July 2, 2026 • 32 mins
It's a political Friday Faceoff this week with esteemed journalist and editor of Politick Richard Harman and NZ Herald Political editor Thomas Coughlan joining Nick Mills in the studio.
Starting with the Moa Point plant review in the hands Minister Simon Watts desk, which has no timeline for public release. Harman and Coughlan discuss why the government could be withholding it and how are they feeling 150 days into the ecological disaster.
The panel analyse Michael Laws candidacy for NZ First, can he make a difference in the party? And can Peters handle all these personalities?
And the tragedy of the man who died after waiting 9 hours in the Emergency Department of Waikato Hospital. Our panel look at the problems that led our country here and how we need to improve so it never happens again.
Have those at the top of the Ministry of Social Development considered the realities of emergency housing before imposing targets for managers? The panel faceoff over whether the government has influenced these and reflect on Minister Tama Potaka's fumbles recently around this and the conservation clause that blew up last week.
Plus, Minister Casey Costello suggests decreasing excise tax for tobacco, being banned from a cafe for a MAGA hat and the panel share their hots and nots.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from news Talk said by seven.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Minutes past eleven, and it's Friday face Off, and Friday
face Off is my favorite part of the week, especially
when I've got a week off next week. Richard Harmon
joins us for the first time. I can't believe that
we haven't. I didn't realize you lived in Wellington until
a few months ago. Managing not managing an editor a polytic?
Is that right?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Did I get it right? Welcome to the show.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Thanks Nick, good to see you after all these years.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Well I was trying to work it out that it
would have been forty years ago seventy six.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yeah, well it's fifty years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Oh oh, that's scary. Thomas. Don't look at us like that.
Thomas Coglan, New Zealand Herald Political Editor political political editor
on the show. Morning Thomas, Morning Neck. How are you?
I'm well, how are you really good? I'm glad to
have two esteemed brains IQs and in the studio I'm
(01:07):
feeling like it to be fun. Let's start off with
moa point, the failure for the crown to review to
be given. I mean the story is that the review
has been given to the minister, but the minister won't
give it to anybody else. He's holding on to it. Tiaki.
Why has taken over a couple of days, Richard, what
are your thoughts on there? Should that be made public
or is it? Do we just sit back and wait?
Speaker 3 (01:29):
Well, I can't understand why it can't be unless there's
some big legal actions in the background, and that may
be what this is all about.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
But surely they still could be actually say, look, we're
not going to announce it because we've got legal things
going on.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Surely, yeah, you would have thought so. But there seems
to be a newfound enthusiasm for suppressing things at the
moment in the government. We've seen that with the We've
seen that with the India Free Trade Agreement obviously, and
this one as well. Nerves going into an election perhaps.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
But surely the time Thomas, I mean more time going
in delection of this is there's something gone wrong. It's
not going to be respond not the government's responsibility. Is
Wellington Water or Wellington City Council or the French company
that's looking after it.
Speaker 4 (02:16):
Surely yeah, I mean I agree with Richard. I think
it sort of suggests that there's there's potentially some legal issue,
there's some legal issue in the background there that that
might be the that might be the reason why I
think it's an interim report. Isn't that that's that's with
that's with them at the moment. It's not the final thing.
But yeah, look, it's I mean, this is a disgrace.
(02:36):
I love. I live quite close by and and some
days you can sort of I think you can sort
of see it, the discolouration in the in the strait
it is, it is disgusting and and certainly it's it's
it's one of these I think people will remember this
incident for for generations to come as a as a
great catastrophic failure of New Zealand infrastructure. And the sooner
(02:58):
the report sort of detailing what went wrong is published,
the better. But but I agree that the fact that
it hasn't been the fact that what July one has
coming on and we haven't sort of heard a peep
from this review suggest that something is happening in the background.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
And there must have been deals done because Tiaki, why
have taken over so that you know they've taken over
a broken, broken organization, so there must have been deals
done that somebody knows a bit more richard than we're
being told.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Well, Taaki way, don't look at this stage to me
to be any great improvement. And I saw that vividly
this week at the end of my little street, which
is a dead end street. The very last house in
the street has a drain a sump outside it, and
they came along to clean it out. But they came
(03:45):
along with one of those big traffic trucks, a whole
lot of cones and two guys to stand there and
watch while it was cleaned out, the traffic control guys.
And I thought, well, why what is going on in
this organization that you need a full traffic control operation
to guard a pump end of a blowing street. And
(04:07):
that speaks to me of a culture inside to Argy
and the previous Wellington Water Care, which frankly doesn't know
what it's.
Speaker 4 (04:16):
Doing exactly the same moral of exactly the same and
it seems like it's easier to get a job with
the organization and to get your your pipes fixed fixed
by them.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Do you think those things are going to change or
is it just you know, waiting to water under a
different disguise, Thomas. I mean you write about it, you
see it, you know it, you know what's going on?
What what what do we expect?
Speaker 4 (04:36):
Well, certainly the settings. I mean, it's it's one of
those questions. Richard probably has a pretty strong view on
this as well, is whether whether this model, which is
a which just comes under the local water done well,
the National Party's version of three Waters reforms is any
better than the last then Labour's version of the three
Waters reforms? Will it cost more? Will it cost less?
Will it will it deliver better service? I think some
(04:57):
of the some of the other. I mean, we we
really need to get on top of traffic management in
New Zealand. I think that's why stuff costs so much.
You know, not always, but but to Richard point, you
see it everywhere. I was meeting someone from overseas the
other day and they were one of the first impressions
that I had of New Zealand was just how many people,
how many road cones they were, And it's, you know,
it's one of these big stories. And until we get
(05:18):
on top of that, our infrastructure is going to I mean.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
That's a quick question to both of you. Will that
change under brook van Velden's new plan.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
I don't think it will because I think most of
those companies will have more too, will they They'll be large, stubby,
large firms, so they're large, and the large firms don't
get us much released under the Brooklyn Beldium plan.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
And don't they get you know, five bucks or so
for each cone per week?
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Oh for sure, I mean there's there's money and Cones
that's for sure. Yes, we are Cones City Friday face
off with Thomas Coglan and Richard Harmon. I want to
just quickly both ask you, because it was Thomas, We'll
come to you first because it was your story. Michael Laws,
this is surprising. Was this? Were you surprised that he's
going to stand for New Zealand first?
Speaker 4 (06:05):
I wasn't, But the rumors have been leaking out about
that for weeks months, and this week it seemed very
obvious that something was happening. It happened this morning. It
is an interesting return to frontline politics for mister Laws.
He's been a counselor for a number of years now
and obviously a mirror at one point as well. It
is an interesting selection because it does say a lot
(06:26):
about you know, the party that New Zealand First. New
Zealand First changes a lot. You know, the New Zealand
First that we have today is very different to previous situations.
I think, well, I think I think they have a
strong view on kind of economic interventionism, getting their hands
duty and economic management, industrial strategy. Then they've got a
strong view on sort of like right wing cultural issues,
(06:48):
transgender issues, MARII issues, that sort of stuff, and I
feel like every election those issues, one of them comes
to the fore. Maybe in twenty seventeen it was more
of an economic interventionist thing and the cultural issues were
maybe sidelined. Went with the labor in twenty seventeen and
made a lot of sense this time around. The cultural
(07:10):
stuff it seems to be really at the forefront of
what New Zealand verst is all about. You know, with
with with Michael Laws obviously, you've got Elliott Ekolai, another
candidate Stuart Nash obviously you know, made some controversial marks
in the cultural space as well. Those candidates are really
ware that the party seems to be getting a lot
(07:31):
of headlines at the moment and some of the economic stuff,
economic interventionism, the Shane Jones side of the party that
seems to be emphasized at the moment.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
So it seems to me though that Richard Shane Jones
is on every bit of media every time you turn
it on. He's either spending too much on a trip boy,
he's controversial, wanting to rip some mining stuff out stuff
or do something. So do you feel that he's slipping
away and it's becoming less about him?
