March 11, 2025 • 22 mins
Labour leader Chris Hipkins says he's grown supportive of the idea of Wellington's four city councils amalgamating into a super city, despite previously being against it.
"I do think some consolidation in the Wellington region would be better for Wellington ratepayers," the Remutaka MP told Nick Mills.
"But also, the lack of strategic oversight for the region is actually holding us back. If we don't sort that out soon we'll get left behind as a region."
Hipkins also discussed the latest Taxpayers Union/Curia poll result showing Labour ahead of National and what a potential coalition would look like.
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 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Said, b.
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Join us for the first time this year. I actually
thought we'd been here before this year.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I thought I thought we had as well good as me.
This is hopefully part too late to wish you a
happy new year.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Then I thinking he had got it wrong. I think
you've beat it before this But anyway, Labor leader and
Ruematucker MP Chris Hoippiins, welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thank you great to be here.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
How do you feel now that you're missed the most
popular politician in the land according to the Courier poll.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
I mean, it's lovely to get a good poll result,
but we've also got to be realistic about this. You know,
we're not even halfway through the parliamentary term yet. An
all full lot can happen in the next year and
a half. But yep, we'll enjoy it while while we've
got it, and we'll work very very hard to see
if we can consolidate it.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Okay, let's start with the pole stuff. The latest Career
Union the Taxpayers Current Union Courier poll shows that Labor
leeds national thirty four to thirty three percent. And you,
as said, are the most more popular than the Prime minister. Why.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I think it's two things. One is, I mean, let's
be clear. I think that let's be clear, let's be frank,
you know, whatever, whatever's are the phrases, I'd be very
very clear about this. I think people have just had
enough of the waffle and the corporate jargon and the
lack of focus on what actually metters. You know, they're
feeling disappointed that this government haven't delivered on the promises
that they made. And I think they're really frustrated that
(01:32):
things are getting worse, not getting better.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
So I think, do you actually really believe things are
getting worse not better? You can't see the light at
the end of the tunnel.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
But I mean I think they've made the light at
the end of the tunnel further away. So the green
shoots of recovery were already there to see. Before the election,
you could see forecast showing that unemployment was going to
peek at a certain level, then it was going to
come down again. They made this worse. If you look
at the thirteen thousand people in building in construction that
have lost their jobs since the election. That was a
(01:59):
large part driven by the government cutting back on its
expenditure in areas like infrastructure and state house bills. So
you know, they've made this problem worse than it needed
to be. But I think the other thing, you know,
looking on the other side is I think key We's
said to us pretty clearly at the last election, we
don't think you're listening. We don't think you're in touch
with the issues that we care about. And we've made
a real effort over the last year to get out
(02:20):
and about and make sure that we are actually connecting
with New Zealanders on the things that matter to them.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Can you put your finger on one thing that makes
this government unpopular?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
I know, because there's just so many of them, and
I think it's you know, let's be clear, I think
it's wrong to blame Christopher Luxan alone.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
I think his corporate waffle drives people mad. His inability
to answer questions drives people mad. But people also see
unemployments being going up, They see the cost of living
crisis isn't actually getting better. You know, ultimately things are
still a lot more expensive than they were. Rates are
going up. You know, crime in terms of issues around crime, actually,
if you look at the Crime and Victimization Survey. Crime
(02:57):
hasn't gone down under this government despite their spin. So
I think what New Zealanders are saying is this is
a government trying to spin its way out of problems
rather than actually solve them.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
Has Christopher like some connected with New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
Well no, he clearly hasn't. But I don't think that's
the government's only problem. I mean, I think one of
the things that Christopher Luckxin's done, which the National Party
as a whole need to accept responsibility for, is they've
allowed ACT in New Zealand First to run circles around them.
Majority of New Zealanders didn't vote for Act in New
Zealand First. A lot more people voted National than ACT
in New Zealand First put together, and yet that's actual
(03:30):
National just seemed to be sitting back and letting ACT
in New Zealand First run the show.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
To be fair, that's going to happen to you too, though.
To be fair, if you get in with a coalition
with the Party Mara and the Greens, we're going to
see the exactly the same thing.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
How can you be any different.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
You have to have some bottom lines Ultimately, I've been
really clear we're not going to vote four things that
if we've said before the last before the election that
we're going to that we're not going to support them,
which is what National has done. You know, the bigger
party in the government still needs to show leadership and
I think that's what National is lacking. And it's not
just Christopher Luxon that the National's not willing to lead.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Were you surprised, and this is completely off tach here,
but were you surprised to hear that, you know, Phil
Goff was fired without the Prime Minister know I.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Was very surprised to learn that the Prime Minister hadn't
even been consulted about that. Frankly, if I was the
Prime minister and someone was making a decision of that
magnitude of one of my ministers, I would want to
know about that. It shows, I think that they don't
have a lot of respect for Christopher Luxe. Does it
show that they think they're in control both him and
David Seymour. I mean, we've seen all the debarcle with
the food stuff, the lunches and the schools, and they
(04:39):
still got their positions. I think one of the things
about this government. I don't think anyone is in control.
And I think that's one of the things that Kiwis
can see. You've got David Seymour off doing his own things,
saying well, I'm dealing with the Prime Minister, Erica Stanford,
who's the minister actually responsible for education, saying well, I'm
trying to meet with David Seymour, but he's not talking
to me. He's only talking to the Prime Minister, you know.
And then you've got David Seymour and Winston Peter's both
(04:59):
ignoring what the Prime Minister tells them half the time.
I think Keywys can see that.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Can you tell me right now five ths things that
you've done over the last eighteen months to show that
you're a different proposition than you were when you're in Parliament?
