Episode 27: Jordan Williams

In Leaders Getting Coffee episode 27 we take a close up look at how governments and local authorities spend our tax and rates money.

 

Our guest for this quest is Jordan Williams, co-founder of The Taxpayers Union, a purpose driven organisation established over ten years ago with a view to campaigning for better value for money from government spending.

 

Jordan graduated from law school at Victoria University and spent his first five years working in the law firm founded by former Act Party MP, Stephen Franks. We hear how he ‘picked up the bug’ of defending taxpayer dollars and the vision that led to the creation of The Taxpayers Union.

 

Former Prime Minister Sir Bill English has described the Union as follows:

 

“One of the principal tools for restoring value for money for the taxpayer is transparency. The Taxpayers’ Union has been remarkably successful simply by exposing the actions of government to the hard light of day”.

 

We’d all like to think that such transparency results in better politicians, better behaviour and better public services. But the job is still a long way from being done.

 

The conversation doesn’t stop at government spending either. The Prime Minister’s speech to Local Government New Zealand a few weeks ago gets some attention during  the podcast as does the recent local body spending news about steps to the $263,000 beach at Milford in Auckland and Wellington’s now famous $500,000 plus bike rack.

 

Jordan Williams is at his animated and enthusiastic best discussing the wasted spending in our public organisations as he celebrates the organisation’s annual “Jonesie Awards” for the worst examples of wasteful spending.

 

Episode 27 of Leaders Getting Coffee is a wonderful opportunity to understand more about where our tax and rates dollars go, and we share the story of those who are trying to make that spending more responsible.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
This is an iHeartRadio New Zealand podcast.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Hi everyone, welcome back to Leaders Getting Coffee. We're here
for episode twenty seven. My name's Bruce Cottrell and it's
great to have you with us for another discussion with
a very interesting young leader who will join us shortly.
As always, thanks to the team at endzed ME, the
people at News Talk z B who help us put
these podcasts together, and of course the Business Herald where
my regular column appears, the latest of which ran on

(00:52):
Saturday twenty eighth September under the headline Economic contrasts Christopher
Luxon's growth strategy versus Chris.

Speaker 3 (00:59):
Hopkins tax plans.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
The article came about on the back of the Minister's
or the Prime Minister's latest overseas trip. I should say
that I haven't always been convinced about Christopher Luxen, but
I think he's growing into the role and he's getting
to grips with the massive challenges that he now faces.
The trip I referred to was to Malaysia in South
Korea a couple of weeks back. He's done a number

(01:21):
of these in his first ten months in office, and
his theme is one of we have to grow the economy,
and we don't do that sitting at home. We have
to grow the economy, and we don't do that sitting
at home. He speaks openly about economic ambition and how
his aspirations for the country can only be achieved if
supported by a stronger economy.

Speaker 3 (01:42):
I have to admit I like that approach.

Speaker 2 (01:44):
But the column also discusses the fact that just as
Luxon was returning from that trip, the Opposition leader Chris
Hipkins appeared on Q and A on TV and Z,
where his focus was on the need to widen the
tax base through the introduction of attach capital gains tax.

Speaker 3 (01:58):
And to borrow more money.

Speaker 2 (02:00):
At the time, I thought, you know, people often say
there's little difference between the two most popular political parties
in New Zealand. Well that's changed, hasn't it. The difference
could not be greater. At one end of the spectrum
is the Prime Minister and his colleagues Peters, McLay, Collins
and co. Traveling the world knocking on doors in the
hope that we can sell.

Speaker 3 (02:18):
More of our stuff to the world.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
Those sales bring revenue, jobs and taxable income to New Zealand,
and they help us pay for what we need.

Speaker 3 (02:26):
At the other extreme, Hipkins and.

Speaker 2 (02:28):
His party and their bedfellows can only see one way,
more tax, more borrowing, and more spending. In case we
didn't notice, folks, Hipkins and his mates have just had
a crack at doing that.

Speaker 3 (02:39):
Let's ask ourselves how.

Speaker 2 (02:41):
That turned out. They borrowed over one hundred billion dollars
over six years while the economy fell apart, and our
education and health systems did the same. And what do
we have to show for that pile of additional debt
we now carry very little? Like any government, the current
one will have people who disagree with them, but their
approach is simple. They want to cut our cost base,
sell our goods and services to the world, educate our people,

(03:04):
and create a sustainable way of life that us back
among the best in the world. It seems like a
simple choice, really a choice between aspiration and hopelessness. And
from this distance it appears that we're finally having a decent.

Speaker 3 (03:17):
Crack at it. So please go and check out the column.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
It's under the headline Economic Contrasts Christopher Luxen's growth strategy
versus Chris hopkins tax plan.

Speaker 3 (03:26):
It's the New Zealand Herald.

Speaker 2 (03:27):
Dot COT dot NZ or under published articles at dubdubdub
dot brucecotteral dot com, Forward Slash Blog.

Speaker 3 (03:34):
Thanks again for being with us. We'll be back shortly
with this week's guest.

Speaker 2 (03:48):
Welcome back to episode twenty seven of Leaders Getting Coffee. Well,
I've just been talking about government policy, and our guest
today is someone who is all too familiar with what
our governments do and how they go about it. A
little after a little over, i should say, ten years ago,
a couple of fellows started up a new venture with
a difference, venture whose prime mission was to campaign for

(04:09):
better value for money from government spending. Somewhat ambitiously, they
called it the New Zealand Taxpayers Union. And my guest
today is one of those men. His name is Jordan
Williams and he's the co founder and the executive director
of the Taxpayers Union. Jordan is a constitutional and commercial
lawyer by trade, a trade he learned in the Wellington
based law firm which specializes in constitutional law Frank's Ogilvy.

Speaker 3 (04:34):
Even as a young man, he had an appetite for
a battle.

Speaker 2 (04:37):
In twenty eleven, he was the spokesperson for Vote for Change,
a lobby group that campaigned against the retention of the
MMP electoral system, and alongside David Ferrara, he set up
the Taxpayers Union in twenty thirteen and he remains responsible for.

Speaker 3 (04:51):
Its operation to this day.

Speaker 2 (04:52):
He also co founded and co chaired the New Zealand
Free Speech Union. You can probably work out what that's
all about, and he set up the Campaign Company, which
helps not for profits and political groups in New Zealand,
Australia and Britain.

Speaker 3 (05:04):
In twenty nineteen.

Speaker 2 (05:06):
Was elected onto the board of the World Taxpayers Association,
a global network of taxpayer groups working together for lower taxes,
limited and accountable government and taxpayer rights all over the world.
He is currently the President and Chair of that organization
and last year the Taxpayers Union released a book entitled

(05:27):
The Mission the Taxpayers Union at ten. In the forward
of that book, written by Sir Bill English no Less,
the former PM, said the Taxpayers Union had a vital
role to play at a moment when New Zealanders want
competent government with lower taxes, less waste and greater accountability
like never before. I think most of us would agree

(05:48):
with that. Jordan Williams, welcome to Leaders getting.

Speaker 1 (05:50):
Coffee, Bruce, thanks for the coffee.

