Labour leader Chris Hipkins claims the Government's failure to compensate for the nurses’ pay rise has driven Health New Zealand's budget blowout.
The agency's finances jumped from an expected half-a-billion dollar surplus to a $1.4 billion deficit in April.
It's now expected to blow out to $1.76 billion.
Chris Hipkins told John MacDonald that there's a mix of issues in the system, but under-funding's definitely playing a role in the deficits.
He says nurses won their pay equity claim after a hard-fought battle and the Government hasn't provided the funds to pay for it, adding more financial pressure.
The crackdown on dodgy builders however, is getting Hipkins’ support.
The Government's looking at changes to registration and licensing regimes, with a focus on lifting competence and accountability requirements.
Larger fines could also be on the cards for workers hiding non-compliant work during inspections.
Hipkins says the regulatory systems for builders aren't as good as they should be.
He says a more streamlined regime with harsher penalties for the cowboys of the industry is great.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Time for our regular Fortnity catch up with Labor and
Opposition leader Chris Sipkins.
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Yeah, Chris, John, how are you going?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Yeah? I'm very well. What do you make of the
announcement by the government today that it is going to
allow international drivers to hold on or drive on their
international license for an extra six months to try and
deal with waiting lists for practical driving tests? Good idea
or not?
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I can't see it. Think they can't see it making
much different side the way. So if it helps to
we use the pressure on you people sitting their driving tests,
then you know that's a good thing. I'm not sure
it's good. Like I can't see it increasing any public
safety risk? So why not? Why not revexed about it?
Speaker 2 (00:50):
How can you? How can you not see it creating
more risk?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Well, I mean, how is an international driver a greater
risk in there thirteen months driving on New Zealand roads
than they are in the twelfth months driving on New
Zealand roads.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
The waiting list issue? Is this something that perhaps stems
from the enthusiasm your previous government have had of allowing
kids to get their licenses as part of the n CEA.
Has that created more demand? Do you think?
Speaker 1 (01:17):
No?
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Ultimately, you know, the systems changed a lot since you
and I would have got our driver's licenses. Nowadays people
kept you young New Zealanders getting their licenses. They have
to be tested twice, whereas we will you and I
probably only ever had to sit one driving test. They
have to set a couple of them. And you know,
so the systems changed. There's you know a lot of
(01:38):
a lot of migrant people looking to get their driver's
licenses here in New Zealand, so that is one of
the things that's increasing pressure on the system. So I mean,
ultimately it's a system under pressure, and I think the
government have indicated a few relatively pragmatic changes, which I'm
pretty relaxed about.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
All right, Okay, what about the situation then with the
fast track projects which were released on Sunday and my
take of a lot of them in Canterbury here anyway,
allowing you know, housing projects to go ahead which have
already been pushed back by local councils, it seems to
be more ram rayed than fast tracked. But what's your
take yeah, I.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Mean, I think we do need more housing. My concern
around the way the government are approaching the fast track
is I think they I think they undermine the system
when they're using fast track to overturn decisions that have
already been taken. I think the issue here is not
around decisions that have already been taken. It's the fact
that it takes too long to get to the decisions
in the first place. So, you know, I think we
(02:38):
had a fast track system in place during COVID where
we were still had environmental protections, we still protected community voice,
but we've got decisions faster, and ultimately, I think that's
what a fast track should do. It should get decisions faster,
but it shouldn't be you know, you shouldn't see, you know,
decisions being overturned using fast track where they've gone the
full way through the process.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
How many of those fast track I mean you probably
don't know specific numbers off the top of your head,
but what percentage of those fast track projects that your
government approved actually happened.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Well, quite a few of the renewable energy ones haven't,
and that's a bit of a concern because you know,
we've got a lot of.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Concerns, But I mean, I mean the ones the one
that our building. I'm turn the COVID ones that you
guys gave the tick for. How many of them eventuated,
Because it's all very while making decisions, but it's actually
delivery that's the big thing.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
As I said, a lot of because there were quite
a few renewable energy projects in there that did go
through that vast track process, and I know that a
number of them have yet to be built. So clearly
it wasn't contending that was the problem that was stopping
that renewable energy being built. It was the fact that
the market actually has been disincentivised in the building of
renewable energy. But I know a number of the housing
developments certainly went through the fast tracking of construction has
(03:50):
been underway on many of those.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Do you admit now that creating Health New Zealand was
a disastrous thing to do When you look at the
budget blowouts, this seemed to be being refreshed day by day.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
Not at all, because we'd been facing that situation where
the health museum that existed or not, you know, there
would still be more nurses in the system. Nurses would
still have achieved their pay equity, and the government still
would have chosen not to run that pay equity, which
is one of the thick things that's driving the budget blowout.
