August 2, 2025 • 10 mins
This week on the Sunday Panel NZ Herald senior writer, Simon Wilson, and Resident Economist at Opes Partners, Ed McKnight, joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the week - and more!
The Government is set to charge tourists $20 to $40 to visit some of New Zealand's most popular outdoor spots, with a promise they'll put the money into biodiversity and infrastructure efforts. What do we make of this?
33 of New Zealand's leading sporting bodies have come together to voice opposition to the Government's newly introduced Online Casino Gambling (OCG) Bill, with concerns it could negatively impact community sport. Should we be concerned about this?
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 and it.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Is time for the panel. And joining me now is
Simon Wilson, New Zealand Herald Senior writer. Good morning, Simon.
That on there we go and resident economists at ope's partners.
Ed mcnight is with us.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Hi, Ed, great to be here, Francesca, good to have.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
You with us. This morning. We talked to tamol Portucky
about the changes to conservation land and look, I we
don't have all the details. Let's make that clear. We
don't know sort of how where or how key we
are going to prove that they're exempt. But I don't
have an issue Simon. With a handful of very highly visited,
(00:49):
you know, walks or parts of our country that we
charge a fee to tourists, I.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Think there's some larger issues at taken in this whole announcement,
and I agree with you charge overseas visitors for tourist attractions.
We should be doing it those if you travel overseas,
you know it's common. It is becoming common now in
our museums, and I can see no reason at all
why it can't be done outside as well. So yes,
(01:18):
absolutely agree with that. There are simals also some other
announcements that are kind of not really quite being made
in this whole thing about what's going to happen to
the conservation estate. And I've got to say I fear
that there are the ministers laying the groundwork for commercializing
parts of it, for handing it over to private use
in ways that possibly New Zealanders would not be so
(01:40):
happy about. And then the third element is the question
of concessions, not so much hanging over the land, but
allowing more concessions. So if you think about Rupe Who,
for example, it's in a national park, the ski fields
are run as concessions, and the chairlifts and so on. Personally,
(02:02):
I think the idea of well managed, carefully placed, sympathetic
concessions for tourist attractions in our national parks is a
good idea and I would like to see that openly
and publicly discussed to see what sort.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Of possible Simon, are you implying that maybe there was
sort of a lot of attention was given to the
idea of putting these fees on certain places, and then
just a little bit more in the background, there was
the comments about and we might allow more businesses to
run on conservation land.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Yes, I am saying that would be great. We could
have the debate in public about it, because that is
that appears to be what is in the proposals that
the Minister's announced.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
What are your thoughts, because I think the majority absolutely fine,
Let's get some revenue, put it back into those areas,
let's charge people to go to a few places. But
there are probably some concerns. And now I did ask
the minister today, you know what kind of businesses do
you envisage being on conservation land? And it was quite
a broad answer I got.
Speaker 3 (02:59):
Yeah, just on actually charging international visits totally makes sense,
especially when with Cathedral COVID about eighty percent of people
who go there are international visitors. At the moment, the
rate payers and the taxpayers are paying to maintain all
of that, so it makes sense to charge. The big questions,
you know, how are we going to do it? I
know we already charge a bit more to international visitors
(03:19):
for the Great Walks, but if you want to go
on one of the Great Walks, they're all at least
three nights, so you've got to book it in and
so there's a mechanism to charge international visitors because they
have to put their credit card details in to book
a hut for the night. I'm not sure how they're
going to start charging people to go down to Cathedral Cove,
whether they'll have a little booth there where you pay
your toll as you go through, but I'm sure they'll
(03:41):
figure that out.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Put turnstiles in Apparently that's been quite successful somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
Oh they're a good Well, I'll make sure I bring
the New Zealand passport so I can just wave myself
on through. But I understand what Simon's saying when it
comes to you know, you can do tourism poorly, you
can do it really well. One of the places that
I've seen at work really really well. I was down
in Stuart Island and there was a tourism operator really
in z and you paid quite a bit of money
(04:08):
to go Kiwi spotting with them, and it was a
wonderful experience. It was on Moldy Land, not Crown Land,
but you knew that a good portion of your spend
was going to maintain that land and to conservation. I'd
say that's an example of it doing well, but you
could do it well, you could also do it poorly.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
That's a fantastic example.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
The money needs to go back into conservations. It can't
just go into a sort of a big pot over
here and the youth WILLI nilly.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
One of the one that I know best is the
Tongarero crossing, a day trip, which is sometimes it's rather
like a railway station. So that trip, it's extraordinary. I
recommend it to everybody. But if there is a funding
mechanism that could allow similar routes to be developed so
(04:55):
that it isn't everybody wanting to do that one route,
because there are big mountains and lots of glorious sceneally
there to be used. If it's done well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
You start at six am, is what you actually do?
