March 11, 2026 • 21 mins
This week for Politics Thursday Nick is joined by Labour MP and spokesperson for Health and Wellington Issues, Ayesha Verrall and National MP for Otaki, Tim Costley.
Yesterday the Covid-19 response findings were released, what have our politicians learned from these findings?
Verrall, who was associate health minister at the time, shares her thoughts on the inquiry findings surrounding spendings, teenage vaccination health concerns and lockdowns.
Was the 30-million-dollar inquiry worth it?
They also cover the union outcry over primary teacher individual pay deals, and the letter from Wellington regional mayors and community leaders opposing move on orders.
Plus, Shane Reti exits the beehive - are some people too good to last in parliament?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Said, b well It Fix Thursday, I Shavil Health and
Wellington Issue spokesperson for Labor North North candidate, I forget that.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
A candidate for North for Wellington North new electorate that
combines Wellington Central in a hurry, you all parts of
the horry.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
It's going to be a great run when we find
out who National is going to put up.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Do you know, no, I'm I'm waiting, but yeah, interested
to know what the land of the land is, Who's
who's in the field.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
I tried to push Nicholer on it last week. I said,
why didn't you stand lazy? I said no, I didn't
say that. It all Nick Costley, Nationals MP for O Techie.
Speaker 4 (00:47):
You're also known as Tim Costley. But close what I
say next? But he's my he's my cousin.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
I'm starting badly. Can we take that for all the
social media? Please?
Speaker 4 (00:58):
Yeah, we only got my name out there. It's Tim Costly.
You can vote for me, but you have to be
in Capay.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Okay, I'm going to Kapiti on sadny I told you.
Speaker 4 (01:05):
And you're welcome. You spend some money on the way through.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
I'm looking forward to it. Let's talk about what did
you say so you could drop in on neck? Thanks
for no thanks Tim. Even yesterday the second phase of
the inquiry into New Zealand COVID nineteen's response was released.
Largely the findings were no surprise. Well, actually the fact
that there was no surprises was a bit of a
(01:28):
surprise to me. But Auckland spent five days longer in
lockdown that was needed. There were some issues with advice,
which is obviously pretty serious and I want to ask
aisher about it with for teenagers second vaccinations. But you know, realistically,
there was nothing in there that will actually win the
coalition the government in a few months back into government
(01:50):
in a few months time. Ayesha. There's still talk why
you guys didn't front up? Is that a dead story
now or do you think that you knew that it
was going to be okay and you didn't need the
front up.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
I think you're referring to interviews in the during the
Royal Commission, and we did front up. We gave multiple hearings.
I also gave written evidence. All of us were interviewed.
So look, we welcome the findings of the Royal Commission.
As you say, it's largely a good report. It identifies
(02:24):
that the response was one of the more successful in
the world, but certainly goes through, as you say, areas
that aren't surprises where there needs to be improvements. So
the question for us now is are we more prepared
today than we were at the beginning of the pandemic
six years ago? And I don't think we are, And
(02:45):
so that's the work for the government.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Can I ask you, as the Health minister during that
period of time, how serious was the issue about the
vaccines and teenage children?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Just remember I was the Associate Minister of Health at
the time. The issue is not about the vaccinations for
teenage children. The issue is about the mandate for a
very small number of teenagers who were working or volunteering
in educational settings, so quite a small number of people.
But the report did make a significant finding, which was
(03:16):
it advice on that was not given to us, And
yes that would have had that would have changed the
outcome in terms of whether or not those children were
covered by vaccine mandate.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
So was it a phew moment when the report came out,
because I mean you could have anything could have come out.
You didn't know what was in the report. So was
it a pretty pretty happy labor organization when they saw it.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Oh? Look, I think it was a fair report and
that's what you hope for in these sort of situations. Ultimately,
I think about where I started from in this process,
So as a doctor down at Wellington Hospital expert and
infectious diseases, decided to contribute to the COVID nineteen response
as an expert, and then in government when we go
(03:59):
through crises in the future, you hope people will contribute
like I did and like others did, and not think,
oh my gosh, will people unfairly tear the response to shreds?
So yeah, I'm happy with this. The pointer is to
get on and implement the findings.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Now, Jim, what was the most interesting part of this inquiry?
I mean there was no real gotcha moments, was it?
Speaker 1 (04:21):
No?
Speaker 4 (04:21):
I mean I think what we already knew we'd had
previously the Treasury report about the spending. We knew sort
of half of the sexy old billion that went got
spent on COVID wasn't actually spent on COVID, and even
Chris Hopkins had said, well, look, we probably would have
spent it anyway. I mean, I think that's pretty telling.