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Yeah? Sure. I think first of all, we spent a
year listening to New Zealanders and I think that was
really important. I've just reshuffled the labor lineup to actually
provide refreshed people in all of those big portfolio areas.
We've set out our priorities for the next government, which
are around jobs, health and homes. Those are the issues
that New Zealanders have told us really matter to them.
(05:35):
We've taken some stuff off the table that we were
talking about at the last election. So the policies that
people thought were a distraction, like GSD or fruit and
vege heard that people don't want that. They want to
see us focused on the more substantive issues. There's four.
I'm sure I could come up with a fifth one,
but I mean I think those four tell the story.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Is there any new ideas? Is there anything that's new
that I wouldn't think that represents labor.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
There will be some new ideas and we're working on
some of those at the moment. What I wanted to
do on Friday when I set out the State of
the Nation speech was basically give people an indication of
what the new ideas are going to contribute to. So
when I say our priorities are jobs, health and homes,
people see new ideas from us that will actually contribute to,
you know, achieving those things.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
How do you think that you'd be able to keep
the party Maori sort of under control and a coalition?
I mean people are just sitting back there looking at
them now and saying, can you imagine why they were
in government?
Speaker 2 (06:27):
That's a very hypothetical question. My goal, frankly, is it
because because there.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Might be no chance in hell have you been in
power without them there with you?
Speaker 2 (06:35):
Not necessarily, my goal is to build Labor support. If
you look at it, we started this parliamentary gym with
tw twenty seven percent support. We're now at thirty five.
If we continue on that trajectory over the next year,
we could well be in a position where it could
be a Labor Green government for example, it could be
a Labor minority government. I'm not saying that there's any
surety that it will be a three way arrangement with
(06:55):
Labor the Greens, and the.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Reality is that we know it's going to be.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Well, no, I don't think you can draw that conclusion yet.
I might.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
I think if you're going to be prime minister, you're
going to have to have party married Pacology.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
That's assuming and they're still in parliament. I tell you what,
We're out there to win every one of those Malori
electrics back at the next election.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
Do you think that elections of popularity contests.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
To some extent, Yes, But I also think people want
to know that you are doing a good job and
you're focused on what matters to them.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
Yeah, so this popularity of you that's growing, and I
mean even I would have thought, gosh, a year ago,
this was not you're really going to see it. That
must be sort of giving you a bit of confidence.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
I'm encouraged by it. But I'm also you know, I've
been around politics to no longer, you know, long enough
to know that things can change and things do. But
when I look at the progress we made over the
last year, I feel satisfied by that. I don't have
a crystal ball to say what, you know, what we're
going to achieve over the next year, but I know
what I'm aiming for, and that's to continue to grow
Labour's share of the vote.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Okay, let's talk about your State of the Nation speech
last week, which I thought you did very well. On
Q and A by the way, I thought you handled
that very well. You talked about your priorities, but really
these have always been your priorities, and you didn't do
them when you're in power, jobs, homes and health well.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
I think, and as I said, you know, I think
that's some pretty clear feedback that we got from Kiwis
at the last election and subsequently as we went around
the country to ask people why they didn't vote for us,
they didn't think that we had focused on the basics
enough and so I've made that really clear. You know,
we're not aiming to get re elected based on what
we were talking about in twenty twenty three people didn't
vote for us. We want where we will be offering
(08:29):
something different in twenty twenty six. You still go around
those three core areas. You still think the are the
three core areas for absolutely. So if you think about jobs,
I mean that ultimately, what's going to contribute to jobs.
That's the broader debate around the economy, how we diversify
the economy, how we grow but not just about growing
the economy, but what are we growing in the economy.
What are the job rich areas that we should be
growing the economy, and just growing the economy by through
(08:52):
another house price bubble, which seems to be the current
government's latest strategy that's not going to make New Zealand
a richer country. Look at areas around health, actually things
like homes. Having a warm, dry home is a predeterminant
of where you're going to end up in an emergency
to apartment. So just have a link to each other.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
Can we just have a look at your team because
it's all been about you. Let's be real, we haven't
seen anyone else from Labor say anything, do anything. It's
all about you. Do you have a strong enough team
around you. Doesn't look like there's a lot of experience there.
You take Karen McNulty and a couple of hours out
and you've got I can't even name them.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Well, no, I think we've got a mix of experience
and new energy. So if you think about it, you've
got really experienced senior figures like Carmel SEPALONEI, Meghan Woods,
who have been in government before, brings some real heft
to the table. Then you've got people like Barbara Edmonds.
I only had a very brief stintism minister before the
last election relatively and you only came into parliament in
twenty twenty, but actually is an expert on the economy,
(09:48):
probably the most qualified incoming Minister of Finance New Zealand
ever would have had in terms of her background and preparation.
And you know, her politics grows by the day. You know,
her presentation as a politician I think gets better by
the day. Then you've got new energy like Karen macinaulty
Jenny Anderson, so some and some real talent coming through
(10:08):
from the backbenches as well. Why did jan Toinetti get
the boot and she didn't get the boot? I mean
she's moved into a different portfolio, she got the boot. No,
she's moved into a different portfolio area, which is one
that she also demoted, has a strengthen. So you know,
jobs and incomes I've given to Ginny Anderson, But sitting
right alongside that is stuff around workplace relations and safety.
(10:28):
I want New Zealanders to be basically to get to
get paid more when they go to work, and the
portfolio I've given to Jen is integral to that.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
Okay, let's start talking that three letter word that you
don't like talking about, which one tax? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:43):
Oh yeah, sure, fire away. Well answers I gave to
guy on the weekend, But let's give it again.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
Well, I mean, surely you've come up with a new
name for capital gains, because that's what's holding you back.