So you've said it was and the government's not paying
for it, so.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
You've said it would have been just as bad either way.
So why did you bother?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Because ultimately, I think New Zealanders, once the new system
is properly up and running, will get better healthcare as
a result. And what do you mean would be healthcare
across the country?
Speaker 2 (04:37):
What do you mean properly up and running.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Well when you're putting twenty odd DHBs together or bringing
all of their systems together. That is going to take
some time, and it's not going to happen in a
twelve month period. It's going it's going to be a
sort of a five year plus project to do that.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
So you won't be criticizing the government for anything that's
doing to try and deal with this.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Only I didn't say that.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
I still you're almost you almost gave away your right
to criticize them because you're saying give it.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Five Well, I mean give it five years for some
of the issues they're talking about, like you know, some
of the financial reporting systems and some of the rostering
systems and so on. But ultimately, if you look at
the fact that the nurse's got a pay rise and
the government didn't increase funding to compensate for that, then
that's actually one of the things that's causing the deficit.
That's you know, nurses won their pay equity claim. It
(05:27):
was a hard for all. They got their pay equity
and now the government have not stumped up with the
funding to pay for it. That's putting the health system
under more financial pressure. So it's a mix of issues,
but underfunding is certainly one of them.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
How was the trip to the UK? What did you
pick up from Kiostarma?
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Yeah, it's good. I mean it's good to form a
relationship with the new UK government over there. It'll be
a government that will be there for at least five years,
which is quite a long time when you could said
the New Zealand's electoral cycle, so good to have a
conversation with them. I think, you know, the UK economy,
there's a lot of similarities between the challenges the UK
economy is facing at the moment and the challenges the
New Zealand's facing. So they also had a cost of
(06:06):
a crisis with a big spike in inflation. Also have
had a period where, you know where housing has been
a big issue for them, and sort of stagnant economics growth,
so they've you know, economic growth driven by population growth
rather than by increased productivity and so on, and so
similar discussions in the UK to the discussion technique in
New Zealand. So some good lessons to bring.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Back from that, like the winter energy payment I think
he's cutting is it something that you'd want to adopt here?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
The winter fuel payment over there is different to the
winter energy payment here, and I have no plans to
cut the winter energy payment here in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Do you think the best thing you can learn from
from Kirstarma and Labor is how to win an election,
not actually to be a good government because they're on
rocky a rocky ride so far.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
That would be very undiplomatic for me to comment on that, John,
But I mean, yeah, they're certainly having a bit of
a bumpy stat would be fair to say. But you know,
our countries have a lot of similarities but are also
quite different too.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Okay, the government's cracking down on dodgy builders. What's the
problem from where you see it in the construction.
Speaker 3 (07:10):
Industry, I think I'm pretty supportive of what I've seen
so far. We haven't seen the detail of what they're
proposing to do yet, but I think the idea of
having you know, harsher penalties for dodgy builders who undermine
the vast majority builders who are actually doing a damn
good job and working really hard, I think is a
good thing. The regulatory systems of builders isn't as good
(07:30):
as it should be, you know. I think that there
is a lot of inconsistency there. There are too many
moving parts to it. And I think a more streamlined
regulatory raising with harsher penalties to get the cowboys out
of the industry, I think it would be a great thing.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
How much of as you do you think it is
that there are so many sub contractors involved in a
build these days. You know, back in the old day,
yet a builder and they pretty much did everything. And
now you've got you know, all sorts of people turning up.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
That's one of the issues, and you need some safeguards
in place about that. Then if you go back to
looking at our experience with leaky building, you know, deregulation
was one of the problems that happened there. You've got
to be to tread carefully around deregulations that you don't
need that with another leaky buildings like crisis. And of course,
the other thing we found was that when it came
to compensation for leaky buildings, a lot of those companies
that just disappeared, and there weren't a lot of barriers
(08:18):
to people just bankrupting one company and then setting up
another company and keeping on going, leaving all the liabilities
behind in the company that they folded up. So I
think that's that's another thing that you know, hopefully the
government will look at as part of this this work
they're doing to crack down on the cowboys.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
How could you do that?
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Though?
Speaker 1 (08:35):
What?
Speaker 3 (08:36):
What?