I think that maybe the questions for me that it
raised were about, Yes, there are questions about was advice
(04:43):
passed to ministers, but there are also questions about, you know,
once they knew, what did they do. So when Chris
Hopkins was told on the twenty second of December that
there were concerns about the double vaccination for youth and I.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Should I can answer that, So why don't we get
on and answer seeing you think it's an important it's
an important question. What the Commission finds is that we
knew about general concerns and I challenged the advice that
we that we got. And therefore you'll note the Commission says,
I write a note describing what I learned from those
(05:16):
interactions in the margin of the of the of my
briefing that I signed off. The point is and the
Royal Commission shows this. The final advice that was firmer
was not given to ministers. Now, you may not be
happy that you didn't get a smoking gun to take
us on on this, and it is absolutely disgusting that
(05:37):
you and that members of the government are raising questions
about this, casting doubt about vaccination at a time when
we desperately need our children vaccinated. Playing into these conspiracy
theories will not help New Zealand. We have had two reports,
people have had their say, we have findings, let's get
on and implement them so our country is safer.
Speaker 4 (05:59):
Okay. So I'll finish now without maybe getting as heated
as that was. And I'm not into conspiracy theory here.
I've consistently said we need to raise vaccination in New Zealand.
Week One of my criticisms of that period would be
we took our foot completely off the pedal in terms
of vaccinations and look at the stats for two year
olds now it's it's appalling, and it's something that we
(06:21):
are intentionally trying to fix. My question was once they knew,
Once they knew, what did they do? Because I shall
signed that advice on the seventh of January. She was,
as she just said on the show, an expert and
infectious diseases. If anyone was going to sit there and
get this, and anyone was going to get these questions
and the information, and maybe some of it wasn't presented
to them, I accept that and I said. The first
(06:43):
thing I said was that that's concerning, and that raised
questions for me. But if anyone was going to be
able to ask these questions and get this information at
the same time that Chris Haipkins knew on the twenty
second of December that there were concerns, maybe he hadn't
had the final advice, but they still ran advice. They
still ran after signed that advice on the twenty second December.
(07:04):
There's two shots for Summer Youth campaign to get people
double vaccinator. That's not the point, well, it's exactly the point. No,
it's not because it puts some young people at risk
and we all accept that now. And maybe you didn't
know everything, and maybe you hadn't asked some things or
found out some ocation.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
What was hopeless? What was the actual concern? I mean,
what was the risk that Tim talks about.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
The risk was which we will all remember cast our
mind back. We all remember that there was a risk
under discussion, widely publicized about the risk of my archaditis
heart inflammation for young people when they received a second dose.
But I just want to be clear, the Royal Commission's
findings are not about what it was specific to the
(07:47):
mandate not for the wider issue for children, and I
think that is an important thing. It's very frustrating that
members of the government are engaging in this sort of
spin when we're meant to be trying to get young
people vaccinated in this country.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
But those mandates lasted. You know from advice that Chris
hit Can signed on the twenty second of December, you've
ever signed on the seventh of January. Mandates continued from
work until junior Royal Commission. The vaccine pasty has been.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
A Royal commission shows that is not true.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Months.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I know you're going told to come here and spend
the morning, but that is not There's been a Royal
Royal commission and you you are not accepting the findings
of the Royal Commission that found ministers told about that. Well,
stop persisting.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
I just protest too much because I've been I'm trying
to be really clean and really balanced. My question was
just what happened in between that seventh and December January
and in April when the when the vaccine pass finally
went away. The emphasis on that for two for kids,
the border that got extended thirty two days against advice
they said it's not needed, we don't need it, we
(08:55):
don't need to put the pressure on the testing. And
that continued right through summer, against any advice.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
It was.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
It was created by Chris Hopkins, took an extra option
to kebnet and then kemn extended it another week again.
And obviously I've already discussed the spending. So I think
there's some great questions.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Can I just ask you quickly, both of you, because
I've got to go to a break thirty million for
both inquiries? Isihaviral good good value? Bad value? Should be
done it?
Speaker 3 (09:22):
If the government has had a thirty million dollars of
inquiries and are not listening to the results, it is
an absolute waste of money.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Tim, Yeah, I.
Speaker 4 (09:31):
Think it's really important. It was the significant time in
our country and were absolutely you think.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
You learned something from it. I mean you're in, you're
in amongst it.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
You guys are not even believing the fine.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
You think you've learned something from it? Has it helped? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (09:43):
I think I think I think it has helpful. I
think it gives a perspective not just on the health measures,
but the spending musuices.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Okay, let's take a short break, Aishaviral and Tim Costly,
brother of cousin of Nick Costly. There was a very
famous basketball player, Nick Costly. That's why I got it
muddled up. Aisheviral and Tim Costly joined us for politics Thursday.
