May 8, 2026 • 40 mins
Jamie Mackay talks to Erica Stanford, Michael Every, and David Seymour.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
And well Well leaders.
Speaker 4 (00:20):
From Gaday and Good Morning New Zealand. I'm Jamie McKay.
This is the best of the country each and every
Saturday morning here on news Talk said be we bring
you the best bits of our weekdays show twelve to one.
You can now hear a some christ Church, Wellington and
Auckland on the AM frequencies and we do so courtesy
(00:40):
of Rabobank. We're growing a better New Zealand together. Kicking
it off with Angie from the Rolling Stones releasing a
new album mix all of eighty two years old. You've
got to admire his energy. We're kicking off the show
today not with Angie but with Erica the Minister of Immigration.
One too pleased on Monday show. In fact, she phoned
(01:02):
us up and said I need to go on and
talk to the farmers of New Zealand. She or was
none too pleased with axe new proposed immigration policy, saying
it's dog whistling in election year. How's this policy going
to affect the farms? Factories and Orchards of New Zealand
got a special two part interview with You with Rabobanks,
Singapore based global strategist. One of my favorite interviews when
(01:26):
I get a chance to talk to them. Part one,
the geopolitical state of the world chaotic. I can't even
say it myself. How close are we to midnight on
the doomsday clock? Part two? As a food producing, agg
trading nation, how do we position ourselves to buffer these
turbulent times? And we're going to finish it with David
(01:46):
Seymour responding really to what Erica Stanford I had to say.
More about that later. It's all on the best of
the Country and it's all brought to you by Rabobank.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
The best of the Country with Rubbobak.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience grow with Rubbobak.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Well, it was the big story yesterday, the new proposed
Act policy on immigration. To perhaps argue the other side
of the coin is the Minister of Immigration, Erica Stanford. Erica,
is this David Seymour an election year trying to cut
Winston's lunch.
Speaker 5 (02:27):
It certainly feels like that a little bit and It's
unfortunate because immigration policy needs really air full thought, because
there are lots of unintended consequences you get when you
have sort of knee jerk populist policies, and one of those,
the glaring one out of the announcement yesterday certainly was
around the attack on small business and certainly the attack.
Speaker 4 (02:49):
On the rule sector well as I am a fond
of saying Erica, if we didn't have the Filipinos, there'll
be no cows Milkton SOUTHND quite literally. And I know
that from hands on variance, we need migrant labor to
do the jobs that Kiwis can't or won't do well.
Speaker 5 (03:07):
We absolutely do, and there are certain regions in New
Zealand where there is low unemployment or there are tv
who are just not willing to do some of those jobs,
be it in agriculture or in for example, aged care.
We rely on migrant workers. Businesses rely on them, and
we already have things in place where we are either
(03:28):
using the tax system to collect text of them, or
last year I put a built through the house which
we're about to implement, which we'll look at what additional
costs that migrants impose and be able to collect those
in a reasonable and proportionate way through the immigration levy system,
very carefully thought through, and those it will be those
(03:51):
costs inclred and things like health and education, but in
a very reasonable and proportionate way. What is not reasonable
or proportionate is this idea of a six dollars a
day charge which has to be charged upfront as a levee.
And if you are a dairy farm work and you
get a hurt manager, for example, and it's a five
year visa, that's an eleven thousand dollar upfront cost that
(04:14):
a migrant will have to pay on top of their
visa fee and their health check screening they have to
do with all those other costs. Now, you and I
both know there ain't no migrant going to pay that.
It's kind of be the it's going to be the
employer that who is desperate has no other choice that
will end up paying that eleven thousand dollars to secure
the migrant that they need. And let's not forget they'd
(04:35):
probably come in with a partner who will have an
open work right. They'll need the eleven thousand dollars upfront
cost too. So there's twenty two thousand dollars to secure
the migrant that you need times out across all of
the migrants you have working in your business.
Speaker 4 (04:49):
Okay, to be fair to David Seymour, eric to Stamford,
he did say he was prepared to relook at his
policy proposal when it came to rural in New Zealand.
But is this just extra admin.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
Well, I think that comment goes to show that he
hasn't thought through this very well, and that is sort
of a little bit typical. Sometimes it's not just rural
New Zealand. What about our healthcare sector who rely on
migrant workers to work in our aged care sector. We've
got thousands and thousands of Filipinos and Indians and others
who are working as healthcare support workers now. Also, we
(05:24):
can't find keywas through that work in the area in
regions or we're just not prepared to do the work.
So okay, is there a carve out there as well? Okay,
what about hospital in areas where it's very difficult to
find New Zealand workers when we have a carve out there,
That's why this policy doesn't work. It is populist and
knee jerk and is just passing costs onto businesses and
(05:44):
then essentially onto the consumer.
Speaker 4 (05:47):
But are we letting and this would be Seemore's argument,
definitely Winston's argument, we're letting through too many unskilled migrant workers.
What do you say to that.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Well, of course we're not, and they we both know
that because when I became the minister, the previous government
had my immigration out of control. They had what's one
hundred and thirty five thousand net migration was our figure
when I became the minister, and seventy percent of those
workers were low skilled because they previous government flew through
(06:18):
the floodgates, open closed their eyes and didn't do any
proper verification. And once there's a chink in your armor
and your board is a compromise, anyone can get in.
I have completely turned that around in two years. We
now have seventy percent of our workers coming in who
are highly skilled workers and only thirty percent to a
lower skilled And we still need, as you know, those
lower skilled workers, for example, the workers and our dairy farms,
(06:41):
the dairy farm workers to come in, so we'll always
need a proportion of those, but it is work tested.
There has to be a genuine job and you have
to properly check that no New Zealander was able to
do the work. And then after three years, and they're
pretty strict on this, you have to leave unless you're
upskilled yourself into a higher role, must leave to create
room for a kiwi. So all of these problems have
(07:03):
been solved, and they are stirring up this sentiment, which
to be fair as a hangover from what Labor did.
But it's all been solved under this government.
Speaker 4 (07:12):
Does he have some fair points though there could be
a strong argument for a stronger English language requirement from
our migrants.
Speaker 5 (07:21):
Well, again, I put in place when I became the minister,
there was no English language requirement.
Speaker 6 (07:27):
For try work visas.
Speaker 5 (07:28):
We already put in place English language for skill level
four and five. And we are about to announce some
more changes which Minister see More knows about because I
put them up creation last week. It's an interesting timing
of his announcement. So we've already massively tightened up on
English language and I've got I will have more to
say in the next in the next few weeks on that.
(07:50):
So again something that we've already dealt with, and again
in a proportionate way, you don't need to English language
test every single migrant coming in the country. Many of
them in the high skilled roles are already doing English
language texts for their registration, their professional registration. So again
carefully thought through, well balanced, and in consultation with the
(08:11):
sectors that are affected the most.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Eric Stanford, can I put it to you that if
a center right government gets re elected and it's a
bigger at this stage, and you've got once then on
one side see more on the other, you're going to
have a hell of a battle with immigration policy.
Speaker 5 (08:28):
Well here's the thing, right, in the last two years,
I've worked really, really hard to make sure we have
a really smart immigration system that works for New Zealanders,
that's getting in the right mix of skills, and that
is not tolerating those who come in and commit times.
We've really toughened up and I'm getting quite a bit
of stick from it from the left, but reasonable New
Zealanders would expect it's how we operate and that's what
(08:50):
we're doing. And actually it's been fine. I've had really
good support from both New Zealand First and ACT over
the last few years forward our immigration policy. But here
we are an election year and everybody's wanting to talk
about immigration, as often happens. But I think that a
key thing to remember is our track record in immigration
(09:10):
is very strong. I'm incredibly proud of the work that
we've done, and that's evidenced by the fact that you
don't hear about immigration and the media much. It's because
we have sorted it out.
Speaker 7 (09:20):
Eric A.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Stanford to use a farming terminology, there's a lot of
dog whistling going on at the moment.
Speaker 5 (09:26):
Oh well, that's an election yere. I'm not the type
of person that uses immigration to dog whistle. I understand
that immigration is incredibly complex and there are many competing
things you have to balance. I mean, I'm landing a
jetplane on a keen cent coin quite often, trying to
manage the balance between putting Kiwi's first and making sure
(09:48):
that we get the migrants that we need, not being
overly restrictive with migrants because they have choices they can
go to other countries, but also making sure that they
fairly you are accountable the costs that they incur. So
very careful. It needs, you know, someone who's considering these
balancing these competing things carefully and not coming out with
(10:11):
knee jerk policies that clearly show that whoever's coming out
with them doesn't understand immigration.
