National's Matt Doocey and Labour's Megan Woods joined John MacDonald for Politics Friday this week.
They covered some of the biggest topics from the week from the Infrastructure Commissions report, NZ First pushing for English to become an official language, and they reflect on the February 2011 earthquake sixteen years on.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk z'b.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
It's good to have the politicians with us as well.
Meghan was good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
Good morning, Good morning to you. John. It is always
good to be here. On the theme of good.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Here we go. Matt Docy, very nice to see.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
It, morning, John. Good that you think it's good that
we're here.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
It's good. I'll tell you what. Donald Trump doesn't. Donald, Oh,
come on, Donald Trump doesn't think it's good. What's happened
with formerly Prince Andrew? The former Prince Andrew. He was
on FS one. He said, it's a shame. He says,
this is a weird says, I think it's very sad.
I think it's so bad for the royal family. It's
(00:47):
very very sad. To me, it's a very sad thing.
What's your reaction, Meghan, Well, I.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Think it is a said, a very very sad thing.
Speaker 5 (00:53):
And I think the more the Epstein saga unfolds, you
just realize just how many thousands of lives of young
women were absolutely turned up down. And I think we're
just saying more and more come out of those. But
I think in the case of Prince Andrew. The reason
I understand he was called in for questioning and has
now been released, was what he did with the official documents.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
I think the.
Speaker 5 (01:18):
Good thing, if we are going to find a good
thing here, is it shows nobody is above the law.
They shouldn't be above the law, and nobody is above
the law. So I think that is a good thing.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Matt do say. We spoke with the correspondent last year
who was saying that questions are already being asked in terms
of how much King Charles knew about it and whether
he is going to survive this. What's your thoughts on that?
Speaker 4 (01:39):
Gil quite rightly, and I joined with Meagan first acknowledging
the victims and also the principle that no one is
above the law. And so I think most people would
welcome the scrutiny of Andrew. And of course I think
by association not only Charles but the wider house of Windsor.
But actually when you step back for it, I actually
(02:02):
think it will be good for the House of Windsor.
I think it will be a good clear out. I
think we're heading towards eventually succession, and I think it's
up to William now to step up at some stage
that they choose to actually rightfully take back the monarchy.
I wasn't a big monarchist. I ended up spending fifteen
years in London and after experiencing the commitment of the
(02:26):
late Queen, I did become a big fan of the monarchy,
and in the time of turbulence in New Zealand, I
think that we do need these institutions, and you think
about the Commonwealth as well. So I hope it is
a good cleanout and they will come out stronger.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
For right So you saying that you would like to
see William taking over before Charles, before the obvious succession point, No, I'm.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
Not predicting a timing of it, but it is inevitable
you would expect with that succession. And I think it
is quite rightly that there is a cleanout because no
institution can sustain this level of accusation, rumor, and quite rightly,
have people have committed a crime against the law in
(03:15):
the UK, then they should be held accountable.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Yeah, I mean someone said last hour? Was any said
last hour? That's time to stop having this lot as
a head of state? What are we ever going to
get the point? We can't even get a referendum on
the four year parliamentary term, let alone setting us up
as a republic, Megan.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
So I think that's a critical thing.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
We're going to have a head of state regardless of
whether or not we have the monarchy, So it's a
matter of how we choose it. I said in my
maiden speech, I believed in the inevitability and the desirability
of New Zealand eventually becoming a republic and choosing our
own head of state. I think we do have to
make sure that we have.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Stability with a head of state.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
That it needs to be someone that is above politics,
someone that isn't part of the political to and fro,
that we can have that solidity at the top. But
I think going back to the Andrew saga, of of course,
in terms of the wider family, is that my understanding
is that some of the allegations against Andrew actually about
(04:22):
using royal households, about who he brought in to Buckingham Palace,
who he brought into his house on the Windsor estate,
and the way he was basically selling access into the
to the royal family. So it is kind of broadening
out into the form into the broader family. I think
the interesting thing. I mean, we can all have situations
(04:45):
in our family, but this is a unique situation for
a family where if he is charged, the charges will
be brought.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
In the name of his brother.
Speaker 5 (04:52):
So it is quite a unique situation in terms of
that family and how they're going to manage it. But
I think the most critical thing is that people have
to have faith that anybody, no matter who they are,
that they will be held accountable for their actions.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Yeah. I think it's some well potentially very very positive.
We'll see, we'll see where it goes. Housing intensification. Once
upon a time, both your parties were holding hands and
you were all set to, you know, intensify, intensively intensify.