We just talked about it in the last hour. So
I'm going to bring it up and talk to you
guys about it. The Inn City. I are angry that
(10:11):
non non union members, and there's quite a few, a
third a third of teachers and the primary teachers aren't
part of the union are going to get the same
deal that they've been negotiating for around about the same
deal to what's your thoughts on this? Should should the
people that don't pack their union fees get the deal
that the union's negotiated.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
So the union's angry, like standard ops for them right
that they will never be happy. They are just a political,
angry little group, the union officials themselves, not the twenty
thousand great we Can teachers they represent. But yeah, so
the other ten thousand teachers have got the ability now
to take a four point seven percent pay rise over
(10:51):
the next twelve months. That puts that that effectively is
what secondary teachers got given last year. That's an extra
fifty to seventy six dollars a week, Like, why would
anyone be angry that teachers are getting offered more money? Well,
it's empire building from the union, right.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Yeah, Well the union's upset not not the non.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Years because people won't want to be part of the
union because all they do is mow and they've been
out of touch.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
The converse could be the same too. They could be saying, well,
ship the union's scholars that money, and I'm not a member,
I should join to help them out.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
Well, if they were actually in touch with what's going
on and they were actually fighting for the things that
teachers have been continually frustrated by the union. A large
number of people have left that union because of the
of the silly games that they've been playing. Teachers just
want to get on and do the thing that they
are passionate about doing, helping young kids to get ahead
in life, and the union just need to get in line.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
I shoul were you surprised that there's the third of
teachers can be in Zindy, I traditionally has been one
of the strongest unions in the country.
Speaker 3 (11:48):
A look, I worked in the public sector in a
hospital before coming into parliament. So no, there's always a
mix of people in any workplace with different views about
about joining a union or not. I'm pretty unhappy with
that anti union diet tribe from tim. Though unions represent workers,
they represent hundreds of thousands of working New Zealanders. If
(12:13):
standing up for workers involves picking a few fights with
the government, I don't think.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
That's not right that they are complaining they got offered
a pay rise.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
They are standing up for decent pay rises. They haven't
been offered a pay rise that keeps up with inflation.
It is absolutely fine, and I think this is why
the government is seen as out of touch, because it
is pushing so many working people to accept lower wages
than they deserve.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
I want to respond to that, well, I don't agree.
Speaker 4 (12:42):
Right, four point seven percent is higher than inflation. Since
our government's come in, we've seen wage growth that is
higher than inflation. We saw the opposite under the last government.
This is a real fight. Well no, I mean it's true.
You can look up the treasure two years.
Speaker 3 (12:55):
That's over two years.
Speaker 4 (12:57):
So this is a positive thing. What should be happening here?
The union? Of course they can go and fight for
their members and do that thing. But they should be
saying great, these tachers have been off of this. They
should settle their collective bargnan and let all the teachers
get ahead. This isn't what teachers want to be focused on.
They want to be able to get the pay rise
if they want it. It's an option. They don't have
to take it, they can choose. We shouldn't be scared
(13:18):
of this.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Moving on, I mean this upset me. Oh, I'd love
to get your guys opinion on this. This week and
open letter to the Prime Minister by Wellington regional mayors
including Andrew Little, Ewe church community leaders all the local
mayors joined forces and sent this letter hither Dupericy Allen
on her show had a huge rant about it. She
said that it absolute shows you that our leaders will
(13:42):
you know, aren't looking after our centers and it will
cause disruption for tourism and be a terrible look for
Wellington and it's an embarrassment for the capital city. Tim,
what's your thoughts on this? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (13:54):
I had to note with a bit of irony that
it came out the same day there was another article
showing what business leaders thought of Wellington Council sixty two
percent unsatisfied, only six percent were positive. You know, the
majority thought it was going in the wrong direction. It
was only eighteen percent that thought it was going in
the right direction. And it's because of stuff like this
I think doesn't help sure and this was before surprise
(14:15):
you moer point right, Yeah, well it does surprise me.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
And it's a problem with people expressing their views. They
can best unions now, meors and the downtown and the community.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
On the socials. My point is I support them. I
support all these business leaders voicing their views which is
frustrated and even in the meors themselves, and understand that
this needs to be responded to. Well, here's here is
(14:48):
a tool for people to use. Business leaders are supporting it,
they're elected to represent these people. They're not doing it.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
And to be fair, I should and I am very
strong on this as well. No one came up with
a plan B. None of the mayors, none of the
social groups, none of the charities came up with one
plan to help the situation. We know that they've got
mental illness, we know that they've got addictions, we know
that troubled people. We know we've got to help them.
(15:14):
No one had a plan to span moving them on.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
I don't know whether that's a fair criticism or not, Nick,
And that's I have been aware. There have been conversations
between government and local government. I'm it's a shame not
more has come out of that that could actually help
this problem.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
It is important after Wellington, that's your job after and
is a problem.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
It is a problem. Our city center has changed things
that I felt comfortable with when I was a young person,
university age person hanging out in Cuba Street and thereabouts.
I now think twice, you know when I'm when I'm
there with my with my twelve year old, and that's
(15:59):
not good. It is. It's not we don't There does
need to be action on this, but this is just
a band aid move on orders. As a band aid,
it won't solve the underlying.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
But it's another like. I get the point you're making, right,
and I agree with you when you talk about that
the inner city has changed and you wouldn't feel comfortable
doing some things maybe you would ten twenty years ago.