If you start at six am, No, no, no, I'm not
to do it. I do it actually almost most years,
and I started, everyone does, my family. I end up
doing it on my own. Now everyone's it to me.
Six am. Start and you'll be at the top and
you'll be looking around and you won't you won't see
a song. It's absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
Anyway, moving on, so you're complaining that no one goes
with you or that.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Well, I've dragged them all over, and I've dragged them
all over enough that they're like, yeah, no, hi, ive
been there, done that. Thanks mum, tack that off the
list several times.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
But we'll pick you up at the years around the
mountain too.
Speaker 2 (05:36):
You have done that, you know, drag them around that
you know. Milford Sound, I think is a really interesting
one because everyone keep saying Milford Track the Prime Minister
and things, but actually what they're talking about is Milford Sound.
Now that is somewhere that you do boat trips, you kayak,
you you hike, you do a lot of things. So
that's one that I'm very curious to know how they're
going to put a mechanism in place to catch people.
You might have to just put a barrier on the road,
(05:56):
cage people.
Speaker 4 (05:57):
It's like, I'm in and out.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Don't that one?
Speaker 2 (05:59):
Anyway? That was? That one's going to be an interesting one.
But I think I understand why people might want to
open areas to mountain biking. That makes sense horse trecking
or something similar.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
If you're doing it's mountain biking, you can put a
barrier on the track.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
Yeah, if you've got I don't know, dark skies. Maybe
you put some luxury little sort of lodges up there
and things. But I think we.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Do, we do.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
We do need to be a little bit careful. I
think you're right Simon as to what that actually means.
I'd love to move on to the online casino gambling bill.
And it's really interesting to see Mutton's need and getting,
you know, getting sports organizations together just to remind the
government to explain to them the impact that this could have.
So if we have these fifteen, if we have fifteen
(06:44):
online casino gambling outfits, we're given licenses to New Zealand.
We are not asking them to pay anything towards our community.
And I think this is appalling because I think that
we only tolerate gambling because we understand that there is
a trade off that something good can come out of
something which could be devastating for others, and we kind
(07:06):
of live with that delicate balance, and all of a sudden,
we're just going, oh, yeah, no, no, don't worry, come
on in, we'll take your tax and we'll put some
protections and things in place. But we're just not really
considering New Zealanders at all.
Speaker 4 (07:19):
One to me, one of the things that we have
a government for is to make sure that communities are protected,
and this is an important part of it. It's shocking
to me that we would, as you say, condone, enable
overseas gambling companies to basically fleece New Zealanders and not
(07:40):
put anything back in the fund that the gambling funding
that we're not supposed to call it gambling, but the
gambling funding that supports communities and sports is. Yeah, it is.
It is an astonishing community asset that's been developed. And yes,
you're right, it hides that other thing, you know, but
it's there. It's necessary. The idea that it would be
(08:01):
undermined or that others could come in and just ignore
it deeply.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
If these overseas gambling organizations come into New Zealand, would
you be more than happy for them to have to
pay a community contribution like we do with the legitimate
gambling that already exists in New Zealand.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, I think this whole thing highlights how sad some
funding is for both sports and arts. I remember I
used to work for an orchestra in New Zealand that
got quite a lot of public funding, and it just
so happened that there were quite a number of Lotto
winners that particular year, and because Lotto was one a
few too many times, it didn't build up and not
(08:43):
as many people were buying Lotto tickets and so there
wasn't as much money to go around. And so my
starting point is, isn't it a bit sad that I
think it's about twenty percent to twenty five percent of
funding for New Zealand sports comes from gambling and if
you know, too, if too few people go out and
play the pokies, there's not as much money to go around.
(09:03):
Now I understand why it's there, and you know, maybe
it's a better solution than having it funded by government
yet to year where it can change, but I do think, like,
oh gosh, that is a bit sad.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Now.
Speaker 3 (09:16):
My starting point with this one, though, is that the
purpose of allowing online casinos in is right now, keywis
are gambling anyway online. The issue is that it's not
regulated by the New Zealand government because we're gambling on
overseas websites rather than ones that are licensed in New Zealand.
So I understand that the government's first port of call
is to say right Yeah, we've got to make sure
(09:37):
that we're looking at harmonimization. The second secondary thing that
we've got to investigate is how do we allow some
funding for sports. I like the idea that maybe you
requisition will say we're going to reserve maybe a third
of the fifteen licenses specifically for some of the gambling
trusts that already operate in New Zealand, such that you
(09:58):
know that there is still a government a funding pipeline
for those sporting organizations.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
And look, I think that's the case. Look, I agree
with you. We're already using the overseas sites needs to
be regulated, but they can still contribute to the community.
