April 11, 2026 • 14 mins
The National Party have called in former broadcaster Rachel Smalley to help Auckland based MPs, including the prime minister, with their communications and media work ahead of the election this year.
It's come after the public have started to notice Luxon becoming less confident and stumbling over his words recently - in contrast to the precise and decided communication style he's had in the past.
LISTEN ABOVE
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 (00:05):
You're listening to the Weekend collective podcast from News talks 'b.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Around the National Party who have called and former broadcaster
Rachel Smalley to help Auckland based MPs, including the Prime Minister,
with their communications and media work ahead of the election
this year. It's come after the public have started to
notice that Crystal Reluxen seems to be having a bit
(00:30):
of a at least in terms of one or two
particular interviews, a bit of a crisis of confidence and
stumbling over his words, perhaps in contrast to maybe the
precise and decided communications style he would have aspired to
in the past.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
What he would aspire to it right now, wouldn't he?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Anyway, he's got a comms problem and they've brought in
Rachel Smalley for him and the MPs anyway to discuss that.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
We're joined.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
It's been a while actually for a political commentator. He's
a former United Future Leader MP and minister.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Peter Dunn.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Hello, Hello Tom? How are you good? Things doing very well? Thanks?
Speaker 2 (01:07):
What was your response when you saw the story that
Rachel Small had been brought in to help the troops?
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well, I wasn't really surprised, but I think it's long
overdue because the problems come to light, particularly some of
the Prime Minister's recent communication issues. But I think it's
much deeper seated. I just don't think that the National
Party generally has been very good at getting its message
across in a way that connects with voters, either in
Auckland or across the country. So this is an overdue move,
(01:34):
but a sensible one, is it just?
Speaker 2 (01:37):
I mean, look, I'll be honest, I just assumed it's
to help lux in it now Christopher Luxon out or
is he?
Speaker 4 (01:46):
I think it's a bit of both. I mean, clearly
that the problems come to a head because of some
of the Prime minister's recent performances in the sense that
he's just not getting the message out. There's not even
quite sure what the message he should be getting out is.
But I think it's a bit more widespread. Some of
the issues that they've dealt with over the last three
years have suffered a little bit from the same thing.
Be that as it may. The challenge for them now
(02:08):
is to get this sorted quickly, and once a strategy
is being developed, the most important thing for all will
be for them to keep to it. It's no good
than deciding yeah, that's the strategy. But I know best
because I think it's been a bit of that of late.
If they've got a strategy for better communicating their message,
then they all need to stick to it.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
When you say there's a strategy of an ibst, are
you thinking of the Prime Minister himself.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Well, I am in a way, because there's been lots
of reports about him not being keen to take advice
from sources about Harris Shall present his message. I don't
know whether that's true or not, but I'm certainly hearing
those reports. And it seems to me that if you
call someone in to advise you on how you go
about this better, then you're obliged from the common sensor,
for no other point of view, to accept their advice.
(02:53):
And that will be the challenge. You know, politicians are
very egotistical people, I know, and they all think they
know better than everyone else. So that if someone says
to you, I remember someone saying to me once when
you've said something for the one hundred and fifty third time
and it sounds boring and try it and ridiculous to you,
that's the point at which it's staying to get through
to people. So don't suddenly decide I can finess this
(03:15):
message better or I can say something different. So the
challenge here will be to get some simple, clear lines
of communication and messaging and for them all to stick
to them.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
You never struck me as having a colossal ego, Peter.
Are you putting yourself in that group there?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Oh you can judge that, not me, But you know politicians.
Politicians are not known for being backward. Let's let's put
it that way.
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Can I'll be honest.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
I mean I just casually said to my producer Tira,
I thought, God, they should have just asked, Peter.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You ever get asked to do this sort of thing?
I mean, we all remember the days when the worm turned.
I mean it sounds like I've been asked.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
I've been asked occasionally by some parties, but not frequently.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Okay, have you ever said, yes, I have.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
Given advice when it's been when it's been asked for,
but I haven't offered it if it hasn't been asked for.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Oh well no, Well that's that's the magic one, isn't it.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Now?