Speaker 4 (10:16):
Eric Stanford, Minister of Immigration on the country, Thanks for
your time, appreciated and just a final word from me,
Yeah we need them. We need the migrant labor to
do the work on the farms of New Zealand.
Speaker 7 (10:26):
There you go, Thank you very much.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
The Best of the Country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience, Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Good Morning, New Zealand. Welcome back to the Best of
the Country. It's brought to you. The show is brought
to you by Rabobank. I'm Jamie Mackay paying tribute to
the Stones, who are releasing a new album in July
of this year. Up next on the Best of the
Country two part interview with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based
global strategist on the geopolitical state of the world and
(11:06):
how as an ag nation, an ag trading nation, how
do we position ourselves to buffer these turbulent times. You're
really going to enjoy what he has to say. David
Seymour before the end of the hour, But before I forget,
the latest Rabobank Agribusiness Monthly is now out provides a
snapshot of the latest trends in the macro agriculture environment.
(11:28):
To access the report, go to the Rabobank website rabobank
dot co dot Nz. Select Agribusiness Monthly under the Knowledge
and Network tab. Up next, Michael every buckle in, that's.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Grow with rubber Bank.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Well, I've been eagerly awaiting and also dreading this interview
on the country today. I love chatting to this bloke.
His name is Michael Every He's Rabobanks Singapore based global strategist.
He is in Sydney today. Michael, I'm going to split
this interview into two because there's too much to get
into one piece. So the first part will be about
(12:22):
the world geopolitically and how close we are to midnight
on the doomsday clock. Part two for New Zealand as
an ag trading nation, where we fit in and how
we position ourselves in this chaotic world. Let's start with
the world geo politically. I call you a bit of
an alarmist. I'm almost afraid to ask you, where are
we on the doomsday clock?
Speaker 7 (12:44):
Well, that doomsday clock, if we're talking about the official one.
As far as I'm aware, it's been something like one
minute to midnight for as long as I can remember,
I think, most of my adult life, and we have
apparently officially seen it. Take a few more seconds forward personally,
and hope this lists people. I don't think we're near
World War three. I don't think we're close to actually
(13:04):
seeing all the major powers go to war with each other.
That threat is there in the background. It's always been
there in the background, and certainly there are a lot
of things going on, but at the moment I think
the rather unpleasant, to put it mildly, you know, serious
regional wars that we have between Russia and Ukraine and
now in the Middle East are probably taking up more
than enough time and attention of the people whose fingers
(13:27):
are on the big red button. So in that respect,
I'd like to reassure people. But that doesn't mean what
we've got now is good and it doesn't have a
big impact on everybody, Because it does.
Speaker 4 (13:36):
How much of this is down to just one man's ego,
and where is the off ramp for Donald Trump?
Speaker 7 (13:43):
Okay, first of all, almost none of it is down
to one man's ego. This is a far more complicated
structural problem that's been evolving for a very long time.
But I actually ended up with one person having to
make the decision whether we're going to do something about
now or wait for something else to happen about it later.
So I don't think we can have the easy a.
I you're saying orange band bad and therefore the world
would be fine without that happening. If that were true,
(14:04):
then I think history would be a lot simpler overall.
Where is the off ramp? That's the really interesting question,
because again, this presumes that this was some ego driven
adventure without which the world was all liveling happily, you know,
grilling marshmallows together around the fire and singing Kumbaya. And
I can heartily assure you that was not the reality
in the Middle East, and were this not happening, we
(14:25):
would be having some other kind of problem. Instead. It's
a region which has plagued with structural issues which are
all coming to the fore. Now we can hope that
they can be resolved. But it's an extremely complex mess
that needs to be disentangled, and what's happening could indeed
make it worse or it could potentially make it better.
So I don't think offramp is actually a very useful
(14:47):
framing for it, to be honest.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
Well, they're sitting on all the oil. What happened to
the world moving away from dependency on oil? We're more
dependent than ever on the stuff.
Speaker 7 (15:00):
Well, I don't know about more dependent than ever, but
there's one fact that needs to be stressed very clearly.
The While renewables will absolutely have a role to play
going forward, and I have them at home myself, you know,
full disclosure. If you actually look at the official data,
you know from the official data providers, on what source
of energy around the world is used in what proportion,
(15:20):
you can see that as the global economy grows and
energy demand grows, while we are seeing a rising share
accounted for by renewables, the overwhelming majority is still accounted
for by fossil fuels. The overwhelming majority. That's always been true,
that remains true at the moment. And it would be
a very very long term process to get every economy
in the world over to renewables from fossil fuel where
(15:43):
that were true. So right now this crisis is happening
when we are still stuck on oil.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
Absolutely, the Western world is wallowing and did often more
than one hundred percent of GDP. You look at some
of those European nations, Japan, I think the UIs So
there's a lot of money owed by a lot countries.
Who's an ode to who holds all the money?
Speaker 7 (16:04):
That's a good question. Actually it depends on the country.
Sometimes they owe it to themselves, sometimes they owe it
to other countries who are themselves extremely indebted. So it's
a tangled web of liabilities. But your overall analysis is
correct that we are entering this crisis which is either
going to see a massive increase in defense spending, which
is given, I believe, particularly given what was already the
(16:27):
background pre war, and or a massive increase in spending
on resilience for the same reasons, and or a massive
increase in spending on bailouts and subsidies, and you know,
trying to make sure people don't feel the pain so
much at the worst possible time. Of course, we also
have in the background the fear of inflation, and not
just the energy squeeze, but that spending into a supply
(16:49):
constrained economy could also be highly inflationary.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
Final question for you before we concentrate on where New
Zealand sits on all this, are China and Russia laughing
all the why to the bank at the moment.
Speaker 7 (17:02):
To be honest, if you read the local news there
carefully and really, you know, lift the stone and dig deeply,
no one's laughing anywhere. There's no scenario in which any
country sits through this and says, well, I'm absolutely sitting
pretty there are no possible negative implications for me. Everybody
is worried about what this could mean and where this
(17:23):
could go, either very directly short term or indirectly you know,
medium to longer term. So there is pressure building for
something to be done. What that will be remains unclear.
But please don't think that anyone is sitting there at
home chuckling and having a cup of cocoa and thinking
it's just those silly Western countries who are in trouble.
In fact, there are many feeling it much more severely
(17:45):
than the West is already.
Speaker 4 (17:46):
But hang On, isn't potent benefiting from this war.
Speaker 7 (17:50):
He is in terms of the oil price, that's undeniable,
even as if Ukraine continues to blow up his own
energy supply. But if you read the newspaper of it
last twenty four hours, you have seen that he's currently
bunkered down in secure sites in Moscow because of fear
of a coup. And in five months, even within Russia
they have parliamentary elections in which his party is expected
(18:11):
to get hammered. So even Putin is hardly sitting there
laughing all the way to the bank.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
We live in a troubled world. Part one of our
interview with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based global strategist.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
We're going to come.
Speaker 4 (18:23):
Back and discuss where New Zealand is an agg trading nation,
fits in and positions itself in this chaotic world.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience Grow with Rubbobank.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
Welcome back to the country. Yes, our two part interview
with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based global strategist, our Prime Minister.
Michael has just been in Singapore or is there as
we record this doing kind of a food for fuel deal.
Is this the future for trade deals?
Speaker 7 (18:58):
I think it is for a while, and I really
want to reiterate a couple of things about that that
I've said previously. The first one is the much heralded
and much loved in New Zealand rules based world order,
which is always a mouthful to say, doesn't exist anymore
the way that it used to. If New Zealand's Prime
Minister is having to fly to Singapore to effectively barter
(19:21):
food for refined fuel products from Singapore, what happened to
free trade agreements? What happened to the wonderful global efficiency
of markets effortlessly moving everything around the world, and small
countries being able to compete big ones. It's gone. It's
back to who has stuff and who doesn't have stuff,
and it's almost Caveman economics of you have food, we
have fire, we swap. That's effectively what it is now.
