July 17, 2024 • 42 mins
ACT leader, MP for Epsom and Associate Finance Minister - amongst other portfolios - David Seymour shares his best and worst money stories with Liam Dann.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Hi, I'm Liam Dan, New Zealand Herald Business Editor at
Large and welcome to this episode of Money Talks. This
is a podcast about money, but we're not going to
tell you how to get rich, and we're not going
to try and pick the next interest rate move. In
this series, I'll be talking to interesting New Zealanders about
how money has shaped their lives and what they've learned
(00:27):
over the years. For today's podcast, I'm joined by leader
of the Act Party, the MP for EPSOM, and the
Associate Finance Minister David Seymour Cuta.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
David, Welcome to Money Talk and thanks for having me. Hey.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Look, yeah, so one thing I want to clarify here
is that when we have politicians on Money Talks, we're
not going to get deep into fiscal policy or anything.
So you're safe regard. I know you probably wouldn't mind.
If you have got any big announcements, feel free to
make them. But really this is about going back and
getting into your relationship with money and all that sort
(01:00):
of stuff. So you know, if I can jump back,
what would be your first memories of having your own money?
Do you recall having it in your hand or your
pocket as a young child.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I have a very strange memory of it having a
two dollar note, and I must have been I don't know,
four or five six, and I lost the thing and
I was so devastated. I couldn't believe it.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Was probably big money back then.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Well well look I just start talking about some of
the management of inflations. But no, no it was. And
so I just remember that real panic it have lost
the two dollar note. It was a purple thing with
a big picture of on them.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, but they didn't last. I mean, I'm guessing that
you're born in the eighties, so its late eighties.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Maybe eighty three, so it was long before the coins
came in. Well that's another thing I remember really clearly
because nineteen ninety was an exciting time. We had the
Expo and it was the Sesqui Centenary of retreating and
the new money and the plastic which you could put
through the wash.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
Yeah. Yeah, So where were you growing up at that point?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
So I was in Fargray, So my dad's families from
the mun Or two. He grew up in Fielding. My
mum was born in Tekopuru, where a hugely disproportionate number
of New Zealanders have been born and her family moved
over to Parade, So we set it all there in
the eighties.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Sure, And would you describe it as a fairly middle
class family A note. I think in the bio that
you went to a desol one intermediate, you know, it
was it sort of a yeah, I mean it was.
It was a whole mix of things. And you get
that in a small provincial city, so you know, it's
not like the country where you sort of isolated in
(02:43):
a very small community, or a really big city which
has sort of sorted into lots of different communities, rich
and poor and so on. It's a provincial city where
everyone's beside everybody. So I went to in a suburb
which had you know, it's pretty idyllic. It was a
new subdivision. Everyone could ride their bikes in a colder sack.
(03:04):
And also it was on the fringe of the city,
so you'd also go on the bush and build huts.
Went to a primary school that still had an egg
day because it had traditionally been out in the country,
and then went intermediate across town that was a totally
different kettle of fish. So in many ways that that
was sort of a.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Real introduction to the world because he realized that not
everything was like this sort of city fringe, sort of
a suburb, sort of a country type suburban paradise. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Yeah, I mean did you have pocket money growing up?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Yeah? I used to get two bucks a week for
this was and they were coined, so this must have
been after I lost the note. But I used to
get two bucks a week for opening the emptying the dishwasher,
and also used to get two bucks for mowing my
grandparents pretty big backyard. So that was I hate to
(04:02):
think about what the labor inspectors would say about that.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yeah, yeah, were the things that you were spending it
on saving for or were you a savor or just
go straight to the dairy? Well.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
I sort of was sort of sporadic, and it sort
of repeated throughout my life that you'd be really disciplined
for a while, and yeah, maybe you get up to
you know, thirty or forty bucks and you think you're rich,
but then you sort of want to buy a model
car or toy or something and then you sort of
blew it or so no, I suspect probably you know,
(04:32):
fifty cent mixed from the dairy.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's a universal theme. Almost amongst
anyone I've spoken to on this is running down to
the dairy in New Zealand. Yeah. So from there, you know,
we the part time jobs. Did you deliver papers or
any of that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
No, I wanted a paper run. But the thing that
thwarted me for most of my time was I went
to boarding school in Auckland, So I tried to get
a job at McDonald's in various places, but they'd always say, well,
you're going to bugger off in two weeks, so why
would we train you? Right? Yeah, yeah, because I didn't
really appreciate it at that time. But for a business,
(05:09):
you actually end up sort of sinking a lot into
a person until they're actually useful to you. And if
they're going to be gone in a few weeks, that's
not going to work out. So pretty limited. My first
job was at TDC Sawmills, Tony Davies Collie. I actually
saw Tony up in fun at Ages yesterday.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
So this was a summer job, was it.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yep? This was after I finished finished high school, finished
sixth form, went off to Yuni and it was tough.
We're doing sixty hours a week and I remember, for
some reason me and my mate from school. We started
at seven for the first month we were starting out,
but actually the sawmill opened at six and when we
transferred to starting we discovered that everyone else was being
(05:50):
given a fresh pair of gloves every morning. Well, which
was just an unbelievable relief.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah, so you went up to board in school at
Ukland Grammar.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Is that right?
Speaker 1 (06:01):
I mean, was that because it was just it wasn't
the opportunity there in the high school or you know,
was there a driver for you to get there? Did
you have a passion for sort of getting out of
Hong today?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, I mean, you know, it's mostly my parents at
that time. Some of their friends were sending their kids
out of and I know at that time there was
a bit of debate about, you know what, what's the
merits of the schools here versus there? But I certainly
found it life changing that. You know, a couple of
things happened. One is I met Sir Edmund Hillary in
(06:33):
my first couple of months. And one of the reasons
I think we need a four lane road up north
is that when you grow up in a place like that,
you can feel like the world's a long way away.
I remember a story someone that made the North and
Reps that I knew under fourteens or under twelves. I
did not make the North and Reps or any other
(06:54):
representative sports team. I can assure you.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
Did you play sports?
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Oh yeah, absolutely, it's not very well. I was. My
main position was left right out. And you know there's
a kid from up north came down to play Auckland
sat in a motel in Saint Mary's Bay and he
sat up the whole night just staring at the harbor
Bridge because he couldn't believe it, and he's seen nothing
like it, hadn't seen an escalator an elevator before. So
you know, cerddainly coming to the big smoke and meeting
(07:19):
famous people, it suddenly changed how you looked at what
was possible.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Yeah, I mean at school, what were you what were
your passions? What were the subjects that you kind of
fell naturally into?
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Rugby? I love playing rugby. I wish I could do
it again. But it's a bit like some of your
columns of at the stage where you feel a bit creaky.
You're not sure that you're more likely to get injured
and less likely to recover. Yeah, So despite having limited talents.
So I loved playing rugby. Did you play mostly open side? Thinker? Well,
(07:53):
I was a lock, Yes, I was. Actually people can't
believe I was a lot, but I am actually tall
for my weight.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Yeah. Yeah, well I was a hooker, which is also
people in a team that was not very good, but
which I actually worked out. I probably probably probably could
have played Chris Luxeon's team, like you know, he was
third level.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Okay, were there any ball people on the other they already.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
Got to hear then, I don't know. But apart from
the rugby years, it was it. I mean, you winded
engineering and philosophy right at university. I guess one one's
right in the thick of the arts and one is
very practical. Was that because you you enjoyed both sides
of that sort of academic world.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Yeah, I just I just wanted a bit of insurance.
I mean, I wanted to do engineering partly because my
family has been in that business for several generations. And
I think, you know, coming out of a good form
class at a school like Grammar, there's a lot of
you know, I was useless at English, so I want
to do law, and I didn't quite think I'd make
(08:53):
ned school so and I was useless at drawing, so
that was architecture gone. So that really left engineering. And
so you had a bit of pressure to do something
like that, plus the family connection to it. But I
just felt like I wanted an outlet or something else.
So I wanted to hedge my bets, not put all
the eggs in the same basket, et cetera, and philosophy
(09:15):
sort of seemed like the way to go. I actually
started off doing a couple of education paperscuse I wanted
to be a teacher, and I was quickly persuaded that,
you know, the kind of highly ideological education that's given
as part of initial teacher education is not preparing people
for the classroom. And that's something, Funnily enough, twenty years
(09:36):
later they still, well, the government's moving on that now, but.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
You're up against I mean and too much policy, but
up against that ideological force in the teacher unions.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
And yep, well, and I look, I think there's been
a strong belief for a long time that if you
got the cap and gown photo, you'd made it, and
so successive governments have made it much easier to get
the cap and gown photo kept the fees at the UNI,
They've up ramped up the subsidies. I've taken the interest
off the loans while you're studying then forever, And as
a result, lots more people get their picture with the
(10:07):
cap and gown. But I'm not sure that the level
of skill and usefulness is there. And I suspect that, actually,
if you look at how they do it in places
like Germany, that there's a place for more learning on
the job. But that's a whole other rabbitue.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
Yeah, sure, Yeah. Philosophy though, do you have a favorite
philosopher or favorite school? Oh?