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Look is bringing in someone like that Rachel Smalley, do
you buy it as a normal professional tune up or
does it actually suggest a deeper political communication problem.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
If it was the former, it would have happened shortly
after the government took office, so it would have been
part of the transition and carried on. Coming in just
six months before the election suggests two things. Aid as
a problem and be they've worked out they've got to
do something about it mighty fast.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
Is she the right person for the job?
Speaker 4 (04:36):
Well, I don't know her well enough. I know her
only professionally, and I think she's a highly skilled communicator.
I think the important thing is to work out what
the message they want to convey to the public is
on any particular issue, and then the best way of
doing that. And I think where they've been falling down
a little of late is they certainly haven't conveyed a
clear message, and they often haven't. They seem to be
(04:58):
a little bit at sixes and seven's internally as to
what the message ought to be. You've seen it during
the fuel crisis. We still don't know really whether the
New Zealand government supports the American position or not. We
think they don't from a number of statements that have
been made, but every now and then the comments made
them make you think, well, maybe we're just holding back
(05:19):
a little bit because we don't want to upset them.
So that's the sort of area I think more clarity
is needed. They don't need to be a bracer or rude,
but they need to be clear, focused and sharp so
that the voters know exactly what they're trying to say
and exactly where they stand and then can decide accordingly.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
In politics, is the act of hiring a media communications
coach is the simple act of hiring that coach. I mean,
I would argue it's sometimes more damaging than what you're
trying to fix, because you know, once the words out,
remember you will remember Bill English, Mark one, you know,
and the pressure he was under with style and substance
(05:55):
and all that. You know, he became a very successful politician,
but he wasn't helped by you know, will spin doctors
coming in.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Was he No? And I think the fact that the
story gets out there someone's been hired, that's a sort
of a lack of dispt on too, if you like.
If you want to call it an external consultant, nothing
wrong with doing it, get external advice, nothing wrong with
doing that. But you normally keep that sort of stuff
in house. As you say, the moment you go out
there and say, hey, look, we're calling an external people
(06:22):
tell us what to do. It's not a good look.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Yeah, they should have hired me because no one want
to believe that anyway.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
I don't know about.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Look is low.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
I've got to find a way of answering. I don't
know if I have a concise way of asking this,
But is it around authenticity? Because I've got the cynical
expression that authenticity is the most important thing in politics.
As soon as you can fake that, you've got it made.
But you see, he may be being authentic Chris Luxin.
But do we need to convince him to be something
(06:57):
other than authentic Chris Luxin?
Speaker 4 (06:59):
Well, I think the problem is this, I don't know
Chris Luxon. Well, I've met him a few times that
a personal level. He is extremely personable, very relaxed, very relatable.
That's what id and something goes wrong, And I think
you're absolutely right. Authenticity is the key. And I think
in this case they've somehow got to get the real
(07:20):
Christopher Luxem out there before the public, and the public
can then make a better judgment what they see at
the podium is not the person you'd meet you in
a more informal setting. Now is that Is that a
lack of confidence on his part? Is it something that
he's just not getting or what? But I think the
key is to produce the authentic person, not the sort
(07:42):
of the cutout figure you see often appearing in public.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So is this what is the what?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Is is there a problem in what it says to
us caucus as well?
Speaker 3 (07:56):
Because this caucus r.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
All will be aware that, you know, I mean, I'm
not going to be the only person talking about it.
Is this a problem from the caucus point of view?
If you're a nationally and p are you reassured by
this or you're thinking? Oh god?
Speaker 4 (08:08):
Now? Of both? Because his colleagues will have more than
likely seen the real Christopher Luxe and up close on
many occasions, which I think is probably why he still
has their support. But they will be becoming frustrated that
the real person isn't quite giving out there to the public.
(08:29):
And how do you get that message across? You know?