I totally get it. What I don't get is why
the opposition to having this is one option in the
tool belt it's not saying everyone has to get like,
no one's getting charge. It's not a criminal conviction, like
(16:31):
why not let police have it. It's a bit like
the gang pitch ban and people criticize that, but it's
kind of worked.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
But because the answer to is because it's got harder
to get people into social housing under your governments. That's why.
That's why we have a market increase in homelessness since
the change in government. And that's the problem. So until
we see actual progress on getting people, have you.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
Got you've got an alternative. Have you've got somebody you
could tell us that actually might help us, that will
will work well?
Speaker 3 (17:03):
Labors, how policy priorities are jobs, how homes. We are
very well aware of this issue, but I did not
come with a policy.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
And now it's not a show today, but these people
are being.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Absolutely the housing first initiatives that were developed under our government,
which was part of our mental health initiatives, putting people
in home and then bringing in the other supports to
help them with addiction and mental health and social services.
That is a model that's shown to work.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
Just go you go well, I mean, I don't accept
the comments about homelessness and look we saw people living
in cas gorop before far under the last one, the
social housing Weightless blew out five times. We spent billions
of dollars on immergency accommodation. So I just think there
are lots of aspects to this. I think it's a
complex issue and I think we need to give people
a whole range of tools to combat this. I think
(17:51):
this is a good way of supporting local businesses because
downtown Wellington needs it.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Can I just add my five cents worth? And when
the Fever World Cup was in on we never saw them,
never saw any homelessness people in Wellington. They were taken out.
What if they can take them out and help look
after them during that period because the world media's attentions
on us, couldn't they do that more often?
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (18:16):
As I said, there are there are solutions, and I
think the challenge with what you said, Tim is that
every Wellingtonian knows this problem has got markedly worse since
the change of government. That's that's the fact that doesn't lie.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
I want to ask you something on a little bit
low key thing because there's something this is coming from
me watching Shane Ritti announce his retirement and his speech
the other the other day, yesterday or two days ago,
and I've always wanted to do so, and I'm going
to do it in the next half hour. Is sometimes
people are sometimes people and I'll come to you first
and them on this too nice for politics? I mean,
(18:49):
this is a guy that obviously is a great family man.
He is a musician, like both of you guys are
found out that both my guests are saxophone players. So
Shane Shane RITTI plays with his family band and he's
very proud of it, and he's a GP and a doctor.
Is this sometimes that people are just too nice for politics?
Speaker 4 (19:09):
I think Shane really is incredibly nice. He is just
a top guy. And I don't think you'll find anyone
on either side of the house really that will criticize
the guy.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
Or that's not my question?
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Sare is it?
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Sometimes?
Speaker 4 (19:20):
It just I like to think. I like to think, no,
people aren't, you know, I don't think that's the thing
I think, And this isn't the case with doctor Shane.
I think some people could come in being too naive
for politics, but that's not him. I just think people
have their own approach to how they tackle this role.
Everyone takes it in a different way. But you know,
(19:41):
he's been a great MP, he's been a great minister,
he has served his community faithfully.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
He's a nice guy, and nice guys just don't last
in politics.
Speaker 4 (19:49):
There's not a long time though.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
In fairness, yeah, he has, he has. He is a
nice person and I've appreciated some of the interactions that
I've had over the time. I've been an opposition with
doctor Shane on the gene technology bill where he was
very very open with us as a as an opposition.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Answer my question, my question I wanted to ask my
listeners and my team when we finish this segment. Is
politics a place for nice people? Well?
Speaker 3 (20:15):
I would put it this way. Political leaders make choices
about the value about the behaviors they encourage in their team.
So you have a choice to keep those nice, but
intelligent and connected to their community people working constructively in
your team. And I reckon that's the challenge for political leaders.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
See, I think that's the problem that why our Prime
Minister is not reflecting to the to the public because
he's a nice person, he's a nice guy. I'm starting
to question where the nice people can survive in politics.
Speaker 4 (20:49):
Well, I think when you know someone personally, sometimes you
get a different impression to what you see in the media. Right,
those that know Shane will have no doubt about the
kind of guy is. And we had a big company
event in the banquetth ort, the beehive, and the consistent
comment from people as the PM worked around and chattity,
everyone was man, goody, such a nice guy, such a
good guy.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Yeah, okay, thank you both for taking time out of
your busy schedule. Have a nice run. Hidington's come in
his shorts and his T shirt and he's going to
jog back to Parliament. So if you see him, give
him a couple of wolf bostles, which your if your
if you're watching watching not allowed to do that any more.
Grace is just giving me the DoD can't do those
in the modern world.
Speaker 1 (21:28):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news Talks It'd Be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Said, b well It Fix Thursday, I Shavil Health and
Wellington Issue spokesperson for Labor North North candidate, I forget that.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
A candidate for North for Wellington North new electorate that
combines Wellington Central in a hurry, you all parts of
the horry.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
It's going to be a great run when we find
out who National is going to put up.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Do you know, no, I'm I'm waiting, but yeah, interested
to know what the land of the land is, Who's
who's in the field.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
I tried to push Nicholer on it last week. I said,
why didn't you stand lazy? I said no, I didn't
say that. It all Nick Costley, Nationals MP for O Techie.