(19:45):
The upside of that is, of course New Zealand has
that food, and that's wonderful in the kind of world
we're entering into now. Of course, it helps to have
things that other people want and need, and that will
always be a strength of New Zealand. A specific weakness
in this one deal isn't New Zealand. It's sorry Singapore
on the other end of it. While they are pledging
(20:05):
to give you refined fuels and they have a fantastic
refinery complex there that can produce them and send them
to you, Singapore doesn't produce any oil of its own.
It's something to get that from other people. So it
itself is going to need to try and swap something
with somebody else longer term if this crisis drags on,
to make sure it still has the crude oil to refine,
(20:26):
interjet fuel, bunker fuel, diesel, etc. To send down to
you in New Zealand. So don't think that the deal
is a done deal forever. I mean nothing is forever,
of course, but don't think that it's an absolutely finalized
thing were we to get a sustained disruption of fuel
flow to Singapore, although that itself is open to question
(20:46):
because they are obviously at the top of the list
to get supplies, particularly from people like the US.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
New Zealand sales food to forty million rich people around
the world or wealthy people there will soon be nine
billion mouths to feed on the planet. Therefore, does that
pot us in the driver's seat going forward.
Speaker 7 (21:07):
Well, again, we've had iterations of this conversation for a
very long time that it depends on what kind of
world you live in. If you think you live in
a rules based order where everyone gets to pick and
choose what they want to do with whom, then yes,
you get to select to your forty million people are
out of you know, nine billion, and you know, rather
snooterly go around the world and choose, you know, what
(21:28):
we'll sell to you and not to you, et cetera,
et cetera. What we're actually seeing, of course, against the
current backdrop of you know, an energy crisis, two major wars,
worries about more, even if, as I said, world War
three isn't looming, is country after country starting to talk
about resilience and thinking about, okay, how can we minimize
our import bill, How can we make sure as much
of what we produce as close to home as possible
(21:49):
so we don't have to worry sending it by ship
if those ships can't get fuel to sail all the
way from New Zealand, et cetera, et cetera. So the
environment in which you're selling that food is changing very dramatically,
and while some doors are opening. For example, this one
food for fuel in Singapore and another one with India, which,
by the way, the free trade deal also had a
(22:10):
defense and technology adjunct to it. So in other words,
it wasn't just about we want to sell you food.
There was a quid pro quo geopolitically, which I fully
expected to see. The environment is now much much more
politicized and New Zealand will have to be more cognizant
of that. For example, going back one more time to
(22:32):
this Singapore deal, it's very lucky that Singapore itself, as
I said, is high up on the list of countries
within Asia which are likely to get redirected fuel from
the US now they can't get it from the Middle East.
But what does that mean. Well, that means that Singapore
will be listening to the US, and that means New
Zealand will be listening to Singapore, who will be listening
to the US. So the choices that one is making
(22:54):
one thinks completely freely in this rules based order are
actually narrowing down all the time.
Speaker 4 (23:00):
You've kind of preempted my next question, But do we
have a paradigm shift and the cost of getting air
goods to market, and obviously you've mentioned the cost of
shipping and getting plus stuff to places, so we're obviously
disadvantaged by our geography.
Speaker 7 (23:18):
Well, it depends what the energy environment, first of all,
looks like on the other side of the war. If
we end up with a very low cost of energy
because Iranian oil starts to flow again and Spenderzwhaland has
and there isn't too much damage in the Middle East
after a six nine month lag as things normalized because
it will take that long, then potentially we could have
very very cheap energy and it'll be cheap to ship
(23:39):
stuff from New Zealand all around the world if we
have a structural shift higher and I'm not making that call,
but there are people already ruminating that the lowest oil
prices might go post war for quite some time, might
be eighty dollars, for example, which is significantly higher than
they were, and bunker fuel for ships might be even
higher than that. That would be a headwind, absolutely in
our maritime headwind on that particular front. But the geopolitical
(24:03):
and geoeconomic architecture which I just you know, spiel about
for a moment, there is absolutely going to be one
where trade is much more politicized and much more coming
with a sidebar defense technology or political agreement that comes
with it, rather than a free for all of I
(24:24):
can pick and choose who my clients are depending on
the season and depending on what suits me best. So
the politicians will be getting much more involved.
Speaker 4 (24:31):
I suspect do we need to pick and choose between
America or China? At the stage were very much allied
to America. But as I said before, were China and
Russia last laughing all the way to the bank as
China effectively going to become the new superpower.
Speaker 7 (24:47):
Well, as I said, no one's laughing all the way
to the bank. The outcome of this war in the
Middle East could be absolutely tremendous for America one end
of the spectrum and reorder the world around Trent and
behind Trump, which New Zealand probably wouldn't like that much,
but that would be the outcome. And the other extreme
it could be a nineteen fifty six style geopolitical humiliation,
(25:10):
not just for Trump, but for America and for the
entire West. And if it's for the entire West, New
Zealand is part of the West, so Trump could stumble
and fall and he would fall on everyone, including New Zealand,
which yes, would benefit China relatively, but in that world
the New Zealand's defense arrangement with America might be very
much called into question. So it's a very very tricky one.
(25:32):
But your base question of is there necessity of making
a choice between the two This is something again we've
discussed many times over the years, and all I would
say is there's an emerging trend from this war on
the other side that those kind of decisions may be
upon us more eminently than might otherwise have been the case.
(25:55):
For example, the Financial Times, you know, the benchmark paper
coming out of the UK talking about international trade and
commerce and economics, ran an opinion piece I believe it
was the day before yesterday asking is China decoupling on food,
underlining that there's the highest level imperative coming out from
Beijing to try and minimize food imports to the absolute
(26:16):
lowest level they can be in exactly the same way
as they've done that with industry. So I'm not saying
specifically that will affect anyone in particular, and it was
only a question in an op ed, but were it true,
then regardless of anything else we're discussing decisions would already
be being made on the other side.
Speaker 4 (26:34):
Michael Every out of Sydney, Rabobank's Singapore based global strategist,
Thanks for your time today. You were almost upbeat. You
surprised me.
Speaker 7 (26:43):
Well, I'll see if I could do better and be
gloomy next time.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Say you always great to chat on the country.
Speaker 7 (26:49):
Thanks Emmy.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
The Best of the Country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (26:52):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 4 (27:04):
Get to New Zealand. Welcome back to the Best of
the Country. I'm Jamie McKay. The show is brought to
you by Rabobank. How good was Michael Every Rabobanks Singapore
based global strategists Going to finish it with David Seymour.
Immigration one of the big stories this week. But how
would the Deputy Prime Minister and act Party leader go
if he had to sit in immigration test himself. We
(27:26):
put him to the test on Thursday's show, just before
we go to David Seymour. Rabobank recently announced ten winners
of its Good Deeds Community Hub competition, who all picked
up ten k to go towards work that improves the
interior or exterior of their nominated hall, clubrooms or Maria
Great to see the Riversdale Rugby Club getting ten k
(27:48):
as well.
Speaker 7 (27:49):
Now.
Speaker 4 (27:49):
The winners were located throughout the country, with five winners
in the North five in the South. To find out
more about the winners, go to the Rabobank website rabobank
dot co dot nz Up next Day and Seymour to
wrap the best of the country.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
The best of the Country with Rubbobank.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience grow with Rubbobank.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Kicking off the country today, Deputy Dave Seymour. Deputy Prime
Minister David Seymour. I had to drop you yesterday because
the Boss wanted to go on the wireless when he
got back from Singapore. So you're on today, David on Sunday,
I think it was Sunday you announced your new immigration policy.
Are you cutting Winston's lunch here?
Speaker 6 (28:31):
Well, he didn't have to drop me, but that's a
choice you made.
Speaker 7 (28:35):
Now.
Speaker 6 (28:35):
I'm responding to concerns people raised with me just about
every day using policies that Act has long harbored. You
can go back to the book I published in twenty
seventeen where I said that there should be some sort
of infrastructure leavy because if you've got a group of
people living in the country paying tax funding infrastructure, that's sustainable.
(28:58):
But then when you add new people, you're actually have
to widen your infrastructure base. The question is should the
new people pay for that or the existing people? And
I think there's a strong argument about of fairness, the
new people should make some sort of extra contribution the
way generations have. But on the question of values again,
(29:20):
I'm on the record ten years ago saying if you're
not prepared to say that men and women are equal
in free speeches a bottom line, then you know, maybe
your values don't quite fit with New Zealand.
