Today on Politics Friday, John was joined in studio by Labour's Megan Woods and National's Hamish Campbell. On today’s agenda:
Why, despite multiple reports, are children in New Zealand still being abused and losing their lives? Is it time for a cross-party commitment to ending this?
What can be done about the drinking culture in New Zealand, is it time to look at either increasing prices or raising the drinking age again?
Plus, they discuss the allegations of bullying towards Karen Chourr in Parliament.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Coming up later on after eleven o'clock Uber Eats. There
are some restaurants saying they're going out of business because
of Uber Eats. I made a confession in the office
this morning. I have never ever used Uber eats. Making
words of you used Uber Eats.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
I couldn't make the same confession as you.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
John, ministerial limo delivering pizza back the day.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Not a ministerial Limo and an Uber driver delivering Uber eats.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Haymus Campbell, you're an uber eatz guy.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Is an Uber eats guy. I have used Uber eat
but yeah.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
I always dragging you into this convoys. Anyway, keep listening
after eleven, guys, because we're going to talk about that
after eleven.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
John. One thing I will say is that I know
that there's like my local tie takeaway, I do order
if I order from there, I ordered directly because I
know that actually it's much better for them.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Brilliant. All right, So we're going to talk but that
after eleven. Right now though, at eight minutes past ten
at a sign for politics right at Nationals Hamish camp
but warning Hamish.
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Good morning.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
How are you, j Verry Good Labour's Megan Woods morning.
Speaker 5 (01:14):
Good morning, John Morning Hamish.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
So this report out yesterday that three years down the
track from the murder of this little five year old
by his care, at risk children are no safer than
they were back when that happened, Megan Woods. That is
a reflection on your government, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
Look I think it is a reflection on us as
a country. I think that there is way more we
have to know, and I'm not going to resile from there.
Speaker 5 (01:42):
I haven't read the whole report.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I've read the introduction and the recommendations that are in
the report. There is undoubtedly things that have to be done.
I think what the report does make clear is that
this is a problem that has decades in the making.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
And look, I can tell you.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
The thirteen years I've been in MP, there is nothing
more troubling as an MP of something coming in that
is an OT case or a sift's cases. It was
when I started out in terms of how it is
that you try and knit all the bits together that
need to be there, because fundamentally the concern has to
be the welfare of the child, all.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Right, So the question was how much was the reflection
on your government is this.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Look, the job wasn't finished and I'm not going to
resist for I mean, I think that every government would
have to say that because we have not got this
right in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Right, So you're saying it's decades in the making. So
as the Chief Children's Commissioner dreaming when she said on
the radio this morning that we need to fix this
with urgency is a pipe dream, No, not at all.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
We have to well, how can I fix.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Something with urgency that's been decades in the making according
to you.
Speaker 3 (02:46):
Look, I think one of the things that comes up
time and time again, and this isn't the first report
that said, and it points to the fact of how
difficult it is to get the various bits of wrap
around support to work together around families. I mean, I
think one of the things that we have to listen to,
and it came through really clearly in the Raw Commission
(03:07):
on Abuse and State keyre too, is what we absolutely
have to do is have confidence when you do raise
a flag, if an agency raise a flag, that there's
got to be absolute confidence that there is going to
be acted on and taken seriously, because I think what
we saw with the Potassi report was actually there were
some concerns in some FLEs that were raised in regard
(03:28):
to to to this child.
Speaker 5 (03:30):
But where is it?
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Where does it say in How can we make sure
that ultimately there is responsibility and accountability for acting on that,
because I think that is the most challenging thing.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Well, Hamisch kem Will, You're in the position of being
in the government that has an opportunity to do something
about this. What are you going to do?
