March 1, 2025 • 12 mins
This week on the Sunday Panel, Coast day host and host of travel podcast Trip Notes, 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!
President Trump, Ukranian President Zelenskyy and VP Vance held a heated meeting yesterday. Trump accused the Ukranian President of not being ready for peace, and gambling with World War 3. How dangerous is this exchange? What could the fallout be?
The Government has agreed to review the legal aid system in order to prioritise victims and their access to justice. Do we agree with this move?
Police Minister Mark Mitchell made headlines after leaping into Auckland's Viaduct Harbour fully clothed during the Z Manu Grand Finals. How do we rate his form?
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 EDBS of April twenty twenty five, ASB
Bank Limited's terms apply. Since nineteen eighty seven, Stonewood Homes
has been building more than just homes.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
With time for the panel now, and I'm joined by
Coast Day host and host of the travel podcast Trip Notes,
Laura Riley. Good morning, Launa, good morning. Good to have
you with us, and Senor Pierre consultant at one plus
one Communications, Damien Venuto, Good to talk to you, Damien,
good morning. Right, let's start with Trump Zelenski, the meeting
(00:43):
in the Oval Office, which took everybody a little bit
by surprise, and then there's been quite a large fallout
after this. Launa, I really wondered whether this was a
good move for the Ukrainian president, considering the things that
had been said, considering the tone that he was hearing
from President Trump, as to whether he should have actually
(01:05):
made this does it and then where else there's the
question of how he has he has responded to the
way he's been spoken to. At the end of the day,
we all just want an outcome here and I feel
like we've gone backwards and awful a lot your.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Thoughts possibly, but I mean it's fair to say we've
mostly only seen the last five minutes of what was
a forty to forty five minute meeting. I've watched the
whole thing, and about forty minutes was absolutely fine. It
was actually we talk about Trump and Zelenski, but it
was actually JD. Vance that really changed the tenor of
the whole conversation. I actually think Zelensky acted entirely appropriately.
(01:45):
I mean, he just reminded people that Putin have broken promises.
How could he practice diplomacy in these situations? And then
basically it was a pylon. The pointing of fingers from
both Trump and and Vance saying.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
You need us.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
You haven't even said thank you, You're not dressed properly,
basically put Zelensky in the position of a wayward teenager
who wasn't allowed to get a word in. Each ways,
and it's interesting to see that, you know, Europe has
sort of solidified support behind Zolensky. Our own leader and
Albanesi as well have also said that we stand unequivocally.
(02:20):
Besides Violinsky, I don't know that i'd agree that he's
done himself, no favors. I think turning up in his
combat year very church release, he's just reminding everyone that
they are still a country at war. You don't turn
up on a flash suit when your people are dying.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Damian for the sake of getting out of this alive
and getting out of this with a deal and getting
out getting out of this, you know, on site, having
having President Trump and his vice president onside, should have
Zelenski just sat there and taken it.
Speaker 4 (02:51):
I don't think so. I think Zolensky knows more than
anyone else in the world right now what it takes
to stand up to autocrats, what it takes to stand
up to bullies if they're representing his country. He has
been representing his country for the last three years. Where
when I watched those last five minutes, because like Lorna,
I also watched a lot of the interview, and there
(03:11):
was a pretty decent exchange in those last five minutes.
But to have these two men who don't have that
first hand combat experience, who haven't hunkered in a bunker
while they're their countries are being bombed, to brate a
man who is defending his country to the extent that
his country may not exist if he loses this war.
(03:31):
I felt it was deeply disappointing. It was a betrayal
of everything that has made the United States it's great
over the last eighty years. Because let's remember, when World
War Two happened, the US chose to stand against autocrats.
Here's another opportunity for the United States to stand against
autocrats and or an autocrat, and it seems to be
(03:53):
fighting with that autocrat. And I just I don't understand it.
Because Trump wants this agreement to be made on Putin's terms,
and Valenski says, we can't do that because it fundamentally
undermines what we've been fighting over the last three years.
So I've found it all very, very disappointing.
