August 24, 2024 • 10 mins
This week on the Sunday Panel, Coast Day host Lorna Riley and senior PR consultant at One Plus One Communications, Damien Venuto, joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the week - and more!
As St John ambulance staff keep striking, more people are wondering why the service isn't fully funded by the Government. Does this need to change?
New research has revealed Kiwis are divided as to whether the Government should have axed funding for mega-ferries. What do we think of this?
How do we feel about politicians taking part in Celebrity Treasure Island?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
These talks a B time for our panel. Now in
joining me this morning, we have Coast to Day host
Lorna Riley. Good morning, Launa Yelder Hi, and we also
have senior pr consulted at one plus one Communications, Damien Venuto.
Good morning, Damien, good morning. Good to have you both
with us. Hey this morning, really interesting comic made by
Saint John, who of course had Rolling Strikes in play yesterday.
(00:37):
They are currently negotiating their latest pay rounds and things
that said that they will be seeking more funding from
the government in twenty twenty six and moving towards one
hundred percent operational funding rather than relying on donations to
pay its bills, and at present about eighty three percent
is tax payer funded. Gosh, we have this conversation a lot,
don't we, Lorna, And we get the point. Now we're by,
(01:00):
you know, quite an important service. Maybe we just get on.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
And fund it extremely important service. And yeah, to me
it seems a bit of a night brain. I mean,
I know it's always about cost, but why shouldn't such
a fundamental service be funded. I know there's a lot
of call outs that maybe aren't emergencies and maybe don't
need to happen, So I guess there's got to be
some you know, stringent measures put in place. But I
think it gobsmakes a lot of people to realize that
(01:24):
it's not a fully funded service. You know, a lot
of New Zealanders. I think it's still learning that it's not,
and it surprises them.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Damian, do you think if they went to be fully
funded then you would just use the user pays for
those sort of services like Launa was talking about, whether
it's transfers and things like that.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
The the thing with us that I've always been struck
by is that I understand that any country has like
a finite pool of money that can be put towards
different things within the country. But I've always always found
that things like the ambulance and certain drugs that just
need to be funded. I feel like we should just
bite the bullet and make that funding because there are
just too many lines that are at risk here. So
(02:03):
I'm really ready in favor of making a decision. I
don't think it's politically dangerous to say that our ambulance
should be our ambulance service should be covered fully by
the government. I think that that that's a decision that
we really need to get to the point where it
should be made. I mean, there, we're eighty five percent there,
that the fact that the ambulance services are spending the
(02:24):
other fourteen percent of their time tru desperately trying to
get funding through charitable New Zealanders. I just don't think
that's good enough for New Zealand. I think that we
really need as a country, we need to make a
decision on that.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
At least it will it will put an end, hopefully
to all the conversations about the things that It just
feels like it's ongoing all the time, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
Oh yeah, yeah, absolutely, And I don't think anyone begrudges
them the action that they've taken in the last few days.
But yeah, no, we've got it. We've got to bite
the bullet, I think is Damien season just just fund it, Okay.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Moving on to the ferries, another issue which has been
very much the forefront of conversations. As you know, we're
constantly receiving press releases about fairies being in and out
of action for a little bit longer Damian. This was
a really interesting poll. They said do you think the
government made the right or wrong decision to cancel the
replacement into Islander cook straight fairies? And this was in
(03:25):
the one News variant poll. Fifty one of the respondent
said it was the wrong decision, a quarter to twenty
six said it was about the right decision, and just
under Court twenty two didn't.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
No.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
I wouldn't say I'm not hugely surprised by that, are you.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
No, not at all. I actually love this topic because
it comes down to this thing called the planning fallacy,
which you see between contractors and governments all the time.
So Daniel Carneman HEA's a Nobel Prize winning economists. He's
written extensively on this. And there was actually this great
reference that I read recently, and it was about the
(03:58):
Edinburgh the Scottish Parliament building in Edinburgh. So the initial
budget for that was forty pounds and then he shot
up to one hundred million by like two years later.
By the time it was built, it was three hundred
and seventy five point eight million pounds, And so it
kind of gives you an indication of how these projects
will blow out enormously, and that's really the problem. He
(04:21):
has an infrastructure, it's a piece of infrastructure that we need.
The question is are we paying too much for it?
And I'm not surprised that people are like, we really
need this infrastructure, but then you do have the people
kind of question whether we've maybe overspent. But the reality
is with all these big projects, they generally blow out
because you have contractors who make promises that they can't
necessarily keep, and you have governments that are overly optimistic
(04:42):
about how much they should be spending for something, and
as it progresses, they're like, oh, I don't know, we
probably need this, we probably need this. So you have
all these things adding on top of it. So the
planning fallacy, it's one of the things that I find
most fascinating about that relationship between contractors and the government.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
But also, wasn't the gap here LRNA to do with
the fak Here we have these mega theories coming in,
but we actually haven't really thought about the land side
infrastructure that's going to be needed in order to serve Yeah,
because I actually I was like, yeah, let's get on
with it, let's get these theories in place. This is
state Highway one. Let's just move forward, Come on, guys.
