Today on Politics Friday, John MacDonald was joined by Matt Doocey and Duncan Webb to delve into some of the topics listeners are most interested in.
They mark the anniversary of the Christchurch Earthquake, which occurred 14 years ago tomorrow.
Rangiora’s after-hours clinic is still not underway, but some certainty has been gained after the Waimakariri District Council has offered to bankroll the project.
Child poverty statistics have not shifted – is this a problem governments can’t solve?
And what do they make about the Chinese Navy sightings in the Pacific?
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 Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I'm for politics Friday, Labour's Duncan web on the phone.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
A Duncan, it's good to be here, well to be
here on the phone.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Yeah, I've never heard anyone say that before. Are you
Wellington or christ Church?
Speaker 3 (00:27):
No, Wellington A caucus meeting up here to you know,
plot to win the next election. So yeah, I'm up
here for that.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
We've got lots of work to do. I'm just conscious
that the Labor phone line has been less than reliable
at times, so hopefully we'll get through the half hour
with that incident. Matt Doucy, Morning.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
To morning, John Morning Duncan. Hey Duncan, are.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
You going to run? Mate? Oh? Yeah, are you running?
Speaker 4 (00:52):
You know what it means when opposition caucus is meeting
on the weekend.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Oh there we go. Yes, okay, I've been there.
Speaker 4 (01:01):
I know what happens when you meet on the weekend
as an opposition caucus.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
He's done that, Good done, Good luck, Duncan. No doub
dunc no dout Duncan. When you are in those meetings tomorrow,
you'll be mindful that it's the quake anniversary, and it's
just amazing how it comes around again and again again
fourteen years and Matt Doocy will never forget though, will we.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
No, No, We'll never forget the one hundred and eighty
five people who lost their lives and many people who
were injured in the large part of the community that
still carries that trauma today. So I'll be at the
commemoration event laying a wreath on behalf of the government.
And it's not only about acknowledging the significant event that
(01:44):
happened on that day of the twenty second, but also
in the wymarked Edi we had the first earthquake in
September the year before, So it was a sequence of
events and I think very poignant to remember.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
And Dunk it is and I know that, you know,
it's a time to remember, but also a time to
acknowledge where the city's come and the fact that we're
going to have seventy thousand people over the course of
two days that electricly have forty thousand people visiting from
out of town. You know, despite the tragedy, Christ Church
has moved forward, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
He had. I'll be there tomorrow as well at the commemoration.
But I think that's right that you know, from Ashes
so to speak, has risen a really fantastic city, and
not just the buildings, but also the kind of spirit
of Cantabrians and just are incredibly proud to say that
they come from christ Church and to bring people to
(02:38):
the city and show them, you know, how far it's come.
And there was a moment in time there where it
was a bit tough, but now people just want to
show off the city and show how far we've come
and what a fantastic place to live and visit it is.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Do you see some last week you were running ads
in the local paper calling for the people behind the
new after Ours Medical Center and running order to just
get on with it and build it and get it going.
And then I see you put out a medius open
yesterday saying that you're losing hope that it's going to
happen anytime soon. What's happened over the last seven days.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Yeah, well, I'm not sure I'm losing hope. I still
have no confidence. So I called on the private healthcare
provider that has the contract. It's been sitting on the
contract for about five years now to deliver after Ours
Healthcare in y marked Eddi. I met with them on Monday.
They still were unable to give me confidence that they
(03:32):
were ready to go, and I stand by my call.
They need to get shovels in the ground. It's been
five years since I've had the contract. They need to
build it or back out and see if someone else
will take up that contract.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
What have you learned over the past seven days that
makes you less optimistic?
Speaker 4 (03:52):
Well, I must say I thought the way they're treating
the community is with contempt. I made it very clear
to them it's not there after ours, it's the communities
after they have been given the contract to provide it.
And still they are not prepared to front the community.
(04:13):
They did in that meeting give me the assurance and
the commitment that they would come into why muccad Eddi
in front the community. But we'll see. Because it's been
five long years, we've had story after story of one
more thing they need to do to put a shovel
in the ground, and they were still unable on Monday
to give me that assurance they are ready to go,
(04:34):
and it just beggars belief five years later they can't
do that.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
What's a story? Duncan, not ignoring you, but it's something
that is close to Matt's era and close to his heart.
What's the story with the local council putting money up
to build it? Now, where's that come from?
Speaker 4 (04:51):
Well, it's not a new idea. It has been discussed
at the start five years ago. So I suppose the
question is for the council, what's changed that they've now
decided to.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Do this good election year, is it?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Well, I mean that's for the council to respond to.