Speaker 2 (04:11):
No, it was really interesting, as you say, you know,
he managed to It was a pretty civil conversation up
to that very end. But there where Vance sort of
made the comment, didn'ty Laurna about you know, you should
be more you should be dealing.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
With this diplomatically, thank you.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Oh no, Look, that part just took my head and
I felt like I felt like I was you know,
it was me talking to a teen year old.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Yeah, I.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Was, Yeah, and we have heard him say it. If
you've ever heard him speak, he says it constantly. He
is constantly thinking the American people. But it was just
the comment about diplomacy and you know, you need to
use some diplomacy here, and you could see that that's
sort of when Zelensky shifted in his seat, and then
of course the performance after that was anything but about diplomacy.
(04:56):
It did feel like, Okay, let's crew a little show
here for headlines and let it remind everybody whose boss
and who holds all the cards.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
It's interesting when you look around the world's media that
really the only people who are quite gleeful about that
how the meeting ended with the Russians, which probably says
it all. But I did like this quote from Stephen King,
who seems to be hanging around Twitter slash x even
though he's not really wanted there, who said a man
who adheres to his principles will always be incomprehensible to
(05:25):
people who don't have any, which I thought was an
interesting take on the whole thing. I mean. At President Trump,
Let's not forget last week he wrongly accused the Ukraine
of starting the war before he called Zelenski dictator, which
he later said, did I say that? Oh, I can't
believe I said that. So, you know, he's kind of
bob each way depending on who he's talking to. But yeah,
I felt it was an opportunity to humiliate Zelensky and
(05:49):
try and take away some of his say in America
coming in and being the big heroes and broker in peace.
But yeah, I don't think they have advanced that.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Cause at all, Damien. The government has agreed to review
the legal aid system. Are they saying it's in order
to prioritize victims the access to justice? They want to sustainable,
you know, and efficient service. I spoke to Fraser bart
And the president of the Law Society this morning. He said, look,
it is a bit of a mess. We do need
to look at this. We don't need to review it.
(06:21):
It can reflect what is happening in the courts. There's
a high demand for it. That is very much the case.
Would you be concerned though, that we are looking at
this as a cost cutting exercise, a way to sort
of save some money, as opposed to create a more
effective system.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
I really hope that any reforms that we do have
do anything but cut costs, because the system needs reform
in order to make it more accessible, to give people
who currently don't have access to legal aid access to
legal aid, because the big problem right now is that
if you're worried about people who are receiving unfair circumstances
(07:01):
in the courtroom, it often comes down to access. So
the current threshold to gain access to illegal aid lawyers
so low that a lot of people on very low
incomes as it is, don't even get access to those
legal aid lawyers, or even worse, sometimes they have to
pay the thieves later. So I hope that any reforms
(07:22):
that do happen ensure that we do think about justice here,
we do think about the fact that you often have
a huge financial disparity between people who are in court,
so you have those who can afford really good lawyers
and those who can't even get into a position where
they get a legal aid lawyer. So there's a huge
(07:42):
disparity here in terms of legal representation in New Zealand.
So I really really hope that any reforms that do
come through focus on providing access to more people. Because
one example that came up when I was working in
journalism quite often was they did have in in parental
(08:02):
battles between parents, the one partner would often have a
lot more money and then that'll be able to squeeze
the other partner to the extent that they just couldn't
fight anymore. And that's not justice. That just means that
one person has more financial resources than the other and
to have that level of financial control over another person,
that's just unfair. And you also have there with organizations
(08:23):
and corporates who also do this. So I just hope
that the reforms think about the victims and justice really.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Because Lorna, we've already seen the government removed legal aid
funding for the Section twenty seven reports, the cultural and
Background reports, and I wonder whether that will expand to
other specialist reports.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Yeah, in terms of more funding, I mean, I did
notice that great word efficiency in the press release, and
to me, that means cutting costs, sustainability, the same thing
I also saw the headline was you know, we're going
to give victims greater access to justice. Well that's fine,
but you also need to ensure the rights of accues
(09:03):
to fair representation as well. I know too that we're
not going to get the recommendations for over a year
probably we'll see no change before the next election. So
whether the change is are good or bad, it's going
to be the next government's problem to have to deal.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
With to do this review and sort this out.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And it has been almost seven years since they've reviewed it,
so it makes sense to review it. But you know,
more people are reliant on this legal aid in the recession.
It makes sense that there's going to be increased demand.