Matt Doosey. Yesterday Chris Bishop did this what's been described
as a U turn, giving into the Nimbi's saying that no,
you don't have to build two million two houses, two
(05:28):
million new houses in Auckland. You can get away with
one point six What led to that nimbiism or what?
Speaker 4 (05:35):
Yeah, Well, the first thing I'd say is I support intensification.
I think we need to go up, and I think
in Greater christ Church we've shown we need to go
out as well. Actually, the precedent for this is actually
Chris Bishop working with the local council here around the
proposals for intensification and greater christ Church. There was some
(05:57):
concern of the blanket, the one size fits all. It
was more targeted down here and that approach has just
flowed on to Auckland, so I welcome it. It's around
the intensification around CBD, town centers, transport corridors and let's
not lose sight. Really what the key part of this
(06:17):
argument is, it's to prevent our children and our grandchildren
from getting locked out of buying their first home. So look,
sometimes you've got to hit it head on. Is that
what count when you take a step back. This is
what it's about. In principal councils around the country. We're
strangling the ability for our homes to be consented and
(06:41):
for growth of city. So I think as a government
you do have to take tough decisions. You have to
hit it head on, and I think with this we've
shown we're going to take a target approach.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
All right, Where where does Labor stand on intensification? Megan, Well,
it was because I'm a bit confused.
Speaker 5 (06:56):
So intensification needs to happen. It's work that we began
that we did have that bipartisan agreement with National because
it is about housing affordability.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
You don't have enough houses.
Speaker 5 (07:07):
Their houses are going to be more expensive. I agree
you need to both both go up and you need
to go out, but you need to have the ability
to do the go up because the thing is that
land might be cheaper on the fringes of a city,
but it's more expensive for people. They've got higher transport costs.
But one of the things that we know is that
councils for decades and decades and decades, and this is
(07:29):
why Labor and National came together on this, have strangled
their growth.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
They have folded at.
Speaker 5 (07:35):
Every point where people, often from the leafy suburbs, have
come in and said, don't want that in my backyard.
And this is what we're seeing again. What we really
are seeing here is a housing minister. And I feel
for Chris Bishop. He was doing the right thing. He's
been thrown under the bus by his own Prime minister,
by Simmy and Brown and by David Seymour and had
(07:55):
to swallow a huge dead rat. There are now going
to be four hundred, four hundred thousand fewer houses in Auckland.
So if Matt says this is about people getting into
their first times, we've just strained there by four hundred thousand.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Just that argument about just that argument get into getting
you know, being done to get people into their first times.
Interesting development this week Reserve Banks saying we're going to
get under this whole drop this idea that you're going
to build your wealth with your residential property. There's that
part of it, But do you really think that apartment
(08:28):
blocks are going to be the way of the coming
generations to build wealth because we know already that the
capital gain on apartment blocks and townhouses is nothing like
what it is on standalone, bigger properties.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
Mare.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
But I think it's about giving people choice, John, And
when you look at people over their life course, they
make different choices about housing. I reflect of my own
experience of living in an apartment for ten years in London,
and actually near the end of it, I got quite
entrenched in apartment living. It's actually quite an attractive lifestyle.
But now I have a family with young kids, I've
(09:06):
got the choice of going into a standalone house. That's
what we want to do. Is give people choice along
their life course.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Megan, So you're absolutely right.
Speaker 5 (09:14):
In terms of the monetary policy statement from the Reserve
Bank this week, they've really pointed the fact that we're
going to see modest increasing increases in property values.
Speaker 2 (09:23):
I think so you politicians got to drop this idea
that this whole thing about getting people into their first times,
don't you, because you're just getting picture waiting the myth.
Speaker 5 (09:32):
No, but people getting into their first home isn't just
about the capital gain they get on it. It's actually
about paying down some of the mortgage. It's about getting
that to posit for the next step. If that's what
people want to do. I think we do need to
realize there are some people that, as Matt says, it
is an attractive way to live in terms of apartments
and townhouses. There's you know, people want to do other
(09:52):
things with their weekends rather than mow the lawns and
do the gardens. But then there are people and life
stages have a big part to do it do with it.
But I think an interesting thing that anecdotally I've noticed
quite a lot in christ Church is actually people once
they retire seeing apartments in townhouses is in the inner
city is an attractive way to live that they can
(10:13):
go out, they can get coffee, they can be amongst it.
Speaker 3 (10:15):
So it is about.
Speaker 5 (10:17):
Having that option for people, and we see it around
the world. Why would New Zealand be any different.
