debating TPM's impact on Labour's chance to win at the next election and the unemployment numbers versus people leaving NZ=================================Come support the work we're doing by becoming a Patron of ⁠⁠#BHN⁠⁠ www.patreon.com/BigHairyNews⁠=================================Merch available at www.BHNShop.nz Like us on Facebookwww.facebook.com/BigHairyNews Follow us on Twitter.@patbrittenden @Chewie_NZFollow us on BlueskyPat @patbrittenden.bsky.socialChewie @chewienz.bsky.socialEmily @iamprettyawesome.bsky.socialMagenta @xkaosmagex.bsky.social

I'm baffled by the Police Commissioner writing that open letter telling off Stuff today. You probably missed this thing when it actually happened, which was back in September, but in the week that Tom Phillips was shot and the kids were saved from the bush, Stuff got its hands on some of the audio of the police chase, and they published it. And they got in trouble with the coppers immediately, and then the cops started an investigation into Stuff. Today, the police boss, Richard Chambers has written an open letter in both main newspaper outlets - as in the Stuff guys and the New Zealand Herald, saying the police have decided not to charge Stuff, but don't do this again, it's really, really bad. Now, I cannot explain to you why Richard Chambers thought this was a good idea - because either way you look at this, this is not a good look. I mean, it either looks like he's trying to bully the media into being good boys and girls, or he hasn't got the cojones to actually do the thing that he's threatened and just go and prosecute Stuff. But what's even weirder about it is - I just don't think that this warranted the cops getting this vexed about it. I mean, as I said, you probably missed it when it happened, because the audio wasn't that interesting. It was mildly informative, because it told us that the police officer who got shot was alone and exposed like we suspected. And it showed how he got in touch with various members of the community, locals, to find out if they could hear Tom Phillips on the quad bike, so that he could track Phillips down. But really, other than that, it wasn't interesting enough to draw public attention to it again - unless of course, you are trying to bully Stuff. And while I think this audio wasn't that interesting, I did find it refreshing, actually, to have a media outlet be brave for once and publish something that the authorities didn't want them to publish and tell the public something that the authorities didn't want them to know - basically doing their job. So on the whole, I think I'm on the side of Stuff on this one. Mainly because I don't like what this looks like, which is the police trying to publicly shame them for doing their job. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Okay, I've got a question for you - and this is a genuine question, it's not a rhetorical question. Do you agree with the teachers' unions that it's an outrage that Erica Stanford is taking the Treaty obligation out of the Education Act, or do you agree with Erica Stanford that it needs to come out? Now, I'm asking you this question because I honestly cannot understand why the teachers' unions are causing uproar over this, because it seems to me to be a clear case that this should come out. It hasn't helped lift Māori achievement in the five years it's been in the legislation. In fact, going by just one metric, which is the proportion of Māori students leaving school with no NCEA qualification at all, it's getting worse. It was 24 percent in 2021, it's now nearly 28 percent at last count. So if this thing isn't helping, then it shouldn't be there - because all it is then is just virtue signalling and distracting schools when they should be, as the minister said, laser-focused on educating kids. So this is where I ask my question - because this is where I get confused. If it doesn't have to be in there, then why are the unions picking this fight? Why are they fighting for yet another pet ideological project? Did they not learn from the allergic reaction that parents had to the news that the number one thing on the PPTA's agenda for the meeting with the minister was Palestine? That went down like a cup of cold sick. Is it not obvious to the unions that they are losing the patience of parents who've already had a guts-full of an education system that isn't educating their kids - and the teacher unions making excuses for it, and the teacher unions not wanting to have to do more work? So it's one of two things that's going on here for me, right? Either teacher unions really just cannot help themselves when it comes to yet another political distraction and a chance to give a National Party a bloody nose, or they know something that I don't - which is that there is enormous support out there for them fighting the good fight on the Treaty obligation for the boards of trustees. Is that happening? Am I missing something here? Is there massive support out there for teachers who are fighting this? Or are they burning parents' goodwill because they can't help themselves yet again fighting with a National-led Government? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How is it possible that the Dame Noeline Taurua crisis has actually got worse today? How is it possible that she's got her job back today and this thing has still got worse? I'm getting the impression that Netball New Zealand do not realize how bad this is today. If they don't realize the enormous damage that Dame Noeline has done to them by going on at least three radio interviews and one TV interview and saying repeatedly the same thing - that she does not know how she was stood down, that there was no investigation to clear her before she was brought back - if they don't realize how enormous this is, I can't explain it to them. They're not responding today to Dame Noels' comments and they're not saying if she's right or wrong. All we know is that the Netball New Zealand minder who was with her when she was doing the interviews told her to stop telling Mike Hosking that she didn't know why she was stood down. Now let me, for the benefit of everyone - but particularly I think for Netball New Zealand - explain how bad this is. None of us here in this office can think of a single employment disagreement that has been dragged out in public like this for this long with this much interest in it. Not even, I would say, the John Hawkesby-Richard Long case back in the late 90s, which was a really big deal at the time - not even that went on this long and was this badly handled. None of us can also think of a single time when Mike Hosking interviewed someone over four interview slots, which is what happened with Dame Noels this morning. Even during COVID, Jacinda Ardern maybe got three slots maximum. Noeline