Thank you both very much. Ed McKnight and Simon Wilson.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks it Be 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 and it.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Is time for the panel. And joining me now is
Simon Wilson, New Zealand Herald Senior writer. Good morning, Simon.
That on there we go and resident economists at ope's partners.
Ed mcnight is with us.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
Hi, Ed, great to be here, Francesca, good to have.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
You with us. This morning. We talked to tamol Portucky
about the changes to conservation land and look, I we
don't have all the details. Let's make that clear. We
don't know sort of how where or how key we
are going to prove that they're exempt. But I don't
have an issue Simon. With a handful of very highly visited,
(00:49):
you know, walks or parts of our country that we
charge a fee to tourists, I.
Speaker 4 (00:55):
Think there's some larger issues at taken in this whole announcement,
and I agree with you charge overseas visitors for tourist attractions.
We should be doing it those if you travel overseas,
you know it's common. It is becoming common now in
our museums, and I can see no reason at all
why it can't be done outside as well. So yes,
(01:18):
absolutely agree with that. There are simals also some other
announcements that are kind of not really quite being made
in this whole thing about what's going to happen to
the conservation estate. And I've got to say I fear
that there are the ministers laying the groundwork for commercializing
parts of it, for handing it over to private use
in ways that possibly New Zealanders would not be so
(01:40):
happy about. And then the third element is the question
of concessions, not so much hanging over the land, but
allowing more concessions. So if you think about Rupe Who,
for example, it's in a national park, the ski fields
are run as concessions, and the chairlifts and so on. Personally,
(02:02):
I think the idea of well managed, carefully placed, sympathetic
concessions for tourist attractions in our national parks is a
good idea and I would like to see that openly
and publicly discussed to see what sort.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Of possible Simon, are you implying that maybe there was
sort of a lot of attention was given to the
idea of putting these fees on certain places, and then
just a little bit more in the background, there was
the comments about and we might allow more businesses to
run on conservation land.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Yes, I am saying that would be great. We could
have the debate in public about it, because that is
that appears to be what is in the proposals that
the Minister's announced.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
What are your thoughts, because I think the majority absolutely fine,
Let's get some revenue, put it back into those areas,
let's charge people to go to a few places. But
there are probably some concerns. And now I did ask
the minister today, you know what kind of businesses do
you envisage being on conservation land? And it was quite
a broad answer I got.
Speaker 3 (02:59):
Yeah, just on actually charging international visits totally makes sense,
especially when with Cathedral COVID about eighty percent of people
who go there are international visitors. At the moment, the
rate payers and the taxpayers are paying to maintain all
of that, so it makes sense to charge. The big questions,
you know, how are we going to do it? I
know we already charge a bit more to international visitors
(03:19):
for the Great Walks, but if you want to go
on one of the Great Walks, they're all at least
three nights, so you've got to book it in and
so there's a mechanism to charge international visitors because they
have to put their credit card details in to book
a hut for the night. I'm not sure how they're
going to start charging people to go down to Cathedral Cove,
whether they'll have a little booth there where you pay
your toll as you go through, but I'm sure they'll
(03:41):
figure that out.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Put turnstiles in Apparently that's been quite successful somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (03:46):
Oh they're a good Well, I'll make sure I bring
the New Zealand passport so I can just wave myself
on through. But I understand what Simon's saying when it
comes to you know, you can do tourism poorly, you
can do it really well. One of the places that
I've seen at work really really well. I was down
in Stuart Island and there was a tourism operator really
in z and you paid quite a bit of money
(04:08):
to go Kiwi spotting with them, and it was a
wonderful experience. It was on Moldy Land, not Crown Land,
but you knew that a good portion of your spend
was going to maintain that land and to conservation. I'd
say that's an example of it doing well, but you
could do it well, you could also do it poorly.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
That's a fantastic example.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
The money needs to go back into conservations. It can't
just go into a sort of a big pot over
here and the youth WILLI nilly.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
One of the one that I know best is the
Tongarero crossing, a day trip, which is sometimes it's rather
like a railway station. So that trip, it's extraordinary. I
recommend it to everybody. But if there is a funding
mechanism that could allow similar routes to be developed so
(04:55):
that it isn't everybody wanting to do that one route,
because there are big mountains and lots of glorious sceneally
there to be used. If it's done well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
You start at six am, is what you actually do?
If you start at six am, No, no, no, I'm not
to do it. I do it actually almost most years,
and I started, everyone does, my family. I end up
doing it on my own. Now everyone's it to me.