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah, Look, I'm a big Paperian. I think what Popper
did in the Philosophy of Knowledge was really really powerful.
And the short, short summary is that, you know, you
have your skeptics who believe it's impossible to know anything
with certainty, your dogmatists who believe that you can know
things with certainty, and neither of them are particularly satisfying.
(10:52):
You know, Popper's I guess a view of critical rationalism
or falsification that well, look, you probably never get to
absolute truth, but you can have a hypothesis that you
are prepared to abandon if the facts change. Your mind.
That to me seemed to be the most civilized way
(11:14):
to think about the world, and it is the basis
of science, or has been the basis of scientific progress
for a long time. I think it's under enormous attack.
I saw the latest Green MP has a CV where
he has done research quote unquote attacking Western empiricism. And
(11:40):
I don't think that observing the world you see and
testing that against a hypothesis is a Western thing. No,
it's a method that's available to all people and appears
to advance knowledge and solve problems and extend people's lives
with better medicine and so on, much better than anything
else that any humans have tried. But my point is
(12:01):
that you know, when you've got people taking serious papers
doing research that is based on attacking the whole method
of hypothesizing and observing cheaper, that that whole methodology that's
done so well for us with science and reason for
a couple of centuries now is really under attack.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
I guess it goes to the engineering a bit too,
because how do we're building a bridge if you're not going.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
To Yeah, and look, this postmodern view is that you know,
we all have lived experience and we all have our
view of the world and they're equally valid, And if
you criticize someone's worldview, then you know you're actually, you know,
attacking them. Well, that doesn't cut it in engineering. I mean,
if you're an electrical engineer, you get it wrong, people
(12:46):
get electrocuted, or your signal just doesn't arrive or isn't
properly decoded. So the way that postmodernism has made all
academia sort of relativist and based on the perspective of
the I think is nuts and it's doing huge harm
because it makes it very difficult for us to talk
(13:06):
to each other.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
It sounds like you're kind of quite skeptical of ideology.
You probably get accused of being ideological from them by
the left because they see you as being on the
right or neoliberal or whatever. I mean, how do you
feel about the idea of ideology, the idea that your
viewers near? You know, if you take it to economics,
you've got your canes and your freedmen. And where do
(13:28):
you sit on those sort of schools of ideological thought.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
Well, I mean, you've got to remember that Milton Friedman
and Anna Schwartz, you know, they won the Nobel Prize
for examining the history of monetary policy in the US,
and they demonstrated that their hypothesis that inflation is always
and everywhere a monetary phenomenon fits the data that it
(13:54):
actually existed in reality better than Whatkines had put forward.
Kines himself said, when the facts change or change my mind,
Cain himself had had Crow up with a theory that
fit the data better than anyone else up to that point.
So and you know, since then we've had modern monetary theory.
And now you don't hear them very much about that
after the last through or three years, so.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Unfortunately, but well, sorry to hear it.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
But you know, the point is, on any issue, you
can actually take that basic preparian method that there is
a real world that we can all join hands and
problem solve through it. That there's a universal humanity and
we all have the same chances and choices to work
through the world. That works. Once you get into this postmodernism,
(14:38):
I have lived experience. I'm writing from an X Y
Z perspective, and you know, if you attack my view
then you're wrong, and that is nuts. And the worst
example of it is, you know, there's actually people in
universities around the world who will seriously argue that the
Western scientific tradition is I guess, angled against people who
(15:00):
are obese. And when you say, well, actually, you know,
medicine has made discoveries that you know, being overweight can
lead to correlate with a number of heart conditions and
other health problems, they say, oh, well, that's just an
oppressive regime of thought that doesn't apply to me. That's
what this relativism means at its most absurd but real example.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
Let me bring it back to where you were coming
through and how you got onto the political side of it.
I mean, I see where you're coming from, but you know,
like at the time you were coming through, it hadn't
sort of switched around so much. There was I guess
there was a sense when I was coming through anyway,
that there was a sort of an absolutist conservative view
that dominated the world. And this was you know, in
those days the postmodernism woke, whatever you want to call it.
(15:49):
They were the underdogs. They're coming through. It's sort of
it's sort of flipped around. And why I'm interested is
because often young people and students in particular tend to
be more on that rebellious coming from the left side
of it, and it seems like you're attracted quite early
to a more conservative outlook. I mean, is that fair?
Speaker 2 (16:11):
No, I mean there might be a bigger age gap
between us, is obvious from your appearance. But certainly the
years I was at the University of Auckland from one
to six, there was a real, uh, you know what
I regarded as a heavy bias towards the postmodernest way
(16:33):
of thinking. You certainly didn't get you know, perhaps outside
the economics department where I tutored for for a semester,
you didn't get people coming out defending you know what
I would regard as the sort of neoliberal view of
the world. We were as act on campus as I
(16:55):
was a member of then we were countercultural.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Right, Yeah, probably about ten years older than you, but
you know, you could see that coming. But certainly, say,
if you think of countercultural in the sixties and seventies,
it was pushing back against what it saw as you know,
the industrial military complex, all that sort of conservatism of
the fifties. But you felt coming through that already you
were there was a sense of, you know, where the
(17:20):
action was in politics was more to the right or
how do you describe it, you know, because I get
you know, your conservative, neoliberal, right wing. You know, people
use all these labels, do you have a.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yeah, they do, but no, I mean, I think that
that philosophical view of being prepared to hypothesize and tests
against the evidence is important. I've changed what might about
things over the years, but I think it's also important
not to pigeonhole people, because sometimes a person can be,
you know, on the same side as you on one issue,
but against you on others. So for example, I mean,
(17:51):
I'm known for having legalized euth in Asia, you know,
and that is a socially liberal cause it's about individual choice,
opposed by a lot of the religious establishment quite vehemently.
I was one of twenty MPs that voted for abortion
to be decriminalized, but actually go even further, to be
(18:12):
between a woman and a doctor, you know, at any time,
not to have this kind of halfway house that actually eventuated,
but which still better than what we had. But so,
you know, I'm a liberal or that. On free speech,
I almost an absolutist. I think you should have the
right to say what you like. You certainly shouldn't be
corralled by some sort of you know, censor, a human
(18:36):
rights commissioner, someone that can haul you and say you
offended someone, you're in big trouble and lock you up.
I'm posed to that. But equally, I look at the
fact that I, as a minister now am responsible as
a fifty percent shareholder in twenty eight different state owned enterprises,
Crown Research inst Should your four companies and so on,
(18:56):
and I think this is nuts. You know, I don't
believe it's possible for a politician to have that level
of oversight as a shareholder on behalf of five million people.
And there's very good evidence that private and privatized firms
do better. The soees that we have have made a
very poor return on equity, and I don't think we
(19:17):
should own those now the current government policy I hasten
to add us that we will continue own, but within
the government I continue to editate we shouldn't and the
facts are that. You know, what do you say to
someone who believes in privatization, a woman's right to choose
euthanasia and free speech.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
Yeah, liberal is a complicated word these days right now.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Well, I'm a liberal in the classical and consistent sense
of it that I believe you should be able to
do it, you like, as long as you're not arming
anyone else.
Speaker 1 (19:42):
Yeah, I mean I sort of lived my life along
those lines. But then I'm sort of conscious that as
a relatively lazy person or whatever.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
I sometimes yourself aware.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
But the government involvement is the government making me put
into KEYI Saver, making me do some things that actually
are good for me. Guess what I'm getting out. I
had a good chat to Sir Roger Douglas here and he,
you know, takes it to extreme that probably isn't politically
viable now around what you do with welfare payment and
health system and things like that. But what do you
do with the people who aren't And I'll use myself,
(20:14):
but you know, who aren't up to making those choices
and decisions. That's where the government comes in, right.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Well again, go back to the data. So the guy
I find most interesting on KEIWI savers David Laws, who says, look,
you know, yes, people can point to a big wad
of cash and their key WE Saver account. What they
can't point to is that maybe they've kept their credit
card running longer than they would have otherwise. Maybe they've
paid off their mortgage slower than they would have otherwise.
Maybe they've you know, neglected, or they've pulled back from
(20:44):
investing in other things that they might have otherwise. So
at the end of the day, once you take out
the taxpayer contribution to your KEII saver, it hasn't actually
increased your saving at all. So I just again to
be ideological, you can look at what's what's been the
outcome of this particular.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
I mean, there's always opportunity cost, but I would I
would say, well, even myself, it's like, I'm glad it's
there because I might not. I probably wouldn't have invested
it was they probably would have spent it on records.