Speaker 2 (08:36):
What? What would need to change to deal with that,
because you know, workmanship's one thing, but an outfit that
goes under and then opens up the next day with
a different sign, that's that's another thing altogether, isn't.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
It It is? I mean, look, I don't have an
instant answer to that. I hope that's one of the
issues that the government will look at though, to see
if there are ways that we can protect that. You know,
the ultimate end users, which are the people who are
paying for the building services. If they do get a
dodgy deal, then they should be able to see compensation
and companies shouldn't be able to just flick their liabilities
in that way.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Hey Chris, thanks for time. We'll catch up in two weeks,
all right, John Bulliver, thank.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
You for more from Category Mornings with John McDonald. Listen
live to news talks It'd be christ Church from nine
am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Time for our regular Fortnity catch up with Labor and
Opposition leader Chris Sipkins.
Speaker 3 (00:17):
Yeah, Chris, John, how are you going?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Yeah? I'm very well. What do you make of the
announcement by the government today that it is going to
allow international drivers to hold on or drive on their
international license for an extra six months to try and
deal with waiting lists for practical driving tests? Good idea
or not?
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I can't see it. Think they can't see it making
much different side the way. So if it helps to
we use the pressure on you people sitting their driving tests,
then you know that's a good thing. I'm not sure
it's good. Like I can't see it increasing any public
safety risk? So why not? Why not revexed about it?
Speaker 2 (00:50):
How can you? How can you not see it creating
more risk?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Well, I mean, how is an international driver a greater
risk in there thirteen months driving on New Zealand roads
than they are in the twelfth months driving on New
Zealand roads.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
The waiting list issue? Is this something that perhaps stems
from the enthusiasm your previous government have had of allowing
kids to get their licenses as part of the n CEA.
Has that created more demand? Do you think?
Speaker 1 (01:17):
No?
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Ultimately, you know, the systems changed a lot since you
and I would have got our driver's licenses. Nowadays people
kept you young New Zealanders getting their licenses. They have
to be tested twice, whereas we will you and I
probably only ever had to sit one driving test. They
have to set a couple of them. And you know,
so the systems changed. There's you know a lot of
(01:38):
a lot of migrant people looking to get their driver's
licenses here in New Zealand, so that is one of
the things that's increasing pressure on the system. So I mean,
ultimately it's a system under pressure, and I think the
government have indicated a few relatively pragmatic changes, which I'm
pretty relaxed about.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
All right, Okay, what about the situation then with the
fast track projects which were released on Sunday and my
take of a lot of them in Canterbury here anyway,
allowing you know, housing projects to go ahead which have
already been pushed back by local councils, it seems to
be more ram rayed than fast tracked. But what's your
take yeah, I.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Mean, I think we do need more housing. My concern
around the way the government are approaching the fast track
is I think they I think they undermine the system
when they're using fast track to overturn decisions that have
already been taken. I think the issue here is not
around decisions that have already been taken. It's the fact
that it takes too long to get to the decisions
in the first place. So, you know, I think we
(02:38):
had a fast track system in place during COVID where
we were still had environmental protections, we still protected community voice,
but we've got decisions faster, and ultimately, I think that's
what a fast track should do. It should get decisions faster,
but it shouldn't be you know, you shouldn't see, you know,
decisions being overturned using fast track where they've gone the
full way through the process.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
How many of those fast track I mean you probably
don't know specific numbers off the top of your head,
but what percentage of those fast track projects that your
government approved actually happened.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Well, quite a few of the renewable energy ones haven't,
and that's a bit of a concern because you know,
we've got a lot of.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Concerns, But I mean, I mean the ones the one
that our building. I'm turn the COVID ones that you
guys gave the tick for. How many of them eventuated,
Because it's all very while making decisions, but it's actually
delivery that's the big thing.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
As I said, a lot of because there were quite
a few renewable energy projects in there that did go
through that vast track process, and I know that a
number of them have yet to be built. So clearly
it wasn't contending that was the problem that was stopping
that renewable energy being built. It was the fact that
the market actually has been disincentivised in the building of
renewable energy. But I know a number of the housing
developments certainly went through the fast tracking of construction has
(03:50):
been underway on many of those.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
Do you admit now that creating Health New Zealand was
a disastrous thing to do When you look at the
budget blowouts, this seemed to be being refreshed day by day.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
Not at all, because we'd been facing that situation where
the health museum that existed or not, you know, there
would still be more nurses in the system. Nurses would
still have achieved their pay equity, and the government still
would have chosen not to run that pay equity, which
is one of the thick things that's driving the budget blowout.
So you've said it was and the government's not paying
for it, so.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
You've said it would have been just as bad either way.
So why did you bother?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
Because ultimately, I think New Zealanders, once the new system
is properly up and running, will get better healthcare as
a result. And what do you mean would be healthcare
across the country?
