February 10, 2026 • 64 mins
Having spent two weeks in Australia, post New Year, Leighton & Carolyn are pleased to be home. Sydney was sweltering as is the political scenery.
Nevertheless a good time was had. Now it’s back to business for 2026, the eighth year of the podcast.
Interestingly there was much inquiry about two politicians by our Australian media friends; Shane Jones & Erica Stanford.
So we begin the year, as we did in ’25 with Shane Jones, Deputy Leader of New Zealand First. He’s not shy about being honest, at times brutally so.
As usual Mrs Producer joins the Mailroom followed by some intelligent comment by Gary Judd KC.
File your comments and complaints at Leighton@newstalkzb.co.nz OR Carolyn@newstalkzb.co.nz
Haven't listened to a podcast before? Check out our simple how-to guide.
Listen here on iHeartRadio
Leighton Smith's podcast also available on iTunes:
To subscribe via iTunes click here
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 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from news talks it B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
It's time for all the attitude, all the opinion, all
the information, all the debates of the now, the Leighton
Smith Podcast powered by news talks it B.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Welcome to Podcasts three hundred and fifteen for February eleven,
twenty twenty six, and after spending two weeks in Sydney
and beyond, I have to say that it's good to
be home. So last year we began with an interview
with Shane Jones, Deputy Leader of New Zealand First, and
(00:48):
I thought it would be an appropriate way to begin
this year as well, for two reasons. It's election year
and I enjoyed talking to mister Jones last year, so
let's do it again this year. And so we have.
But it didn't get off to such a good start
because I just before we were due to short while
before we were due to talk, I managed to blow
(01:09):
the studio up. I put one one extra plug into
into a socket and everything when whiz bang. So that
delayed us a bit and stole some of our time.
So it was a little shorter than I would have liked,
and we didn't get to ask some questions I would
have liked to have pursued. But there will be another chance,
I think. Anyway, Shane Jones is Shane Jones, and we
(01:33):
will talk with him soon. I just want to make
reference to there's something else, because this has taken on
a life of its own. It seems people ask you know,
what are you reading or what have you bought lately?
So I did not get to read a nonfiction book,
still haven't, which means my Daniel Silver books are about
(01:53):
six years easily six years maybe even eight behind. I
got the books sitting on the bookshelf, but I haven't
had time to read them. And I actually bought a
Daniel Silver book, A Portrait of a Spy, which was
an early one. I think it came out in twenty
twenty eleven, I think, And I don't know what happened
(02:14):
to my copy, but my hardcover copy, but I've ordered
a paperback of it, so my collection is complete. But
I did buy a number of books, and I just
have to comment on something. It's a beautiful thing. Decide
you want a book, go online and order it and
it's there within It's delivered within a matter of almost minutes.
(02:40):
For instance, I had three deliveries over the two weeks.
One of them was one of them was ordered late
in the evening and it was there at seven o'clock
in the next morning, and the other one was something similar.
But it really is something that you get with living
in a big city rather than a little country. Can't
do anything about it, as far as I'm aware, it's
(03:02):
not worthwhile Amazon opening up a big warehouse here, but
who knows what the future might bring would be a
good thing. So let's get into it in just a moment.
A conversation with Shane Jones. Oh, at the end of
At the end of this, I'm going to insert a
commentary that pertains to the legal system, judicial activism, and
(03:25):
a few other things. But I think that you'll find
it interesting, just saying now after a short break, Shane Jones.
Buccerlan is a natural oral vaccine in a tablet form
called bacterial nice sate. It'll boost your natural protection against
(03:47):
bacterial infections in your chest and throat. A three day
course of seven Buckleland tablets will help your body build
up to three months of immunity against bugs which cause
bacterial cold symptoms. So who can take buccolan well the
whole family From two years of age and upwards. A
course of Bucklan tablets offers cost effective and safe protection
(04:07):
from colds and chill. Protection becomes effective a few days
after you take buccolin and lasts for up to three
months following the three day course. Buccolin can be taken
throughout the cold season, over winter or all the year round.
And remember Bucklin is not intended as an alternative to
influenza vaccination, but may be used along with the flu
vaccination for added protection. And keep in mind that millions
(04:31):
of doses have been taken by Kiwi's for over fifty years.
Only available from your pharmacist. Always read the label and
users directed and see your doctor if systems persist. Farmer
Broker Auckland Laton Smith Shane Jones is the Minister for
(04:55):
Oceans and Fisheries, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Resources,
Associate Minister of Finance and Associate Minister for Energy. For
those who don't know, and there will be very few
of you, Mister Jones headed Parliament in two two thousand
and five with the Labor Party. He joined New Zealand
first as an MP in twenty seventeen. He was educated
(05:16):
rather well, they say, at Saint Stephen's and that has
completed degrees in universities in Wellington, West Australia and Harvard.
He's also held business and public sector leadership roles such
as Chairman of Sea Lord, our country's first spacific economic Ambassador,
member of Parliament and Minister in Government. He is also
(05:37):
the Deputy Leader of New Zealand First. We spoke with
you last year at this time and we're speaking again
because last year was so impactive I had the hope
of repeating it. Welcome back to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
Hi greetings, folks.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Thank you very much for enabling us to share a
few thoughts and observations about the year hit.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
I think there are a few, quite a few. Let
me start by asking you what is the biggest challenge
this country is faced with at the moment, and if
you want you to have challenges two and three.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Well, Economically, I certainly believe that the cost of energy,
the cost of electricity, is stripping us of our competitiveness.
But behind the problem with electricity lies a deeper problem
that we've inherited a system that's not competitive. And also
(06:40):
we're still saddled with a system in New Zealand pertaining
to resource consents and other environmental permits that remains absolutely sluggish,
dominated by unelected grandees who never faced the consequences of
(07:01):
their constipated approach to facilitating resource development, unlike US politicians.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
So that's first thing.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Second thing, ah, I don't know, maybe your listeners and
your audience don't agree, but I do see a big
problem with immigration in the sense that not only is
our infrastructure unable to cope with it, but our host
society have never been asked, how radically do you want
(07:32):
to change your population?
Speaker 3 (07:35):
Who do you want to.
Speaker 4 (07:36):
Come to New Zealand, after all, it's our country, and
who will stand up and ensure that the foundation culture,
the host nation culture, isn't radically changed or worsened as
a consequence of immigration that's not well managed in the
(07:56):
absence of US not having a population policy. I do
think my final point, I do think that the Prime
Bister and Erica Stamford are onto something when they focus
on the failings of our education system and how it's
been overtaken by an ideology where you don't really need
(08:22):
to perform and you can get necessary qualifications and come
out without the requisite standard of numeracy and literacy. And
it's particularly bad from the community that I come from.
A lot of the Maldi and i'd say also Pis
and that's very dangerous because you cannot consistently create a
pocket where the people are at the margin of society,
(08:45):
and they'll turn to pretty crude and dangerous ways to
make a go of life.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
There are so many spinoffs from what you've just said.
Let me let me just try another approach, and not
because that one didn't work, but because I think it
fits in from nineteen to eighty to today when it
comes to the issues that you were discussing, particularly with
regard to your own lot. What's changed.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Well.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
I was born in nineteen fifty nine, I was in
my third year at university. In nineteen eighty, I was
a father and I just moved to Wellington. I think
that in terms of the Mildi community, some of the
biggest changes has been the degradation of the family unit,
(09:44):
an abandonment by too many men of their responsibilities, and
the ease of access to welfare. Now, of course, New
Zealand needs a system where there is a safety net,
and New Zealand First, the party I belong to, thoroughly
accepts that. But when you look at the stats of
(10:06):
the number of where the recipients of wealth here come from,
we've inherited a hell of a messmate, that's got worse
since nineteen eighty. And I don't fully buy in to
the explanation that the rogenomics experience of eighty four to
eighty seven, eighty seven to ninety ninety to ninety three
(10:28):
with ruthin Asia.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Sure that had a major disruptive effect, but.
Speaker 4 (10:32):
A lot of values and a lot of attitudes and
sense of service and obligation and duty and collegiality, that
all starts at the kitchen table. It all starts inside
the place you call home. And in my view, there's
been a distortion of those foundation values that I grew
(10:54):
up with. And I don't accept that it's colonialism. I
don't accept that it's just the cause. The cause is
just to do a social media or whatever technological changes
are happening. It's more fundamental and that's part of why
New Zealand First, in my view, are doing reasonably well
(11:17):
in the minds of increasingly larger numbers of New Zealanders
because we're preaching service, we're preaching self responsibility. What the
hell's wrong with that?
Speaker 2 (11:28):
There is nought wrong with that. I arrived in New Zealand,
as you know, in nineteen eighty. We were both in
Wellington at the same time. Was discovered sitting in the
same law class. Indeed, and you remember that I didn't.
Speaker 4 (11:40):
But but and now tutor was a guy called Stephen Kosch.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
Who went on to be a Supreme Court judge.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
There you go. So the point I'm going to make
is that when I quit the microphone on a daily basis,
part of the driving factor for that was what I discovered.
But I got here in nineteen eighty and I was
brought over to I was important to start talk back
(12:11):
in Wellington. The things that were being discussed then are
still the same things in the same category that are
being discussed today. So all we do is go round
and round in circles and very little is resolved wrong
or right.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Oh.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
I think each generation brings challenges forward. Let's face the
desk and always be some perennials. I sense of security,
I quality of life and relation to access to essential services,
whether it's health, education and housing. I'm sure that my parents' generation,
(12:50):
my grandparents generation, they all sort of made the best
decisions they could in relation to those issues.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
But I do feel that with the ubiquity.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Of social media, the way in which people are now
developing sources of information often easily distorted. That is, I
would put to you that that is something different than
the times that you and I were at university.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
They also.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
The other challenges that I've noticed as I've grown a
bit older. There's the kind of expectations that each generation has,
Like I find with a lot of the younger ones
that I bump into the north who are coming into
positions of leadership. So everyone wants to go to the
top floor the penthouse of the sky City casino, but
(13:45):
they want to catch the elevator. No, sorry, you have
to go via the staircase and it's a long, hard slog.
So that's something that I have seen within multiculture, and
I like putting them in their place.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Seeing that you've mentioned Northland on more than one occasion,
I was going to ask you, so I will do
it now. Crime in Northland is well, give me a
ranking out of ten. How bad is it?
Speaker 4 (14:17):
Ah? In some parts of North. It's shocking, it's at
least state, at least state of mind.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
So I'm referring to somebody that we both are familiar with,
Dallas Gurney, who who was the manager of News Talks
at Beeper for some time, who retired and went with
his wife and bought the local store up north and
recently got beaten up by some thugs.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Yes, yes, I saw that.
Speaker 4 (14:46):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
How does that are?
Speaker 3 (14:50):
You? Are you?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
Do you have any idea what's followed on from that?
Has anybody been arrested? Anybody in charged?
Speaker 4 (14:55):
Yeah, a bloke was. A bloke was charged. He's been
taken to court. He's been given what do you call
it name suppression. I doubt if that's going to hold.
I think it was a case of of trunkenness, loutish behavior.
Sadly for him, it's spread all over social media. He's
(15:16):
been identified by people who know the far in a area.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
Well. The kind of crime, though, that I'm referring to.
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Is crime that threatens basic security, crime that leaves you
uncertain and almost fearful, and a lot of that is
driven by excessive bouts of drunk taking and stuff like that.