Speaker 4 (29:33):
But once surely your six dollars daily fee for temporary
work visas be borne ultimately by the employer, which shall
ultimately be passed on to the consumer.
Speaker 6 (29:45):
Well, I mean, when you put a tax on someone,
there's always a debate about who's really paying, And the
answer is that, depending on who needs who the most,
they break the cost up between them. So yes, you
can argue that some of it will go to the employer.
Some of it will result in a lower take home
pay for the worker, and to the extent it goes
(30:09):
on to the employer, some will be paid by the consumers.
So you know, you can argue about tax incidents if
you like. The point is to raise the revenue, and
that revenue I think is essential for infrastructure. Some people
in the rural space might say, look, you know, infrastructure
is mainly.
Speaker 7 (30:26):
An urban problem.
Speaker 6 (30:28):
We believe there should be a reduction or exemption for
rural workers. I'm actually open to that, and Andrew Hogart
has said that all along to us internally. I think
the other way that you might think about it is
you currently have this quite high medium wage requirement. You
could knock seventy five cents an hour off that, and
(30:50):
that would cover the six dollars a day at eight
hours a day. So you know, lots of ways to
skin a cat. I think when people come out and
say it's a tax on Rayal, New Zealand or an
attack on small business, it's almost.
Speaker 7 (31:03):
As though they know more about my policy than I do.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
But I haven't finalized it all right, David Seymour, we
need migrant labor, though, to do the work on the
farms and orchards of New Zealand.
Speaker 6 (31:16):
I agree with that, and that's why I've been a
strong supporter of the RS scheme that is in need
of major reform, by the way, And yet if we
want to have an ongoing relationship with migrant labor, it
needs to remain politically sustainable. Any public policy has to
be politically sustainable. And if you look around the world,
(31:36):
if you ask people in New Zealand, there are a
lot of people who are saying, look, I appreciate the
role of migration in our history, but is it continuing
to build the key week character that we rely on
for most migrants, absolutely, but for a growing number perhaps not.
And are we keeping up with the infrastructure required for
a population that's growing pretty rapidly. You look at duned
(31:59):
and say, you know, we add almost to Dunedin worth
of people every couple of years. The actual Dunedin took
one hundred and eighty years to build, and some people
say it still isn't finished. So you know, there's a
question of whether or not we have the right balance.
X policies are designed to do precisely that, while accepting
the legitimate concerns of people who say, hey, look, I
(32:19):
know this country is built by migration, but does it
working for us right now?
Speaker 7 (32:23):
Now?
Speaker 4 (32:23):
One of your other policies is a stronger English language requirement,
and I think generally that's probably been accepted. But are
they are migrants under your scheme going to have to
sit one of these migrant tests. I know that, for example,
the one in the UK is forty five minutes long.
It has twenty four questions. You've got to get eighteen
(32:44):
out of twenty four. And I was given some sample
questions for this migration test, and I don't know if
I don't think I would pass. Apparently most Brits can't pass.
Speaker 6 (32:55):
Well, I mean, I'm not entirely surprised after talking to
you for a long time.
Speaker 4 (32:59):
Jane, Well, hang on, David, David, let's see how clever
you are. I'm going to throw this question at you.
History question, when did the Romans leave Britain.
Speaker 6 (33:10):
Well, some would argue they still have no, no.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
No, give me an answer, stop fudging.
Speaker 6 (33:15):
I'm going to go with about four hundred AD.
Speaker 4 (33:17):
Four hundred and ten AD. So you got that wrong.
Here's a government.
Speaker 6 (33:21):
Question and I got it within ten years over two
thousand years.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
It's still not right government. How many members are there
in the House of.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
Commons About six hundred six sixty there is six fifty.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
Once again, you're wrong, David. Three strikes and you're out. Okay,
I think you'll get this one. What is the nickname
for the Queen Elizabeth Tower in London?
Speaker 7 (33:44):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (33:46):
That one you've got me on, but just bear in mind.
Speaker 4 (33:48):
No, no, hang on, well no that's big Ben. So
you'll strike that, you'll struck out none from three.
Speaker 6 (33:54):
That's absolute rubbish. First of all, I'm sure the multi
choice I would have got those right. Second of all,
they're not actually I'm not actually trying to migrate.
Speaker 7 (34:04):
To the UK.
Speaker 6 (34:06):
And well Onceton might like you to well, who knows.
I'm not really worried about his preferences. But you know,
I think the wider point is you talk about English language,
you talk about knowledge. A lot of people in healthcare,
a lot of people in education saying hey, look, our
job's materially harder because we are dealing with people that
(34:26):
don't have the language skills. Now you know, yes we
want people to come here, Yes we need the source
of labor, but should that cost be put on to
the other patients in the waiting room or the other
kids in the classroom. It's all about balance, and I
think it's high time that we had a more sophisticated
conversation than perhaps we've had lately.
Speaker 7 (34:45):
With people going on but a check in and all that.
Speaker 6 (34:48):
I think we need to ask ourselves, you know, how
do we reconcile our heritage and our future is a
country of migrants with the real needs and concerns of
people already living here.
Speaker 4 (34:58):
Hey, you're at Millbrook to I don't know why you're
not playing golf, but apparently you've got some economic speech
and I think later later today.
Speaker 7 (35:05):
You're heading caps, but not the right type.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Yes, later this afternoon a big announcement with our old
Mike Casey on electrification, and I think there's an embargo
on that one. But positive economic stories.
Speaker 7 (35:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (35:19):
Look, I'm talking to people here about the economy and
what we're going to do to turn it around a lot.
We have done, a lot of things coming into effect
very soon. If you look at resource management law, can't
say enough about it. It's the game changer for a
resource based country or land based country. But you know,
also just make the point that if we don't figure
(35:40):
out how to get energy abundance in this country, then
our whole story of being first world becomes kind of academic.
So I'm looking forward to talking to Mike Casey about
how we can make a few things easier when it
comes to solar because you know, the sun doesn't shine
every day, but it shines enough that we need to
take advantage of that.
Speaker 4 (36:01):
Final question for you, David Sea, my Act Party leader
Deputy Prime Minister for the upcoming New Zealand Test for migrants,
how many tales are wagging the coalition dog at the moment?
Two or three?
Speaker 6 (36:14):
Well, look, our government's about to put together it's third
budget with three parties that reduces the size of government
as a percentage of the economy three in a row,
less money being taken more for the private sector. Has
it gone as fast as the Act Party would go?
Speaker 7 (36:32):
No?
Speaker 6 (36:33):
Has it gone faster than it would without us? Yes,
we can point to receipts literally where we've saved billions
of dollars as Act ministers, and that with Act policy,
all good stuff. However, I would just say, look, you
know anyone that wishes that the part that the government
was divided only needs to look at the actual track record.
Three budgets in a row saving the taxpayer money.
Speaker 7 (36:57):
Pretty good stuff, all.
Speaker 4 (36:58):
Right, David Seamore, thanks for your time, as always, enjoy
your day at Melbrook.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
Yes, the best of the country with Robboback choose the
bank with one hundred and twenty years global agribusiness experience.
Grow with Rubbobako, dav De Seymour, Act Party Leader, Deputy
(37:23):
Prime Minister wrapping are the best of the country.
Speaker 4 (37:26):
It's going to be an interesting six month run into
that November seven election, that's for sure. Surely my Highlanders
can get the BIS done this afternoon. They won't drop
the ball two weeks in a row. Here's hoping, hope
you have a great weekend wherever you are in God's own.
I'll catch your back, same time, same place next Saturday
morning for the best of the country. Brought to you
(37:46):
by Rabobank. I'm going to leave you with the rolling
Stones Ageless. This is one of my favorites. Wild horses.
Speaker 5 (38:00):
I know.
Speaker 3 (38:02):
Three you see line I have not free, you don't
have the.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
Man rou.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Hell bust try. There's two songs after we die, Wow,
(38:58):
Draggy Wow, wyss and we right.
Speaker 8 (39:11):
The wows Trappy Wow, wows.
Speaker 3 (40:01):
The alty. Somebody
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
And well Well leaders.
Speaker 4 (00:20):
From Gaday and Good Morning New Zealand. I'm Jamie McKay.
This is the best of the country each and every
Saturday morning here on news Talk said be we bring
you the best bits of our weekdays show twelve to one.