And then it was like, oh, sorry, what so someone
(05:17):
hasn't thought about, you know, how it's going to birth
or where it's going to you know.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Yeah, we've actually got to do the port development as well,
but we actually do need to do that. And I
think that the Pole was really asking the wrong question
because it's not whether we want the Mega Fairies or
we don't want the Mega Fairies.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Do we want a bit of service.
Speaker 3 (05:34):
We just need to know what is happening, because you know,
the government made the rather shock decision last December that
they were going to cancel this. The last I heard
at the end of June, I think they were still
trying to exit the contract. It was looking like it
was going to be half a billion dollars to exit,
but I don't know whether that's all being concluded. There
were so many things to work through with lawyers and
(05:55):
what have you. And meantime you've got places like Picton,
who's you know, very livelihood depends on this. You've got
the entire transport industry saying okay, cancel the Mega Fairies
or don't cancel the Mega but what is happening in meantime,
that inter islander service is just well embarrassing, isn't it well?
Speaker 2 (06:11):
And the problem is and isn't damon that every time
there is a problem with the islander, you know, they're
going to be pointing the finger right back at the
at the coalition government, going well, what's your plan? What
would you like to talk about it? You know.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
The interesting thing in that that dal Carnoman reference that
I just made was that very rarely do government's back
out once costs do blow out, because they realize that
they just need to get it done. So contractors kind
of like also take advantage of that where they know
that they can get a budget signed off knowing that
it's very very rare for a government to actually just
(06:42):
back out because of the political risk that comes with
backing up. In this instance, the government is sending quite
a clear message that look, if but the budgets line
is going to blow out, we're not going to do it,
which is an interesting precedent to set.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
So do you because it's that whole thing laurna do
you throw good money after bad? And I think that
you know, Christ is having that conversation with the cathedral
at the moment.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
We've so much with the cost of not throwing good
money after the yeah it's bad, half a billion dollars.
Then you've got to kind of go okay, and god
knows how long the delay you know is going to
be as well.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
So now I don't want I don't want to offend
anybody who has previously appeared on Celebrity Treasure Island, But
can I can I just say? I mean, I got
flipped through the lineup of celebrities who are going to
be appearing on the next show, and I was really impressed. Laughter.
(07:34):
It's really actually interesting collection of people.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
It is a really good a year. I'm James Wallaston.
Can't wait to see him, Susan Paul, very exciting. I
had Actually I've got a disclaimer. There was whispers that
I might be approached to represent the Breast Cancer Foundation
on the program, and I was terrified because I thought
if they asked me, I'm going to have to say yes,
(07:59):
and I don't want to because it looks really hard.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
You've just blown it.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You've just blown it.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
There's someone out there now writing this down for next year,
going oh no.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Not happening. Oh god no. Anyway, I was surprised though
to see Carmel Seppaloni on there.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
And that's what I'd love to discuss.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
Yes, m.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
I mean is it appropriate? The question is it appropriate
for a sitting MP to have the time to go
off and compete on.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Please, because I think absolutely not. I don't think it's
appropriate at all. I think the clues and the title
Celebrity Treasure Island and people can debate whether these people
are celebrities or not celebrities, but I think we can
all agree our MP's should not be celebrities. That is
not what the taxpayer is paying them for. Now. I
understand that Carmel Seppoloni has got you know, agreement with
(08:48):
Chris Hipkins that she can do it. She continues to
be paid because you can't take leave without pay, and
she's going to donate that pay to her charity, which
is all very noble, but that's not the point. That
The point is she is employed to do a job
representing the taxpayer and going off and doing Celebrity Treasure
Island for a pit cause, which is a very good cause,
(09:10):
but it's not it's not what our MP's are there for.
A talent fee that she gets paid why, you know,
I don't. I don't think MP should be class as
celebrities at all. And I think it's a dangerous president.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
I think Lorna has some very good points there, Damien,
but I'm kind of curious to see her on it.
Speaker 4 (09:29):
I you know what the thing is like, as always
look at these politicians, someone like are you serious? People
like are you do you take this off? Seriously? Like
what are you doing? It doesn't I can't. I can't
imagine a partner at a major law firm taking some
time out to go inn appear on celebrity for Treasure Island.
It just doesn't make sense to me. It makes no
(09:50):
sense to me whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
And you're not talking about, you know, a backbench MP, right,
you know, you're talking about the deputy leader of the opposition,
And yeah, no, I think it's it's nuts.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Thank you both very much for your contribution this morning.
Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
For more for this Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks at B from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News Talks EDB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
These talks a B time for our panel. Now in
joining me this morning, we have Coast to Day host
Lorna Riley. Good morning, Launa Yelder Hi, and we also
have senior pr consulted at one plus one Communications, Damien Venuto.
Good morning, Damien, good morning. Good to have you both
with us. Hey this morning, really interesting comic made by
Saint John, who of course had Rolling Strikes in play yesterday.
(00:37):
They are currently negotiating their latest pay rounds and things
that said that they will be seeking more funding from
the government in twenty twenty six and moving towards one
hundred percent operational funding rather than relying on donations to
pay its bills, and at present about eighty three percent
is tax payer funded. Gosh, we have this conversation a lot,
don't we, Lorna, And we get the point. Now we're by,
(01:00):
you know, quite an important service. Maybe we just get on.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
And fund it extremely important service. And yeah, to me
it seems a bit of a night brain. I mean,
I know it's always about cost, but why shouldn't such
a fundamental service be funded. I know there's a lot
of call outs that maybe aren't emergencies and maybe don't
need to happen, So I guess there's got to be
some you know, stringent measures put in place. But I
think it gobsmakes a lot of people to realize that
(01:24):
it's not a fully funded service. You know, a lot
of New Zealanders. I think it's still learning that it's not,
and it surprises them.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
Damian, do you think if they went to be fully
funded then you would just use the user pays for
those sort of services like Launa was talking about, whether
it's transfers and things like that.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
The the thing with us that I've always been struck
by is that I understand that any country has like
a finite pool of money that can be put towards
different things within the country. But I've always always found
that things like the ambulance and certain drugs that just
need to be funded. I feel like we should just
bite the bullet and make that funding because there are
just too many lines that are at risk here. So
(02:03):
I'm really ready in favor of making a decision. I
don't think it's politically dangerous to say that our ambulance
should be our ambulance service should be covered fully by
the government. I think that that that's a decision that
we really need to get to the point where it
should be made. I mean, there, we're eighty five percent there,
that the fact that the ambulance services are spending the
(02:24):
other fourteen percent of their time tru desperately trying to
get funding through charitable New Zealanders. I just don't think
that's good enough for New Zealand. I think that we
really need as a country, we need to make a
decision on that.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
At least it will it will put an end, hopefully
to all the conversations about the things that It just
feels like it's ongoing all the time, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
Oh yeah, yeah, absolutely, And I don't think anyone begrudges
them the action that they've taken in the last few days.
But yeah, no, we've got it. We've got to bite
the bullet, I think is Damien season just just fund it, Okay.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Moving on to the ferries, another issue which has been
very much the forefront of conversations. As you know, we're
constantly receiving press releases about fairies being in and out
of action for a little bit longer Damian. This was
a really interesting poll. They said do you think the
government made the right or wrong decision to cancel the
replacement into Islander cook straight fairies? And this was in
(03:25):
the one News variant poll. Fifty one of the respondent
said it was the wrong decision, a quarter to twenty
six said it was about the right decision, and just
under Court twenty two didn't.
Speaker 4 (03:34):
No.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
I wouldn't say I'm not hugely surprised by that, are you.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
No, not at all. I actually love this topic because
it comes down to this thing called the planning fallacy,
which you see between contractors and governments all the time.
So Daniel Carneman HEA's a Nobel Prize winning economists. He's
written extensively on this. And there was actually this great
reference that I read recently, and it was about the
(03:58):
Edinburgh the Scottish Parliament building in Edinburgh. So the initial
budget for that was forty pounds and then he shot
up to one hundred million by like two years later.
By the time it was built, it was three hundred
and seventy five point eight million pounds, And so it
kind of gives you an indication of how these projects
will blow out enormously, and that's really the problem. He
(04:21):
has an infrastructure, it's a piece of infrastructure that we need.
The question is are we paying too much for it?
And I'm not surprised that people are like, we really
need this infrastructure, but then you do have the people
kind of question whether we've maybe overspent. But the reality
is with all these big projects, they generally blow out
because you have contractors who make promises that they can't
necessarily keep, and you have governments that are overly optimistic
(04:42):
about how much they should be spending for something, and
as it progresses, they're like, oh, I don't know, we
probably need this, we probably need this. So you have
all these things adding on top of it. So the
planning fallacy, it's one of the things that I find
most fascinating about that relationship between contractors and the government.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
But also, wasn't the gap here LRNA to do with
the fak Here we have these mega theories coming in,
but we actually haven't really thought about the land side
infrastructure that's going to be needed in order to serve Yeah,
because I actually I was like, yeah, let's get on
with it, let's get these theories in place. This is
state Highway one. Let's just move forward, Come on, guys.
