Parliament erupted with a haka during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill yesterday. Was the performance appropriate?
Also, former Tasman District Council chief executive Lindsay McKenzie has been named as the Crown observer appointed to Wellington City Council. Is he up to the job?
To discuss those topics and more, Nick was joined by former Wellington mayor Justin Lester and Franks Ogilvie director Brigitte Morten.
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 sat B dissecting the week sublime and ridiculous.
Friday faceoff with Quinovic Property Management, a better rental experience
for all. Call eight hundred Quinovic. Thursday starts by.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Way Friday face Off. Joining us for Friday face Off.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
This week is for Mark Willington Mayor didn't have an
observer when he was there and Dot Loves Data director
Justin Lester and Frank's Ogilby director Bridget Morton.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Good morning to both of you.
Speaker 4 (00:53):
Good morning, Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
It's no we'll talk about the observer when it comes
to to because we actually are going to discuss it
this morning.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Let's start with the Treaty Bill Bill principles.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
David Seymour's bill was read for a first time yesterday
and we'll go to Select committee before failing.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
It's going to fail.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
But there was a big blow up in Parliament yesterday
as members of the Taparty Mary left their seats and
interrupted the house with a hukka.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Bridget, what do you make of that.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Behavior in parliament and what should we do about?
Speaker 5 (01:27):
Yeah, I mean I think they did what they are
meant to do, which is in terms of they suspended
and then they suspended the MPs involved. So I think
that's the appropriate response because you have to have respect
for the institution. They are absolutely entitled to their views.
They absolutely need to make the best case for their
views on behalf of their constituents. But ultimately Parliament is
meant to be where you should be able to have
(01:47):
respectful debate, and we try and enforce them. It doesn't
always happen, but should that should have been allowed to happen.
And I think that they did overstep the mark with
what they did yesterday, and they're going to have a
great platform next week on Tuesday on the fore Court.
They didn't need to do what they did yesterday.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Do you think it changes saying I've been talking your
morning with the he coy, because I think the he
Couoy has been wonderful. There's been young kids smiling and
people smiling, and the whole presentation of it has been great.
Do you think the aggressiveness of what happened in Parliament
yesterday change is the hequi?
Speaker 4 (02:17):
I don't think so.
Speaker 5 (02:18):
I think for people who've already sort of made up
their views on the Treaty Principles Bill. Those people that
are really in favor of it are very locked in
behind David Seymour on it.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
Those that are very very opposed, those walking in the
hikoy are. You know, for the most part, you know
already got their views.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
They are supportive of any noise and any kind of
attention that's brought to it. What I think is for
most Kiwis, though, is that this is not effecting their
day to day This is a distraction.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
We know the economy and cost.
Speaker 5 (02:44):
Of living is still a big issue, and for them
they just want this kind of noise to go away
and want politicians to kind of get on with doing
the stuff that's going to make difference to their households.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Justin what do you make of the whole thing? I mean,
is this debate just a complete waste of time? I mean,
I know that you are going to think that everything
happened yesterday was kind of okay. I thought it's brilliant
great that the Maori Party stood up for what they
believe in. And be honest, it's not any different from
what the all bleck died last week at Ireland.
Speaker 4 (03:13):
Parliament.
Speaker 6 (03:15):
Respect for the democracy.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
So you're tuning up with a rugby pair of rugby shorts,
sign and rugby ju ju.
Speaker 6 (03:22):
Before back in the data. I'm sure it's happened before,
so it's no different. Look, all it meant was there
was a twenty minute delay in Parliament. Meanwhile, it's the
news has traveled internationally all over the world. It's raised
credence to the issue, the opposition that malady have to
the Treaty Treaty Principles Bill, possibly more so than the Hecoy,
which I agree with you as a wonderful march of
(03:44):
community and solidarity. But look, I just want to let's
just focus on the issue for a moment. The Treaty
Principal's Bill is a piece of racist, divisive legislation being
introduced into Parliament that deserves what it's getting. Imagine that
I turned up at the airport and you're there because
you're a nice guy, and you see me, and I'm
looking all the shevel nowt of place, and you say, oh,
(04:05):
come home to my place. I'll look after you for
a week. And then I turn up and I like it,
but I start behaving badly and see say, okay, well
you can stay, but we'll draw up this agreement so
you can stay, so you behave with a bed and
throw some equal terms and then we agree, and that
goes on for a week or so, and then I
start disrespecting it. Not only that, but then this agreement
gives us me equal standing in your house. I mean,
(04:27):
the whole thing is actually ridiculous. I mean what I'm
going to take the TV either, amn't your wife your bedroom,
cast you outside, give you some blanket matches and say
that's all.
Speaker 2 (04:34):
Okay. Look, the whole thing.
Speaker 6 (04:38):
To my mind, should not be in Parliament. They shouldn't
have allowed it to happen through the coalishon agreement. Bridget's right,
it's a complete distraction. It's soaking up so much attention
and it's degrading for Moldy.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
So why do it? Can I just ask you both?
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Or you go? Bridget?
Speaker 5 (04:52):
Yeah, I just think though that kind of that rhetoric
and that narrative, none of what you just see that
has got anything to do with ext you bod is
in the actual treaty.
Speaker 6 (05:00):
Prince, as David Simo's lines, David was lines, you are
trying to re right a constitutional document which has been
settled law for more than one hundred and eighty years.
Forty two cases just this week have come out and
said exactly that.
Speaker 5 (05:16):
Well, once again, that's not what they said. So the
Treaty principles, I agree, it's a rubbish bill. It doesn't
do what it claims that it wants to do. It's
not going to be effective. And that's actually mostly what
the cases said is that you can't actually try and
flip what's happened in the courts and it hasn't been
settled law for all that time, because the principles are
actually a new factor as a way of dealing with
(05:37):
the treaty translations by the courts, and this is what
where David Seymow were down. So I think this has
been the problem a little bit with the debate is
there's been a lot of discussion about, you know a
lot of other things that are actually other than the bill.
If we were discussing the actual bill, we could just
have a discussion about actually, once again, it is a
bill that doesn't achieve what it wants to achieve. It's
going to actually cause more time. It's it's a gift
(05:58):
to lawyers because it creates way more like court cases
and way more fights and so it doesn't achieve anything.
So I think that's where what has been lost in
this bait. Then there's a lot of noise, a lot
of rhetoric, and not enough actual debate on actually what
is in that bill, because then we could actually show
it up for the fact that actually David Seymore has
not been effective in getting what he promised to his
voters that he would get done.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Now, can I just ask you both, because I heard
this this morning on Ryan Bridges show on first Edition,
Early Edition, and he was interviewing Chris Finnlerssen, who I
have a lot of respect and time for. He asked
him his thoughts, and he said basically that if John
Key had been Prime Minister, he would have even though
(06:41):
he would have agreed to the coalition and agreed to
ever read in the coalition, once this whole underbelly thing
started going up, John Key would have walked straight up
to him and say drop it gone, And he said,
this is Chrisphinerason, not Nick Mills. Chris Finnerson said that
then David Seymour would have thrown it Taddy and said, well,
I'm going into the cross benches and John Key would
have said you go see you later and I'll stand
(07:04):
for Ebsen and I'll have a crack at you. You know,
what are your thoughts, What are your thoughts on that?
Is it a a point of view that we don't
have the right leadership or don't have a powerful enough
leader to control the coalition.
Speaker 6 (07:15):
Look, I completely agree with Chris Finlayson and also other
comments that he made. There have been National Party ministers
in the past have done a lot for Maldi and
they took a non part as an approach to one
that wasn't political nor expedient or ideological him Dug Graham,
Jimbolja and many others including John Key, And you're right,
perhaps in the signing of the coalitionon agreement, Christopher Luxe
(07:35):
may have been naive at the time thinking that this
would just wash through. His stance on it now, to
be fair to him as much much stronger. He's called
it divisive, he's called it I'm not sure if he
used the words, but along the lines of toxic as well.
So he's walked back from it considerably since where he started.
So he has got himself into a mess and this
could bears three waters again. It's growing up into a
(07:58):
something much larger than it needed to be.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
But going back to Bridget, going back to Chris Finnderson's comments,
was that John Keith still would in front of him today, yesterday, whatever,
and done something about it.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Will luxon.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
No, I don't think you will.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
I mean, he's made his position clear that he is
allowing this to go through through the Select committe process
and then would be voted down. And you know, based
on the speech that you saw yesterday that that is
you know, there is no chance that this bell is
getting up.