Speaker 4 (00:47):
You're also known as Tim Costley. But close what I
say next? But he's my he's my cousin.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
I'm starting badly. Can we take that for all the
social media? Please?
Speaker 4 (00:58):
Yeah, we only got my name out there. It's Tim Costly.
You can vote for me, but you have to be
in Capay.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
Okay, I'm going to Kapiti on sadny I told you.
Speaker 4 (01:05):
And you're welcome. You spend some money on the way through.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
I'm looking forward to it. Let's talk about what did
you say so you could drop in on neck? Thanks
for no thanks Tim. Even yesterday the second phase of
the inquiry into New Zealand COVID nineteen's response was released.
Largely the findings were no surprise. Well, actually the fact
that there was no surprises was a bit of a
(01:28):
surprise to me. But Auckland spent five days longer in
lockdown that was needed. There were some issues with advice,
which is obviously pretty serious and I want to ask
aisher about it with for teenagers second vaccinations. But you know, realistically,
there was nothing in there that will actually win the
coalition the government in a few months back into government
(01:50):
in a few months time. Ayesha. There's still talk why
you guys didn't front up? Is that a dead story
now or do you think that you knew that it
was going to be okay and you didn't need the
front up.
Speaker 3 (02:03):
I think you're referring to interviews in the during the
Royal Commission, and we did front up. We gave multiple hearings.
I also gave written evidence. All of us were interviewed.
So look, we welcome the findings of the Royal Commission.
As you say, it's largely a good report. It identifies
(02:24):
that the response was one of the more successful in
the world, but certainly goes through, as you say, areas
that aren't surprises where there needs to be improvements. So
the question for us now is are we more prepared
today than we were at the beginning of the pandemic
six years ago? And I don't think we are, And
(02:45):
so that's the work for the government.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Can I ask you, as the Health minister during that
period of time, how serious was the issue about the
vaccines and teenage children?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Just remember I was the Associate Minister of Health at
the time. The issue is not about the vaccinations for
teenage children. The issue is about the mandate for a
very small number of teenagers who were working or volunteering
in educational settings, so quite a small number of people.
But the report did make a significant finding, which was
(03:16):
it advice on that was not given to us, And
yes that would have had that would have changed the
outcome in terms of whether or not those children were
covered by vaccine mandate.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
So was it a phew moment when the report came out,
because I mean you could have anything could have come out.
You didn't know what was in the report. So was
it a pretty pretty happy labor organization when they saw it.
Speaker 3 (03:39):
Oh? Look, I think it was a fair report and
that's what you hope for in these sort of situations. Ultimately,
I think about where I started from in this process,
So as a doctor down at Wellington Hospital expert and
infectious diseases, decided to contribute to the COVID nineteen response
as an expert, and then in government when we go
(03:59):
through crises in the future, you hope people will contribute
like I did and like others did, and not think,
oh my gosh, will people unfairly tear the response to shreds?
So yeah, I'm happy with this. The pointer is to
get on and implement the findings.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Now, Jim, what was the most interesting part of this inquiry?
I mean there was no real gotcha moments, was it?
Speaker 1 (04:21):
No?
Speaker 4 (04:21):
I mean I think what we already knew we'd had
previously the Treasury report about the spending. We knew sort
of half of the sexy old billion that went got
spent on COVID wasn't actually spent on COVID, and even
Chris Hopkins had said, well, look, we probably would have
spent it anyway. I mean, I think that's pretty telling.
I think that maybe the questions for me that it
raised were about, Yes, there are questions about was advice
(04:43):
passed to ministers, but there are also questions about, you know,
once they knew, what did they do. So when Chris
Hopkins was told on the twenty second of December that
there were concerns about the double vaccination for youth and I.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
Should I can answer that, So why don't we get
on and answer seeing you think it's an important it's
an important question. What the Commission finds is that we
knew about general concerns and I challenged the advice that
we that we got. And therefore you'll note the Commission says,
I write a note describing what I learned from those
(05:16):
interactions in the margin of the of the of my
briefing that I signed off. The point is and the
Royal Commission shows this. The final advice that was firmer
was not given to ministers. Now, you may not be
happy that you didn't get a smoking gun to take
us on on this, and it is absolutely disgusting that
(05:37):
you and that members of the government are raising questions
about this, casting doubt about vaccination at a time when
we desperately need our children vaccinated. Playing into these conspiracy
theories will not help New Zealand. We have had two reports,
people have had their say, we have findings, let's get
on and implement them so our country is safer.
Speaker 4 (05:59):
Okay. So I'll finish now without maybe getting as heated
as that was. And I'm not into conspiracy theory here.
I've consistently said we need to raise vaccination in New Zealand.