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Yeah? I think so. I think Thomas is right that
they're becoming a culture warriors party. But you know, you
look the selection of laws, you look at the selection
of Ilakai, Stuart Nash and Alfred Naro. Those are going
to be four hard dog for dogs are going to
be hard to keep on the porch. Now, Peters has
(08:20):
always had very loyal MPs who have known when to
shut up, which is whenever he's talking, and I'm not
so sure that's going to be the case now. There's
going to be a lot of velbow elbowing of each other.
He's going to have a real party on his hands,
and whether he wants to manage that at his age,
(08:41):
and given also that he may be Foreign Minister and
overseas all the time. I think it's going to be
rather interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
So, and this seems to be from from a layman's point.
Someone's obviously a talkback host, but looks from the outside
and where you guys are, Thomas, and it feels to
me like they want to announce anything that will be
what public want to talk about that day.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Yeah, I've had I mean they've had this incredible tactic,
this parliamentary term of having a member's bill on basically anything,
and you're only allowed a certain number of members bills,
and so you know, a big a topic will come
up and one of the members bills will quietly get
taken out of the ballot, and then with great fan fear,
a new members bill would be put in the ballot
and the MP who's whose name the bill is in
(09:25):
they won't be anywhere near it because Winston Peters will
be all over the announcement saying, well, this is my
members bill, and this is what we're this is what
we're doing. And so yes that they've got all these
tactics to talk about everything all the time, whatever is,
whatever's front of mine for the general population, they're all
over it like a rash it's been quite an effective strategy.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
And also, Richard, it feels to me like National are
having a crack at them every possible time they can.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
They're increasingly doing so, and particularly Nikola Willis.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
Is to say she was in the show doing it
the other week.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
But the one person who's not very much is Christopher Luxon.
And you would have thought this week, with his Foreign
minister taking on India, which is an with the free
trade agreement, that the Prime Minister might have wanted to
sort that out, but he hasn't, and that raises a
real question about how much rope n z First gets
(10:17):
given or how much rope Winston gets given. And at
the moment it appears that it's endless. Who knows where
he's going to go next or what he's going to do,
because as Thomas says, they're on top of every Ish
popular issue of the day and their attention span is about.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
A week, just real quickly. So I want to move
on to the next topic. Do you think Michael Laws
will make any difference at all?
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Well, I think his reputation for saying outrageous things. You know,
at some point in the campaign you might find yourself
in the middle of a week long media cycle. You know,
the campaign is shorts, only a few weeks long, and
Michael Laws might say something outrageous. The entire energy of
the campaign has spent on debating the weather too, and
wifles of what he said, Richard.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
I think when he was last time an MP, some
of his colleagues would say that they found it difficult
to trust him.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Oh there you go. Now, A very sad story came
across a New Zealand media this week. I mean it
was a horror show, let's be honest, at the Wakaddow Hospital.
The reports I saw on TV one news of stories
I've read about it. You know, a fifty year old
man went and waited nine hours, got found unresponsible in
a cubicle. You know, twenty emergency staff all going through
(11:33):
the emergency department with you know, nurses on top of
the trolley trying to you know, to get him to
back to life. Pretty horrible story, Thomas, How do we
keep this from ever happening again? And did you really
feel that that we got the true story about what
was happening.
Speaker 4 (11:51):
Well, it's a disaster. I mean it's one of the worst.
You know, nine years of what happens in a need
and I'm not sure. I'm sure eventually we'll get to
the bottom of what has actually happened. I don't think
anyone's being withholding information that you know doesn't need to
be with how I think I think we will eventually
(12:12):
know what happened. I think the question is ed performance
in New Zealand and around the world has gotten much
worse since the pandemic. I was reading an article in
The Economist a couple of months ago and I pulled
it up just for prepping on the show. The Australian
health workforce has increased by about twenty percent since the pandemic,
and yet increasingly and a number of patients are being
left to wait inside an ambulance for half an hour
(12:34):
when they're brought to an ed. And in New Zealand,
I looked at our health workforce has increased by fifteen
thousand people in the public health system since twenty twenty.
Fifteen thousand people. There are five sorry eighty five thousand
people twenty twenty, there's now about one hundred thousand people
working in the health system. And obviously our performance isn't
great either, getting worse and health spending in real terms,
has increased by twenty percent since pandemic.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
I'm interested to hear what you say about Australia because
I've got lots of family members in Australia and they
think the system is perfect over there, is it not.
Speaker 4 (13:02):
I want to think it's much better than over here,
but it's just I definitely think it'srobably better than here,
but it's just it's all over the world. We've really
struggled for some reason. We have really struggled after the
pandemic to get our hospital systems working, despite the fact
that after the pandemic we all tipped billions of dollars
into our health system and hired a bunch of people,
(13:23):
which I think is probably a good thing. We're getting
older and sicker, we need bigger health systems. But for
some reason, since the pandemic, were really really struggled to
get the system working in proportion to the resources we
put into it.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Richard Harbour, when I did the story on the show,
I said that in my lifetime, it would go from
your mother ringing you to tell you that your auntie
had gone to hospital, but don't worry, she's in the
right place. To now we don't have that feeling that
of security once you get to hospital anymore.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Well, my wife's a GP and I asked her about
this last night and her answer was pretty straightforward. EDI's
are overrun with demand that all sorts of things explain that.
And for example, in some parts of New Zealand there's
no overnight independent after ours.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Medical service, including Wellington. Well there's still eleven o'clock overnight.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
It's worse than that in some other places. So that's one.
Two has been the explosion in mental health issues, people
with mental health issues. I spent a night in ed
about four years ago when I fell off a ladder
and the place was full of police bringing in essentially
(14:41):
mental health cases. Now you get that huge influx of that,
and people who may have complex and difficult things wrong
with them, like a potential heart attack, are easily going
to get overlooked. The places is Mayhem.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
Yes, I was in a d about two years ago
and I was in the middle of the day and
you know, I got treated and then I was left
in the corridor. I was treated very well in the corridor,
no complaints. It was a good corridor, but you know
it was nonetheless in the corridor and around me was
was was chaos and and you know around me was
was what couldn't have been dealt with the night before,
which was to include mental health cases. And it's you know,
(15:22):
it's interesting. The other story that that's big this week
is obviously these MESD targets and the Prime Minister not
being aware of the lack of an Auckland night shelter. Well,
it's interesting.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
You know.
Speaker 4 (15:32):
One of the things the government's put up this week
is the fact that it is very, very difficult to
get to get a place that can house people who
have very intense, disruptive, sometimes violent mental health needs because
they can't really go in a night shelter because they're
not safe for themselves or for the other people in
the night shelter. But then where do they go? And
(15:54):
there's often you know, the answer is the street or
the ed.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
I mean, Richard, you'd remember when hospital was there, you
know what I mean, Thomas, you wouldn't, But we had
a hospital set up exactly for that mental health hospital.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
Yeah, when you've only got a walk outside this very
building and look across the road and see some of
the people walking up and down the street. These people
are clearly have mental health issues.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
Yeah. So, I mean a lot of people said we
should never have closed por hospital and there was one
up north to wasn't there There was two of them.