Speaker 4 (10:21):
Megan agrees with me. That's what she said. It was
a long way of saying.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
I think what they're saying is you're going to get
a get an apartment together, Matt doy Matt Douce, Matt
Doocy and.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
Very large apartment.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Matt Doucy. Are you prepared under the infrastructure plan that
came out last week, would you be prepared to, you know,
forego the wood End bypass in flavor of a new hospital.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
I don't think they're asking us to forego there, hoping not.
I mean, as a government, we've made a commitment to
start construction of that in our first term. Early implementation
works are underway. The design looks great. Fly over at
Pineakers as well as between I guess and.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
You're going you were going to have a referendum on
the four year parliamentary term and your first term of
government too, weren't you.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
Well, I think we've propose that, yes, right anyway, Yeah,
we didn't commit to it. We proposed it, and we've
made a commitment. We're not doing it now. But back
to the Infrastructure Plan, I think it's quite right when
you think about a country like New Zealand, quite a
high rate of our GDP we invest into infrastructure, and
it beggars belief we didn't have a thirty year plan.
(11:27):
You only need to look at the comments in their
plan that individual government departments didn't have things like asset
registers of their infrastructure assets. So it shows we haven't
been managing it well. And I welcome the scrutiny of
it because when I've got the responsibility for not only
mental health but rural health, and quite rightly, when you
(11:47):
go around the country you look at decades of not
prioritizing our hospitals and rural communities, and the Infrastructure Commission
is saying, hey, we need to step through this, and
I welcome that.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
Megan Wood's what chance though, that that'll just be put
on the shelf and the politics will get involved and
it will go nowhere.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
This is actually an area where I do have great hope.
Speaker 5 (12:07):
We set up the Infrastructure Commission to do precisely this,
to try and take some of the politics out of it,
because these have to be long term plans. We've got
to have long term asset manager.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
It's very easy to take the politics out of the
initial thinking in the initial drafting of a plan and recommendations,
but as soon as it's delivered, the politics come seeping
through it again, don't.
Speaker 5 (12:29):
Yeah, and look, I think there are some more things
that can be done in terms of having the Infrastructure
Commission very much part of the advice that goes to
Cabinet when infrastructure projects are proposed, to have them as
part of that.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Look, we welcome this plan. We look forward to getting
a brief on it.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
We'll go through it and where there's sensible things, Karen
will have more to say. But where there's sensible things,
we absolutely will beck it. For a variety of reasons,
we've got to get out of the situation where we
had where to use an example, a government came in
and canceled a very deal and now we've got another
few bypass.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
Oh yeah, we lost six years. Think of the finished
at a good example on local examples.
Speaker 5 (13:15):
But what I'm saying, I'm actually making a point there
that we've got to get out of the point of
precisely what you're doing now, which is this back and forth,
because not only do we need those assets as a
country and as a society, but our construction sector needs
to have That's exactly right, and that's precisely why we
set it up. But on the Wooden Bypass, if they
(13:36):
started construction on the on the tolling boat.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
So when you well, that's an interesting and I'll go
back to that. So when you look at the Wooden Bypass, Yes,
it was always a trilogy or a sequencing of three
motorways the National government built or was going to build,
and when labour came in and canceled bypassed no, no, no,
no no no, let me finish show. And you gave
me going a good go a construction crew when they
(14:02):
finished the Northern Corridor and twenty twenty was supposed to
go on and build the Wooden I passed you. Where
did they all go Australia because labor canceled the bike light.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
I'm sorry, Matt, record number of construction Australia.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Rory reaching for the world's tiniest violin. Can you give
it a reason?
Speaker 4 (14:20):
No? No, Think of the cost to taxpayers of six
years of inaction. That motorway is a lot more thanks
to labor and.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
As I pointed out the other day, as I pointed
out the other day, the problem, the problem with infrastructure
is you've got politicians who stake their political ambitions and
the political futures on it. And we've just heard another
piece of evidence to back that up. Politics Friday, Megan Woods,
Matthew Deucy with us, Saul matt Doocy.
Speaker 4 (14:45):
With Matthew when not too long ago, because when I'm
in trouble with my mum, Matthew comes out all.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Right, Well, Matthew, how do you feel about your government
being involved in this ridiculous push to make English an
official language in New Zealand.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
It's a Polish and agreement between you feel embarrassed by no.
I mean that that is a principal point. It's a
coalition agreement. And quite rightly, when you talk to people
on the street, they do say why is it not
an official language?
Speaker 2 (15:15):
So they do not they don't say that. They said
I had no idea, and that's what.
Speaker 4 (15:19):
I was saying. It was split. That is what they're saying.