Speaker 4 (08:25):
So I think that's safety.
Speaker 5 (08:26):
But I think it's always easier in hindsight to sort
of say, you know, and also we don't know what
was on the table in terms of the coalition, about
what was bargained for and against. In hindsight, this is
definitely something that you wouldn't have agreed to if you
knew or felt that this was going to happen. So
maybe Justin's right that they were a bit naive about
the level of rhetoric that would come out of this.
I mean, PARTI Maldi has done a very very good
(08:48):
job of highlighting this issue, browling community building, corese building
a movement they had not had as much presence until
this term of government. So I think you know, that
sort of uprising has been a bit of an unforeseen.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Well, I'm going to quickly ask you, because this off
topic a little bit, is that because of the ah,
what's the word I'm looking for? Less aggressive Labor Party.
I mean, you know, we don't have an opposition, do
we really? I mean, to the party, tame is the
word tame Labor Party? Is that?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
What?
Speaker 5 (09:17):
I think that's necessarily fear to the Labor Party because
it's always really hard the first year in opposition to
be you know, to get actually media attention for what
you're doing. So I don't think that's correct, but I
do think they had to walk back from a lot
of things that they had promised to Maori going into
the lection in last year. They've sort of gone, you know,
too far in a number of spaces for where the
community was at, and that gave a space to Party
(09:38):
Maori to win those Maori seats to get much of
a voice. So they've got a much stronger presence in
Parliament now than they had previously.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Now I know that you're not going to say anything
negative towards Labor justin but do you think that I
possibly could be right that we have a tame labor
opposition at the moment.
Speaker 6 (09:54):
Like I've always I've said plenty negative things that labor
in the past when they've made the wrong decisions. But
I think they've actually playing a smart strategic game. Remember,
of course, oppositions don't win government governments lose elections. They're
biding your time.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
And do you think they're just sitting back waiting for
this to self self implode and then they'll sneak back in.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
Not necessarily sneak back in. Look, you don't expect that
the government will lose after one term, particularly when the
economy is improving, interest rates coming down and the like.
So it'll be hard asked for them. But people don't
remember what happened today, they'll remember what happened in an
election year. So I think it's smart of Curssipicans and
their leadership. And look, they don't need to do too
much at the moment to party Mold is making an
(10:33):
issue off himself. You've got thousands of people marching all
around the country, And just back to the point around
politicians and coalition agreements and the benefit of findsight. That's
why politicians need to have a moral compass. That's why
they need to have something that they stand for, and
they need to be able to stand up for those
values as well, because if they don't, then it comes
(10:54):
back by the many Arts.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
News talk said be Friday face off of getting a
very hard time because apparently my watch has got an
alarm going off and it tells me is probably I've
got half an hour to go on the show. So
my producer has been giving me a bit of a
hard time. In the break we are what.
Speaker 6 (11:08):
Was it exactly, boomer tech supporter, where the words.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Is, oh, stop it, stop picking on me. It's actually
not legal to do that anymore. You don't, okay, boomer ages.
What's the colled ages of Bridget? You're a lawyer? Can
I come to see you? I'm getting you.
Speaker 4 (11:23):
I think it's the legal ground that you can actually
aren't you on?
Speaker 2 (11:26):
So cognitive declined is not legal ground? That's right.
Speaker 6 (11:30):
I'll keep you living at home.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Thanks.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
Oh gosh, I'll be the first one shipped out the
door into a don't worry about that. I'd be well gone.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
Right.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
Let's talk about Obviously, we have Bridget Morton and Justin
Lester on the show here. We got a little bit
sideswiped by my damn phone on in my watch. Former
Tasman District Council Chief Executive has been appointed the Crown
Observer at the w Wellington City Council. Come on, justin
you start us on this one. What do you make
of his appointment? He couldn't even get there on time
(11:58):
for the first meeting. He's getting a thousand dollars a day,
which I think is chump changed. Not that expensive really
is it. But it's only going to be there a
couple of days a week.
Speaker 6 (12:05):
Is that enough well for the meetings and that's the
most important thing. Otherwise he's probably wasting his time. I
think it's a good thing. There have been some issues,
particularly un behavior. I think it's a bit of a
storm and a key tea cup to be honest though.
What I think he'll find the Crown Observer is that
it makes a world of difference when you have reporters
sitting at every single meeting, reporting on every meeting, which
(12:28):
you don't have at most councils up and down the country.
And that's probably the biggest difference between Wellington and most
councils in New Zealand and it'll be an insight for him.
Hopefully it improves the behavior. You know, there are ants
and termites always around any decision making table, and hopefully
some of those term mightes improve.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
Bridget Are you even slightly concerned that he's what I've
called not not anyone else, but I'll call him a
small town boy. He's just most of his experiences in
Gisbone and Nelson And you know this is a billion
dollar operation Wellington City Council.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
Yeah, I mean I know that.
Speaker 5 (13:00):
You're just concerned about discrimination and base of ageism, the
discrimination in the base of the regions.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
There's someone from Tottenger.
Speaker 5 (13:06):
I think we had great value to the world even
though we come from smaller towns. I don't think it
is because it ultimately is about the mechanics of how
a council operates. Yeah, the figures might be bigger than
what he's dealt with before, but ultimately it's what is
the investment, how you pay for it, what's the debt levels?
All of those things, and that's what his job actually
is is to focus on those numbers and the data
(13:26):
and the information. And yeah, I'm fully supportive of the
Crown oserver being in the air. First of all, we
just need to get a little bit of trust back
in the Wellington City Council and this does help a
little bit with that. We need people to actually believe
that the council can actually do positive things. And second
of all, I think you know the mayor was on
I think your show like last week or earlier this
week sort of talking about a little bit that it's
(13:46):
having a bit of a chilling effect in terms of
the pavior. So people have gone, oh, we've got a
crown and server. We actually need to like set up
a little bit straighter and actually minor piece and cues.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
A bit more because we know what the next movers.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Yeah, absolutely, because he had got the escalation.
Speaker 5 (13:59):
And also it's not that far away until the next election,
and they know many of them want to be re elected.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
And they wouldn't want to go to a commissioner before
that election because none of them would get back and
really struggle to get back and.
Speaker 6 (14:11):
With it all lose their jobs and look at some
of the behavior too. Right, you've got a mayor who
is elected with the Songking majority. To be fair to
the mayor, and you've also got a number of councilors
who've run for the mayor TI two. It always used
to intrigue me. As a comment by Steve Mahari actually
said a lot of politicians, particularly those that have run
and not been elected, go to the mirror every morning.
(14:33):
They think these famous woods, why not me?
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Why not me?
Speaker 6 (14:37):
Why can't I be mayor? And there's a good reason
why they weren't elected mere because I think they're the
best ideas, didn't campaign well or they were shown to
be ineffective and what they put forward. So that's some
of the politics is playing out around the table. Look,
they've got some mesurees. They'll need to sort them out.
But if this helps then great, do you think good?
Speaker 5 (14:57):
Well, so you've got at the moment though, is that
leading into the election next year? As most people and
Wellington they're looking at the mirror and be like, why
would you being accounts? And most people are like why
would you be accounts?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
That's the problem, isn't it Britain.
Speaker 6 (15:10):
I hopefully we're both in that game because the same things,
Oh why on earth would you bother?
Speaker 3 (15:15):
And that's and I go to obviously a lot of
business meetings and people say the same thing you know
you've got a profile, you're on radio.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Whyn't you run from me? What you think? I'm stupid?
Speaker 6 (15:24):
Stupid than that. It's it's a real privilege to serve.
Wellington is a great city, so they've got it up there.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
And you're a politician. Of course you're a politician. You'd
love it. Why do you stand again? You're young, you're bright,
you're smart.
Speaker 6 (15:37):
I'm enjoying my life with having my kids and I
work in the private sector and it's easy in comparison,
much easier.
Speaker 3 (15:43):
Well, you just gave us the rent about being public
service and they have.
Speaker 6 (15:47):
To, Well someone has to. We want good people there,
so someone should do you reckon, she'll stand again.
Speaker 5 (15:54):
It's hard to know. I mean, she did, as you say,
have that really good majority. I think she could probably
still get a good number of votes, but the pressure
going into the exediction would be quite significant. Also, who
else is going to put their hand up always makes
a difference as well, And we'll see how that.