There was two major hospitals, so were like hospitals just
for mental health people.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Well, you may not even be safe there. I mean
Waiketo Hospital also had an incident a few weeks ago
at its mental health facility where they jabbed the autistic
Mary girl and rendered it more or less unconscious because
they had the wrong name.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
And then someone walked out. Someone that was in that
same unit walked out and committed suicide on the down
the road the same two weeks later. Terrible situation. Simon
Brown's got a bit of work to do.
Speaker 4 (16:58):
Yes, I think it's the toughest portfolio and government.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Of course it is. Of course, it is a hard
one to satisfy anyone. With Friday face off with Richard
Harmon and Thomas Cogland MISD have been under fire after
it was revealed one of their targets, one of eleven metrics,
was for their staff to decrease those people that are
sent to emergency housing to make the numbers look right. Richard,
(17:21):
when you first heard this. What do you think.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
Oh, this is the problem with targets, isn't it. It
doesn't matter whether the targets are.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
In, but surely emergency housing when someone's really down on
their luck, we shouldn't be saying, oh, have you got
a tent?
Speaker 3 (17:34):
I mean, but this is the problem. The government believes
that by imposing targets they've solved the problem, and then
they report back and say eighty percent of the targets
being met or whatever. But ofcause, what's going on on
the front line, whether it's MSD or an ED or wherever,
is that the staff are gaming the targets. And that's
what's going on here. Mis People have a natural incarnation
(17:57):
to make themselves look good in a job and bugger
what they're actually supposed to be doing.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
But I mean, once again, I think we're making lighter.
But the fact was that actually we want, you know,
as a job requirement, to stop people getting into emergency
housing when you know, like a thousand I think a
thousand people had been triarged and weren't even getting seen.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Yeah. Well, plainly the system as it stands doesn't work, right.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Thomas, your thoughts on it?
Speaker 4 (18:26):
Yeah, I mean I remember when Labor got rid of
a lot of the targets when they took office in
twenty seventeen, they got rid of a bunch of the targets,
and those things that had been targeted got worse. But
Labor argued that a more holistic approach lead to overall
better outcomes. And I think you know both both things
are true. If you don't target stuff, then those things
(18:47):
tend to not The things that you are not targeting
tend not to happen. But if you do target things,
and you target them too aggressively, then the public service
will hit your targets and do nothing else, and so sencely,
everything else, everything around your target gets a whole lot worse.
And that's what's happened here. It's one of those awful issues.
We're both both sides are telling the truth, and it
seems like you can't. You sort of can't win either way.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
Were you surprised, I mean you would have seen Tama Potacker.
He sort of seemed like he was completely lost with it. Tommy,
he just didn't he didn't even know he didn't. It
just just felt like it just something didn't feel right
to me.
Speaker 4 (19:21):
I mean, Tama Potacker, I think is his has come
up against the limits of his communications abilities in the
last month. He obviously blundered his way through those Conservation
Act reforms a couple of weeks ago where he had
to u turn after Forrest and Bird published those maps,
which you know it leads to the government was trying
to flog off of the country, which they obviously went.
(19:42):
But he couldn't argue a way out of that one,
and he couldn't argue his way out of this one.
I think. I think it's certainly, you know, one of
the one of the interesting things we're probably seeing this
this year is some of those kind of mid tier,
mid mid bench ministers. The one the one sort of
obviously high up the rankings is in the National Party,
but down the bottom of the rankings cabinet wise, or
you know, in the middle of the rankings kebnet wise,
that they are kind of getting a bit of pressure
(20:04):
put on them, and in time of Potuck case, I
think the last month he's shown himself to not quite
be up to up to meeting that pressure.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
I mean, Richard, that's a bit of a problem for
the Prime Minister because he's their Maori. Look isn't he.
I mean, you know, if you're going to try and
be the cultural you know this person he's it. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Look, I disagree with Thomas a little bit on this one.
Those conservation changes that Timer got into a whole part
of trouble over had been in the system for over
two years. They'd been discussed around the cabinet table. They
had been ticked off by the cabinet. Everything he did
(20:45):
was right, and then suddenly Forrest and bird E merge
out of literally nowhere with their maps.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
Now.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
He was slow off his feet to respond to that,
but he did, and he did respond. He said, I mean,
I was I don't know about you, Thomas, but he said,
I certainly got approached and would I interview him and
talk them to him about them? And I did. I
think his problem at the end of the day was
(21:12):
nervous colleagues. He could have stood his ground on the
on that legislation.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Ah See, I found him. I've only had him on
the phone interviews, but I've interviewed him a couple of times.
I find him a little bit supercilious. Is that a
word that I can use correctly? But he always wants
to make it a little bit lighter and a little
bit more jovial and not quite serious and straight up
and down and am I close or not? I'm happy
to I'm happy to be wrong.
Speaker 4 (21:38):
Well, I think he failed to. I think he failed
to come out with the He did attack forrests and
burd but he could have been much bare erect and said, look,
using visual aids himself, we're not flogging off Mount Cook.
You know, we're not flogging off the remarkables. We are
selling the you know, met service building in Calvin, which
you know the Wellington listeners will we will probably agree,
(22:01):
is not a great town of this country and it's
a piece of danger concrete. And I think the reforms
have mirits. You know that the conservation estate is bogged
down by a lot of stuff that it doesn't really
need to own, that has no sort of conservation value. No, yeah,
(22:23):
there are gravel pits, which is an example that he gave,
and he was he was unable to make that case,
I think. But Richard's right. I think it was Simeon
Brown and some of the jittery national colleagues who who thought,
you know what selection year, why have a fight, Why
have a fight? You know, the best fight is one
(22:44):
that doesn't take place in the first place, and so
they're just backed down because they just couldn't be bothered
fighting it.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
MP spending has come under the spotlight in the last
couple of weeks. Shane Jones not the only minister spending
big bucks on limosines. Three MP's have been caught spending
over twenty grand and three months on domestic travel when
the house only sat for six weeks. Richard Harmond, should
MP's actually have to show their receipts and should the
(23:11):
public know what with what that's been in their money on?
And should there be some more you know, look at?
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Yeah? I think so. But I thought Richard Prebble made
an interesting point in his column and The Herald where
he said it's not the top three that you should
be looking at, it's the bottom three and you've got
to ask yourself whether they were doing anything at all.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
But it should be should be be more I don't know, spotlight.
Should the spotlight be on them more? Twenty five thou
and three months? It's a lot of money, Thomas.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
Oh, yeah, And I think the big story here is
that there actually actually wasn't a lot of parliamentary work
going on and the period in question, so you've got
to sort of scratch your head a wee bit and
wonder what on earth was going wrong. But I agree
with them with Richard's people. You know, you know it's
the it's very easy for some MPs to get quite
detached a large portion of ourt. You know, our m
(24:07):
MP parliament is based up in Auckland and they work
down in Wellington. So you know, if you are in
Auckland MP and what Greg Fleming and this list is,
you know, it's very easy to get to get to
spend your entire political life community in between Auckland and Wellington,
and then you really would be quite detached. So I
think there's a good thing if if you're an MP
and you use some of your your travel perk to
(24:28):
get out and about and see people gosh from starting
like crystaler luxon. Now, I don't think it's the worst thing,
but you have to be you have to be careful.