got four, that's how big this is. It's certainly big enough, I think, for somebody at Netball New Zealand to lose their job now. I'm sorry to say this, because I've got a lot of respect for Matt Whineray, the chair of the board, but I think this is now big enough for him to actually have to consider standing down. Either him or the CEO Jennie Wyllie - or frankly, both of them. Either that or they tell us that Dame Noeline is wrong and that what she said on air this morning was wrong. But if her version of events is right, then what has happened to her is completely unacceptable, and Netball New Zealand must indicate that they think this - that they do not condone this kind of ill treatment of employees because their judgment is now in question. We're all looking at this and thinking - if you can stuff up something this badly, what else are you going to stuff up? They cannot afford for us to not believe in their judgment because they are now far from through the worst of what they're going through, with the financial crisis that they're in and the broadcasting crisis that they're in, right? They have not actually solved their broadcasting problems and they have not saved the domestic competition. If they want us to trust that they know what they're doing, and if they want us to not question them at every single turn, then I'm sorry - someone absolutely has to lose their job over this. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I've got an update for you on the social media ban for kids situation - over in Australia, the social media companies have now admitted they can kick underage kids off their platforms, and they've admitted that they will start enforcing the ban when the ban in Australia comes into effect on December 10th. Now, this is not a surprise to me that they can actually do it, because I never believed the nonsense when they said: “Oh, it's impossible to age verify, we couldn't possibly.” Because guess what? They can. Reddit over in the UK does this - it age verifies and stops people seeing content. It's completely possible to do. And it's pretty obvious that they already have a rough idea of how old the kids are, because that's why they feed teenage content to teenage people. What I think we should take from this, though, is that we should never believe the social media companies when they say they can't stop kids using their products. What I think you should do is kind of take the approach of treating them a little bit like the tobacco companies of old - completely untrustworthy, want to peddle their product, do not want to stop peddling their product. In fact, I think, to be honest, that there is a useful parallel here with the way that we treat ciggies and how we should be treating social media companies. We ban kids under the age of 18 from buying ciggies, we ban them from buying booze because we know it's bad for them. When they're older, they can use it. Hopefully, they use it wisely, but not when their little brains and their little bodies are still developing. And I think the same is true of social media. And yes, like the ciggies and the booze, the kids are gonna find a way to get around it and get their hands on it. On a New Year's Eve when they're 16, they're gonna get completely drunk. But hopefully it'll be a rare occasion, not an every weekend type of thing. And in the case of banning the booze and the ciggies, we could have left that up to the parents. We could have said: “Nah, it's okay, you decide if your kids want to smoke and drink under the age of 18.” And parents should play a role, right? But I think we all decided as a group that this was worth banning, and I think we need to do the same thing with social media. And I think we need to do it mainly for the social media companies, because they are not prepared to do it themselves until they're forced to - just like in Australia. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I've got an update for you on the social media ban for kids situation - over in Australia, the social media companies have now admitted they can kick underage kids off their platforms, and they've admitted that they will start enforcing the ban when the ban in Australia comes into effect on December 10th. Now, this is not a surprise to me that they can actually do it, because I never believed the nonsense when they said: “Oh, it's impossible to age verify, we couldn't possibly.” Because guess what? They can. Reddit over in the UK does this - it age verifies and stops people seeing content. It's completely possible to do. And it's pretty obvious that they already have a rough idea of how old the kids are, because that's why they feed teenage content to teenage people. What I think we should take from this, though, is that we should never believe the social media companies when they say they can't stop kids using their products. What I think you should do is kind of take the approach of treating them a little bit like the tobacco companies of old - completely untrustworthy, want to peddle their product, do not want to stop peddling their product. In fact, I think, to be honest, that there is a useful parallel here with the way that we treat ciggies and how we should be treating social media companies. We ban kids under the age of 18 from buying ciggies, we ban them from buying booze because we know it's bad for them.When they're older, they can use it. Hopefully, they use it wisely, but not when their little brains and their little bodies are still developing. And I think the same is true of social media. And yes, like the ciggies and the booze, the kids are gonna find a way to get around it and get their hands on it. On a New Year's Eve when they're 16, they're gonna get completely drunk. But hopefully it'll be a rare occasion, not an every weekend type of thing. And in the case of banning the booze and the ciggies, we could have left that up to the parents. We could have said: “Nah, it's okay, you decide if your kids want to smoke and drink under the age of 18.” And parents should play a role, right? But I think we all decided as a group that this was worth banning, and I think we need to do the same thing with social media. And I think we need to do it mainly for the social media companies, because they are not prepared to do it themselves until they're forced to - just like in Australia. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If yesterday told us anything, it's that National doesn't have to replace Chris Luxon as urgently as some in the party were saying just a couple of weeks ago. Because if Labour carries on like they did yesterday, National is probably going to be fine for next year, aren't they? That chat, by the way, was real. There really are senior people within the party who think that Chris Luxon needs to be replaced. And from the sounds of things, they were starting to get pretty anxious in the last few weeks because of the recent polls showing Labour pulling ahead and Luxon getting less popular. Surely they're gonna be feeling a little better today, because what we learned yesterday is Labour looks credible - until they start talking. The minute they start releasing policy, it goes south. Yesterday, they couldn't even get the policy out without it being leaked first. And then they did manage to get it out and it was the same old 'come for your money' that Labour always reverts to - and then Chippy wasn't at all credible on it when he had to start answering questions. Same with last week when the doctors' policy got released before Chippy was even ready for it. Now, this doesn't actually solve National's problem altogether. Luxon is still unpopular by previous Prime Ministers' standards. But I'd have to wonder, does he not look quite as bad when you see what the alternative is now? Is it possible that Labour has actually saved Luxon's skin by sending voters back to National by just being predictable money grabbers, and then incompetent at explaining it? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I don't know what's worse for Labour - the fact that they've announced a capital gains tax policy again today, or the fact that someone leaked it and forced them to announce it in a rush. Obviously, it does suck for them that somebody leaked it first, because it means that they were so unprepared that they had to rush-job announce it in an email at 3:05 this morning. And then Chippy had to cancel his morning radio interviews so that he didn't have to answer questions about this until he was ready - and then they had to get ready and call themselves a rush-job press conference where they all looked furious, and they stumbled over their words. Honestly, you haven't seen such a sad line-up of people announcing something they're proud of. This is the second policy announcement that Labour has managed to stuff up in just about a week's duration - which hardly looks convincing, does it? But then it also sucks for them that this is the policy that they're taking to the election, because I don't care what the Beltway in Wellington tells us - I do not believe that a majority of New Zealanders want a capital gains tax. No matter how many times Labour pitches it, no matter how many times they try to convince us that everyone else wants it, why don't you want it? And you know I'm right when I say this, because look at how Labour's selling this today. Even they sound like they're not so sure that we want a CGT, because they've double-policed it. Today, they've told us what they're going to spend the money on, which is three free GP visits a year for us - basically to try and sell it to us, in order to convince us that a capital gains tax is good for us. And also, just look at how gleeful the National Party sound. They know that this made 2026 just a little bit more likely for them. What I now want to know though - is who leaked this to the media? Was it someone who was just really excited that they knew something, so they leaked it to the media and blew up their own party's big announcement - or was it someone who disagrees with Labour and wanted to blow up their own party's big announcement? Either way, they've just made an unconvincing policy even less convincing today. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Te Pāti Māori's behaviour is once again a topic of discussion following bill burning and allegations of over-spending this week. Barry Soper told Heather du Plessis-Allan that Te Pāti Māori 'shouldn't be anywhere near Government'. Soper identified a possible link between the ongoing party controversies and it's culture of nepotism. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Prominent colorectal surgeon Frank Frizelle says it is now a necessity for dedicated cancer centres in New Zealand. The Christchurch-based surgeon believes if New Zealand does not adopt comprehensive cancer centres, the system will fail patients. Frizelle told Heather du Plessis-Allan, "it's just about trying to give adequate volumes and concentrations of resources to try and get the best value for money". LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Air New Zealand CEO Nikhil Ravishankar has suggested a “situational subsidy” to support regional routes when the economy is not doing well and demand is low. Ravishankar officially took over as CEO on 20 October 2025, replacing Greg Foran who stepped down after six years. Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour tells Heather du Plessis-Allan that the implementation of a subsidy could allow for too much Government control over the agency which would be a 'complete disaster'. Seymour also addresses the legalisation of melatonin for those aged under-55. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I have to be honest with you, because it's been a little while since I sat in the home economics class in Tuakau College - so there is a fair chance that my experience is a little out of date by about 20 years and I might just make a fool of myself with what I'm about to say next. But I do not understand the angst about Erica Stanford dropping home economics from the NCEA curriculum. There is an opinion piece in The Spinoff today, and it's arguing against Erica Stanford removing this 'vital' subject from our school subject list because it's a 'moral decision,' - because, quote, 'everyone deserves to know what's in their food, how it affects their health, and how to make choices that support their overall well-being.' Now, I tend to agree with that. You should know what's going on in your food. But from what I understand, home ec is still being taught and will still be taught to years 9 and 10 in some form or another, that's not going to change. And if you cannot learn in the space of 2 years that you need to eat your fruit and your vegetables and your meat and maybe avoid the processed stuff and the sugar, then I don't have much hope that you're ever gonna learn this stuff. And what's more, we are already one of the most obese nations on this planet. So home economics hasn't done very much for us in helping us to keep ourselves healthy in the last 114 years that it's been around, has it? But also, and I think this is the most important thing, come on - did you actually learn anything in home ec? Libby, who works with us, reckons that in one class, she spent the entire class just learning how to make a sandwich. I remember setting a pot of oil on fire and and then running around with it and being taught how to put the fire out. So I suppose that's semi-helpful, but I also learned how to cut carrots, which, frankly, I should have known anyway. All of this stuff, you can learn at home. Now, home economics strikes me as one of those subjects that the country would be better off dropping altogether and replacing with another session on maths. Don't you agree? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There's yet another, frankly welcome, sign that the world's climate overhype may be over, or at least correcting. The latest is that the Government has announced it's now easing the rules on how much compulsory climate reporting the big listed companies have to do. Now, I don't blame you if you feel at this minute like your eyes are about to glaze over, but do not let that happen. Because this is actually much more important than it sounds. This goes back to the bad old days of Jacinda and Grant in 2021, when the Ardern administration brought in rules forcing large, publicly listed companies to report to shareholders the impact that climate change may have on them. It was world-leading, it was ground-breaking - and it was incredibly expensive. Turner's, the car company, reckons that their first report, which only runs to seven pages, cost them $1 million to produce. Some companies have told the relevant minister, Scott Simpson, that it cost them $2 million to produce their reports. And the ones who are getting off easy here are still paying apparently close to $10,000. Veteran director Joan Withers famously complained about this in July, when she said that climate reporting was taking up more of her time than preparing financial statements, which is the actual thing that shareholders are interested in - and that is completely nuts. And for all of the money and all of the effort that these businesses were putting into it, not one carbon particle was saved from going into the atmosphere. It did not bring down anybody's emissions and that was not the point of it. It was simply to talk about it. And the money was just wasted on paperwork instead of being reinvested into the business to raise productivity, which is the thing that we should be laser-focused on in this country. Now, I applaud the Government for doing what it has done today, but it does not go far enough, because they've only eased the rules for the smaller companies. So about 88 of them will now not have to report. But 76 of the big ones are still going to be required to do this utterly pointless, expensive, unproductive exercise. If it is pointless and expensive and unproductive for the small companies, it is also pointless, expensive and unproductive for the big companies. And the Government should go further than it has today. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I think it's fair to say, don't you think, that Labour's first policy has been a flop? It's been panned by pretty much everybody worth listening to or worth reading. I mean, I see Maiki Sherman over at TVNZ liked it last night. She called it a 'solid first hit' on telly, but I think everyone else seems to have seen through what Chippy's trying to do here. Let me quote you some. Tom Pullar-Strecker at The Post: Labour's Future Fund hits the buzzwords, but the rationale is hard to follow. Pattrick Smellie at BusinessDesk: This suggests either that Labour is economically illiterate or that its target audience is presumed to be. Radio New Zealand: The distinct lack of detail has left Labour somewhat exposed, evoking echoes of other ambitious projects that fizzled like KiwiBuild or the Green Investment Fund. Jenée Tibshraeny at the Herald says this is actually less about making New Zealand wealthy and really more about having a crack at National and possible asset sales at the next election. Henry Cooke at The Post: Labour's Future Fund promises everything and nothing. It's hard to know what to really make of this. And then from Patrick Smellie again, because his piece is just so eviscerating: Labour will have to do a whole lot better than this. Now, basically, what you could take from that is that no one serious is convinced by it - because Labour has taken a great idea, which is Singapore's Temasek, and then taken away all the things that make Temasek successful. Temasek sells assets, this lot is not allowed. Temasek invests overseas, this lot is not allowed. That's just a couple of the problems here. Honestly, the list of problems in this policy announcement is so long, we could do an entire show about it. I suspect Labour knows and I think they know it's a bad idea. They just think we're too stupid to realize how bad an idea it is. They think that we're going to be hoodwinked by all of the feel-good slogans about investing in New Zealand's future and cutting out the foreign investors and stuff like that. But I'm happy to report that judging by the media roundup I just read you, we're not at all as stupid as Labour thinks we are. We can see a dog policy when we're presented with one, and this is one. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, even I didn't expect Prince Andrew to lose the use of his titles that fast. It was about 5pm on Friday afternoon that I said that he would lose them - and about 7am the next morning, the news broke that he had. But then again, I suppose we can see why it happened so fast, right? Because since that happened, it has just been one revelation after the other involving him. First, the police are looking into reports that he tried to get his personal protection officers to dig up dirt on Virginia Giuffre, his accuser. Then came the news that Fergie and the girls were among the first to welcome Epstein out of jail, and she kept trying to borrow money. And now you've got the creepy detail emerging from Giuffre's book about how Andrew behaved. Now, that is why the announcement about Andrew's titles came so quickly, because King Charles needed it to happen before the newspapers started printing excerpts from the book so that the stuff that came out didn't hurt the royals by association. But honestly, I don't know that King Charles has done enough, because Andrew hasn't actually lost anything. Which might be news to you, because the palace has done an epic spin job in trying to make it look like Andrew's given up all of his titles. He actually hasn't. He is still the Duke of York, he just has agreed not to use it in public. And I don't know about you, but we saw how that went with Meghan and Harry, didn't we? They were also promising not to use the HRH titles, and then Megs was busted using it in a private note to someone. So what's happening now is that all the UK newspapers are unsatisfied and they're calling for complete stripping of the titles. You've got the MPs coming under pressure to confront the royal family - just the sheer volume of coverage that this is getting at the moment over in the UK suggests that this could go on for days. That is not what King Charles wants, because in a couple of days he's got a meeting with the Pope, and he will not want that meeting to be overshadowed by his playboy brother and all the revelations coming out. I would say, watch this space. I reckon there's a better than average chance that Andrew hasn't even got his full punishment yet. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In July the Government announced a ban on surcharges on credit card payments in-store from May 2026 at the latest. ACT is attempting to block this ban by allowing credit card surcharges, as long as other payment options are offered- such as cash or eftpos. They suggest the ban will either increase prices for customers or unfairly punish businesses. ACT Commerce and Consumer Affairs spokesperson Dr Parmjeet Parmar said to Heather du Plessis-Allan that ACT's proposal was creating with 'cost and choice' in mind. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen, I don't know how much most people will care about the drama that's unfolding with the BSA. Obviously here in radio world, we do, because these people are our watchdog. But if you enjoy watching people try something on and then be forced to retreat, you might enjoy this one. So what's kicked this off is that the BSA apparently decided, in secret, that they would give themselves permission to tidy up not just New Zealand's TV and radio, but now also the entire internet. And the first outfit that they've come after is The Platform. Now my personal dealings with the BSA have led me to believe that the people drawn to sitting on bodies like the BSA are not always the country's deepest thinkers, and this case only reinforces that - because if you thought about this for any more than 10 minutes, you would realize the BSA should just leave the internet alone. The BSA can't police the entire internet, it's too big. What, are they seriously proposing to send Joe Rogan a fine for $3000 NZD if someone in New Zealand complains about something he said? They can't even realistically police the part of the internet that New Zealand uses, it's too big. There's too many podcasts, too many videos, audio files, live streams, you name it, which means they're gonna have to pick and choose what they police and crack down on on the internet, which will inevitably lead to them being accused of bias and favouritism. Which is exactly what has happened here, because the first lot they've come after is The Platform, which if you know the story, was set up on the internet precisely to avoid the BSA and its rules. So - what a surprise that it's the first one the BSA comes after. What a surprise that they're copping a huge amount of flak and resistance from all over the show, including Winston and David Seymour. It seems to me there is a way out of this for the BSA - they'll have to back down. Because this is just an interim decision, and I think they might have to abandon it - and their plans for internet domination may have to also be abandoned. And then they will have to eat some humble pie, which surely would have been obvious to them if they had only thought about it, like the rest of us, for about, I don't know, 10 minutes. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen, go on and tell me that any of the allegations that we've heard about the Māori Party in the last 36 hours surprise you. Does it shock you in any way to find out that one of their MPs allegedly paid her son $120,000 of taxpayer money, that she couldn't apparently balance her own budget? And that her son allegedly abused parliamentary staff so badly that he was trespassed from the grounds? No really, right? Not really a surprise. And this feels exactly like the kind of stuff you would expect to be happening when a political party pulls together a collection of activists who have no respect for the rules - which they demonstrate on a seemingly weekly basis by not showing up to their jobs in Parliament, who can't even do up a pair of leather shoes to go to work, and who think nepotism is just another way of showing love to your family. Their words, not mine. Now, do you really think that that alleged incident where Eru Kapa-Kingi shouted at parliamentary staff and threatened to knock one out happened on Budget Day 2024 - as in 18 months ago, and we have only just found out now? Which has me wondering, what else is going on in there that we don't know about yet? Now, I'm not surprised by what's being revealed. And what it means is that I'm weirdly not actually terribly exercised by it, certainly not in the way that I would be if this was National or Labour or any other serious party. I would expect in those instances for heads to roll, and I would expect explanations and media stand-ups and real interrogations by the media and people appearing on the show to be grilled. But I don't expect that with the Māori Party. Now, that should worry the Māori Party, because what that means is that I, and anyone else who feels like me, don't take them seriously. We don't think they're serious people. We don't expect them to hold standards up. We regard what we're seeing as more of a clown show that needs to be contained so it doesn't contaminate the rest of Parliament. So good luck to them making it into a future Cabinet, which they're obviously quite keen on, if they're not being taken seriously by us. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So, what happened last night is remarkable. Before the deadline of 10pm New Zealand time, 20 living Israeli hostages - who had been held for 2 years, who had been forced in some cases to dig their own graves, spend unknown lengths of time in tunnels underground, and go without much in the way of sustenance at times - were handed over by their captors back into the care of Israel, which is their home. That is remarkable. Because, I mean, let's be honest about it - in the last two years, there were times where surely we started to believe that we'd seen the last of the survivors make it out. Surely, we'd assumed most, if not all, of the remaining 20 would die in captivity in the years that we may have thought stretched ahead of us. But look at what's happened, aid is now flowing back into Gaza, people are going back to their homes - whatever is left of it - and the shelling has stopped. You would think this would be a moment to celebrate, right? The very thing that so many of us have been calling for for such a long time and increasingly in the last few months has happened. The fighting has stopped, the starvation has stopped. But where is the celebration? I mean, don't you think it's remarkably muted today? Now I realize a lot of that will be that there is some weariness, quite rightly, over whether this peace can hold because so many ceasefires have broken down in the past, and there are so many ways that this ceasefire can break