Week One of my criticisms of that period would be
we took our foot completely off the pedal in terms
of vaccinations and look at the stats for two year
olds now it's it's appalling, and it's something that we
(06:21):
are intentionally trying to fix. My question was once they knew,
Once they knew, what did they do? Because I shall
signed that advice on the seventh of January. She was,
as she just said on the show, an expert and
infectious diseases. If anyone was going to sit there and
get this, and anyone was going to get these questions
and the information, and maybe some of it wasn't presented
to them, I accept that and I said. The first
(06:43):
thing I said was that that's concerning, and that raised
questions for me. But if anyone was going to be
able to ask these questions and get this information at
the same time that Chris Haipkins knew on the twenty
second of December that there were concerns, maybe he hadn't
had the final advice, but they still ran advice. They
still ran after signed that advice on the twenty second December.
(07:04):
There's two shots for Summer Youth campaign to get people
double vaccinator. That's not the point, well, it's exactly the point. No,
it's not because it puts some young people at risk
and we all accept that now. And maybe you didn't
know everything, and maybe you hadn't asked some things or
found out some ocation.
Speaker 2 (07:19):
What was hopeless? What was the actual concern? I mean,
what was the risk that Tim talks about.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
The risk was which we will all remember cast our
mind back. We all remember that there was a risk
under discussion, widely publicized about the risk of my archaditis
heart inflammation for young people when they received a second dose.
But I just want to be clear, the Royal Commission's
findings are not about what it was specific to the
(07:47):
mandate not for the wider issue for children, and I
think that is an important thing. It's very frustrating that
members of the government are engaging in this sort of
spin when we're meant to be trying to get young
people vaccinated in this country.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
But those mandates lasted. You know from advice that Chris
hit Can signed on the twenty second of December, you've
ever signed on the seventh of January. Mandates continued from
work until junior Royal Commission. The vaccine pasty has been.
Speaker 3 (08:12):
A Royal commission shows that is not true.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Months.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I know you're going told to come here and spend
the morning, but that is not There's been a Royal
Royal commission and you you are not accepting the findings
of the Royal Commission that found ministers told about that. Well,
stop persisting.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
I just protest too much because I've been I'm trying
to be really clean and really balanced. My question was
just what happened in between that seventh and December January
and in April when the when the vaccine pass finally
went away. The emphasis on that for two for kids,
the border that got extended thirty two days against advice
they said it's not needed, we don't need it, we
(08:55):
don't need to put the pressure on the testing. And
that continued right through summer, against any advice.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
It was.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
It was created by Chris Hopkins, took an extra option
to kebnet and then kemn extended it another week again.
And obviously I've already discussed the spending. So I think
there's some great questions.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Can I just ask you quickly, both of you, because
I've got to go to a break thirty million for
both inquiries? Isihaviral good good value? Bad value? Should be
done it?
Speaker 3 (09:22):
If the government has had a thirty million dollars of
inquiries and are not listening to the results, it is
an absolute waste of money.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Tim, Yeah, I.
Speaker 4 (09:31):
Think it's really important. It was the significant time in
our country and were absolutely you think.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
You learned something from it. I mean you're in, you're
in amongst it.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
You guys are not even believing the fine.
Speaker 2 (09:41):
You think you've learned something from it? Has it helped? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (09:43):
I think I think I think it has helpful. I
think it gives a perspective not just on the health measures,
but the spending musuices.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Okay, let's take a short break, Aishaviral and Tim Costly,
brother of cousin of Nick Costly. There was a very
famous basketball player, Nick Costly. That's why I got it
muddled up. Aisheviral and Tim Costly joined us for politics Thursday.
We just talked about it in the last hour. So
I'm going to bring it up and talk to you
guys about it. The Inn City. I are angry that
(10:11):
non non union members, and there's quite a few, a
third a third of teachers and the primary teachers aren't
part of the union are going to get the same
deal that they've been negotiating for around about the same
deal to what's your thoughts on this? Should should the
people that don't pack their union fees get the deal
that the union's negotiated.
Speaker 4 (10:30):
So the union's angry, like standard ops for them right
that they will never be happy. They are just a political,
angry little group, the union officials themselves, not the twenty
thousand great we Can teachers they represent. But yeah, so
the other ten thousand teachers have got the ability now
to take a four point seven percent pay rise over
(10:51):
the next twelve months. That puts that that effectively is
what secondary teachers got given last year. That's an extra
fifty to seventy six dollars a week, Like, why would
anyone be angry that teachers are getting offered more money? Well,
it's empire building from the union, right.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Yeah, Well the union's upset not not the non.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Years because people won't want to be part of the
union because all they do is mow and they've been
out of touch.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
The converse could be the same too. They could be saying, well,
ship the union's scholars that money, and I'm not a member,
I should join to help them out.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
Well, if they were actually in touch with what's going
on and they were actually fighting for the things that
teachers have been continually frustrated by the union. A large
number of people have left that union because of the
of the silly games that they've been playing. Teachers just
want to get on and do the thing that they
are passionate about doing, helping young kids to get ahead
in life, and the union just need to get in line.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
I shoul were you surprised that there's the third of
teachers can be in Zindy, I traditionally has been one
of the strongest unions in the country.