You don't well, you don't want it to it's a
it's a real contextual thing because you don't you don't
want to get into a situation where it looks like
you're you're sending yourself on a ticket tour the country.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
But one MP I mean two MP's from blenn and
more kaikur right, one spending twenty three thousand and one
spending eleven grand. I mean you can't. There's got to
be something that someone's doing wrong, as someone staying working
from home. I mean, once again, it's just a bit
of transparency would be nice.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
Yeah, I think it. There's a bit of a culture
of let's hop on a plane among MP's I think,
for example, I mean, I don't want to beg the
Parliamentary rugby team. But on the other hand, there were
hordes of them up in the Bay of Islands over
the weekend for a rugby game. Now it was allegedly
raising money for some charity or another.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
Would that be all on the on the tech? Oh yeah,
you see, I would have sat signorant to be not
the thing there, But I would have not thought that's
their own type of their own thing that would beyond
the tech.
Speaker 4 (25:32):
They do seem to choose to play rugby in such
nice places. You know, I'm not going to I'm not
going to pick on a part of the country that
I don't think is nice. But then they're certainly not
going on an nothing to play play rugby and not mine.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
I like Papasa try to give.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
It museum, and so maybe they should play.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
The Okay, let's talk about tobacco. I saw the story
on Ryan's show and I thought to my saying, oh
my god, you see uh elicit tobacco we know is
taking over New Zealand and Australia. It's horrendous, really gang
related death, killing, murders, all that stuff. New Zealand Minister
Casey Costello thinks the answer is to reduce the excise tax.
(26:17):
Richard Harvin', I mean, we've got ourselves in this country
to a really good situation where me and you grew up.
Everyone smoked. Everyone we spoked in the office, we smoked
in the studio. I can remember coming to work here
where the host was smoking in a studio. We've got
ourselves in a good situation. Surely we should not be
looking at doing anything to change that.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
I think that's the question. I mean, obviously, when you
put a tax on and make things like this as
expensive as they are, and you're going to get smuggling
and crime involved. But if we reduce the tax and
suddenly start increasing smoking, so that we're all sitting in
this room smoking. Then we have gone backwards. So it's
(26:57):
a fine line, and I'm not sure we draw it,
but someone's going to have to draw it somewhere.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Thomas, Yes, I came.
Speaker 4 (27:05):
I when I were turned eighteen, I think cigarettes was
still ten or twelve dollars a pack, which which was
very affordable. And now that I think that thirty five
dollars a pack, and I think, you know, at that price,
a lot of young people are like, you know, thanks,
but no thanks. I think I think that the price
has a massive distancingive on people's willingness to smoke. And
obviously it does come at the cost of organized crime
(27:28):
getting and organized crime getting in on the business. But
at the moment, I think that's probably a cost that
way there is outweighed by the benefits.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
You and you're a lot younger than us and Thomas
and you you're it's socially not acceptable to smoke now, really,
is it? Yeah? I mean you're really You got to
go around. It's almost like you've got to go into
the bike sheds to have a fag if you want one.
Speaker 4 (27:46):
Now, yeah, a few people, a few people still smoke,
but certainly yeah, it's I think people enjoy I remember
living when I was nineteen. I just wanted to spread
my wings a little bit and I moved to Poland
where people still smoked inside and it's incredible. You know,
people you just have a you know, your your meal
and a glass of wine and people would be like up,
(28:07):
but it's dank and all of your clothes start to stink.
You know. It was my entire wardrobe. It's very cold country.
So I had a lot of jumpers. Just all of
my jumpers smelled of smoking. And I think if it
ever changed the New Zealand people would people would rebell
for smell reasons.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
If nothing I've started can't quite work the what out.
It's wanted to spread your wings and go to Poland.
That's a great.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Tell you what, I tell you what. Poland is soon
going to be richer than we are, you know, and
it is incredible New Zealand's economic relative economic decline versus
Poland taking off. I thought I made the right decision
to leave Poland and come back.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
I just want to quickly do a story that I
talked about the We're Crazy on the show. A made
of Mine goes and has a coffee and a coffee
bar with another made of mine, right, been doing it
for years, seven o'clock every morning. He wears what do
they call those trump hats. I've got a special name
and Thomas the Mega hat, Mega hat, right, you know right?
So he wears the hat. He goes into the coffee
(29:05):
bar and he gets told by the lady serving the
coffee that she will not serve him unless he takes
his hat off. He says he's not going to take
his hat off. She bans them downtown Wellington, Thomas Cobland,
What do you think? I mean, I've known you. Your
btes would say that's okay.
Speaker 4 (29:21):
No, I think I look at you know I'm not.
I don't know why you'd ban someone for wearing a
hadl like that. I think that's no reaction. I wouldn't.
I wouldn't go around wearing a Mega I certainly wouldn't
go around wearing a megahatt and Wellington, it's not a
great way to make friends in this town with it.
Some with his voting record, and I probably wouldn't go
into a coffee shop megaheat either. But but banning people
(29:45):
for wearing a pretty ordinary hat, you know that seems
like a bit of a note.
Speaker 3 (29:50):
Richard Harmon, Well, I was always taught to take my
hat off when I went inside. But having said that,
banning somebody for wearing a mega hat does seem a
little extreme. After all, people wear t shirts with all
sorts of political messages all over them.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
Really big strong political messages, don't you. I've seen some
green message Green Party stuff going to cafes that I've
worked that have been pretty strong, haven't they. Yeah, So
I mean, yeah, so take your hat off before you
went inside.
Speaker 4 (30:19):
It van hats and restaurants. There we go is a
members bill for New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
First see, I were a cap every week in all
weekend right, and I always thought, can I come to
my come to the radio station with a cap one?
Can you? Is it acceptable?
Speaker 4 (30:33):
Oh you're the best dress man. Well, well we had
the win in Parla. We had Rowedy waits to hit
has a selection of wonderful hats and he's managed to
get those through the dress code.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Don't start me up on that. Don't start me up
there because he wouldn't wear them until Mariah would he.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
Well, for a very good reason. He wears a hat
when he takes it off you you see why he's
like that old Lavery and b David Samuels. He wears
a hat all the time for the same reason.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Take a short break and come back with hots and
notts with our guests, Richard Harmon and Thomas Coglan. By
the way, for those listeners, Thomas Cogland's probably the best
dressed person in politics. You know, he always looks every
time you see it. It looks like he's just come
out of man for man and spent a lot of money.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
There you go, the Friday face. Hot.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
Okay, Richard Harmon, quickly give us your hots and knots.
I've gone over time.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Hot New Zealand cricket winning the series in England outstanding.
Not those road cones at the end of my street.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
You're not the first person that said that, Thomas Cognan,
what's your hots and notts?
Speaker 4 (31:34):
My heart will. I was out for a walk last Sunday,
out for a run along the coast and Seaturn. I
ran past Ian McKellen playing you know, the guy played
gandalfrom Lord of the Rings. And he was at my pub,
local pub that night, the Little Sprig and Seaturn. And
it felt hot because it's a return to those great
sort of period when Wellington was really hot, you know,
the two thousand and three Lord of the Rings. It's
(31:54):
wonderful to get the mojo back in mind was also
the road Cones, so Richard stold.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
It amazing to have those sort of vibes and.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
Yeah, yeah, it's good. We need we need to we
need to bring that that that sort of that that's
time back in a way because there was a lot
more I don't know, optimism in the city.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Thank you both so very very much. Have a great weekend,
Richard Harmon and Thomas Cogland.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
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 said by seven.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Minutes past eleven, and it's Friday face Off, and Friday
face Off is my favorite part of the week, especially
when I've got a week off next week. Richard Harmon
joins us for the first time. I can't believe that
we haven't. I didn't realize you lived in Wellington until
a few months ago. Managing not managing an editor a polytic?