Speaker 2 (04:37):
What do you mean properly up and running.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Well when you're putting twenty odd DHBs together or bringing
all of their systems together. That is going to take
some time, and it's not going to happen in a
twelve month period. It's going it's going to be a
sort of a five year plus project to do that.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
So you won't be criticizing the government for anything that's
doing to try and deal with this.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Only I didn't say that.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
I still you're almost you almost gave away your right
to criticize them because you're saying give it.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Five Well, I mean give it five years for some
of the issues they're talking about, like you know, some
of the financial reporting systems and some of the rostering
systems and so on. But ultimately, if you look at
the fact that the nurse's got a pay rise and
the government didn't increase funding to compensate for that, then
that's actually one of the things that's causing the deficit.
That's you know, nurses won their pay equity claim. It
(05:27):
was a hard for all. They got their pay equity
and now the government have not stumped up with the
funding to pay for it. That's putting the health system
under more financial pressure. So it's a mix of issues,
but underfunding is certainly one of them.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
How was the trip to the UK? What did you
pick up from Kiostarma?
Speaker 3 (05:44):
Yeah, it's good. I mean it's good to form a
relationship with the new UK government over there. It'll be
a government that will be there for at least five years,
which is quite a long time when you could said
the New Zealand's electoral cycle, so good to have a
conversation with them. I think, you know, the UK economy,
there's a lot of similarities between the challenges the UK
economy is facing at the moment and the challenges the
New Zealand's facing. So they also had a cost of
(06:06):
a crisis with a big spike in inflation. Also have
had a period where, you know where housing has been
a big issue for them, and sort of stagnant economics growth,
so they've you know, economic growth driven by population growth
rather than by increased productivity and so on, and so
similar discussions in the UK to the discussion technique in
New Zealand. So some good lessons to bring.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
Back from that, like the winter energy payment I think
he's cutting is it something that you'd want to adopt here?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
The winter fuel payment over there is different to the
winter energy payment here, and I have no plans to
cut the winter energy payment here in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
Do you think the best thing you can learn from
from Kirstarma and Labor is how to win an election,
not actually to be a good government because they're on
rocky a rocky ride so far.
Speaker 3 (06:51):
That would be very undiplomatic for me to comment on that, John,
But I mean, yeah, they're certainly having a bit of
a bumpy stat would be fair to say. But you know,
our countries have a lot of similarities but are also
quite different too.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Okay, the government's cracking down on dodgy builders. What's the
problem from where you see it in the construction.
Speaker 3 (07:10):
Industry, I think I'm pretty supportive of what I've seen
so far. We haven't seen the detail of what they're
proposing to do yet, but I think the idea of
having you know, harsher penalties for dodgy builders who undermine
the vast majority builders who are actually doing a damn
good job and working really hard, I think is a
good thing. The regulatory systems of builders isn't as good
(07:30):
as it should be, you know. I think that there
is a lot of inconsistency there. There are too many
moving parts to it. And I think a more streamlined
regulatory raising with harsher penalties to get the cowboys out
of the industry, I think it would be a great thing.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
How much of as you do you think it is
that there are so many sub contractors involved in a
build these days. You know, back in the old day,
yet a builder and they pretty much did everything. And
now you've got you know, all sorts of people turning up.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
That's one of the issues, and you need some safeguards
in place about that. Then if you go back to
looking at our experience with leaky building, you know, deregulation
was one of the problems that happened there. You've got
to be to tread carefully around deregulations that you don't
need that with another leaky buildings like crisis. And of course,
the other thing we found was that when it came
to compensation for leaky buildings, a lot of those companies
that just disappeared, and there weren't a lot of barriers
(08:18):
to people just bankrupting one company and then setting up
another company and keeping on going, leaving all the liabilities
behind in the company that they folded up. So I
think that's that's another thing that you know, hopefully the
government will look at as part of this this work
they're doing to crack down on the cowboys.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
How could you do that?
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Though?
Speaker 1 (08:35):
What?
Speaker 3 (08:36):
What?
Speaker 2 (08:36):
What? What would need to change to deal with that,
because you know, workmanship's one thing, but an outfit that
goes under and then opens up the next day with
a different sign, that's that's another thing altogether, isn't.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
It It is? I mean, look, I don't have an
instant answer to that. I hope that's one of the
issues that the government will look at though, to see
if there are ways that we can protect that. You know,
the ultimate end users, which are the people who are
paying for the building services. If they do get a
dodgy deal, then they should be able to see compensation
and companies shouldn't be able to just flick their liabilities
in that way.
Speaker 2 (09:08):
Hey Chris, thanks for time. We'll catch up in two weeks,
all right, John Bulliver, thank.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
You for more from Category Mornings with John McDonald. Listen
live to news talks It'd be christ Church 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. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!