Speaker 4 (16:11):
I mean, she was.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Sitting this week, this week that she was on the show,
even I think it was this week she was sitting
exactly on Tuesday, where you're sitting justin and I have
a good relationship with her. You know, we go at
each other, but we have a reasonable relationship. When I
asked that question, I automatically saw emotion in her eyes
and she said, yes, I am going to stand very slowly.
(16:35):
But you know you can see in people's eyes when
things was it was definitely a trigger point. So you know,
I think right now, on paper, she'd still.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Get back in.
Speaker 5 (16:47):
Yeah, I think there's that possibly too, is a saying,
but massive toll on her personally.
Speaker 6 (16:51):
I think to do mess.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
It's going to be a lot of personal attacks going
into that election, and.
Speaker 6 (16:55):
I think it's been hard. It hasn't been easy on
a personal level. So you've put away all those things up.
Speaker 3 (17:01):
And I don't know whether it was you or someone
of equal intelligence, And being in that position before said
it's a very hard job, made even harder if you've
not been on council first.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
I like it takes six years head around how the
mechanics of council works, and we're seeing that in order
to be effective. We've seen it with Wayne Brown. He
takes it a very different approach. He just criticizes everything
the council does, but it seems to be effective.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
The government has apologized to victims of abuse suffered while
in state care, but redress has yet to be sorted.
Just a lester without compensation, is the apology hollow?
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Yeah? I think so. Look, these people suffer significant mental distress,
abuse psychologically and physical as mentioning the bridge and to
you before the show started my firm, but I worked
for dot love Stata. We had to read through and
quantify the analysis of three and a half thousand survivor reports.
(17:59):
It's horrific and very tragic the number of people that
then subsequently went on to be incarcerated, They went on
to become members of gangs. It pretty much destroyed your
entire lives and something they've never got away from. If
that happened to a member of the public, y, of
course we'd compensate them and they should be So I
(18:20):
hope that gets to orded pretty quickly.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Why didn't they do it, like at least come give
some sort of idea before the apology.
Speaker 5 (18:26):
Yeah, I think this is a bit of a misstep
in terms of how long it is until the compensation
scheme will be set up. You know they've given commitments
to it happening, but we know that you know, about
fifty percent of the current survivor.
Speaker 4 (18:38):
Group is sort of over fifty.
Speaker 5 (18:40):
Lots of them are significantly older, you know, for them
to actually be adequately compensated and actually be able to
sort of not get enjoyment, to get some use out
of that compensation that actually they you know, that needs
to happen sooner rather than later. I understand them not
necessarily announcing that on the day of the apology, because
I think the mechanics would have been quite distracting from
what was actually a really powerful moment. But ultimately they
(19:01):
need to work a bit faster on this understand the
complex system. But that shouldn't take until the mid twenty.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Twenty five, no, I mean, the thing that kind of
almost embarrassed me was that they needed to put it
in the next year's budget justin I mean, come on.
Speaker 6 (19:16):
Look, the biggest risk from the commission, I think was
always that this would be brushed under the carpets, that
people deflect and move away from it. The good thing
is politicians have acknowledged what went on, they have accepted it,
and the churches have as well. So compensation has to
be addressed, should be done quickly, and I hope that's appropriate.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
What's it going to look like, bridget How do you
think they're going to work it out?
Speaker 4 (19:41):
Well, it is going to be really tricky.
Speaker 5 (19:43):
I mean they've got some overseas jurisdictions like Australia and
Canada they've had similar type schemes that they've put in place,
so there is some ways to work around that. You've
got some issues though, in terms of survivor families or
people that grew up in family and affected families, so
children or descendants of They've also got a complexity and
a political problem that we can't ignore them. Is just
and pointed out lots of those people because of the experiences,
(20:05):
went on to like you know, have significant mental health
problems or being gangs, or be vulnerable, and so giving
chunks of cash to people like that without some safeguards and.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
Places also really triggy.
Speaker 5 (20:16):
You want to be respectful, you don't want to be
patronizing of them, but ultimately you need to make sure
that actually it's not going to make the problem worse
rather than actually compensate them.
Speaker 2 (20:25):
I want to ask.
Speaker 3 (20:26):
You both what you thought when you read the story
about Peter Jackson and friend. While she reportedly own eighty
one properties, and Warrington demolished a home in Karaka Bay
to make way for a garden. Some people have had
issues with it. Some say that the home should have
been moved rather than pulled down, justin do you have
any thoughts on that or.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Issues with it? I mean, or is it none of
our business?
Speaker 6 (20:46):
Yeah, look at leave them alone. It's just the biggest
issue we've got going on at the moment.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
Well, it's I mean the issue that I think people have.
And we have a housing issue, don't we. So it's
one less house. Yeah, look, and the house could have
been taken somewhere else and absolutely my wife works. It's well,
there a community housing provider. They social housing all around
the city. So if someone sent to them, we'll give
you a free home that you can move onto plot
of land, they probably would have taken it.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Great.
Speaker 6 (21:14):
But at the same time, look, that's their decision. So
just leave them alone. Let people get on with your life.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
So yeah, identally agree.
Speaker 5 (21:20):
I also suspect that there's a bit of a crossover
from people that wanted to keep this very nice looking
house and people that were against the medium density because
imagine if that actually knocked it down and put ten
townhouses on that properly, I don't think those people would
be in the same boat. So I think they don't
think it is a question about housing. I think it's
probably a lot to do with actually, you know, this
house was lovely, and therefore, you know, somebody should have
(21:42):
lived in this lovely house rather than the being knocked down.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Can I say that?
Speaker 3 (21:46):
And I'd like to say it at this particular time
that I was one of those people a year and
a half, two years ago that lived next door to
a beautiful old home across the road from a beautiful home,
and a big section that got bold and fourteen townhouses
got built, and I've had a heart attack, you know,
like I really kind of concerned me. Two years on,
there's fourteen people living across the road from my house,
(22:07):
and I don't even know that it's even there. So
I think we've got to be careful about whether we overreacted.
I was one of those not in my backyards.
Speaker 5 (22:14):
I remember having this debate with you on the show
about it those townhouses being built, and so yeah, absolutely,
And I think that is the thing, is that people's
fear of what somedly influx of people was going to
have is something going to.
Speaker 4 (22:28):
Be an issue?
Speaker 5 (22:29):
And ultimately, Peter Jackson has made this money, he's done
this investment, he's been very successful. Therefore, you know, he
can do what he wants with his money.
Speaker 3 (22:37):
One hundred percent. And that's exactly my stance on it.
But I think that maybe the house could have been
given to something that could have done something with it.
Speaker 6 (22:44):
But anyway, just not on your housing to because I
remember having the same debate with you as well. And
I know some people that live in those townhouses and
they've got a young family. There's a couple of them.
One's a migrant from France for me. Yeah, and they
love it. They love it, and you know, change is
always taking place, right But the funny thing is that
you can leave the ladder down, you can lift it
up because you've got your house and your lovely little spot.
(23:06):
And then let's have the next generation of people getting
their home turn It might look different, it might be
smaller because that's affordable. But let's give everyone the opportunity
to do the same.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
Yeah, absolutely, are we big? Are we big?
Speaker 6 (23:18):
PC?
Speaker 2 (23:19):
At nice? Today? Let's get a bit angry, let's get
a bit ugly.
Speaker 6 (23:23):
Or brought up a protest sign across the road saying
go away.
Speaker 3 (23:25):
Yeah, no, we didn't we we didn't say go away.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
Did ruin the view of my next door neighbors a
little bit, but that's all right.
Speaker 6 (23:32):
He ruined someone else's view when he built his hair.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
Yeah, okay, all right, come on, why you're always a politician?
Speaker 2 (23:37):
I thought you'd giving that up.
Speaker 3 (23:38):
She had, Let's go. She had, probably Wellington's. Would they
be Wellington's best known ben? I reckon they probably would
be even in my generation? Would they be in your
guys generation? Or you're from Tarama, so you've.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Thought on the telegram?
Speaker 2 (23:53):
Yeah, okay, would they be?
Speaker 6 (23:55):
I think that would have to be certainly welcome High's
and most famous product or the ken CAPESI came from these?
Probably arguably not High he did? Yeah, he played Underwater
Arch James Shure, the hilarious any Yeah, she had, I
think Wellington's best musical export.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah. Is it sad that they're breaking up with them
together for forty years or something, isn't it?