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Yeah? Look, and I think I think, first of all,
I think we do need to acknowledge families that have
lost children in these very trying situations. So I think
that's that's that's number one. I think kind of Megan's right,
This is this is a matter there has been happening
over over decades and.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
The last washing your hands as well, No, I would.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Say, is something that we don't want to turn into
a political football. I think of both sides, and I
think Megan Meghan's not in an agreement. This is something
that we need to face as a country on both
sides of the house. Look, we do need to make
sure that the government agencies are working together. There's probably
there's multiple different agencies working that they are in the
(04:27):
space of child and family services, and I think we
need to make sure everybody's working together. And I think
the Minister for Children is focused on making sure that
all the government departments are making sure they put children
safety first.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Yeah, they won't, that will never happen. I mean, you know, Megan,
you know government parts that don't work together. All they
care about is the minister. You would have learn that
from from a minister. When you're a minister your departments
about Megan Happy mean, No, that's not the case.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
And I think one of the changes that we made
when we were in government was actually to be able
to bring together into departmental groups and the cees to
have jointed accounterbility.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
I think that works probably and COVID, but no other time, No,
I know, and it.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Has to work. John.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
I think one of the things that the problems that
is important in as complex as this do require multi
agency approach.
Speaker 5 (05:20):
But they also it's not just about the government.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
This is also about how it is that we as communities,
how we as schools, as early childhoods, and families, families, neighbors, all.
Speaker 4 (05:32):
This, and I think kind of also mental health also
comes into it as well, so I think there's a
lot lot to do. So we of course have a
Minister for mental health. Look, I'm not saying that it's
going to be the silver bullet that's going to solve
solve all the problems, but we do need to work together.
I think kind of a lot of people in these departments,
and I know for myself we appearance ourselves and we
see the vulnerability of children. We know that we have
(05:54):
to have their safety first.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
I think one of the things John, the one thing
I would say, and I agree that we should not
make this a political issue. This is something that we
as as politicians need to work parties. Can I just
finish this thought chain, I'll say one thing that whoever
is Government of the day has to make sure, particularly
in the context of service cuts, they have to have
(06:18):
absolute confidence that we are not cutting services.
Speaker 5 (06:22):
There will come to be on this erm.
Speaker 3 (06:24):
I'm not going to get into a political argument about it,
because it's not just about funding in children, it's right
across all our services.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
I think we'd be able to respond to that.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
Will you will say they are hamish.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
What I'm saying is I think the Government of the day,
whoever there is, has to have absolute confidence that cuts
that they are making are not going to have consequences
that put the safety of our kids at risk.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
Look, I think we just need to be focused on
the outcomes to make sure our children are safe.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Yeah, I know, well the Prime Minister would say that,
any of your cabinet ministers would say that. But what
does that mean? How are you going to do that?
All sent so far I was cut, cut, cut.
Speaker 4 (07:03):
No, it's about making sure that there's efficiencies and that
the department areas to be working.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
To get that.
Speaker 4 (07:08):
Keep people saying it's focusing on outcomes. It's not about
the inputs. It's about the outcomes.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
So what's we're going to move on. What's what's the
outcome then that it is going to fix the situation
that led to the death of Malachai.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
Look, I think one of the things that has been
highlighted is that when flags have been raised, there hasn't
been action, and also that there's multiple agencies working in
the space and they need to work together and make
sure we get the best outcomes for us.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
There's a report today in the Medical Journal. Some surgeons
or medical people are talking about in christ Church in particular.
They say that there is a drinking culture, evidence of
which they have talked about some cases of people turning
up in hospital with bottletops needing to be removed from
their Stomach's Hamish Campbell. And they are saying this in
(07:58):
the article that they've written for the Medical Journal, that
christ Church in particular has a problematic drinking culture following
the earthquakes, covid oscar texts. What do you think?
Speaker 4 (08:08):
Oh, look, I think alcohol is a harmful substance. Anything
the government does it is going to be a fine
balance between kind of people being able to enjoy themselves
and that sort of culture. And I think I think
New Zealand we probably do have a drinking culture. Hopefully
things that are guing slightly better. We see a lot
more of alcohol free beers, alcohol free wines being available.
(08:31):
We're seeing people getting into sports, so watching what they
drink probably a little bit, yeah, I think so. And
so that's I think is probably you like a drink.
I don't mind a drink or two. It's quite nice
to be able to relax. I think kind of going
to the pub. There's great pubs inn Ireland downward trading
(08:51):
coats Friday night, just kind of catch up with people
and have a casual drink. I think it's a very
but it's a very important part of our society.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
But as a medical someone with a medical background yourself,
would you concur with what these people are saying that
there was a particul your problem in christ Church?