Speaker 3 (11:48):
A look, I worked in the public sector in a
hospital before coming into parliament. So no, there's always a
mix of people in any workplace with different views about
about joining a union or not. I'm pretty unhappy with
that anti union diet tribe from tim. Though unions represent workers,
they represent hundreds of thousands of working New Zealanders. If
(12:13):
standing up for workers involves picking a few fights with
the government, I don't think.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
That's not right that they are complaining they got offered
a pay rise.
Speaker 3 (12:21):
They are standing up for decent pay rises. They haven't
been offered a pay rise that keeps up with inflation.
It is absolutely fine, and I think this is why
the government is seen as out of touch, because it
is pushing so many working people to accept lower wages
than they deserve.
Speaker 2 (12:39):
I want to respond to that, well, I don't agree.
Speaker 4 (12:42):
Right, four point seven percent is higher than inflation. Since
our government's come in, we've seen wage growth that is
higher than inflation. We saw the opposite under the last government.
This is a real fight. Well no, I mean it's true.
You can look up the treasure two years.
Speaker 3 (12:55):
That's over two years.
Speaker 4 (12:57):
So this is a positive thing. What should be happening here?
The union? Of course they can go and fight for
their members and do that thing. But they should be
saying great, these tachers have been off of this. They
should settle their collective bargnan and let all the teachers
get ahead. This isn't what teachers want to be focused on.
They want to be able to get the pay rise
if they want it. It's an option. They don't have
to take it, they can choose. We shouldn't be scared
(13:18):
of this.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Moving on, I mean this upset me. Oh, I'd love
to get your guys opinion on this. This week and
open letter to the Prime Minister by Wellington regional mayors
including Andrew Little, Ewe church community leaders all the local
mayors joined forces and sent this letter hither Dupericy Allen
on her show had a huge rant about it. She
said that it absolute shows you that our leaders will
(13:42):
you know, aren't looking after our centers and it will
cause disruption for tourism and be a terrible look for
Wellington and it's an embarrassment for the capital city. Tim,
what's your thoughts on this? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (13:54):
I had to note with a bit of irony that
it came out the same day there was another article
showing what business leaders thought of Wellington Council sixty two
percent unsatisfied, only six percent were positive. You know, the
majority thought it was going in the wrong direction. It
was only eighteen percent that thought it was going in
the right direction. And it's because of stuff like this
I think doesn't help sure and this was before surprise
(14:15):
you moer point right, Yeah, well it does surprise me.
Speaker 3 (14:20):
And it's a problem with people expressing their views. They
can best unions now, meors and the downtown and the community.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
On the socials. My point is I support them. I
support all these business leaders voicing their views which is
frustrated and even in the meors themselves, and understand that
this needs to be responded to. Well, here's here is
(14:48):
a tool for people to use. Business leaders are supporting it,
they're elected to represent these people. They're not doing it.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
And to be fair, I should and I am very
strong on this as well. No one came up with
a plan B. None of the mayors, none of the
social groups, none of the charities came up with one
plan to help the situation. We know that they've got
mental illness, we know that they've got addictions, we know
that troubled people. We know we've got to help them.
(15:14):
No one had a plan to span moving them on.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
I don't know whether that's a fair criticism or not, Nick,
And that's I have been aware. There have been conversations
between government and local government. I'm it's a shame not
more has come out of that that could actually help
this problem.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
It is important after Wellington, that's your job after and
is a problem.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
It is a problem. Our city center has changed things
that I felt comfortable with when I was a young person,
university age person hanging out in Cuba Street and thereabouts.
I now think twice, you know when I'm when I'm
there with my with my twelve year old, and that's
(15:59):
not good. It is. It's not we don't There does
need to be action on this, but this is just
a band aid move on orders. As a band aid,
it won't solve the underlying.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
But it's another like. I get the point you're making, right,
and I agree with you when you talk about that
the inner city has changed and you wouldn't feel comfortable
doing some things maybe you would ten twenty years ago.
I totally get it. What I don't get is why
the opposition to having this is one option in the
tool belt it's not saying everyone has to get like,
no one's getting charge. It's not a criminal conviction, like
(16:31):
why not let police have it. It's a bit like
the gang pitch ban and people criticize that, but it's
kind of worked.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
But because the answer to is because it's got harder
to get people into social housing under your governments. That's why.
That's why we have a market increase in homelessness since
the change in government. And that's the problem. So until
we see actual progress on getting people, have you.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
Got you've got an alternative. Have you've got somebody you
could tell us that actually might help us, that will
will work well?
Speaker 3 (17:03):
Labors, how policy priorities are jobs, how homes. We are
very well aware of this issue, but I did not
come with a policy.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
And now it's not a show today, but these people
are being.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Absolutely the housing first initiatives that were developed under our government,
which was part of our mental health initiatives, putting people
in home and then bringing in the other supports to
help them with addiction and mental health and social services.
