Opposition Leader Chris Hipkins wouldn't say whether his internal polling indicates he would need Te Pāti Māori's support to form a government if Labour is successful in this year’s election.
Speaking to Canterbury Mornings, the Labour Party leader said the internal polling he receives shows Labour in the “high thirties”, and he is confident the party is on the right track to win in November.
"My goal is to make sure Labour gets the most votes and is in the strongest possible position going into any post-election discussion."
After it was revealed that an ex-Labour staffer is behind the social media account "luxury_marmite_sandwich", which has been trolling Government MPs, Hipkins said it had nothing to do with his party, and that some of the content posted by the page was objectionable.
"To be very, very clear, that has nothing to do with us"
"I have asked my office to go back to him (ex-staffer) and be very clear that no footage that he had access to from his time working for us should be used in any of the material that he is producing now."
They also discussed proposed changes to climate change laws, whether Hipkins believes there should be any further public funding for Christ Church Cathedral, and his thoughts on Judith Collins as she bows out of politics this week.
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 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from Newstalk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Right now that it's time for our regular catch up
with Labor and Opposition leader Chris Hipkins.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
Go Chris, gooday, John, how are you very well?
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
So.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Christians City Council is proposing putting in another fifteen million
dollars into the christ Each Cathedral reinstatement, but it says
that would be dependent on more government support. Do you
think taxpayers should contribute more to the cathedral here?
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I've got to be frank with you, it's not something
that we've looked at. When we stumped up the money
last time, we did say, look, this is what we
think the central government can contribute, and we haven't been
willing to consider adding to that since then. And at
the moment I've got to say, you know, there's a
lot of things that are pressing on the government's finances
at the moment. I'd love to see the christ Church
(00:56):
Cathedral rebuilt, but I don't think there's a strong case
for central government to be chipping in more money ever. Look,
you never say never, but right now I don't think
that that's a priority for.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Us all right, because Winston Peter's obviously does, because he's
pledged another fifteen million of his in the next government.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Well, Winston Peter's promises a lot of things to a
lot of people.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Just on that, you would have seen the New Zealand
Herald pole of polls saying despite Labor potentially coming out
the largest party in Parliament, you still wouldn't be able
to form a government. How despiriting is that.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Well, their pole of poles three years ago had Labor
being re elected as the government. So if I was
the New Zealand Herald, I'd be asking for my money back.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
The point is, though, even since the pole of polls
to Party Mary has shown more signs of self or
is it self combustion going down the route of you know,
not not even being worth thinking about. Where's your position
on them now? Because I know that even before this
week you were you were pretty despairing.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
I said to the Maori Party at last year or
the year before, when they're going through their difficulties before
they can contemplate any role in a future parliament, let
alone a future government, they need to sort themselves out.
We're going to compete vigorously in the seven Madi electorates
and my message to Marty voters up and down the
country is if you want to change the government, then
voting labor is the way that you can achieve that.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Yes, but it seems that that's the message. But to
go back again to the pole of polls and not
to make come too much emphasis on that in particular.
But it's all very well. You know, people voting labor,
but if you don't have the Greens or to Party
Mary two to support you, you won't get into government,
will you.
Speaker 3 (02:41):
Well the election campaign hasn't even started yet, John, but
our polling, according to the poll of polls, we've increased
by quite a significant amount since the last election, and
that's before the campaign's even started. So I'm really looking
forward to the campaign. It's going to be a great
campaign and Labor's going to win it.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Where is your polling pulling Labor.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
Significantly better then it's been in quite some time? In
National's bowling is not looking cleish at all?
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Well, that's according to your polling. So what what what
sort of what domain is labor holding in terms of
your internal polls.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
We've been climbing up towards the high thirties in our
own internal polling. We don't release that obviously. I'm very
very I'm very I'm very comfortable that our polling is
showing that we're on the right track in terms of,
you know, heading towards the victory in November.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
Would you still need to party Mari based on your
internal polling?
Speaker 3 (03:38):
Well, look, that's all hypothetical at this point.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Well, Chris, you're happy to target when the numbers sounded
good for Labor. So the question is those that same polling,
does it tell you would need to party Mari or not?
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Well, you have to work with other parties under m MP.
Who you have to work with and and so on.