I mean in the old days you'd say he knocked
on every door in New Zealand, but it's just not
physically possible to do that these days, So in a
short media presentation, he's got to convey his real personality
and I think the trick will be getting that to
get out to people so they can then make a judgment.
(08:50):
But as you said, the fact they're even talking about it,
the fact that they've gone and hired Rachel smally suggests
that they know they've got a problem.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
So you know how you said, when you meet him
one on one, and I've heard this countless times. I mean,
everyone says, look, one on one, he's just fantastic. Is
it that he can't that he's not managing to capture
that when he's talking to a bigger audience, or is
the problem that he is capturing that that one doesn't
suit the other.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
I'm not sure. He is on one on one basis
very relaxed yea, and very warm, and I'm just not
sure what the disconnect is. But there's a problem there.
He should be able to convey some of that to
a public setting, but it looks as though you put
him in front of a press conference and he freezes,
And for an experienced business leader politician, that shouldn't be
(09:44):
the case. And I think that the sort of unlocking
what that problem is and getting a much more realistic
person up there is the answer. Can Rachel Smallly do
that in a few months. I don't know, but she's
got a work cut out.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Yeah, devoters care about I mean, look at you and I.
We're enjoying chatting about this, and devoters care about the
sort of things. I mean, do they really you know,
the average punter?
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Are they are? They? Are they noticing?
Speaker 4 (10:11):
I think they notice that when clearly things go wrong,
and there have been a couple of very bad performances
of late which bore attention to it, and then the
media highlights it and it becomes a sort of a
rapidly spinning circle. Up until that point, I don't think
many people are particularly bothered by it. They might sort
of have a bit of a laugh or a bit
of a joke, but take it no further. But when
it seemed to be as it appears to be at
(10:33):
the moment, a bit of an ongoing pattern at a
time when the country's got a whole range of big
problems facing it which we're not getting clear answers on,
then I think it becomes an.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Issue how will we judge that it's worked because I can't.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
Again, I'll do a long winded one.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
I can't imagine this ever being viewed a success because
we are constantly going to be focusing on the substance
in the style of how he's delivering things. It's, you know,
this elephant that's standing in the corner all the time. Now,
I mean, I don't know how you get rid of it.
Speaker 4 (11:04):
It's not it's not going to happen overnight, and it's
a bit of the old Rachel Hunter out. It won't
happen overnight, but it will happen. And I think the
only way the public, the public I think will notice
when it doesn't become an issue. If that's not a
bit convoluted, if we stop talking about it because we
don't see there as an issue anymore, then it succeeded.
But if we're constantly talking about it and saying, oh no,
he's not quite getting me yet or he's not, the
(11:25):
whole thing's not working. So I think that it's going
to have to be a very careful, softly, softly approach,
and I think it's going to be around managing not
just media performances but also media opportunities and the sort
of things to be said and not said.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Is it just a case that I mean, Winston can
be a bit winston Ish, and Seymour can be you know,
they can be more slightly. I don't want to use
the word eccentric, but there we are. That's the word
I've gone with. Whereas he is the Prime minister, it's
he's sort of got a I mean, is that the
problem you sort of feel that you've got to try
and please and look after everyone.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
I think that might be pretty close to it. I mean,
he doesn't have the freedom of move movement that the
other two have, for instance, or even that Chris Hipkins
has in opposition. He is the Prime Minister and every
word he says is consequently measured much more stronger than
it might be for the others. And maybe he's too
conscious of that.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
I mean, because I think most John I just.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
Take so IM just going to say, I take John
Key as an example. He could make mistakes but would
laugh them off, Oh yeah, well I screwed them up
and move on. And I think maybe that's the bit
that Luckson's missing. He's so conscious of not making a
mistake that he sort of stumbles into it and then
can't get itself out of it by just saying, oh,
well that I'm sorry about that and that was just
a stuff up on my apartment here is on What
(12:44):
would you say, Tom, I'd say to him, Look, this
is pretty trite, I know, but just being yourself. Just pretend,
will not pretend, But imagine when you're in those press
conference settings or in a television interview, it's a one
on one conversation and forget the wider audience. Just relax
and talk to whom woever you're question or is in
(13:06):
the way you've talk to them if you around them
at the airport.