Speaker 6 (24:15):
Well? Yeah, they haven't been playing as much and they're
getting of it on to be honest, but I think
you're amazing, Like I was on your show. Once we
were asked to talk about our most favorite new meg
and I said, yeah, two thousand, the Big Day Out
and the lineup was the Food Fighters, the REDT Chili Peppers,
nine Inch Nails, a Chemical Brothers, some big name international
(24:37):
acts and who blew them all out of the park
just in terms of the level of performance and getting
the crowd going. She had absolutely right, fifty five thousand people.
I will never forget.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
It, so you are.
Speaker 5 (24:48):
It was also the bigd Out and I remember that too,
just being amazing. Yeah, she had was also my first
ever concert. I think it's like thirteen or fourteen, and
to the mountains like Harburside event Center, like I actually
little shocked my parents let me go now when I
released her little like thirteen.
Speaker 4 (25:03):
But yeah, we were there super early.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
Holding onto that wooden barrier the front, like while the
moshpit just went nuts behind us.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Amazing.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
No, I wouldn't have taken you for a rocker.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
I wouldn't think, I am, well, that's at thirteen, you're
obviously a rocker.
Speaker 4 (25:17):
All of friends.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
No, I wouldn't have taken you for a rocker. We're justin.
Speaker 3 (25:21):
I probably would take them for as she had fan.
One of the things that's been griping will grinding my
gears a little bit is and this is not coming
from me. This is coming from real Wellingtonians who have
put a lot into the city. They always say to
me all the time when we have a coffee or
have a chat about the fact that not enough people
live in the city. Justin we are set up for
(25:44):
something like two hundred thousand people in the city, aren't
we or something really huge number of what you probably
know the numbers better than me. But they all go
home at nights and come in the mornings. Why do
we not have more people living in the city. Is
it just we're not one of those cities or could
we change it?
Speaker 6 (25:59):
Yeah, just to correct a myth there. For a start,
the city is our biggest suburb. So we always talked
about Codori, you know, wonderful could Audity, which is where
I live these days, being one of the largest suburbs
in New Zealand, if not Southern heminosphere is to talk
about us. Australasia, however, the seabed is much bigger than
could order now and it's growing daily. There have been
(26:22):
some issues recently just around development, particularly the insurance costs
and the cost to build multi unit dwellings and the
risks associated with that around earthquake strengthening. So that's the
only thing really holding it back. But completely agree, the
more we can do the better, so long as people
don't keep opposing projects. Go into the city and we
get on with it. But it'll make one of the
businesses busier. It all have a denser, more vibrant feel
(26:47):
to town. And it's good for security too because more
people around means that hopefully will be come safer too.
Speaker 3 (26:53):
And then things like everyone's worried about how many cars
we have. What you mean, if save me and my
wife lived in town, we wouldn't need two cars. We'd
have one car because one of us would be doing
something that you know, they could take the car out,
the other in town doing something in town. You wouldn't
need the whole use of cars, would.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
You, Yeah, But I mean I wanted to live in
the city, and I looked at many many apartments when
I was looking to buy in the city, and it's
what justin SA is the insurance and where that was
going and how much could possibly invest in terms of
getting the money you know, to like do capital works
and things. It was just completely beyond the risk I
was willing to take. So that's how I ended up buying.
Speaker 4 (27:25):
In the heart.
Speaker 3 (27:26):
But do you think it's a good thing? Do you
both think it's a good thing if we could get
more people living.
Speaker 5 (27:30):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think there's the vibrancy that you'd
want to see and lots of people I think would
much rather live in the city. I mean, do you
honest those safety at the moment is a big question.
You know, you can't feel it's safe walking home from
a restaurant at ten o'clock at night as you previously did,
and that makes a difference for the liveability of the city.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
And I think that's kind of a little bit of
a beat up too. I think you know, I'm still
Friday and Saturday nights are working on the streets, so
I know what the streets feel like.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
Yeah, there's a lot of.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
Homeless people on the streets, and there's a little bit
of here and there. But for the sheer numbers of
percentage is pretty light for trouble, isn't it.
Speaker 6 (28:02):
Oh Look, I've never had any issues personally, I'm but
I'm not a young woman who who would feel compromise
with their safety if they're being surrounded by young men
who have had a bit too much as drink and
might have been shouting and seeing things. I'm not sure,
so Bridget's a rebably better judge to that. Look, I
generally feel really safe in New Zealand. I've got young kids,
I've got girls growing up, so I hope they have
good experience as they get older. Very shocked obviously said.
(28:25):
And if they don't, But for any father or mother
that has young kids, and there was one recently when
a young South African mayle was killed. It's here and
went when it was a refectory.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
Can I just quickly ask you, because I've got to
go to hots and Notts and take a break. The
new government's released the decision document floating the idea of
charging kiwi's twenty dollars and tourists thirty dollars to visit
conservation areas like Cathedral Gove and tom Arero Crossing. Just
you reckon, it's okay to pay to go to that
of your kiwi and or an overseas tourist.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Pay more if you're an overseas.
Speaker 6 (28:56):
Tours Oh yeah, Look, I think Kiwi's would be happy to.
In a perfect world for me as a decision maker,
I'd be charging the overseas tourists fifty and I charge
Kiwi's nothing because I already pay the ten. Having said that,
I mean, it's such a wonderful asset that we're very
fortunate to have. People shouldn't mind.
Speaker 5 (29:14):
Yeah, I'm totally on board with paying. I'm a big tramper.
I do a lot of tramping in the natural parks
that are amazing.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
So you're happy paying every time you win?
Speaker 5 (29:22):
Yeah, absolutely, because I think for the most part you're
doing it as an exception. You know, Dad and I
are doing the Tonguera crossing in early January. We would
totally pay you to have the experience. It's not like
you're trying to do the Tonguera crossing every weekend. I
think we want to keep, like some of our regional parks,
the stuff that's really accessible to the cities free and accessible,
because I think that encourages people to get out. But
those kind of special occasion event type places that we
(29:45):
have that we need to control some of the visitor numbers.
Speaker 4 (29:47):
Absolutely, I think that's totally fine.
Speaker 6 (29:49):
Right, and that on the time of crossing. Actually the
last TIONE did it. What really shocked me were the queues.
I happily have everyone paying, but more for I don't
have to queue. There were hundreds of us, and particularly
then at the first sort of stop, the queues for
the toilets were ridiculous. If that meant that there was
a bit somewhat better public toilet provision and I made
(30:10):
a few fewer people went great because it shocked me that.
Speaker 1 (30:16):
The Friday Facie Hot Okay, hots and knots, Bridget Morton,
give us your hots and knots please.
Speaker 5 (30:23):
My hot is definitely the sort of green shoots of
sort of business coming back in Wellington. Just walking along
Lampton Key and Willis Street in the way here much
more like least signs and a few new places open
and new shop frunts and people investing.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
It's great to see.
Speaker 5 (30:36):
Might not this week as the flooding that happened at
Pa Tony this morning. That meant that I spent like
forty five minutes driving in this morning, so which means
I probably should have bought the apartment in time. I
told you then I wouldn't have been sucking that traffic.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
I told you.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
I just gave you some advice. Give it up, give
it up and get an apartment justin you're hot and.
Speaker 6 (30:52):
Hot similar green Shoots. You know, I've been a lot
about recently Bordeaux closing and Pandora closing. That's very sad.
Having said that, this week, disest today. In fact, Shelley
Day Bakery opened up in Corory and it was people
killing out the door and I went and got croissant.
It's lovely. Likewise, dough Bay Crees opening all around town.
It's a Mia and Tim Trace doing really well there
(31:14):
and it's great to see all these new businesses sproutings.
That's great. Well it's not I'm going to go with
the treaty principles Bill. I think we're going to see
a week of action and protests. So it's a real
distraction from what should be more important issues that people
could focus on.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Yeah, I agree, I agree. Thank you both. Have a
great and wonderful weekend. I wish I could promise you
sunny skies and great weather, but apparently it's going to
be not that great until Sunday. But Sunday might be
your brunch out on Sunday, guys. But thanks for taking
your time. I know you're both very busy. People appreciate
your having on the show.
Speaker 1 (31:45):
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 sat B dissecting the week sublime and ridiculous.