Speaker 2 (21:09):
Well, I mean, you know, but what I'm telling is
you've you've got someone who has devoted a lot of
their time and has considerable expertise on the subject, and
they've they've studied it and they've recorded their observations. I mean,
this is a scientific method, right, and they've said that
the actually when you when it's all said and done,
the things you're conscious of the things you're not conscious of,
(21:29):
your net saving levels is no different.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Yeah, So you wouldn't support compulsory super No, one doesn't
any part of it, to be fair. But when you
look at Australia four point eight trillion dollars there, they're
a wealthy country and their financial markets they've got their hummer.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
So that's just unpack that. I mean, first of all,
on the compulsion. So I've had a few people lately,
given the high interest rates and the tough situation we face,
they're saying, look, I'm getting a hammered up the wazoo
on my mortgage interest, far more mortgage interest than my
keywisavers returning why can't I'm actually losing money because I
can't take the principle out of my keivsaver and reduce
my mortgage. That's the kind of thing that people are
(22:09):
forced to do in a system of compulsion, and I
think that's wrong. Then you look at Australia. It's absolutely
true that Australia has the super funds, but you're not
asking what's the counter factual if they hadn't had compulsion,
would Australian savings rates be any different? Well, evidence was
actually around the world. If you talk to I'm going
(22:30):
to forget his name Michael Littlewood at the University of
Aalknings actually doesn't make a huge difference how much compulsion
there is, savings rates influenced by other factors. So again
everyone points to Australia, but you got to ask yourself,
what's the counter factual if they didn't have that compulsion,
suspect they would have saved just as much.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Okay, I want to jump back to career a little bit.
You come out of university, you briefly an engineering job.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Yep, yepy. It was a pretty rough time. So I
got a job, a three month contract and in my
second month the project I was working on was canceled.
It was actually ericson doing fiber opt at cables being
blown with compressed ear through Vector's channels. So this was
(23:16):
fiber to the home before there was. But it was
very cool stuff and you know, just to ahead of
the curve a year while they were playing regulatory trick
and with them it was a very messy thing anyway,
Needless to say, one of the first people to go
was their twenty one year old they'd just hired as
well see you later. So that was that was the
end of that contract. But at that time my Mum
(23:36):
had become very ill. So I returned to fang Ray
and started working for my what was then my grandfather's company.
While we sort of, you know, Mum sort of convalesse there.
She passed. Now I thought, what the hell do I do?
I got off at a job in Canada, so I left, and.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
You're in Canada, basically a shorthand. And it's completely fair,
but that you're kind of word looking for think tanks
that maybe along the long lines of the New Zealand
initiative that kind.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
Of be very similar to the interative. And it was
it was like it was a wonderful thing because first
of all, you know, go off and find a fed
some time in Auckland. Suddenly you're in a place that
you know actually has flights to Chicago, a place that
you just couldn't even think of going to.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
But that was through the I mean, that wasn't through engineering.
That was through maybe the political stuff you were doing
around the sides and having a philosophy degree and knowing
they could you could.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
Well, it was actually through Roger Douglas because Canada went
broke in the early nineties and they formed these taxpayers
federations and then they got Roger Douglas to come and
tell them what they thought they should do, because New
Zealand had been through a similar problem that Canada was
then in, and so Roger maintained a connection with these
(24:50):
Canadian think tanks, and so he was my my connection
to them well twenty years almost twenty years later, so
that that's how that happened. I effectively did like a
postgraduate degree. I mean I learned how to do a
media interview or try read a lot more philosophers and economists,
wrote newspaper op eds and you know, policy papers such
(25:13):
as they were for the think tanks. So it was
if you were going to do what I eventually end
up doing, it was it was like a sort of
a perfect sort of it was like a learn while
you study free. In fact they paid me post grad degree.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Yeah, and getting into all that political action, I guess
in a Canadian way.
Speaker 2 (25:33):
Yeah, Well, I think about the think tanks said, you know,
they're quite proud of not dirtying themselves with politics. It's
always a debate or should you get involved in actual politics.
So well it wasn't. It was policy rather than politics.
And I think a lot of people in politics today
surprising how little they know about policy and how unimportant
it is to them.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Yeah, yeah, and look, I don't want to harp on
about the fact, but because we had Sir Roger here
and he made some comments and he made before the
election last year in a couple of places which were
kind of dismissive of all the parties, and part of that,
I guess was a sense that he feels that act
now has gone to centrist or mainstream. I just wondered
(26:14):
what you thought of those comments, you know, are you
still pushing for those very much those you know? Like
I guess, I guess he is pushing a you know,
a very the flat tax and all that stuff that
maybe you just think that you couldn't sell.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
Or well, it's interesting. I was reading a political autobiography
of a guy called Peter mccardal, who's those fascinating guys.
He was in at least three different parties, he was
a minister. He actually went from being a minister to
a political staffer, which most people are far too proud
to do. So I read with interest and mccardal said,
(26:50):
Roger Douglas, without a doubt, is the most significant New
Zealand politician in the post war era, and I agree
with that. But a couple of things about Roger One
is he's always in a state of rebellion. So he
has bagged every political leader he's been a member of
since Norman Kirk, so I, you know, it would be
disappointed if he hadn't bagged me as the current act leader.
(27:13):
He bagged Rodney, he bagged Richard, and everyone bagged Long.
He has famously fell out forty years ago now, and
he also has been so significant historically because he's just
absolutely uncompromising. He knows what he believes needs to be
done and he just goes and does it. And so
(27:35):
very proud to be associated with him, proud to be
attacked by him, and totally understand why he says what
he says.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
Yeah, all right, coming back through early on, you got
you know, you come back to New Zealand. What was
the driver for coming back? I mean you could have
could have Presumably he had a career in Canada.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Well I did, and by that time I'd moved to Calgary,
I was I was working with Preston Manning, who people
describe as the best Prime minister can and I never
had he had started a party with one person kind
of familiar and got it up to be the official opposition.
So it's a bit of an inspiration and what Preston
was able to do with the Reform Party there, and
(28:13):
he was just a great mentor and he was running
a think tank there. I loved working for Presto, but
then I came back for my brothers and one of
my friend's weddings, two separate weddings, and basically at that
point John Banks had resigned X was really for all
(28:33):
intents and purposes over and I thought, well, if I
spend the year knocking on doors basically apologizing for everything
that's happened and asked them to give you another chance,
they might do it. So I did that. I knocked
on about fourteen thousand doors in the EPSOM Electric and
it was a useful experience for a bunch of reasons,
but mainly people said, yeah, okay, but don't let us down.
(28:54):
And that's been a lot of those conversations still stick
with me, so being the MP's always been my first job.
But also a style of politics, it's old fashion. It's
like what you learn about in forth form social studies
that basically people choose their representative to go and speak
and they're responsible for those people. That's that's sort of
(29:15):
that that was quite formative for me.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
Sure, I mean you're really associated with EPSOM. It has
a reputation for being you know, the seat that's being
part of a deal and all that sort of stuff.
But when you came back, did you you target at
EPSOM because you felt a connection? Did you live there?
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Is that?
Speaker 1 (29:30):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Well i'd live there for you or compared apart from
when I lived in Canada in farm Ra, when I've
lived in Auckland, I almost always lived in the EPSOM electorate.
I think I had a year down at the UNI hostel,
but other than that, i'd been on epsomite.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Yeah, and I think you had a reputation for being
a party leader who didn't own their own house. You
own your own house now.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
I do now. But it took me til those thirty
seven because I'd basically spent my life up to and
then on passion projects and traveling, so you know, being
a waiting for a think tank. Like I said, it
was a sort of a post grad degree and it
was free and in fact they paid me but not much.
I'd spent two years of my life in twenty eleven
and twenty fourteen basically taking the year off to campaign,
(30:17):
so that didn't help with the finances, and so you know,
it took me a few years in Parliament before I
got to at the stage where, like many people of
my generation, if you have a partner, it's doable. If
you don't have a partner, it's nearly impossible. And also
just add if you're someone who's a bit older who
(30:37):
doesn't own their house, lives very hard. So you know,
we've I think one of the most important things we
can do as a government is get back to the
stage where a generation can realistically build and own its
own home and have families at a younger age and
get on with life. Whereas at the moment I think
our dysfunctional housing market has actually bugged up many many
(30:59):
aspects of life in New Zealand.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
Yeah, it's interesting too much into policy, but the stuff
that Chris Biship's been talking about and coming from the
policy stuff in the last few weeks or months, it
seems like this government is prepared to talk about house
prices not going up or going down.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
You know, are you well they're going down as we speak.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
Yeah, yeah, they've been going down because you know the
cycle obviously, But the idea that we can really get
enough built that house prices go down is that something
you can live with as a as a party leader.
It used to be sort of a poison poison sort
of statement to suggest that house prices go down in
this country.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Look, I remember daw knocking in the twenty seventeen campaign
and people in the epsom A lecture were saying, yeah,
I've done well, but where are my kids going to live?
And I knew that the government was going to change
because people were so disappointed with where the housing market
was going. Now she twenty seventeen it was a paradise anyway,
housing affordability, labor came in, and rightly or wrongly, the
(32:00):
things that they did, such as Kiwi build, such as
kyeing Aura, I don't well, I don't think, I mean,
I know, they did not affect housing prices. What was
astonishing is that they banned foreign investors and then actually
shut the border for two years, which saw housing prices
go even higher, which I think probably finally put a
(32:22):
lie to the idea that it was about foreign demand.
And then, of course, you know, with rising interest rates,
and there's there's a real economic well I hesitate to
say collapse, but it's pretty bad. So you know, what
we now have the opportunity to do is to reset
and make it easier to build homes again.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
I mean, one thing that was surprising me about labors
where they talk about housing those they failed on the
Kiwi building, but they got the private sector during their
term built far more houses than happened under John Keyes government.