Speaker 2 (13:08):
So that the line that's out there is that he's
that I mean, we've been focusing on Christopher Luxon. I
mean that's probably the truth of it. But the line
that's out there is they broaden Rachel to work with
the Auckland based MPs. And off the top of my head,
I've got Mark Mitchell, Erica Stanford, Simeon Brown, and Christopher Luxon.
I'm not sure the others need much help, do they?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
They just do know.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
I think this is I think this is more sort
of you know, we all know that the election will
be won and lost in Auckland. So it's about telling
Auckland is that they're being taken seriously, that their issues count,
and that the government's focusing me on them, et cetera.
I think that's the wider message. But really this is
all cover for getting the Prime minister's issues sort of
and also a bit more clarity perhaps about some of
(13:49):
the messages in Auckland regarding housing for instance, where there
seem to be different views from different people.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
As long as he doesn't start start answering his emails
and a lah Wayne Brown.
Speaker 4 (14:00):
Well, yeah, Wayne Brown's Wayne Brown, and you wouldn't want
to imitate him because you know he's there a place
in that sense. But but I just think Christopher Laxen,
me and Christopher Laxon would be a pretty good start.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
Good stuff. Hey Peter, thanks so much for your time.
Really good to chat to you. Okay, cheer by, cheers by.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
For more from the Weekend Collective, listen live to news
Talks it'd be weekends from three pm or follow the
podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Weekend collective podcast from News talks 'b.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Around the National Party who have called and former broadcaster
Rachel Smalley to help Auckland based MPs, including the Prime Minister,
with their communications and media work ahead of the election
this year. It's come after the public have started to
notice that Crystal Reluxen seems to be having a bit
(00:30):
of a at least in terms of one or two
particular interviews, a bit of a crisis of confidence and
stumbling over his words, perhaps in contrast to maybe the
precise and decided communications style he would have aspired to
in the past.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
What he would aspire to it right now, wouldn't he?
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Anyway, he's got a comms problem and they've brought in
Rachel Smalley for him and the MPs anyway to discuss that.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
We're joined.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
It's been a while actually for a political commentator. He's
a former United Future Leader MP and minister.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Peter Dunn.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Hello, Hello Tom? How are you good? Things doing very well? Thanks?
Speaker 2 (01:07):
What was your response when you saw the story that
Rachel Small had been brought in to help the troops?
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well, I wasn't really surprised, but I think it's long
overdue because the problems come to light, particularly some of
the Prime Minister's recent communication issues. But I think it's
much deeper seated. I just don't think that the National
Party generally has been very good at getting its message
across in a way that connects with voters, either in
Auckland or across the country. So this is an overdue move,
(01:34):
but a sensible one, is it just?
Speaker 2 (01:37):
I mean, look, I'll be honest, I just assumed it's
to help lux in it now Christopher Luxon out or
is he?
Speaker 4 (01:46):
I think it's a bit of both. I mean, clearly
that the problems come to a head because of some
of the Prime minister's recent performances in the sense that
he's just not getting the message out. There's not even
quite sure what the message he should be getting out is.
But I think it's a bit more widespread. Some of
the issues that they've dealt with over the last three
years have suffered a little bit from the same thing.
Be that as it may. The challenge for them now
(02:08):
is to get this sorted quickly, and once a strategy
is being developed, the most important thing for all will
be for them to keep to it. It's no good
than deciding yeah, that's the strategy. But I know best
because I think it's been a bit of that of late.
If they've got a strategy for better communicating their message,
then they all need to stick to it.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
When you say there's a strategy of an ibst, are
you thinking of the Prime Minister himself.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Well, I am in a way, because there's been lots
of reports about him not being keen to take advice
from sources about Harris Shall present his message. I don't
know whether that's true or not, but I'm certainly hearing
those reports. And it seems to me that if you
call someone in to advise you on how you go
about this better, then you're obliged from the common sensor,
for no other point of view, to accept their advice.