Friday faceoff with Quinovic Property Management, a better rental experience
for all. Call eight hundred Quinovic. Thursday starts by.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Way Friday face Off. Joining us for Friday face Off.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
This week is for Mark Willington Mayor didn't have an
observer when he was there and Dot Loves Data director
Justin Lester and Frank's Ogilby director Bridget Morton.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Good morning to both of you.
Speaker 4 (00:53):
Good morning, Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
It's no we'll talk about the observer when it comes
to to because we actually are going to discuss it
this morning.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Let's start with the Treaty Bill Bill principles.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
David Seymour's bill was read for a first time yesterday
and we'll go to Select committee before failing.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
It's going to fail.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
But there was a big blow up in Parliament yesterday
as members of the Taparty Mary left their seats and
interrupted the house with a hukka.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Bridget, what do you make of that.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Behavior in parliament and what should we do about?
Speaker 5 (01:27):
Yeah, I mean I think they did what they are
meant to do, which is in terms of they suspended
and then they suspended the MPs involved. So I think
that's the appropriate response because you have to have respect
for the institution. They are absolutely entitled to their views.
They absolutely need to make the best case for their
views on behalf of their constituents. But ultimately Parliament is
meant to be where you should be able to have
(01:47):
respectful debate, and we try and enforce them. It doesn't
always happen, but should that should have been allowed to happen.
And I think that they did overstep the mark with
what they did yesterday, and they're going to have a
great platform next week on Tuesday on the fore Court.
They didn't need to do what they did yesterday.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
Do you think it changes saying I've been talking your
morning with the he coy, because I think the he
Couoy has been wonderful. There's been young kids smiling and
people smiling, and the whole presentation of it has been great.
Do you think the aggressiveness of what happened in Parliament
yesterday change is the hequi?
Speaker 4 (02:17):
I don't think so.
Speaker 5 (02:18):
I think for people who've already sort of made up
their views on the Treaty Principles Bill. Those people that
are really in favor of it are very locked in
behind David Seymour on it.
Speaker 4 (02:26):
Those that are very very opposed, those walking in the
hikoy are. You know, for the most part, you know
already got their views.
Speaker 5 (02:33):
They are supportive of any noise and any kind of
attention that's brought to it. What I think is for
most Kiwis, though, is that this is not effecting their
day to day This is a distraction.
Speaker 4 (02:42):
We know the economy and cost.
Speaker 5 (02:44):
Of living is still a big issue, and for them
they just want this kind of noise to go away
and want politicians to kind of get on with doing
the stuff that's going to make difference to their households.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Justin what do you make of the whole thing? I mean,
is this debate just a complete waste of time? I mean,
I know that you are going to think that everything
happened yesterday was kind of okay. I thought it's brilliant
great that the Maori Party stood up for what they
believe in. And be honest, it's not any different from
what the all bleck died last week at Ireland.
Speaker 4 (03:13):
Parliament.
Speaker 6 (03:15):
Respect for the democracy.
Speaker 3 (03:17):
So you're tuning up with a rugby pair of rugby shorts,
sign and rugby ju ju.
Speaker 6 (03:22):
Before back in the data. I'm sure it's happened before,
so it's no different. Look, all it meant was there
was a twenty minute delay in Parliament. Meanwhile, it's the
news has traveled internationally all over the world. It's raised
credence to the issue, the opposition that malady have to
the Treaty Treaty Principles Bill, possibly more so than the Hecoy,
which I agree with you as a wonderful march of
(03:44):
community and solidarity. But look, I just want to let's
just focus on the issue for a moment. The Treaty
Principal's Bill is a piece of racist, divisive legislation being
introduced into Parliament that deserves what it's getting. Imagine that
I turned up at the airport and you're there because
you're a nice guy, and you see me, and I'm
looking all the shevel nowt of place, and you say, oh,
(04:05):
come home to my place. I'll look after you for
a week. And then I turn up and I like it,
but I start behaving badly and see say, okay, well
you can stay, but we'll draw up this agreement so
you can stay, so you behave with a bed and
throw some equal terms and then we agree, and that
goes on for a week or so, and then I
start disrespecting it. Not only that, but then this agreement
gives us me equal standing in your house. I mean,
(04:27):
the whole thing is actually ridiculous. I mean what I'm
going to take the TV either, amn't your wife your bedroom,
cast you outside, give you some blanket matches and say
that's all.
Speaker 2 (04:34):
Okay. Look, the whole thing.
Speaker 6 (04:38):
To my mind, should not be in Parliament. They shouldn't
have allowed it to happen through the coalishon agreement. Bridget's right,
it's a complete distraction. It's soaking up so much attention
and it's degrading for Moldy.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
So why do it? Can I just ask you both?
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Or you go? Bridget?
Speaker 5 (04:52):
Yeah, I just think though that kind of that rhetoric
and that narrative, none of what you just see that
has got anything to do with ext you bod is
in the actual treaty.
Speaker 6 (05:00):
Prince, as David Simo's lines, David was lines, you are
trying to re right a constitutional document which has been
settled law for more than one hundred and eighty years.
Forty two cases just this week have come out and
said exactly that.
Speaker 5 (05:16):
Well, once again, that's not what they said. So the
Treaty principles, I agree, it's a rubbish bill. It doesn't
do what it claims that it wants to do. It's
not going to be effective. And that's actually mostly what
the cases said is that you can't actually try and
flip what's happened in the courts and it hasn't been
settled law for all that time, because the principles are
actually a new factor as a way of dealing with
(05:37):
the treaty translations by the courts, and this is what
where David Seymow were down. So I think this has
been the problem a little bit with the debate is
there's been a lot of discussion about, you know a
lot of other things that are actually other than the bill.
If we were discussing the actual bill, we could just
have a discussion about actually, once again, it is a
bill that doesn't achieve what it wants to achieve. It's
going to actually cause more time. It's it's a gift
(05:58):
to lawyers because it creates way more like court cases
and way more fights and so it doesn't achieve anything.
So I think that's where what has been lost in
this bait. Then there's a lot of noise, a lot
of rhetoric, and not enough actual debate on actually what
is in that bill, because then we could actually show
it up for the fact that actually David Seymore has
not been effective in getting what he promised to his
voters that he would get done.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Now, can I just ask you both, because I heard
this this morning on Ryan Bridges show on first Edition,
Early Edition, and he was interviewing Chris Finnlerssen, who I
have a lot of respect and time for. He asked
him his thoughts, and he said basically that if John
Key had been Prime Minister, he would have even though
(06:41):
he would have agreed to the coalition and agreed to
ever read in the coalition, once this whole underbelly thing
started going up, John Key would have walked straight up
to him and say drop it gone, And he said,
this is Chrisphinerason, not Nick Mills. Chris Finnerson said that
then David Seymour would have thrown it Taddy and said, well,
I'm going into the cross benches and John Key would
have said you go see you later and I'll stand
(07:04):
for Ebsen and I'll have a crack at you. You know,
what are your thoughts, What are your thoughts on that?
Is it a a point of view that we don't
have the right leadership or don't have a powerful enough
leader to control the coalition.
Speaker 6 (07:15):
Look, I completely agree with Chris Finlayson and also other
comments that he made. There have been National Party ministers
in the past have done a lot for Maldi and
they took a non part as an approach to one
that wasn't political nor expedient or ideological him Dug Graham,
Jimbolja and many others including John Key, And you're right,
perhaps in the signing of the coalitionon agreement, Christopher Luxe
(07:35):
may have been naive at the time thinking that this
would just wash through. His stance on it now, to
be fair to him as much much stronger. He's called
it divisive, he's called it I'm not sure if he
used the words, but along the lines of toxic as well.
So he's walked back from it considerably since where he started.
So he has got himself into a mess and this
could bears three waters again. It's growing up into a
(07:58):
something much larger than it needed to be.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
But going back to Bridget, going back to Chris Finnderson's comments,
was that John Keith still would in front of him today, yesterday, whatever,
and done something about it.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Will luxon.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
No, I don't think you will.
Speaker 5 (08:12):
I mean, he's made his position clear that he is
allowing this to go through through the Select committe process
and then would be voted down. And you know, based
on the speech that you saw yesterday that that is
you know, there is no chance that this bell is
getting up.
Speaker 4 (08:25):
So I think that's safety.
Speaker 5 (08:26):
But I think it's always easier in hindsight to sort
of say, you know, and also we don't know what
was on the table in terms of the coalition, about
what was bargained for and against. In hindsight, this is
definitely something that you wouldn't have agreed to if you
knew or felt that this was going to happen. So
maybe Justin's right that they were a bit naive about
the level of rhetoric that would come out of this.