Speaker 3 (05:52):
You're most welcome.

Speaker 2 (05:54):
You'll have a different perspective on my article than most
my article from the weekend about the Luxeon approach versus
the Hipkins approach.

Speaker 1 (06:04):
Your thoughts, I think it's reflects what I'm hearing from
our donors is that Luxen is starting to find a stride.
I particularly liked that you refer to what actually matters
around growth, which isn't GEDDP, it's GDP per capita, and
you rightly point out that we're down two point seven
percent this year. I mean, it takes a while to

(06:26):
flow through to wages, but ultimately you know, your GDP
per capita means your prosperity in the long term. And
in fact, if I wish the media would stop sit
as saying are we in recession or aren't we in recession?
Instead of this bouncing around the head of the head
of a pin. We have gone backwards now for longer

(06:47):
than at any time in New Zealands since records began
correct and actually our GDP per capita has come down
more post COVID than even the global financial crisis.

Speaker 2 (06:59):
I think this is way worse than the GFC. I,
as you know, I'm talking to businesses every day. I'm
probably across ten different businesses at any one time, and
there's some real pain out there. The only person that
doesn't seem to notice is Adrian or Yeah.

Speaker 1 (07:15):
Well, it also is reflective of we've had now a
generation of politicians that have sort of stopped performing and
imported growth by importing people.

Speaker 2 (07:23):
Yes, yeah, absolutely, Okay, we better move on from that
column otherwise we'll talk about it for the whole hour.
I want to talk about you, your life, your education,
because it's it's not every young lawyer's dream to end
up running a taxpayers association.

Speaker 3 (07:40):
I'm sure, where did you go to school?

Speaker 1 (07:42):
I went to school originally hero Worth, which is a
private intermediate school. I was pulled out A pulled me
out of Mayfia School because apparently I was very far
behind and not reading.

Speaker 3 (07:55):
They had to be pulled out and pushed out.

Speaker 1 (07:57):
Well, yeah, maybe that was coming. But I really did
enjoy it until I got to Linda's Farn, which is
a Presbyterian boys school, and haste things. And at about fifteen,
I don't know, something clicked and I went from really
not enjoying school to absolutely.

Speaker 2 (08:13):
Thriving, fantastic. So you went to high school just fun
and then off to Victoria University.

Speaker 3 (08:19):
Am I right?

Speaker 1 (08:20):
Yeah, I got school. I got university entrants in the
sixth form, but made the mistake for going to visit
and seeing that the state of some friends halls of residence.
But I'm glad I stayed seventh. I've always been self conscious.
I don't want to be on those people that their
best year was their last year of high school. But
it was a good year. I really enjoyed it because

(08:42):
you sort of you cast off the difficulty and have
lots of fun. And as you can imagine, being interested
in politics, I took every opportunity to do those nerds sorry,
leadership experiences, you know, the youth parliaments and things like that.

Speaker 3 (08:57):
What were you like at school?

Speaker 1 (09:01):
Well, as I said, I wasn't very good at sport,
which was reason I found particularly intermediate quite difficult. Grew
up without an old man. So actually, as much as
I didn't enjoy it at first, that sort of boys
environment with I mean I didn't have a male teacher
until I was about Form one. Wow, But getting that

(09:23):
I really thrived. I was always the kid that others
would come and get advice from. Again, of giving away
my nerdiness here, but being on the school Board of
Trustees as a student rep, which even at the time
I thought was pretty silly, and.

Speaker 3 (09:37):
As well I was pretty nerdy.

Speaker 1 (09:38):
Yeah, but it's also it's been at the forefront of
my mind this week as a result of the Hastings
Council putting their youth counselors not just as observers or
an advisory group, actually giving them voting rights onto council committees.

Speaker 3 (09:54):
Yeah, well that's scary. We might talk about that later on.
Did you have interests outside of school other than politics?

Speaker 1 (09:59):
Yeah, of course you asked me, you know, interested outside
of school or university? I was thinking what was the
most important thing. Most important thing was I met Emily
and the mother and my two kids.

Speaker 2 (10:11):
Right, well, that's an important interest. But yeah, I love
She might not like you calling her an interest.

Speaker 1 (10:18):
The I mean, look, even back then I was pretty academic. So,
notwithstanding the lack of sporting ability, as much as possible,
I love getting out outdoors into the hills. When I
worked for Steve and he introduced me to dear stalking,
I don't pretend to be any good. It's very but

(10:39):
I love it because it's I can't. My brothers as
a charter fishing business out of Napier, and I can't
think of anything worse than just sitting on a boat fishing.
I've got to be moving a fly fishing I'll do
or at where our holiday house is at Rhodemar, getting
on the kayak and tying a lure around the lake.
Oh yep, that's great. But I can't sit still when

(11:01):
it's unless I'm working.

Speaker 2 (11:04):
Were you always someone to champion a cause or did
that come later?

Speaker 1 (11:09):
Well? My mother who was horrified when I gave up
a law job to set up a think tank for
which she I think I think she still view that
I need to at some stage to get a real
job and this, you know, this is just a phase.
I've I blame mum for the political bug though, because

(11:30):
she was elected onto Hasting Scouts I think in nineteen
ninety right, so I mean pretty pretty So my formative
years is I joke and I do not tell the
Taxpayers Union, but I can remember being at primary school
and spending my afternoons in the councilor lounge and mums
saying eat up, this is your dinner. This is your dinner.

Speaker 2 (11:51):
Right, Okay, so it's probably always been there, lurking, lurking
in the background.

Speaker 1 (11:56):
Yeah, what is it. The acorn doesn't fall far from
the tree.

Speaker 3 (11:59):
From the tree.

Speaker 2 (12:00):
You you had a reasonable reasonably normal start for a
law graduate. You went off and and worked with Stephen Franks,
the former act Party MP. As you've already touched on,
was what was that experience? Like, I think you're there
for about five years.

Speaker 1 (12:14):
Yeah, it was tremendous. A lot of the work was
reabitro economic law, so stuff around price quality, regulation of
electricity distribution transmission, the way that airport's natural monopoly regulation.
And I had always expected to go down the accounting route,

(12:34):
go into one of the big consultancy or accounting firms.
My grades for commerce are pretty good. My grades for
law not so good. But when I was at the
end of my degree, it was when the GFC had
had and my assessment was friends of mine that were

(12:56):
far smarter than I were not getting jobs. I knew
Steve Franks through the National Party was heavily involved in
one of his campaigns. In fact, it's a bit unfair.
I basically when I moved to Wellington, I adopt Stephen
Cathy as my my the fact he appearance down whether
they liked it or not, and Stephen said, look, I'm
leaving Chapman Trip, I'm setting up this firm. I can't

(13:18):
guarantee you a job, but if there is one, if
the firm works, it's yours. And I thought this is
actually better job security than anyone else in my cohort.
So I took off and for the last six months
of my law degree, took off to Germany and went
to law school there.

Speaker 3 (13:37):
Yes, I saw that, so was that an exchange.

Speaker 1 (13:39):
Yeah, it was. It was a It was a Germany's
only private law school that they specialized in his national
commercial law, so it wasn't a total folly. And then
came back to New Zealand in twenty ten and two
days later started.