Speaker 3 (15:43):
And a lot of it mate is kids maybe.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
Between the age twelve thirteen, fourteen, fifteen sixteen, not under
parental control. If they are, the parents are even worse
than the kids, and they are turning into a pack
of very dangerous young thieves who, when confronted, turn very feral,
very quickly. And what to do with them because they've
(16:11):
come from a set of circumstances where the boundaries or
the structure hasn't been robust, and they're out there creating mayhem,
easily influenced by men and women slightly older than them.
So that's a small example of what I'm trying to
describe to you in relation to warrying Quran. Because they're
so young and they're going to take a howl of
(16:31):
a long time to grow out that type of behavior.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
So my suggestion is that they've developed from the beginning
to a greater level, shall we say, of criminal activity,
because they weren't apprehended and dealt with appropriately the first time.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
That's partly true, but also they've come from a petri
dish where that type of behavior is deemed to be
acceptable or it's a behavior spawned in a sense of desperation.
So I don't care for it. Look, I've a perfect
sort of paragon ourself. But between Dot and I we
(17:15):
have eight kids. And sure we have you ups and
downs with your children, but my dad was one of
seventeen children.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
None of them went to jail.
Speaker 4 (17:24):
There's a classic mix of the Delhi Marii and a
bit of Welsh and we'll work the land and whatnot.
And there's nothing wrong with us extolling those foundational values
and consistently reminding society or the institutions that we rely
on society to bold and change and improve attitudes that
(17:45):
these are our expectations.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
So how long can you keep the lights on in
the northern part?
Speaker 4 (17:53):
Well, we've got to continue to see. You raise a
damn good question there. Do we as a society say, look,
the market can't fix the problem. Therefore what we'll do
is will sustain communities at a kind of subsistence level
through welfare or whatnot? Or do we join up as
I've been doing and not always successfully, but putting money
(18:17):
into certain regions of New Zealand to engender greatest sense
of hope, gives them options and ensure that we don't
continually have parts in New Zealand that are in perpetual deficit,
whether it's the quality of infrastructure, the attitudes of the people,
(18:38):
or the declining quality of the services they receive, including schools.
So for me, one of the reasons why I've supported
Winston and come into public life after having left for
a while is to effect those sorts of changes. And hey,
I'll do my bit, others will trot along and do
(18:59):
their bit. And in my view, if we as a
country and as a government turn our backs on certain
parts of New Zealand, we're just going to breed a
living of dysfunctionalism that will make the places virtually uninhabitable.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
What's your degree of success do you think in what
you've just described.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
Well, in a number of areas it's been very very successful,
certainly in respect of infrastructure.
Speaker 3 (19:24):
Like I'm the.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Guy who found the money to roll out better electronic connectivity.
I'm the guy who found the money to upgrade, for example,
in a lot of isolated areas m I and they
are the only in many cases institutions that can offer
(19:45):
a place of refuge when these wretched weather events happen.
But also put a lot of money into genuine marine
infrastructure and that will last thirty forty years around about
stop banks. I mean, I actually I'm a doubting thomasows
Well shrill voices about climate change. The best thing we
(20:06):
can do assist invest in adapting to cope with mother Nature.
And the two hundred million dollars it went into stock banks,
it's reduced its strengthened the ability of people to still
get insurance. Now it sounds very boring, but for a
chap who grew up on the land, on a farm
next to a river that had a massive stock bank,
(20:26):
it's very important.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
So one of your goals is to provide affordable, reliable
and clean energy, which means essentially electricity. What's standing in
what's standing in the country's way of achieving that in
a hurry.
Speaker 4 (20:44):
Well, the gent tailors are, in my view, not competitive.
They're so powerful in New Zealand's economy and they have
such powerful lobbing influence that they can change the attitudes
of politicians or change the direction of travel, which is
why I'm going to campaign aggressively that they be broken up.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
That's the first thing.
Speaker 4 (21:09):
I have not hidden this from anyone, because unless in
nation has an affordable.
Speaker 3 (21:14):
Level of energy, then you don't have an economic plan.
Speaker 4 (21:18):
I do think, however, that we've inherited a system Laton
where it's I don't know, it's sort of shrouded in
no culture, and rather than pick up the approach that
my dad's generation had. We're sure they didn't get everything right. Yeah,
sure some of the environmental effects they were.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
Excessive, but they built the country.
Speaker 4 (21:41):
And nowadays we've got the ability to deliver mitigating, mitigative
measures that cope with the way in which we interact
and change the environment. And I'm such a powerful supporter
of mining, but we've got to continue to dismantle this
no culture totally.
Speaker 3 (22:02):
Enough.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Somebody said to me only yesterday, because everybody's discussing it,
and I'll expand on that in a minute, but somebody
said to me yesterday the reason that Southland is worthy
of visiting is because of gold in the first place.
It opened it up, provided jobs, provided wealth, and it
(22:24):
is what it is today. Correct, Absolutely, Dunedin as well.
I mean the Scottish people there developed a fine philanthropic.
Speaker 4 (22:36):
Tradition, but a lot of that came from using the
natural resources. And I'm looking forward to the debate I'm
having with Ian Taylor. Syrian Taylor I'm astounded by monster
jump into the boxing ring with me and debate whether
or not gold mining should be tolerated in Otago or
in New Zealand. The reality is made. We're up against
(23:02):
an ideological hardwired, a group of people who hold positions
of influence in New Zealand, who while to consistently drink
the fiscal milk, but never buy the cow.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
It's intriguing.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
I have.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
A great interest in gold, and when I say a
great interest, I don't mean financially so much. I just
mean I latched on silver back in nineteen eighty three
and I've been interested in it ever since. The reason
that it's fascinating now is spoken by the market, and
(23:46):
it's patently obvious that gold is a very valuable item,
and I believe it'll stay that way. And I wondered,
for instance, whether this country might not have enough gold
underground that could be mined and could make this country independent,
(24:07):
specifically by a gold backed currency.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
Yes, you're not the first person to have made that observation.
And I'm assured by the geologists, arm the investors, and
the other executives leading this gold renaissance that we have
an enormous lead deep and rich endowment, not only of.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
Gold, but a host of other minerals.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
And it's like I told you, for the last thirty
odd years, it's been marginalized and you've been canceled if
you're a promoter of gold, or promoter of coal, or
promoter of minerals. And the allegation you face is that
you're crippling in a sort of irreparable way the landscape. Well, hello,
(24:55):
for those of you in Otago who farm, who have vineyards,
you have an effect on the environment, and stop catastrophizing
the existence of gold operations.
Speaker 3 (25:09):
Because creates jobs. It's a store of value, and it's.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Also the basis upon which the whole industry technically speaking,
human capital wise, can be expanded, grown, and it can
be applied to other types of minerals after that.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
All right, So the rush job that's been created, the
rush to success, which isn't quite oddly, which isn't quite
working as well as one anticipated, brings me to Taranaki
and Transit has been resources. It just so happened. I
(25:50):
was in I was in Sydney when the news came
that the application by Transit has been resources to mind
the sands of Taranaki had been rejected or was going
to be rejected. It was established and there seems to
be a war going on with regard to whether that's
(26:12):
right or wrong. Now. I interviewed Alan Eggers last July.
I'd never heard of him, I'd never heard of TTR,
but I came across the story that was a current
at the time, which is still current, where he was
being and the company was being stymied. So because I
still had his phone on his number on my phone,
(26:34):
I made a call and had a good conversation with him.
They're not giving up. But what's what has taken place,
and I discovered this during the interview, is that this
seems to me to be a and I've got to
be careful when I say this, I don't mean the
financial corruption, but a corruption of some kind in operation
(26:57):
in this particular case, if not in others that are
being rejected. Comment well, obviously the process is still unfolding,
and there's a draft decision out, but there's a more
fundamental point. At a time where the world is calling
(27:19):
out for critical minerals, rare earth minerals, we have a
figuratively speaking Sahara desert scale resource off the west coast
of the North Island called iron sands, and in those
iron sands is vanadium and titanium and other important minerals.
(27:39):
So it's quite dichotomous that we've got the panel that
appears to have rejected his proposal, whilst we've got the
momentum amongst our fellow minded nations heading towards more development, more.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Utilization, more reliance.
Speaker 4 (28:03):
And this is what I say, who ought to make
those trade offs? Should it be elected politicians or obscure
individuals appointed under law to make a call whether a
project represents a positive contribution to the regional interest or
the national interest, how to manage the risks, how to
(28:28):
cope with the mitigating measures, and how to make a
decision where you're always going to have to take account
and manage risk. So you know, I came off second best.
And it's been my view for a long time that
New Zealand's better served by having those decisions made by politicians.
(28:48):
Now that's not the current status, and I accept that
because I'm willing to live by the collective responsibilities of cabinet.
But once we start campaigning, it's more than reasonable for
these ideas to be put in front.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
Of kiwis So the Climate Justice Taranaki, which has been
in operation for some considerable time. I think I found
my way to their list. I didn't apply, but I
get their mail. And this came out last week following
the Prime Minister's comments about do we want this mining
(29:28):
in the country. Absolutely, yes we do. He said, want
a critical minerals sector and went on to explain why so.
The response was Climate Justice Taranaki do not agree. No,
we don't want a critical mineral sector here in aa
Heiro and New Zealand. We are this little country at
the bottom of the world. Our natural assets are our
(29:51):
unique ecosystems and remnant forests, wetlands, indigenous species and wild oceans.
As has happened repeatedly thanks to brutal self interest, typically
of foreign firms, mining will destroy these and the clean
waterways and land that we Mari and Pakia depend on
for well being and a sustainable economy. I think that
(30:14):
the opening sentence was really all that mattered. No, we
don't want a critical mineral sector here. That's that go off,
and so they have. They have formulated their approach with
support from some pretty high places. Ever since.
Speaker 4 (30:32):
Yeah, I think that that ideology, that analysis, that narrative
has ruled the country, certainly during Cinder's time. I mean
that's partly what drove her to cancel the oil and
gas industry. I think it was encouraged in Helen's time
as well, and mister Key he never really challenged it.
(30:58):
And it's a it's a long term mission of mine
to not only correct that perspective, but to distill an
alternative view which is far more pragmatic than that dogmatic
view that the garden of Eden is how we should
live with no thought to GDP, no thought to employment,
(31:23):
is zero consideration as to how do you actually invest
and get a return on investment. So I don't underestimate, mate,
how deeply baked in those ideological perspectives are. Probably one
of the things that has set me on my normal,
my rear end whilst I've been running around extolling the
(31:47):
virtues of the natural resource exploitative sector, is how deeply
those found that those ideological foundations now run in not
only in the younger generation, but throughout corporate New Zealand
as well. I mean corporate New Zealand is brought into
(32:08):
all of this climate hysteria the point that we've had
to unwind, for example, a number of the reporting obligations
put in place by Desinder, where firms are deluged and
burdened with all sorts of reporting obligations as to how
they're ruining the planet. Firms exist, from my perspective, to
(32:29):
operate within the law and go away, employ people and
generate profit and leave law making or law interpretation to
those who are endowed with that responsibility.
Speaker 2 (32:44):
Are you taking into account judicial activism?
Speaker 4 (32:49):
Yes, well we yeah, I mean we in the area
of the Treaty of White Tongue. Obviously, we've seen increasingly
difficult interpretations visited upon the treaty and governments and officials
and others struggle to make any sense out of it.
So it's one good thing. The Prime Minister did say
while he's up at White Honey. He was very simple.