I mean, PARTI Maldi has done a very very good
(08:48):
job of highlighting this issue, browling community building, corese building
a movement they had not had as much presence until
this term of government. So I think you know, that
sort of uprising has been a bit of an unforeseen.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Well, I'm going to quickly ask you, because this off
topic a little bit, is that because of the ah,
what's the word I'm looking for? Less aggressive Labor Party.
I mean, you know, we don't have an opposition, do
we really? I mean, to the party, tame is the
word tame Labor Party? Is that?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
What?
Speaker 5 (09:17):
I think that's necessarily fear to the Labor Party because
it's always really hard the first year in opposition to
be you know, to get actually media attention for what
you're doing. So I don't think that's correct, but I
do think they had to walk back from a lot
of things that they had promised to Maori going into
the lection in last year. They've sort of gone, you know,
too far in a number of spaces for where the
community was at, and that gave a space to Party
(09:38):
Maori to win those Maori seats to get much of
a voice. So they've got a much stronger presence in
Parliament now than they had previously.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Now I know that you're not going to say anything
negative towards Labor justin but do you think that I
possibly could be right that we have a tame labor
opposition at the moment.
Speaker 6 (09:54):
Like I've always I've said plenty negative things that labor
in the past when they've made the wrong decisions. But
I think they've actually playing a smart strategic game. Remember,
of course, oppositions don't win government governments lose elections. They're
biding your time.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
And do you think they're just sitting back waiting for
this to self self implode and then they'll sneak back in.
Speaker 6 (10:13):
Not necessarily sneak back in. Look, you don't expect that
the government will lose after one term, particularly when the
economy is improving, interest rates coming down and the like.
So it'll be hard asked for them. But people don't
remember what happened today, they'll remember what happened in an
election year. So I think it's smart of Curssipicans and
their leadership. And look, they don't need to do too
much at the moment to party Mold is making an
(10:33):
issue off himself. You've got thousands of people marching all
around the country, And just back to the point around
politicians and coalition agreements and the benefit of findsight. That's
why politicians need to have a moral compass. That's why
they need to have something that they stand for, and
they need to be able to stand up for those
values as well, because if they don't, then it comes
(10:54):
back by the many Arts.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
News talk said be Friday face off of getting a
very hard time because apparently my watch has got an
alarm going off and it tells me is probably I've
got half an hour to go on the show. So
my producer has been giving me a bit of a
hard time. In the break we are what.
Speaker 6 (11:08):
Was it exactly, boomer tech supporter, where the words.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Is, oh, stop it, stop picking on me. It's actually
not legal to do that anymore. You don't, okay, boomer ages.
What's the colled ages of Bridget? You're a lawyer? Can
I come to see you? I'm getting you.
Speaker 4 (11:23):
I think it's the legal ground that you can actually
aren't you on?
Speaker 2 (11:26):
So cognitive declined is not legal ground? That's right.
Speaker 6 (11:30):
I'll keep you living at home.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Thanks.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
Oh gosh, I'll be the first one shipped out the
door into a don't worry about that. I'd be well gone.
Speaker 6 (11:38):
Right.
Speaker 3 (11:38):
Let's talk about Obviously, we have Bridget Morton and Justin
Lester on the show here. We got a little bit
sideswiped by my damn phone on in my watch. Former
Tasman District Council Chief Executive has been appointed the Crown
Observer at the w Wellington City Council. Come on, justin
you start us on this one. What do you make
of his appointment? He couldn't even get there on time
(11:58):
for the first meeting. He's getting a thousand dollars a day,
which I think is chump changed. Not that expensive really
is it. But it's only going to be there a
couple of days a week.
Speaker 6 (12:05):
Is that enough well for the meetings and that's the
most important thing. Otherwise he's probably wasting his time. I
think it's a good thing. There have been some issues,
particularly un behavior. I think it's a bit of a
storm and a key tea cup to be honest though.
What I think he'll find the Crown Observer is that
it makes a world of difference when you have reporters
sitting at every single meeting, reporting on every meeting, which
(12:28):
you don't have at most councils up and down the country.
And that's probably the biggest difference between Wellington and most
councils in New Zealand and it'll be an insight for him.
Hopefully it improves the behavior. You know, there are ants
and termites always around any decision making table, and hopefully
some of those term mightes improve.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
Bridget Are you even slightly concerned that he's what I've
called not not anyone else, but I'll call him a
small town boy. He's just most of his experiences in
Gisbone and Nelson And you know this is a billion
dollar operation Wellington City Council.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
Yeah, I mean I know that.
Speaker 5 (13:00):
You're just concerned about discrimination and base of ageism, the
discrimination in the base of the regions.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
There's someone from Tottenger.
Speaker 5 (13:06):
I think we had great value to the world even
though we come from smaller towns. I don't think it
is because it ultimately is about the mechanics of how
a council operates. Yeah, the figures might be bigger than
what he's dealt with before, but ultimately it's what is
the investment, how you pay for it, what's the debt levels?
All of those things, and that's what his job actually
is is to focus on those numbers and the data
(13:26):
and the information. And yeah, I'm fully supportive of the
Crown oserver being in the air. First of all, we
just need to get a little bit of trust back
in the Wellington City Council and this does help a
little bit with that. We need people to actually believe
that the council can actually do positive things. And second
of all, I think you know the mayor was on
I think your show like last week or earlier this
week sort of talking about a little bit that it's
(13:46):
having a bit of a chilling effect in terms of
the pavior. So people have gone, oh, we've got a
crown and server. We actually need to like set up
a little bit straighter and actually minor piece and cues.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
A bit more because we know what the next movers.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
Yeah, absolutely, because he had got the escalation.
Speaker 5 (13:59):
And also it's not that far away until the next election,
and they know many of them want to be re elected.
Speaker 3 (14:04):
And they wouldn't want to go to a commissioner before
that election because none of them would get back and
really struggle to get back and.
Speaker 6 (14:11):
With it all lose their jobs and look at some
of the behavior too. Right, you've got a mayor who
is elected with the Songking majority. To be fair to
the mayor, and you've also got a number of councilors
who've run for the mayor TI two. It always used
to intrigue me. As a comment by Steve Mahari actually
said a lot of politicians, particularly those that have run
and not been elected, go to the mirror every morning.
(14:33):
They think these famous woods, why not me?
Speaker 2 (14:37):
Why not me?
Speaker 6 (14:37):
Why can't I be mayor? And there's a good reason
why they weren't elected mere because I think they're the
best ideas, didn't campaign well or they were shown to
be ineffective and what they put forward. So that's some
of the politics is playing out around the table. Look,
they've got some mesurees. They'll need to sort them out.
But if this helps then great, do you think good?
Speaker 5 (14:57):
Well, so you've got at the moment though, is that
leading into the election next year? As most people and
Wellington they're looking at the mirror and be like, why
would you being accounts? And most people are like why
would you be accounts?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
That's the problem, isn't it Britain.
Speaker 6 (15:10):
I hopefully we're both in that game because the same things,
Oh why on earth would you bother?
Speaker 3 (15:15):
And that's and I go to obviously a lot of
business meetings and people say the same thing you know
you've got a profile, you're on radio.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Whyn't you run from me? What you think? I'm stupid?
Speaker 6 (15:24):
Stupid than that. It's it's a real privilege to serve.
Wellington is a great city, so they've got it up there.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
And you're a politician. Of course you're a politician. You'd
love it. Why do you stand again? You're young, you're bright,
you're smart.
Speaker 6 (15:37):
I'm enjoying my life with having my kids and I
work in the private sector and it's easy in comparison,
much easier.
Speaker 3 (15:43):
Well, you just gave us the rent about being public
service and they have.
Speaker 6 (15:47):
To, Well someone has to. We want good people there,
so someone should do you reckon, she'll stand again.
Speaker 5 (15:54):
It's hard to know. I mean, she did, as you say,
have that really good majority. I think she could probably
still get a good number of votes, but the pressure
going into the exediction would be quite significant. Also, who
else is going to put their hand up always makes
a difference as well, And we'll see how that.
Speaker 4 (16:11):
I mean, she was.