You want to you want to have You're going to
bring capital gains and we all know you're going to
bring capital gains and but what are you going to
call it.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Look, let me go, let's stop the spin games. If ultimately,
if we adopt the capital gains we will call it
a capital gains tax. I think people have had enough
of this government trying to say one thing and do
the opposite. If we're going to do it, we'll call
it what it is.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
It's not a matter if it's a matter of when wasn't.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
It Let's may well form that view, Nick, But the
issue is what you do on tex You and I
have had this discussion before. What you do on text.
You can't just consider text by itself. Tax has to
be considered alongside your broader economic policy, including how much
money does the government need, what's it going to spend
it on, what's it going to do to drive economic
growth within the country, what's it going to do to
(11:38):
move and when are we going to get tax away
from speculative investment we're all buying and selling houses from
each other to when we were investing in businesses that
actually grow the economy. These things all interconnect.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Have you looked at other taxes, looked at Australia for instance,
I've always wondered why there hasn't been a luxury car
tax in New Zealand when it's so successful in Australia.
Have you thought of that?
Speaker 2 (11:59):
And that's not something that I've looked at. No, But
again let's be clear, New Zealand has a very narrow
tax base can compaied to countries that we compare ourselves
to Australia, the US, the UK, others. We get most
of our income from from people going and celery wag
journers paying their paye or through GST. Other countries have
a broader tax base than that, and it actually eases
(12:21):
the tax pressure on working people.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
Are you going to come up with something that's innovative taxation,
something that's like a game changer completely?
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I mean we will have some innovative economic policy before
the next selection. As I said, tax is only one
small set of economic policy. I want to know when,
Oh you just watch the space, look reckon, it'll be
this year. You'll see our tax policy this year.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
This year. Okay, okay, last time you're on, we had
a bet that you were going to be Prime minister
next selection. Do you remember that.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
How's that looking for you so far?
Speaker 3 (12:54):
I'm still pretty confident. I'm still pretty confident. I think
I've still got the short. I think I've got the
hot hot loop. Help we take another bet that you'll
go into the selection with the capital gains tax.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
Now, look, I'm not going to that. I'm not going
to keep making bits. I probably shouldn't have made the
last one, but I'll honor it. I'm a man of
my word. I'll honor the bit that I've made. But
if I start getting into making bets all over the show,
it'll live me and you.
Speaker 3 (13:15):
Both know capital gains is coming in, but we just
won't be called capital gains. It'll be called something less evasive. Evasive,
shall we say?
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Look, I'm not going to get into making bets on
that one. Okay, it'd be like insider training trading because
I know more than you do, so that what you.
Speaker 3 (13:29):
Do is coming. Well, I think we both know the
same thing. Capital gads is coming. It's just when you're
going to do it and what you're going to call it,
because there's no there's no way in god given world
that you're going to call it capital gads tax.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
As they as they said on the House of Cards,
you may well think that I couldn't possibly comment.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Okay, take a short break, I'll ask him on the
break you'll tell me then no, he won't. Joining us
in the studio is Labor leader Chris Hipkins. Chris, I
want to talk to you about dwell into and water.
What a debark or what a problem the councils can't
agree on what we're The problem is we can't look
back and see where where we spent all the money
and we're paying three times as much for a pipe.
I mean, this is your erea, your backyard, you drive
(14:06):
past through, a ride past it every day and look
at that, you know, shining building, and what do you think?
Speaker 2 (14:11):
I mean, Look, Wellington Water wouldn't still be here if
the current government had gone ahead with the water reforms
that we had already underway. I think the current structure
of Wellington Water is fundamentally flawed. But also, you know,
let's be clear, our local councils over the last thirty
forty years have told Wellingtonians and include the suburbs you know,
include out my way, have told us all that we
(14:33):
can have low rates and that there's no future cost
to that. Well, there is a future cost to that
is we haven't invested in our water infrastructure and now
we're seeing what that's actually doing.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Is it as bad as you thought it was when
you were in parliament? Did you know that? You know
when governments you know, did you know it was bad?
Speaker 2 (14:48):
I think there's two things. One is the rundown nature
of our water infrastructure. Yes, so the fact that the
pipes have literally falling apart below the ground, that we
haven't got enough water storage so that our water treatments
not where it needs to be. Knew all of that.
The bit that I think has come out in the
last few weeks which I'm really alarmed by, is that
the money that we're putting in now to fix those
things up isn't actually doing the job that we that
(15:12):
we could should expect of. It's the idea that Fulton
and Hogan are making a huge amount of money for
doing less work than they would if they were doing
the same work in other areas for the same money.
I don't think that's excusable, you know, I think that's
somewhere along the way some people have lost their moral
compass here that they're taking money, you know, they're overcharging
for work that they would charge less for somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
What are your thoughts on Nick Legg? It should he go, Look,
I like Nick. Everybody likes Nick.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
That's not the question, even if he's a trader who
left the Labor Party to join the National Party. But yeah,
I think he's a good guy. He just happens to
be the guy who's sitting in the seat. Now. I
wouldn't hold him completely accountable for the woes of Wellington Water.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
But is there a simple answer?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
There isn't a simple art. Well the simple answer is
that Wellington Water needs to be turned upside down and
needs a different structure, needs greater accountability, and yep, it's
going to need more investment.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Now, you came out yesterday wrong against the City Council,
warning the City Council because not applying for the regional
deal from the government basically free money for infrastructure project.
Is this actual further proof that the councils in this
area are dropping the ball. I mean, I know your
your mayor has come out hard. He wanted to do something,
but they couldn't, couldn't form a consensus, couldn't put anything.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
And I think the councils should have got together, they
should have put something in. I think it seems all
the wrong messages that they didn't But having said that,
the bit of information that I didn't have yesterday was
you do have now is I cannot believe that the
government are criticizing them for following the advice of the
Crown Observer that the government itself appointed. So the Crown
Observer said, don't put in an application to the to
(16:48):
this fund. The Council followed the advice of the Crown Observer,
thinking that the Crown Observer was speaking on behalf of
the government, and now the government's attacking them for following them.