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Look, I think there's always I think it's not just
christ which I think it's probably country wide. I think
we do have a problem with drinking. I think we
have problem with drugs, and so yeah, it's about kind
of how we can minimize that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Or drugs are illegal, that's true, but.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
It doesn't stop kind of consumption here in New Zealand.
What I think fourteen percent of the population use cannabis
at some stage. So as New Zealanders, we probably are
kind of We probably drink probably too much. We probably
partaken things that were protion.
Speaker 2 (09:39):
So what do we need to do well?
Speaker 4 (09:41):
I think kind of. I think having a conversation about
it is that.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Doesn't stop people turning up at emergency department with bottletops
and there and their stomach does up. Megan Woods, what
do you think we should do?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Maybe we should put a warning on beer bottles, do
not induce the bottle top. I mean, I mean, I
have to say, I can't imagine a scenario where people
think that that is a good thing to in cheat.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
As a result of a drinking game.
Speaker 5 (10:06):
Okay, I mean that's all I think we should just so.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
When we have the Canoby Mornings the end of your party,
don't we'll be lining you up for the game.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
I think one of the critical things that we do
have to do, and it's been a long time in
the making, and I think the Council has started it,
which is the local alcohol plans, because actually I think
actually having communities in neighborhoods being able to make decisions
about what is the best fit for their local area
is really important. So people in a local neighborhood know
(10:40):
the tipping point of having too many bottle stores and
having alcohol is too available, and to have people to
actually have some say and what's happening in their local
area is really important. I understand. I think the Council
has started the work. I think they started heck in
May on those local alcohol plans. I don't think that's
a silver bullet. I don't think that's going to solve everything.
People can still get access to alcohol. But I think
(11:03):
actually communities getting together and look what is the right
balance for us?
Speaker 2 (11:09):
But how much how much of a problem then, do
you think can be attributed to the change in the
drinking age in the late nineties.
Speaker 5 (11:15):
Oh, look, very little.
Speaker 3 (11:18):
I mean I I still when I was young, there
was still a drinking age of twenty. I cannot hand
on heart stand here and tell you I did not
go to the pub before us twenty and it was.
Speaker 5 (11:32):
An exception.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Did you get caught? I did several times, multiple times.
Speaker 3 (11:35):
I was about quacker than that, John Gott.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
I got caught multiple times on one night and the
cops said, you still have gone home the first time.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
What a good thing about the duckster lax in the
summer was you could always get out around the mpitheater.
We just saw the police coming through the door.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
Join I do, I think, John, there's also been a
change in the way, especially probably younger people drink, probably
a lot more drinking at house parties rather than going
to pubs and establishments. And I think that that kind
of means is probably more drinking and unsupervised condition. Not
saying that people need to be supervised when they're drinking.
But I think it kind of has been a slight
(12:11):
change in the way people have been consuming alcohol.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Do you think that drinking age should change or the
age for purchasing alcohol should change.
Speaker 4 (12:19):
If I'm not, I don't like Megan. I actually don't
think it's necessarily an age age thing. I think kind
of it's about actually introducing people to alcohol.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Sensibly, Megan the ethnicity box ticking exercise when it came
to prioritizing surgical treatment, why did labor bring that in
in the first place?
Speaker 3 (12:43):
Well, I think the first thing is clinical need always
came first, always did.
Speaker 5 (12:48):
And one of the things.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Clinical need came first, why did you even bother ticking
a box in relation to a person's MARI or Pacific
Island ethnicity.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
It wasn't just around ethnicity, John, There were five factors
that were identified and quantifiable. The evidence told us that
these were people were at greater risk. So as well
as ethnicity, there was also people from rural communities because
we know that the provision of health services and rural communities,
so that was one of the equity tools that was
(13:17):
in there, as well as people on low income from
low income households, and you just need to look at
the evidence. So, if you're Mari in New Zealand in
the twenty first century, you have a life expendency that
is on average about ten years lower than me, and
that is not okay. So if we want a health
system that is addressing need, we do have to take
into account various factors.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Did this approach save people?