Why is it not because we didn't I haven't you
out on the street and talk on the street all
the time. You're always stuck in this bubble.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
I haven't.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
I haven't just bubble without real people.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
My bubble is better than your bubble.
Speaker 4 (15:38):
Don't worry about I expect callers to call in after.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
That, and so don't you worry about that. Megan, this
is just nuts, Isn't it.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Look to be perfect?
Speaker 5 (15:47):
But it was brought up with me as part of
the culture wars in the last election.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
It's the people on the street we're talking about, you
go especially and Wigram.
Speaker 5 (15:57):
It was brought up by a particular group of voters
that they'd come to meetings and bring it up. To
be perfectly honest, John, I didn't realize English and an
official language. But here's a fun fact that I've found
out since that English isn't actually recognized as an official
language in England in the United Kingdoms.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
That is correct.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
So it's I think official languages are usually other languages
that are brought in later that they need to be
recognized by statue. Obviously, English is the language that is
spoken in New Zealand, you know almost you know, probably
ninety five percent of the time. So I think that
historically it's never needed to be recognized as an official language.
(16:41):
We voted for the legislation because like it's you know, okay,
if you.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Want to make it an official language, making.
Speaker 5 (16:47):
An official language, all right, But I mean the fact
that it got into the fact no, the fact that
it got into a coalition agreement that seriously, when people
sat down and thought, what are the greatest challenges facing
our nation? What are the most important things we could
do for New Zealand?
Speaker 3 (17:05):
This made the cart.
Speaker 5 (17:06):
This is what national thought was one of the most
pressing issues of our time, and we needed to use
precious house time and an election year on.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
And this is the kind of leadership.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
That's got the look on the coalition. MAT's got that
coalition look on his chops, which is yeah, yeah, yeah,
you right, John. It is stupid, but you know, we're
just going along with it.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
Not at all. I was actually impressed learning from Megan
once again, New Zealand is world leading making English official
language when other countries evn't got on. New Zealand always
at the front of the pack.
Speaker 5 (17:37):
And how does this help people pay for their groceries?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
How does this.
Speaker 2 (17:41):
Help squeeze You voted for it, We did supported.
Speaker 5 (17:46):
But this government quite frankly should have higher priorities on
its religious letter for gender, Like what can we do
to actually is the pressure that people are feeling when
they get.
Speaker 4 (17:56):
Their best reduce food inflation from the twelve percent you left.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
You don't talk to anyway, get out and talk to
people on the street.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Don't worry you can, either of you believe. On Sunday
it will be fifteen years since the big quake map.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
No in a way, where is that time gone? And
I'm sure we all agree. Just acknowledging one hundred and
eighty five victims of the quake in their family and
everyone who's been impacted by the earthquake over the years,
and I think quite rightly will come together on the
banks of the Avon and remember them.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Megan, when you had involvement with through your regeneration portfolio.
When you look at the city, I find it a
little bit weird when you say, look at the city, now,
look how far we've come, because it doesn't actually acknowledge
the loss, the human loss right.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
Absolutely and we can never forget that on fifteen years
ago tomorrow that we did see one hundred and eighty
five people lose their lives we saw extraordinary acts from
first responders. We saw extraordinary acts from the community, the
way the community came together, and I don't I think
we should ever lose sight of that either, the way
in which people came together. I was a candidate at
(19:11):
the time I was elected in November of twenty eleven.
I was selected to be the labor candidate for W.
Graham ten days after the September earthquake, but worked with
Jimmy and Deerton, who was still the in paper weregram
after the February quake and just getting around seeing the
way people came together. I think I had at one
point for a week something like seventy students from Lincoln
(19:35):
turning up at my house in Sprayden to go out
and dig out liqu affection. It was kind of like
it became known that you meet at the blue House
on this street and then we'll go out and we'll
dig out liqu affection. So just extraordinary acts of community mindedness,
and I think that has to be absolutely integral to
(19:55):
who we continue being as a city.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Brilliant. Nice to see you both, Thank you, Good to
see John again.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Nice to see you, mean good to see you boy.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
Your pleasure Sea, the Flat, It's to eleven. Politics, We're
on Cooking tonight night. It was a Friday night off
for everybody?
Speaker 3 (20:12):
Was it?
Speaker 2 (20:13):
What's It's just like every other flap.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
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 z'b.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
It's good to have the politicians with us as well.