(33:12):
He said, the treaty means we're governing, there is scope
for local autonomy, and we're all bound together by a
common set of civic rights and obligations.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
That's all we need to know. It's all we need
to know.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
We don't need any more Treaty of White Hongey references
scattered through statutes. We don't need any more tedious dissertations
from the White Tongue tribunal.
Speaker 3 (33:39):
We need to go back to the basics.
Speaker 4 (33:41):
And Winston has always said that, which is why he's
railed against the existence of these normative prescriptive measures known
as principles.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
So let's sidebar just for a moment. Having mentioned Winston,
he's is he eighty eight or about to turn Yeah?
Speaker 3 (33:58):
No, he is born in nineteen forty five.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Yes, how long do you think he's got as leader
of New Zealand first for as long as he wants it. Well,
he's got to be around to want it, Okay, So
he will retain that position, and I'm not trying to
I'm not trying to allude to anything. He'll retain that
(34:20):
position after the election, Yeah, definitely, but it stands to
reason that at some stage a change will be made.
Speaker 4 (34:29):
Yeah. Well, he's certainly under no pressure from anyone in
our caucus or our party to retire from the field
of play. He's so well versed not only in politics
but judgment and give the guys, some Jews his respect.
He first stood in nineteen seventy five, then he became
(34:52):
a politician in nineteen seventy eight, that he's sort of
been in and out depending on the vagaries of the electorate.
And I'm not going to place too much reliance on
the current polls, but we seem to be resonating and
he in particular is growing in popularity. Every pole that
(35:15):
is taken as popularity continues to grow into the double figures.
Speaker 3 (35:20):
So that's positive.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
That's an example of why our party needs them to
hang around.
Speaker 3 (35:28):
And he.
Speaker 4 (35:31):
Definitely has struck a court with more and more Kiwis.
As we face the various uncertainties driven by not only
international geopolitics.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
But our society is going through a transition.
Speaker 4 (35:41):
There's a lot of angst, there's a lot of apprehension
and uncertainty, mate, And if you doubt that, just have
a look at how divided the country are is in
terms of.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Poles indeed, and you might then extend the conversation to
Australia and suggests that both countries are going through a
very difficult time.
Speaker 4 (36:05):
Yeah. I go over to Australia on a semi regular
basis and I often get interviewed over there, and I've
been allowed to participate in the radio show formerly hosted
by Alan Jones, the well known.
Speaker 3 (36:22):
Shop jock over there in.
Speaker 4 (36:23):
The past, and Mate, their challenges are on another scale
when you think about what's happened with their demography. They've
obviously signed up a long time ago to the creed
of multiculturalism.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
We need to be watching that here in New Zealand,
and we need to.
Speaker 4 (36:41):
Ensure that the culture which defines our host society is
not driven either out of existence or undermined to suit
the priorities of new migrants.
Speaker 3 (36:55):
We're not having that when in Rome you do as
the Romans.
Speaker 2 (36:57):
Do, and that's the line that's being expressed at the
moment across the Tasman quite right now, okay, by some,
only by some, all right. The number the numbers that
have poured in over there are ginormous, but we have
probably per capita and not too dissimilar situation.
Speaker 4 (37:21):
Here, yes, yes, well, obviously the pressure point at the moment,
it's on the front page of the Herald, is the
immigration provisions in the upcoming India Free Trade Deal, which
our leader Winston says we'll not be backing.
Speaker 3 (37:42):
And obviously the.
Speaker 4 (37:44):
New Zealand Herald has had a look at the detail
of this agreement and it's it's inconsistent with what our
party represents. We are not having a situation where you
can fast track another two three four, five hundred thousand
people from India to come to New Zealand, which is
not having it.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
It's not a racist thing, it's a culture.
Speaker 4 (38:08):
I don't care if I sound fascist. I'm a Dahi marian.
I can say what the hell I like about the heritage.
Speaker 3 (38:15):
Of my country.
Speaker 2 (38:16):
Well, you can hear it's it's not that at all.
It's that it is. It took me a while to
realize it that it is a cultural thing that causes
the problems, not a racial thing.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
Correct, Correct?
Speaker 2 (38:30):
And you know all the Indians I know, whether they're
driving cars to the airport or whatever they're doing, they're
they're all pretty fine people. That's my experience anyway.
Speaker 3 (38:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (38:44):
But if you want to substantially change the character of
your country, if you want to re reform the population
of your country, go and campaign on it. Don't ask Kiwis,
well what do you want for a population policy? How
many people do you want living here? How can we
afford the infrastructure? Pretty basic questions. They always get canceled,
(39:07):
though in relation to people like my good self being
dismissed as a as a sort of luddite or some
fascist prejudice. Get mate, I look forward to the selection campaign.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
I have nothing to say except I'm looking forward to it. Also,
you mentioned something earlier on with regard to who should
make the decisions politicians or bureaucrats. Right on that basis,
(39:41):
where does MB stand as far as New Zealand first
is concerned.
Speaker 3 (39:48):
MB the government department that one.
Speaker 4 (39:51):
Yeah, well there's it's an amalgam.
Speaker 3 (39:54):
It's huge, It's bigger than Ben her.
Speaker 4 (39:59):
I think as a politician, you've got to stamp your authority.
Don't do it in a way that creates a us
situation of the bureaucracy. But providing they know there's a
clear line of accountability, there's a clear line of sight.
We don't, sadly in New Zealand, have the ability to
(40:19):
require CEOs and government departments to tender their resignation every
time a government changes. Now, in Australia you've partially got that.
In America you've got it in spades. So that's something
that I'm going to take to our party conference to ensure.
Speaker 3 (40:37):
That the bureaucracy.
Speaker 4 (40:41):
Doesn't become a block to what an elected government wants
to do in my small area of regional development and
fisheries and whatnot. I think it's fair to say that
they're by and large followed and delivered what we campaigned on,
(41:02):
but in matters of environmental law and such areas are
not in control of it. It just is so frustrating
that at a time where we should be turbocharging the
growth of our primary sector, the growth of our minerals
in a variety of other things, that takes so long
to get the permission space sorted out.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
You mentioned, you mentioned earlier business big business, and it's
latching on to the catchphrase of the time, woke climate,
other matters. There's another story at the moment that I
only just became aware of since coming back, and that
(41:46):
revolves around the Reserve Bank and New Zealand Post. Oh yeah,
are you with me?
Speaker 3 (41:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (41:54):
Well, I've got my head around the Reserve Bank, and
Winston clearly told that lady, the Scandinavian lady, that stick
to your lane. Your job is to study the abacus,
not a pine on geopolitical metas.
Speaker 2 (42:11):
So, for those that don't know, this is about a
New Zealand Post in conjunction with others wanting to produce
and sell a one ounce gold coin, as they do
in other parts of the world, South Africa, in Canada,
America's got its got its own and this has been
(42:33):
knocked on the head by the Reserve Bank. Why do
they have the power for that.
Speaker 4 (42:39):
Well, they have exclusive authority over currency, and I can't
exactly tell you why they would have snuffed out the
prospect of creating a gold coin. I'm quite excited by
the prospect of one day owning one myself. Of course,
one would need to have a different career than a politician.
Speaker 2 (42:59):
Well that's not true, because my understanding is that the
price of it would be one hundred dollars.
Speaker 4 (43:08):
Yeah, yeah, right, Okay, Well, perhaps they're worried that it's
a competing form of currency monetary value. I'm not sure, mate,
But now that you've part called my curiosity, I shall
go and find out. Well, I am about to go
at ten to two to question.
Speaker 3 (43:25):
Time in our New Zealand Parliament.
Speaker 4 (43:27):
I shall make an appropriate impact and pluck the weeds
out of the vineyard of democracy.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
So you're off, you're dumping me, and I'm in a
position now to go and watch which is something I
really do, but I did. I did I have to
say sit through your speech that you recently made. Oh,
thank you very much, and well there are things I'd
(43:58):
say about it, but I don't have time.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
Yeah, I tend to just ll not speak off the cut.
Speaker 4 (44:07):
Hey, I'm six or six year years old, been in
business and raised a family and lived in a community
in the Far North and had reasonable education. If I
can't stand up and talk coherently for ten minutes, then
I'm definitely without notes.
Speaker 3 (44:20):
Then I'm definitely in the wrong career.
Speaker 2 (44:23):
So once again, thank you. I can only say that
I expect some very positive male and I look forward
to next time because we'll have one before the election.
Speaker 4 (44:36):
I much appreciate later in you providing me the opportunity.
Speaker 3 (44:41):
And you still have your distinctive.
Speaker 4 (44:45):
Tone, the distinctive tone in your voice that I recall
at nineteen eighty when I first bumpedn't you at a
law lecture.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
I don't know what to say, bye bye, mate, thank
you into the mail room with missus producer, and I
(45:16):
want to say welcome back to you. Have you recovered
yet from a venture across the Tasman lighton?
Speaker 3 (45:25):
Hello?
Speaker 5 (45:26):
Happy twenty twenty six. We had a fantastic few weeks
in Sydney. A couple of weeks we did, and it
was so it was a hectic few months here beforehand,
and was so glad to We were so glad to
get away.
Speaker 2 (45:41):
And cut the ties for a while. The weather was
stinking hot most of the time.
Speaker 5 (45:48):
Yes, well, we just left that awful rainy period here
where you literally didn't think you'd ever see the sun again.
So we were very grateful. But the best part of
the summer Laton was your em n z M that
you were delivered on New Year's Day. We're all very
proud of you.
Speaker 4 (46:07):
Wow.
Speaker 3 (46:07):
Family is very.
Speaker 5 (46:08):
Proud of you. Children are very proud of you.
Speaker 2 (46:11):
Well, there's a few people that feel the same. I
have a huge apology to make because it's a renowned
fact that I am messy when it comes to records
and keeping things and yes and having them organized properly
because there's so many of them. But there were so
(46:32):
many emails that came in starting on the thirty first
of December when the announcement was made. There were so
many emails that came in. I printed a handful and
then then allocated the rest as they came in to
the flag division on the on the computer right, so
I flagged them, they're not there. Get back from two
(46:55):
weeks away. They're not there. There have been things that happened.
I nearly blew the studio up, the home studio up
the other day by putting one too many plugs in
the years in the whole, and that caused that caused
total chaos. I could tell you more, but I'm not
going to because it's too embarrassing.
Speaker 5 (47:19):
Anyway, you were saying, you've lost these and these are
the people to thank.
Speaker 2 (47:23):
Yeah, there are. There were a lot, seriously a lot.
And I'm very grateful to those of you who who
dropped a note, and I'm very pleased that we all
enjoyed this together, to be honest. So I've got I've
got something here that i want to I want to
drop in. Ze has arrived at seven thirteen am on
(47:46):
December thirty one, morning, latent, my hardiest congratulations on your
much deserved m n Z M award. I know zed
B will run an interview with you this morning, and
I look forward to hearing this happy new year from
Don Don the the.
Speaker 3 (48:07):
Don.
Speaker 2 (48:07):
The interview was was pre recorded a few days before.
And I don't know whether you picked that up or not,
but I hope you found it well somewhat interesting and
thank you, Leighton.
Speaker 5 (48:22):
Liz says, as I scrolled the news in the half
light of an early Matter Matter morning, I worked my
way through the new Year's honors list. I was delighted
to see Leydon's Men's Edit m Award. Whatever these wards mean,
it's a wonderful recognition of an outstanding career and the
ongoing labor of love for the truth and quality broadcasting.
That is your prod, that is your podcast. Best wishes
(48:44):
to you both, happy birthdays, Merry Christmas, and above all,
blessings for an outstanding twenty six twenty twenty six And
Liz to you too, thank you for thank you for writing.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
And I go with you on the twenty six comment.