I mean, but they don't really like to take credit
for it.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
I guess yeah, I mean yes, and no, I mean
they built I mean I've always said nineteen seventy four
was the sort of healthy and year. I think there's
about forty five thousand houses consented. It was roughly the
same in twenty twenty two, if I remember right, I
think we beat it. I think it was the biggest
you might have built it. But of course New Zealand
twice the population. Yeah, yeah, of course, of course, But
I mean it was still you know.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
We've only just come back to the consent levels that
are nearing what we averaged through the John Key years
when you were in government.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Yeah. So definitely there is more private sector building going on.
But if you look at the New Zealand Initiative have
done good work on this. There's a certain number of
houses that just wear out every year, make it ten thousand.
There's a certain number of houses needed for population increase,
and there's also I would say a major shortage. That's
where people be living in motels and stuff before that
(33:49):
in cars and garages.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
So certainly had a big population increase years.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
So you know there's still needs to be fifty or
sixty thousand a year for the next decade, and that's
size of the challenge.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Look, I want to get into some quick fire money
talks questions. We ask everyone, what's the poorest you've ever been.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
I was a student, very very poor, basically literally jigging
under the seat of your car to see if you
go a buck that you can go across to the
bakery and buy a bigette.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
Were you a student loan guy? Did you wreck up
a student loan or yeah? You said you didn't really
have part time job as much except in the summer.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
Well when I was a student. That was by the
time I was a university student, that's different. I was
a warterproofer and in the end I got hired a
whole bunch of my mates ended up working for the
same guy who's now quite a strong political supporter of mine.
But no worked. I remember one week I did forty
hours and went to all my lectures. Yeah, so it
(34:54):
was different by the time I was a university student.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
Flip side of that question, I suppose is when you
finally got a bit of money in your pock what
was the most indulgent purchase you've ever made?
Speaker 2 (35:03):
Oh g, that's a great, great question. I think probably
in most of my twenties and thirties, I just traveled.
I mean I've been to about sixteen countries. I think
I've been to twenty eight American states, most of the
Canadian provinces, and I've been all over New Zealand. So
(35:23):
I feel really lucky that I've been able to travel
pretty freely through my life and see a lot of places.
Speaker 1 (35:28):
Sure. On the campaign trail, Christopher Luxen was asked about
his spend on groceries and he said sixty dollars and
got a bit of flag. I think he was talking
about his own, his own flat and Wellington, not the family.
But how's your grocery spend? Are you a big shopper?
Speaker 2 (35:45):
I think it's an unfair question because I don't know
what city I'm going to be in from day to day.
So that's where Christoph Luckxon got coot and what not
that I would give my colleagues advice in public, But
what I would have said is, look, I appreciate that
it's a very tough time getting groceries, but in all honesty,
the life that you have to lead to do well
(36:07):
at this job. You actually can't plan a weekly shop
because I've tried it and you end up throwing half
of it out because, as it turns out, you didn't
realize that you were going on the bus for a week,
and by the time you get up get back, you've
just got a whole lot of milk you've got to
tip down the sink and breed you've got to put
in the bin. So you know, fair enough.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Hey, do you do you buy a lot of tickets?
Speaker 2 (36:28):
No?
Speaker 1 (36:30):
Do you ever imagine winning lotto? No?
Speaker 2 (36:34):
I sometimes think about if I'd made better investment decisions
when I was younger, Right, yeah, yeah, if I'd realized
that houses in two thousand and four were actually a
real bargain, then maybe I'd be at a different place now.
Speaker 1 (36:48):
Yeah, I mean obviously, I mean, you know, probably not
to some people. But the kind of career you're in,
the question there is money important to you? Is it
a driver for you? Or is it just a byproducts success?
Speaker 2 (37:01):
To be really honest, you don't think about it a
lot because the job is all encompassing, it's highly public,
and you know, losing in politics is like losing and boxing.
It's not actually fun. You know, if you're a lawyer
and you don't do very well, then chances are there's
there's still a there's still a job somewhere for okay lawyers.
(37:23):
If you fail at this, you can't just go and
work down the road at a different parliament. Some people
end up doing that with a local council, which not
something fills me with with with joy. So you know,
you sort of you know, obviously you want to have
a plan in the background to there's a rapid fire,
isn't it to make sure that you know you're going
(37:43):
to be able to pay your bills and eventually pay
off your mortgage? But no, no, not not really.
Speaker 1 (37:48):
I mean, would you broadly say you're good with money?
You know when it comes to all that personal finance stuff,
without going into all the detail about you.
Speaker 2 (37:55):
I think I think you can. I think what I've
learned is you can change. So it's a game of
two half. So you know, in my twenties, like I say,
I mean, I took jobs that didn't pay as well
as I might have, you know, went out and and
you know, traveled endlessly, and you know, just had a
pretty good time really party through you know, most of
(38:15):
the two thousands. But you know, after that, I sort
of thought, well, shosh, you know I was going to
be pretty tragic. I carry on like this. I'm a
sixties so fair to start sending some foundations to grow older.
And so I've been you know, it's a game of
two halves. I really really changed tech a couple of
years after I was elected.
Speaker 1 (38:37):
Sure, look, this is a weird question to ask you
because it's it's a hypothetical question to ask everyone. You know,
if you were prime minister for a day, well that's
actually next week, that's gonna yeah, yeah, and and and
there's going to be a few more opportunities over the
rest of this term at least, and then then you're
going to be in the actually being prime minister. And
it's hard to work. But hypothetically, in an imaginary world
(39:00):
where we can make you all powerful leader of New
Zealand for a day, what would be the policy or
what is the big initiative that you would want to
focus on to really try and deal with the equity
issues and the social inequality in this country.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Well, changing the way that we regulate the use of
land and fund and finance infrastructure. You know, you solve
so many problems for everything from health from bad housing
and education, from kids getting moved from one school to
the next, to people aging in place, to people having
(39:37):
a sense of belonging and wanting to vote and take
an interest in their community. I mean the number of
problems you can solve by making it possible for a
person to really do their best at life. But know
there's the reward of aar going to have a place
of their own, and unfortunately for too many New Zealanders
now that's not realistic no matter how hard they work.
And when someone tells you, no matter how hard you work,
(39:58):
it's not going to count, well, man, that's demoralizing and
then you either get beaten down or you rise up,
and neither of them are actually good. So you know,
I would change the way we regulate land use and
fund and finance infrastructure, both of which we're doing.
Speaker 1 (40:16):
Yeah, so you think they can make a fundamental difference
a lot of the poverty. You know, it starts with
a stable home environment.
Speaker 2 (40:22):
Look if you look at the data, and this is
a little bit old, but this is about twenty seventeen.
But they took the Household Labor Force Survey, which started
in nineteen eighty two and eighty two, the poorest twenty
percent of households, they were spending twenty seven percent of
their income on housing, so make it a quarter. By
(40:45):
twenty seventeen, they were spending fifty four percent of their
income on housing, so make it a bit over half. Basically,
what's left went from three quarters of their income after
they pay their rental orbit to less than half of
their come after they pay their rental mortgage. Now that
really constrains your options. And the other thing about it is,
(41:06):
you know, people say that young people are a bit
hopeless and lazy and not doing what they should, and
you know, you can debate whether that's true. But one
thing I know is true is that if you don't
have a realistic goal that you can actually achieve. It's
very hard to stay motivated and it's very hard to
build your self esteem by saying, right, here's the thing
(41:27):
I want to do. I've done it, I can do
another thing. So look at it is essential and I
know I'm going on. But the other thing is you're
going to have a concept of what this country is about.
I mean, we got probably the best piece of land
on the planet in terms of just natural beauty per
square kilometer. We've got the mildest climate. I mean, some
people go to Sydney for better weather. I Dinet it's horrible.
(41:48):
You know, go to Perth and January it's about die.
And then there's this question of you know what, We're
a preally nice place to be, but somehow, despite this
huge inheritance, we've managed to make it almost impossible for
people to build a place of their own to live here.
That's just nuts. So that is the thing I would fix.
(42:10):
File as dictator for a day. Prime minister for a
day doesn't work because I had a whole week next
week exit prime minister, and I don't think we're going
to fix it in that time. But I do think
the things the government is doing will take us a
long way in that direction.
Speaker 1 (42:20):
That's great, David, look gonna leave it there. Good luck
in the Prime Minister's seat. Thanks for being on Money Talks.
Speaker 2 (42:26):
Hey, thanks for having me. It's been a great show.
Speaker 1 (42:28):
Thanks for listening to this episode of Money Talks. If
you want to get in touch, drop me a line
at Liam dot Dan at nzme dot co dot nz
and you can read more from me at enzidherld dot
co dot NZED. Thanks to my producer Ethan Sills can
sound engineer Line McDonald. Follow Money Talks on iHeartRadio or
(42:49):
wherever you get your podcasts, with new episodes available every Thursday.