Meghan was good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
Good morning, Good morning to you. John. It is always
good to be here. On the theme of good.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Here we go. Matt Docy, very nice to see.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
It, morning, John. Good that you think it's good that
we're here.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
It's good. I'll tell you what. Donald Trump doesn't. Donald, Oh,
come on, Donald Trump doesn't think it's good. What's happened
with formerly Prince Andrew? The former Prince Andrew. He was
on FS one. He said, it's a shame. He says,
this is a weird says, I think it's very sad.
I think it's so bad for the royal family. It's
(00:47):
very very sad. To me, it's a very sad thing.
What's your reaction, Meghan, Well, I.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
Think it is a said, a very very sad thing.
Speaker 5 (00:53):
And I think the more the Epstein saga unfolds, you
just realize just how many thousands of lives of young
women were absolutely turned up down. And I think we're
just saying more and more come out of those. But
I think in the case of Prince Andrew. The reason
I understand he was called in for questioning and has
now been released, was what he did with the official documents.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
I think the.
Speaker 5 (01:18):
Good thing, if we are going to find a good
thing here, is it shows nobody is above the law.
They shouldn't be above the law, and nobody is above
the law. So I think that is a good thing.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
Matt do say. We spoke with the correspondent last year
who was saying that questions are already being asked in terms
of how much King Charles knew about it and whether
he is going to survive this. What's your thoughts on that?
Speaker 4 (01:39):
Gil quite rightly, and I joined with Meagan first acknowledging
the victims and also the principle that no one is
above the law. And so I think most people would
welcome the scrutiny of Andrew. And of course I think
by association not only Charles but the wider house of Windsor.
But actually when you step back for it, I actually
(02:02):
think it will be good for the House of Windsor.
I think it will be a good clear out. I
think we're heading towards eventually succession, and I think it's
up to William now to step up at some stage
that they choose to actually rightfully take back the monarchy.
I wasn't a big monarchist. I ended up spending fifteen
years in London and after experiencing the commitment of the
(02:26):
late Queen, I did become a big fan of the monarchy,
and in the time of turbulence in New Zealand, I
think that we do need these institutions, and you think
about the Commonwealth as well. So I hope it is
a good cleanout and they will come out stronger.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
For right So you saying that you would like to
see William taking over before Charles, before the obvious succession point, No, I'm.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
Not predicting a timing of it, but it is inevitable
you would expect with that succession. And I think it
is quite rightly that there is a cleanout because no
institution can sustain this level of accusation, rumor, and quite rightly,
have people have committed a crime against the law in
(03:15):
the UK, then they should be held accountable.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Yeah, I mean someone said last hour? Was any said
last hour? That's time to stop having this lot as
a head of state? What are we ever going to
get the point? We can't even get a referendum on
the four year parliamentary term, let alone setting us up
as a republic, Megan.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
So I think that's a critical thing.
Speaker 5 (03:34):
We're going to have a head of state regardless of
whether or not we have the monarchy, So it's a
matter of how we choose it. I said in my
maiden speech, I believed in the inevitability and the desirability
of New Zealand eventually becoming a republic and choosing our
own head of state. I think we do have to
make sure that we have.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Stability with a head of state.
Speaker 5 (03:58):
That it needs to be someone that is above politics,
someone that isn't part of the political to and fro,
that we can have that solidity at the top. But
I think going back to the Andrew saga, of of course,
in terms of the wider family, is that my understanding
is that some of the allegations against Andrew actually about
(04:22):
using royal households, about who he brought in to Buckingham Palace,
who he brought into his house on the Windsor estate,
and the way he was basically selling access into the
to the royal family. So it is kind of broadening
out into the form into the broader family. I think
the interesting thing. I mean, we can all have situations
(04:45):
in our family, but this is a unique situation for
a family where if he is charged, the charges will
be brought.
Speaker 3 (04:51):
In the name of his brother.
Speaker 5 (04:52):
So it is quite a unique situation in terms of
that family and how they're going to manage it. But
I think the most critical thing is that people have
to have faith that anybody, no matter who they are,
that they will be held accountable for their actions.
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Yeah. I think it's some well potentially very very positive.
We'll see, we'll see where it goes. Housing intensification. Once
upon a time, both your parties were holding hands and
you were all set to, you know, intensify, intensively intensify.
Matt Doosey. Yesterday Chris Bishop did this what's been described
as a U turn, giving into the Nimbi's saying that no,
you don't have to build two million two houses, two
(05:28):
million new houses in Auckland. You can get away with
one point six What led to that nimbiism or what?
Speaker 4 (05:35):
Yeah, Well, the first thing I'd say is I support intensification.