Is that right?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Did I get it right? Welcome to the show.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Thanks Nick, good to see you after all these years.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Well I was trying to work it out that it
would have been forty years ago seventy six.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
Yeah, well it's fifty years ago.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Oh oh, that's scary. Thomas. Don't look at us like that.
Thomas Coglan, New Zealand Herald Political Editor political political editor
on the show. Morning Thomas, Morning Neck. How are you?
I'm well, how are you really good? I'm glad to
have two esteemed brains IQs and in the studio I'm
(01:07):
feeling like it to be fun. Let's start off with
moa point, the failure for the crown to review to
be given. I mean the story is that the review
has been given to the minister, but the minister won't
give it to anybody else. He's holding on to it. Tiaki.
Why has taken over a couple of days, Richard, what
are your thoughts on there? Should that be made public
or is it? Do we just sit back and wait?
Speaker 3 (01:29):
Well, I can't understand why it can't be unless there's
some big legal actions in the background, and that may
be what this is all about.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
But surely they still could be actually say, look, we're
not going to announce it because we've got legal things
going on.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
Surely, yeah, you would have thought so. But there seems
to be a newfound enthusiasm for suppressing things at the
moment in the government. We've seen that with the We've
seen that with the India Free Trade Agreement obviously, and
this one as well. Nerves going into an election perhaps.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
But surely the time Thomas, I mean more time going
in delection of this is there's something gone wrong. It's
not going to be respond not the government's responsibility. Is
Wellington Water or Wellington City Council or the French company
that's looking after it.
Speaker 4 (02:16):
Surely yeah, I mean I agree with Richard. I think
it sort of suggests that there's there's potentially some legal issue,
there's some legal issue in the background there that that
might be the that might be the reason why I
think it's an interim report. Isn't that that's that's with
that's with them at the moment. It's not the final thing.
But yeah, look, it's I mean, this is a disgrace.
(02:36):
I love. I live quite close by and and some
days you can sort of I think you can sort
of see it, the discolouration in the in the strait
it is, it is disgusting and and certainly it's it's
it's one of these I think people will remember this
incident for for generations to come as a as a
great catastrophic failure of New Zealand infrastructure. And the sooner
(02:58):
the report sort of detailing what went wrong is published,
the better. But but I agree that the fact that
it hasn't been the fact that what July one has
coming on and we haven't sort of heard a peep
from this review suggest that something is happening in the background.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
And there must have been deals done because Tiaki, why
have taken over so that you know they've taken over
a broken, broken organization, so there must have been deals
done that somebody knows a bit more richard than we're
being told.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Well, Taaki way, don't look at this stage to me
to be any great improvement. And I saw that vividly
this week at the end of my little street, which
is a dead end street. The very last house in
the street has a drain a sump outside it, and
they came along to clean it out. But they came
(03:45):
along with one of those big traffic trucks, a whole
lot of cones and two guys to stand there and
watch while it was cleaned out, the traffic control guys.
And I thought, well, why what is going on in
this organization that you need a full traffic control operation
to guard a pump end of a blowing street. And
(04:07):
that speaks to me of a culture inside to Argy
and the previous Wellington Water Care, which frankly doesn't know
what it's.
Speaker 4 (04:16):
Doing exactly the same moral of exactly the same and
it seems like it's easier to get a job with
the organization and to get your your pipes fixed fixed
by them.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Do you think those things are going to change or
is it just you know, waiting to water under a
different disguise, Thomas. I mean you write about it, you
see it, you know it, you know what's going on?
What what what do we expect?
Speaker 4 (04:36):
Well, certainly the settings. I mean, it's it's one of
those questions. Richard probably has a pretty strong view on
this as well, is whether whether this model, which is
a which just comes under the local water done well,
the National Party's version of three Waters reforms is any
better than the last then Labour's version of the three
Waters reforms? Will it cost more? Will it cost less?
Will it will it deliver better service? I think some
(04:57):
of the some of the other. I mean, we we
really need to get on top of traffic management in
New Zealand. I think that's why stuff costs so much.
You know, not always, but but to Richard point, you
see it everywhere. I was meeting someone from overseas the
other day and they were one of the first impressions
that I had of New Zealand was just how many people,
how many road cones they were, And it's, you know,
it's one of these big stories. And until we get
(05:18):
on top of that, our infrastructure is going to I mean.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
That's a quick question to both of you. Will that
change under brook van Velden's new plan.
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
I don't think it will because I think most of
those companies will have more too, will they They'll be large, stubby,
large firms, so they're large, and the large firms don't
get us much released under the Brooklyn Beldium plan.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
And don't they get you know, five bucks or so
for each cone per week?
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Oh for sure, I mean there's there's money and Cones
that's for sure. Yes, we are Cones City Friday face
off with Thomas Coglan and Richard Harmon. I want to
just quickly both ask you, because it was Thomas, We'll
come to you first because it was your story. Michael Laws,
this is surprising. Was this? Were you surprised that he's
going to stand for New Zealand first?
Speaker 4 (06:05):
I wasn't, But the rumors have been leaking out about
that for weeks months, and this week it seemed very
obvious that something was happening. It happened this morning. It
is an interesting return to frontline politics for mister Laws.
He's been a counselor for a number of years now
and obviously a mirror at one point as well. It
is an interesting selection because it does say a lot
(06:26):
about you know, the party that New Zealand First. New
Zealand First changes a lot. You know, the New Zealand
First that we have today is very different to previous situations.
I think, well, I think I think they have a
strong view on kind of economic interventionism, getting their hands
duty and economic management, industrial strategy. Then they've got a
strong view on sort of like right wing cultural issues,
(06:48):
transgender issues, MARII issues, that sort of stuff, and I
feel like every election those issues, one of them comes
to the fore. Maybe in twenty seventeen it was more
of an economic interventionist thing and the cultural issues were
maybe sidelined. Went with the labor in twenty seventeen and
made a lot of sense this time around. The cultural
(07:10):
stuff it seems to be really at the forefront of
what New Zealand verst is all about. You know, with
with with Michael Laws obviously, you've got Elliott Ekolai, another
candidate Stuart Nash obviously you know, made some controversial marks
in the cultural space as well. Those candidates are really
ware that the party seems to be getting a lot
(07:31):
of headlines at the moment and some of the economic stuff,
economic interventionism, the Shane Jones side of the party that
seems to be emphasized at the moment.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
So it seems to me though that Richard Shane Jones
is on every bit of media every time you turn
it on. He's either spending too much on a trip boy,
he's controversial, wanting to rip some mining stuff out stuff
or do something. So do you feel that he's slipping
away and it's becoming less about him?
Speaker 3 (07:59):
Yeah? I think so. I think Thomas is right that
they're becoming a culture warriors party. But you know, you
look the selection of laws, you look at the selection
of Ilakai, Stuart Nash and Alfred Naro. Those are going
to be four hard dog for dogs are going to
be hard to keep on the porch. Now, Peters has
(08:20):
always had very loyal MPs who have known when to
shut up, which is whenever he's talking, and I'm not
so sure that's going to be the case now. There's
going to be a lot of velbow elbowing of each other.