Hi, I'm Liam Dan, New Zealand Herald Business Editor at
Large and welcome to this episode of Money Talks. This
is a podcast about money, but we're not going to
tell you how to get rich, and we're not going
to try and pick the next interest rate move. In
this series, I'll be talking to interesting New Zealanders about
how money has shaped their lives and what they've learned
(00:27):
over the years. For today's podcast, I'm joined by leader
of the Act Party, the MP for EPSOM, and the
Associate Finance Minister David Seymour Cuta.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
David, Welcome to Money Talk and thanks for having me. Hey.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Look, yeah, so one thing I want to clarify here
is that when we have politicians on Money Talks, we're
not going to get deep into fiscal policy or anything.
So you're safe regard. I know you probably wouldn't mind.
If you have got any big announcements, feel free to
make them. But really this is about going back and
getting into your relationship with money and all that sort
(01:00):
of stuff. So you know, if I can jump back,
what would be your first memories of having your own money?
Do you recall having it in your hand or your
pocket as a young child.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I have a very strange memory of it having a
two dollar note, and I must have been I don't know,
four or five six, and I lost the thing and
I was so devastated. I couldn't believe it.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
Was probably big money back then.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Well well look I just start talking about some of
the management of inflations. But no, no it was. And
so I just remember that real panic it have lost
the two dollar note. It was a purple thing with
a big picture of on them.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, but they didn't last. I mean, I'm guessing that
you're born in the eighties, so its late eighties.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Maybe eighty three, so it was long before the coins
came in. Well that's another thing I remember really clearly
because nineteen ninety was an exciting time. We had the
Expo and it was the Sesqui Centenary of retreating and
the new money and the plastic which you could put
through the wash.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
Yeah. Yeah, So where were you growing up at that point?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
So I was in Fargray, So my dad's families from
the mun Or two. He grew up in Fielding. My
mum was born in Tekopuru, where a hugely disproportionate number
of New Zealanders have been born and her family moved
over to Parade, So we set it all there in
the eighties.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Sure, And would you describe it as a fairly middle
class family A note. I think in the bio that
you went to a desol one intermediate, you know, it
was it sort of a yeah, I mean it was.
It was a whole mix of things. And you get
that in a small provincial city, so you know, it's
not like the country where you sort of isolated in
(02:43):
a very small community, or a really big city which
has sort of sorted into lots of different communities, rich
and poor and so on. It's a provincial city where
everyone's beside everybody. So I went to in a suburb
which had you know, it's pretty idyllic. It was a
new subdivision. Everyone could ride their bikes in a colder sack.
(03:04):
And also it was on the fringe of the city,
so you'd also go on the bush and build huts.
Went to a primary school that still had an egg
day because it had traditionally been out in the country,
and then went intermediate across town that was a totally
different kettle of fish. So in many ways that that
was sort of a.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
Real introduction to the world because he realized that not
everything was like this sort of city fringe, sort of
a suburb, sort of a country type suburban paradise. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Yeah, I mean did you have pocket money growing up?
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Yeah? I used to get two bucks a week for
this was and they were coined, so this must have
been after I lost the note. But I used to
get two bucks a week for opening the emptying the dishwasher,
and also used to get two bucks for mowing my
grandparents pretty big backyard. So that was I hate to
(04:02):
think about what the labor inspectors would say about that.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
Yeah, yeah, were the things that you were spending it
on saving for or were you a savor or just
go straight to the dairy? Well.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
I sort of was sort of sporadic, and it sort
of repeated throughout my life that you'd be really disciplined
for a while, and yeah, maybe you get up to
you know, thirty or forty bucks and you think you're rich,
but then you sort of want to buy a model
car or toy or something and then you sort of
blew it or so no, I suspect probably you know,
(04:32):
fifty cent mixed from the dairy.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Yeah, yeah, I mean it's a universal theme. Almost amongst
anyone I've spoken to on this is running down to
the dairy in New Zealand. Yeah. So from there, you know,
we the part time jobs. Did you deliver papers or
any of that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2 (04:47):
No, I wanted a paper run. But the thing that
thwarted me for most of my time was I went
to boarding school in Auckland, So I tried to get
a job at McDonald's in various places, but they'd always say, well,
you're going to bugger off in two weeks, so why
would we train you? Right? Yeah, yeah, because I didn't
really appreciate it at that time. But for a business,
(05:09):
you actually end up sort of sinking a lot into
a person until they're actually useful to you. And if
they're going to be gone in a few weeks, that's
not going to work out. So pretty limited. My first
job was at TDC Sawmills, Tony Davies Collie. I actually
saw Tony up in fun at Ages yesterday.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
So this was a summer job, was it.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
Yep? This was after I finished finished high school, finished
sixth form, went off to Yuni and it was tough.
We're doing sixty hours a week and I remember, for
some reason me and my mate from school. We started
at seven for the first month we were starting out,
but actually the sawmill opened at six and when we
transferred to starting we discovered that everyone else was being
(05:50):
given a fresh pair of gloves every morning. Well, which
was just an unbelievable relief.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah, so you went up to board in school at
Ukland Grammar.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Is that right?
Speaker 1 (06:01):
I mean, was that because it was just it wasn't
the opportunity there in the high school or you know,
was there a driver for you to get there? Did
you have a passion for sort of getting out of
Hong today?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
Yeah, I mean, you know, it's mostly my parents at
that time. Some of their friends were sending their kids
out of and I know at that time there was
a bit of debate about, you know what, what's the
merits of the schools here versus there? But I certainly
found it life changing that. You know, a couple of
things happened. One is I met Sir Edmund Hillary in
(06:33):
my first couple of months. And one of the reasons
I think we need a four lane road up north
is that when you grow up in a place like that,
you can feel like the world's a long way away.
I remember a story someone that made the North and
Reps that I knew under fourteens or under twelves. I
did not make the North and Reps or any other
(06:54):
representative sports team. I can assure you.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
Did you play sports?
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Oh yeah, absolutely, it's not very well. I was. My
main position was left right out. And you know there's
a kid from up north came down to play Auckland
sat in a motel in Saint Mary's Bay and he
sat up the whole night just staring at the harbor
Bridge because he couldn't believe it, and he's seen nothing
like it, hadn't seen an escalator an elevator before. So
you know, cerddainly coming to the big smoke and meeting
(07:19):
famous people, it suddenly changed how you looked at what
was possible.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Yeah, I mean at school, what were you what were
your passions? What were the subjects that you kind of
fell naturally into?
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Rugby? I love playing rugby. I wish I could do
it again. But it's a bit like some of your
columns of at the stage where you feel a bit creaky.
You're not sure that you're more likely to get injured
and less likely to recover. Yeah, So despite having limited talents.
So I loved playing rugby. Did you play mostly open side? Thinker? Well,
(07:53):
I was a lock, Yes, I was. Actually people can't
believe I was a lot, but I am actually tall
for my weight.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Yeah. Yeah, well I was a hooker, which is also
people in a team that was not very good, but
which I actually worked out. I probably probably probably could
have played Chris Luxeon's team, like you know, he was
third level.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Okay, were there any ball people on the other they already.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
Got to hear then, I don't know. But apart from
the rugby years, it was it. I mean, you winded
engineering and philosophy right at university. I guess one one's
right in the thick of the arts and one is
very practical. Was that because you you enjoyed both sides
of that sort of academic world.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Yeah, I just I just wanted a bit of insurance.
I mean, I wanted to do engineering partly because my
family has been in that business for several generations. And
I think, you know, coming out of a good form
class at a school like Grammar, there's a lot of
you know, I was useless at English, so I want
to do law, and I didn't quite think I'd make
(08:53):
ned school so and I was useless at drawing, so
that was architecture gone. So that really left engineering. And
so you had a bit of pressure to do something
like that, plus the family connection to it. But I
just felt like I wanted an outlet or something else.
So I wanted to hedge my bets, not put all
the eggs in the same basket, et cetera, and philosophy
(09:15):
sort of seemed like the way to go. I actually
started off doing a couple of education paperscuse I wanted
to be a teacher, and I was quickly persuaded that,
you know, the kind of highly ideological education that's given
as part of initial teacher education is not preparing people
for the classroom. And that's something, Funnily enough, twenty years
(09:36):
later they still, well, the government's moving on that now, but.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
You're up against I mean and too much policy, but
up against that ideological force in the teacher unions.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
And yep, well, and I look, I think there's been
a strong belief for a long time that if you
got the cap and gown photo, you'd made it, and
so successive governments have made it much easier to get
the cap and gown photo kept the fees at the UNI,
They've up ramped up the subsidies. I've taken the interest
off the loans while you're studying then forever, And as
a result, lots more people get their picture with the
(10:07):
cap and gown. But I'm not sure that the level
of skill and usefulness is there. And I suspect that, actually,
if you look at how they do it in places
like Germany, that there's a place for more learning on
the job. But that's a whole other rabbitue.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
Yeah, sure, Yeah. Philosophy though, do you have a favorite
philosopher or favorite school? Oh?
Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah, Look, I'm a big Paperian. I think what Popper
did in the Philosophy of Knowledge was really really powerful.
And the short, short summary is that, you know, you
have your skeptics who believe it's impossible to know anything
with certainty, your dogmatists who believe that you can know
things with certainty, and neither of them are particularly satisfying.