down. It could be a rocket fired in error, it could be Hamas still refusing to disarm, it could be anything. But I do wonder if part of it is also because it's hard for some people to give credit to Donald Trump for the role that he played in this. I mean, already there are opinion pieces that are writing him out of this historic moment and talking up the diplomatic efforts of others, particularly in the Middle East, and warning he will never get a Nobel Peace Prize for this, regardless of whether this peace holds. But you can't ignore his role in this and you can't write him out of this. He was instrumental in a way that Biden never was. And it was for various reasons, mainly because of his friendship with Benjamin Netanyahu - which Biden never had - but also because of his relationship with the Arab countries because of previous work in the region, in his first administration, like the Abraham Accords. Now, let's be fair, it's always hard to give credit to people we dislike. It's also very hard to give credit to people who are so capable of dishing out copious amounts of credit to themselves, like Donald Trump. But Trump does deserve credit and he deserves a lot of it for getting the Gaza conflict to a point that it has never been before, which is that all the living hostages are out. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Listen, I am more and more convinced that we need to cut the number of councils we have across the country. I mean, that voter turnout that we've seen at the weekend was abysmal. Last count I've seen is that nationally, only 38 percent of us voted. It's worse in Auckland, where only around 29 percent - so not even 1 in 3 of us - voted. Now, I think anyone who thinks that we can fix local Government by ditching the postal vote system and going hard with the orange guy and his dog is dreaming. Because that is not the problem. The problem is not how you vote, the problem is who you vote for. I think we have a complete breakdown in the trust between the voter and the people that we are voting for and the authority in general. I mean, you've opened your booklet, right? Surely, you've had a look at who you had to vote for. It's overpopulated by people you wouldn't trust to mind your pet, never mind run the council. You don't actually believe that these people are going to make smart decisions, do you? Or do what they say they're gonna do? You wouldn't even know if they do what they say they're gonna do, because there's hardly any media coverage nowadays and holding people to account. I think it fundamentally comes down to us simply having too many local body politicians in New Zealand, right? Because Auckland alone has 170 of these people. That is more than Parliament has for the entire country. Now, run that 170 in Auckland across the entire country, but it's like 1000. We don't have enough media to cover everything, grill them when they break promises. We don't have enough attention spans ourselves to absorb that much information on top of everything we're already absorbing with central Government. And so what we do is we just tap out and we give up and only what, 40 percent of us vote? I reckon what we need to do is we need to take our 67 territorial authorities and just cut it down. Some commentators reckon we need to go as low as 13. I don't mind, that's a good starting point. It's certainly a better starting point than 67 which equals a, what, 38 percent turnout? LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Three New Zealanders detained by Israel last week, have returned home. Rana Hamida, Youssef Sammour and Samuel Leason were in an aid flotilla to Gaza, intercepted by Israel's military in the Mediterranean. They were among hundreds from around the world, attempting to deliver food and medical supplies. Leason told Heather du Plessis-Allan that he's hoping the ceasefire announced yesterday, will hold. He says he wants what's best for the people of Gaza. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are calls for a Government crackdown on some temporary pools, after five deaths in the past decade. Coroner Heidi Wrigley's reviewed the death of 20-month-old Aromaia Duff in Napier in 2023, after being found face down in a backyard pool. Wrigley says her death reaffirms concerns a pattern's emerging of drownings in such pools. Acting Water Safety NZ CEO Gavin Walker told Heather du Plessis Allan that the issue isn't paddling pools - or much larger ones. He says the problem is more with waist deep, medium-size pools about three metres across - which have proliferated. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour claims a promise isn't being kept - as the Government mulls selling its stake in Chorus. Finance Minister Nicola Willis today said the Government's considering selling the 61 percent stake in the telecoms infrastructure company - now rollout of ultra-fast broadband is complete. She says the money from a sale would be spent on hospitals and schools. But Chris Hipkins told Heather du-Plessis Allan that they've broken their word. He says National promised no asset sales - and this would fall into that category. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's happened again, unfortunately - the Māori Party has hijacked Parliament once again with a haka. It played out like this: Oriini Kaipara, who's their new MP replacing the late Takutai Tarsh Kemp, delivered her maiden speech because today's her first day in Parliament. Afterwards, there was a song and the public gallery was involved. She stepped out of her seat into the aisle, onto the floor to receive the song. As soon as the song ended, someone - sounded like it was somebody up in the public gallery - started a haka and she started to haka back. From news reports I've read, one of the other MPs, Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, also started to haka. Speaker Gerry Brownlee said, “Oh no, not that.” He went on to say that was not the agreement that had been struck, but they didn't stop, they basically ignored him. He got to his feet, at which point the House is usually supposed to stop everything it's doing and go quiet to allow him to speak, and they just completely ignored him. He threw his hands in the air, he then suspended the House, walked off, and the camera feed cut. He's come back subsequently very unhappy about it, and I'm going to bring you up to speed on all of that. Now, the thing is, though - before you get angry about it - don't bother wasting energy on being angry at the Māori Party for doing this, because that's akin to wasting energy on getting angry at an alcoholic for getting drunk if you put beer in front of them, or getting angry at a toddler for packing a tantrum if they're tired. This is what the Māori Party does, right? This is the stuff that they thrive