Speaker 2 (13:52):
With Steve fantastic and then five years later you move
away from all that. What's probably quite a nice, sustainable
job and a law firm doing the stuff that you enjoy,
and you and David put together the concept of the
Taxpayers Union.

Speaker 1 (14:09):
What prompted that, Well, when I was living in Germany,
I attended something called IYDU, the sort of club of
center right parties around the world, and the sort of
youth Wings of them, and I met a chap called
Matthew Elliott and Matthew had founded a group called the
Taxpayers Alliance in the UK. Matthew's more known because he

(14:29):
went on to found a group called Business for Britain,
which reformed itself as something called Vote Leave, which had
a small impact on UK public policy. And I just
I thought, a taxpayer group. That's a boy. We do
well to have one of those at home. David Farrer
had met Matthew at the same conference somewhere else and

(14:53):
had thought the same thing. And then the MP referendum
sort of crystallized it because I saw the way the
center right just did not turn up. I don't want
to dock them because he's I think he's forgiven me.
But when I was about twenty four to twenty five,

(15:14):
I went to Phil o'riley's office with Peter Shirtcliffe. Peter Shirtcliffe,
a former chair of Telecom, stuck his head up above
the parapet and ninety three and ninety four for the
first REFERENDU right, And I mean, he was a million,
but he's still sharp as attack, but he was a
million back then, and I remember him saying to Phillo Riley, well, look,

(15:34):
you know the battons now with you. We've got this
referendum in nine months time. What are you going to
do about it? And phil O'Riley said, oh, look, I've
spoken to Keys Offers, spoken to Wayne Eagleson, he's the
in chief of staff, and look they consider it a
distraction to the election, so we're probably going to sit
this one out. And that sort of crystallized the taxpayers unions.

(15:57):
I wanted to do something because it just said to me, no,
wonder the center right is marching backwards if we don't
turn up to the fights. How can we be surprised
when you know public policy isn't going forward?

Speaker 3 (16:10):
Absolutely? What made you use the word union?

Speaker 2 (16:13):
You've already you know, association comes to mind, You've already
touched on alliance. You say union, which just sounds a
little bit tougher.

Speaker 1 (16:23):
Yet, David, it was not something I pushed for. David
Farrer pushed for that. I remember when I was setting
up the office in early October twenty thirteen. I was
down at the Dobbins, the second hand office furniture place
in Wellington, and the Marty chap there, who was riding
out the audit slip and he asked what the company

(16:44):
name was. I said me, he's on Taxpayers Union. And
he looked at me and said, I'm a tax payer,
and I sort of thought, peel, that's what I want.
That's the reaction the word union. There are taxpayer unions
around the world going back a century, so there is
there is some historical precedent. But look, one of the

(17:05):
things our opponents like to do is trying to frame
us as sort of some libertarian you know, drowned the
government in a bath type organization. An actual fact, you know,
of New Zealanders, ninety five percent New Zealanders would agree
that government waste is a problem. And you know we don't.

(17:25):
I don't want people turned off on the basis that
you know that we are because we're not neoliberals united
a lot. You know, we're the effort Tim the tax
pa and for Sally the single mom and Danny Virk
fighting for good common sense and this radical idea that
you spend my money, so you should spend it wisely
fair enough to.

Speaker 2 (17:46):
Like any startup. I assume there's been some highs and
lows along the way. Goodness me after what eleven years
now can you can you think of anything.

Speaker 1 (17:55):
Off the cause? I suspective it's the same that with
any startup. You know, that's the biggest headache for an
organization like the Taxpayers Union is you're in come is
extremely lumpy, but your cost base is pretty fixed because
I mean it's it's basically payroll. You know that we

(18:18):
we contract in as much as we can, but at
the end of the day, it's your people. And of
course that isn't a lumpy cost And like anythink tank,
and I know that as I talked to board members
around the world and other think tanks, it's very difficult
or seldom do you have more than a few months
money in the bank. It's pretty public that we came

(18:39):
pretty close to the wire like many organizations, and the
lead up to COVID, the idea that we would we
supported the wage subsidy well before we ever thought we'd
ever need it. But then of course when we recovered
in lockdown, you know, we paid it back.

Speaker 2 (18:58):
And you totally reliant on donations, Oh absolutely, so have
any major sponsorships or anything like that. Well, Bruce, if
you had to write the cost base.

Speaker 1 (19:06):
Bruce, at the end of this interview, you will be
non oubt writing a writing a check to the Taxpayers Union.
And if you want to make it five dollars, five
thousand or five million, you picked the most appropriate. No,
the pre COVID our business model was sort of two
thirds large dollar donations we call large dollar or anything
over one thousand dollars, and COVID flipped it on its head.

(19:27):
You know, last year we were about eighty percent funded
by small dollar donations, the average being seventy two dollars.
And you know, we have a very small percentage of
like two percent. Is it's what we call industry or
you know, corporate memberships from the sorts of industries that
have a particular interest in things like sugar taxes and

(19:50):
things like that. And then so you're only left with
about sort of fifteen to twenty percent of that sort
of large dollar I'm very proud of that. You know,
our donor base, you know, our work is made possible
last year by about twenty two thousand New Zealanders who
see the work the Taxpayers Union appreciate it, and I

(20:12):
hope they'd agree that on many things were their voice fantastic.

Speaker 2 (20:17):
We're with Jordan Williams, the head of the Taxpayers Union.
As I say, not association, not alliance, the Taxpayers Union.
And we'll be back in a moment, back with Jordan Williams,

(20:38):
and we're talking about the Taxpayers Union. Jordan eleven years in.
What are your aspirations for the business.

Speaker 1 (20:46):
Well, it's not. You don't set up a think tank
or pressure group for yourselves. You know. One of the
mistakes some political organizations do is they think that it's
about their own name recognition, or their own brand, health
or anything like that. No, what the Taxpayers Union exists
for is for a more prosperous New Zealand. Before I

(21:07):
had kids, but now I have kids, it becomes even
more important. I don't I love New Zealand. I love
this country, but I don't want my kids to grow
up somewhere that's poor or have to look overseas to
have the sorts of opportunities previous generations have had by
staying in New Zealand. It's clearly it's the economics that

(21:30):
guides me. I really, you know, I flirt between beings,
so the libertarian end or the conservative end, it's the economics.
That's why I set up the organization, and it remains,
so what do I where I want the taxpayers? You
neion to be Well, we've got keivil take two hundred
thousand subscribed email supporters. That makes us the largest per

(21:51):
capita in the English speaking world. Not quite the largest
in the world. The Finns have that, but they've been
going one hundred years and they actually help you do
your taxes. It's like different model, but the I mean
it's public policy. You know that. Coming back in the organizations.
You mentioned the Free Speech Union, but there's been others
that have sort of spawned out of the Taxpayers Union.

(22:15):
I like to think my contribution and I hope that
there are many more, is providing some voices that to
go back to the earlier metaphor with Shirtcliffe and Phil
O'Riley is that we're turning up and at least we're
doing that first step. And you look at particularly on

(22:35):
that Free Speech Union file, not only we're turning up,
we're having wins, and even better, we're having wins on
the positive side, not just being reactionary to put to
butcherss what particularly the last government wanted to do.