I think we need to go up, and I think
in Greater christ Church we've shown we need to go
out as well. Actually, the precedent for this is actually
Chris Bishop working with the local council here around the
proposals for intensification and greater christ Church. There was some
(05:57):
concern of the blanket, the one size fits all. It
was more targeted down here and that approach has just
flowed on to Auckland, so I welcome it. It's around
the intensification around CBD, town centers, transport corridors and let's
not lose sight. Really what the key part of this
(06:17):
argument is, it's to prevent our children and our grandchildren
from getting locked out of buying their first home. So look,
sometimes you've got to hit it head on. Is that
what count when you take a step back. This is
what it's about. In principal councils around the country. We're
strangling the ability for our homes to be consented and
(06:41):
for growth of city. So I think as a government
you do have to take tough decisions. You have to
hit it head on, and I think with this we've
shown we're going to take a target approach.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
All right, Where where does Labor stand on intensification? Megan, Well,
it was because I'm a bit confused.
Speaker 5 (06:56):
So intensification needs to happen. It's work that we began
that we did have that bipartisan agreement with National because
it is about housing affordability.
Speaker 3 (07:05):
You don't have enough houses.
Speaker 5 (07:07):
Their houses are going to be more expensive. I agree
you need to both both go up and you need
to go out, but you need to have the ability
to do the go up because the thing is that
land might be cheaper on the fringes of a city,
but it's more expensive for people. They've got higher transport costs.
But one of the things that we know is that
councils for decades and decades and decades, and this is
(07:29):
why Labor and National came together on this, have strangled
their growth.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
They have folded at.
Speaker 5 (07:35):
Every point where people, often from the leafy suburbs, have
come in and said, don't want that in my backyard.
And this is what we're seeing again. What we really
are seeing here is a housing minister. And I feel
for Chris Bishop. He was doing the right thing. He's
been thrown under the bus by his own Prime minister,
by Simmy and Brown and by David Seymour and had
(07:55):
to swallow a huge dead rat. There are now going
to be four hundred, four hundred thousand fewer houses in Auckland.
So if Matt says this is about people getting into
their first times, we've just strained there by four hundred thousand.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
Just that argument about just that argument get into getting
you know, being done to get people into their first times.
Interesting development this week Reserve Banks saying we're going to
get under this whole drop this idea that you're going
to build your wealth with your residential property. There's that
part of it, But do you really think that apartment
(08:28):
blocks are going to be the way of the coming
generations to build wealth because we know already that the
capital gain on apartment blocks and townhouses is nothing like
what it is on standalone, bigger properties.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
Mare.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
But I think it's about giving people choice, John, And
when you look at people over their life course, they
make different choices about housing. I reflect of my own
experience of living in an apartment for ten years in London,
and actually near the end of it, I got quite
entrenched in apartment living. It's actually quite an attractive lifestyle.
But now I have a family with young kids, I've
(09:06):
got the choice of going into a standalone house. That's
what we want to do. Is give people choice along
their life course.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Megan, So you're absolutely right.
Speaker 5 (09:14):
In terms of the monetary policy statement from the Reserve
Bank this week, they've really pointed the fact that we're
going to see modest increasing increases in property values.
Speaker 2 (09:23):
I think so you politicians got to drop this idea
that this whole thing about getting people into their first times,
don't you, because you're just getting picture waiting the myth.
Speaker 5 (09:32):
No, but people getting into their first home isn't just
about the capital gain they get on it. It's actually
about paying down some of the mortgage. It's about getting
that to posit for the next step. If that's what
people want to do. I think we do need to
realize there are some people that, as Matt says, it
is an attractive way to live in terms of apartments
and townhouses. There's you know, people want to do other
(09:52):
things with their weekends rather than mow the lawns and
do the gardens. But then there are people and life
stages have a big part to do it do with it.
But I think an interesting thing that anecdotally I've noticed
quite a lot in christ Church is actually people once
they retire seeing apartments in townhouses is in the inner
city is an attractive way to live that they can
(10:13):
go out, they can get coffee, they can be amongst it.
Speaker 3 (10:15):
So it is about.
Speaker 5 (10:17):
Having that option for people, and we see it around
the world. Why would New Zealand be any different.
Speaker 4 (10:21):
Megan agrees with me. That's what she said. It was
a long way of saying.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
I think what they're saying is you're going to get
a get an apartment together, Matt doy Matt Douce, Matt
Doocy and.
Speaker 3 (10:31):
Very large apartment.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Matt Doucy. Are you prepared under the infrastructure plan that
came out last week, would you be prepared to, you know,
forego the wood End bypass in flavor of a new hospital.
Speaker 4 (10:43):
I don't think they're asking us to forego there, hoping not.