Six am. Start and you'll be at the top and
you'll be looking around and you won't you won't see
a song. It's absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
Anyway, moving on, so you're complaining that no one goes
with you or that.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Well, I've dragged them all over, and I've dragged them
all over enough that they're like, yeah, no, hi, ive
been there, done that. Thanks mum, tack that off the
list several times.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
But we'll pick you up at the years around the
mountain too.
Speaker 2 (05:36):
You have done that, you know, drag them around that
you know. Milford Sound, I think is a really interesting
one because everyone keep saying Milford Track the Prime Minister
and things, but actually what they're talking about is Milford Sound.
Now that is somewhere that you do boat trips, you kayak,
you you hike, you do a lot of things. So
that's one that I'm very curious to know how they're
going to put a mechanism in place to catch people.
You might have to just put a barrier on the road,
(05:56):
cage people.
Speaker 4 (05:57):
It's like, I'm in and out.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
Don't that one?
Speaker 2 (05:59):
Anyway? That was? That one's going to be an interesting one.
But I think I understand why people might want to
open areas to mountain biking. That makes sense horse trecking
or something similar.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
If you're doing it's mountain biking, you can put a
barrier on the track.
Speaker 2 (06:15):
Yeah, if you've got I don't know, dark skies. Maybe
you put some luxury little sort of lodges up there
and things. But I think we.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
Do, we do.
Speaker 2 (06:21):
We do need to be a little bit careful. I
think you're right Simon as to what that actually means.
I'd love to move on to the online casino gambling bill.
And it's really interesting to see Mutton's need and getting,
you know, getting sports organizations together just to remind the
government to explain to them the impact that this could have.
So if we have these fifteen, if we have fifteen
(06:44):
online casino gambling outfits, we're given licenses to New Zealand.
We are not asking them to pay anything towards our community.
And I think this is appalling because I think that
we only tolerate gambling because we understand that there is
a trade off that something good can come out of
something which could be devastating for others, and we kind
(07:06):
of live with that delicate balance, and all of a sudden,
we're just going, oh, yeah, no, no, don't worry, come
on in, we'll take your tax and we'll put some
protections and things in place. But we're just not really
considering New Zealanders at all.
Speaker 4 (07:19):
One to me, one of the things that we have
a government for is to make sure that communities are protected,
and this is an important part of it. It's shocking
to me that we would, as you say, condone, enable
overseas gambling companies to basically fleece New Zealanders and not
(07:40):
put anything back in the fund that the gambling funding
that we're not supposed to call it gambling, but the
gambling funding that supports communities and sports is. Yeah, it is.
It is an astonishing community asset that's been developed. And yes,
you're right, it hides that other thing, you know, but
it's there. It's necessary. The idea that it would be
(08:01):
undermined or that others could come in and just ignore
it deeply.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
If these overseas gambling organizations come into New Zealand, would
you be more than happy for them to have to
pay a community contribution like we do with the legitimate
gambling that already exists in New Zealand.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, I think this whole thing highlights how sad some
funding is for both sports and arts. I remember I
used to work for an orchestra in New Zealand that
got quite a lot of public funding, and it just
so happened that there were quite a number of Lotto
winners that particular year, and because Lotto was one a
few too many times, it didn't build up and not
(08:43):
as many people were buying Lotto tickets and so there
wasn't as much money to go around. And so my
starting point is, isn't it a bit sad that I
think it's about twenty percent to twenty five percent of
funding for New Zealand sports comes from gambling and if
you know, too, if too few people go out and
play the pokies, there's not as much money to go around.
(09:03):
Now I understand why it's there, and you know, maybe
it's a better solution than having it funded by government
yet to year where it can change, but I do think, like,
oh gosh, that is a bit sad.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
Now.
Speaker 3 (09:16):
My starting point with this one, though, is that the
purpose of allowing online casinos in is right now, keywis
are gambling anyway online. The issue is that it's not
regulated by the New Zealand government because we're gambling on
overseas websites rather than ones that are licensed in New Zealand.
So I understand that the government's first port of call
is to say right Yeah, we've got to make sure
(09:37):
that we're looking at harmonimization. The second secondary thing that
we've got to investigate is how do we allow some
funding for sports. I like the idea that maybe you
requisition will say we're going to reserve maybe a third
of the fifteen licenses specifically for some of the gambling
trusts that already operate in New Zealand, such that you
(09:58):
know that there is still a government a funding pipeline
for those sporting organizations.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
And look, I think that's the case. Look, I agree
with you. We're already using the overseas sites needs to
be regulated, but they can still contribute to the community.
Thank you both very much. Ed McKnight and Simon Wilson.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
For more from the Sunday session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks it Be 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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.