We know that's right that they appointed.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Well that's right. I mean when I read and heard
that this morning, I thought that can't be true.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Well, no, apparently it is. And according to if you
listen to read what you if you believe what you
read on stuff, they've actually verified that with the Crown Observer,
that that's exactly the advice that the Observer gave. I
just think that shows the government once again, we're all
over the show. They don't really know what they're doing here.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Now. You spend a bit of time in Auckland and
I know that it's something that's an area where you
want to get popularity. Back is the malgamation the answer
for Wellington if we could tie up Upper Hut, Potidur
and Wellington. I'm that the answer I strongly feel it is.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
I mean, I think I've had this conversation with you before.
I've kind of changed my mind on that over the years.
Used to be firmly opposed to it. I do think
some consolidation in the Wellington region would be better. The
better for Wellington rate payers, you know, I think there
is a lot of duplication in there, but also just
the lack of strategic oversight for the region is actually
(17:52):
holding Wellington back. You know, if we don't sort that
out soon, we'll get left behind as a region. We
are now well, we already are, but it'll get worse
if we don't sort that out.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Do you think that we should actually put in amalgamation?
You think, yes, that's dope.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Go for it. And I think if the current councils
actually showed some leadership, got together and said how are
we going to fix this, and went to government with
a plan, I think the government, either it's a national
government or a labor government would welcome that with open arms.
The reality is Wellington's not working in the way that
it's structured now.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
So that's yeah, that's exactly how I think it should
be anyway. I know, I don't really want to talk
about this, but school lunch has been an absolute debarkle.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
I think it's now officially in omni shambles. You know,
when you're dealing with so many things going wrong, you've
got lunches exploding and giving kids, you know, burns, You've
got a lunch is not showing up now, I saw
I've read a story today where one of the schools
are feeding the lunches to their school pig because the
kids won't eat them. I mean, this is just disgraceful.
And David Semore seems to be the only person in
(18:51):
the country who didn't figure out that if you accept
the one lowest bid, that the only bid that says
that they can do it for three bucks a lunch,
when everyone else is saying no, it's more like five
six seven dollars a lunch. If you accept that only
bid and that provider goes broke, you haven't got a
lot of places to go because they've forced all of
the other providers out of the market.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
Do you think they forced that provider so low to
get the volume that they just couldn't do it.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
I think that is obvious. You know, I think anyone
looking at that and now it can now see that
that was never going to stack up in the first place.
All of the lunch providers who were already doing it
except for this one, were saying, this is nuts and
they're not going to be able to do it. Lo
and behold they couldn't do it.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Would that be any different if it wasn't one of
the coalition leaders looking after that? I mean, you know,
would that that person be fired if it wasn't you know,
the minister in charge with that? Would he be swapped
or changed over if it wasn't a coalition partner or leader?
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Oh? Absolutely? Prime Minister should have done something about it.
I mean, David Seymour is massively underperforming in this and
other areas, but he won't do anything about it because
he doesn't want to it. Is more interested in clinging
to power than actually, you know, holding his ministers accountable
for their lack of performance.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Do you think that's genuine?
Speaker 2 (20:03):
I do, But I also think he's too weak. I
actually think you know, he thinks that he can get
away with just a whole lot of word salad and
mumbo jumbo and the people won't notice the fact that
his government's making a hash of everything. I think actually
New Zealanders are noticing, right.
Speaker 3 (20:16):
I want to talk quickly about the fact that you
haven't been able to find a labor candidate to run
for the mayoralty. Now. There's been a lot of talk
about how that you've asked everybody that can stand on
two feet that represents labor to stand for you, and
no one said yes. Is it that bad?
Speaker 1 (20:33):
No?
Speaker 2 (20:33):
I think that's a bit unfair that. I mean, to
be fair, I haven't been actively engaged in this at all.
My focus is on parliamentary leadership rather than local government leadership.
But the party has in the past supported mayoral candidates.
That doesn't not actively looking for one. You don't mean
there are always labor candidates. Sometimes if good people pop
up who aren't labor but we think it would do
a good job, we'll throw away behind them and support them.
(20:53):
I think Wellington City does need a real, really good
shake up, and so if there are people who are
keen to shake Wellington up, I'm very open to talking
to them about it.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Are you currently talking to anyone because it seems to
be a lot of people are saying, well, well, I've
been approached by Labor. Jill Day's apparent name's been banding around.
She doesn't want to take part of it. There's other
names that are banding around. Do you think that you
are going to find somebody that you're going to hang
your cat on?
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Look, as I said, it's not something that's been occupying
my attention. I haven't looked at it particularly closely. But
I think if a good person came out of the
woodwork who said, look, I want to have a real
crack at turning Wellington around, I'm interested in, you know,
having that conversation because I do think Wellington needs a
real injection of fresh energy.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
Do you think that that we are smart enough to
find somebody for that?
Speaker 2 (21:39):
I hope so. I mean, Wellington's well if you look
at central Wellington's one of the most highly educated areas
in the country. Surely there's got to be someone out
there who will we want this on.
Speaker 3 (21:48):
We want to go green well. I mean if you
look at the look at the brains in the central city,
it's green well.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
That may have been the case at the last election.
I'm not sure that's the case right now.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
Okay. Always a pleasure. Christ I know you've got to go.
I could spend all hour with you, but I know
you've got to go, and through other have our commitments.
But I appreciate you coming in and spending some time
with us.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Great great to talk to you, Nick, as always, Thank you.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Take care.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Said, b.