That is a model that's shown to work.
Speaker 4 (17:29):
Just go you go well, I mean, I don't accept
the comments about homelessness and look we saw people living
in cas gorop before far under the last one, the
social housing Weightless blew out five times. We spent billions
of dollars on immergency accommodation. So I just think there
are lots of aspects to this. I think it's a
complex issue and I think we need to give people
a whole range of tools to combat this. I think
(17:51):
this is a good way of supporting local businesses because
downtown Wellington needs it.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
Can I just add my five cents worth? And when
the Fever World Cup was in on we never saw them,
never saw any homelessness people in Wellington. They were taken out.
What if they can take them out and help look
after them during that period because the world media's attentions
on us, couldn't they do that more often?
Speaker 4 (18:15):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (18:16):
As I said, there are there are solutions, and I
think the challenge with what you said, Tim is that
every Wellingtonian knows this problem has got markedly worse since
the change of government. That's that's the fact that doesn't lie.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
I want to ask you something on a little bit
low key thing because there's something this is coming from
me watching Shane Ritti announce his retirement and his speech
the other the other day, yesterday or two days ago,
and I've always wanted to do so, and I'm going
to do it in the next half hour. Is sometimes
people are sometimes people and I'll come to you first
and them on this too nice for politics? I mean,
(18:49):
this is a guy that obviously is a great family man.
He is a musician, like both of you guys are
found out that both my guests are saxophone players. So
Shane Shane RITTI plays with his family band and he's
very proud of it, and he's a GP and a doctor.
Is this sometimes that people are just too nice for politics?
Speaker 4 (19:09):
I think Shane really is incredibly nice. He is just
a top guy. And I don't think you'll find anyone
on either side of the house really that will criticize
the guy.
Speaker 2 (19:18):
Or that's not my question?
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Sare is it?
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Sometimes?
Speaker 4 (19:20):
It just I like to think. I like to think, no,
people aren't, you know, I don't think that's the thing
I think, And this isn't the case with doctor Shane.
I think some people could come in being too naive
for politics, but that's not him. I just think people
have their own approach to how they tackle this role.
Everyone takes it in a different way. But you know,
(19:41):
he's been a great MP, he's been a great minister,
he has served his community faithfully.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
He's a nice guy, and nice guys just don't last
in politics.
Speaker 4 (19:49):
There's not a long time though.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
In fairness, yeah, he has, he has. He is a
nice person and I've appreciated some of the interactions that
I've had over the time. I've been an opposition with
doctor Shane on the gene technology bill where he was
very very open with us as a as an opposition.
Speaker 2 (20:06):
Answer my question, my question I wanted to ask my
listeners and my team when we finish this segment. Is
politics a place for nice people? Well?
Speaker 3 (20:15):
I would put it this way. Political leaders make choices
about the value about the behaviors they encourage in their team.
So you have a choice to keep those nice, but
intelligent and connected to their community people working constructively in
your team. And I reckon that's the challenge for political leaders.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
See, I think that's the problem that why our Prime
Minister is not reflecting to the to the public because
he's a nice person, he's a nice guy. I'm starting
to question where the nice people can survive in politics.
Speaker 4 (20:49):
Well, I think when you know someone personally, sometimes you
get a different impression to what you see in the media. Right,
those that know Shane will have no doubt about the
kind of guy is. And we had a big company
event in the banquetth ort, the beehive, and the consistent
comment from people as the PM worked around and chattity,
everyone was man, goody, such a nice guy, such a
good guy.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Yeah, okay, thank you both for taking time out of
your busy schedule. Have a nice run. Hidington's come in
his shorts and his T shirt and he's going to
jog back to Parliament. So if you see him, give
him a couple of wolf bostles, which your if your
if you're watching watching not allowed to do that any more.
Grace is just giving me the DoD can't do those
in the modern world.
Speaker 1 (21:28):
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
The Girlfriends: Trust Me Babe
When a group of women from all over the country realise they all dated the same prolific romance scammer they vow to bring him to justice. In this brand new season of global number 1 hit podcast, The Girlfriends, Anna Sinfield meets a group of funny, feisty, determined women who all had the misfortune of dating a mysterious man named Derek Alldred. Trust Me Babe is a story about the protective forces of gossip, gut instinct, and trusting your besties and the group of women who took matters into their own hands to take down a fraudster when no one else would listen. If you’re affected by any of the themes in this show, our charity partners NO MORE have available resources at https://www.nomore.org. To learn more about romance scams, and to access specialised support, visit https://fightcybercrime.org/ The Girlfriends: Trust Me Babe is produced by Novel for iHeartPodcasts. For more from Novel, visit https://novel.audio/. You can listen to new episodes of The Girlfriends: Trust Me Babe completely ad-free and 1 week early with an iHeart True Crime+ subscription, available exclusively on Apple Podcasts. Open your Apple Podcasts app, search for “iHeart True Crime+, and subscribe today!