Speaker 2 (22:50):
In other words, you're proactively driving policy rather than reacting
to policy suggestions, you have to.

Speaker 1 (22:57):
I mean, you can win ninety percent of the time,
but if you're on the defense, you're still losing. Our
challenge is to go on to the is the front foot,
So even if we're only willing to percent of the time,
we're still winning. The challenges is how to pay for it,
because you know, it's part of the human condition. You'll
be people are better, and it will likely to donate

(23:18):
when there is a risk of something being taken away
rather than the positive picture of you know what could be.
That's a real challenge for for organizations like this.

Speaker 3 (23:29):
Sure is the job ever done well?

Speaker 1 (23:34):
Of course it is, of course it can be. You
know that policy matters. You know, it was US in
post war, it was US Argentina that were the richest
GDP per capita in the world. You know, if we
got back into the into the top five of the OECD,
then I don't think that. I mean, of course you
want the institutional checks and all that sort of thing,
but I don't think it would have the same sort

(23:54):
of urgency as opposed to the path we're currently on.

Speaker 3 (23:58):
Fair enough, what.

Speaker 2 (23:58):
Do you what are you focused on currently? If you
look out there at the scope of work. You know,
we've we've had a change of government ten or so
months ago, ten or eleven months ago.

Speaker 3 (24:09):
It's a very as I said.

Speaker 2 (24:11):
In my column on the weekend and in the introduction
to our discussion, it's a very different.

Speaker 3 (24:18):
Government, a very different focus.

Speaker 2 (24:20):
So an organization like yours must change focus too.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
When you get a change like that.

Speaker 1 (24:25):
Yeah, it is very easy to dilute your message by
going after so many things. So every few months of
staff are really having to We've got limited resources. What
are the things that disproportionately make the difference, So headline
stuff you would have noticed the Taxpayers Union, there's a
lot of going back to our core DNA of just

(24:45):
that day to day exposing government waste, yep, to promote
the public demanding better quality of spending, because putting aside
the size of government, we all do better if the
quality is good. So that's the first. Second is around
the fiscals, as a excellent piece by be Cultural in

(25:11):
the Herald last week pointed out, you know, the fiscals
are quite dire, and I think that the problem for
the NATS is because a sort of in the public
think it's all She'll be right now. Another opinion writer,
and enzed Met Cameron Baggery had an excellent piece last
week on the long term fiscal implications and it is

(25:31):
quite scary. And Ruth Richardson has just taken over. She's
acting cheer because my cheer is on a leave of absence,
and you can imagine that. You know, every day she
is on the on the staff's back about and rightly
so about you know that this is the big issue.
So that local government, I mean we you had a
previous piece on local government as a result of Christopher

(25:53):
Luxen's excellent speech at Al jean Z that buried in
it had some really significant things that, as far as
I'm aware, only the Taxpayers Union have been fighting for,
for example, giving counselors the access information like company directors.
I mean, it's all very well for the Taxpayers Union
to hopperty hopperty mad about a council piddling money away.

(26:17):
How do you expect good governance where your counselors or
elected officials are able to be told by the chief executives. Oh,
I'm sorry, counselor, that's an operational matter and not entitled
to that. If we can get real, so that and
I learned subsequently that that may or may not have
been written by one of our alumni and one of
the Taxpayers Union former staffers who had including worked on

(26:39):
that particular issue. Rima is the big Kahunah. The largest
potential tax relief provided by Luxein's government will almost certainly
be a reform of the RMA. You know that, according
to Business New Zealand's members back when I met for
Low Riley, the two largest handbrake handbrakes on New Zealand's

(27:01):
long term prosperity MMP and the RAMA. If Christopher Bishop,
if Simon Court asks in Marching that regulatory tax back,
I think that will be the equivalent in the eighties
of removing export licensing. It is the and no one
in the Western world has managed to go from where

(27:22):
we are back towards property rights and freedom. So that's
the potential upside. And tied into that is this horrible,
horrible co governance, critical race theory overlay that's appearing and
more and more of our public policy. I didn't set
up the Taxpayers Union to take on those sorts of issues, sure,

(27:43):
but at the end of the day, if you dig
and this comes back to why we took three waters.
So seriously, if you decouple whether it's resource management or
control of public assets from the ballot box and go
down this co governance direction, unaccountable co governance direction, that's

(28:04):
not a recipe for long term prosperity.

Speaker 3 (28:06):
No that this makes sense to most of us.

Speaker 2 (28:09):
I'm sure there's a tendency to think about. The Taxpayers
Union is focusing on government spending, but as you've already
touched on, you're focusing on local bodies.

Speaker 3 (28:20):
To Christopher Lux.

Speaker 2 (28:22):
And how to go at them at the Local Government
New Zealand conference, where's the most money wasted? Is more
money wasted in government or in local authorities?

Speaker 1 (28:31):
We're just both sides. It's clearly it will always be
central government, but it's partly the institutional checks and local
government clearly are wanting.

Speaker 3 (28:40):
It's easy to hide in local government, isn't it.

Speaker 1 (28:42):
Well, it's also it's not. The budgeting works quite differently,
and the transparency it is not the same. I'll give
you a we obviously had this all. It's not yet
in law, but it sounds like we've got this one
coming around rights. The excess information of you another example
that no one will like the hair on fire about it,
but we consider it. Something very important is in central government,

(29:07):
officials have a duty of political neutrality. It's also a protection.
It's not often seen like this, but it means that
when an official is before a select committee, the protection
will I have to give it down the middle, Minister.
I can't give the answer that you necessarily want or
the one that's spun. That doesn't exist in local government.

(29:28):
And so what you have is that it's worse in
Auckland because of its unique setup. But basically your chief
executives are controlling what information, what counselors are getting. So
it really means it's impossible to have the equivalent of
an opposition or the contrarian or the testing of ideas.

(29:49):
Your incentives are to get close to your chief executive
and otherwise you're sitting on the sidelines. And that's what
I hear from counselors around the country.

Speaker 2 (29:58):
So the other part of the challenge for local government,
and you just got to look at what Wayne Brown's
been going through right in his head against the wall,
trying to make sure that they do simple things in Auckland.
And then he gets the Milford steps right for four steps,
four sets of steps. I've walked up and down those

(30:20):
steps plenty of times as probably four or five steps
of most in each in each of the four two
hundred and sixty three thousand dollars. Then there's Wellington's bike
crack at five hundred and eighty four thousand.

Speaker 3 (30:32):
You know what's going wrong?

Speaker 2 (30:34):
How can all that distance away from the decision making
where Wayne brown sits? How can the people on the
factory floor get stuff so wrong?