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Join us for the first time this year. I actually
thought we'd been here before this year.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I thought I thought we had as well good as me.
This is hopefully part too late to wish you a
happy new year.
Speaker 3 (00:25):
Then I thinking he had got it wrong. I think
you've beat it before this But anyway, Labor leader and
Ruematucker MP Chris Hoippiins, welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thank you great to be here.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
How do you feel now that you're missed the most
popular politician in the land according to the Courier poll.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
I mean, it's lovely to get a good poll result,
but we've also got to be realistic about this. You know,
we're not even halfway through the parliamentary term yet. An
all full lot can happen in the next year and
a half. But yep, we'll enjoy it while while we've
got it, and we'll work very very hard to see
if we can consolidate it.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
Okay, let's start with the pole stuff. The latest Career
Union the Taxpayers Current Union Courier poll shows that Labor
leeds national thirty four to thirty three percent. And you,
as said, are the most more popular than the Prime minister. Why.
Speaker 2 (01:10):
I think it's two things. One is, I mean, let's
be clear. I think that let's be clear, let's be frank,
you know, whatever, whatever's are the phrases, I'd be very
very clear about this. I think people have just had
enough of the waffle and the corporate jargon and the
lack of focus on what actually metters. You know, they're
feeling disappointed that this government haven't delivered on the promises
that they made. And I think they're really frustrated that
(01:32):
things are getting worse, not getting better.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
So I think, do you actually really believe things are
getting worse not better? You can't see the light at
the end of the tunnel.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
But I mean I think they've made the light at
the end of the tunnel further away. So the green
shoots of recovery were already there to see. Before the election,
you could see forecast showing that unemployment was going to
peek at a certain level, then it was going to
come down again. They made this worse. If you look
at the thirteen thousand people in building in construction that
have lost their jobs since the election. That was a
(01:59):
large part driven by the government cutting back on its
expenditure in areas like infrastructure and state house bills. So
you know, they've made this problem worse than it needed
to be. But I think the other thing, you know,
looking on the other side is I think key We's
said to us pretty clearly at the last election, we
don't think you're listening. We don't think you're in touch
with the issues that we care about. And we've made
a real effort over the last year to get out
(02:20):
and about and make sure that we are actually connecting
with New Zealanders on the things that matter to them.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Can you put your finger on one thing that makes
this government unpopular?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
I know, because there's just so many of them, and
I think it's you know, let's be clear, I think
it's wrong to blame Christopher Luxan alone.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
Yep.
Speaker 2 (02:34):
I think his corporate waffle drives people mad. His inability
to answer questions drives people mad. But people also see
unemployments being going up, They see the cost of living
crisis isn't actually getting better. You know, ultimately things are
still a lot more expensive than they were. Rates are
going up. You know, crime in terms of issues around crime, actually,
if you look at the Crime and Victimization Survey. Crime
(02:57):
hasn't gone down under this government despite their spin. So
I think what New Zealanders are saying is this is
a government trying to spin its way out of problems
rather than actually solve them.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
Has Christopher like some connected with New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
Well no, he clearly hasn't. But I don't think that's
the government's only problem. I mean, I think one of
the things that Christopher Luckxin's done, which the National Party
as a whole need to accept responsibility for, is they've
allowed ACT in New Zealand First to run circles around them.
Majority of New Zealanders didn't vote for Act in New
Zealand First. A lot more people voted National than ACT
in New Zealand First put together, and yet that's actual
(03:30):
National just seemed to be sitting back and letting ACT
in New Zealand First run the show.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
To be fair, that's going to happen to you too, though.
To be fair, if you get in with a coalition
with the Party Mara and the Greens, we're going to
see the exactly the same thing.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
How can you be any different.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
You have to have some bottom lines Ultimately, I've been
really clear we're not going to vote four things that
if we've said before the last before the election that
we're going to that we're not going to support them,
which is what National has done. You know, the bigger
party in the government still needs to show leadership and
I think that's what National is lacking. And it's not
just Christopher Luxon that the National's not willing to lead.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
Were you surprised, and this is completely off tach here,
but were you surprised to hear that, you know, Phil
Goff was fired without the Prime Minister know I.
Speaker 2 (04:18):
Was very surprised to learn that the Prime Minister hadn't
even been consulted about that. Frankly, if I was the
Prime minister and someone was making a decision of that
magnitude of one of my ministers, I would want to
know about that. It shows, I think that they don't
have a lot of respect for Christopher Luxe. Does it
show that they think they're in control both him and
David Seymour. I mean, we've seen all the debarcle with
the food stuff, the lunches and the schools, and they
(04:39):
still got their positions. I think one of the things
about this government. I don't think anyone is in control.
And I think that's one of the things that Kiwis
can see. You've got David Seymour off doing his own things,
saying well, I'm dealing with the Prime Minister, Erica Stanford,
who's the minister actually responsible for education, saying well, I'm
trying to meet with David Seymour, but he's not talking
to me. He's only talking to the Prime Minister, you know.
And then you've got David Seymour and Winston Peter's both
(04:59):
ignoring what the Prime Minister tells them half the time.
I think Keywys can see that.
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Can you tell me right now five ths things that
you've done over the last eighteen months to show that
you're a different proposition than you were when you're in Parliament?
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Yeah? Sure. I think first of all, we spent a
year listening to New Zealanders and I think that was
really important. I've just reshuffled the labor lineup to actually
provide refreshed people in all of those big portfolio areas.
We've set out our priorities for the next government, which
are around jobs, health and homes. Those are the issues
that New Zealanders have told us really matter to them.
(05:35):
We've taken some stuff off the table that we were
talking about at the last election. So the policies that
people thought were a distraction, like GSD or fruit and
vege heard that people don't want that. They want to
see us focused on the more substantive issues. There's four.