I mean this, this is a private company that's taken
on a contract. If they are saying now that they're
not financially able to deliver that contract, well they need
to come out and say that. So it poses more
questions and answers. And so it comes back to my
(05:22):
original point, build it or back out, and that's what
they need to front the community about.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
All right, Duncan, we're just quickly just to get your
take on it. Do you think this is the future.
You've got local councils building facilities for medical practices.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Oh, it's a slippery slate because you'll be building hospitals next.
Maybe the need and needs to build their own hospital.
But I mean, the question is when we were in government,
Matt was pushing the government to do something about it,
and I'm wondering whether you know he's pushing he is
Associate Minister of Health, whether he's pushing his colleagues to
intervene in this to get this for our clinic up
(05:59):
and running.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
Well, just in response that Duncan, I don't think you
exactly correct. In twenty nineteen pushed the government to commit
to after hours, which it did. Health New Zealand has
put the contract out and now it's to the private
provider who took up their contract, so it's actually with
the private provider.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
We're talking child poverty on the shows and the depressing
stats that it's just going going nowhere. The governments failed
to achieve all its child poverty reduction targets. Duncan web,
You guys weren't much better because the reduction plateaued, even
Jacindradurn making it a key plankt of your government's time.
(06:38):
Is this a sign that no governments ever going to
fix it?
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Well, I certainly hope not, and you're right that we
made progress in the first term of government and then
through COVID. It's certainly flattened out. We made no additional progress,
and now it's going backwards. And I mean it's actually
a real concern if you understand what the it's measure,
it's saying that kids are missing out on six of
(07:04):
thirteen essential kind of bits good food, good housing, and
so on. So we do need to And one of
the concerns is that you know, the family support that
the kind of tax package gave with this government isn't
being taken up.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
Okay, but you guys, but you guys, but you guys know,
don't you that most people really, if if you were
asked them, what's your top five concerns, child poverty probably
wouldn't even make it into the top five. It would
be you know, back pocket, back pocket, back pocket, back pocket,
back pocket, and child poverty taking place at maybe number six,
number seven, Matt do So you guys know that, So
(07:40):
you know that these not achieving these targets as news
today and tomorrow, people won't care.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
Oh I think a lot of people do care.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
And what do they do about it? Because they should
be holding you got new lot to account.
Speaker 4 (07:50):
Yeah, and quite rightly, as elected representatives they should be.
And I think it is right to take a bipartisan
approach to this and that's what we're doing. When you
look at the targets, the target missed was to have
it the number down to nine percent of young people
experiencing material hardship, with a goal by twenty twenty eight
(08:14):
to be down to six percent. So currently we are
at thirteen percent. We're about three or four percent higher.
We have missed that target. That that is not good
enough and I don't think anyone in New Zealand should
be happy with that. Where I disagree with Duncan, the
Stats Chief Officer did say as Duncan alluded to that
(08:34):
there was a significant degrading of that target in the
last term of the Labor government, but actually in the
last year there's been no statistically significant decrease. So in
the last year it's flat lined. That's nothing to be
proud of, but it does show in a time with
a cost of living crisis that we do have parts
(08:55):
of New Zealand who are more impacted by that, and
that's why it's imperative that we do turn the economy
around to give these people better jobs.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
And I mean, yeah, but job wasn't mentioned once in
the Prime Minister State of the Nation speech. So you
do wonder about that commitment, and you do wonder about
that commitment when your cabinet turned us back on the
advice or didn't didn't like the advice from Treasury that
if it wanted to eliminate child poverty it would cost
three billion dollars a year.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
Yeah, but when you look at the advice we receive
for budget twenty twenty four that our budget package, including
the family Boost, would lift tens of thousands of young
kiwi's out of poverty. Look, you get a range of advice.
I was criticized this week for going against advice to
keeping money stuck in Wellington that have got out to
the front line of mental health services. So you know
(09:44):
we are responding and you do get a range of advice.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
All right, Duncan, what are you guys you get back
in in eighteen months time. What are you going to
do to materially change these numbers on child poverty?
Speaker 3 (09:58):
Well, I mean, I'm not going to be announcing Labor
Party policy today, but certainly one of the drivers of
this is unemployment. And we know at families who don't
have parents working much more likely to be in poverty.
And what our policy, our policies would not be intentionally
driving up unemployment just for a quick sugarhead of inflation.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
All right, So the answer, the answer is that the
answer is no solutions, just a stab at the current government.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
No. Look, I'm not saying that. I'm saying I'm not
going to we absolutely, I mean the fact that we're
measuring child poverty is really important and Matt you know,
pointed that out that we do want to know this
and we should hold any government to account on how
our kids are doing. But I'm not going to here
today say that we're going to hand out this to
families or have these tax breaks for families, or whatever
(10:50):
it might be. We will go be going to the
next election with some transformative policies.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
And one of the things, how do you know transform
it because you've got them or or that's your intention.