Speaker 1 (30:45):
Well, of course, I mean that's ultimately why government tends
not be as efficient because the incentives are all backward.
You know, in the private sector you coming under budget,
you know, you get rewarded, and the public sector, if
you don't spend your allocated budget you might end up
with a small than one next year sort of thing.
It just it works differently. I think you've illustrated very

(31:07):
well though, the business model of what we do and
why we do it, that in the grand scheme of things,
they are not huge amounts. I mean they are for
some steers, but in terms of the overall size of
Auckland Council. Sure the government. One of our opponents, and

(31:27):
it's a fear criticism, is that you know, why do
you go after the rats and mice rather than the
big ones. And in the Auckland office, I have our
large on the wall, the front page Herald. You'd imagine
our office just covered in front pages over shares, and
it has our largest ever piece of waste that we
uncovered so that it was under the key government. Parliament

(31:51):
changed the law to do with child support to save
about twenty five million a year. The cost overrun of
the software implementation at IRD was one hundred and twenty
four million. You know, we got one front page in
the Herald, no TV, no radio, no press follower. Next
to it, I've got Steven Joyce's two and a half

(32:12):
grand taxi ride in Sydney. We don't get crowned cars anymore.
He just got off the plane, put the taxi on
the and the time around all day one of those
matters one does not. Yes, it's absolutely it is so
infetically small, but and it's something the left are much
better at, that emotional connection to Tim the taxpayer, to

(32:34):
Sally the single mom and Danny Urk. You know she relates,
so he she relates to the taxi, but not the
it cost overrun.

Speaker 2 (32:43):
Yeah, we do risk majoring and minor things, don't we
But politics is a I mean, look that is That's
why I say it's a valecridit and it's something that
as a for you know, governing an organization like the
Taxpayers Union is that you've got to have the mix
of both.

Speaker 1 (32:58):
You've got to have the sort of skirmishes winning hearts
and minds. But also we you know, we are ultimately
a think tank. We've got a all so you know,
fixing some some stairs or a bike crack doesn't change
the long term prosperity in New Zealand. That is used
for the you know, to develop the culture of accountability.

Speaker 2 (33:18):
So so you have a special way of celebrating waste,
don't you. You call it your annual Jonesy Awards. Tell
us about the Jonesy Awards.

Speaker 1 (33:26):
Well, it's actually coming up. In fact, I'm off to
Wellington tomorrow where we're going to be planning this year's Jones's,
which is the you know awards seasons coming up. There's
the you know, the Oscars and and you know we
put on at Parliament with the red carpet, the ball
gowns myself or whoever's going to be I haven't hosted
in a few years now, but someone will be in

(33:48):
the tuxedo, including our mascot, Porky the Waisttater and where
will be awarding the bits of the worst in government
wastes and extravagance. And I'm glad I hope to see
you there in Parliamentary Banquet Hall.

Speaker 3 (34:07):
Will the Milford Steps or the Wellington bike crack be
in the finalist?

Speaker 1 (34:09):
Do you think, well, you might have to nominate the
now and it's I mean there's I don't need the
Bruce Cultural Steps.

Speaker 2 (34:16):
Isn't it Bruce Cultural Steps that attached me to that
at all? One of the worst examples you've seen over
the years you have the eleven years, you must have
seen some horrific waste.

Speaker 3 (34:26):
Look, is there a couple of classics that come to mind?

Speaker 1 (34:29):
That there's so many I stroke I struggled to remember.
One of the ones that has often seems to have
hit the lexicons often thrown back at me was the
Turtle story where the where a turtle washed up in Canterbury.
They're locally. We didn't want it, so Tapapa wanted it
for research. They trucked it to Wellington and the year

(34:51):
we changed their mind, and then it sat there for
I think eighteen months while they figured out what to do.
Cut a long story short. Having built it a specialized
coffin and shipping it back down to Canterbury, they used
a helicopter to fly it to the top of the
hill and bury it where they had a ceremony which
include the board of TAPAPA and board members from DOC.

(35:15):
Now this is just you only do this sort of
stuff when it's other people's money, and for which we
don't even know the gender of said turtle because no
research was undertaken at all. I wish I hadn't asked
that question last it's also last week an email on Friday.
This is just beyond belief. So you'll know about the science, gluckman.

(35:39):
Scientific big science challenges, big science questions came in under
the Key government. Well, one of them relates to protecting
New Zealand's by diversity. Yep, fair enough and as a
stream of that, looking NBA tasked with managing this project
about looking at Carrie die Back and Myrtle rust fair enough,
well being Wellington. Of course you have to have tea

(36:02):
hunger aspects of almost everything that the government touches now
and so this is this is not an exaggeration. People
are literally being paid to record wales because the sperm
whale is in Mari with's a legend the brother of

(36:24):
Caldi trees recording the whales, mixing it with sounds of
healthy Chardi forests to play in Cardi forests affected by
DIA die back. And that's that is this is supposed
to be New Zealand's sort of premiere leading scientific projects

(36:46):
and eventually suggest that that is not perhaps the best
use of their money.

Speaker 2 (36:50):
Nor the best use of our scientists. Over the years,
you guys have had a bit of flack, you know
you I guess it goes with the territory.

Speaker 3 (36:59):
How do you gope with that?

Speaker 1 (37:02):
Well, I mean the I think the awful court case
I went through in twenty sixteen sort of prepare you know,
hopefully nothing ever gets worse than that. But for me,
the only thing that does affect me is when our
junior staff are threatened or things like that, because one
of the reasons I love this job an organization is

(37:24):
it really runs on the energy of young people. And
you know, we have a whole laundry list of people
in Parliament now, both as staff is and even and
MPs who have come through the organization, and you know,
we love that we're a bit of a stepping stone,
a bit of a training ground, not just for conservative

(37:45):
or center right students, you know, deliberately higher across the spectrum.
But when they are docks on Twitter and things like that,
I struggle with that because I think that's so unfair
and I have a sense of responsibility for these you know,
these wonderful young people and you see them in the media.
We don't I get far more set as faction with

(38:08):
these young people in the media on a story that
they have uncovered then passing it over to their now
aging boss to go and fly their flag. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (38:20):
No, it's all I think we all get to kick
out of how we can create opportunities for our young people.
And it is sad if they get a bit of flack,
and I guess it goes with the territory. But as
I said Bill English and his introduction to the book
that I mentioned at the outset, he made this comment.
He said, one of the principal tools for restoring value

(38:41):
for money for the taxpayer is transparency. The Taxpayers Union
has been remarkably successful simply by exposing the actions of
government to the hard light of day, after all the knocks.
A comment like that, coming from a person like that,
it must feel pretty good.

Speaker 1 (39:00):
Yeah, I think I mentioned it in my chapter of
the book. I don't see any reason why counts. I
might not mention which minister, but I had reason a
few years ago to be staying or visiting her care
paratus place up up in Gisbon, and she made a
comment that she would sometimes say to officials, I can't
do this. What if the taxpayers Union find finds out.

(39:21):
Now it's very hard in the think tank world, and
it's something we think a lot about, is how you
measure success. I put to you that when former ministers
of the Crown are saying that they would tell officials,
pull your head, and what if the taxpayers Union found out?
And we've also seen it in documents assessing spending out

(39:43):
of government agencies, where they put a potential risk as
possible criticism by the taxpayers Union That actually suggests that
the many thousands of information requests our staff do every
year do have the intended effect of reminding officials, hey,
someone's looking over your shoulder here. Absolutely, and that it's

(40:06):
one of the important roles.