(02:53):
And that will be the challenge. You know, politicians are
very egotistical people, I know, and they all think they
know better than everyone else. So that if someone says
to you, I remember someone saying to me once when
you've said something for the one hundred and fifty third time
and it sounds boring and try it and ridiculous to you,
that's the point at which it's staying to get through
to people. So don't suddenly decide I can finess this
(03:15):
message better or I can say something different. So the
challenge here will be to get some simple, clear lines
of communication and messaging and for them all to stick
to them.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
You never struck me as having a colossal ego, Peter.
Are you putting yourself in that group there?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Oh you can judge that, not me, But you know politicians.
Politicians are not known for being backward. Let's let's put
it that way.
Speaker 3 (03:37):
Can I'll be honest.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
I mean I just casually said to my producer Tira,
I thought, God, they should have just asked, Peter.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You ever get asked to do this sort of thing?
I mean, we all remember the days when the worm turned.
I mean it sounds like I've been asked.
Speaker 4 (03:50):
I've been asked occasionally by some parties, but not frequently.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Okay, have you ever said, yes, I have.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
Given advice when it's been when it's been asked for,
but I haven't offered it if it hasn't been asked for.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Oh well no, Well that's that's the magic one, isn't it.
Speaker 4 (04:04):
Now?
Speaker 2 (04:04):
Look is bringing in someone like that Rachel Smalley, do
you buy it as a normal professional tune up or
does it actually suggest a deeper political communication problem.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
If it was the former, it would have happened shortly
after the government took office, so it would have been
part of the transition and carried on. Coming in just
six months before the election suggests two things. Aid as
a problem and be they've worked out they've got to
do something about it mighty fast.
Speaker 3 (04:32):
Is she the right person for the job?
Speaker 4 (04:36):
Well, I don't know her well enough. I know her
only professionally, and I think she's a highly skilled communicator.
I think the important thing is to work out what
the message they want to convey to the public is
on any particular issue, and then the best way of
doing that. And I think where they've been falling down
a little of late is they certainly haven't conveyed a
clear message, and they often haven't. They seem to be
(04:58):
a little bit at sixes and seven's internally as to
what the message ought to be. You've seen it during
the fuel crisis. We still don't know really whether the
New Zealand government supports the American position or not. We
think they don't from a number of statements that have
been made, but every now and then the comments made
them make you think, well, maybe we're just holding back
(05:19):
a little bit because we don't want to upset them.
So that's the sort of area I think more clarity
is needed. They don't need to be a bracer or rude,
but they need to be clear, focused and sharp so
that the voters know exactly what they're trying to say
and exactly where they stand and then can decide accordingly.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
In politics, is the act of hiring a media communications
coach is the simple act of hiring that coach. I mean,
I would argue it's sometimes more damaging than what you're
trying to fix, because you know, once the words out,
remember you will remember Bill English, Mark one, you know,
and the pressure he was under with style and substance
(05:55):
and all that. You know, he became a very successful politician,
but he wasn't helped by you know, will spin doctors
coming in.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
Was he No? And I think the fact that the
story gets out there someone's been hired, that's a sort
of a lack of dispt on too, if you like.
If you want to call it an external consultant, nothing
wrong with doing it, get external advice, nothing wrong with
doing that. But you normally keep that sort of stuff
in house. As you say, the moment you go out
there and say, hey, look, we're calling an external people
(06:22):
tell us what to do. It's not a good look.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Yeah, they should have hired me because no one want
to believe that anyway.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
I don't know about.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Look is low.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
I've got to find a way of answering. I don't
know if I have a concise way of asking this,
But is it around authenticity? Because I've got the cynical
expression that authenticity is the most important thing in politics.
As soon as you can fake that, you've got it made.
But you see, he may be being authentic Chris Luxin.
But do we need to convince him to be something
(06:57):
other than authentic Chris Luxin?