Ultimately comes down to who votes. You know, who gets
the most votes. My goal is to make sure Labor
gets done most votes. That is in the strongest possible
position going into any post election discussion.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
Sure, but that tells me that your parling says that
you would need to party Mardy.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Yep. Yeah, yeah, it's inconclusive. It'd be beir to say
that that's inconclusive.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
So your high thirty results also inconclusive?
Speaker 3 (04:24):
No, no, not at all. But you know the party
mariy it's not even clear they'll be in parliament at
this point.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
What about you said the election campaign's not Underwagh yet,
But what about this person that used to work for
you who's been running this troll account on social media
saying some pretty unsavory things about Christopher Luxen and I
gather they also feature your the toaster in your office.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
Yeah, to be very very clear, John, there's nothing to
do with us. I can't control the actions of people
who used to work for the Labor Party any more
than the National Party can control the actions of people
like Cameron Slater and David Farrer and Andy O'Brien who
used to work for the National Party. Ultimately, you know,
people move on with their lives therefore to do what
they want. I have asked my office, how ever, to
(05:09):
go back to them and be very clear that no
footage and content that he has access to from his
time working for us should be used in any of
the material that he's producing now.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
Right, So the toaster is gone.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, absolutely, I mean I think that that was inappropriate
for him to use that what appears to have been
content that he had from his time working for us
and his material that he's producing now.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
You see, I've been aware of that stuff for months.
How long have you been aware of it.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
Too? I don't spend a lot of times school.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
That wasn't the question. That wasn't the question. The question
was how long have you been aware of it?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
I was first aware of it yesterday when I was
asked about it. I don't spend a lot of time
looking at these things these days. I find social media
is largely to assess pot of stuff that I don't
particularly enjoy looking at.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
So does that mean Labor won't be using it during
the campaign.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
No, that Labor part is going to be using social
media extensively I personally.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Don't you say you're going to be an assessment.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Well, you know, all political parties have to go out
and campaign and reach voters. My job as a leader
is best served doing media interviews, public debates, and meeting
people in person. We've got an active social media team,
but I don't spend a lot of time scrolling through
the social media feeds myself.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Right, So you never had any of your colleagues saying, well,
look on this thing, and Matt Jackson, this is good.
You never had anyone pointing out these social media the
social media activity of your former staffer.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
People show me social media posts when they're sitting next
to me and so on all the time. I don't
spend a lot of time inquiring as to their providence
or what other material that those posters might be producing.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And so Labor won't be indulging in any negative social
media rum portrayals of the parties you're competing against.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Look, there are going to be a social media posts
critiquing and criticizing and in some extent, to some extent
making fun off your opponents that the National Party are
doing the same towards us at the moment. But I
think you know, some of the posts that I saw
yesterday that will highlighted to me do cross our line
to being offensive, and that's not the sort of material
(07:20):
that we'll be promoting.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
How are you going to make sure that that that
that happens?
Speaker 3 (07:27):
What do you mean that your.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Your social media activity, your social media people don't get
too carried away and you've got stuff going out there
which which is not what you've what you've got in mind.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
I think we've just set some standards, you know, I
think material that's offensive should it's clearly out of bound
and said, Oh, I don't want to see that happening.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
What about information that's incorrect.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
We're going to do our best to make sure information
is correct. You know. Obviously some facts are subjective, though, John,
that's the nature of politics. What we believe to be
true and what the National Party believed to be true
or clearly quite different.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Judith Collins is finally winding up her political career. What's
her legacy? Do you think.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
Judith Collins has been a combative politician? She certainly dished
it out and be a volume. I haven't agreed with
everything that Judith Collins has done. I haven't always agreed
with her approach to politics either, but I think she's
meilowed out in recent years and she's done a reasonably
good job as Attorney General, I think, and upholding the
law and the spirit of the law and you know,
(08:35):
the conventions around the law. I think she's actually done
that quite well. And you know, I wish her well
for her future.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
It's not a glowing review, Chris.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
Well. You know, she's leader of the world, leader of
the National Party at a time when we were vigorously
competing with them, you know. So she's an opponent who
I respect as an opponent.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Were you in the house yesterday for her valedictory speech?
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Unfortunately I wasn't able to be there, but I did
send her a message beforehand and we had a brief
text message convas about life moving on to.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Do you think that as a leader of the opposition,
someone of Judith Colin's standing deserved your presence?
Speaker 3 (09:16):
Yeah, generally I would try and be there for that.