I mean, as a government, we've made a commitment to
start construction of that in our first term. Early implementation
works are underway. The design looks great. Fly over at
Pineakers as well as between I guess and.
Speaker 2 (11:00):
You're going you were going to have a referendum on
the four year parliamentary term and your first term of
government too, weren't you.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
Well, I think we've propose that, yes, right anyway, Yeah,
we didn't commit to it. We proposed it, and we've
made a commitment. We're not doing it now. But back
to the Infrastructure Plan, I think it's quite right when
you think about a country like New Zealand, quite a
high rate of our GDP we invest into infrastructure, and
it beggars belief we didn't have a thirty year plan.
(11:27):
You only need to look at the comments in their
plan that individual government departments didn't have things like asset
registers of their infrastructure assets. So it shows we haven't
been managing it well. And I welcome the scrutiny of
it because when I've got the responsibility for not only
mental health but rural health, and quite rightly, when you
(11:47):
go around the country you look at decades of not
prioritizing our hospitals and rural communities, and the Infrastructure Commission
is saying, hey, we need to step through this, and
I welcome that.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
Megan Wood's what chance though, that that'll just be put
on the shelf and the politics will get involved and
it will go nowhere.
Speaker 3 (12:04):
This is actually an area where I do have great hope.
Speaker 5 (12:07):
We set up the Infrastructure Commission to do precisely this,
to try and take some of the politics out of it,
because these have to be long term plans. We've got
to have long term asset manager.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
It's very easy to take the politics out of the
initial thinking in the initial drafting of a plan and recommendations,
but as soon as it's delivered, the politics come seeping
through it again, don't.
Speaker 5 (12:29):
Yeah, and look, I think there are some more things
that can be done in terms of having the Infrastructure
Commission very much part of the advice that goes to
Cabinet when infrastructure projects are proposed, to have them as
part of that.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
Look, we welcome this plan. We look forward to getting
a brief on it.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
We'll go through it and where there's sensible things, Karen
will have more to say. But where there's sensible things,
we absolutely will beck it. For a variety of reasons,
we've got to get out of the situation where we
had where to use an example, a government came in
and canceled a very deal and now we've got another
few bypass.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
Oh yeah, we lost six years. Think of the finished
at a good example on local examples.
Speaker 5 (13:15):
But what I'm saying, I'm actually making a point there
that we've got to get out of the point of
precisely what you're doing now, which is this back and forth,
because not only do we need those assets as a
country and as a society, but our construction sector needs
to have That's exactly right, and that's precisely why we
set it up. But on the Wooden Bypass, if they
(13:36):
started construction on the on the tolling boat.
Speaker 4 (13:38):
So when you well, that's an interesting and I'll go
back to that. So when you look at the Wooden Bypass, Yes,
it was always a trilogy or a sequencing of three
motorways the National government built or was going to build,
and when labour came in and canceled bypassed no, no, no,
no no no, let me finish show. And you gave
me going a good go a construction crew when they
(14:02):
finished the Northern Corridor and twenty twenty was supposed to
go on and build the Wooden I passed you. Where
did they all go Australia because labor canceled the bike light.
Speaker 5 (14:10):
I'm sorry, Matt, record number of construction Australia.
Speaker 2 (14:16):
Rory reaching for the world's tiniest violin. Can you give
it a reason?
Speaker 4 (14:20):
No? No, Think of the cost to taxpayers of six
years of inaction. That motorway is a lot more thanks
to labor and.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
As I pointed out the other day, as I pointed
out the other day, the problem, the problem with infrastructure
is you've got politicians who stake their political ambitions and
the political futures on it. And we've just heard another
piece of evidence to back that up. Politics Friday, Megan Woods,
Matthew Deucy with us, Saul matt Doocy.
Speaker 4 (14:45):
With Matthew when not too long ago, because when I'm
in trouble with my mum, Matthew comes out all.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Right, Well, Matthew, how do you feel about your government
being involved in this ridiculous push to make English an
official language in New Zealand.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
It's a Polish and agreement between you feel embarrassed by no.
I mean that that is a principal point. It's a
coalition agreement. And quite rightly, when you talk to people
on the street, they do say why is it not
an official language?
Speaker 2 (15:15):
So they do not they don't say that. They said
I had no idea, and that's what.
Speaker 4 (15:19):
I was saying. It was split. That is what they're saying.
Why is it not because we didn't I haven't you
out on the street and talk on the street all
the time. You're always stuck in this bubble.
Speaker 2 (15:31):
I haven't.
Speaker 3 (15:31):
I haven't just bubble without real people.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
My bubble is better than your bubble.