Speaker 4 (06:59):
Well, I think the problem is this, I don't know
Chris Luxon. Well, I've met him a few times that
a personal level. He is extremely personable, very relaxed, very relatable.
That's what id and something goes wrong, And I think
you're absolutely right. Authenticity is the key. And I think
in this case they've somehow got to get the real
(07:20):
Christopher Luxem out there before the public, and the public
can then make a better judgment what they see at
the podium is not the person you'd meet you in
a more informal setting. Now is that Is that a
lack of confidence on his part? Is it something that
he's just not getting or what? But I think the
key is to produce the authentic person, not the sort
(07:42):
of the cutout figure you see often appearing in public.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So is this what is the what?
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Is is there a problem in what it says to
us caucus as well?
Speaker 3 (07:56):
Because this caucus r.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
All will be aware that, you know, I mean, I'm
not going to be the only person talking about it.
Is this a problem from the caucus point of view?
If you're a nationally and p are you reassured by
this or you're thinking? Oh god?
Speaker 4 (08:08):
Now? Of both? Because his colleagues will have more than
likely seen the real Christopher Luxe and up close on
many occasions, which I think is probably why he still
has their support. But they will be becoming frustrated that
the real person isn't quite giving out there to the public.
(08:29):
And how do you get that message across? You know?
I mean in the old days you'd say he knocked
on every door in New Zealand, but it's just not
physically possible to do that these days, So in a
short media presentation, he's got to convey his real personality
and I think the trick will be getting that to
get out to people so they can then make a judgment.
(08:50):
But as you said, the fact they're even talking about it,
the fact that they've gone and hired Rachel smally suggests
that they know they've got a problem.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
So you know how you said, when you meet him
one on one, and I've heard this countless times. I mean,
everyone says, look, one on one, he's just fantastic. Is
it that he can't that he's not managing to capture
that when he's talking to a bigger audience, or is
the problem that he is capturing that that one doesn't
suit the other.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
I'm not sure. He is on one on one basis
very relaxed yea, and very warm, and I'm just not
sure what the disconnect is. But there's a problem there.
He should be able to convey some of that to
a public setting, but it looks as though you put
him in front of a press conference and he freezes,
And for an experienced business leader politician, that shouldn't be
(09:44):
the case. And I think that the sort of unlocking
what that problem is and getting a much more realistic
person up there is the answer. Can Rachel Smallly do
that in a few months. I don't know, but she's
got a work cut out.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
Yeah, devoters care about I mean, look at you and I.
We're enjoying chatting about this, and devoters care about the
sort of things. I mean, do they really you know,
the average punter?
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Are they are? They? Are they noticing?
Speaker 4 (10:11):
I think they notice that when clearly things go wrong,
and there have been a couple of very bad performances
of late which bore attention to it, and then the
media highlights it and it becomes a sort of a
rapidly spinning circle. Up until that point, I don't think
many people are particularly bothered by it. They might sort
of have a bit of a laugh or a bit
of a joke, but take it no further. But when
it seemed to be as it appears to be at
(10:33):
the moment, a bit of an ongoing pattern at a
time when the country's got a whole range of big
problems facing it which we're not getting clear answers on,
then I think it becomes an.
Speaker 2 (10:42):
Issue how will we judge that it's worked because I can't.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
Again, I'll do a long winded one.
Speaker 2 (10:50):
I can't imagine this ever being viewed a success because
we are constantly going to be focusing on the substance
in the style of how he's delivering things. It's, you know,
this elephant that's standing in the corner all the time. Now,
I mean, I don't know how you get rid of it.
Speaker 4 (11:04):
It's not it's not going to happen overnight, and it's
a bit of the old Rachel Hunter out. It won't
happen overnight, but it will happen. And I think the
only way the public, the public I think will notice
when it doesn't become an issue. If that's not a
bit convoluted, if we stop talking about it because we
don't see there as an issue anymore, then it succeeded.