on. They thrive on performance, they thrive on sticking the middle finger to authority, it's basically what they would call their kaupapa. I'm just surprised that Gerry Brownlee got hoodwinked so easily into making an agreement with them and thinking this wouldn't happen. Or maybe he didn't, or maybe someone in Parliament didn't get hoodwinked, because it looks like someone was prepared for this. As soon as that haka started, the camera never cut back to the Māori Party or the gallery. It stayed on Gerry, and as soon as he suspended Parliament, the feed cut. Now, what that means is you never really see the Māori Party doing the haka or anyone doing the haka. You can just kind of hear it in the background, but you can't see it. That basically robs the Māori Party of the ability to do what they did previously - strip the crisp, professional parliamentary TV feed, put it on their social media, and hope the thing goes viral. It's not going to happen this time because that footage is not there for them. Now, it is not ideal, obviously, having Parliament's rules broken like this for obvious reasons, but it is not unexpected. So I think, given all things, the best outcome may be the one that was achieved today - which is just a blackout. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Good news - the Reserve Bank has finally done the thing many of us thought was necessary, and they've gone for a double cut in the OCR of 50 basis points. That's the good news. The bad news is that they've been forced to do it because they didn't do it earlier, as in, they haven't cut as quickly as they should have. I mean, think back to July when they actually chose not to cut at all, which was clearly a mistake at the time - but became even more of a mistake when we saw the shock GDP number that followed. We saw that in the three months before that decision, the economy had actually contracted by a whopping 0.9 percent and the Reserve Bank hadn't really noticed at all. And the bad news, I suppose, again, is that they could have done a double cut last time when two of them on the Monetary Policy Statement said we should go double cut. But more of them said, no, let's just go with the single cut. So they've gone with a double cut today - vindication for two, it would seem. We're gonna stick to the good news though, which is that, finally, the Reserve Bank has caught up with the rest of us. The economy is cooked, and we need to do something, so they have delivered it. They admit that this is a signal. The signal is it's okay to go out and spend and invest - because they've realized, finally, that people are freaked out, right? There have been too many predictions of green shoots just before the economy falls again, which freak people out, and there have been too many bad surprises which freak people out. Business confidence is shot, look at the QBSO yesterday. Consumer confidence is also slightly increasing, but still really negative. People are holding on to their money, they're saving instead of spending, they're worrying instead of investing. And this cut is a circuit breaker that's supposed to snap us out of our fear. Now, there are some who worry that we are actually already so freaked out that even this cut, given how big it is, could spook us all over again. It's possible, maybe it could happen. But I think what's more likely is that it's going to give the assurance that people need. And the assurance is that the people in charge of the economy actually realize how bad things are - and are prepared to be bold. And I'll tell you what, it's better late than never. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We need to talk about why we're persisting with having so many local body politicians. We clearly have too many positions, don't we? I mean, just look at how many people are winning their seats at the moment. The elections are this weekend - look at how many people are winning their seats without any elections, without anybody standing against them. With more than 200, that's 1 in every 7 council races. So Hurunui already has its mayor, even though the elections are this weekend. It's Marie Black, no one's standing against her. Manawatū already has its mayor, Michael Ford, no one's standing against him. There are more than 80 councillors who are already elected across the country, there are several on the Southland Regional Council already elected. Lower Hutt, Southland, Buller, Stratford, Marlborough councils, two of Auckland's councils already elected - unopposed - as well as 3 of Christchurch's. There are also empty seats that no one wants to fill in community boards in the Rotorua Lakes, New Plymouth's Kaitake, Clifton as well, rural Hastings, Hanmer Springs, Twizel, and Mataura. What that tells you is that you have more positions to fill than you have people who want to fill those positions. Now, please have a look at your voting papers and vote if you can. I voted in Auckland already, right? I had 1 vote for mayor, I had 1 vote for council, and then I had up to 7 votes for my local board. I didn't vote 7 times for my local, I didn't know who all of those people were. I knew about 5 of them and at least 2 of them I knew for bad reasons, so I didn't want to vote for them. So, you know, I think we clearly are asking too much. And by the way, in Auckland, we have 172 local board politicians by the end of this process, and I'm not even counting the local licensing board. The most junior of which, the ward councillors, get paid more than $54,000 each. Now, I think looking at all of this, we are well overdue tipping all of this up and changing it and massively reducing the number of people that we're paying to do probably not a lot. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On these protesters who've been harassing Winston and his neighbours - even as recently as last night - they really have to call this nonsense off. Turning up at someone's house in the evening, or as the Prime Minister said to Mike this morning, at 11 at night or 4 in the morning is not protesting. That's actually just intimidating. Particularly, I think, in the case of Winston, who I know has been actually dealing with this for a number of months. Now, I don't think he's actually gone public yet. Even when I asked him, I don't think he's gone public with the extent of the harassment that he's been dealing with - and it was probably because he didn't want to encourage it to continue. But I have been aware for months that this has been going on outside his house. What makes it worse is that like with many heritage suburbs in central Auckland, Winston's house is right on the roadside. He doesn't have a yard out the front between him and the protesters. He doesn't have a long driveway between him and them. If you stand outside his house, you're