Easy to say that.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
That's what that's what we're working in. But at the moment,
you know, there's a room full of people who are
thinking about these things and developing policies.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
What about Sir Brian Roche, the head of the Public Service,
saying that we might have too many government departments. Now, Duncan,
I'm guessing that you'll disagree with that idea.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Well, I mean, the one we could probably do without
is the Ministry for Regulation, which is David Seymour's vanity
ministry that they've just set up by demolishing the Productivity
Commission Bill Kovano, which one wants to get rid of
because I think if it's the Ministry for Ethnic Communities,
or the Ministry for Disability, or the Ministry for Women
or the Ministry for Pacific Affairs, I think the people
(11:48):
who are well served would be really alarmed to think
that they were going to be downgraded and collapsed into
some other ministry. It's just you know which ministry are
we talking about?
Speaker 2 (11:59):
Well, it sounds like that's an extended answer to the
question that you would be against it, Matt. Do see
what garments need to go?
Speaker 4 (12:08):
Well, I don't have a list today, John, but it
will be no surprise to listeners that I think, you know,
we do need to reduce the size of government. When
you're spending nine billion a year just on paying the
interest of debt, you know that money is going to
have to come from somewhere.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
That is increasing under your government.
Speaker 4 (12:24):
Well, something we inherited next, John, But I must say
my experience, if you can call me still a new minister,
is yeah, the size of government, the ministries, the number
of boards and entities, and the cost of this, and
you do wonder whether you need all that in totality.
(12:48):
So as a point, do we think we should look
at where we can make a more efficiency. Clearly the
answer has got to be yes. And actually when you
look internationally, every government is actually doing this at the
moment to go through and look at the cost of
government that all it's doing is adding on cost of
doing business, which actually stops people employing people and addressing
(13:11):
the unemployment rights.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Talking so long answers from both of you, but the
long and short of it is Duncan thinks, well, I'm
not sure if we do have too many, I'm not
sure which ones you want to cut. And you're saying
I think we have too many, but I'm not sure
yet which ones will cut.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
Well, I haven't got a definitive list for you today,
but the Public Service Commissioner is starting a debate and
I'd encourage that because I'd say you walk out around
the Margaret Mayhee playground. I'm looking at out today through
your window, John, Most people would say the size of
government is too big?
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Is that the job of a public servant to start
that debate though.
Speaker 4 (13:44):
Or he's Public Service commission still in public service. He's
coming in with a view and I welcome that view. Look,
you've got to take a position because if you don't,
you just end up what we've had for the last
six years.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
Of You can't say last six season anymore. That's it's
just like saying Happy New Year. You can't say anymore.
Was that Duncan.
Speaker 4 (14:03):
Oh, I'm going to a Chinese New Year event tonight,
so we're still saying it right here we go.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
It's Duncan absolutely right that You're absolutely right. There's nothing
wrong with looking at having an effective and efficient public service.
And Brian Roch has said he wants to do that.
I think that's a good thing. Every government should do that.
But to then all of a sudden say we don't
need such and such ministry, you've really got to know
which one. I can't think other than the Ministry for Regulation,
(14:28):
which is a vanity ministry for David Seymour. I can't
think of one which doesn't have a good mission and
a good job. Now we can do things better yes,
but cutting things going out and saying and this is leadership.
This is for the Prime Minister to say, and Brian
Roch would not be saying it without the Prime Minister's consent.
This is the Prime Minister who's saying that we're going
(14:49):
to go and cut ministries and he needs to be
upfront and say which ones is he looking at?
Speaker 4 (14:52):
Yeah, but I think you're also misconstruing it, Dunka. It's
not necessarily cutting when you look at the last National
government to round MB and MPI, bringing ministries together, sharing
the back office and reducing the cost of the blocke
to bureaucracy. That's what I think is signaling and that's
why I think most key weis would be interested in doing.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
All.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Right, let's talk about this idea that Labour's got of
forcing power companies to reinvest dividends to increase power generation.
It sounds like a bit of a weird idea, dunk
when it's not just reliant on investment but also other
things like supply of natural resources. So how would this work.
Speaker 3 (15:29):
Well, this is what we're doing at the moment right,
We're just mixing up some ideas and certainly you know
the government owns a large chunk of the gentailors, which
in the government coming into the government coffers are large dividends.
But sometimes you don't necessarily want to be driven by dividends.