(10:52):
You know, Popper's I guess a view of critical rationalism
or falsification that well, look, you probably never get to
absolute truth, but you can have a hypothesis that you
are prepared to abandon if the facts change. Your mind.
That to me seemed to be the most civilized way
(11:14):
to think about the world, and it is the basis
of science, or has been the basis of scientific progress
for a long time. I think it's under enormous attack.
I saw the latest Green MP has a CV where
he has done research quote unquote attacking Western empiricism. And
(11:40):
I don't think that observing the world you see and
testing that against a hypothesis is a Western thing. No,
it's a method that's available to all people and appears
to advance knowledge and solve problems and extend people's lives
with better medicine and so on, much better than anything
else that any humans have tried. But my point is
(12:01):
that you know, when you've got people taking serious papers
doing research that is based on attacking the whole method
of hypothesizing and observing cheaper, that that whole methodology that's
done so well for us with science and reason for
a couple of centuries now is really under attack.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
I guess it goes to the engineering a bit too,
because how do we're building a bridge if you're not going.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
To Yeah, and look, this postmodern view is that you know,
we all have lived experience and we all have our
view of the world and they're equally valid, And if
you criticize someone's worldview, then you know you're actually, you know,
attacking them. Well, that doesn't cut it in engineering. I mean,
if you're an electrical engineer, you get it wrong, people
(12:46):
get electrocuted, or your signal just doesn't arrive or isn't
properly decoded. So the way that postmodernism has made all
academia sort of relativist and based on the perspective of
the I think is nuts and it's doing huge harm
because it makes it very difficult for us to talk
(13:06):
to each other.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
It sounds like you're kind of quite skeptical of ideology.
You probably get accused of being ideological from them by
the left because they see you as being on the
right or neoliberal or whatever. I mean, how do you
feel about the idea of ideology, the idea that your
viewers near? You know, if you take it to economics,
you've got your canes and your freedmen. And where do
(13:28):
you sit on those sort of schools of ideological thought.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
Well, I mean, you've got to remember that Milton Friedman
and Anna Schwartz, you know, they won the Nobel Prize
for examining the history of monetary policy in the US,
and they demonstrated that their hypothesis that inflation is always
and everywhere a monetary phenomenon fits the data that it
(13:54):
actually existed in reality better than Whatkines had put forward.
Kines himself said, when the facts change or change my mind,
Cain himself had had Crow up with a theory that
fit the data better than anyone else up to that point.
So and you know, since then we've had modern monetary theory.
And now you don't hear them very much about that
after the last through or three years, so.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Unfortunately, but well, sorry to hear it.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
But you know, the point is, on any issue, you
can actually take that basic preparian method that there is
a real world that we can all join hands and
problem solve through it. That there's a universal humanity and
we all have the same chances and choices to work
through the world. That works. Once you get into this postmodernism,
(14:38):
I have lived experience. I'm writing from an X Y
Z perspective, and you know, if you attack my view
then you're wrong, and that is nuts. And the worst
example of it is, you know, there's actually people in
universities around the world who will seriously argue that the
Western scientific tradition is I guess, angled against people who
(15:00):
are obese. And when you say, well, actually, you know,
medicine has made discoveries that you know, being overweight can
lead to correlate with a number of heart conditions and
other health problems, they say, oh, well, that's just an
oppressive regime of thought that doesn't apply to me. That's
what this relativism means at its most absurd but real example.
Speaker 1 (15:27):
Let me bring it back to where you were coming
through and how you got onto the political side of it.
I mean, I see where you're coming from, but you know,
like at the time you were coming through, it hadn't
sort of switched around so much. There was I guess
there was a sense when I was coming through anyway,
that there was a sort of an absolutist conservative view
that dominated the world. And this was you know, in
those days the postmodernism woke, whatever you want to call it.
(15:49):
They were the underdogs. They're coming through. It's sort of
it's sort of flipped around. And why I'm interested is
because often young people and students in particular tend to
be more on that rebellious coming from the left side
of it, and it seems like you're attracted quite early
to a more conservative outlook. I mean, is that fair?
Speaker 2 (16:11):
No, I mean there might be a bigger age gap
between us, is obvious from your appearance. But certainly the
years I was at the University of Auckland from one
to six, there was a real, uh, you know what
I regarded as a heavy bias towards the postmodernest way
(16:33):
of thinking. You certainly didn't get you know, perhaps outside
the economics department where I tutored for for a semester,
you didn't get people coming out defending you know what
I would regard as the sort of neoliberal view of
the world. We were as act on campus as I
(16:55):
was a member of then we were countercultural.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Right, Yeah, probably about ten years older than you, but
you know, you could see that coming. But certainly, say,
if you think of countercultural in the sixties and seventies,
it was pushing back against what it saw as you know,
the industrial military complex, all that sort of conservatism of
the fifties. But you felt coming through that already you
were there was a sense of, you know, where the
(17:20):
action was in politics was more to the right or
how do you describe it, you know, because I get
you know, your conservative, neoliberal, right wing. You know, people
use all these labels, do you have a.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Yeah, they do, but no, I mean, I think that
that philosophical view of being prepared to hypothesize and tests
against the evidence is important. I've changed what might about
things over the years, but I think it's also important
not to pigeonhole people, because sometimes a person can be,
you know, on the same side as you on one issue,
but against you on others. So for example, I mean,
(17:51):
I'm known for having legalized euth in Asia, you know,
and that is a socially liberal cause it's about individual choice,
opposed by a lot of the religious establishment quite vehemently.
I was one of twenty MPs that voted for abortion
to be decriminalized, but actually go even further, to be
(18:12):
between a woman and a doctor, you know, at any time,
not to have this kind of halfway house that actually eventuated,
but which still better than what we had. But so,
you know, I'm a liberal or that. On free speech,
I almost an absolutist. I think you should have the
right to say what you like. You certainly shouldn't be
corralled by some sort of you know, censor, a human
(18:36):
rights commissioner, someone that can haul you and say you
offended someone, you're in big trouble and lock you up.
I'm posed to that. But equally, I look at the
fact that I, as a minister now am responsible as
a fifty percent shareholder in twenty eight different state owned enterprises,
Crown Research inst Should your four companies and so on,
(18:56):
and I think this is nuts. You know, I don't
believe it's possible for a politician to have that level
of oversight as a shareholder on behalf of five million people.
And there's very good evidence that private and privatized firms
do better. The soees that we have have made a
very poor return on equity, and I don't think we
(19:17):
should own those now the current government policy I hasten
to add us that we will continue own, but within
the government I continue to editate we shouldn't and the
facts are that. You know, what do you say to
someone who believes in privatization, a woman's right to choose
euthanasia and free speech.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
Yeah, liberal is a complicated word these days right now.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Well, I'm a liberal in the classical and consistent sense
of it that I believe you should be able to
do it, you like, as long as you're not arming
anyone else.
Speaker 1 (19:42):
Yeah, I mean I sort of lived my life along
those lines. But then I'm sort of conscious that as
a relatively lazy person or whatever.
Speaker 2 (19:51):
I sometimes yourself aware.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
But the government involvement is the government making me put
into KEYI Saver, making me do some things that actually
are good for me. Guess what I'm getting out. I
had a good chat to Sir Roger Douglas here and he,
you know, takes it to extreme that probably isn't politically
viable now around what you do with welfare payment and
health system and things like that. But what do you
do with the people who aren't And I'll use myself,
(20:14):
but you know, who aren't up to making those choices
and decisions. That's where the government comes in, right.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Well again, go back to the data. So the guy
I find most interesting on KEIWI savers David Laws, who says, look,
you know, yes, people can point to a big wad
of cash and their key WE Saver account. What they
can't point to is that maybe they've kept their credit
card running longer than they would have otherwise. Maybe they've
paid off their mortgage slower than they would have otherwise.
Maybe they've you know, neglected, or they've pulled back from
(20:44):
investing in other things that they might have otherwise. So
at the end of the day, once you take out
the taxpayer contribution to your KEII saver, it hasn't actually
increased your saving at all. So I just again to
be ideological, you can look at what's what's been the
outcome of this particular.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
I mean, there's always opportunity cost, but I would I
would say, well, even myself, it's like, I'm glad it's
there because I might not. I probably wouldn't have invested
it was they probably would have spent it on records.
Speaker 2 (21:09):
Well, I mean, you know, but what I'm telling is
you've you've got someone who has devoted a lot of
their time and has considerable expertise on the subject, and
they've they've studied it and they've recorded their observations. I mean,
this is a scientific method, right, and they've said that
the actually when you when it's all said and done,
the things you're conscious of the things you're not conscious of,
(21:29):
your net saving levels is no different.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Yeah, So you wouldn't support compulsory super No, one doesn't
any part of it, to be fair. But when you
look at Australia four point eight trillion dollars there, they're
a wealthy country and their financial markets they've got their hummer.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
So that's just unpack that. I mean, first of all,
on the compulsion. So I've had a few people lately,
given the high interest rates and the tough situation we face,
they're saying, look, I'm getting a hammered up the wazoo
on my mortgage interest, far more mortgage interest than my
keywisavers returning why can't I'm actually losing money because I
can't take the principle out of my keivsaver and reduce
my mortgage. That's the kind of thing that people are
(22:09):
forced to do in a system of compulsion, and I
think that's wrong. Then you look at Australia. It's absolutely
true that Australia has the super funds, but you're not
asking what's the counter factual if they hadn't had compulsion,
would Australian savings rates be any different? Well, evidence was
actually around the world. If you talk to I'm going
(22:30):
to forget his name Michael Littlewood at the University of
Aalknings actually doesn't make a huge difference how much compulsion
there is, savings rates influenced by other factors. So again
everyone points to Australia, but you got to ask yourself,
what's the counter factual if they didn't have that compulsion,
suspect they would have saved just as much.