Speaker 3 (40:08):
And that's what you're there for, to make an impact.

Speaker 1 (40:11):
Yeah, I mean the the that I mean we have
effectively we empower a lot of our people to be
armchair auditors, you know, and that role used to be
done a lot more with the newsrooms. But newsrooms are
much smaller than they used to.

Speaker 3 (40:28):
Be and they don't have the resources.

Speaker 2 (40:30):
We're with Jordan Williams, co founder of the Taxpayers Union.
We'll be back in a moment. Back with Jordan Williams
from the Taxpayers Union. Jordan, you know, we're almost a
year after the last election, a new government elected.

Speaker 3 (40:54):
How do you think they're doing?

Speaker 1 (40:56):
It depends on the area. I mean that they've got
a hic of a lot to do. I worry that
the government isn't necessarily taking Roger Douglas's advice. There was
a very good series of podcasts on the Fourth Labor
Government and one of the lessons is you've got to
go hell for leather because every day as a new
government gets more barnacles, things get harder and you look

(41:19):
at we're on the public records saying you know why
we as the government spending so much political capital on
say fast track when actually when you know, we need
to fast track this new replacement the difficult probably on
that particular area. And it again it suggests that as
a movement, the center right has not got the same

(41:42):
sort of institutional you know, the left have lots of quangos,
a lot of quasi government funded sort of charity sector
also up the wazoo, we don't. I mean, you look
at something like three Waters. The Taxpayers Union spent more
than a million dollars on ensuring there was drafting, instructions
and the core aspects of a bill drafted ready to go.

(42:06):
That hadn't happened with the RIMA. And so the government
is now you know, they've got a very poor quality
department in NEF in the Ministry of the Environment. It's
one of them. It's an agency that has grown enormously
under the last government, among the highest staff turnover. And frankly,
it's just say it's not necessarily everyone there is brains

(42:28):
are Britain, and yet they are the you know, they're
holding the pen on advising the government or delivering what
is challenging. So but if we take the government can
get there, although there is some risk that as I say,
that's going to be harder in two years time. That's

(42:48):
good education is fantastic. Health. I'm really worried about, you know,
like there's a bit of rearranging and managing better, but
this is an effect. This government is doing what the
Tories in the UK did and no matter how much
more money they put into it, it up in their face.
I'm very worried about that. And then come back to

(43:11):
the economics that I'm very worried and as my boards
certainly are that the path back to surplus for Nikola
Willis is based on heroic assumptions. And I think that Cameron,
as I say, Cameron Berry, has done some great work
on here, but it's Treasury in our sounding the alarms

(43:32):
that actually tough decisions are going to be need to
be made, and especially in a context where you've got
the opposition focused on growing the government's share of the
pie rather than growing the pie. I think that New
Zealand is in much larger danger of it of quite
a harsh fiscal correction than the average votre probably believes.

Speaker 3 (43:53):
Yeah, I think that's right. The one thing I would
say is.

Speaker 2 (44:01):
I feel the government have gone probably as fast as
they can. They're probably dealing well, they probably came in
dealing with with a group of management teams who didn't.

Speaker 3 (44:11):
Really like their arrival.

Speaker 2 (44:13):
Yes, they so you've got to turn that around. They've
instituted the cuts in the workforce. I my view is
those cuts aren't excessive enough.

Speaker 1 (44:24):
There's a great there's a great illustration though, is that
actually on the cuts they have been so moderate. You
know that the narrative run by the media is so
far from the actual numbers. When you look at Okay,
they might have got rid of people, but when you
actually take the net figure, they have barely touched the surface.

Speaker 2 (44:42):
Well, I don't think they've they've let I don't think
they've downsized the government workforce by as many people who
were put on in the last six months of the
last government.

Speaker 1 (44:51):
Well, we looked at this roughly that we looked at
this in May, and this was what the height of
all the the screaming from the rooftops, from from staff
and the post et cetera, and the and the public
sector unions. They had only got rid of the new
people that have been that the growth since the election.

(45:12):
You know, this is not they were not there's homelessness
in Wellington but it ain't that reason there's cafe struggling
in Wellington. That's because people aren't going to work. It's
not that people have lost their jobs.

Speaker 3 (45:21):
Well they've moved on that too. They've got the working
from home announcement. That was a couple of weeks.

Speaker 1 (45:25):
We actually have been asking for government agencies. They wouldn't
tell us working from home. So what we did is
we asked about how the security works for their main
officers and then just did it give us a data
match between the card numbers and what was the proportion
of staff turning up to work? And that might be one.
We're simply asking the question results and that coming up

(45:50):
the agenda and the minister's officers and we need to
do something. So that's I mean, that's almost a policy
victory for us by asking the questions.

Speaker 2 (45:59):
Just even if you did come coming through the back door,
so to speak.

Speaker 1 (46:04):
But you know what I mean, like, there's no better
I understandining if you've been at the you know, we
just picked random days for some reason. Fridays it was
dramatically lower. You know what proportioning of your staff waived
in today And.

Speaker 2 (46:17):
Of course for listeners who didn't didn't see the announcement
last week or the week before, it became clear that
the Public Service Commissioner and some of the CEOs didn't
really know how many people were working from home or
when they were working from home, and the immediate conclusion
you could jump to is that people could be not
turning up at all and getting a paycheck.

Speaker 1 (46:36):
You mentioned the public sector bosses earlier. That would be
one thing that There's been two sort of strategic mistakes
the government has made to date. One of them is
they haven't changed the Public Services Act, the framework that
actually Chrisshipkins was responsible for, and that you actually can't
get rid of people. I know that a lot of

(46:57):
listeners to this podcast that would employ senior management teams,
would you know that there must be a lot of
people that are marginal but you know, or cost a
year's salary to get rid of them. It's even worse
in government because as a minister you can't even decide
to get rid of them. Look at this fudge that's
just been done last week with Andrew Costa. You know

(47:18):
very clear, you know, I mean putting aside the hypocrisy
of him going on the front page of the Herald saying, well,
someone fear I was politicized. This is the most political
police commissioner we've had in my lifetime, and yet in
order to get rid of them, they had to give
him a cushy job within the state sector to move
him sideways. You cannot expect the sort of reform and

(47:41):
change the direction that the Cabinet are talking about unless
you're able to move people on. And I think that
an area we're going to be pushing for over the
next twelve months is not just in the public sector,
but I think it's possibly a big driver of our
poor productivity is the ability to move even senior people on.

Speaker 2 (48:03):
I think that's an issue across spectrum. It's not limited
to government exactly. You know, it is difficult. You know
sometimes I've been in a position where we've had to
let people go and and the hoops that you have
to jump through.

Speaker 3 (48:18):
I often feel.

Speaker 2 (48:21):
A supportive of making sure people get a fair hearing,
but I do think we have slipped, many of our
managers have slipped into that process taking longer.

Speaker 3 (48:32):
Than it needs to take. You've talked about health and education.

Speaker 2 (48:35):
You just touched on on the police, but crime crime
was probably the other one. Of the big three going
into the last election. How do you think we're doing on.