We did make sure that we had a good number
of labor MP's there. But I had a commitment. I
don't want to sound like Stuart Smith, but I did
have a long standing commitment that involved a public speaking
engagement to a whole lot of young people out here
in Upper Hearts that I basically didn't want to bail
out of at the last minute.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
All right, just finally, what do you make of this
law change that would make it illegal for people to
take court action against industries that are accused or stand
accused of damaging the environment.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
It's bad lawmaking. They're basically passing a law change to
extinguish a case that's currently before the courts. You know,
they should at least let the courts deliberate on it
and make their ruling before they go and change the law.
Parliaments will disagree with decisions that the judiciary makes, all
will often be amended after that fact. But changing the
law whilst a court case is in process is very
(10:14):
unusual and it is really an attack on the basic
premise of the rule of war.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
So would you support it if there was not a
pending case?
Speaker 3 (10:23):
Well, I think they've got to. You've got to see
what the case comes back with this. There may be
no case to answer. The courts may decide, you know,
in favor of the government on this, or they may decide, well,
you know, in favor of the government's position on this,
or they may decide otherwise. You generally let the courts
run their process before Parliament goes in and rushes to legislation.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
Yeah, but I'm asking you see beyond that specific element
of it. I mean, do you think that people should
be free to sue companies for damage damaged caused by
their omissions?
Speaker 3 (10:55):
In principle? There are some cases where I think that
that should be that that should be possible, yes, And.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
What would be the cases where it shouldn't be.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Well, I'm not going to go a case by case basis,
but an example, I'm comfortable with the law as it
stands now that the people who want to change it
should at least wait and see what the courts come
back with before they rush forward to legislation.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
All right, finally, before how long is kiss Starmer Labor,
British Labor Prime Minister kistarm are going to last? What's
the what's the beat in New Zealand Labor Party's office?
Speaker 3 (11:30):
Well, that would that would be very undiplomatic for me
to be speculating on that, as you as you well know,
but you know, look, I wish the British Labor team
all the very best. Those are deliberations for them, does
he toast? Look, that's just really not something that it
would be polite or diplomatic to be to speculate on.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Have you sent him a message of support?
Speaker 3 (11:55):
No, I haven't. I haven't spoken to him for well
a couple of years now, probably right.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
Thanks Chris, Well to catch up again for night.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
For more from Canterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at be Christchurch from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from Newstalk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
Right now that it's time for our regular catch up
with Labor and Opposition leader Chris Hipkins.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
Go Chris, gooday, John, how are you very well?
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (00:20):
So.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Christians City Council is proposing putting in another fifteen million
dollars into the christ Each Cathedral reinstatement, but it says
that would be dependent on more government support. Do you
think taxpayers should contribute more to the cathedral here?
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I've got to be frank with you, it's not something
that we've looked at. When we stumped up the money
last time, we did say, look, this is what we
think the central government can contribute, and we haven't been
willing to consider adding to that since then. And at
the moment I've got to say, you know, there's a
lot of things that are pressing on the government's finances
at the moment. I'd love to see the christ Church
(00:56):
Cathedral rebuilt, but I don't think there's a strong case
for central government to be chipping in more money ever. Look,
you never say never, but right now I don't think
that that's a priority for.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Us all right, because Winston Peter's obviously does, because he's
pledged another fifteen million of his in the next government.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Well, Winston Peter's promises a lot of things to a
lot of people.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Just on that, you would have seen the New Zealand
Herald pole of polls saying despite Labor potentially coming out
the largest party in Parliament, you still wouldn't be able
to form a government. How despiriting is that.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Well, their pole of poles three years ago had Labor
being re elected as the government. So if I was
the New Zealand Herald, I'd be asking for my money back.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
The point is, though, even since the pole of polls
to Party Mary has shown more signs of self or
is it self combustion going down the route of you know,
not not even being worth thinking about. Where's your position
on them now? Because I know that even before this
week you were you were pretty despairing.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
I said to the Maori Party at last year or
the year before, when they're going through their difficulties before
they can contemplate any role in a future parliament, let
alone a future government, they need to sort themselves out.
We're going to compete vigorously in the seven Madi electorates
and my message to Marty voters up and down the
country is if you want to change the government, then
voting labor is the way that you can achieve that.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Yes, but it seems that that's the message. But to
go back again to the pole of polls and not
to make come too much emphasis on that in particular.