So let's spread our wings a bit. On the eighth
of January, lateon, I've just finished listening to your outstanding
interview with doctor vi here Corey, thank you. I'm ashamed
to admit that I was a believer, and like a
good little boy, ran along to receive my three adurned
Bloomfield recommended mRNA shots. Given my philosophical and instinctive distrust
(49:20):
slash dislike of said individuals that should have been enough
to precipitate greater questioning at the time, But having had
a background in vaccine development, albeit on the fringes thereof
in a past life, I swallowed the kool aid and complied.
But the worm has turned, and at least I have
the guts to admit when I was wrong. Only after
(49:42):
the third shot and the rapidly deteriorating rate of efficacy
of these wonderful new shots did I start to wise up.
My own son suffered mild vaccine injury and my arcarditis,
which I dismissed as him being anti. Then, a young
concrete business owner that I knew personally in New Plymouth,
(50:04):
fit as a fiddle, fit as a fiddle, I repeat,
died of an unexplained heart attack a couple of days
host mRNA vaccine, which he was mandated to receive in
order to keep his contract reconcrete the parking lot at
New Plymouth Base Hospital. That, combined with the fact that
(50:26):
we were fed a changing story and ever increasing need
for more booster shots despite their obvious failure to protect
us from COVID, finally wake me up. I had heard
of friends and relatives using ibermectan in my native South Africa.
Two friends with similar backgrounds to me obtained some and
used it in New Zealand. Neither of them managed to
(50:48):
escape contracting COVID, but I will say they appeared to
shake it off pretty quickly and get back to work.
Then my brother in law presented me with doctor Pierre
Corey's book, The War on Ibermecton. It is brilliant and
it is I endorsed that. Suddenly a lot of pieces
of the jigsaw fell into place for me, including why,
after initial enthusiasm, my iber mecton's efficacy was proven, albeit
(51:14):
in vitro, at Monash University. Ex colleagues of mine at
Ligan's Institute suddenly went quiet and would not even return
or comment on my emails that I sent them on
the subject. Thank goodness for brave, honest individuals like Pierre Corey,
Joseph Barron, Paul Merrick, whom you've also interviewed, and also
(51:35):
an ex saffer. Another individual who I would place alongside
those fine gentlemen who you may have heard of, is
doctor John Campbell. He would be a great interview for
a podcast Laton. I don't mind being quoted Layton, but
I do request that my name and contact details be
(51:56):
withheld for obvious reasons. I don't think I named it,
did I. So there we have it. And that's all
very well said. And I've had numerous letters covering that
sort of thing, but that one's a great one late.
Speaker 5 (52:12):
And this is from Nigel. Nigel is somebody that we
have worked with in the past and both very much admire.
So this little note makes it all the sweeter. Really,
he says, I'm in Hong Kong, which is when he
found out about your M nst M, and he said,
I am so thrilled for you.
Speaker 3 (52:30):
You are the best.
Speaker 2 (52:32):
You know, Holks. It's embarrassing, but I accept it. And
the finally until I find the missing the missing bits?
Are you another one?
Speaker 1 (52:44):
Well?
Speaker 5 (52:44):
Why as you go, Bob says, as a former voluntary
victim of your podcast program, I take the opportunity of
conveying hearty congratulation on your well deserved New Year's Honors award.
Over the years, you've conducted interviews with innumerable people for
the information, education and enjoyment of the public, and I
(53:05):
trust that you will continue this in good health on
any more occasions, and Bob wishes you best wishes for
twenty twenty six and kind regards Bob.
Speaker 2 (53:16):
Bob, that's much appreciated, and I can't tell you how
much I enjoyed it when we had our discussion. And
I trust that you're well as well as your wife.
So finally I can't resist this. This is twenty three December,
written by Jonathan. Don't know whether you've had opportunity to
(53:36):
analyze Simon Wilson's lengthy piece in last Saturday's Herald on
Stephen Pinker, a cognitive psychologist. Apparently he looks slightly deranged.
Many shrinks are. Wilson clearly admires him. Some of his
alleged views appear to be reasonable, others just theft fascist allegations.
(53:57):
Threely tossed about Trump, the most mendacious politician in the century.
No mention of Obama or the Dems who controlled the
Biden Marrionette views are climate change seem more reasonable, but
you need to read between the lines. Thought you were
relieved of Simon Wilson for a while, but the Herald
is evidently going to give his occasional offerings great promidence.
(54:21):
Silly me, silly me, he says, why should I have
thought otherwise?
Speaker 3 (54:26):
John?
Speaker 2 (54:27):
What can I say? Well done, missus producer.
Speaker 3 (54:32):
Here we go again.
Speaker 2 (54:33):
I would imagine that we will. We will get a
bit of correspondence this week on the interview that we
did with Shane James. Yes, I'm sure you will, So
we'll see you then you will next week.
Speaker 3 (54:45):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (55:03):
Now, there's more than one reason why I'm about to
quote you from a letter that I received from Gary
Judd KC last September. September twenty had stated and I
referred to it at the time. I don't think I
read the whole letter, but I want to do that today.
There's a number of reasons for it. I say. One
(55:24):
is having spent two weeks in Sydney, and out of
Sydney down at Bowrel, we went for three nights to
stay with a friend on one hundred and fifty acres,
which was really quite stunning. But maybe more on that
another time. But it was there that I made a
call to Louise Clegg. Now you may remember, but if
(55:48):
you don't, we did a podcast interview with her last
September and Gary refers to it. So and there's another
connection I'll get to that in a minute, he said, Latin,
thank you for your most interesting discussion with Louise Clegg.
Her description of some of her progressive friends as a
(56:09):
little bit malleable and credulous and also fashionable is perceptive.
A few more descriptors may be added, an uncritical desire
to be part of the good and on the right
side of history. A need to look good in the
eyes of others, asking not is this true, but do
(56:29):
others think it's true? Seeking the approval of others, all
leading to a reluctance to engage in critical thinking and debate.
Not your attention a hope. This is the mode of
thinking of those whom Einrand described as second handers and
portrayed in The fountain Head, contrasted with the individualist Howard Rourke.
(56:53):
As Rand put it elsewhere, it is to a second
hander that the moral appraisal of himself by others is
a primary concern, which supersedes truth, facts, reason, and logic.
The divide close quote. The divide in this aspect of
the human condition is not between the left or progressives
(57:14):
on the one hand and conservatives on the other. Conservatives
can be secondhanders, as much as others. The divide is between,
on one hand, second handers and those who have loyalty
to the group as a primary and on the other
those of independent thought and action who take responsibility for
(57:35):
those thoughts and actions. There is no doubt that in
New Zealand, like Louis's perception of Australia, too many members
of the legal profession are in the first camp. Louise
referred to Francis Fukuiyama. I consider Fukiyama's The Origins of
Political Order, tracing the growth of political order from pre
human times to the French Revolution, and political order and
(57:59):
political decay from the separate books from the Industrial Revolution
to what he calls the globalization of democracy to be
great works. As Louise said in her Sliding into Technocracy
article in the Spectator of Australia, Fukiyama places faith in
(58:19):
a properly functioning administrative state. What needs emphasis is that
it is critical to Fukiyama's conception of a properly functioning
administrative state that the state be one where the rule
of law prevails. He notes in Origins, page two forty six.
(58:40):
Up to this point, I have discussed political development in
terms of state building the ability of states to concentrate
and use power. The rule of law is a separate
component of political order that puts limitations on a state's power.
The first checks on executive power are not those imposed
by democratic assemblies or elections. Rather, they are the result
(59:05):
of societies believing that rulers had to operate under the law.
State building and the rule of law therefore coexist in
a certain tension. On the one hand, rulers can enhance
their authority by acting within and on behalf of the law.
On the other hand, the law can prevent them from
doing things that they would like to do, not just
(59:27):
in their own private interest, but in the interests of
the community as a whole. In her discussion with you,
Louise noted how during her legal career the profession in
Australia had moved steadily leftward. During my legal career, writ
Scarry Judd. During my legal career in New Zealand, the
distance between the conservatism of most judges and other legal
(59:52):
elites at the start and today's frequent lack of obedience
to disliked legislation an abandonment of the virtues of deciding
a present case. In the same way as a previous
case has become extreme. Incrementalism is being planted by radicalism,
often driven by political ideology. This means that judges and
(01:00:15):
leaders of the legal profession, who should be upholding and
protecting the rule of law, are undermining it. By judges
assuming the role of lawmaker without condemnation from the profession.
This is what we call judicial activism. It's my insert,
all the while pretending that they are acting to advance
(01:00:37):
the rule of law, when in truth they are trying
to advance the rule of judges and lawyers. The essence
of the rule of law is that rule is by law,
not man. Practicality demands that society choose some people to
be responsible for making and implementing law. In today's democracies,
we need not rely on societal pressure to keep lawmakers
(01:01:01):
within the law, but on the ability to get rid
of elected representatives. No such ability exists regarding those who
are charged with implementing the law, that is, the judges.
When judges ignore the sovereignty of parliament, abandon precedent and incrementalism,
and make themselves law makers, they place themselves above the law,
(01:01:25):
and in confrontation of the rule of law in defiance
of the oaths they took when entering office to be
faithful and bear true allegiance to the sovereign according to
the law, and to serve the Sovereign according to the
law in the office of Judge. Regards Gary, Now, I
should again thank Gary Judd for writing and sending me
(01:01:48):
that opinion. The connection that I mentioned earlier with Louise Clegg,
that's what inspired him to write. But Louise Clegg, in
case you don't know, is the wife of Angus Taylor. Now,
as I'm recording this, which is on the morning of release,
anything can happen in the next day twenty four hours,
(01:02:11):
forty eight hours, but probably this week with regard to
Angus Taylor, who is a member of the Liberal Party
of course and a member of Parliament, and is also
as far as we know as I speak, is standing
for the leadership of the Liberal Party in Australia. It's
a mess. The whole scenario in Australia is a mess politically.
(01:02:36):
Anywhere and everywhere we went and spoke with people, they
wanted to discuss such things and make comparisons or ask
questions about New Zealand and how much better off. We
might be it was just a rolling conversation, so it
could be by the time you hear this that Angus
Taylor is the leader of the Liberal Party, which can
(01:02:58):
only be an improvement or is not, and he's gone
and things will roll on poorly as they have been
with the incompetence who currently running it, that is the
Liberal Party, and providing no alternative to the fool that's
running the country. Well, that's what his chore is. What
(01:03:19):
he's doing is nothing of the sort, as I think
most people, even those who belong to the Labor Party agree. Now,
that will take us out for podcast number three hundred
and fifteen if you would like to write to us
latent aduced Talk, SAIDB dot Co dot nz and Carolyn
at Newstalk said B dot Co dot Nz. The other
(01:03:42):
thing I was going to say was that Gary Judd's
letter would fit hand in glove in my opinion, with
Shane Jones's attitude. And both of them come from Northland,
so I find that interesting. Maybe Northland has the answers
over which the rest of the country is still struggling.
(01:04:04):
So we shall return, as I say, for three to
one six next week in the meantime, thank you for
listening and we'll talk soon.
Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Thank you for more from News Talks, ed B Listen
live on air or online, and keep our shows with
you wherever you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from news talks it B.
Follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
It's time for all the attitude, all the opinion, all
the information, all the debates of the now, the Leighton
Smith Podcast powered by news talks it B.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Welcome to Podcasts three hundred and fifteen for February eleven,
twenty twenty six, and after spending two weeks in Sydney
and beyond, I have to say that it's good to
be home. So last year we began with an interview
with Shane Jones, Deputy Leader of New Zealand First, and
(00:48):
I thought it would be an appropriate way to begin
this year as well, for two reasons. It's election year
and I enjoyed talking to mister Jones last year, so
let's do it again this year. And so we have.
But it didn't get off to such a good start
because I just before we were due to short while
before we were due to talk, I managed to blow
(01:09):
the studio up. I put one one extra plug into
into a socket and everything when whiz bang. So that
delayed us a bit and stole some of our time.
So it was a little shorter than I would have liked,
and we didn't get to ask some questions I would
have liked to have pursued. But there will be another chance,
I think. Anyway, Shane Jones is Shane Jones, and we
(01:33):
will talk with him soon. I just want to make
reference to there's something else, because this has taken on
a life of its own. It seems people ask you know,
what are you reading or what have you bought lately?
So I did not get to read a nonfiction book,
still haven't, which means my Daniel Silver books are about
(01:53):
six years easily six years maybe even eight behind. I
got the books sitting on the bookshelf, but I haven't
had time to read them. And I actually bought a
Daniel Silver book, A Portrait of a Spy, which was
an early one. I think it came out in twenty
twenty eleven, I think, And I don't know what happened
(02:14):
to my copy, but my hardcover copy, but I've ordered
a paperback of it, so my collection is complete. But
I did buy a number of books, and I just
have to comment on something. It's a beautiful thing. Decide
you want a book, go online and order it and
it's there within It's delivered within a matter of almost minutes.
(02:40):
For instance, I had three deliveries over the two weeks.
One of them was one of them was ordered late
in the evening and it was there at seven o'clock
in the next morning, and the other one was something similar.
But it really is something that you get with living
in a big city rather than a little country. Can't
do anything about it, as far as I'm aware, it's
(03:02):
not worthwhile Amazon opening up a big warehouse here, but
who knows what the future might bring would be a
good thing. So let's get into it in just a moment.
A conversation with Shane Jones. Oh, at the end of
At the end of this, I'm going to insert a
commentary that pertains to the legal system, judicial activism, and
(03:25):
a few other things. But I think that you'll find
it interesting, just saying now after a short break, Shane Jones.
Buccerlan is a natural oral vaccine in a tablet form
called bacterial nice sate. It'll boost your natural protection against
(03:47):
bacterial infections in your chest and throat. A three day
course of seven Buckleland tablets will help your body build
up to three months of immunity against bugs which cause
bacterial cold symptoms. So who can take buccolan well the
whole family From two years of age and upwards. A
course of Bucklan tablets offers cost effective and safe protection
(04:07):
from colds and chill. Protection becomes effective a few days
after you take buccolin and lasts for up to three
months following the three day course. Buccolin can be taken
throughout the cold season, over winter or all the year round.
And remember Bucklin is not intended as an alternative to
influenza vaccination, but may be used along with the flu
vaccination for added protection. And keep in mind that millions
(04:31):
of doses have been taken by Kiwi's for over fifty years.
Only available from your pharmacist. Always read the label and
users directed and see your doctor if systems persist. Farmer
Broker Auckland Laton Smith Shane Jones is the Minister for
(04:55):
Oceans and Fisheries, Minister for Regional Development, Minister for Resources,
Associate Minister of Finance and Associate Minister for Energy. For
those who don't know, and there will be very few
of you, Mister Jones headed Parliament in two two thousand
and five with the Labor Party. He joined New Zealand
first as an MP in twenty seventeen. He was educated
(05:16):
rather well, they say, at Saint Stephen's and that has
completed degrees in universities in Wellington, West Australia and Harvard.
He's also held business and public sector leadership roles such
as Chairman of Sea Lord, our country's first spacific economic Ambassador,
member of Parliament and Minister in Government. He is also
(05:37):
the Deputy Leader of New Zealand First. We spoke with
you last year at this time and we're speaking again
because last year was so impactive I had the hope
of repeating it. Welcome back to the podcast.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
Hi greetings, folks.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Thank you very much for enabling us to share a
few thoughts and observations about the year hit.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
I think there are a few, quite a few. Let
me start by asking you what is the biggest challenge
this country is faced with at the moment, and if
you want you to have challenges two and three.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Well, Economically, I certainly believe that the cost of energy,
the cost of electricity, is stripping us of our competitiveness.
But behind the problem with electricity lies a deeper problem
that we've inherited a system that's not competitive. And also
(06:40):
we're still saddled with a system in New Zealand pertaining
to resource consents and other environmental permits that remains absolutely sluggish,
dominated by unelected grandees who never faced the consequences of
(07:01):
their constipated approach to facilitating resource development, unlike US politicians.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
So that's first thing.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Second thing, ah, I don't know, maybe your listeners and
your audience don't agree, but I do see a big
problem with immigration in the sense that not only is
our infrastructure unable to cope with it, but our host
society have never been asked, how radically do you want
(07:32):
to change your population?
Speaker 3 (07:35):
Who do you want to.
Speaker 4 (07:36):
Come to New Zealand, after all, it's our country, and
who will stand up and ensure that the foundation culture,
the host nation culture, isn't radically changed or worsened as
a consequence of immigration that's not well managed in the
(07:56):
absence of US not having a population policy. I do
think my final point, I do think that the Prime
Bister and Erica Stamford are onto something when they focus
on the failings of our education system and how it's
been overtaken by an ideology where you don't really need
(08:22):
to perform and you can get necessary qualifications and come
out without the requisite standard of numeracy and literacy. And
it's particularly bad from the community that I come from.
A lot of the Maldi and i'd say also Pis
and that's very dangerous because you cannot consistently create a
pocket where the people are at the margin of society,
(08:45):
and they'll turn to pretty crude and dangerous ways to
make a go of life.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
There are so many spinoffs from what you've just said.
Let me let me just try another approach, and not
because that one didn't work, but because I think it
fits in from nineteen to eighty to today when it
comes to the issues that you were discussing, particularly with
regard to your own lot. What's changed.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Well.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
I was born in nineteen fifty nine, I was in
my third year at university. In nineteen eighty, I was
a father and I just moved to Wellington. I think
that in terms of the Mildi community, some of the
biggest changes has been the degradation of the family unit,
(09:44):
an abandonment by too many men of their responsibilities, and
the ease of access to welfare. Now, of course, New
Zealand needs a system where there is a safety net,
and New Zealand First, the party I belong to, thoroughly
accepts that. But when you look at the stats of
(10:06):
the number of where the recipients of wealth here come from,
we've inherited a hell of a messmate, that's got worse
since nineteen eighty. And I don't fully buy in to
the explanation that the rogenomics experience of eighty four to
eighty seven, eighty seven to ninety ninety to ninety three
(10:28):
with ruthin Asia.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Sure that had a major disruptive effect, but.
Speaker 4 (10:32):
A lot of values and a lot of attitudes and
sense of service and obligation and duty and collegiality, that
all starts at the kitchen table. It all starts inside
the place you call home. And in my view, there's
been a distortion of those foundation values that I grew
(10:54):
up with. And I don't accept that it's colonialism. I
don't accept that it's just the cause. The cause is
just to do a social media or whatever technological changes
are happening. It's more fundamental and that's part of why
New Zealand First, in my view, are doing reasonably well
(11:17):
in the minds of increasingly larger numbers of New Zealanders
because we're preaching service, we're preaching self responsibility. What the
hell's wrong with that?
Speaker 2 (11:28):
There is nought wrong with that. I arrived in New Zealand,
as you know, in nineteen eighty. We were both in
Wellington at the same time. Was discovered sitting in the
same law class. Indeed, and you remember that I didn't.
Speaker 4 (11:40):
But but and now tutor was a guy called Stephen Kosch.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
Who went on to be a Supreme Court judge.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
There you go. So the point I'm going to make
is that when I quit the microphone on a daily basis,
part of the driving factor for that was what I discovered.
But I got here in nineteen eighty and I was
brought over to I was important to start talk back
(12:11):
in Wellington. The things that were being discussed then are
still the same things in the same category that are
being discussed today. So all we do is go round
and round in circles and very little is resolved wrong
or right.
Speaker 1 (12:29):
Oh.
Speaker 4 (12:29):
I think each generation brings challenges forward. Let's face the
desk and always be some perennials. I sense of security,
I quality of life and relation to access to essential services,
whether it's health, education and housing. I'm sure that my parents' generation,
(12:50):
my grandparents generation, they all sort of made the best
decisions they could in relation to those issues.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
But I do feel that with the ubiquity.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Of social media, the way in which people are now
developing sources of information often easily distorted. That is, I
would put to you that that is something different than
the times that you and I were at university.
Speaker 3 (13:18):
They also.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
The other challenges that I've noticed as I've grown a
bit older. There's the kind of expectations that each generation has,
Like I find with a lot of the younger ones
that I bump into the north who are coming into
positions of leadership. So everyone wants to go to the
top floor the penthouse of the sky City casino, but
(13:45):
they want to catch the elevator. No, sorry, you have
to go via the staircase and it's a long, hard slog.
So that's something that I have seen within multiculture, and
I like putting them in their place.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Seeing that you've mentioned Northland on more than one occasion,
I was going to ask you, so I will do
it now. Crime in Northland is well, give me a
ranking out of ten. How bad is it?
Speaker 4 (14:17):
Ah? In some parts of North. It's shocking, it's at
least state, at least state of mind.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
So I'm referring to somebody that we both are familiar with,
Dallas Gurney, who who was the manager of News Talks
at Beeper for some time, who retired and went with
his wife and bought the local store up north and
recently got beaten up by some thugs.
Speaker 3 (14:45):
Yes, yes, I saw that.
Speaker 4 (14:46):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (14:47):
How does that are?
Speaker 3 (14:50):
You? Are you?
Speaker 2 (14:50):
Do you have any idea what's followed on from that?
Has anybody been arrested? Anybody in charged?
Speaker 4 (14:55):
Yeah, a bloke was. A bloke was charged. He's been
taken to court. He's been given what do you call
it name suppression. I doubt if that's going to hold.
I think it was a case of of trunkenness, loutish behavior.
Sadly for him, it's spread all over social media. He's
(15:16):
been identified by people who know the far in a area.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
Well. The kind of crime, though, that I'm referring to.
Speaker 4 (15:27):
Is crime that threatens basic security, crime that leaves you
uncertain and almost fearful, and a lot of that is
driven by excessive bouts of drunk taking and stuff like that.
Speaker 3 (15:43):
And a lot of it mate is kids maybe.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
Between the age twelve thirteen, fourteen, fifteen sixteen, not under
parental control. If they are, the parents are even worse
than the kids, and they are turning into a pack
of very dangerous young thieves who, when confronted, turn very feral,
very quickly. And what to do with them because they've
(16:11):
come from a set of circumstances where the boundaries or
the structure hasn't been robust, and they're out there creating mayhem,
easily influenced by men and women slightly older than them.
So that's a small example of what I'm trying to
describe to you in relation to warrying Quran. Because they're
so young and they're going to take a howl of
(16:31):
a long time to grow out that type of behavior.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
So my suggestion is that they've developed from the beginning
to a greater level, shall we say, of criminal activity,
because they weren't apprehended and dealt with appropriately the first time.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
That's partly true, but also they've come from a petri
dish where that type of behavior is deemed to be
acceptable or it's a behavior spawned in a sense of desperation.