But if we're constantly talking about it and saying, oh no,
he's not quite getting me yet or he's not, the
(11:25):
whole thing's not working. So I think that it's going
to have to be a very careful, softly, softly approach,
and I think it's going to be around managing not
just media performances but also media opportunities and the sort
of things to be said and not said.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Is it just a case that I mean, Winston can
be a bit winston Ish, and Seymour can be you know,
they can be more slightly. I don't want to use
the word eccentric, but there we are. That's the word
I've gone with. Whereas he is the Prime minister, it's
he's sort of got a I mean, is that the
problem you sort of feel that you've got to try
and please and look after everyone.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
I think that might be pretty close to it. I mean,
he doesn't have the freedom of move movement that the
other two have, for instance, or even that Chris Hipkins
has in opposition. He is the Prime Minister and every
word he says is consequently measured much more stronger than
it might be for the others. And maybe he's too
conscious of that.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
I mean, because I think most John I just.
Speaker 4 (12:22):
Take so IM just going to say, I take John
Key as an example. He could make mistakes but would
laugh them off, Oh yeah, well I screwed them up
and move on. And I think maybe that's the bit
that Luckson's missing. He's so conscious of not making a
mistake that he sort of stumbles into it and then
can't get itself out of it by just saying, oh,
well that I'm sorry about that and that was just
a stuff up on my apartment here is on What
(12:44):
would you say, Tom, I'd say to him, Look, this
is pretty trite, I know, but just being yourself. Just pretend,
will not pretend, But imagine when you're in those press
conference settings or in a television interview, it's a one
on one conversation and forget the wider audience. Just relax
and talk to whom woever you're question or is in
(13:06):
the way you've talk to them if you around them
at the airport.
Speaker 2 (13:08):
So that the line that's out there is that he's
that I mean, we've been focusing on Christopher Luxon. I
mean that's probably the truth of it. But the line
that's out there is they broaden Rachel to work with
the Auckland based MPs. And off the top of my head,
I've got Mark Mitchell, Erica Stanford, Simeon Brown, and Christopher Luxon.
I'm not sure the others need much help, do they?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
They just do know.
Speaker 4 (13:28):
I think this is I think this is more sort
of you know, we all know that the election will
be won and lost in Auckland. So it's about telling
Auckland is that they're being taken seriously, that their issues count,
and that the government's focusing me on them, et cetera.
I think that's the wider message. But really this is
all cover for getting the Prime minister's issues sort of
and also a bit more clarity perhaps about some of
(13:49):
the messages in Auckland regarding housing for instance, where there
seem to be different views from different people.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
As long as he doesn't start start answering his emails
and a lah Wayne Brown.
Speaker 4 (14:00):
Well, yeah, Wayne Brown's Wayne Brown, and you wouldn't want
to imitate him because you know he's there a place
in that sense. But but I just think Christopher Laxen,
me and Christopher Laxon would be a pretty good start.
Speaker 3 (14:11):
Good stuff. Hey Peter, thanks so much for your time.
Really good to chat to you. Okay, cheer by, cheers by.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
For more from the Weekend Collective, listen live to news
Talks it'd be weekends from three pm 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
Kingdom of Fraud
It’s the unlikeliest of criminal partnerships: a devout polygamist from an insular Utah sect joining forces with a shadowy Armenian tycoon from LA. The result - a billion dollar fraud conspiracy. In Kingdom of Fraud, investigative reporter Michele McPhee traces the origins of the extraordinary alliance between Jacob Kingston and Levon Termendzhyan. Together, the two men trigger the largest tax investigation in American history and weave around themselves a web of dirty cops, influential political relationships and transnational money laundering. All this is set against the backdrop of Jacob Kingston’s clan – The Order. A powerful and secretive polygamist organization in Salt Lake City. To whom Jacob is desperate to prove his worth. Kingdom of Fraud is produced by Novel for iHeart Podcasts. For more from Novel, visit https://novel.audio/. You can listen to new episodes of Kingdom of Fraud completely ad-free and 1 week early with an iHeart True Crime+ subscription, available exclusively on Apple Podcasts. Open your Apple Podcasts app, search for “iHeart True Crime+, and subscribe today!