Speaker 4 (15:38):
Don't worry about I expect callers to call in after.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
That, and so don't you worry about that. Megan, this
is just nuts, Isn't it.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Look to be perfect?
Speaker 5 (15:47):
But it was brought up with me as part of
the culture wars in the last election.
Speaker 4 (15:52):
It's the people on the street we're talking about, you
go especially and Wigram.
Speaker 5 (15:57):
It was brought up by a particular group of voters
that they'd come to meetings and bring it up. To
be perfectly honest, John, I didn't realize English and an
official language. But here's a fun fact that I've found
out since that English isn't actually recognized as an official
language in England in the United Kingdoms.
Speaker 3 (16:16):
That is correct.
Speaker 5 (16:18):
So it's I think official languages are usually other languages
that are brought in later that they need to be
recognized by statue. Obviously, English is the language that is
spoken in New Zealand, you know almost you know, probably
ninety five percent of the time. So I think that
historically it's never needed to be recognized as an official language.
(16:41):
We voted for the legislation because like it's you know, okay,
if you.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
Want to make it an official language, making.
Speaker 5 (16:47):
An official language, all right, But I mean the fact
that it got into the fact no, the fact that
it got into a coalition agreement that seriously, when people
sat down and thought, what are the greatest challenges facing
our nation? What are the most important things we could
do for New Zealand?
Speaker 3 (17:05):
This made the cart.
Speaker 5 (17:06):
This is what national thought was one of the most
pressing issues of our time, and we needed to use
precious house time and an election year on.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
And this is the kind of leadership.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
That's got the look on the coalition. MAT's got that
coalition look on his chops, which is yeah, yeah, yeah,
you right, John. It is stupid, but you know, we're
just going along with it.
Speaker 4 (17:27):
Not at all. I was actually impressed learning from Megan
once again, New Zealand is world leading making English official
language when other countries evn't got on. New Zealand always
at the front of the pack.
Speaker 5 (17:37):
And how does this help people pay for their groceries?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
How does this.
Speaker 2 (17:41):
Help squeeze You voted for it, We did supported.
Speaker 5 (17:46):
But this government quite frankly should have higher priorities on
its religious letter for gender, Like what can we do
to actually is the pressure that people are feeling when
they get.
Speaker 4 (17:56):
Their best reduce food inflation from the twelve percent you left.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
You don't talk to anyway, get out and talk to
people on the street.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Don't worry you can, either of you believe. On Sunday
it will be fifteen years since the big quake map.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
No in a way, where is that time gone? And
I'm sure we all agree. Just acknowledging one hundred and
eighty five victims of the quake in their family and
everyone who's been impacted by the earthquake over the years,
and I think quite rightly will come together on the
banks of the Avon and remember them.
Speaker 2 (18:36):
Megan, when you had involvement with through your regeneration portfolio.
When you look at the city, I find it a
little bit weird when you say, look at the city, now,
look how far we've come, because it doesn't actually acknowledge
the loss, the human loss right.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
Absolutely and we can never forget that on fifteen years
ago tomorrow that we did see one hundred and eighty
five people lose their lives we saw extraordinary acts from
first responders. We saw extraordinary acts from the community, the
way the community came together, and I don't I think
we should ever lose sight of that either, the way
in which people came together. I was a candidate at
(19:11):
the time I was elected in November of twenty eleven.
I was selected to be the labor candidate for W.
Graham ten days after the September earthquake, but worked with
Jimmy and Deerton, who was still the in paper weregram
after the February quake and just getting around seeing the
way people came together. I think I had at one
point for a week something like seventy students from Lincoln
(19:35):
turning up at my house in Sprayden to go out
and dig out liqu affection. It was kind of like
it became known that you meet at the blue House
on this street and then we'll go out and we'll
dig out liqu affection. So just extraordinary acts of community mindedness,
and I think that has to be absolutely integral to
(19:55):
who we continue being as a city.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
Brilliant. Nice to see you both, Thank you, Good to
see John again.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Nice to see you, mean good to see you boy.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
Your pleasure Sea, the Flat, It's to eleven. Politics, We're
on Cooking tonight night. It was a Friday night off
for everybody?
Speaker 3 (20:12):
Was it?
Speaker 2 (20:13):
What's It's just like every other flap.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
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
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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 Clifford Show
The Clifford Show with Clifford Taylor IV blends humor, culture, and behind-the-scenes sports talk with real conversations featuring athletes, creators, and personalities—spotlighting the grind, the growth, and the opportunities shaping the next generation of sports and culture.