So I don't care for it. Look, I've a perfect
sort of paragon ourself. But between Dot and I we
(17:15):
have eight kids. And sure we have you ups and
downs with your children, but my dad was one of
seventeen children.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
None of them went to jail.
Speaker 4 (17:24):
There's a classic mix of the Delhi Marii and a
bit of Welsh and we'll work the land and whatnot.
And there's nothing wrong with us extolling those foundational values
and consistently reminding society or the institutions that we rely
on society to bold and change and improve attitudes that
(17:45):
these are our expectations.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
So how long can you keep the lights on in
the northern part?
Speaker 4 (17:53):
Well, we've got to continue to see. You raise a
damn good question there. Do we as a society say, look,
the market can't fix the problem. Therefore what we'll do
is will sustain communities at a kind of subsistence level
through welfare or whatnot? Or do we join up as
I've been doing and not always successfully, but putting money
(18:17):
into certain regions of New Zealand to engender greatest sense
of hope, gives them options and ensure that we don't
continually have parts in New Zealand that are in perpetual deficit,
whether it's the quality of infrastructure, the attitudes of the people,
(18:38):
or the declining quality of the services they receive, including schools.
So for me, one of the reasons why I've supported
Winston and come into public life after having left for
a while is to effect those sorts of changes. And hey,
I'll do my bit, others will trot along and do
(18:59):
their bit. And in my view, if we as a
country and as a government turn our backs on certain
parts of New Zealand, we're just going to breed a
living of dysfunctionalism that will make the places virtually uninhabitable.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
What's your degree of success do you think in what
you've just described.
Speaker 4 (19:17):
Well, in a number of areas it's been very very successful,
certainly in respect of infrastructure.
Speaker 3 (19:24):
Like I'm the.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Guy who found the money to roll out better electronic connectivity.
I'm the guy who found the money to upgrade, for example,
in a lot of isolated areas m I and they
are the only in many cases institutions that can offer
(19:45):
a place of refuge when these wretched weather events happen.
But also put a lot of money into genuine marine
infrastructure and that will last thirty forty years around about
stop banks. I mean, I actually I'm a doubting thomasows
Well shrill voices about climate change. The best thing we
(20:06):
can do assist invest in adapting to cope with mother Nature.
And the two hundred million dollars it went into stock banks,
it's reduced its strengthened the ability of people to still
get insurance. Now it sounds very boring, but for a
chap who grew up on the land, on a farm
next to a river that had a massive stock bank,
(20:26):
it's very important.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
So one of your goals is to provide affordable, reliable
and clean energy, which means essentially electricity. What's standing in
what's standing in the country's way of achieving that in
a hurry.
Speaker 4 (20:44):
Well, the gent tailors are, in my view, not competitive.
They're so powerful in New Zealand's economy and they have
such powerful lobbing influence that they can change the attitudes
of politicians or change the direction of travel, which is
why I'm going to campaign aggressively that they be broken up.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
That's the first thing.
Speaker 4 (21:09):
I have not hidden this from anyone, because unless in
nation has an affordable.
Speaker 3 (21:14):
Level of energy, then you don't have an economic plan.
Speaker 4 (21:18):
I do think, however, that we've inherited a system Laton
where it's I don't know, it's sort of shrouded in
no culture, and rather than pick up the approach that
my dad's generation had. We're sure they didn't get everything right. Yeah,
sure some of the environmental effects they were.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
Excessive, but they built the country.
Speaker 4 (21:41):
And nowadays we've got the ability to deliver mitigating, mitigative
measures that cope with the way in which we interact
and change the environment. And I'm such a powerful supporter
of mining, but we've got to continue to dismantle this
no culture totally.
Speaker 3 (22:02):
Enough.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Somebody said to me only yesterday, because everybody's discussing it,
and I'll expand on that in a minute, but somebody
said to me yesterday the reason that Southland is worthy
of visiting is because of gold in the first place.
It opened it up, provided jobs, provided wealth, and it
(22:24):
is what it is today. Correct, Absolutely, Dunedin as well.
I mean the Scottish people there developed a fine philanthropic.
Speaker 4 (22:36):
Tradition, but a lot of that came from using the
natural resources. And I'm looking forward to the debate I'm
having with Ian Taylor. Syrian Taylor I'm astounded by monster
jump into the boxing ring with me and debate whether
or not gold mining should be tolerated in Otago or
in New Zealand. The reality is made. We're up against
(23:02):
an ideological hardwired, a group of people who hold positions
of influence in New Zealand, who while to consistently drink
the fiscal milk, but never buy the cow.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
It's intriguing.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
I have.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
A great interest in gold, and when I say a
great interest, I don't mean financially so much. I just
mean I latched on silver back in nineteen eighty three
and I've been interested in it ever since. The reason
that it's fascinating now is spoken by the market, and
(23:46):
it's patently obvious that gold is a very valuable item,
and I believe it'll stay that way. And I wondered,
for instance, whether this country might not have enough gold
underground that could be mined and could make this country independent,
(24:07):
specifically by a gold backed currency.
Speaker 4 (24:12):
Yes, you're not the first person to have made that observation.
And I'm assured by the geologists, arm the investors, and
the other executives leading this gold renaissance that we have
an enormous lead deep and rich endowment, not only of.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
Gold, but a host of other minerals.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
And it's like I told you, for the last thirty
odd years, it's been marginalized and you've been canceled if
you're a promoter of gold, or promoter of coal, or
promoter of minerals. And the allegation you face is that
you're crippling in a sort of irreparable way the landscape. Well, hello,
(24:55):
for those of you in Otago who farm, who have vineyards,
you have an effect on the environment, and stop catastrophizing
the existence of gold operations.
Speaker 3 (25:09):
Because creates jobs. It's a store of value, and it's.
Speaker 4 (25:13):
Also the basis upon which the whole industry technically speaking,
human capital wise, can be expanded, grown, and it can
be applied to other types of minerals after that.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
All right, So the rush job that's been created, the
rush to success, which isn't quite oddly, which isn't quite
working as well as one anticipated, brings me to Taranaki
and Transit has been resources. It just so happened. I
(25:50):
was in I was in Sydney when the news came
that the application by Transit has been resources to mind
the sands of Taranaki had been rejected or was going
to be rejected. It was established and there seems to
be a war going on with regard to whether that's
(26:12):
right or wrong. Now. I interviewed Alan Eggers last July.
I'd never heard of him, I'd never heard of TTR,
but I came across the story that was a current
at the time, which is still current, where he was
being and the company was being stymied. So because I
still had his phone on his number on my phone,
(26:34):
I made a call and had a good conversation with him.
They're not giving up. But what's what has taken place,
and I discovered this during the interview, is that this
seems to me to be a and I've got to
be careful when I say this, I don't mean the
financial corruption, but a corruption of some kind in operation
(26:57):
in this particular case, if not in others that are
being rejected. Comment well, obviously the process is still unfolding,
and there's a draft decision out, but there's a more
fundamental point. At a time where the world is calling
(27:19):
out for critical minerals, rare earth minerals, we have a
figuratively speaking Sahara desert scale resource off the west coast
of the North Island called iron sands, and in those
iron sands is vanadium and titanium and other important minerals.
(27:39):
So it's quite dichotomous that we've got the panel that
appears to have rejected his proposal, whilst we've got the
momentum amongst our fellow minded nations heading towards more development, more.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Utilization, more reliance.
Speaker 4 (28:03):
And this is what I say, who ought to make
those trade offs? Should it be elected politicians or obscure
individuals appointed under law to make a call whether a
project represents a positive contribution to the regional interest or
the national interest, how to manage the risks, how to
(28:28):
cope with the mitigating measures, and how to make a
decision where you're always going to have to take account
and manage risk. So you know, I came off second best.
And it's been my view for a long time that
New Zealand's better served by having those decisions made by politicians.
(28:48):
Now that's not the current status, and I accept that
because I'm willing to live by the collective responsibilities of cabinet.
But once we start campaigning, it's more than reasonable for
these ideas to be put in front.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
Of kiwis So the Climate Justice Taranaki, which has been
in operation for some considerable time. I think I found
my way to their list. I didn't apply, but I
get their mail. And this came out last week following
the Prime Minister's comments about do we want this mining
(29:28):
in the country. Absolutely, yes we do. He said, want
a critical minerals sector and went on to explain why so.
The response was Climate Justice Taranaki do not agree. No,
we don't want a critical mineral sector here in aa
Heiro and New Zealand. We are this little country at
the bottom of the world. Our natural assets are our
(29:51):
unique ecosystems and remnant forests, wetlands, indigenous species and wild oceans.
As has happened repeatedly thanks to brutal self interest, typically
of foreign firms, mining will destroy these and the clean
waterways and land that we Mari and Pakia depend on
for well being and a sustainable economy. I think that
(30:14):
the opening sentence was really all that mattered. No, we
don't want a critical mineral sector here. That's that go off,
and so they have. They have formulated their approach with
support from some pretty high places. Ever since.
Speaker 4 (30:32):
Yeah, I think that that ideology, that analysis, that narrative
has ruled the country, certainly during Cinder's time. I mean
that's partly what drove her to cancel the oil and
gas industry. I think it was encouraged in Helen's time
as well, and mister Key he never really challenged it.
(30:58):
And it's a it's a long term mission of mine
to not only correct that perspective, but to distill an
alternative view which is far more pragmatic than that dogmatic
view that the garden of Eden is how we should
live with no thought to GDP, no thought to employment,
(31:23):
is zero consideration as to how do you actually invest
and get a return on investment. So I don't underestimate, mate,
how deeply baked in those ideological perspectives are. Probably one
of the things that has set me on my normal,
my rear end whilst I've been running around extolling the
(31:47):
virtues of the natural resource exploitative sector, is how deeply
those found that those ideological foundations now run in not
only in the younger generation, but throughout corporate New Zealand
as well. I mean corporate New Zealand is brought into
(32:08):
all of this climate hysteria the point that we've had
to unwind, for example, a number of the reporting obligations
put in place by Desinder, where firms are deluged and
burdened with all sorts of reporting obligations as to how
they're ruining the planet. Firms exist, from my perspective, to
(32:29):
operate within the law and go away, employ people and
generate profit and leave law making or law interpretation to
those who are endowed with that responsibility.
Speaker 2 (32:44):
Are you taking into account judicial activism?
Speaker 4 (32:49):
Yes, well we yeah, I mean we in the area
of the Treaty of White Tongue. Obviously, we've seen increasingly
difficult interpretations visited upon the treaty and governments and officials
and others struggle to make any sense out of it.
So it's one good thing. The Prime Minister did say
while he's up at White Honey. He was very simple.
(33:12):
He said, the treaty means we're governing, there is scope
for local autonomy, and we're all bound together by a
common set of civic rights and obligations.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
That's all we need to know. It's all we need
to know.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
We don't need any more Treaty of White Hongey references
scattered through statutes. We don't need any more tedious dissertations
from the White Tongue tribunal.
Speaker 3 (33:39):
We need to go back to the basics.
Speaker 4 (33:41):
And Winston has always said that, which is why he's
railed against the existence of these normative prescriptive measures known
as principles.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
So let's sidebar just for a moment. Having mentioned Winston,
he's is he eighty eight or about to turn Yeah?
Speaker 3 (33:58):
No, he is born in nineteen forty five.
Speaker 2 (34:00):
Yes, how long do you think he's got as leader
of New Zealand first for as long as he wants it. Well,
he's got to be around to want it, Okay, So
he will retain that position, and I'm not trying to
I'm not trying to allude to anything. He'll retain that
(34:20):
position after the election, Yeah, definitely, but it stands to
reason that at some stage a change will be made.