You want to be driven by good reinvestments for the
long term energy security of the country. And there's an
(15:52):
argument there that the gentators and the generators as well
aren't putting enough money back into constructing new clean generation.
Now it's an idea, it's not policy. It's just an idea.
But we need to think about these ideas because at
the moment our electricity market is broken.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
But the thing is the market has done yeah, but
the market's broken. But reinvesting dividends won't make more water
fall from the sky, will it. It won't increase link levels.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
No, But it could be damns. It could be it
could be pumped hydro, it could be wind, it could
be solar. There's a lot of options out there, and
that's what we need for a secure energy market. We
need a diverse energy market and for you know, to
meet our climate targets, we need a clean energy market
as well. So you know, we and that's the that's
(16:42):
the project. There's one way to go about it.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
And Matt Dursey that's the challenge. A lot, a lot
it could be. But then we find this week that
we're still importing tons and tons and tons of coal
from overseas as a backup for power generation.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
And that is the example exactly of why we should
not follow what Duncan and Labor are proposing, because when
Labor gets interfering into markets like banning all links, it
led to us importing a record amount of dirty Indonesian coal.
So actually New Zealand is a market society. The government
(17:15):
at times has to lean into that market, but you've
got to choose when you lean in. So we're not
going to interfere with that market. What we would say
is actually the constraint is around investment into new energy infrastructure,
and you do that by freeing up the consent process
fast tracking consent. At the moment on John, it takes
(17:37):
eight years on average in New Zealand to consent the window.
We know that that's how you stimulate the market.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
That I thought we were at the door to this place.
We searched you for key messages and speaking points, but
obviously security has lapsed today and you've got through with
your key messages and speaking not at all.
Speaker 4 (17:54):
I'm explaining about our approach to supporting market competition or
labors is to interfere with it. Ours is to free
up the regulation so it can flourish.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Right, three Chinese warships and the TASMANI see Duncan web.
Should we freak out?
Speaker 3 (18:10):
Freak out? But recognize that this is the world we
live in. Right, we don't have a single superpower, and
we live in a Pacific which is increasingly contested both
militarily and diplomatically. And we'd be fools to ignore that.
I mean, and in that sense, I think we don't
need to freak out. But Judith Collins is right that,
(18:31):
you know, this is the world we live in. The
reach of China in every sense is into the South Pacific.
So it's been that way for a while. And this
is just an example of the Chinese, you know, probably
doing a little bit of you know, capacity testing, seeing
how they go in the Southern Ocean. Of course they
can do that. They're entitled to do it. They're not
(18:51):
breaking any laws. But don't pretend that we live in
American ocean. This is not the Gulf of America.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
There's a good line, Matt doc and according to some people,
the golf of the America doesn't exist anywhere, Matt ducon
are we going to see now? Because Judith Collins is
alluded to it. She was saying in the news today
that this shows the environment we're in. So we're going
to see more investment in defense in this year's budget.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
Well potentially, But I think Duncan's right. The Chinese aren't
operating outside international law and so they are allowed to
be in international waters. What Judith Collins, as Defense Minister,
has quite rightly said is that we were not given
our heads up. We have a strong relationship with China,
(19:38):
primarily around trade, but we also pride ourselves on people
to people relationships and this is an issue around relationship,
and as Judith has expressed, it is concerning that we
weren't told that these military craft would be there, and
it is disappointing.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
No one's telling you a lot in the thingy Cork
Island's not telling the stuff, China's not telling a stuff.
Duncan's not telling us what he's up to really in
Wellington today, ah kind of silence one. The big question though,
before we go Duncan, where do you going to Electric GAV?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
And going to Electric GAV with my son, and I'm
really looking forward to it. I have the weather holes,
I hear the weathers but dodgy.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Yeah, yeah, be fine by by tomorrow. So which which
band are actually going to see? You know? Really going for.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
Well, I'm heading down this afternoon and I'm going to
see Shape Shap Shift tonight.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
It'll be all go. You're gonna wear that you were
in the the Swanee.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
I haven't chosen my outfit yet.
Speaker 2 (20:42):
I'll let you get to one and do that. Thanks doun'
get nice to hear you. Thank you, Doug. We had
to land on the line there. Maybe China was listening, Matt,
do see you going to Electric AV? No, I'm not.
Speaker 4 (20:51):
I'm disappointed though, because I know the lead actors Prodigy,
and I remember seeing them twenty five years ago and
they are brilliant and everyone will be rocking along to
fire Starter. So I am disappointed. But hey, how how
good it is for the town?
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Is you early? Amazing?
Speaker 3 (21:07):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Brilliant forty three Well, I'm doing the numbers. It's signed.