But yeah, when I saw the words efficiency and sustainability,
my blood weren cold a little.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Okay, here's a question for the two of you. Could
you see the money the dive bomb becoming seen as
a national sport? Dam it?
Speaker 4 (09:46):
I'd love it like it's it's fantastic, it's good fun.
When you saw those families out there just having a
good time, you saw everyone doing their best. I absolutely
love it. So the more exposure it gets, the better.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
You're thinking, too small, franchise, You're too small. Why have
it as a national sport? Why don't we go to the
American route, you know, with their Baseball World Champs and
we can have the money World Champs. And if we're
the only ones that take part, who guess.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
Exactly? It has been reported in The Guardian and things
people do seem to be quite fascinated. Of course, I'm
talking about that. We had the the z Manu Grand
Finals and our Sports and Recreational Minister Mark Mitchell dive
bombed fully clothed into Auckland's.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
He's not just a minister, he's a cool minister.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
But here's the thing, right, here's the thing. This is
what I reckon happened. I don't know because he's got
his suit pants, he's taking his shoes off and hopefully
it's watch and taking out of his pocket. But he
was in a suit pants and his shirt, you know,
his dress shirt. And I think this is what happens
to most of us. When you're standing watching other people
jump off stuff. You just want to be part of it.
And I reckon, I don't know. I'm keen to hear
(10:56):
what you thought of his start. I think he took
quite an old fashioned approach to it, but probably quite effective.
But I reckon he just went how it I'm in.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I'm going as someone who is particular uncoordinated and were
probably just belly flop into the water. I thought his
style was fantastic. We had, you know, one of his
police officers last week since and Katuby he did it.
His was a bit sort of more free style, but
I actually thought it was a pretty decent man who
I thought, good on him for giving it a go.
And you know, if we believe the organizers, it was
(11:24):
all complete, a complete surprise. He just sort of turned up,
as you say, whipped the shoes off, and then he
went so, yeah, pretty.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Cool, Damien, how do you write the the style?
Speaker 4 (11:36):
I thought he did a great job. The only the
only thing that I kind of gave me a little
pause for concern was the cost of that suit. And
like diving into suit, I was like, if you don't
want your suits managers given to me, I'll take it.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
I thought about the dry cleaning bill because there's been
a few issues about some of the minister's dry cleaning
bills this week, and I did think to myself and well,
that'll be we'll be clocking that up again. Norna'reiley and
Damien Venuto, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
For more from the 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 EDBS of April twenty twenty five, ASB
Bank Limited's terms apply. Since nineteen eighty seven, Stonewood Homes
has been building more than just homes.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
With time for the panel now, and I'm joined by
Coast Day host and host of the travel podcast Trip Notes,
Laura Riley. Good morning, Launa, good morning. Good to have
you with us, and Senor Pierre consultant at one plus
one Communications, Damien Venuto, Good to talk to you, Damien,
good morning. Right, let's start with Trump Zelenski, the meeting
(00:43):
in the Oval Office, which took everybody a little bit
by surprise, and then there's been quite a large fallout
after this. Launa, I really wondered whether this was a
good move for the Ukrainian president, considering the things that
had been said, considering the tone that he was hearing
from President Trump, as to whether he should have actually
(01:05):
made this does it and then where else there's the
question of how he has he has responded to the
way he's been spoken to. At the end of the day,
we all just want an outcome here and I feel
like we've gone backwards and awful a lot your.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Thoughts possibly, but I mean it's fair to say we've
mostly only seen the last five minutes of what was
a forty to forty five minute meeting. I've watched the
whole thing, and about forty minutes was absolutely fine. It
was actually we talk about Trump and Zelenski, but it
was actually JD. Vance that really changed the tenor of
the whole conversation. I actually think Zelensky acted entirely appropriately.
(01:45):
I mean, he just reminded people that Putin have broken promises.
How could he practice diplomacy in these situations? And then
basically it was a pylon. The pointing of fingers from
both Trump and and Vance saying.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
You need us.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
You haven't even said thank you, You're not dressed properly,
basically put Zelensky in the position of a wayward teenager
who wasn't allowed to get a word in. Each ways,
and it's interesting to see that, you know, Europe has
sort of solidified support behind Zolensky. Our own leader and
Albanesi as well have also said that we stand unequivocally.