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Okay, I want to jump back to career a little bit.
You come out of university, you briefly an engineering job.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Yep, yepy. It was a pretty rough time. So I
got a job, a three month contract and in my
second month the project I was working on was canceled.
It was actually ericson doing fiber opt at cables being
blown with compressed ear through Vector's channels. So this was
(23:16):
fiber to the home before there was. But it was
very cool stuff and you know, just to ahead of
the curve a year while they were playing regulatory trick
and with them it was a very messy thing anyway,
Needless to say, one of the first people to go
was their twenty one year old they'd just hired as
well see you later. So that was that was the
end of that contract. But at that time my Mum
(23:36):
had become very ill. So I returned to fang Ray
and started working for my what was then my grandfather's company.
While we sort of, you know, Mum sort of convalesse there.
She passed. Now I thought, what the hell do I do?
I got off at a job in Canada, so I left, and.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
You're in Canada, basically a shorthand. And it's completely fair,
but that you're kind of word looking for think tanks
that maybe along the long lines of the New Zealand
initiative that kind.
Speaker 2 (24:03):
Of be very similar to the interative. And it was
it was like it was a wonderful thing because first
of all, you know, go off and find a fed
some time in Auckland. Suddenly you're in a place that
you know actually has flights to Chicago, a place that
you just couldn't even think of going to.
Speaker 1 (24:18):
But that was through the I mean, that wasn't through engineering.
That was through maybe the political stuff you were doing
around the sides and having a philosophy degree and knowing
they could you could.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
Well, it was actually through Roger Douglas because Canada went
broke in the early nineties and they formed these taxpayers
federations and then they got Roger Douglas to come and
tell them what they thought they should do, because New
Zealand had been through a similar problem that Canada was
then in, and so Roger maintained a connection with these
(24:50):
Canadian think tanks, and so he was my my connection
to them well twenty years almost twenty years later, so
that that's how that happened. I effectively did like a
postgraduate degree. I mean I learned how to do a
media interview or try read a lot more philosophers and economists,
wrote newspaper op eds and you know, policy papers such
(25:13):
as they were for the think tanks. So it was
if you were going to do what I eventually end
up doing, it was it was like a sort of
a perfect sort of it was like a learn while
you study free. In fact they paid me post grad degree.
Speaker 1 (25:28):
Yeah, and getting into all that political action, I guess
in a Canadian way.
Speaker 2 (25:33):
Yeah, Well, I think about the think tanks said, you know,
they're quite proud of not dirtying themselves with politics. It's
always a debate or should you get involved in actual politics.
So well it wasn't. It was policy rather than politics.
And I think a lot of people in politics today
surprising how little they know about policy and how unimportant
it is to them.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Yeah, yeah, and look, I don't want to harp on
about the fact, but because we had Sir Roger here
and he made some comments and he made before the
election last year in a couple of places which were
kind of dismissive of all the parties, and part of that,
I guess was a sense that he feels that act
now has gone to centrist or mainstream. I just wondered
(26:14):
what you thought of those comments, you know, are you
still pushing for those very much those you know? Like
I guess, I guess he is pushing a you know,
a very the flat tax and all that stuff that
maybe you just think that you couldn't sell.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
Or well, it's interesting. I was reading a political autobiography
of a guy called Peter mccardal, who's those fascinating guys.
He was in at least three different parties, he was
a minister. He actually went from being a minister to
a political staffer, which most people are far too proud
to do. So I read with interest and mccardal said,
(26:50):
Roger Douglas, without a doubt, is the most significant New
Zealand politician in the post war era, and I agree
with that. But a couple of things about Roger One
is he's always in a state of rebellion. So he
has bagged every political leader he's been a member of
since Norman Kirk, so I, you know, it would be
disappointed if he hadn't bagged me as the current act leader.
(27:13):
He bagged Rodney, he bagged Richard, and everyone bagged Long.
He has famously fell out forty years ago now, and
he also has been so significant historically because he's just
absolutely uncompromising. He knows what he believes needs to be
done and he just goes and does it. And so
(27:35):
very proud to be associated with him, proud to be
attacked by him, and totally understand why he says what
he says.
Speaker 1 (27:41):
Yeah, all right, coming back through early on, you got
you know, you come back to New Zealand. What was
the driver for coming back? I mean you could have
could have Presumably he had a career in Canada.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
Well I did, and by that time I'd moved to Calgary,
I was I was working with Preston Manning, who people
describe as the best Prime minister can and I never
had he had started a party with one person kind
of familiar and got it up to be the official opposition.
So it's a bit of an inspiration and what Preston
was able to do with the Reform Party there, and
(28:13):
he was just a great mentor and he was running
a think tank there. I loved working for Presto, but
then I came back for my brothers and one of
my friend's weddings, two separate weddings, and basically at that
point John Banks had resigned X was really for all
(28:33):
intents and purposes over and I thought, well, if I
spend the year knocking on doors basically apologizing for everything
that's happened and asked them to give you another chance,
they might do it. So I did that. I knocked
on about fourteen thousand doors in the EPSOM Electric and
it was a useful experience for a bunch of reasons,
but mainly people said, yeah, okay, but don't let us down.
(28:54):
And that's been a lot of those conversations still stick
with me, so being the MP's always been my first job.
But also a style of politics, it's old fashion. It's
like what you learn about in forth form social studies
that basically people choose their representative to go and speak
and they're responsible for those people. That's that's sort of
(29:15):
that that was quite formative for me.
Speaker 1 (29:17):
Sure, I mean you're really associated with EPSOM. It has
a reputation for being you know, the seat that's being
part of a deal and all that sort of stuff.
But when you came back, did you you target at
EPSOM because you felt a connection? Did you live there?
Speaker 2 (29:29):
Is that?
Speaker 1 (29:30):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (29:30):
Well i'd live there for you or compared apart from
when I lived in Canada in farm Ra, when I've
lived in Auckland, I almost always lived in the EPSOM electorate.
I think I had a year down at the UNI hostel,
but other than that, i'd been on epsomite.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
Yeah, and I think you had a reputation for being
a party leader who didn't own their own house. You
own your own house now.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
I do now. But it took me til those thirty
seven because I'd basically spent my life up to and
then on passion projects and traveling, so you know, being
a waiting for a think tank. Like I said, it
was a sort of a post grad degree and it
was free and in fact they paid me but not much.
I'd spent two years of my life in twenty eleven
and twenty fourteen basically taking the year off to campaign,
(30:17):
so that didn't help with the finances, and so you know,
it took me a few years in Parliament before I
got to at the stage where, like many people of
my generation, if you have a partner, it's doable. If
you don't have a partner, it's nearly impossible. And also
just add if you're someone who's a bit older who
(30:37):
doesn't own their house, lives very hard. So you know,
we've I think one of the most important things we
can do as a government is get back to the
stage where a generation can realistically build and own its
own home and have families at a younger age and
get on with life. Whereas at the moment I think
our dysfunctional housing market has actually bugged up many many
(30:59):
aspects of life in New Zealand.
Speaker 1 (31:01):
Yeah, it's interesting too much into policy, but the stuff
that Chris Biship's been talking about and coming from the
policy stuff in the last few weeks or months, it
seems like this government is prepared to talk about house
prices not going up or going down.
Speaker 2 (31:17):
You know, are you well they're going down as we speak.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
Yeah, yeah, they've been going down because you know the
cycle obviously, But the idea that we can really get
enough built that house prices go down is that something
you can live with as a as a party leader.
It used to be sort of a poison poison sort
of statement to suggest that house prices go down in
this country.
Speaker 2 (31:35):
Look, I remember daw knocking in the twenty seventeen campaign
and people in the epsom A lecture were saying, yeah,
I've done well, but where are my kids going to live?
And I knew that the government was going to change
because people were so disappointed with where the housing market
was going. Now she twenty seventeen it was a paradise anyway,
housing affordability, labor came in, and rightly or wrongly, the
(32:00):
things that they did, such as Kiwi build, such as
kyeing Aura, I don't well, I don't think, I mean,
I know, they did not affect housing prices. What was
astonishing is that they banned foreign investors and then actually
shut the border for two years, which saw housing prices
go even higher, which I think probably finally put a
(32:22):
lie to the idea that it was about foreign demand.
And then, of course, you know, with rising interest rates,
and there's there's a real economic well I hesitate to
say collapse, but it's pretty bad. So you know, what
we now have the opportunity to do is to reset
and make it easier to build homes again.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
I mean, one thing that was surprising me about labors
where they talk about housing those they failed on the
Kiwi building, but they got the private sector during their
term built far more houses than happened under John Keyes government.