Two thirds of the people going, seventy thousand people go,
two thirds from out of town. What's that forty thousand people.
Speaker 4 (21:15):
Yeah, brilliant for the local economy.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
For more from Category Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at be Christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
I'm for politics Friday, Labour's Duncan web on the phone.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
A Duncan, it's good to be here, well to be
here on the phone.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Yeah, I've never heard anyone say that before. Are you
Wellington or christ Church?
Speaker 3 (00:27):
No, Wellington A caucus meeting up here to you know,
plot to win the next election. So yeah, I'm up
here for that.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
We've got lots of work to do. I'm just conscious
that the Labor phone line has been less than reliable
at times, so hopefully we'll get through the half hour
with that incident. Matt Doucy, Morning.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
To morning, John Morning Duncan. Hey Duncan, are.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
You going to run? Mate? Oh? Yeah, are you running?
Speaker 4 (00:52):
You know what it means when opposition caucus is meeting
on the weekend.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Oh there we go. Yes, okay, I've been there.
Speaker 4 (01:01):
I know what happens when you meet on the weekend
as an opposition caucus.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
He's done that, Good done, Good luck, Duncan. No doub
dunc no dout Duncan. When you are in those meetings tomorrow,
you'll be mindful that it's the quake anniversary, and it's
just amazing how it comes around again and again again
fourteen years and Matt Doocy will never forget though, will we.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
No, No, We'll never forget the one hundred and eighty
five people who lost their lives and many people who
were injured in the large part of the community that
still carries that trauma today. So I'll be at the
commemoration event laying a wreath on behalf of the government.
And it's not only about acknowledging the significant event that
(01:44):
happened on that day of the twenty second, but also
in the wymarked Edi we had the first earthquake in
September the year before, So it was a sequence of
events and I think very poignant to remember.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
And Dunk it is and I know that, you know,
it's a time to remember, but also a time to
acknowledge where the city's come and the fact that we're
going to have seventy thousand people over the course of
two days that electricly have forty thousand people visiting from
out of town. You know, despite the tragedy, Christ Church
has moved forward, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
He had. I'll be there tomorrow as well at the commemoration.
But I think that's right that you know, from Ashes
so to speak, has risen a really fantastic city, and
not just the buildings, but also the kind of spirit
of Cantabrians and just are incredibly proud to say that
they come from christ Church and to bring people to
(02:38):
the city and show them, you know, how far it's come.
And there was a moment in time there where it
was a bit tough, but now people just want to
show off the city and show how far we've come
and what a fantastic place to live and visit it is.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Do you see some last week you were running ads
in the local paper calling for the people behind the
new after Ours Medical Center and running order to just
get on with it and build it and get it going.
And then I see you put out a medius open
yesterday saying that you're losing hope that it's going to
happen anytime soon. What's happened over the last seven days.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Yeah, well, I'm not sure I'm losing hope. I still
have no confidence. So I called on the private healthcare
provider that has the contract. It's been sitting on the
contract for about five years now to deliver after Ours
Healthcare in y marked Eddi. I met with them on Monday.
They still were unable to give me confidence that they
(03:32):
were ready to go, and I stand by my call.
They need to get shovels in the ground. It's been
five years since I've had the contract. They need to
build it or back out and see if someone else
will take up that contract.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
What have you learned over the past seven days that
makes you less optimistic?
Speaker 4 (03:52):
Well, I must say I thought the way they're treating
the community is with contempt. I made it very clear
to them it's not there after ours, it's the communities
after they have been given the contract to provide it.
And still they are not prepared to front the community.
(04:13):
They did in that meeting give me the assurance and
the commitment that they would come into why muccad Eddi
in front the community. But we'll see. Because it's been
five long years, we've had story after story of one
more thing they need to do to put a shovel
in the ground, and they were still unable on Monday
to give me that assurance they are ready to go,
(04:34):
and it just beggars belief five years later they can't
do that.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
What's a story? Duncan, not ignoring you, but it's something
that is close to Matt's era and close to his heart.
What's the story with the local council putting money up
to build it? Now, where's that come from?
Speaker 4 (04:51):
Well, it's not a new idea. It has been discussed
at the start five years ago. So I suppose the
question is for the council, what's changed that they've now
decided to.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Do this good election year, is it?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Well, I mean that's for the council to respond to.
I mean this, this is a private company that's taken
on a contract. If they are saying now that they're
not financially able to deliver that contract, well they need
to come out and say that. So it poses more
questions and answers. And so it comes back to my
(05:22):
original point, build it or back out, and that's what
they need to front the community about.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
All right, Duncan, we're just quickly just to get your
take on it. Do you think this is the future.