(02:20):
Besides Violinsky, I don't know that i'd agree that he's
done himself, no favors. I think turning up in his
combat year very church release, he's just reminding everyone that
they are still a country at war. You don't turn
up on a flash suit when your people are dying.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
Damian for the sake of getting out of this alive
and getting out of this with a deal and getting
out getting out of this, you know, on site, having
having President Trump and his vice president onside, should have
Zelenski just sat there and taken it.
Speaker 4 (02:51):
I don't think so. I think Zolensky knows more than
anyone else in the world right now what it takes
to stand up to autocrats, what it takes to stand
up to bullies if they're representing his country. He has
been representing his country for the last three years. Where
when I watched those last five minutes, because like Lorna,
I also watched a lot of the interview, and there
(03:11):
was a pretty decent exchange in those last five minutes.
But to have these two men who don't have that
first hand combat experience, who haven't hunkered in a bunker
while they're their countries are being bombed, to brate a
man who is defending his country to the extent that
his country may not exist if he loses this war.
(03:31):
I felt it was deeply disappointing. It was a betrayal
of everything that has made the United States it's great
over the last eighty years. Because let's remember, when World
War Two happened, the US chose to stand against autocrats.
Here's another opportunity for the United States to stand against
autocrats and or an autocrat, and it seems to be
(03:53):
fighting with that autocrat. And I just I don't understand it.
Because Trump wants this agreement to be made on Putin's terms,
and Valenski says, we can't do that because it fundamentally
undermines what we've been fighting over the last three years.
So I've found it all very, very disappointing.
Speaker 2 (04:11):
No, it was really interesting, as you say, you know,
he managed to It was a pretty civil conversation up
to that very end. But there where Vance sort of
made the comment, didn'ty Laurna about you know, you should
be more you should be dealing.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
With this diplomatically, thank you.
Speaker 2 (04:27):
Oh no, Look, that part just took my head and
I felt like I felt like I was you know,
it was me talking to a teen year old.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Yeah, I.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Was, Yeah, and we have heard him say it. If
you've ever heard him speak, he says it constantly. He
is constantly thinking the American people. But it was just
the comment about diplomacy and you know, you need to
use some diplomacy here, and you could see that that's
sort of when Zelensky shifted in his seat, and then
of course the performance after that was anything but about diplomacy.
(04:56):
It did feel like, Okay, let's crew a little show
here for headlines and let it remind everybody whose boss
and who holds all the cards.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
It's interesting when you look around the world's media that
really the only people who are quite gleeful about that
how the meeting ended with the Russians, which probably says
it all. But I did like this quote from Stephen King,
who seems to be hanging around Twitter slash x even
though he's not really wanted there, who said a man
who adheres to his principles will always be incomprehensible to
(05:25):
people who don't have any, which I thought was an
interesting take on the whole thing. I mean. At President Trump,
Let's not forget last week he wrongly accused the Ukraine
of starting the war before he called Zelenski dictator, which
he later said, did I say that? Oh, I can't
believe I said that. So, you know, he's kind of
bob each way depending on who he's talking to. But yeah,
I felt it was an opportunity to humiliate Zelensky and
(05:49):
try and take away some of his say in America
coming in and being the big heroes and broker in peace.
But yeah, I don't think they have advanced that.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Cause at all, Damien. The government has agreed to review
the legal aid system. Are they saying it's in order
to prioritize victims the access to justice? They want to sustainable,
you know, and efficient service. I spoke to Fraser bart
And the president of the Law Society this morning. He said, look,
it is a bit of a mess. We do need
to look at this. We don't need to review it.
(06:21):
It can reflect what is happening in the courts. There's
a high demand for it. That is very much the case.
Would you be concerned though, that we are looking at
this as a cost cutting exercise, a way to sort
of save some money, as opposed to create a more
effective system.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
I really hope that any reforms that we do have
do anything but cut costs, because the system needs reform
in order to make it more accessible, to give people
who currently don't have access to legal aid access to
legal aid, because the big problem right now is that
if you're worried about people who are receiving unfair circumstances
(07:01):
in the courtroom, it often comes down to access. So
the current threshold to gain access to illegal aid lawyers
so low that a lot of people on very low
incomes as it is, don't even get access to those
legal aid lawyers, or even worse, sometimes they have to
pay the thieves later. So I hope that any reforms
(07:22):
that do happen ensure that we do think about justice here,
we do think about the fact that you often have
a huge financial disparity between people who are in court,
so you have those who can afford really good lawyers
and those who can't even get into a position where
they get a legal aid lawyer. So there's a huge
(07:42):
disparity here in terms of legal representation in New Zealand.