I'm sure I could come up with a fifth one,
but I mean I think those four tell the story.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Is there any new ideas? Is there anything that's new
that I wouldn't think that represents labor.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
There will be some new ideas and we're working on
some of those at the moment. What I wanted to
do on Friday when I set out the State of
the Nation speech was basically give people an indication of
what the new ideas are going to contribute to. So
when I say our priorities are jobs, health and homes,
people see new ideas from us that will actually contribute to,
you know, achieving those things.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
How do you think that you'd be able to keep
the party Maori sort of under control and a coalition?
I mean people are just sitting back there looking at
them now and saying, can you imagine why they were
in government?
Speaker 2 (06:27):
That's a very hypothetical question. My goal, frankly, is it
because because there.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Might be no chance in hell have you been in
power without them there with you?
Speaker 2 (06:35):
Not necessarily, my goal is to build Labor support. If
you look at it, we started this parliamentary gym with
tw twenty seven percent support. We're now at thirty five.
If we continue on that trajectory over the next year,
we could well be in a position where it could
be a Labor Green government for example, it could be
a Labor minority government. I'm not saying that there's any
surety that it will be a three way arrangement with
(06:55):
Labor the Greens, and the.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
Reality is that we know it's going to be.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Well, no, I don't think you can draw that conclusion yet.
I might.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
I think if you're going to be prime minister, you're
going to have to have party married Pacology.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
That's assuming and they're still in parliament. I tell you what,
We're out there to win every one of those Malori
electrics back at the next election.
Speaker 3 (07:12):
Do you think that elections of popularity contests.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
To some extent, Yes, But I also think people want
to know that you are doing a good job and
you're focused on what matters to them.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
Yeah, so this popularity of you that's growing, and I
mean even I would have thought, gosh, a year ago,
this was not you're really going to see it. That
must be sort of giving you a bit of confidence.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
I'm encouraged by it. But I'm also you know, I've
been around politics to no longer, you know, long enough
to know that things can change and things do. But
when I look at the progress we made over the
last year, I feel satisfied by that. I don't have
a crystal ball to say what, you know, what we're
going to achieve over the next year, but I know
what I'm aiming for, and that's to continue to grow
Labour's share of the vote.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Okay, let's talk about your State of the Nation speech
last week, which I thought you did very well. On
Q and A by the way, I thought you handled
that very well. You talked about your priorities, but really
these have always been your priorities, and you didn't do
them when you're in power, jobs, homes and health well.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
I think, and as I said, you know, I think
that's some pretty clear feedback that we got from Kiwis
at the last election and subsequently as we went around
the country to ask people why they didn't vote for us,
they didn't think that we had focused on the basics
enough and so I've made that really clear. You know,
we're not aiming to get re elected based on what
we were talking about in twenty twenty three people didn't
vote for us. We want where we will be offering
(08:29):
something different in twenty twenty six. You still go around
those three core areas. You still think the are the
three core areas for absolutely. So if you think about jobs,
I mean that ultimately, what's going to contribute to jobs.
That's the broader debate around the economy, how we diversify
the economy, how we grow but not just about growing
the economy, but what are we growing in the economy.
What are the job rich areas that we should be
growing the economy, and just growing the economy by through
(08:52):
another house price bubble, which seems to be the current
government's latest strategy that's not going to make New Zealand
a richer country. Look at areas around health, actually things
like homes. Having a warm, dry home is a predeterminant
of where you're going to end up in an emergency
to apartment. So just have a link to each other.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
Can we just have a look at your team because
it's all been about you. Let's be real, we haven't
seen anyone else from Labor say anything, do anything. It's
all about you. Do you have a strong enough team
around you. Doesn't look like there's a lot of experience there.
You take Karen McNulty and a couple of hours out
and you've got I can't even name them.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Well, no, I think we've got a mix of experience
and new energy. So if you think about it, you've
got really experienced senior figures like Carmel SEPALONEI, Meghan Woods,
who have been in government before, brings some real heft
to the table. Then you've got people like Barbara Edmonds.
I only had a very brief stintism minister before the
last election relatively and you only came into parliament in
twenty twenty, but actually is an expert on the economy,
(09:48):
probably the most qualified incoming Minister of Finance New Zealand
ever would have had in terms of her background and preparation.
And you know, her politics grows by the day. You know,
her presentation as a politician I think gets better by
the day. Then you've got new energy like Karen macinaulty
Jenny Anderson, so some and some real talent coming through
(10:08):
from the backbenches as well. Why did jan Toinetti get
the boot and she didn't get the boot? I mean
she's moved into a different portfolio, she got the boot. No,
she's moved into a different portfolio area, which is one
that she also demoted, has a strengthen. So you know,
jobs and incomes I've given to Ginny Anderson, But sitting
right alongside that is stuff around workplace relations and safety.
(10:28):
I want New Zealanders to be basically to get to
get paid more when they go to work, and the
portfolio I've given to Jen is integral to that.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
Okay, let's start talking that three letter word that you
don't like talking about, which one tax? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:43):
Oh yeah, sure, fire away. Well answers I gave to
guy on the weekend, But let's give it again.
Speaker 3 (10:49):
Well, I mean, surely you've come up with a new
name for capital gains, because that's what's holding you back.
You want to you want to have You're going to
bring capital gains and we all know you're going to
bring capital gains and but what are you going to
call it.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Look, let me go, let's stop the spin games. If ultimately,
if we adopt the capital gains we will call it
a capital gains tax. I think people have had enough
of this government trying to say one thing and do
the opposite. If we're going to do it, we'll call
it what it is.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
It's not a matter if it's a matter of when wasn't.