But it's all very well. You know, people voting labor,
but if you don't have the Greens or to Party
Mary two to support you, you won't get into government,
will you.
Speaker 3 (02:41):
Well the election campaign hasn't even started yet, John, but
our polling, according to the poll of polls, we've increased
by quite a significant amount since the last election, and
that's before the campaign's even started. So I'm really looking
forward to the campaign. It's going to be a great
campaign and Labor's going to win it.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Where is your polling pulling Labor.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
Significantly better then it's been in quite some time? In
National's bowling is not looking cleish at all?
Speaker 2 (03:07):
Well, that's according to your polling. So what what what
sort of what domain is labor holding in terms of
your internal polls.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
We've been climbing up towards the high thirties in our
own internal polling. We don't release that obviously. I'm very
very I'm very I'm very comfortable that our polling is
showing that we're on the right track in terms of,
you know, heading towards the victory in November.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
Would you still need to party Mari based on your
internal polling?
Speaker 3 (03:38):
Well, look, that's all hypothetical at this point.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Well, Chris, you're happy to target when the numbers sounded
good for Labor. So the question is those that same polling,
does it tell you would need to party Mari or not?
Speaker 3 (03:53):
Well, you have to work with other parties under m MP.
Who you have to work with and and so on.
Ultimately comes down to who votes. You know, who gets
the most votes. My goal is to make sure Labor
gets done most votes. That is in the strongest possible
position going into any post election discussion.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
Sure, but that tells me that your parling says that
you would need to party Mardy.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
Yep. Yeah, yeah, it's inconclusive. It'd be beir to say
that that's inconclusive.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
So your high thirty results also inconclusive?
Speaker 3 (04:24):
No, no, not at all. But you know the party
mariy it's not even clear they'll be in parliament at
this point.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
What about you said the election campaign's not Underwagh yet,
But what about this person that used to work for
you who's been running this troll account on social media
saying some pretty unsavory things about Christopher Luxen and I
gather they also feature your the toaster in your office.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
Yeah, to be very very clear, John, there's nothing to
do with us. I can't control the actions of people
who used to work for the Labor Party any more
than the National Party can control the actions of people
like Cameron Slater and David Farrer and Andy O'Brien who
used to work for the National Party. Ultimately, you know,
people move on with their lives therefore to do what
they want. I have asked my office, how ever, to
(05:09):
go back to them and be very clear that no
footage and content that he has access to from his
time working for us should be used in any of
the material that he's producing now.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
Right, So the toaster is gone.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, absolutely, I mean I think that that was inappropriate
for him to use that what appears to have been
content that he had from his time working for us
and his material that he's producing now.
Speaker 2 (05:33):
You see, I've been aware of that stuff for months.
How long have you been aware of it.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
Too? I don't spend a lot of times school.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
That wasn't the question. That wasn't the question. The question
was how long have you been aware of it?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
I was first aware of it yesterday when I was
asked about it. I don't spend a lot of time
looking at these things these days. I find social media
is largely to assess pot of stuff that I don't
particularly enjoy looking at.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
So does that mean Labor won't be using it during
the campaign.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
No, that Labor part is going to be using social
media extensively I personally.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Don't you say you're going to be an assessment.
Speaker 3 (06:07):
Well, you know, all political parties have to go out
and campaign and reach voters. My job as a leader
is best served doing media interviews, public debates, and meeting
people in person. We've got an active social media team,
but I don't spend a lot of time scrolling through
the social media feeds myself.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Right, So you never had any of your colleagues saying, well,
look on this thing, and Matt Jackson, this is good.
You never had anyone pointing out these social media the
social media activity of your former staffer.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
People show me social media posts when they're sitting next
to me and so on all the time. I don't
spend a lot of time inquiring as to their providence
or what other material that those posters might be producing.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
And so Labor won't be indulging in any negative social
media rum portrayals of the parties you're competing against.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Look, there are going to be a social media posts
critiquing and criticizing and in some extent, to some extent
making fun off your opponents that the National Party are
doing the same towards us at the moment. But I
think you know, some of the posts that I saw
yesterday that will highlighted to me do cross our line
to being offensive, and that's not the sort of material
(07:20):
that we'll be promoting.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
How are you going to make sure that that that
that happens?