I mean, but they don't really like to take credit
for it.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
I guess yeah, I mean yes, and no, I mean
they built I mean I've always said nineteen seventy four
was the sort of healthy and year. I think there's
about forty five thousand houses consented. It was roughly the
same in twenty twenty two, if I remember right, I
think we beat it. I think it was the biggest
you might have built it. But of course New Zealand
twice the population. Yeah, yeah, of course, of course, But
I mean it was still you know.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
We've only just come back to the consent levels that
are nearing what we averaged through the John Key years
when you were in government.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Yeah. So definitely there is more private sector building going on.
But if you look at the New Zealand Initiative have
done good work on this. There's a certain number of
houses that just wear out every year, make it ten thousand.
There's a certain number of houses needed for population increase,
and there's also I would say a major shortage. That's
where people be living in motels and stuff before that
(33:49):
in cars and garages.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
So certainly had a big population increase years.
Speaker 2 (33:53):
So you know there's still needs to be fifty or
sixty thousand a year for the next decade, and that's
size of the challenge.
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Look, I want to get into some quick fire money
talks questions. We ask everyone, what's the poorest you've ever been.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
I was a student, very very poor, basically literally jigging
under the seat of your car to see if you
go a buck that you can go across to the
bakery and buy a bigette.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
Were you a student loan guy? Did you wreck up
a student loan or yeah? You said you didn't really
have part time job as much except in the summer.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
Well when I was a student. That was by the
time I was a university student, that's different. I was
a warterproofer and in the end I got hired a
whole bunch of my mates ended up working for the
same guy who's now quite a strong political supporter of mine.
But no worked. I remember one week I did forty
hours and went to all my lectures. Yeah, so it
(34:54):
was different by the time I was a university student.
Speaker 1 (34:56):
Flip side of that question, I suppose is when you
finally got a bit of money in your pock what
was the most indulgent purchase you've ever made?
Speaker 2 (35:03):
Oh g, that's a great, great question. I think probably
in most of my twenties and thirties, I just traveled.
I mean I've been to about sixteen countries. I think
I've been to twenty eight American states, most of the
Canadian provinces, and I've been all over New Zealand. So
(35:23):
I feel really lucky that I've been able to travel
pretty freely through my life and see a lot of places.
Speaker 1 (35:28):
Sure. On the campaign trail, Christopher Luxen was asked about
his spend on groceries and he said sixty dollars and
got a bit of flag. I think he was talking
about his own, his own flat and Wellington, not the family.
But how's your grocery spend? Are you a big shopper?
Speaker 2 (35:45):
I think it's an unfair question because I don't know
what city I'm going to be in from day to day.
So that's where Christoph Luckxon got coot and what not
that I would give my colleagues advice in public, But
what I would have said is, look, I appreciate that
it's a very tough time getting groceries, but in all honesty,
the life that you have to lead to do well
(36:07):
at this job. You actually can't plan a weekly shop
because I've tried it and you end up throwing half
of it out because, as it turns out, you didn't
realize that you were going on the bus for a week,
and by the time you get up get back, you've
just got a whole lot of milk you've got to
tip down the sink and breed you've got to put
in the bin. So you know, fair enough.
Speaker 1 (36:25):
Hey, do you do you buy a lot of tickets?
Speaker 2 (36:28):
No?
Speaker 1 (36:30):
Do you ever imagine winning lotto? No?
Speaker 2 (36:34):
I sometimes think about if I'd made better investment decisions
when I was younger, Right, yeah, yeah, if I'd realized
that houses in two thousand and four were actually a
real bargain, then maybe I'd be at a different place now.
Speaker 1 (36:48):
Yeah, I mean obviously, I mean, you know, probably not
to some people. But the kind of career you're in,
the question there is money important to you? Is it
a driver for you? Or is it just a byproducts success?
Speaker 2 (37:01):
To be really honest, you don't think about it a
lot because the job is all encompassing, it's highly public,
and you know, losing in politics is like losing and boxing.
It's not actually fun. You know, if you're a lawyer
and you don't do very well, then chances are there's
there's still a there's still a job somewhere for okay lawyers.
(37:23):
If you fail at this, you can't just go and
work down the road at a different parliament. Some people
end up doing that with a local council, which not
something fills me with with with joy. So you know,
you sort of you know, obviously you want to have
a plan in the background to there's a rapid fire,
isn't it to make sure that you know you're going
(37:43):
to be able to pay your bills and eventually pay
off your mortgage? But no, no, not not really.
Speaker 1 (37:48):
I mean, would you broadly say you're good with money?
You know when it comes to all that personal finance stuff,
without going into all the detail about you.
Speaker 2 (37:55):
I think I think you can. I think what I've
learned is you can change. So it's a game of
two half. So you know, in my twenties, like I say,
I mean, I took jobs that didn't pay as well
as I might have, you know, went out and and
you know, traveled endlessly, and you know, just had a
pretty good time really party through you know, most of
(38:15):
the two thousands. But you know, after that, I sort
of thought, well, shosh, you know I was going to
be pretty tragic. I carry on like this. I'm a
sixties so fair to start sending some foundations to grow older.
And so I've been you know, it's a game of
two halves. I really really changed tech a couple of
years after I was elected.
Speaker 1 (38:37):
Sure, look, this is a weird question to ask you
because it's it's a hypothetical question to ask everyone. You know,
if you were prime minister for a day, well that's
actually next week, that's gonna yeah, yeah, and and and
there's going to be a few more opportunities over the
rest of this term at least, and then then you're
going to be in the actually being prime minister. And
it's hard to work. But hypothetically, in an imaginary world
(39:00):
where we can make you all powerful leader of New
Zealand for a day, what would be the policy or
what is the big initiative that you would want to
focus on to really try and deal with the equity
issues and the social inequality in this country.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
Well, changing the way that we regulate the use of
land and fund and finance infrastructure. You know, you solve
so many problems for everything from health from bad housing
and education, from kids getting moved from one school to
the next, to people aging in place, to people having
(39:37):
a sense of belonging and wanting to vote and take
an interest in their community. I mean the number of
problems you can solve by making it possible for a
person to really do their best at life. But know
there's the reward of aar going to have a place
of their own, and unfortunately for too many New Zealanders
now that's not realistic no matter how hard they work.
And when someone tells you, no matter how hard you work,
(39:58):
it's not going to count, well, man, that's demoralizing and
then you either get beaten down or you rise up,
and neither of them are actually good. So you know,
I would change the way we regulate land use and
fund and finance infrastructure, both of which we're doing.
Speaker 1 (40:16):
Yeah, so you think they can make a fundamental difference
a lot of the poverty. You know, it starts with
a stable home environment.
Speaker 2 (40:22):
Look if you look at the data, and this is
a little bit old, but this is about twenty seventeen.
But they took the Household Labor Force Survey, which started
in nineteen eighty two and eighty two, the poorest twenty
percent of households, they were spending twenty seven percent of
their income on housing, so make it a quarter. By
(40:45):
twenty seventeen, they were spending fifty four percent of their
income on housing, so make it a bit over half. Basically,
what's left went from three quarters of their income after
they pay their rental orbit to less than half of
their come after they pay their rental mortgage. Now that
really constrains your options. And the other thing about it is,
(41:06):
you know, people say that young people are a bit
hopeless and lazy and not doing what they should, and
you know, you can debate whether that's true. But one
thing I know is true is that if you don't
have a realistic goal that you can actually achieve. It's
very hard to stay motivated and it's very hard to
build your self esteem by saying, right, here's the thing
(41:27):
I want to do. I've done it, I can do
another thing. So look at it is essential and I
know I'm going on. But the other thing is you're
going to have a concept of what this country is about.
I mean, we got probably the best piece of land
on the planet in terms of just natural beauty per
square kilometer. We've got the mildest climate. I mean, some
people go to Sydney for better weather. I Dinet it's horrible.
(41:48):
You know, go to Perth and January it's about die.
And then there's this question of you know what, We're
a preally nice place to be, but somehow, despite this
huge inheritance, we've managed to make it almost impossible for
people to build a place of their own to live here.
That's just nuts. So that is the thing I would fix.
(42:10):
File as dictator for a day. Prime minister for a
day doesn't work because I had a whole week next
week exit prime minister, and I don't think we're going
to fix it in that time. But I do think
the things the government is doing will take us a
long way in that direction.
Speaker 1 (42:20):
That's great, David, look gonna leave it there. Good luck
in the Prime Minister's seat. Thanks for being on Money Talks.
Speaker 2 (42:26):
Hey, thanks for having me. It's been a great show.
Speaker 1 (42:28):
Thanks for listening to this episode of Money Talks. If
you want to get in touch, drop me a line
at Liam dot Dan at nzme dot co dot nz
and you can read more from me at enzidherld dot
co dot NZED. Thanks to my producer Ethan Sills can
sound engineer Line McDonald. Follow Money Talks on iHeartRadio or
(42:49):
wherever you get your podcasts, with new episodes available every Thursday.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com