You've got local councils building facilities for medical practices.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Oh, it's a slippery slate because you'll be building hospitals next.
Maybe the need and needs to build their own hospital.
But I mean, the question is when we were in government,
Matt was pushing the government to do something about it,
and I'm wondering whether you know he's pushing he is
Associate Minister of Health, whether he's pushing his colleagues to
intervene in this to get this for our clinic up
(05:59):
and running.
Speaker 4 (06:00):
Well, just in response that Duncan, I don't think you
exactly correct. In twenty nineteen pushed the government to commit
to after hours, which it did. Health New Zealand has
put the contract out and now it's to the private
provider who took up their contract, so it's actually with
the private provider.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
We're talking child poverty on the shows and the depressing
stats that it's just going going nowhere. The governments failed
to achieve all its child poverty reduction targets. Duncan web,
You guys weren't much better because the reduction plateaued, even
Jacindradurn making it a key plankt of your government's time.
(06:38):
Is this a sign that no governments ever going to
fix it?
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Well, I certainly hope not, and you're right that we
made progress in the first term of government and then
through COVID. It's certainly flattened out. We made no additional progress,
and now it's going backwards. And I mean it's actually
a real concern if you understand what the it's measure,
it's saying that kids are missing out on six of
(07:04):
thirteen essential kind of bits good food, good housing, and
so on. So we do need to And one of
the concerns is that you know, the family support that
the kind of tax package gave with this government isn't
being taken up.
Speaker 2 (07:20):
Okay, but you guys, but you guys, but you guys know,
don't you that most people really, if if you were
asked them, what's your top five concerns, child poverty probably
wouldn't even make it into the top five. It would
be you know, back pocket, back pocket, back pocket, back pocket,
back pocket, and child poverty taking place at maybe number six,
number seven, Matt do So you guys know that, So
(07:40):
you know that these not achieving these targets as news
today and tomorrow, people won't care.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
Oh I think a lot of people do care.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
And what do they do about it? Because they should
be holding you got new lot to account.
Speaker 4 (07:50):
Yeah, and quite rightly, as elected representatives they should be.
And I think it is right to take a bipartisan
approach to this and that's what we're doing. When you
look at the targets, the target missed was to have
it the number down to nine percent of young people
experiencing material hardship, with a goal by twenty twenty eight
(08:14):
to be down to six percent. So currently we are
at thirteen percent. We're about three or four percent higher.
We have missed that target. That that is not good
enough and I don't think anyone in New Zealand should
be happy with that. Where I disagree with Duncan, the
Stats Chief Officer did say as Duncan alluded to that
(08:34):
there was a significant degrading of that target in the
last term of the Labor government, but actually in the
last year there's been no statistically significant decrease. So in
the last year it's flat lined. That's nothing to be
proud of, but it does show in a time with
a cost of living crisis that we do have parts
(08:55):
of New Zealand who are more impacted by that, and
that's why it's imperative that we do turn the economy
around to give these people better jobs.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
And I mean, yeah, but job wasn't mentioned once in
the Prime Minister State of the Nation speech. So you
do wonder about that commitment, and you do wonder about
that commitment when your cabinet turned us back on the
advice or didn't didn't like the advice from Treasury that
if it wanted to eliminate child poverty it would cost
three billion dollars a year.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
Yeah, but when you look at the advice we receive
for budget twenty twenty four that our budget package, including
the family Boost, would lift tens of thousands of young
kiwi's out of poverty. Look, you get a range of advice.
I was criticized this week for going against advice to
keeping money stuck in Wellington that have got out to
the front line of mental health services. So you know
(09:44):
we are responding and you do get a range of advice.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
All right, Duncan, what are you guys you get back
in in eighteen months time. What are you going to
do to materially change these numbers on child poverty?
Speaker 3 (09:58):
Well, I mean, I'm not going to be announcing Labor
Party policy today, but certainly one of the drivers of
this is unemployment. And we know at families who don't
have parents working much more likely to be in poverty.
And what our policy, our policies would not be intentionally
driving up unemployment just for a quick sugarhead of inflation.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
All right, So the answer, the answer is that the
answer is no solutions, just a stab at the current government.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
No. Look, I'm not saying that. I'm saying I'm not
going to we absolutely, I mean the fact that we're
measuring child poverty is really important and Matt you know,
pointed that out that we do want to know this
and we should hold any government to account on how
our kids are doing. But I'm not going to here
today say that we're going to hand out this to
families or have these tax breaks for families, or whatever
(10:50):
it might be. We will go be going to the
next election with some transformative policies.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
And one of the things, how do you know transform
it because you've got them or or that's your intention.