He's going to have a real party on his hands,
and whether he wants to manage that at his age,
(08:41):
and given also that he may be Foreign Minister and
overseas all the time. I think it's going to be
rather interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
So, and this seems to be from from a layman's point.
Someone's obviously a talkback host, but looks from the outside
and where you guys are, Thomas, and it feels to
me like they want to announce anything that will be
what public want to talk about that day.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Yeah, I've had I mean they've had this incredible tactic,
this parliamentary term of having a member's bill on basically anything,
and you're only allowed a certain number of members bills,
and so you know, a big a topic will come
up and one of the members bills will quietly get
taken out of the ballot, and then with great fan fear,
a new members bill would be put in the ballot
and the MP who's whose name the bill is in
(09:25):
they won't be anywhere near it because Winston Peters will
be all over the announcement saying, well, this is my
members bill, and this is what we're this is what
we're doing. And so yes that they've got all these
tactics to talk about everything all the time, whatever is,
whatever's front of mine for the general population, they're all
over it like a rash it's been quite an effective strategy.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
And also, Richard, it feels to me like National are
having a crack at them every possible time they can.
Speaker 3 (09:50):
They're increasingly doing so, and particularly Nikola Willis.
Speaker 2 (09:53):
Is to say she was in the show doing it
the other week.
Speaker 3 (09:56):
But the one person who's not very much is Christopher Luxon.
And you would have thought this week, with his Foreign
minister taking on India, which is an with the free
trade agreement, that the Prime Minister might have wanted to
sort that out, but he hasn't, and that raises a
real question about how much rope n z First gets
(10:17):
given or how much rope Winston gets given. And at
the moment it appears that it's endless. Who knows where
he's going to go next or what he's going to do,
because as Thomas says, they're on top of every Ish
popular issue of the day and their attention span is about.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
A week, just real quickly. So I want to move
on to the next topic. Do you think Michael Laws
will make any difference at all?
Speaker 4 (10:44):
Well, I think his reputation for saying outrageous things. You know,
at some point in the campaign you might find yourself
in the middle of a week long media cycle. You know,
the campaign is shorts, only a few weeks long, and
Michael Laws might say something outrageous. The entire energy of
the campaign has spent on debating the weather too, and
wifles of what he said, Richard.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
I think when he was last time an MP, some
of his colleagues would say that they found it difficult
to trust him.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Oh there you go. Now, A very sad story came
across a New Zealand media this week. I mean it
was a horror show, let's be honest, at the Wakaddow Hospital.
The reports I saw on TV one news of stories
I've read about it. You know, a fifty year old
man went and waited nine hours, got found unresponsible in
a cubicle. You know, twenty emergency staff all going through
(11:33):
the emergency department with you know, nurses on top of
the trolley trying to you know, to get him to
back to life. Pretty horrible story, Thomas, How do we
keep this from ever happening again? And did you really
feel that that we got the true story about what
was happening.
Speaker 4 (11:51):
Well, it's a disaster. I mean it's one of the worst.
You know, nine years of what happens in a need
and I'm not sure. I'm sure eventually we'll get to
the bottom of what has actually happened. I don't think
anyone's being withholding information that you know doesn't need to
be with how I think I think we will eventually
(12:12):
know what happened. I think the question is ed performance
in New Zealand and around the world has gotten much
worse since the pandemic. I was reading an article in
The Economist a couple of months ago and I pulled
it up just for prepping on the show. The Australian
health workforce has increased by about twenty percent since the pandemic,
and yet increasingly and a number of patients are being
left to wait inside an ambulance for half an hour
(12:34):
when they're brought to an ed. And in New Zealand,
I looked at our health workforce has increased by fifteen
thousand people in the public health system since twenty twenty.
Fifteen thousand people. There are five sorry eighty five thousand
people twenty twenty, there's now about one hundred thousand people
working in the health system. And obviously our performance isn't
great either, getting worse and health spending in real terms,
has increased by twenty percent since pandemic.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
I'm interested to hear what you say about Australia because
I've got lots of family members in Australia and they
think the system is perfect over there, is it not.
Speaker 4 (13:02):
I want to think it's much better than over here,
but it's just I definitely think it'srobably better than here,
but it's just it's all over the world. We've really
struggled for some reason. We have really struggled after the
pandemic to get our hospital systems working, despite the fact
that after the pandemic we all tipped billions of dollars
into our health system and hired a bunch of people,
(13:23):
which I think is probably a good thing. We're getting
older and sicker, we need bigger health systems. But for
some reason, since the pandemic, were really really struggled to
get the system working in proportion to the resources we
put into it.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Richard Harbour, when I did the story on the show,
I said that in my lifetime, it would go from
your mother ringing you to tell you that your auntie
had gone to hospital, but don't worry, she's in the
right place. To now we don't have that feeling that
of security once you get to hospital anymore.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Well, my wife's a GP and I asked her about
this last night and her answer was pretty straightforward. EDI's
are overrun with demand that all sorts of things explain that.
And for example, in some parts of New Zealand there's
no overnight independent after ours.
Speaker 2 (14:15):
Medical service, including Wellington. Well there's still eleven o'clock overnight.
Speaker 3 (14:21):
It's worse than that in some other places. So that's one.
Two has been the explosion in mental health issues, people
with mental health issues. I spent a night in ed
about four years ago when I fell off a ladder
and the place was full of police bringing in essentially
(14:41):
mental health cases. Now you get that huge influx of that,
and people who may have complex and difficult things wrong
with them, like a potential heart attack, are easily going
to get overlooked. The places is Mayhem.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
Yes, I was in a d about two years ago
and I was in the middle of the day and
you know, I got treated and then I was left
in the corridor. I was treated very well in the corridor,
no complaints. It was a good corridor, but you know
it was nonetheless in the corridor and around me was
was was chaos and and you know around me was
was what couldn't have been dealt with the night before,
which was to include mental health cases. And it's you know,
(15:22):
it's interesting. The other story that that's big this week
is obviously these MESD targets and the Prime Minister not
being aware of the lack of an Auckland night shelter. Well,
it's interesting.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
You know.
Speaker 4 (15:32):
One of the things the government's put up this week
is the fact that it is very, very difficult to
get to get a place that can house people who
have very intense, disruptive, sometimes violent mental health needs because
they can't really go in a night shelter because they're
not safe for themselves or for the other people in
the night shelter. But then where do they go? And
(15:54):
there's often you know, the answer is the street or
the ed.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
I mean, Richard, you'd remember when hospital was there, you
know what I mean, Thomas, you wouldn't, But we had
a hospital set up exactly for that mental health hospital.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
Yeah, when you've only got a walk outside this very
building and look across the road and see some of
the people walking up and down the street. These people
are clearly have mental health issues.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
Yeah. So, I mean a lot of people said we
should never have closed por hospital and there was one
up north to wasn't there There was two of them.
There was two major hospitals, so were like hospitals just
for mental health people.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Well, you may not even be safe there. I mean
Waiketo Hospital also had an incident a few weeks ago
at its mental health facility where they jabbed the autistic
Mary girl and rendered it more or less unconscious because
they had the wrong name.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
And then someone walked out. Someone that was in that
same unit walked out and committed suicide on the down
the road the same two weeks later. Terrible situation. Simon
Brown's got a bit of work to do.