You can now hear a some christ Church, Wellington and
Auckland on the AM frequencies and we do so courtesy
(00:40):
of Rabobank. We're growing a better New Zealand together. Kicking
it off with Angie from the Rolling Stones releasing a
new album mix all of eighty two years old. You've
got to admire his energy. We're kicking off the show
today not with Angie but with Erica the Minister of Immigration.
One too pleased on Monday show. In fact, she phoned
(01:02):
us up and said I need to go on and
talk to the farmers of New Zealand. She or was
none too pleased with axe new proposed immigration policy, saying
it's dog whistling in election year. How's this policy going
to affect the farms? Factories and Orchards of New Zealand
got a special two part interview with You with Rabobanks,
Singapore based global strategist. One of my favorite interviews when
(01:26):
I get a chance to talk to them. Part one,
the geopolitical state of the world chaotic. I can't even
say it myself. How close are we to midnight on
the doomsday clock? Part two? As a food producing, agg
trading nation, how do we position ourselves to buffer these
turbulent times? And we're going to finish it with David
(01:46):
Seymour responding really to what Erica Stanford I had to say.
More about that later. It's all on the best of
the Country and it's all brought to you by Rabobank.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
The best of the Country with Rubbobak.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience grow with Rubbobak.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Well, it was the big story yesterday, the new proposed
Act policy on immigration. To perhaps argue the other side
of the coin is the Minister of Immigration, Erica Stanford. Erica,
is this David Seymour an election year trying to cut
Winston's lunch.
Speaker 5 (02:27):
It certainly feels like that a little bit and It's
unfortunate because immigration policy needs really air full thought, because
there are lots of unintended consequences you get when you
have sort of knee jerk populist policies, and one of those,
the glaring one out of the announcement yesterday certainly was
around the attack on small business and certainly the attack.
Speaker 4 (02:49):
On the rule sector well as I am a fond
of saying Erica, if we didn't have the Filipinos, there'll
be no cows Milkton SOUTHND quite literally. And I know
that from hands on variance, we need migrant labor to
do the jobs that Kiwis can't or won't do well.
Speaker 5 (03:07):
We absolutely do, and there are certain regions in New
Zealand where there is low unemployment or there are tv
who are just not willing to do some of those jobs,
be it in agriculture or in for example, aged care.
We rely on migrant workers. Businesses rely on them, and
we already have things in place where we are either
(03:28):
using the tax system to collect text of them, or
last year I put a built through the house which
we're about to implement, which we'll look at what additional
costs that migrants impose and be able to collect those
in a reasonable and proportionate way through the immigration levy system,
very carefully thought through, and those it will be those
(03:51):
costs inclred and things like health and education, but in
a very reasonable and proportionate way. What is not reasonable
or proportionate is this idea of a six dollars a
day charge which has to be charged upfront as a levee.
And if you are a dairy farm work and you
get a hurt manager, for example, and it's a five
year visa, that's an eleven thousand dollar upfront cost that
(04:14):
a migrant will have to pay on top of their
visa fee and their health check screening they have to
do with all those other costs. Now, you and I
both know there ain't no migrant going to pay that.
It's kind of be the it's going to be the
employer that who is desperate has no other choice that
will end up paying that eleven thousand dollars to secure
the migrant that they need. And let's not forget they'd
(04:35):
probably come in with a partner who will have an
open work right. They'll need the eleven thousand dollars upfront
cost too. So there's twenty two thousand dollars to secure
the migrant that you need times out across all of
the migrants you have working in your business.
Speaker 4 (04:49):
Okay, to be fair to David Seymour, eric to Stamford,
he did say he was prepared to relook at his
policy proposal when it came to rural in New Zealand.
But is this just extra admin.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
Well, I think that comment goes to show that he
hasn't thought through this very well, and that is sort
of a little bit typical. Sometimes it's not just rural
New Zealand. What about our healthcare sector who rely on
migrant workers to work in our aged care sector. We've
got thousands and thousands of Filipinos and Indians and others
who are working as healthcare support workers now. Also, we
(05:24):
can't find keywas through that work in the area in
regions or we're just not prepared to do the work.
So okay, is there a carve out there as well? Okay,
what about hospital in areas where it's very difficult to
find New Zealand workers when we have a carve out there,
That's why this policy doesn't work. It is populist and
knee jerk and is just passing costs onto businesses and
(05:44):
then essentially onto the consumer.
Speaker 4 (05:47):
But are we letting and this would be Seemore's argument,
definitely Winston's argument, we're letting through too many unskilled migrant workers.
What do you say to that.
Speaker 5 (05:56):
Well, of course we're not, and they we both know
that because when I became the minister, the previous government
had my immigration out of control. They had what's one
hundred and thirty five thousand net migration was our figure
when I became the minister, and seventy percent of those
workers were low skilled because they previous government flew through
(06:18):
the floodgates, open closed their eyes and didn't do any
proper verification. And once there's a chink in your armor
and your board is a compromise, anyone can get in.
I have completely turned that around in two years. We
now have seventy percent of our workers coming in who
are highly skilled workers and only thirty percent to a
lower skilled And we still need, as you know, those
lower skilled workers, for example, the workers and our dairy farms,
(06:41):
the dairy farm workers to come in, so we'll always
need a proportion of those, but it is work tested.
There has to be a genuine job and you have
to properly check that no New Zealander was able to
do the work. And then after three years, and they're
pretty strict on this, you have to leave unless you're
upskilled yourself into a higher role, must leave to create
room for a kiwi. So all of these problems have
(07:03):
been solved, and they are stirring up this sentiment, which
to be fair as a hangover from what Labor did.
But it's all been solved under this government.
Speaker 4 (07:12):
Does he have some fair points though there could be
a strong argument for a stronger English language requirement from
our migrants.
Speaker 5 (07:21):
Well, again, I put in place when I became the minister,
there was no English language requirement.
Speaker 6 (07:27):
For try work visas.
Speaker 5 (07:28):
We already put in place English language for skill level
four and five. And we are about to announce some
more changes which Minister see More knows about because I
put them up creation last week. It's an interesting timing
of his announcement. So we've already massively tightened up on
English language and I've got I will have more to
say in the next in the next few weeks on that.
(07:50):
So again something that we've already dealt with, and again
in a proportionate way, you don't need to English language
test every single migrant coming in the country. Many of
them in the high skilled roles are already doing English
language texts for their registration, their professional registration. So again
carefully thought through, well balanced, and in consultation with the
(08:11):
sectors that are affected the most.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Eric Stanford, can I put it to you that if
a center right government gets re elected and it's a
bigger at this stage, and you've got once then on
one side see more on the other, you're going to
have a hell of a battle with immigration policy.
Speaker 5 (08:28):
Well here's the thing, right, in the last two years,
I've worked really, really hard to make sure we have
a really smart immigration system that works for New Zealanders,
that's getting in the right mix of skills, and that
is not tolerating those who come in and commit times.
We've really toughened up and I'm getting quite a bit
of stick from it from the left, but reasonable New
Zealanders would expect it's how we operate and that's what
(08:50):
we're doing. And actually it's been fine. I've had really
good support from both New Zealand First and ACT over
the last few years forward our immigration policy. But here
we are an election year and everybody's wanting to talk
about immigration, as often happens. But I think that a
key thing to remember is our track record in immigration
(09:10):
is very strong. I'm incredibly proud of the work that
we've done, and that's evidenced by the fact that you
don't hear about immigration and the media much. It's because
we have sorted it out.
Speaker 7 (09:20):
Eric A.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Stanford to use a farming terminology, there's a lot of
dog whistling going on at the moment.
Speaker 5 (09:26):
Oh well, that's an election yere. I'm not the type
of person that uses immigration to dog whistle. I understand
that immigration is incredibly complex and there are many competing
things you have to balance. I mean, I'm landing a
jetplane on a keen cent coin quite often, trying to
manage the balance between putting Kiwi's first and making sure
(09:48):
that we get the migrants that we need, not being
overly restrictive with migrants because they have choices they can
go to other countries, but also making sure that they
fairly you are accountable the costs that they incur. So
very careful. It needs, you know, someone who's considering these
balancing these competing things carefully and not coming out with
(10:11):
knee jerk policies that clearly show that whoever's coming out
with them doesn't understand immigration.