Speaker 5 (13:41):
It didn't have time John, that it was brought in.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
I think if you were going to look at any
kind of data to see whether or not it saved people,
I think the fact that it's been scrapped means that
we wouldn't have time to look at that. I think
what needs to happen now because I actually think this
is just ideological posturing from the government that what we
need to see now, what are they going to do
to address the fact that we have a group of people,
(14:07):
because of their ethnicity, have a life expediency that is
about ten years less than me, and that's not ok okay.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
How much Campbell your medical research background, do you honestly
back what your government is doing with this?
Speaker 4 (14:20):
Yes? I do, and it's actually very clear, John, and
I think there is the outcome that we both agree
on and I don't think anybody wants to see any
sector of our society works off or having poor healthcare. Now,
the thing is, I think it's very clear that we
need to be treating on need, not on race and John,
let me finish, we're going to interrupt. I think prostate
(14:43):
cancer is actually a prime example. There's data showing that,
of course there's immortality in Mari males from prostate cancer,
but when you actually look at the cause of it,
what we see is actually it's mainly because they are
presenting for treatment later than non Mari males. So once
you account for that, actually the outcomes are the same.
(15:04):
So it's actually but time it gets a hospital and
you're picking a box on ethnicity, you've actually missed the boat.
It's actually about kind of making sure that we get
treatment early, and that's why we're introducing that way.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I don't have adoctors at Tagable hospital.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
No, that's why we're introducing targets. So there's quicker, quicker
first specialists, faster cancer treatments. It is why we're actually
investing in more pharmaceutical interventions. You can have this wait
list and then try and prioritize on it. Or you
can actually do something to actually deal with it. And
that is what we're doing to get better health outcomes
for all New Zanders.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
All right, what do you make of a Tiger and
Aalkland universities coming up without that report coming out with
that report saying oh, we don't need another medical school
at one cutterre? Is that genuine or is that patch protection?
Speaker 4 (15:45):
Oh? Look, I think that there's there's advantages of having
a third medical school, And of course some of the
things is going to be slightly different. It's going to
be a postgraduate entry medical school and it's going to
be focusing more on kind of reyal health and kind
of I think it's a very useful, useful thing thing
to do. We do need more doctors. We've probably needed
more doctors over the last couple of years, so we're
(16:06):
doing something about it.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Of us postgraduate that doesn't necessarily mean more people more
doctors on the wards overnight, does it.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
Oh, there's a lot of people that there's a lot
of people that already have their degree already.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
So it doesn't mean more doctors.
Speaker 4 (16:19):
It's going to take time for us to grow our workforce,
but we do need to grow our locally homegrown workforce.
Is going to be a shortage of doctors worldwide, and
we need to make sure we're training more doctors.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
I've never been convinced that necessarily setting up a whole
new medical school is.
Speaker 5 (16:36):
The way to achieve that.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
That we have medical schools, that funding could be put
in place for them to up there and.
Speaker 4 (16:43):
Take and we are doing that as well.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
And that they could actually do that, but they could
do graduate and take as well. The costs of setting
up a third medical school and the time it's going
to take hanging on Hamish, the time it's going to
take to get it up and running. I'm not convinced
it's the best way to do it, but I do
just want to go back that we're hearing a lot
of talk about outcomes in inputs. What I want to
(17:06):
start hearing from this government is what they are going
to do to ensure that New Zealanders, regardless of their ethnicity,
have the same treatment in our health sustain either that's
the two stree or primary. We have not heard that
yet and the government needs to front up. They can
cut things, but they happen.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
One final thing, one final thing, one final thing. I
was about to say, you guys have been extremely well behaved,
and I hope that one hundred and twenty eight of
your parliamentary colleagues have tuned in today and listened. Come on,
don't disappointment the slate stage, Hamish, you've been very well behaved.
How did you feel, I'll ask you first, Hamish, when
(17:46):
you saw Karen in tears on the news this week
talking about bullying at Parliament?