Speaker 2 (11:17):
It Let's may well form that view, Nick, But the
issue is what you do on tex You and I
have had this discussion before. What you do on text.
You can't just consider text by itself. Tax has to
be considered alongside your broader economic policy, including how much
money does the government need, what's it going to spend
it on, what's it going to do to drive economic
growth within the country, what's it going to do to
(11:38):
move and when are we going to get tax away
from speculative investment we're all buying and selling houses from
each other to when we were investing in businesses that
actually grow the economy. These things all interconnect.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Have you looked at other taxes, looked at Australia for instance,
I've always wondered why there hasn't been a luxury car
tax in New Zealand when it's so successful in Australia.
Have you thought of that?
Speaker 2 (11:59):
And that's not something that I've looked at. No, But
again let's be clear, New Zealand has a very narrow
tax base can compaied to countries that we compare ourselves
to Australia, the US, the UK, others. We get most
of our income from from people going and celery wag
journers paying their paye or through GST. Other countries have
a broader tax base than that, and it actually eases
(12:21):
the tax pressure on working people.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
Are you going to come up with something that's innovative taxation,
something that's like a game changer completely?
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I mean we will have some innovative economic policy before
the next selection. As I said, tax is only one
small set of economic policy. I want to know when,
Oh you just watch the space, look reckon, it'll be
this year. You'll see our tax policy this year.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
This year. Okay, okay, last time you're on, we had
a bet that you were going to be Prime minister
next selection. Do you remember that.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
How's that looking for you so far?
Speaker 3 (12:54):
I'm still pretty confident. I'm still pretty confident. I think
I've still got the short. I think I've got the
hot hot loop. Help we take another bet that you'll
go into the selection with the capital gains tax.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
Now, look, I'm not going to that. I'm not going
to keep making bits. I probably shouldn't have made the
last one, but I'll honor it. I'm a man of
my word. I'll honor the bit that I've made. But
if I start getting into making bets all over the show,
it'll live me and you.
Speaker 3 (13:15):
Both know capital gains is coming in, but we just
won't be called capital gains. It'll be called something less evasive. Evasive,
shall we say?
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Look, I'm not going to get into making bets on
that one. Okay, it'd be like insider training trading because
I know more than you do, so that what you.
Speaker 3 (13:29):
Do is coming. Well, I think we both know the
same thing. Capital gads is coming. It's just when you're
going to do it and what you're going to call it,
because there's no there's no way in god given world
that you're going to call it capital gads tax.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
As they as they said on the House of Cards,
you may well think that I couldn't possibly comment.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
Okay, take a short break, I'll ask him on the
break you'll tell me then no, he won't. Joining us
in the studio is Labor leader Chris Hipkins. Chris, I
want to talk to you about dwell into and water.
What a debark or what a problem the councils can't
agree on what we're The problem is we can't look
back and see where where we spent all the money
and we're paying three times as much for a pipe.
I mean, this is your erea, your backyard, you drive
(14:06):
past through, a ride past it every day and look
at that, you know, shining building, and what do you think?
Speaker 2 (14:11):
I mean, Look, Wellington Water wouldn't still be here if
the current government had gone ahead with the water reforms
that we had already underway. I think the current structure
of Wellington Water is fundamentally flawed. But also, you know,
let's be clear, our local councils over the last thirty
forty years have told Wellingtonians and include the suburbs you know,
include out my way, have told us all that we
(14:33):
can have low rates and that there's no future cost
to that. Well, there is a future cost to that
is we haven't invested in our water infrastructure and now
we're seeing what that's actually doing.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Is it as bad as you thought it was when
you were in parliament? Did you know that? You know
when governments you know, did you know it was bad?
Speaker 2 (14:48):
I think there's two things. One is the rundown nature
of our water infrastructure. Yes, so the fact that the
pipes have literally falling apart below the ground, that we
haven't got enough water storage so that our water treatments
not where it needs to be. Knew all of that.
The bit that I think has come out in the
last few weeks which I'm really alarmed by, is that
the money that we're putting in now to fix those
things up isn't actually doing the job that we that
(15:12):
we could should expect of. It's the idea that Fulton
and Hogan are making a huge amount of money for
doing less work than they would if they were doing
the same work in other areas for the same money.
I don't think that's excusable, you know, I think that's
somewhere along the way some people have lost their moral
compass here that they're taking money, you know, they're overcharging
for work that they would charge less for somewhere else.
Speaker 3 (15:34):
What are your thoughts on Nick Legg? It should he go, Look,
I like Nick. Everybody likes Nick.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
That's not the question, even if he's a trader who
left the Labor Party to join the National Party. But yeah,
I think he's a good guy. He just happens to
be the guy who's sitting in the seat. Now. I
wouldn't hold him completely accountable for the woes of Wellington Water.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
But is there a simple answer?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
There isn't a simple art. Well the simple answer is
that Wellington Water needs to be turned upside down and
needs a different structure, needs greater accountability, and yep, it's
going to need more investment.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Now, you came out yesterday wrong against the City Council,
warning the City Council because not applying for the regional
deal from the government basically free money for infrastructure project.
Is this actual further proof that the councils in this
area are dropping the ball. I mean, I know your
your mayor has come out hard. He wanted to do something,
but they couldn't, couldn't form a consensus, couldn't put anything.
Speaker 2 (16:26):
And I think the councils should have got together, they
should have put something in. I think it seems all
the wrong messages that they didn't But having said that,
the bit of information that I didn't have yesterday was
you do have now is I cannot believe that the
government are criticizing them for following the advice of the
Crown Observer that the government itself appointed. So the Crown
Observer said, don't put in an application to the to
(16:48):
this fund. The Council followed the advice of the Crown Observer,
thinking that the Crown Observer was speaking on behalf of
the government, and now the government's attacking them for following them.