Speaker 3 (07:27):
What do you mean that your.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
Your social media activity, your social media people don't get
too carried away and you've got stuff going out there
which which is not what you've what you've got in mind.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
I think we've just set some standards, you know, I
think material that's offensive should it's clearly out of bound
and said, Oh, I don't want to see that happening.
Speaker 2 (07:48):
What about information that's incorrect.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
We're going to do our best to make sure information
is correct. You know. Obviously some facts are subjective, though, John,
that's the nature of politics. What we believe to be
true and what the National Party believed to be true
or clearly quite different.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Judith Collins is finally winding up her political career. What's
her legacy? Do you think.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
Judith Collins has been a combative politician? She certainly dished
it out and be a volume. I haven't agreed with
everything that Judith Collins has done. I haven't always agreed
with her approach to politics either, but I think she's
meilowed out in recent years and she's done a reasonably
good job as Attorney General, I think, and upholding the
law and the spirit of the law and you know,
(08:35):
the conventions around the law. I think she's actually done
that quite well. And you know, I wish her well
for her future.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
It's not a glowing review, Chris.
Speaker 3 (08:44):
Well. You know, she's leader of the world, leader of
the National Party at a time when we were vigorously
competing with them, you know. So she's an opponent who
I respect as an opponent.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Were you in the house yesterday for her valedictory speech?
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Unfortunately I wasn't able to be there, but I did
send her a message beforehand and we had a brief
text message convas about life moving on to.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
Do you think that as a leader of the opposition,
someone of Judith Colin's standing deserved your presence?
Speaker 3 (09:16):
Yeah, generally I would try and be there for that.
We did make sure that we had a good number
of labor MP's there. But I had a commitment. I
don't want to sound like Stuart Smith, but I did
have a long standing commitment that involved a public speaking
engagement to a whole lot of young people out here
in Upper Hearts that I basically didn't want to bail
out of at the last minute.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
All right, just finally, what do you make of this
law change that would make it illegal for people to
take court action against industries that are accused or stand
accused of damaging the environment.
Speaker 3 (09:51):
It's bad lawmaking. They're basically passing a law change to
extinguish a case that's currently before the courts. You know,
they should at least let the courts deliberate on it
and make their ruling before they go and change the law.
Parliaments will disagree with decisions that the judiciary makes, all
will often be amended after that fact. But changing the
law whilst a court case is in process is very
(10:14):
unusual and it is really an attack on the basic
premise of the rule of war.
Speaker 2 (10:19):
So would you support it if there was not a
pending case?
Speaker 3 (10:23):
Well, I think they've got to. You've got to see
what the case comes back with this. There may be
no case to answer. The courts may decide, you know,
in favor of the government on this, or they may decide, well,
you know, in favor of the government's position on this,
or they may decide otherwise. You generally let the courts
run their process before Parliament goes in and rushes to legislation.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
Yeah, but I'm asking you see beyond that specific element
of it. I mean, do you think that people should
be free to sue companies for damage damaged caused by
their omissions?
Speaker 3 (10:55):
In principle? There are some cases where I think that
that should be that that should be possible, yes, And.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
What would be the cases where it shouldn't be.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Well, I'm not going to go a case by case basis,
but an example, I'm comfortable with the law as it
stands now that the people who want to change it
should at least wait and see what the courts come
back with before they rush forward to legislation.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
All right, finally, before how long is kiss Starmer Labor,
British Labor Prime Minister kistarm are going to last? What's
the what's the beat in New Zealand Labor Party's office?
Speaker 3 (11:30):
Well, that would that would be very undiplomatic for me
to be speculating on that, as you as you well know,
but you know, look, I wish the British Labor team
all the very best. Those are deliberations for them, does
he toast? Look, that's just really not something that it
would be polite or diplomatic to be to speculate on.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
Have you sent him a message of support?
Speaker 3 (11:55):
No, I haven't. I haven't spoken to him for well
a couple of years now, probably right.
Speaker 2 (12:00):
Thanks Chris, Well to catch up again for night.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
For more from Canterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at be Christchurch 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.
The MeatEater Podcast
Building on the belief that a deeper understanding of the natural world enriches all of our lives, host Steven Rinella brings an in-depth and relevant look at all outdoor topics including hunting, fishing, nature, conservation, and wild foods. Filled with humor, irreverence, and things that will surprise the hell out of you, each episode welcomes a diverse group of guests who add their own expertise to the vast world of the outdoors. Part of The MeatEater Podcast Network.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.