So I really really hope that any reforms that do
come through focus on providing access to more people. Because
one example that came up when I was working in
journalism quite often was they did have in in parental
(08:02):
battles between parents, the one partner would often have a
lot more money and then that'll be able to squeeze
the other partner to the extent that they just couldn't
fight anymore. And that's not justice. That just means that
one person has more financial resources than the other and
to have that level of financial control over another person,
that's just unfair. And you also have there with organizations
(08:23):
and corporates who also do this. So I just hope
that the reforms think about the victims and justice really.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
Because Lorna, we've already seen the government removed legal aid
funding for the Section twenty seven reports, the cultural and
Background reports, and I wonder whether that will expand to
other specialist reports.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Yeah, in terms of more funding, I mean, I did
notice that great word efficiency in the press release, and
to me, that means cutting costs, sustainability, the same thing
I also saw the headline was you know, we're going
to give victims greater access to justice. Well that's fine,
but you also need to ensure the rights of accues
(09:03):
to fair representation as well. I know too that we're
not going to get the recommendations for over a year
probably we'll see no change before the next election. So
whether the change is are good or bad, it's going
to be the next government's problem to have to deal.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
With to do this review and sort this out.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And it has been almost seven years since they've reviewed it,
so it makes sense to review it. But you know,
more people are reliant on this legal aid in the recession.
It makes sense that there's going to be increased demand.
But yeah, when I saw the words efficiency and sustainability,
my blood weren cold a little.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
Okay, here's a question for the two of you. Could
you see the money the dive bomb becoming seen as
a national sport? Dam it?
Speaker 4 (09:46):
I'd love it like it's it's fantastic, it's good fun.
When you saw those families out there just having a
good time, you saw everyone doing their best. I absolutely
love it. So the more exposure it gets, the better.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
You're thinking, too small, franchise, You're too small. Why have
it as a national sport? Why don't we go to the
American route, you know, with their Baseball World Champs and
we can have the money World Champs. And if we're
the only ones that take part, who guess.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
Exactly? It has been reported in The Guardian and things
people do seem to be quite fascinated. Of course, I'm
talking about that. We had the the z Manu Grand
Finals and our Sports and Recreational Minister Mark Mitchell dive
bombed fully clothed into Auckland's.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
He's not just a minister, he's a cool minister.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
But here's the thing, right, here's the thing. This is
what I reckon happened. I don't know because he's got
his suit pants, he's taking his shoes off and hopefully
it's watch and taking out of his pocket. But he
was in a suit pants and his shirt, you know,
his dress shirt. And I think this is what happens
to most of us. When you're standing watching other people
jump off stuff. You just want to be part of it.
And I reckon, I don't know. I'm keen to hear
(10:56):
what you thought of his start. I think he took
quite an old fashioned approach to it, but probably quite effective.
But I reckon he just went how it I'm in.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I'm going as someone who is particular uncoordinated and were
probably just belly flop into the water. I thought his
style was fantastic. We had, you know, one of his
police officers last week since and Katuby he did it.
His was a bit sort of more free style, but
I actually thought it was a pretty decent man who
I thought, good on him for giving it a go.
And you know, if we believe the organizers, it was
(11:24):
all complete, a complete surprise. He just sort of turned up,
as you say, whipped the shoes off, and then he
went so, yeah, pretty.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Cool, Damien, how do you write the the style?
Speaker 4 (11:36):
I thought he did a great job. The only the
only thing that I kind of gave me a little
pause for concern was the cost of that suit. And
like diving into suit, I was like, if you don't
want your suits managers given to me, I'll take it.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
I thought about the dry cleaning bill because there's been
a few issues about some of the minister's dry cleaning
bills this week, and I did think to myself and well,
that'll be we'll be clocking that up again. Norna'reiley and
Damien Venuto, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 1 (12:05):
For more from the Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks at B from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.