Speaker 4 (34:29):
Yeah. Well, he's certainly under no pressure from anyone in
our caucus or our party to retire from the field
of play. He's so well versed not only in politics
but judgment and give the guys, some Jews his respect.
He first stood in nineteen seventy five, then he became
(34:52):
a politician in nineteen seventy eight, that he's sort of
been in and out depending on the vagaries of the electorate.
And I'm not going to place too much reliance on
the current polls, but we seem to be resonating and
he in particular is growing in popularity. Every pole that
(35:15):
is taken as popularity continues to grow into the double figures.
Speaker 3 (35:20):
So that's positive.
Speaker 4 (35:22):
That's an example of why our party needs them to
hang around.
Speaker 3 (35:28):
And he.
Speaker 4 (35:31):
Definitely has struck a court with more and more Kiwis.
As we face the various uncertainties driven by not only
international geopolitics.
Speaker 3 (35:39):
But our society is going through a transition.
Speaker 4 (35:41):
There's a lot of angst, there's a lot of apprehension
and uncertainty, mate, And if you doubt that, just have
a look at how divided the country are is in
terms of.
Speaker 2 (35:51):
Poles indeed, and you might then extend the conversation to
Australia and suggests that both countries are going through a
very difficult time.
Speaker 4 (36:05):
Yeah. I go over to Australia on a semi regular
basis and I often get interviewed over there, and I've
been allowed to participate in the radio show formerly hosted
by Alan Jones, the well known.
Speaker 3 (36:22):
Shop jock over there in.
Speaker 4 (36:23):
The past, and Mate, their challenges are on another scale
when you think about what's happened with their demography. They've
obviously signed up a long time ago to the creed
of multiculturalism.
Speaker 3 (36:38):
We need to be watching that here in New Zealand,
and we need to.
Speaker 4 (36:41):
Ensure that the culture which defines our host society is
not driven either out of existence or undermined to suit
the priorities of new migrants.
Speaker 3 (36:55):
We're not having that when in Rome you do as
the Romans.
Speaker 2 (36:57):
Do, and that's the line that's being expressed at the
moment across the Tasman quite right now, okay, by some,
only by some, all right. The number the numbers that
have poured in over there are ginormous, but we have
probably per capita and not too dissimilar situation.
Speaker 4 (37:21):
Here, yes, yes, well, obviously the pressure point at the moment,
it's on the front page of the Herald, is the
immigration provisions in the upcoming India Free Trade Deal, which
our leader Winston says we'll not be backing.
Speaker 3 (37:42):
And obviously the.
Speaker 4 (37:44):
New Zealand Herald has had a look at the detail
of this agreement and it's it's inconsistent with what our
party represents. We are not having a situation where you
can fast track another two three four, five hundred thousand
people from India to come to New Zealand, which is
not having it.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
It's not a racist thing, it's a culture.
Speaker 4 (38:08):
I don't care if I sound fascist. I'm a Dahi marian.
I can say what the hell I like about the heritage.
Speaker 3 (38:15):
Of my country.
Speaker 2 (38:16):
Well, you can hear it's it's not that at all.
It's that it is. It took me a while to
realize it that it is a cultural thing that causes
the problems, not a racial thing.
Speaker 3 (38:29):
Correct, Correct?
Speaker 2 (38:30):
And you know all the Indians I know, whether they're
driving cars to the airport or whatever they're doing, they're
they're all pretty fine people. That's my experience anyway.
Speaker 3 (38:44):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (38:44):
But if you want to substantially change the character of
your country, if you want to re reform the population
of your country, go and campaign on it. Don't ask Kiwis,
well what do you want for a population policy? How
many people do you want living here? How can we
afford the infrastructure? Pretty basic questions. They always get canceled,
(39:07):
though in relation to people like my good self being
dismissed as a as a sort of luddite or some
fascist prejudice. Get mate, I look forward to the selection campaign.
Speaker 2 (39:20):
I have nothing to say except I'm looking forward to it. Also,
you mentioned something earlier on with regard to who should
make the decisions politicians or bureaucrats. Right on that basis,
(39:41):
where does MB stand as far as New Zealand first
is concerned.
Speaker 3 (39:48):
MB the government department that one.
Speaker 4 (39:51):
Yeah, well there's it's an amalgam.
Speaker 3 (39:54):
It's huge, It's bigger than Ben her.
Speaker 4 (39:59):
I think as a politician, you've got to stamp your authority.
Don't do it in a way that creates a us
situation of the bureaucracy. But providing they know there's a
clear line of accountability, there's a clear line of sight.
We don't, sadly in New Zealand, have the ability to
(40:19):
require CEOs and government departments to tender their resignation every
time a government changes. Now, in Australia you've partially got that.
In America you've got it in spades. So that's something
that I'm going to take to our party conference to ensure.
Speaker 3 (40:37):
That the bureaucracy.
Speaker 4 (40:41):
Doesn't become a block to what an elected government wants
to do in my small area of regional development and
fisheries and whatnot. I think it's fair to say that
they're by and large followed and delivered what we campaigned on,
(41:02):
but in matters of environmental law and such areas are
not in control of it. It just is so frustrating
that at a time where we should be turbocharging the
growth of our primary sector, the growth of our minerals
in a variety of other things, that takes so long
to get the permission space sorted out.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
You mentioned, you mentioned earlier business big business, and it's
latching on to the catchphrase of the time, woke climate,
other matters. There's another story at the moment that I
only just became aware of since coming back, and that
(41:46):
revolves around the Reserve Bank and New Zealand Post. Oh yeah,
are you with me?
Speaker 3 (41:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (41:54):
Well, I've got my head around the Reserve Bank, and
Winston clearly told that lady, the Scandinavian lady, that stick
to your lane. Your job is to study the abacus,
not a pine on geopolitical metas.
Speaker 2 (42:11):
So, for those that don't know, this is about a
New Zealand Post in conjunction with others wanting to produce
and sell a one ounce gold coin, as they do
in other parts of the world, South Africa, in Canada,
America's got its got its own and this has been
(42:33):
knocked on the head by the Reserve Bank. Why do
they have the power for that.
Speaker 4 (42:39):
Well, they have exclusive authority over currency, and I can't
exactly tell you why they would have snuffed out the
prospect of creating a gold coin. I'm quite excited by
the prospect of one day owning one myself. Of course,
one would need to have a different career than a politician.
Speaker 2 (42:59):
Well that's not true, because my understanding is that the
price of it would be one hundred dollars.
Speaker 4 (43:08):
Yeah, yeah, right, Okay, Well, perhaps they're worried that it's
a competing form of currency monetary value. I'm not sure, mate,
But now that you've part called my curiosity, I shall
go and find out. Well, I am about to go
at ten to two to question.
Speaker 3 (43:25):
Time in our New Zealand Parliament.
Speaker 4 (43:27):
I shall make an appropriate impact and pluck the weeds
out of the vineyard of democracy.
Speaker 2 (43:36):
So you're off, you're dumping me, and I'm in a
position now to go and watch which is something I
really do, but I did. I did I have to
say sit through your speech that you recently made. Oh,
thank you very much, and well there are things I'd
(43:58):
say about it, but I don't have time.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
Yeah, I tend to just ll not speak off the cut.
Speaker 4 (44:07):
Hey, I'm six or six year years old, been in
business and raised a family and lived in a community
in the Far North and had reasonable education. If I
can't stand up and talk coherently for ten minutes, then
I'm definitely without notes.
Speaker 3 (44:20):
Then I'm definitely in the wrong career.
Speaker 2 (44:23):
So once again, thank you. I can only say that
I expect some very positive male and I look forward
to next time because we'll have one before the election.
Speaker 4 (44:36):
I much appreciate later in you providing me the opportunity.
Speaker 3 (44:41):
And you still have your distinctive.
Speaker 4 (44:45):
Tone, the distinctive tone in your voice that I recall
at nineteen eighty when I first bumpedn't you at a
law lecture.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
I don't know what to say, bye bye, mate, thank
you into the mail room with missus producer, and I
(45:16):
want to say welcome back to you. Have you recovered
yet from a venture across the Tasman lighton?
Speaker 3 (45:25):
Hello?
Speaker 5 (45:26):
Happy twenty twenty six. We had a fantastic few weeks
in Sydney. A couple of weeks we did, and it
was so it was a hectic few months here beforehand,
and was so glad to We were so glad to
get away.
Speaker 2 (45:41):
And cut the ties for a while. The weather was
stinking hot most of the time.
Speaker 5 (45:48):
Yes, well, we just left that awful rainy period here
where you literally didn't think you'd ever see the sun again.
So we were very grateful. But the best part of
the summer Laton was your em n z M that
you were delivered on New Year's Day. We're all very
proud of you.
Speaker 4 (46:07):
Wow.
Speaker 3 (46:07):
Family is very.
Speaker 5 (46:08):
Proud of you. Children are very proud of you.
Speaker 2 (46:11):
Well, there's a few people that feel the same. I
have a huge apology to make because it's a renowned
fact that I am messy when it comes to records
and keeping things and yes and having them organized properly
because there's so many of them. But there were so
(46:32):
many emails that came in starting on the thirty first
of December when the announcement was made. There were so
many emails that came in. I printed a handful and
then then allocated the rest as they came in to
the flag division on the on the computer right, so
I flagged them, they're not there. Get back from two
(46:55):
weeks away. They're not there. There have been things that happened.
I nearly blew the studio up, the home studio up
the other day by putting one too many plugs in
the years in the whole, and that caused that caused
total chaos. I could tell you more, but I'm not
going to because it's too embarrassing.
Speaker 5 (47:19):
Anyway, you were saying, you've lost these and these are
the people to thank.
Speaker 2 (47:23):
Yeah, there are. There were a lot, seriously a lot.
And I'm very grateful to those of you who who
dropped a note, and I'm very pleased that we all
enjoyed this together, to be honest. So I've got I've
got something here that i want to I want to
drop in. Ze has arrived at seven thirteen am on
(47:46):
December thirty one, morning, latent, my hardiest congratulations on your
much deserved m n Z M award. I know zed
B will run an interview with you this morning, and
I look forward to hearing this happy new year from
Don Don the the.
Speaker 3 (48:07):
Don.
Speaker 2 (48:07):
The interview was was pre recorded a few days before.
And I don't know whether you picked that up or not,
but I hope you found it well somewhat interesting and
thank you, Leighton.
Speaker 5 (48:22):
Liz says, as I scrolled the news in the half
light of an early Matter Matter morning, I worked my
way through the new Year's honors list. I was delighted
to see Leydon's Men's Edit m Award. Whatever these wards mean,
it's a wonderful recognition of an outstanding career and the
ongoing labor of love for the truth and quality broadcasting.
That is your prod, that is your podcast. Best wishes
(48:44):
to you both, happy birthdays, Merry Christmas, and above all,
blessings for an outstanding twenty six twenty twenty six And
Liz to you too, thank you for thank you for writing.
Speaker 2 (48:54):
And I go with you on the twenty six comment.
So let's spread our wings a bit. On the eighth
of January, lateon, I've just finished listening to your outstanding
interview with doctor vi here Corey, thank you. I'm ashamed
to admit that I was a believer, and like a
good little boy, ran along to receive my three adurned
Bloomfield recommended mRNA shots. Given my philosophical and instinctive distrust
(49:20):
slash dislike of said individuals that should have been enough
to precipitate greater questioning at the time, But having had
a background in vaccine development, albeit on the fringes thereof
in a past life, I swallowed the kool aid and complied.