Speaker 3 (16:12):
Sitting this week, this week that she was on the show,
even I think it was this week she was sitting
exactly on Tuesday, where you're sitting justin and I have
a good relationship with her. You know, we go at
each other, but we have a reasonable relationship. When I
asked that question, I automatically saw emotion in her eyes
and she said, yes, I am going to stand very slowly.
(16:35):
But you know you can see in people's eyes when
things was it was definitely a trigger point. So you know,
I think right now, on paper, she'd still.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Get back in.
Speaker 5 (16:47):
Yeah, I think there's that possibly too, is a saying,
but massive toll on her personally.
Speaker 6 (16:51):
I think to do mess.
Speaker 4 (16:52):
It's going to be a lot of personal attacks going
into that election, and.
Speaker 6 (16:55):
I think it's been hard. It hasn't been easy on
a personal level. So you've put away all those things up.
Speaker 3 (17:01):
And I don't know whether it was you or someone
of equal intelligence, And being in that position before said
it's a very hard job, made even harder if you've
not been on council first.
Speaker 6 (17:13):
I like it takes six years head around how the
mechanics of council works, and we're seeing that in order
to be effective. We've seen it with Wayne Brown. He
takes it a very different approach. He just criticizes everything
the council does, but it seems to be effective.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
The government has apologized to victims of abuse suffered while
in state care, but redress has yet to be sorted.
Just a lester without compensation, is the apology hollow?
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Yeah? I think so. Look, these people suffer significant mental distress,
abuse psychologically and physical as mentioning the bridge and to
you before the show started my firm, but I worked
for dot love Stata. We had to read through and
quantify the analysis of three and a half thousand survivor reports.
(17:59):
It's horrific and very tragic the number of people that
then subsequently went on to be incarcerated, They went on
to become members of gangs. It pretty much destroyed your
entire lives and something they've never got away from. If
that happened to a member of the public, y, of
course we'd compensate them and they should be So I
(18:20):
hope that gets to orded pretty quickly.
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Why didn't they do it, like at least come give
some sort of idea before the apology.
Speaker 5 (18:26):
Yeah, I think this is a bit of a misstep
in terms of how long it is until the compensation
scheme will be set up. You know they've given commitments
to it happening, but we know that you know, about
fifty percent of the current survivor.
Speaker 4 (18:38):
Group is sort of over fifty.
Speaker 5 (18:40):
Lots of them are significantly older, you know, for them
to actually be adequately compensated and actually be able to
sort of not get enjoyment, to get some use out
of that compensation that actually they you know, that needs
to happen sooner rather than later. I understand them not
necessarily announcing that on the day of the apology, because
I think the mechanics would have been quite distracting from
what was actually a really powerful moment. But ultimately they
(19:01):
need to work a bit faster on this understand the
complex system. But that shouldn't take until the mid twenty.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Twenty five, no, I mean, the thing that kind of
almost embarrassed me was that they needed to put it
in the next year's budget justin I mean, come on.
Speaker 6 (19:16):
Look, the biggest risk from the commission, I think was
always that this would be brushed under the carpets, that
people deflect and move away from it. The good thing
is politicians have acknowledged what went on, they have accepted it,
and the churches have as well. So compensation has to
be addressed, should be done quickly, and I hope that's appropriate.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
What's it going to look like, bridget How do you
think they're going to work it out?
Speaker 4 (19:41):
Well, it is going to be really tricky.
Speaker 5 (19:43):
I mean they've got some overseas jurisdictions like Australia and
Canada they've had similar type schemes that they've put in place,
so there is some ways to work around that. You've
got some issues though, in terms of survivor families or
people that grew up in family and affected families, so
children or descendants of They've also got a complexity and
a political problem that we can't ignore them. Is just
and pointed out lots of those people because of the experiences,
(20:05):
went on to like you know, have significant mental health
problems or being gangs, or be vulnerable, and so giving
chunks of cash to people like that without some safeguards and.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
Places also really triggy.
Speaker 5 (20:16):
You want to be respectful, you don't want to be
patronizing of them, but ultimately you need to make sure
that actually it's not going to make the problem worse
rather than actually compensate them.
Speaker 2 (20:25):
I want to ask.
Speaker 3 (20:26):
You both what you thought when you read the story
about Peter Jackson and friend. While she reportedly own eighty
one properties, and Warrington demolished a home in Karaka Bay
to make way for a garden. Some people have had
issues with it. Some say that the home should have
been moved rather than pulled down, justin do you have
any thoughts on that or.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Issues with it? I mean, or is it none of
our business?
Speaker 6 (20:46):
Yeah, look at leave them alone. It's just the biggest
issue we've got going on at the moment.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
Well, it's I mean the issue that I think people have.
And we have a housing issue, don't we. So it's
one less house. Yeah, look, and the house could have
been taken somewhere else and absolutely my wife works. It's well,
there a community housing provider. They social housing all around
the city. So if someone sent to them, we'll give
you a free home that you can move onto plot
of land, they probably would have taken it.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
Great.
Speaker 6 (21:14):
But at the same time, look, that's their decision. So
just leave them alone. Let people get on with your life.
Speaker 4 (21:19):
So yeah, identally agree.
Speaker 5 (21:20):
I also suspect that there's a bit of a crossover
from people that wanted to keep this very nice looking
house and people that were against the medium density because
imagine if that actually knocked it down and put ten
townhouses on that properly, I don't think those people would
be in the same boat. So I think they don't
think it is a question about housing. I think it's
probably a lot to do with actually, you know, this
house was lovely, and therefore, you know, somebody should have
(21:42):
lived in this lovely house rather than the being knocked down.
Speaker 2 (21:44):
Can I say that?
Speaker 3 (21:46):
And I'd like to say it at this particular time
that I was one of those people a year and
a half, two years ago that lived next door to
a beautiful old home across the road from a beautiful home,
and a big section that got bold and fourteen townhouses
got built, and I've had a heart attack, you know,
like I really kind of concerned me. Two years on,
there's fourteen people living across the road from my house,
(22:07):
and I don't even know that it's even there. So
I think we've got to be careful about whether we overreacted.
I was one of those not in my backyards.
Speaker 5 (22:14):
I remember having this debate with you on the show
about it those townhouses being built, and so yeah, absolutely,
And I think that is the thing, is that people's
fear of what somedly influx of people was going to
have is something going to.
Speaker 4 (22:28):
Be an issue?
Speaker 5 (22:29):
And ultimately, Peter Jackson has made this money, he's done
this investment, he's been very successful. Therefore, you know, he
can do what he wants with his money.
Speaker 3 (22:37):
One hundred percent. And that's exactly my stance on it.
But I think that maybe the house could have been
given to something that could have done something with it.
Speaker 6 (22:44):
But anyway, just not on your housing to because I
remember having the same debate with you as well. And
I know some people that live in those townhouses and
they've got a young family. There's a couple of them.
One's a migrant from France for me. Yeah, and they
love it. They love it, and you know, change is
always taking place, right But the funny thing is that
you can leave the ladder down, you can lift it
up because you've got your house and your lovely little spot.
(23:06):
And then let's have the next generation of people getting
their home turn It might look different, it might be
smaller because that's affordable. But let's give everyone the opportunity
to do the same.
Speaker 2 (23:15):
Yeah, absolutely, are we big? Are we big?
Speaker 6 (23:18):
PC?
Speaker 2 (23:19):
At nice? Today? Let's get a bit angry, let's get
a bit ugly.
Speaker 6 (23:23):
Or brought up a protest sign across the road saying
go away.
Speaker 3 (23:25):
Yeah, no, we didn't we we didn't say go away.
Speaker 2 (23:29):
Did ruin the view of my next door neighbors a
little bit, but that's all right.
Speaker 6 (23:32):
He ruined someone else's view when he built his hair.
Speaker 3 (23:34):
Yeah, okay, all right, come on, why you're always a politician?
Speaker 2 (23:37):
I thought you'd giving that up.
Speaker 3 (23:38):
She had, Let's go. She had, probably Wellington's. Would they
be Wellington's best known ben? I reckon they probably would
be even in my generation? Would they be in your
guys generation? Or you're from Tarama, so you've.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Thought on the telegram?
Speaker 2 (23:53):
Yeah, okay, would they be?
Speaker 6 (23:55):
I think that would have to be certainly welcome High's
and most famous product or the ken CAPESI came from these?
Probably arguably not High he did? Yeah, he played Underwater
Arch James Shure, the hilarious any Yeah, she had, I
think Wellington's best musical export.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah. Is it sad that they're breaking up with them
together for forty years or something, isn't it?