Speaker 4 (16:58):
Yes, I think it's the toughest portfolio and government.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Of course it is. Of course, it is a hard
one to satisfy anyone. With Friday face off with Richard
Harmon and Thomas Cogland MISD have been under fire after
it was revealed one of their targets, one of eleven metrics,
was for their staff to decrease those people that are
sent to emergency housing to make the numbers look right. Richard,
(17:21):
when you first heard this. What do you think.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
Oh, this is the problem with targets, isn't it. It
doesn't matter whether the targets are.
Speaker 2 (17:26):
In, but surely emergency housing when someone's really down on
their luck, we shouldn't be saying, oh, have you got
a tent?
Speaker 3 (17:34):
I mean, but this is the problem. The government believes
that by imposing targets they've solved the problem, and then
they report back and say eighty percent of the targets
being met or whatever. But ofcause, what's going on on
the front line, whether it's MSD or an ED or wherever,
is that the staff are gaming the targets. And that's
what's going on here. Mis People have a natural incarnation
(17:57):
to make themselves look good in a job and bugger
what they're actually supposed to be doing.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
But I mean, once again, I think we're making lighter.
But the fact was that actually we want, you know,
as a job requirement, to stop people getting into emergency
housing when you know, like a thousand I think a
thousand people had been triarged and weren't even getting seen.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Yeah. Well, plainly the system as it stands doesn't work, right.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Thomas, your thoughts on it?
Speaker 4 (18:26):
Yeah, I mean I remember when Labor got rid of
a lot of the targets when they took office in
twenty seventeen, they got rid of a bunch of the targets,
and those things that had been targeted got worse. But
Labor argued that a more holistic approach lead to overall
better outcomes. And I think you know both both things
are true. If you don't target stuff, then those things
(18:47):
tend to not The things that you are not targeting
tend not to happen. But if you do target things,
and you target them too aggressively, then the public service
will hit your targets and do nothing else, and so sencely,
everything else, everything around your target gets a whole lot worse.
And that's what's happened here. It's one of those awful issues.
We're both both sides are telling the truth, and it
seems like you can't. You sort of can't win either way.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
Were you surprised, I mean you would have seen Tama Potacker.
He sort of seemed like he was completely lost with it. Tommy,
he just didn't he didn't even know he didn't. It
just just felt like it just something didn't feel right
to me.
Speaker 4 (19:21):
I mean, Tama Potacker, I think is his has come
up against the limits of his communications abilities in the
last month. He obviously blundered his way through those Conservation
Act reforms a couple of weeks ago where he had
to u turn after Forrest and Bird published those maps,
which you know it leads to the government was trying
to flog off of the country, which they obviously went.
(19:42):
But he couldn't argue a way out of that one,
and he couldn't argue his way out of this one.
I think. I think it's certainly, you know, one of
the one of the interesting things we're probably seeing this
this year is some of those kind of mid tier,
mid mid bench ministers. The one the one sort of
obviously high up the rankings is in the National Party,
but down the bottom of the rankings cabinet wise, or
you know, in the middle of the rankings kebnet wise,
that they are kind of getting a bit of pressure
(20:04):
put on them, and in time of Potuck case, I
think the last month he's shown himself to not quite
be up to up to meeting that pressure.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
I mean, Richard, that's a bit of a problem for
the Prime Minister because he's their Maori. Look isn't he.
I mean, you know, if you're going to try and
be the cultural you know this person he's it. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:25):
Look, I disagree with Thomas a little bit on this one.
Those conservation changes that Timer got into a whole part
of trouble over had been in the system for over
two years. They'd been discussed around the cabinet table. They
had been ticked off by the cabinet. Everything he did
(20:45):
was right, and then suddenly Forrest and bird E merge
out of literally nowhere with their maps.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
Now.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
He was slow off his feet to respond to that,
but he did, and he did respond. He said, I mean,
I was I don't know about you, Thomas, but he said,
I certainly got approached and would I interview him and
talk them to him about them? And I did. I
think his problem at the end of the day was
(21:12):
nervous colleagues. He could have stood his ground on the
on that legislation.
Speaker 2 (21:17):
Ah See, I found him. I've only had him on
the phone interviews, but I've interviewed him a couple of times.
I find him a little bit supercilious. Is that a
word that I can use correctly? But he always wants
to make it a little bit lighter and a little
bit more jovial and not quite serious and straight up
and down and am I close or not? I'm happy
to I'm happy to be wrong.
Speaker 4 (21:38):
Well, I think he failed to. I think he failed
to come out with the He did attack forrests and
burd but he could have been much bare erect and said, look,
using visual aids himself, we're not flogging off Mount Cook.
You know, we're not flogging off the remarkables. We are
selling the you know, met service building in Calvin, which
you know the Wellington listeners will we will probably agree,
(22:01):
is not a great town of this country and it's
a piece of danger concrete. And I think the reforms
have mirits. You know that the conservation estate is bogged
down by a lot of stuff that it doesn't really
need to own, that has no sort of conservation value. No, yeah,
(22:23):
there are gravel pits, which is an example that he gave,
and he was he was unable to make that case,
I think. But Richard's right. I think it was Simeon
Brown and some of the jittery national colleagues who who thought,
you know what selection year, why have a fight, Why
have a fight? You know, the best fight is one
(22:44):
that doesn't take place in the first place, and so
they're just backed down because they just couldn't be bothered
fighting it.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
MP spending has come under the spotlight in the last
couple of weeks. Shane Jones not the only minister spending
big bucks on limosines. Three MP's have been caught spending
over twenty grand and three months on domestic travel when
the house only sat for six weeks. Richard Harmond, should
MP's actually have to show their receipts and should the
(23:11):
public know what with what that's been in their money on?
And should there be some more you know, look at?
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Yeah? I think so. But I thought Richard Prebble made
an interesting point in his column and The Herald where
he said it's not the top three that you should
be looking at, it's the bottom three and you've got
to ask yourself whether they were doing anything at all.
Speaker 2 (23:34):
But it should be should be be more I don't know, spotlight.
Should the spotlight be on them more? Twenty five thou
and three months? It's a lot of money, Thomas.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
Oh, yeah, And I think the big story here is
that there actually actually wasn't a lot of parliamentary work
going on and the period in question, so you've got
to sort of scratch your head a wee bit and
wonder what on earth was going wrong. But I agree
with them with Richard's people. You know, you know it's
the it's very easy for some MPs to get quite
detached a large portion of ourt. You know, our m
(24:07):
MP parliament is based up in Auckland and they work
down in Wellington. So you know, if you are in
Auckland MP and what Greg Fleming and this list is,
you know, it's very easy to get to get to
spend your entire political life community in between Auckland and Wellington,
and then you really would be quite detached. So I
think there's a good thing if if you're an MP
and you use some of your your travel perk to
(24:28):
get out and about and see people gosh from starting
like crystaler luxon. Now, I don't think it's the worst thing,
but you have to be you have to be careful.
You don't well, you don't want it to it's a
it's a real contextual thing because you don't you don't
want to get into a situation where it looks like
you're you're sending yourself on a ticket tour the country.
Speaker 2 (24:45):
But one MP I mean two MP's from blenn and
more kaikur right, one spending twenty three thousand and one
spending eleven grand. I mean you can't. There's got to
be something that someone's doing wrong, as someone staying working
from home. I mean, once again, it's just a bit
of transparency would be nice.