Easy to say that.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
That's what that's what we're working in. But at the moment,
you know, there's a room full of people who are
thinking about these things and developing policies.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
What about Sir Brian Roche, the head of the Public Service,
saying that we might have too many government departments. Now, Duncan,
I'm guessing that you'll disagree with that idea.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Well, I mean, the one we could probably do without
is the Ministry for Regulation, which is David Seymour's vanity
ministry that they've just set up by demolishing the Productivity
Commission Bill Kovano, which one wants to get rid of
because I think if it's the Ministry for Ethnic Communities,
or the Ministry for Disability, or the Ministry for Women
or the Ministry for Pacific Affairs, I think the people
(11:48):
who are well served would be really alarmed to think
that they were going to be downgraded and collapsed into
some other ministry. It's just you know which ministry are
we talking about?
Speaker 2 (11:59):
Well, it sounds like that's an extended answer to the
question that you would be against it, Matt. Do see
what garments need to go?
Speaker 4 (12:08):
Well, I don't have a list today, John, but it
will be no surprise to listeners that I think, you know,
we do need to reduce the size of government. When
you're spending nine billion a year just on paying the
interest of debt, you know that money is going to
have to come from somewhere.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
That is increasing under your government.
Speaker 4 (12:24):
Well, something we inherited next, John, But I must say
my experience, if you can call me still a new minister,
is yeah, the size of government, the ministries, the number
of boards and entities, and the cost of this, and
you do wonder whether you need all that in totality.
(12:48):
So as a point, do we think we should look
at where we can make a more efficiency. Clearly the
answer has got to be yes. And actually when you
look internationally, every government is actually doing this at the
moment to go through and look at the cost of
government that all it's doing is adding on cost of
doing business, which actually stops people employing people and addressing
(13:11):
the unemployment rights.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Talking so long answers from both of you, but the
long and short of it is Duncan thinks, well, I'm
not sure if we do have too many, I'm not
sure which ones you want to cut. And you're saying
I think we have too many, but I'm not sure
yet which ones will cut.
Speaker 4 (13:25):
Well, I haven't got a definitive list for you today,
but the Public Service Commissioner is starting a debate and
I'd encourage that because I'd say you walk out around
the Margaret Mayhee playground. I'm looking at out today through
your window, John, Most people would say the size of
government is too big?
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Is that the job of a public servant to start
that debate though.
Speaker 4 (13:44):
Or he's Public Service commission still in public service. He's
coming in with a view and I welcome that view. Look,
you've got to take a position because if you don't,
you just end up what we've had for the last
six years.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
Of You can't say last six season anymore. That's it's
just like saying Happy New Year. You can't say anymore.
Was that Duncan.
Speaker 4 (14:03):
Oh, I'm going to a Chinese New Year event tonight,
so we're still saying it right here we go.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
It's Duncan absolutely right that You're absolutely right. There's nothing
wrong with looking at having an effective and efficient public service.
And Brian Roch has said he wants to do that.
I think that's a good thing. Every government should do that.
But to then all of a sudden say we don't
need such and such ministry, you've really got to know
which one. I can't think other than the Ministry for Regulation,
(14:28):
which is a vanity ministry for David Seymour. I can't
think of one which doesn't have a good mission and
a good job. Now we can do things better yes,
but cutting things going out and saying and this is leadership.
This is for the Prime Minister to say, and Brian
Roch would not be saying it without the Prime Minister's consent.
This is the Prime Minister who's saying that we're going
(14:49):
to go and cut ministries and he needs to be
upfront and say which ones is he looking at?
Speaker 4 (14:52):
Yeah, but I think you're also misconstruing it, Dunka. It's
not necessarily cutting when you look at the last National
government to round MB and MPI, bringing ministries together, sharing
the back office and reducing the cost of the blocke
to bureaucracy. That's what I think is signaling and that's
why I think most key weis would be interested in doing.
Speaker 3 (15:11):
All.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
Right, let's talk about this idea that Labour's got of
forcing power companies to reinvest dividends to increase power generation.
It sounds like a bit of a weird idea, dunk
when it's not just reliant on investment but also other
things like supply of natural resources. So how would this work.
Speaker 3 (15:29):
Well, this is what we're doing at the moment right,
We're just mixing up some ideas and certainly you know
the government owns a large chunk of the gentailors, which
in the government coming into the government coffers are large dividends.
But sometimes you don't necessarily want to be driven by dividends.
You want to be driven by good reinvestments for the
long term energy security of the country. And there's an
(15:52):
argument there that the gentators and the generators as well
aren't putting enough money back into constructing new clean generation.
Now it's an idea, it's not policy. It's just an idea.