Speaker 6 (24:15):
Well? Yeah, they haven't been playing as much and they're
getting of it on to be honest, but I think
you're amazing, Like I was on your show. Once we
were asked to talk about our most favorite new meg
and I said, yeah, two thousand, the Big Day Out
and the lineup was the Food Fighters, the REDT Chili Peppers,
nine Inch Nails, a Chemical Brothers, some big name international
(24:37):
acts and who blew them all out of the park
just in terms of the level of performance and getting
the crowd going. She had absolutely right, fifty five thousand people.
I will never forget.
Speaker 2 (24:47):
It, so you are.
Speaker 5 (24:48):
It was also the bigd Out and I remember that too,
just being amazing. Yeah, she had was also my first
ever concert. I think it's like thirteen or fourteen, and
to the mountains like Harburside event Center, like I actually
little shocked my parents let me go now when I
released her little like thirteen.
Speaker 4 (25:03):
But yeah, we were there super early.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
Holding onto that wooden barrier the front, like while the
moshpit just went nuts behind us.
Speaker 4 (25:09):
Amazing.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
No, I wouldn't have taken you for a rocker.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
I wouldn't think, I am, well, that's at thirteen, you're
obviously a rocker.
Speaker 4 (25:17):
All of friends.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
No, I wouldn't have taken you for a rocker. We're justin.
Speaker 3 (25:21):
I probably would take them for as she had fan.
One of the things that's been griping will grinding my
gears a little bit is and this is not coming
from me. This is coming from real Wellingtonians who have
put a lot into the city. They always say to
me all the time when we have a coffee or
have a chat about the fact that not enough people
live in the city. Justin we are set up for
(25:44):
something like two hundred thousand people in the city, aren't
we or something really huge number of what you probably
know the numbers better than me. But they all go
home at nights and come in the mornings. Why do
we not have more people living in the city. Is
it just we're not one of those cities or could
we change it?
Speaker 6 (25:59):
Yeah, just to correct a myth there. For a start,
the city is our biggest suburb. So we always talked
about Codori, you know, wonderful could Audity, which is where
I live these days, being one of the largest suburbs
in New Zealand, if not Southern heminosphere is to talk
about us. Australasia, however, the seabed is much bigger than
could order now and it's growing daily. There have been
(26:22):
some issues recently just around development, particularly the insurance costs
and the cost to build multi unit dwellings and the
risks associated with that around earthquake strengthening. So that's the
only thing really holding it back. But completely agree, the
more we can do the better, so long as people
don't keep opposing projects. Go into the city and we
get on with it. But it'll make one of the
businesses busier. It all have a denser, more vibrant feel
(26:47):
to town. And it's good for security too because more
people around means that hopefully will be come safer too.
Speaker 3 (26:53):
And then things like everyone's worried about how many cars
we have. What you mean, if save me and my
wife lived in town, we wouldn't need two cars. We'd
have one car because one of us would be doing
something that you know, they could take the car out,
the other in town doing something in town. You wouldn't
need the whole use of cars, would.
Speaker 5 (27:07):
You, Yeah, But I mean I wanted to live in
the city, and I looked at many many apartments when
I was looking to buy in the city, and it's
what justin SA is the insurance and where that was
going and how much could possibly invest in terms of
getting the money you know, to like do capital works
and things. It was just completely beyond the risk I
was willing to take. So that's how I ended up buying.
Speaker 4 (27:25):
In the heart.
Speaker 3 (27:26):
But do you think it's a good thing? Do you
both think it's a good thing if we could get
more people living.
Speaker 5 (27:30):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think there's the vibrancy that you'd
want to see and lots of people I think would
much rather live in the city. I mean, do you
honest those safety at the moment is a big question.
You know, you can't feel it's safe walking home from
a restaurant at ten o'clock at night as you previously did,
and that makes a difference for the liveability of the city.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
And I think that's kind of a little bit of
a beat up too. I think you know, I'm still
Friday and Saturday nights are working on the streets, so
I know what the streets feel like.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
Yeah, there's a lot of.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
Homeless people on the streets, and there's a little bit
of here and there. But for the sheer numbers of
percentage is pretty light for trouble, isn't it.
Speaker 6 (28:02):
Oh Look, I've never had any issues personally, I'm but
I'm not a young woman who who would feel compromise
with their safety if they're being surrounded by young men
who have had a bit too much as drink and
might have been shouting and seeing things. I'm not sure,
so Bridget's a rebably better judge to that. Look, I
generally feel really safe in New Zealand. I've got young kids,
I've got girls growing up, so I hope they have
good experience as they get older. Very shocked obviously said.
(28:25):
And if they don't, But for any father or mother
that has young kids, and there was one recently when
a young South African mayle was killed. It's here and
went when it was a refectory.
Speaker 3 (28:36):
Can I just quickly ask you, because I've got to
go to hots and Notts and take a break. The
new government's released the decision document floating the idea of
charging kiwi's twenty dollars and tourists thirty dollars to visit
conservation areas like Cathedral Gove and tom Arero Crossing. Just
you reckon, it's okay to pay to go to that
of your kiwi and or an overseas tourist.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Pay more if you're an overseas.
Speaker 6 (28:56):
Tours Oh yeah, Look, I think Kiwi's would be happy to.
In a perfect world for me as a decision maker,
I'd be charging the overseas tourists fifty and I charge
Kiwi's nothing because I already pay the ten. Having said that,
I mean, it's such a wonderful asset that we're very
fortunate to have. People shouldn't mind.
Speaker 5 (29:14):
Yeah, I'm totally on board with paying. I'm a big tramper.
I do a lot of tramping in the natural parks
that are amazing.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
So you're happy paying every time you win?
Speaker 5 (29:22):
Yeah, absolutely, because I think for the most part you're
doing it as an exception. You know, Dad and I
are doing the Tonguera crossing in early January. We would
totally pay you to have the experience. It's not like
you're trying to do the Tonguera crossing every weekend. I
think we want to keep, like some of our regional parks,
the stuff that's really accessible to the cities free and accessible,
because I think that encourages people to get out. But
those kind of special occasion event type places that we
(29:45):
have that we need to control some of the visitor numbers.
Speaker 4 (29:47):
Absolutely, I think that's totally fine.
Speaker 6 (29:49):
Right, and that on the time of crossing. Actually the
last TIONE did it. What really shocked me were the queues.
I happily have everyone paying, but more for I don't
have to queue. There were hundreds of us, and particularly
then at the first sort of stop, the queues for
the toilets were ridiculous. If that meant that there was
a bit somewhat better public toilet provision and I made
(30:10):
a few fewer people went great because it shocked me that.
Speaker 1 (30:16):
The Friday Facie Hot Okay, hots and knots, Bridget Morton,
give us your hots and knots please.
Speaker 5 (30:23):
My hot is definitely the sort of green shoots of
sort of business coming back in Wellington. Just walking along
Lampton Key and Willis Street in the way here much
more like least signs and a few new places open
and new shop frunts and people investing.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
It's great to see.
Speaker 5 (30:36):
Might not this week as the flooding that happened at
Pa Tony this morning. That meant that I spent like
forty five minutes driving in this morning, so which means
I probably should have bought the apartment in time. I
told you then I wouldn't have been sucking that traffic.
Speaker 2 (30:47):
I told you.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
I just gave you some advice. Give it up, give
it up and get an apartment justin you're hot and.
Speaker 6 (30:52):
Hot similar green Shoots. You know, I've been a lot
about recently Bordeaux closing and Pandora closing. That's very sad.
Having said that, this week, disest today. In fact, Shelley
Day Bakery opened up in Corory and it was people
killing out the door and I went and got croissant.
It's lovely. Likewise, dough Bay Crees opening all around town.
It's a Mia and Tim Trace doing really well there
(31:14):
and it's great to see all these new businesses sproutings.
That's great. Well it's not I'm going to go with
the treaty principles Bill. I think we're going to see
a week of action and protests. So it's a real
distraction from what should be more important issues that people
could focus on.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Yeah, I agree, I agree. Thank you both. Have a
great and wonderful weekend. I wish I could promise you
sunny skies and great weather, but apparently it's going to
be not that great until Sunday. But Sunday might be
your brunch out on Sunday, guys. But thanks for taking
your time. I know you're both very busy. People appreciate
your having on the show.
Speaker 1 (31:45):
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
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
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!