And then it was like, oh, sorry, what so someone
(05:17):
hasn't thought about, you know, how it's going to birth
or where it's going to you know.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Yeah, we've actually got to do the port development as well,
but we actually do need to do that. And I
think that the Pole was really asking the wrong question
because it's not whether we want the Mega Fairies or
we don't want the Mega Fairies.
Speaker 2 (05:32):
Do we want a bit of service.
Speaker 3 (05:34):
We just need to know what is happening, because you know,
the government made the rather shock decision last December that
they were going to cancel this. The last I heard
at the end of June, I think they were still
trying to exit the contract. It was looking like it
was going to be half a billion dollars to exit,
but I don't know whether that's all being concluded. There
were so many things to work through with lawyers and
(05:55):
what have you. And meantime you've got places like Picton,
who's you know, very livelihood depends on this. You've got
the entire transport industry saying okay, cancel the Mega Fairies
or don't cancel the Mega but what is happening in meantime,
that inter islander service is just well embarrassing, isn't it well?
Speaker 2 (06:11):
And the problem is and isn't damon that every time
there is a problem with the islander, you know, they're
going to be pointing the finger right back at the
at the coalition government, going well, what's your plan? What
would you like to talk about it? You know.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
The interesting thing in that that dal Carnoman reference that
I just made was that very rarely do government's back
out once costs do blow out, because they realize that
they just need to get it done. So contractors kind
of like also take advantage of that where they know
that they can get a budget signed off knowing that
it's very very rare for a government to actually just
(06:42):
back out because of the political risk that comes with
backing up. In this instance, the government is sending quite
a clear message that look, if but the budgets line
is going to blow out, we're not going to do it,
which is an interesting precedent to set.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
So do you because it's that whole thing laurna do
you throw good money after bad? And I think that
you know, Christ is having that conversation with the cathedral
at the moment.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
We've so much with the cost of not throwing good
money after the yeah it's bad, half a billion dollars.
Then you've got to kind of go okay, and god
knows how long the delay you know is going to
be as well.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
So now I don't want I don't want to offend
anybody who has previously appeared on Celebrity Treasure Island, But
can I can I just say? I mean, I got
flipped through the lineup of celebrities who are going to
be appearing on the next show, and I was really impressed. Laughter.
(07:34):
It's really actually interesting collection of people.
Speaker 3 (07:38):
It is a really good a year. I'm James Wallaston.
Can't wait to see him, Susan Paul, very exciting. I
had Actually I've got a disclaimer. There was whispers that
I might be approached to represent the Breast Cancer Foundation
on the program, and I was terrified because I thought
if they asked me, I'm going to have to say yes,
(07:59):
and I don't want to because it looks really hard.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
You've just blown it.
Speaker 3 (08:03):
You've just blown it.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
There's someone out there now writing this down for next year,
going oh no.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Not happening. Oh god no. Anyway, I was surprised though
to see Carmel Seppaloni on there.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
And that's what I'd love to discuss.
Speaker 3 (08:17):
Yes, m.
Speaker 2 (08:19):
I mean is it appropriate? The question is it appropriate
for a sitting MP to have the time to go
off and compete on.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Please, because I think absolutely not. I don't think it's
appropriate at all. I think the clues and the title
Celebrity Treasure Island and people can debate whether these people
are celebrities or not celebrities, but I think we can
all agree our MP's should not be celebrities. That is
not what the taxpayer is paying them for. Now. I
understand that Carmel Seppoloni has got you know, agreement with
(08:48):
Chris Hipkins that she can do it. She continues to
be paid because you can't take leave without pay, and
she's going to donate that pay to her charity, which
is all very noble, but that's not the point. That
The point is she is employed to do a job
representing the taxpayer and going off and doing Celebrity Treasure
Island for a pit cause, which is a very good cause,
(09:10):
but it's not it's not what our MP's are there for.
A talent fee that she gets paid why, you know,
I don't. I don't think MP should be class as
celebrities at all. And I think it's a dangerous president.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
I think Lorna has some very good points there, Damien,
but I'm kind of curious to see her on it.
Speaker 4 (09:29):
I you know what the thing is like, as always
look at these politicians, someone like are you serious? People
like are you do you take this off? Seriously? Like
what are you doing? It doesn't I can't. I can't
imagine a partner at a major law firm taking some
time out to go inn appear on celebrity for Treasure Island.
It just doesn't make sense to me. It makes no
(09:50):
sense to me whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
And you're not talking about, you know, a backbench MP, right,
you know, you're talking about the deputy leader of the opposition,
And yeah, no, I think it's it's nuts.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Thank you both very much for your contribution this morning.
Appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
For more for this Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks at B from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.