But the worm has turned, and at least I have
the guts to admit when I was wrong. Only after
(49:42):
the third shot and the rapidly deteriorating rate of efficacy
of these wonderful new shots did I start to wise up.
My own son suffered mild vaccine injury and my arcarditis,
which I dismissed as him being anti. Then, a young
concrete business owner that I knew personally in New Plymouth,
(50:04):
fit as a fiddle, fit as a fiddle, I repeat,
died of an unexplained heart attack a couple of days
host mRNA vaccine, which he was mandated to receive in
order to keep his contract reconcrete the parking lot at
New Plymouth Base Hospital. That, combined with the fact that
(50:26):
we were fed a changing story and ever increasing need
for more booster shots despite their obvious failure to protect
us from COVID, finally wake me up. I had heard
of friends and relatives using ibermectan in my native South Africa.
Two friends with similar backgrounds to me obtained some and
used it in New Zealand. Neither of them managed to
(50:48):
escape contracting COVID, but I will say they appeared to
shake it off pretty quickly and get back to work.
Then my brother in law presented me with doctor Pierre
Corey's book, The War on Ibermecton. It is brilliant and
it is I endorsed that. Suddenly a lot of pieces
of the jigsaw fell into place for me, including why,
after initial enthusiasm, my iber mecton's efficacy was proven, albeit
(51:14):
in vitro, at Monash University. Ex colleagues of mine at
Ligan's Institute suddenly went quiet and would not even return
or comment on my emails that I sent them on
the subject. Thank goodness for brave, honest individuals like Pierre Corey,
Joseph Barron, Paul Merrick, whom you've also interviewed, and also
(51:35):
an ex saffer. Another individual who I would place alongside
those fine gentlemen who you may have heard of, is
doctor John Campbell. He would be a great interview for
a podcast Laton. I don't mind being quoted Layton, but
I do request that my name and contact details be
(51:56):
withheld for obvious reasons. I don't think I named it,
did I. So there we have it. And that's all
very well said. And I've had numerous letters covering that
sort of thing, but that one's a great one late.
Speaker 5 (52:12):
And this is from Nigel. Nigel is somebody that we
have worked with in the past and both very much admire.
So this little note makes it all the sweeter. Really,
he says, I'm in Hong Kong, which is when he
found out about your M nst M, and he said,
I am so thrilled for you.
Speaker 3 (52:30):
You are the best.
Speaker 2 (52:32):
You know, Holks. It's embarrassing, but I accept it. And
the finally until I find the missing the missing bits?
Are you another one?
Speaker 1 (52:44):
Well?
Speaker 5 (52:44):
Why as you go, Bob says, as a former voluntary
victim of your podcast program, I take the opportunity of
conveying hearty congratulation on your well deserved New Year's Honors award.
Over the years, you've conducted interviews with innumerable people for
the information, education and enjoyment of the public, and I
(53:05):
trust that you will continue this in good health on
any more occasions, and Bob wishes you best wishes for
twenty twenty six and kind regards Bob.
Speaker 2 (53:16):
Bob, that's much appreciated, and I can't tell you how
much I enjoyed it when we had our discussion. And
I trust that you're well as well as your wife.
So finally I can't resist this. This is twenty three December,
written by Jonathan. Don't know whether you've had opportunity to
(53:36):
analyze Simon Wilson's lengthy piece in last Saturday's Herald on
Stephen Pinker, a cognitive psychologist. Apparently he looks slightly deranged.
Many shrinks are. Wilson clearly admires him. Some of his
alleged views appear to be reasonable, others just theft fascist allegations.
(53:57):
Threely tossed about Trump, the most mendacious politician in the century.
No mention of Obama or the Dems who controlled the
Biden Marrionette views are climate change seem more reasonable, but
you need to read between the lines. Thought you were
relieved of Simon Wilson for a while, but the Herald
is evidently going to give his occasional offerings great promidence.
(54:21):
Silly me, silly me, he says, why should I have
thought otherwise?
Speaker 3 (54:26):
John?
Speaker 2 (54:27):
What can I say? Well done, missus producer.
Speaker 3 (54:32):
Here we go again.
Speaker 2 (54:33):
I would imagine that we will. We will get a
bit of correspondence this week on the interview that we
did with Shane James. Yes, I'm sure you will, So
we'll see you then you will next week.
Speaker 3 (54:45):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (55:03):
Now, there's more than one reason why I'm about to
quote you from a letter that I received from Gary
Judd KC last September. September twenty had stated and I
referred to it at the time. I don't think I
read the whole letter, but I want to do that today.
There's a number of reasons for it. I say. One
(55:24):
is having spent two weeks in Sydney, and out of
Sydney down at Bowrel, we went for three nights to
stay with a friend on one hundred and fifty acres,
which was really quite stunning. But maybe more on that
another time. But it was there that I made a
call to Louise Clegg. Now you may remember, but if
(55:48):
you don't, we did a podcast interview with her last
September and Gary refers to it. So and there's another
connection I'll get to that in a minute, he said, Latin,
thank you for your most interesting discussion with Louise Clegg.
Her description of some of her progressive friends as a
(56:09):
little bit malleable and credulous and also fashionable is perceptive.
A few more descriptors may be added, an uncritical desire
to be part of the good and on the right
side of history. A need to look good in the
eyes of others, asking not is this true, but do
(56:29):
others think it's true? Seeking the approval of others, all
leading to a reluctance to engage in critical thinking and debate.
Not your attention a hope. This is the mode of
thinking of those whom Einrand described as second handers and
portrayed in The fountain Head, contrasted with the individualist Howard Rourke.
(56:53):
As Rand put it elsewhere, it is to a second
hander that the moral appraisal of himself by others is
a primary concern, which supersedes truth, facts, reason, and logic.
The divide close quote. The divide in this aspect of
the human condition is not between the left or progressives
(57:14):
on the one hand and conservatives on the other. Conservatives
can be secondhanders, as much as others. The divide is between,
on one hand, second handers and those who have loyalty
to the group as a primary and on the other
those of independent thought and action who take responsibility for
(57:35):
those thoughts and actions. There is no doubt that in
New Zealand, like Louis's perception of Australia, too many members
of the legal profession are in the first camp. Louise
referred to Francis Fukuiyama. I consider Fukiyama's The Origins of
Political Order, tracing the growth of political order from pre
human times to the French Revolution, and political order and
(57:59):
political decay from the separate books from the Industrial Revolution
to what he calls the globalization of democracy to be
great works. As Louise said in her Sliding into Technocracy
article in the Spectator of Australia, Fukiyama places faith in
(58:19):
a properly functioning administrative state. What needs emphasis is that
it is critical to Fukiyama's conception of a properly functioning
administrative state that the state be one where the rule
of law prevails. He notes in Origins, page two forty six.
(58:40):
Up to this point, I have discussed political development in
terms of state building the ability of states to concentrate
and use power. The rule of law is a separate
component of political order that puts limitations on a state's power.
The first checks on executive power are not those imposed
by democratic assemblies or elections. Rather, they are the result
(59:05):
of societies believing that rulers had to operate under the law.
State building and the rule of law therefore coexist in
a certain tension. On the one hand, rulers can enhance
their authority by acting within and on behalf of the law.
On the other hand, the law can prevent them from
doing things that they would like to do, not just
(59:27):
in their own private interest, but in the interests of
the community as a whole. In her discussion with you,
Louise noted how during her legal career the profession in
Australia had moved steadily leftward. During my legal career, writ
Scarry Judd. During my legal career in New Zealand, the
distance between the conservatism of most judges and other legal
(59:52):
elites at the start and today's frequent lack of obedience
to disliked legislation an abandonment of the virtues of deciding
a present case. In the same way as a previous
case has become extreme. Incrementalism is being planted by radicalism,
often driven by political ideology. This means that judges and
(01:00:15):
leaders of the legal profession, who should be upholding and
protecting the rule of law, are undermining it. By judges
assuming the role of lawmaker without condemnation from the profession.
This is what we call judicial activism. It's my insert,
all the while pretending that they are acting to advance
(01:00:37):
the rule of law, when in truth they are trying
to advance the rule of judges and lawyers. The essence
of the rule of law is that rule is by law,
not man. Practicality demands that society choose some people to
be responsible for making and implementing law. In today's democracies,
we need not rely on societal pressure to keep lawmakers
(01:01:01):
within the law, but on the ability to get rid
of elected representatives. No such ability exists regarding those who
are charged with implementing the law, that is, the judges.
When judges ignore the sovereignty of parliament, abandon precedent and incrementalism,
and make themselves law makers, they place themselves above the law,
(01:01:25):
and in confrontation of the rule of law in defiance
of the oaths they took when entering office to be
faithful and bear true allegiance to the sovereign according to
the law, and to serve the Sovereign according to the
law in the office of Judge. Regards Gary, Now, I
should again thank Gary Judd for writing and sending me
(01:01:48):
that opinion. The connection that I mentioned earlier with Louise Clegg,
that's what inspired him to write. But Louise Clegg, in
case you don't know, is the wife of Angus Taylor. Now,
as I'm recording this, which is on the morning of release,
anything can happen in the next day twenty four hours,
(01:02:11):
forty eight hours, but probably this week with regard to
Angus Taylor, who is a member of the Liberal Party
of course and a member of Parliament, and is also
as far as we know as I speak, is standing
for the leadership of the Liberal Party in Australia. It's
a mess. The whole scenario in Australia is a mess politically.
(01:02:36):
Anywhere and everywhere we went and spoke with people, they
wanted to discuss such things and make comparisons or ask
questions about New Zealand and how much better off. We
might be it was just a rolling conversation, so it
could be by the time you hear this that Angus
Taylor is the leader of the Liberal Party, which can
(01:02:58):
only be an improvement or is not, and he's gone
and things will roll on poorly as they have been
with the incompetence who currently running it, that is the
Liberal Party, and providing no alternative to the fool that's
running the country. Well, that's what his chore is. What
(01:03:19):
he's doing is nothing of the sort, as I think
most people, even those who belong to the Labor Party agree. Now,
that will take us out for podcast number three hundred
and fifteen if you would like to write to us
latent aduced Talk, SAIDB dot Co dot nz and Carolyn
at Newstalk said B dot Co dot Nz. The other
(01:03:42):
thing I was going to say was that Gary Judd's
letter would fit hand in glove in my opinion, with
Shane Jones's attitude. And both of them come from Northland,
so I find that interesting. Maybe Northland has the answers
over which the rest of the country is still struggling.
(01:04:04):
So we shall return, as I say, for three to
one six next week in the meantime, thank you for
listening and we'll talk soon.
Speaker 1 (01:04:21):
Thank you for more from News Talks, ed B Listen
live on air or online, and keep our shows with
you wherever you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Bleep! with Ana Navarro
Fear thrives in silence and confusion. Ana Navarro rejects both. Her voice is an antidote to today’s chaos. Her new podcast, Bleep! with Ana Navarro, takes on today’s most pressing issues with the voices most connected to it: decision-makers, political leaders, cultural shapers, and people on the frontlines of the story. The conversations acknowledge the emotions we all feel—despair, sadness, fear— but emerge with knowledge, perspective, and hope. The belief is simple: fearless dialogue can transform fear into courage, and courage into change. When fear dominates the headlines, this show digs deeper. Because information, debate, and conversation don’t just ease fear, they give us power to shape the future.
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.