Speaker 1 (48:46):
That, Well, it's pretty mixed. It seems that feels better. Yeah,
well we're we're obviously sitting here in Auckland, CBD and
I go to Wellington most weeks. As I mentioned that,
the Wellington officers lean's pretty young and I lived in
Wellington I think for twelve maybe fifteen years, and I

(49:09):
never worried about crime. All my young guys and girls
in their twenties worry about crime and walking home from
Courtney Place in a way that I never did. Auckland. Yeah,
it's terrible. I mean we were up on Queen Street,
which Work Street and Queen Street now we're down here.
It is it is something that makes me deeply embarrassed,

(49:31):
frankly that to reist see what we see and the
drunken and offensiveness, the homelessness. It's not the New Zealand
I grew up in and it's something that really motivates
me in terms of crime itself. Is out we'd consider
that what we'd call outside our wheelhouse. Yes, so if
there's waste within the police and they do a lot

(49:53):
of sort of virtue signaling, stuff. The Free Speech Union
of course, engages regularly with the police because unfortunately, again
mister Costa, more and more the New Zealand police force
enforcing the law as that like it to be in
relation to hate speech and things like that, not what
it actually is, and that's a cause for real concern.

Speaker 2 (50:17):
Well, let's hope that the new government, who I think
have actually started to improve the outcomes on crime. Let's
hope they keep going. And as you say, the three
year term is short and they got to get a
move on, but they are sending some pretty good signals.

Speaker 1 (50:34):
Where with.

Speaker 2 (50:35):
Jordan Williams, founder of the Taxpayers Union, will be back
in a moment.

Speaker 3 (50:50):
Jordan, I want to talk about your leadership activities. We
talked about your time at school.

Speaker 2 (50:59):
Do you remember your earliest memory of taking on a
leadership role with something that you cared about? Did you
stick up for somebody at school or anything like that.

Speaker 1 (51:08):
Yeah, I was always the I mean again embarrassingly as
a student broad across the Europe and all those nerdy things.
It was probably the point in which I really started
enjoying school was about the time I started young enterprise
and you notwithstand we didn't actually have Young Enterprise as
a it's actually this is classic me. Actually we didn't

(51:30):
have a Young Enterprise as a class, so we just
did it anyway outside of school, and we ended up
winning a national award for the particular project. That was
probably the first sort of formal leadership thing I'd done
where it was sort of recognized of the leadership role.
As I say, we were the only the only team
in Hawks Bay that didn't actually have a teacher allocated.

(51:51):
We still went on and won a national.

Speaker 3 (51:52):
Win and you still did it. Good stuff.

Speaker 2 (51:54):
That Young Enterprise scheme, you know in twenty seven podcasts,
I don't think that's been mentioned.

Speaker 1 (52:02):
And I'm amazed.

Speaker 3 (52:03):
It's an incredible thing for young people.

Speaker 2 (52:08):
Going in the sixth and seventh form to give them
a little bit of commercial experience. I mentored a couple
of groups a number of years ago in Young Enterprise,
and I think it's a fantastic scheme.

Speaker 3 (52:19):
Does it still go?

Speaker 1 (52:20):
Yes, it does. It's a little bit more formalized though
in that it's sort of been broad in so it's
the curricular and I worry it's a bit like one
of the great things about Young Enterprize is it is
not fast and loose, but it's sort of unstructured learning.

Speaker 3 (52:35):
It used to be outside the system.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
Yeah yeah, whereas I think it's a lot more sort
of formalized now and I wonder whether you quite get that.
You get a value out of it, but it might
be a little bit different.

Speaker 3 (52:44):
Yeah sure. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (52:46):
What's been the biggest challenge in your career so far?
You're still a young fella.

Speaker 1 (52:52):
Ah, the transition, which I've enjoyed because it puts everything
in perspective, the transition to becoming a parent. We simply
have LEAs hours in the day, you know. I've obviously
got a couple of businesses. I run the Taxpayers Union,
and I'm involved in a couple of other purpose base
not for profits and then of course World tax Payers.
I mean, it's it's like the life adjustment to having

(53:16):
your fingers in so many pies and with figuring out
you know, what is the what not. It's not just
the urgent, which is the nature of all these organizations,
is you constantly pulled to urgent things. It's making sure
the important gets done.

Speaker 3 (53:29):
Yep. Well, you need to read the chapter in my
book on work life balance.

Speaker 1 (53:35):
I think now that you've said that my wife's going
to insist I do.

Speaker 2 (53:40):
Have. You've been surrounded by leading figures for a lot
of your career. Are there any any role models that
really stand out?

Speaker 1 (53:48):
Yeah, I mean that I've been extremely lucky in that area.
It's it's again, this has been in mind because John Bishop,
my founding chair, and he was a mentor for me
for a long time. Chris Bishop's dad passed away the
week before last. Obviously Steven, but you know, Don Brash

(54:08):
is a family, family friend, and that was one of
the reasons I sort of in my formative years I
got pulled towards the left and the greens because of
ge and pulled towards the center right on because of
the dumbing down what I perceived as the dumbing down
and the education system. I've got my current chair, Ruth Richardson,
a former lot Laura Qubiac, who used to head the

(54:29):
Zealand Institute of Economic Research, Barry Saunders, who is just
like John as an institution in Wellington. Been extremely lucky
Ruth Richardson at the moment my current chair, who is
I mean, I have a I sort of reject the
Institute of Director's approach to not for profit governance, I

(54:50):
think it serves New Zealand poorly. And I really embrace
the American concept of stewardship. For what is the role
of a board member for a not for profit? I
think governance is far too narrow. It's it's stewardship. And
one of my former chairs I over heard him speaking
to actually a former mentor, the former head of will

(55:11):
Taxpayers and said, you know, what do you what do
you see your role as chair of something like the
Taxpayers Union, because it's pretty unique. And she said, my
role is a shoulder to Jordan, to cry on the
strategic sounding board, someone to celebrate success with, and someone
to hold him to account. And I thought that's such
a good encapsulation of what a and it's I've tried

(55:34):
to apply that when I've cheered the Free Speech Union
and that chief executive. But actually coming back earlier, Mum's
probably where I got the political bug from. And she
had three businesses as well as being on both the
regional and the district council. You know, as I say,

(55:55):
the acorn doesn't fall far from the tree.

Speaker 3 (55:58):
So what's your best skill?

Speaker 2 (55:59):
Having having been been taught by the who's who of
the political world.

Speaker 3 (56:04):
You must be good at something.

Speaker 1 (56:06):
My old graphic design Zigner, she worked for me for
ten years, absolute hard, absolute Marxist, like neo Marxist. Tree
said that once that my superpower is pulling to people together, right,
and you know that the and I've enjoy doing it,
and I come back to the Free speech Union will

(56:28):
be something I'm particularly proud of because we pulled that together.
That she pulled it together over a weekend. But I
now probably spent an hour a month on that file.
And yet it is absolutely going gangbusters. And isn't that
sort of in the I mean, the thing that the
insecurity I have is I'm not driven by money. You know,

(56:52):
I have a business, but I all ninety five percent
of the work I agree with yes, and it's the
vast majority of the clients are this is digital marketing
company are not for profits. And nessing my head read
that I'm not driven by the financial motive. Yet maybe

(57:12):
that will come when I have forty It.