Speaker 4 (10:16):
Eric Stanford, Minister of Immigration on the country, Thanks for
your time, appreciated and just a final word from me,
Yeah we need them. We need the migrant labor to
do the work on the farms of New Zealand.
Speaker 7 (10:26):
There you go, Thank you very much.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
The Best of the Country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience, Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Good Morning, New Zealand. Welcome back to the Best of
the Country. It's brought to you. The show is brought
to you by Rabobank. I'm Jamie Mackay paying tribute to
the Stones, who are releasing a new album in July
of this year. Up next on the Best of the
Country two part interview with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based
global strategist on the geopolitical state of the world and
(11:06):
how as an ag nation, an ag trading nation, how
do we position ourselves to buffer these turbulent times. You're
really going to enjoy what he has to say. David
Seymour before the end of the hour, But before I forget,
the latest Rabobank Agribusiness Monthly is now out provides a
snapshot of the latest trends in the macro agriculture environment.
(11:28):
To access the report, go to the Rabobank website rabobank
dot co dot Nz. Select Agribusiness Monthly under the Knowledge
and Network tab. Up next, Michael every buckle in, that's.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Grow with rubber Bank.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Well, I've been eagerly awaiting and also dreading this interview
on the country today. I love chatting to this bloke.
His name is Michael Every He's Rabobanks Singapore based global strategist.
He is in Sydney today. Michael, I'm going to split
this interview into two because there's too much to get
into one piece. So the first part will be about
(12:22):
the world geopolitically and how close we are to midnight
on the doomsday clock. Part two for New Zealand as
an ag trading nation, where we fit in and how
we position ourselves in this chaotic world. Let's start with
the world geo politically. I call you a bit of
an alarmist. I'm almost afraid to ask you, where are
we on the doomsday clock?
Speaker 7 (12:44):
Well, that doomsday clock, if we're talking about the official one.
As far as I'm aware, it's been something like one
minute to midnight for as long as I can remember,
I think, most of my adult life, and we have
apparently officially seen it. Take a few more seconds forward personally,
and hope this lists people. I don't think we're near
World War three. I don't think we're close to actually
(13:04):
seeing all the major powers go to war with each other.
That threat is there in the background. It's always been
there in the background, and certainly there are a lot
of things going on, but at the moment I think
the rather unpleasant, to put it mildly, you know, serious
regional wars that we have between Russia and Ukraine and
now in the Middle East are probably taking up more
than enough time and attention of the people whose fingers
(13:27):
are on the big red button. So in that respect,
I'd like to reassure people. But that doesn't mean what
we've got now is good and it doesn't have a
big impact on everybody, Because it does.
Speaker 4 (13:36):
How much of this is down to just one man's ego,
and where is the off ramp for Donald Trump?
Speaker 7 (13:43):
Okay, first of all, almost none of it is down
to one man's ego. This is a far more complicated
structural problem that's been evolving for a very long time.
But I actually ended up with one person having to
make the decision whether we're going to do something about
now or wait for something else to happen about it later.
So I don't think we can have the easy a.
I you're saying orange band bad and therefore the world
would be fine without that happening. If that were true,
(14:04):
then I think history would be a lot simpler overall.
Where is the off ramp? That's the really interesting question,
because again, this presumes that this was some ego driven
adventure without which the world was all liveling happily, you know,
grilling marshmallows together around the fire and singing Kumbaya. And
I can heartily assure you that was not the reality
in the Middle East, and were this not happening, we
(14:25):
would be having some other kind of problem. Instead. It's
a region which has plagued with structural issues which are
all coming to the fore. Now we can hope that
they can be resolved. But it's an extremely complex mess
that needs to be disentangled, and what's happening could indeed
make it worse or it could potentially make it better.
So I don't think offramp is actually a very useful
(14:47):
framing for it, to be honest.
Speaker 4 (14:49):
Well, they're sitting on all the oil. What happened to
the world moving away from dependency on oil? We're more
dependent than ever on the stuff.
Speaker 7 (15:00):
Well, I don't know about more dependent than ever, but
there's one fact that needs to be stressed very clearly.
The While renewables will absolutely have a role to play
going forward, and I have them at home myself, you know,
full disclosure. If you actually look at the official data,
you know from the official data providers, on what source
of energy around the world is used in what proportion,
(15:20):
you can see that as the global economy grows and
energy demand grows, while we are seeing a rising share
accounted for by renewables, the overwhelming majority is still accounted
for by fossil fuels. The overwhelming majority. That's always been true,
that remains true at the moment. And it would be
a very very long term process to get every economy
in the world over to renewables from fossil fuel where
(15:43):
that were true. So right now this crisis is happening
when we are still stuck on oil.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
Absolutely, the Western world is wallowing and did often more
than one hundred percent of GDP. You look at some
of those European nations, Japan, I think the UIs So
there's a lot of money owed by a lot countries.
Who's an ode to who holds all the money?
Speaker 7 (16:04):
That's a good question. Actually it depends on the country.
Sometimes they owe it to themselves, sometimes they owe it
to other countries who are themselves extremely indebted. So it's
a tangled web of liabilities. But your overall analysis is
correct that we are entering this crisis which is either
going to see a massive increase in defense spending, which
is given, I believe, particularly given what was already the
(16:27):
background pre war, and or a massive increase in spending
on resilience for the same reasons, and or a massive
increase in spending on bailouts and subsidies, and you know,
trying to make sure people don't feel the pain so
much at the worst possible time. Of course, we also
have in the background the fear of inflation, and not
just the energy squeeze, but that spending into a supply
(16:49):
constrained economy could also be highly inflationary.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
Final question for you before we concentrate on where New
Zealand sits on all this, are China and Russia laughing
all the why to the bank at the moment.
Speaker 7 (17:02):
To be honest, if you read the local news there
carefully and really, you know, lift the stone and dig deeply,
no one's laughing anywhere. There's no scenario in which any
country sits through this and says, well, I'm absolutely sitting
pretty there are no possible negative implications for me. Everybody
is worried about what this could mean and where this
(17:23):
could go, either very directly short term or indirectly you know,
medium to longer term. So there is pressure building for
something to be done. What that will be remains unclear.
But please don't think that anyone is sitting there at
home chuckling and having a cup of cocoa and thinking
it's just those silly Western countries who are in trouble.
In fact, there are many feeling it much more severely
(17:45):
than the West is already.
Speaker 4 (17:46):
But hang On, isn't potent benefiting from this war.
Speaker 7 (17:50):
He is in terms of the oil price, that's undeniable,
even as if Ukraine continues to blow up his own
energy supply. But if you read the newspaper of it
last twenty four hours, you have seen that he's currently
bunkered down in secure sites in Moscow because of fear
of a coup. And in five months, even within Russia
they have parliamentary elections in which his party is expected
(18:11):
to get hammered. So even Putin is hardly sitting there
laughing all the way to the bank.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
We live in a troubled world. Part one of our
interview with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based global strategist.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
We're going to come.
Speaker 4 (18:23):
Back and discuss where New Zealand is an agg trading nation,
fits in and positions itself in this chaotic world.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
The best of the country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (18:33):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience Grow with Rubbobank.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
Welcome back to the country. Yes, our two part interview
with Michael Every Rabobanks, Singapore based global strategist, our Prime Minister.
Michael has just been in Singapore or is there as
we record this doing kind of a food for fuel deal.
Is this the future for trade deals?
Speaker 7 (18:58):
I think it is for a while, and I really
want to reiterate a couple of things about that that
I've said previously. The first one is the much heralded
and much loved in New Zealand rules based world order,
which is always a mouthful to say, doesn't exist anymore
the way that it used to. If New Zealand's Prime
Minister is having to fly to Singapore to effectively barter
(19:21):
food for refined fuel products from Singapore, what happened to
free trade agreements? What happened to the wonderful global efficiency
of markets effortlessly moving everything around the world, and small
countries being able to compete big ones. It's gone. It's
back to who has stuff and who doesn't have stuff,
and it's almost Caveman economics of you have food, we
have fire, we swap. That's effectively what it is now.
(19:45):
The upside of that is, of course New Zealand has
that food, and that's wonderful in the kind of world
we're entering into now. Of course, it helps to have
things that other people want and need, and that will
always be a strength of New Zealand. A specific weakness
in this one deal isn't New Zealand. It's sorry Singapore
on the other end of it. While they are pledging
(20:05):
to give you refined fuels and they have a fantastic
refinery complex there that can produce them and send them
to you, Singapore doesn't produce any oil of its own.