basically touching his porch and his front door is about 1.5 to 2 metres away. I think that makes the intimidation even greater. And what these protesters need to understand is that they're not drawing attention to Gaza by harassing a senior politician - just like with the flotilla kids, right? Because they're not drawing attention to Gaza. They are only drawing attention to themselves and getting us talking - not about Gaza, but about whether the thing that they are doing as their protest or their activism is appropriate. They're simply drawing attention to themselves. Now, there is a planned law to stop this business about the protesting outside people's houses. It's in the submissions phase, so it hasn't passed yet and it's a while away from passing Which means, of course, that in the meantime these protesters can pretty much do what they like by the looks of things. But what they should understand is that it is inappropriate and most New Zealanders with families will look at this and think this is inappropriate, and so all they're doing is risking goodwill towards their cause. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I reckon we shouldn't panic too much on behalf of those three New Zealand citizens who've been intercepted by the Israeli military and the flotilla. Obviously, we want international law to be followed, but it's pretty clear that these guys knew what they were getting themselves into and did it anyway. I mean, they are absolutely milking this for all that it's worth with the social media posts claiming they've been kidnapped and all that kind of stuff - by the Israelis, by the way. But they knew this was gonna happen, and they were prepared for it because this is what happened to Greta in June. She was on the flotilla that got stopped by the IDF- and they took her to Ashdod and they kept her for a few hours and then they tried to make her watch a video of the October 7 massacre, she didn't want to. And they put her on a plane in the back row, right in front of the toilet, so there wasn't even any reclining space for her, and then they packed her off home. And that was fine. So they got on some more ships and they tried to do it again. So it was always going to play out in exactly the same way. And for that reason, I think it is fair to call this a stunt, because what they're doing is something that they know has no reasonable chance of success - which is delivering aid to Gaza, but they're doing it anyway, to draw attention to Gaza. That's a stunt. Now, I'm not going to criticize them for wanting to draw attention to Gaza because it is horrific and intolerable what's happening there. And if there is any doubt that the Israelis are deliberately constraining the flow of aid, I think that was quite obviously dispelled this week when the Trump peace plan was released and it promised that if Hamas accepts the deal, then full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip. Which is essentially, I think you can see, an admission that full aid is currently being withheld from the Gaza Strip. So I understand why they want to draw attention to it, but I still don't have much time for stunts like this because generally, they don't actually draw attention to the thing that they're trying to draw attention to - which is the starvation in Gaza. They only really draw attention to themselves - which is Greta and her mates. That's what we're talking about. Because we're not talking about Gaza today, are we? We're talking about Greta and her mates. The whole thing becomes about the safety and the treatment of the activists, not the safety and the treatment of the people of Gaza. And frankly, they are, in my opinion, of no value whatsoever to the people of Gaza right now. Now, obviously, I do hope the IDF treats these kids well. Our diplomats have asked for as much, but they knew this was going to happen. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you were looking forward to today to learn how the Government would rescue the country from the energy crisis we face, you are already disappointed by now because you've looked at it and you've seen there's nothing here. There is nothing here that is going to stop us going through what we are going through right now. For months and months every winter for the last two winters we've seen the closing down of mills, extremely high power bills, and a shortage of gas - and all of that's going to continue. The disappointing thing is that we have waited two whole winters for this package of ideas, and yet the best idea seems, to me, to be a kooky idea, which is that the Government may be backing the construction of an LNG import terminal. That was an idea that sounded great last winter, but in the months since, when we've actually had a look at the thing and had some reports done and it has been debunked for being quite expensive for not a lot of gain. To set up one of these terminals, most likely at the port of Taranaki, it would cost somewhere between $200 million and $1 billion dollars, which is not money that we have. The gas that we would then import from offshore to basically make up for the shortage of gas that we have in the country at the moment would be very expensive. Have a look at what you're paying for your gas right now - and add 25 percent to that. The second best idea in this seems to be the Government throwing taxpayer money at the partially owned gentailers in order that they can raise capital to build more generation. Which is not capital that they appear to be asking for. They do not seem to have a shortage of money, as evidenced by the fact that they keep paying out massive dividends. The upshot for all of this - as in how much we're going to save - Simon Watts reckons he might be able to drop power prices by two percent a year. Two percent. Now, I'll tell you the problem with this plan is that it appears - and from what I hear - they haven't spent much time understanding the problem and thus understanding what it would take to fix it properly. So what they've done is, in haste, cobbled together a series of what sounds like maybe decent announcements if you're half listening. But they're really things that will not do that much. Unfortunately for them, we have an energy crisis, and it is massive. It is probably the biggest thing that is facing business in this country right now. A crisis of this size demands a proper fix. This is becoming a theme for this Government - having lots of really big things to deal with, and they're not really dealing with them properly. This is not really a fix. So unfortunately, and I'm so sorry to say this, strap yourself in because it looks like for next winter and the winters to come, the deindustrialization of New Zealand will continue. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.