Speaker 3 (57:14):
Might come as you start paying school fees for those kids.

Speaker 1 (57:16):
Maybe, But I mean, on the other hand, I remind
the staff, you know that that our burn rate at
the moment is about forty five k a week, and
so it's you know, it's a lot of money as
far as Union is not a small organization, you know.
But on the on the other hand, we get paid
to complain about the government. Now most people do that

(57:38):
for free. Aren't we lucky? I mean we get up.
I get up in the morning and drive to work
and fight for what I believe in. That is such
a privilege.

Speaker 3 (57:49):
Having talked about what you'll get good at, what do
you admire in others?

Speaker 1 (57:56):
I admire people that particularly have had different have been
successful in different areas of your life and and all careers.
I mentioned Lauria Kuback earlier. Here's a guy who was
C suite in British Telecom and BP came back to
New Zealand headed up ends at IAR for I think

(58:18):
about a decade and now owns half of a or
owns a part of a very high tech, small run
niche manufacturing electronics company and techaniny that literally make black
boxes for golf stream and satellites for SpaceX. I respect that,

(58:39):
and that maybe forty I always joked that I'm a
year away from leaving. I always kid myself that I am.
But for people that have managed to do quite different
careers and been successful at it. I really really admire
that also, the self confidence of people that are self made.

(59:00):
There's the perception is that the Taxpayers Union's large donors
are the accountants and the law and the professionals, and
not just the Taxpayers Union. It's the same with center
right groups all around the world. Almost without exception, our
largest donors are medium sized, self made entrepreneurs nearing retirement.

(59:22):
And it's it's not second very seldom is it second
generation money.

Speaker 2 (59:26):
It's first generation, and it's people give it deciding to
give back.

Speaker 1 (59:31):
My working theory is is that you understand the cost
of government when you've been at when you've had your
hands on the tools.

Speaker 3 (59:37):
I think you understand the cost of anything.

Speaker 2 (59:39):
Yeah, when you've had to run a business, you've been
You see plenty of politicians up close.

Speaker 3 (59:45):
What separates the good ones from those who aren't so good?

Speaker 2 (59:51):
Uh?

Speaker 1 (59:53):
I'm a great believer in doing something outside of politics. Notwithstanding,
you know, I've always been pretty suspicious of political apparatics
that have gone into Parliament as they trip over the
evanonbilical cord. The You know that it worries me that
business people sometimes go into politics and think that public

(01:00:16):
policy or government is like business, that they are skilled
and talent and therefore they can do deals, whereas public
policy that's not a good it's not a good mix.
So I remember speaking at length to Christopher Luxan on
this one. He was the local government spokesperson. Is you
had this idea of regional deals and infrastructure deals and
I said, look, that might work for you, but have

(01:00:38):
you met the officials at d i A. Do you
know the caliber of people or or whoever the next
minister is going to be. It's something that center right
or Tory parties around the world that sort of trick
they can fall into public policy. It's it's you know
that it requires a slightly different analytical framework. So that's

(01:01:00):
what I'm really looking for. And the other one is, look,
the people that tend to do well in pols are
people that have personally faced you know, hardship and pick
themselves up. That's there's a lot of One of the
really interesting correlation they read a book called Why we

(01:01:20):
get the Wrong Politicians out of the UK is as
early as the eighties there was a huge disproportionate number
of politicians from one parent homes right, which from the
eighth you think of their generation is really a head
of the curve.

Speaker 2 (01:01:38):
Which goes back to your comment about people having a
breadth of experiences.

Speaker 1 (01:01:42):
Yeah, I mean it's also you've got to be kind
of nuts to put up with the with the proverbial
you have to put up with as a politician. It's
one of the main mets out of the staff that
you know is think tankers. You know, we're probably a
little bit nuts too for the careers that we've picked,
but the differences as we've we've got to strive to
be self aware.

Speaker 3 (01:02:01):
Absolutely well, Jordan Williams. Finally, the million dollar question.

Speaker 2 (01:02:06):
You sit so close to all these politicians and you
see what they do every day or most days.

Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
If you could be the prime minister for a day,
what's the one thing you'd like to do.

Speaker 1 (01:02:15):
I don't know whether people say this is serious or
the joke, because've already said my serious one, which is
Arima reform, and that's all roads, All roads lead back
to that. So maybe I should give you a tongue
in cheek one, which is I remember saying to Lux
and look, no one's going to elect as prime minister
the guy who is so ampty intellectual. He banned newspapers

(01:02:35):
from the Coro lounge. Maybe just bring back those newspapers
to the Coral Lounge and then maybe that's maybe that
would be make New Zealand better place.

Speaker 3 (01:02:43):
But no, am RMA reform is the one.

Speaker 2 (01:02:45):
Well. Jordan Williams, the one of the founders, co founder
of the Taxpayers Union, it's been a very rapid hour.
Thank you so much for joining us on leaders getting coffee,
and thank you for what you do on behalf of
those of us who pay taxes and rates. Thank you
to you and your team for what you do on
our behalf. I suspect at times it's not particularly glamorous

(01:03:07):
and it probably comes with its fair share of confrontation,
and so you have to be a certain breed to
take this on.

Speaker 3 (01:03:13):
And we've heard a little bit about.

Speaker 2 (01:03:15):
That backhanded compliment. Then about that breed, Well, no, it
is a compliment. It is a compliment. I for one,
would not take it on. We've been fortunate enough to
get some insight into those challenges during the last hour
and for that I thank you very much, so thanks
for joining us.

Speaker 1 (01:03:30):
Thank you bruth.

Speaker 2 (01:03:32):
Finally, folks, my leadership tip of the week as is
so often the case, I try to stay true to
the theme of the day, and this time it's more
a quote than a leadership tip, and it's about government
spending and it comes from Margaret Thatcher, also Nane as
the Iron Lady, who was the Prime Minister of the
UK from nineteen seventy nine to nineteen ninety.

Speaker 3 (01:03:51):
It was a bit controversial at the time and not
everybody agrees with it, but I quite like it.

Speaker 2 (01:03:55):
It goes like this, if the state wishes to spend more,
it can do so only by borrowing or by taxing
you more. It is no good thinking that someone else
will pay that someone else's you. There is no such
thing is public money. There is only taxpayers money. If
only every politician understood that, we would all be that
little bit richer.

Speaker 3 (01:04:14):
That's it. We're done for another week.

Speaker 2 (01:04:16):
Thanks again for joining us on leaders Getting Coffee Episode
twenty seven with our guest, co founder of the Taxpayers Union,
Jordan Williams. As always, if you have any feedback, please
get in touch at info at leaders Getting Coffee at
dot com. Remember our favorite charities Bike for Blokes dot
Coto NZ and we will look forward to seeing you
again soon. With another great leadership story. In the meantime,

(01:04:38):
have a great couple of weeks, and we'll catch you
next time.