We know that's right that they appointed.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Well that's right. I mean when I read and heard
that this morning, I thought that can't be true.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Well, no, apparently it is. And according to if you
listen to read what you if you believe what you
read on stuff, they've actually verified that with the Crown Observer,
that that's exactly the advice that the Observer gave. I
just think that shows the government once again, we're all
over the show. They don't really know what they're doing here.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Now. You spend a bit of time in Auckland and
I know that it's something that's an area where you
want to get popularity. Back is the malgamation the answer
for Wellington if we could tie up Upper Hut, Potidur
and Wellington. I'm that the answer I strongly feel it is.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
I mean, I think I've had this conversation with you before.
I've kind of changed my mind on that over the years.
Used to be firmly opposed to it. I do think
some consolidation in the Wellington region would be better. The
better for Wellington rate payers, you know, I think there
is a lot of duplication in there, but also just
the lack of strategic oversight for the region is actually
(17:52):
holding Wellington back. You know, if we don't sort that
out soon, we'll get left behind as a region. We
are now well, we already are, but it'll get worse
if we don't sort that out.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Do you think that we should actually put in amalgamation?
You think, yes, that's dope.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Go for it. And I think if the current councils
actually showed some leadership, got together and said how are
we going to fix this, and went to government with
a plan, I think the government, either it's a national
government or a labor government would welcome that with open arms.
The reality is Wellington's not working in the way that
it's structured now.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
So that's yeah, that's exactly how I think it should
be anyway. I know, I don't really want to talk
about this, but school lunch has been an absolute debarkle.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
I think it's now officially in omni shambles. You know,
when you're dealing with so many things going wrong, you've
got lunches exploding and giving kids, you know, burns, You've
got a lunch is not showing up now, I saw
I've read a story today where one of the schools
are feeding the lunches to their school pig because the
kids won't eat them. I mean, this is just disgraceful.
And David Semore seems to be the only person in
(18:51):
the country who didn't figure out that if you accept
the one lowest bid, that the only bid that says
that they can do it for three bucks a lunch,
when everyone else is saying no, it's more like five
six seven dollars a lunch. If you accept that only
bid and that provider goes broke, you haven't got a
lot of places to go because they've forced all of
the other providers out of the market.
Speaker 3 (19:11):
Do you think they forced that provider so low to
get the volume that they just couldn't do it.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
I think that is obvious. You know, I think anyone
looking at that and now it can now see that
that was never going to stack up in the first place.
All of the lunch providers who were already doing it
except for this one, were saying, this is nuts and
they're not going to be able to do it. Lo
and behold they couldn't do it.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Would that be any different if it wasn't one of
the coalition leaders looking after that? I mean, you know,
would that that person be fired if it wasn't you know,
the minister in charge with that? Would he be swapped
or changed over if it wasn't a coalition partner or leader?
Speaker 2 (19:47):
Oh? Absolutely? Prime Minister should have done something about it.
I mean, David Seymour is massively underperforming in this and
other areas, but he won't do anything about it because
he doesn't want to it. Is more interested in clinging
to power than actually, you know, holding his ministers accountable
for their lack of performance.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Do you think that's genuine?
Speaker 2 (20:03):
I do, But I also think he's too weak. I
actually think you know, he thinks that he can get
away with just a whole lot of word salad and
mumbo jumbo and the people won't notice the fact that
his government's making a hash of everything. I think actually
New Zealanders are noticing, right.
Speaker 3 (20:16):
I want to talk quickly about the fact that you
haven't been able to find a labor candidate to run
for the mayoralty. Now. There's been a lot of talk
about how that you've asked everybody that can stand on
two feet that represents labor to stand for you, and
no one said yes. Is it that bad?
Speaker 1 (20:33):
No?
Speaker 2 (20:33):
I think that's a bit unfair that. I mean, to
be fair, I haven't been actively engaged in this at all.
My focus is on parliamentary leadership rather than local government leadership.
But the party has in the past supported mayoral candidates.
That doesn't not actively looking for one. You don't mean
there are always labor candidates. Sometimes if good people pop
up who aren't labor but we think it would do
a good job, we'll throw away behind them and support them.
(20:53):
I think Wellington City does need a real, really good
shake up, and so if there are people who are
keen to shake Wellington up, I'm very open to talking
to them about it.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Are you currently talking to anyone because it seems to
be a lot of people are saying, well, well, I've
been approached by Labor. Jill Day's apparent name's been banding around.
She doesn't want to take part of it. There's other
names that are banding around. Do you think that you
are going to find somebody that you're going to hang
your cat on?
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Look, as I said, it's not something that's been occupying
my attention. I haven't looked at it particularly closely. But
I think if a good person came out of the
woodwork who said, look, I want to have a real
crack at turning Wellington around, I'm interested in, you know,
having that conversation because I do think Wellington needs a
real injection of fresh energy.
Speaker 3 (21:34):
Do you think that that we are smart enough to
find somebody for that?
Speaker 2 (21:39):
I hope so. I mean, Wellington's well if you look
at central Wellington's one of the most highly educated areas
in the country. Surely there's got to be someone out
there who will we want this on.
Speaker 3 (21:48):
We want to go green well. I mean if you
look at the look at the brains in the central city,
it's green well.
Speaker 2 (21:54):
That may have been the case at the last election.
I'm not sure that's the case right now.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
Okay. Always a pleasure. Christ I know you've got to go.
I could spend all hour with you, but I know
you've got to go, and through other have our commitments.
But I appreciate you coming in and spending some time
with us.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Great great to talk to you, Nick, as always, Thank you.
Speaker 3 (22:12):
Take care.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
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.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.