It's something to get that from other people. So it
itself is going to need to try and swap something
with somebody else longer term if this crisis drags on,
to make sure it still has the crude oil to refine,
(20:26):
interjet fuel, bunker fuel, diesel, etc. To send down to
you in New Zealand. So don't think that the deal
is a done deal forever. I mean nothing is forever,
of course, but don't think that it's an absolutely finalized
thing were we to get a sustained disruption of fuel
flow to Singapore, although that itself is open to question
(20:46):
because they are obviously at the top of the list
to get supplies, particularly from people like the US.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
New Zealand sales food to forty million rich people around
the world or wealthy people there will soon be nine
billion mouths to feed on the planet. Therefore, does that
pot us in the driver's seat going forward.
Speaker 7 (21:07):
Well, again, we've had iterations of this conversation for a
very long time that it depends on what kind of
world you live in. If you think you live in
a rules based order where everyone gets to pick and
choose what they want to do with whom, then yes,
you get to select to your forty million people are
out of you know, nine billion, and you know, rather
snooterly go around the world and choose, you know, what
(21:28):
we'll sell to you and not to you, et cetera,
et cetera. What we're actually seeing, of course, against the
current backdrop of you know, an energy crisis, two major wars,
worries about more, even if, as I said, world War
three isn't looming, is country after country starting to talk
about resilience and thinking about, okay, how can we minimize
our import bill, How can we make sure as much
of what we produce as close to home as possible
(21:49):
so we don't have to worry sending it by ship
if those ships can't get fuel to sail all the
way from New Zealand, et cetera, et cetera. So the
environment in which you're selling that food is changing very dramatically,
and while some doors are opening. For example, this one
food for fuel in Singapore and another one with India, which,
by the way, the free trade deal also had a
(22:10):
defense and technology adjunct to it. So in other words,
it wasn't just about we want to sell you food.
There was a quid pro quo geopolitically, which I fully
expected to see. The environment is now much much more
politicized and New Zealand will have to be more cognizant
of that. For example, going back one more time to
(22:32):
this Singapore deal, it's very lucky that Singapore itself, as
I said, is high up on the list of countries
within Asia which are likely to get redirected fuel from
the US now they can't get it from the Middle East.
But what does that mean. Well, that means that Singapore
will be listening to the US, and that means New
Zealand will be listening to Singapore, who will be listening
to the US. So the choices that one is making
(22:54):
one thinks completely freely in this rules based order are
actually narrowing down all the time.
Speaker 4 (23:00):
You've kind of preempted my next question, But do we
have a paradigm shift and the cost of getting air
goods to market, and obviously you've mentioned the cost of
shipping and getting plus stuff to places, so we're obviously
disadvantaged by our geography.
Speaker 7 (23:18):
Well, it depends what the energy environment, first of all,
looks like on the other side of the war. If
we end up with a very low cost of energy
because Iranian oil starts to flow again and Spenderzwhaland has
and there isn't too much damage in the Middle East
after a six nine month lag as things normalized because
it will take that long, then potentially we could have
very very cheap energy and it'll be cheap to ship
(23:39):
stuff from New Zealand all around the world if we
have a structural shift higher and I'm not making that call,
but there are people already ruminating that the lowest oil
prices might go post war for quite some time, might
be eighty dollars, for example, which is significantly higher than
they were, and bunker fuel for ships might be even
higher than that. That would be a headwind, absolutely in
our maritime headwind on that particular front. But the geopolitical
(24:03):
and geoeconomic architecture which I just you know, spiel about
for a moment, there is absolutely going to be one
where trade is much more politicized and much more coming
with a sidebar defense technology or political agreement that comes
with it, rather than a free for all of I
(24:24):
can pick and choose who my clients are depending on
the season and depending on what suits me best. So
the politicians will be getting much more involved.
Speaker 4 (24:31):
I suspect do we need to pick and choose between
America or China? At the stage were very much allied
to America. But as I said before, were China and
Russia last laughing all the way to the bank as
China effectively going to become the new superpower.
Speaker 7 (24:47):
Well, as I said, no one's laughing all the way
to the bank. The outcome of this war in the
Middle East could be absolutely tremendous for America one end
of the spectrum and reorder the world around Trent and
behind Trump, which New Zealand probably wouldn't like that much,
but that would be the outcome. And the other extreme
it could be a nineteen fifty six style geopolitical humiliation,
(25:10):
not just for Trump, but for America and for the
entire West. And if it's for the entire West, New
Zealand is part of the West, so Trump could stumble
and fall and he would fall on everyone, including New Zealand,
which yes, would benefit China relatively, but in that world
the New Zealand's defense arrangement with America might be very
much called into question. So it's a very very tricky one.
(25:32):
But your base question of is there necessity of making
a choice between the two This is something again we've
discussed many times over the years, and all I would
say is there's an emerging trend from this war on
the other side that those kind of decisions may be
upon us more eminently than might otherwise have been the case.
(25:55):
For example, the Financial Times, you know, the benchmark paper
coming out of the UK talking about international trade and
commerce and economics, ran an opinion piece I believe it
was the day before yesterday asking is China decoupling on food,
underlining that there's the highest level imperative coming out from
Beijing to try and minimize food imports to the absolute
(26:16):
lowest level they can be in exactly the same way
as they've done that with industry. So I'm not saying
specifically that will affect anyone in particular, and it was
only a question in an op ed, but were it true,
then regardless of anything else we're discussing decisions would already
be being made on the other side.
Speaker 4 (26:34):
Michael Every out of Sydney, Rabobank's Singapore based global strategist,
Thanks for your time today. You were almost upbeat. You
surprised me.
Speaker 7 (26:43):
Well, I'll see if I could do better and be
gloomy next time.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
Say you always great to chat on the country.
Speaker 7 (26:49):
Thanks Emmy.
Speaker 1 (26:50):
The Best of the Country with Rabobank.
Speaker 2 (26:52):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
Grow with Rabobank.
Speaker 4 (27:04):
Get to New Zealand. Welcome back to the Best of
the Country. I'm Jamie McKay. The show is brought to
you by Rabobank. How good was Michael Every Rabobanks Singapore
based global strategists Going to finish it with David Seymour.
Immigration one of the big stories this week. But how
would the Deputy Prime Minister and act Party leader go
if he had to sit in immigration test himself. We
(27:26):
put him to the test on Thursday's show, just before
we go to David Seymour. Rabobank recently announced ten winners
of its Good Deeds Community Hub competition, who all picked
up ten k to go towards work that improves the
interior or exterior of their nominated hall, clubrooms or Maria
Great to see the Riversdale Rugby Club getting ten k
(27:48):
as well.
Speaker 7 (27:49):
Now.
Speaker 4 (27:49):
The winners were located throughout the country, with five winners
in the North five in the South. To find out
more about the winners, go to the Rabobank website rabobank
dot co dot nz Up next Day and Seymour to
wrap the best of the country.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
The best of the Country with Rubbobank.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Choose the bank with one hundred and twenty years global
agribusiness experience grow with Rubbobank.
Speaker 4 (28:13):
Kicking off the country today, Deputy Dave Seymour. Deputy Prime
Minister David Seymour. I had to drop you yesterday because
the Boss wanted to go on the wireless when he
got back from Singapore. So you're on today, David on Sunday,
I think it was Sunday you announced your new immigration policy.
Are you cutting Winston's lunch here?
Speaker 6 (28:31):
Well, he didn't have to drop me, but that's a
choice you made.
Speaker 7 (28:35):
Now.
Speaker 6 (28:35):
I'm responding to concerns people raised with me just about
every day using policies that Act has long harbored. You
can go back to the book I published in twenty
seventeen where I said that there should be some sort
of infrastructure leavy because if you've got a group of
people living in the country paying tax funding infrastructure, that's sustainable.
(28:58):
But then when you add new people, you're actually have
to widen your infrastructure base. The question is should the
new people pay for that or the existing people? And
I think there's a strong argument about of fairness, the
new people should make some sort of extra contribution the
way generations have. But on the question of values again,
(29:20):
I'm on the record ten years ago saying if you're
not prepared to say that men and women are equal
in free speeches a bottom line, then you know, maybe
your values don't quite fit with New Zealand.