But we need to think about these ideas because at
the moment our electricity market is broken.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
But the thing is the market has done yeah, but
the market's broken. But reinvesting dividends won't make more water
fall from the sky, will it. It won't increase link levels.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
No, But it could be damns. It could be it
could be pumped hydro, it could be wind, it could
be solar. There's a lot of options out there, and
that's what we need for a secure energy market. We
need a diverse energy market and for you know, to
meet our climate targets, we need a clean energy market
as well. So you know, we and that's the that's
(16:42):
the project. There's one way to go about it.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
And Matt Dursey that's the challenge. A lot, a lot
it could be. But then we find this week that
we're still importing tons and tons and tons of coal
from overseas as a backup for power generation.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
And that is the example exactly of why we should
not follow what Duncan and Labor are proposing, because when
Labor gets interfering into markets like banning all links, it
led to us importing a record amount of dirty Indonesian coal.
So actually New Zealand is a market society. The government
(17:15):
at times has to lean into that market, but you've
got to choose when you lean in. So we're not
going to interfere with that market. What we would say
is actually the constraint is around investment into new energy infrastructure,
and you do that by freeing up the consent process
fast tracking consent. At the moment on John, it takes
(17:37):
eight years on average in New Zealand to consent the window.
We know that that's how you stimulate the market.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
That I thought we were at the door to this place.
We searched you for key messages and speaking points, but
obviously security has lapsed today and you've got through with
your key messages and speaking not at all.
Speaker 4 (17:54):
I'm explaining about our approach to supporting market competition or
labors is to interfere with it. Ours is to free
up the regulation so it can flourish.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Right, three Chinese warships and the TASMANI see Duncan web.
Should we freak out?
Speaker 3 (18:10):
Freak out? But recognize that this is the world we
live in. Right, we don't have a single superpower, and
we live in a Pacific which is increasingly contested both
militarily and diplomatically. And we'd be fools to ignore that.
I mean, and in that sense, I think we don't
need to freak out. But Judith Collins is right that,
(18:31):
you know, this is the world we live in. The
reach of China in every sense is into the South Pacific.
So it's been that way for a while. And this
is just an example of the Chinese, you know, probably
doing a little bit of you know, capacity testing, seeing
how they go in the Southern Ocean. Of course they
can do that. They're entitled to do it. They're not
(18:51):
breaking any laws. But don't pretend that we live in
American ocean. This is not the Gulf of America.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
There's a good line, Matt doc and according to some people,
the golf of the America doesn't exist anywhere, Matt ducon
are we going to see now? Because Judith Collins is
alluded to it. She was saying in the news today
that this shows the environment we're in. So we're going
to see more investment in defense in this year's budget.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
Well potentially, But I think Duncan's right. The Chinese aren't
operating outside international law and so they are allowed to
be in international waters. What Judith Collins, as Defense Minister,
has quite rightly said is that we were not given
our heads up. We have a strong relationship with China,
(19:38):
primarily around trade, but we also pride ourselves on people
to people relationships and this is an issue around relationship,
and as Judith has expressed, it is concerning that we
weren't told that these military craft would be there, and
it is disappointing.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
No one's telling you a lot in the thingy Cork
Island's not telling the stuff, China's not telling a stuff.
Duncan's not telling us what he's up to really in
Wellington today, ah kind of silence one. The big question though,
before we go Duncan, where do you going to Electric GAV?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
And going to Electric GAV with my son, and I'm
really looking forward to it. I have the weather holes,
I hear the weathers but dodgy.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
Yeah, yeah, be fine by by tomorrow. So which which
band are actually going to see? You know? Really going for.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
Well, I'm heading down this afternoon and I'm going to
see Shape Shap Shift tonight.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
It'll be all go. You're gonna wear that you were
in the the Swanee.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
I haven't chosen my outfit yet.
Speaker 2 (20:42):
I'll let you get to one and do that. Thanks doun'
get nice to hear you. Thank you, Doug. We had
to land on the line there. Maybe China was listening, Matt,
do see you going to Electric AV? No, I'm not.
Speaker 4 (20:51):
I'm disappointed though, because I know the lead actors Prodigy,
and I remember seeing them twenty five years ago and
they are brilliant and everyone will be rocking along to
fire Starter. So I am disappointed. But hey, how how
good it is for the town?
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Is you early? Amazing?
Speaker 3 (21:07):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (21:08):
Brilliant forty three Well, I'm doing the numbers. It's signed.
Two thirds of the people going, seventy thousand people go,
two thirds from out of town. What's that forty thousand people.
Speaker 4 (21:15):
Yeah, brilliant for the local economy.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
For more from Category Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at 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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.