Speaker 3 (25:01):
Yeah, I think it. There's a bit of a culture
of let's hop on a plane among MP's I think,
for example, I mean, I don't want to beg the
Parliamentary rugby team. But on the other hand, there were
hordes of them up in the Bay of Islands over
the weekend for a rugby game. Now it was allegedly
raising money for some charity or another.
Speaker 2 (25:22):
Would that be all on the on the tech? Oh yeah,
you see, I would have sat signorant to be not
the thing there, But I would have not thought that's
their own type of their own thing that would beyond
the tech.
Speaker 4 (25:32):
They do seem to choose to play rugby in such
nice places. You know, I'm not going to I'm not
going to pick on a part of the country that
I don't think is nice. But then they're certainly not
going on an nothing to play play rugby and not mine.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
I like Papasa try to give.
Speaker 4 (25:53):
It museum, and so maybe they should play.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
The Okay, let's talk about tobacco. I saw the story
on Ryan's show and I thought to my saying, oh
my god, you see uh elicit tobacco we know is
taking over New Zealand and Australia. It's horrendous, really gang
related death, killing, murders, all that stuff. New Zealand Minister
Casey Costello thinks the answer is to reduce the excise tax.
(26:17):
Richard Harvin', I mean, we've got ourselves in this country
to a really good situation where me and you grew up.
Everyone smoked. Everyone we spoked in the office, we smoked
in the studio. I can remember coming to work here
where the host was smoking in a studio. We've got
ourselves in a good situation. Surely we should not be
looking at doing anything to change that.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
I think that's the question. I mean, obviously, when you
put a tax on and make things like this as
expensive as they are, and you're going to get smuggling
and crime involved. But if we reduce the tax and
suddenly start increasing smoking, so that we're all sitting in
this room smoking. Then we have gone backwards. So it's
(26:57):
a fine line, and I'm not sure we draw it,
but someone's going to have to draw it somewhere.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Thomas, Yes, I came.
Speaker 4 (27:05):
I when I were turned eighteen, I think cigarettes was
still ten or twelve dollars a pack, which which was
very affordable. And now that I think that thirty five
dollars a pack, and I think, you know, at that price,
a lot of young people are like, you know, thanks,
but no thanks. I think I think that the price
has a massive distancingive on people's willingness to smoke. And
obviously it does come at the cost of organized crime
(27:28):
getting and organized crime getting in on the business. But
at the moment, I think that's probably a cost that
way there is outweighed by the benefits.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
You and you're a lot younger than us and Thomas
and you you're it's socially not acceptable to smoke now, really,
is it? Yeah? I mean you're really You got to
go around. It's almost like you've got to go into
the bike sheds to have a fag if you want one.
Speaker 4 (27:46):
Now, yeah, a few people, a few people still smoke,
but certainly yeah, it's I think people enjoy I remember
living when I was nineteen. I just wanted to spread
my wings a little bit and I moved to Poland
where people still smoked inside and it's incredible. You know,
people you just have a you know, your your meal
and a glass of wine and people would be like up,
(28:07):
but it's dank and all of your clothes start to stink.
You know. It was my entire wardrobe. It's very cold country.
So I had a lot of jumpers. Just all of
my jumpers smelled of smoking. And I think if it
ever changed the New Zealand people would people would rebell
for smell reasons.
Speaker 2 (28:22):
If nothing I've started can't quite work the what out.
It's wanted to spread your wings and go to Poland.
That's a great.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
Tell you what, I tell you what. Poland is soon
going to be richer than we are, you know, and
it is incredible New Zealand's economic relative economic decline versus
Poland taking off. I thought I made the right decision
to leave Poland and come back.
Speaker 2 (28:43):
I just want to quickly do a story that I
talked about the We're Crazy on the show. A made
of Mine goes and has a coffee and a coffee
bar with another made of mine, right, been doing it
for years, seven o'clock every morning. He wears what do
they call those trump hats. I've got a special name
and Thomas the Mega hat, Mega hat, right, you know right?
So he wears the hat. He goes into the coffee
(29:05):
bar and he gets told by the lady serving the
coffee that she will not serve him unless he takes
his hat off. He says he's not going to take
his hat off. She bans them downtown Wellington, Thomas Cobland,
What do you think? I mean, I've known you. Your
btes would say that's okay.
Speaker 4 (29:21):
No, I think I look at you know I'm not.
I don't know why you'd ban someone for wearing a
hadl like that. I think that's no reaction. I wouldn't.
I wouldn't go around wearing a Mega I certainly wouldn't
go around wearing a megahatt and Wellington, it's not a
great way to make friends in this town with it.
Some with his voting record, and I probably wouldn't go
into a coffee shop megaheat either. But but banning people
(29:45):
for wearing a pretty ordinary hat, you know that seems
like a bit of a note.
Speaker 3 (29:50):
Richard Harmon, Well, I was always taught to take my
hat off when I went inside. But having said that,
banning somebody for wearing a mega hat does seem a
little extreme. After all, people wear t shirts with all
sorts of political messages all over them.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
Really big strong political messages, don't you. I've seen some
green message Green Party stuff going to cafes that I've
worked that have been pretty strong, haven't they. Yeah, So
I mean, yeah, so take your hat off before you
went inside.
Speaker 4 (30:19):
It van hats and restaurants. There we go is a
members bill for New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (30:25):
First see, I were a cap every week in all
weekend right, and I always thought, can I come to
my come to the radio station with a cap one?
Can you? Is it acceptable?
Speaker 4 (30:33):
Oh you're the best dress man. Well, well we had
the win in Parla. We had Rowedy waits to hit
has a selection of wonderful hats and he's managed to
get those through the dress code.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Don't start me up on that. Don't start me up
there because he wouldn't wear them until Mariah would he.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
Well, for a very good reason. He wears a hat
when he takes it off you you see why he's
like that old Lavery and b David Samuels. He wears
a hat all the time for the same reason.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Take a short break and come back with hots and
notts with our guests, Richard Harmon and Thomas Coglan. By
the way, for those listeners, Thomas Cogland's probably the best
dressed person in politics. You know, he always looks every
time you see it. It looks like he's just come
out of man for man and spent a lot of money.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
There you go, the Friday face. Hot.
Speaker 2 (31:19):
Okay, Richard Harmon, quickly give us your hots and knots.
I've gone over time.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Hot New Zealand cricket winning the series in England outstanding.
Not those road cones at the end of my street.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
You're not the first person that said that, Thomas Cognan,
what's your hots and notts?
Speaker 4 (31:34):
My heart will. I was out for a walk last Sunday,
out for a run along the coast and Seaturn. I
ran past Ian McKellen playing you know, the guy played
gandalfrom Lord of the Rings. And he was at my pub,
local pub that night, the Little Sprig and Seaturn. And
it felt hot because it's a return to those great
sort of period when Wellington was really hot, you know,
the two thousand and three Lord of the Rings. It's
(31:54):
wonderful to get the mojo back in mind was also
the road Cones, so Richard stold.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
It amazing to have those sort of vibes and.
Speaker 4 (32:02):
Yeah, yeah, it's good. We need we need to we
need to bring that that that sort of that that's
time back in a way because there was a lot
more I don't know, optimism in the city.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Thank you both so very very much. Have a great weekend,
Richard Harmon and Thomas Cogland.
Speaker 1 (32:17):
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
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
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