Speaker 4 (29:33):
But once surely your six dollars daily fee for temporary
work visas be borne ultimately by the employer, which shall
ultimately be passed on to the consumer.
Speaker 6 (29:45):
Well, I mean, when you put a tax on someone,
there's always a debate about who's really paying, And the
answer is that, depending on who needs who the most,
they break the cost up between them. So yes, you
can argue that some of it will go to the employer.
Some of it will result in a lower take home
pay for the worker, and to the extent it goes
(30:09):
on to the employer, some will be paid by the consumers.
So you know, you can argue about tax incidents if
you like. The point is to raise the revenue, and
that revenue I think is essential for infrastructure. Some people
in the rural space might say, look, you know, infrastructure
is mainly.
Speaker 7 (30:26):
An urban problem.
Speaker 6 (30:28):
We believe there should be a reduction or exemption for
rural workers. I'm actually open to that, and Andrew Hogart
has said that all along to us internally. I think
the other way that you might think about it is
you currently have this quite high medium wage requirement. You
could knock seventy five cents an hour off that, and
(30:50):
that would cover the six dollars a day at eight
hours a day. So you know, lots of ways to
skin a cat. I think when people come out and
say it's a tax on Rayal, New Zealand or an
attack on small business, it's almost.
Speaker 7 (31:03):
As though they know more about my policy than I do.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
But I haven't finalized it all right, David Seymour, we
need migrant labor, though, to do the work on the
farms and orchards of New Zealand.
Speaker 6 (31:16):
I agree with that, and that's why I've been a
strong supporter of the RS scheme that is in need
of major reform, by the way, And yet if we
want to have an ongoing relationship with migrant labor, it
needs to remain politically sustainable. Any public policy has to
be politically sustainable. And if you look around the world,
(31:36):
if you ask people in New Zealand, there are a
lot of people who are saying, look, I appreciate the
role of migration in our history, but is it continuing
to build the key week character that we rely on
for most migrants, absolutely, but for a growing number perhaps not.
And are we keeping up with the infrastructure required for
a population that's growing pretty rapidly. You look at duned
(31:59):
and say, you know, we add almost to Dunedin worth
of people every couple of years. The actual Dunedin took
one hundred and eighty years to build, and some people
say it still isn't finished. So you know, there's a
question of whether or not we have the right balance.
X policies are designed to do precisely that, while accepting
the legitimate concerns of people who say, hey, look, I
(32:19):
know this country is built by migration, but does it
working for us right now?
Speaker 7 (32:23):
Now?
Speaker 4 (32:23):
One of your other policies is a stronger English language requirement,
and I think generally that's probably been accepted. But are
they are migrants under your scheme going to have to
sit one of these migrant tests. I know that, for example,
the one in the UK is forty five minutes long.
It has twenty four questions. You've got to get eighteen
(32:44):
out of twenty four. And I was given some sample
questions for this migration test, and I don't know if
I don't think I would pass. Apparently most Brits can't pass.
Speaker 6 (32:55):
Well, I mean, I'm not entirely surprised after talking to
you for a long time.
Speaker 4 (32:59):
Jane, Well, hang on, David, David, let's see how clever
you are. I'm going to throw this question at you.
History question, when did the Romans leave Britain.
Speaker 6 (33:10):
Well, some would argue they still have no, no.
Speaker 4 (33:12):
No, give me an answer, stop fudging.
Speaker 6 (33:15):
I'm going to go with about four hundred AD.
Speaker 4 (33:17):
Four hundred and ten AD. So you got that wrong.
Here's a government.
Speaker 6 (33:21):
Question and I got it within ten years over two
thousand years.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
It's still not right government. How many members are there
in the House of.
Speaker 6 (33:28):
Commons About six hundred six sixty there is six fifty.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
Once again, you're wrong, David. Three strikes and you're out. Okay,
I think you'll get this one. What is the nickname
for the Queen Elizabeth Tower in London?
Speaker 7 (33:44):
Oh?
Speaker 6 (33:46):
That one you've got me on, but just bear in mind.
Speaker 4 (33:48):
No, no, hang on, well no that's big Ben. So
you'll strike that, you'll struck out none from three.
Speaker 6 (33:54):
That's absolute rubbish. First of all, I'm sure the multi
choice I would have got those right. Second of all,
they're not actually I'm not actually trying to migrate.
Speaker 7 (34:04):
To the UK.
Speaker 6 (34:06):
And well Onceton might like you to well, who knows.
I'm not really worried about his preferences. But you know,
I think the wider point is you talk about English language,
you talk about knowledge. A lot of people in healthcare,
a lot of people in education saying hey, look, our
job's materially harder because we are dealing with people that
(34:26):
don't have the language skills. Now you know, yes we
want people to come here, Yes we need the source
of labor, but should that cost be put on to
the other patients in the waiting room or the other
kids in the classroom. It's all about balance, and I
think it's high time that we had a more sophisticated
conversation than perhaps we've had lately.
Speaker 7 (34:45):
With people going on but a check in and all that.
Speaker 6 (34:48):
I think we need to ask ourselves, you know, how
do we reconcile our heritage and our future is a
country of migrants with the real needs and concerns of
people already living here.
Speaker 4 (34:58):
Hey, you're at Millbrook to I don't know why you're
not playing golf, but apparently you've got some economic speech
and I think later later today.
Speaker 7 (35:05):
You're heading caps, but not the right type.
Speaker 4 (35:07):
Yes, later this afternoon a big announcement with our old
Mike Casey on electrification, and I think there's an embargo
on that one. But positive economic stories.
Speaker 7 (35:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (35:19):
Look, I'm talking to people here about the economy and
what we're going to do to turn it around a lot.
We have done, a lot of things coming into effect
very soon. If you look at resource management law, can't
say enough about it. It's the game changer for a
resource based country or land based country. But you know,
also just make the point that if we don't figure
(35:40):
out how to get energy abundance in this country, then
our whole story of being first world becomes kind of academic.
So I'm looking forward to talking to Mike Casey about
how we can make a few things easier when it
comes to solar because you know, the sun doesn't shine
every day, but it shines enough that we need to
take advantage of that.
Speaker 4 (36:01):
Final question for you, David Sea, my Act Party leader
Deputy Prime Minister for the upcoming New Zealand Test for migrants,
how many tales are wagging the coalition dog at the moment?
Two or three?
Speaker 6 (36:14):
Well, look, our government's about to put together it's third
budget with three parties that reduces the size of government
as a percentage of the economy three in a row,
less money being taken more for the private sector. Has
it gone as fast as the Act Party would go?
Speaker 7 (36:32):
No?
Speaker 6 (36:33):
Has it gone faster than it would without us? Yes,
we can point to receipts literally where we've saved billions
of dollars as Act ministers, and that with Act policy,
all good stuff. However, I would just say, look, you
know anyone that wishes that the part that the government
was divided only needs to look at the actual track record.
Three budgets in a row saving the taxpayer money.
Speaker 7 (36:57):
Pretty good stuff, all.
Speaker 4 (36:58):
Right, David Seamore, thanks for your time, as always, enjoy
your day at Melbrook.
Speaker 2 (37:01):
Yes, the best of the country with Robboback choose the
bank with one hundred and twenty years global agribusiness experience.
Grow with Rubbobako, dav De Seymour, Act Party Leader, Deputy
(37:23):
Prime Minister wrapping are the best of the country.
Speaker 4 (37:26):
It's going to be an interesting six month run into
that November seven election, that's for sure. Surely my Highlanders
can get the BIS done this afternoon. They won't drop
the ball two weeks in a row. Here's hoping, hope
you have a great weekend wherever you are in God's own.
I'll catch your back, same time, same place next Saturday
morning for the best of the country. Brought to you
(37:46):
by Rabobank. I'm going to leave you with the rolling
Stones Ageless. This is one of my favorites. Wild horses.
Speaker 5 (38:00):
I know.
Speaker 3 (38:02):
Three you see line I have not free, you don't
have the.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
Man rou.
Speaker 3 (38:32):
Hell bust try. There's two songs after we die, Wow,
(38:58):
Draggy Wow, wyss and we right.
Speaker 8 (39:11):
The wows Trappy Wow, wows.
Speaker 3 (40:01):
The alty. Somebody
Popular Podcasts
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.
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.