Speaker 4 (17:52):
Look, I think kind of. It's never nice when people
are facing hostilities. So I feel very sorry for But
can I just say.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
Done? Move on because you don't want the truth?
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Hold on, I played by the rules.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
I'm the speaker. Hold on that one that that won't
sound because you guys don't have faith faith in the speaker.
Megan Woods, how did you feel when you saw Karen
Shua in tears on the news this week?
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Look, I mean it's it's never nice to see anyone
like that, and it's never nice to to see people
who are under who are being put under that much pressure.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
And I don't mean pressure in their job.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
I mean that they that they're finding the way in
which they're being treated difficult.
Speaker 5 (18:38):
That's never nice.
Speaker 3 (18:39):
I've seen colleagues and tears and it's it's not a
nice thing to see. And I think Parliament does have
to be a place that it is robust, we debate,
but it does have to be a place that recognizes
that all of us sitting around there, we may be
from political parties, but we are all humans and that
we do have Yes, yes it's breaking news, John, you
(18:59):
can run that on your news, but you know, everybody
comes to that place with a desire to do better.
And it's even nice to see someone who was that upset.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Easy talk. It's been said before, but nothing's changed.
Speaker 3 (19:14):
Look, John, actually I think if you watch what happened
in the house yesterday the speaker asked that two questions
were heard in silence, both her but asked and answered
in silence, and she was the opposition that adhered to
that what we had was we had we did actually
(19:36):
we had the watch that can see the chastising that guy.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
If you're listening to this, they're not the great example
that I said, if you're listening to something else.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
What Jerry needed to do with the government benches, because
they weren't the ones that were hearing to the fact
he is trying to take out.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
Of it with respect. Megan, you're now going down the
down the but hold, David Seymour went down the speeen.
You talk about my new shi the rest of us.
To be honest, don't.
Speaker 5 (20:11):
Really care if you asked the question.
Speaker 2 (20:13):
Jaw, I know, thank you, Thank you both. Hey, we
can we get same to you, John means relief. We oh,
thank you.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
Enjoy the Olympics in kep War.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
All right.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
For more from Category Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news Talks It'd be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk ZB.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Coming up later on after eleven o'clock Uber Eats. There
are some restaurants saying they're going out of business because
of Uber Eats. I made a confession in the office
this morning. I have never ever used Uber eats. Making
words of you used Uber Eats.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
I couldn't make the same confession as you.
Speaker 2 (00:31):
John, ministerial limo delivering pizza back the day.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
Not a ministerial Limo and an Uber driver delivering Uber eats.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Haymus Campbell, you're an uber eatz guy.
Speaker 4 (00:42):
Is an Uber eats guy. I have used Uber eat
but yeah.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
I always dragging you into this convoys. Anyway, keep listening
after eleven, guys, because we're going to talk about that
after eleven.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
John. One thing I will say is that I know
that there's like my local tie takeaway, I do order
if I order from there, I ordered directly because I
know that actually it's much better for them.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
Brilliant. All right, So we're going to talk but that
after eleven. Right now though, at eight minutes past ten
at a sign for politics right at Nationals Hamish camp
but warning Hamish.
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Good morning.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
How are you, j Verry Good Labour's Megan Woods morning.
Speaker 5 (01:14):
Good morning, John Morning Hamish.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
So this report out yesterday that three years down the
track from the murder of this little five year old
by his care, at risk children are no safer than
they were back when that happened, Megan Woods. That is
a reflection on your government, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
Look I think it is a reflection on us as
a country. I think that there is way more we
have to know, and I'm not going to resile from there.
Speaker 5 (01:42):
I haven't read the whole report.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I've read the introduction and the recommendations that are in
the report. There is undoubtedly things that have to be done.
I think what the report does make clear is that
this is a problem that has decades in the making.
Speaker 5 (01:56):
And look, I can tell you.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
The thirteen years I've been in MP, there is nothing
more troubling as an MP of something coming in that
is an OT case or a sift's cases. It was
when I started out in terms of how it is
that you try and knit all the bits together that
need to be there, because fundamentally the concern has to
be the welfare of the child, all.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Right, So the question was how much was the reflection
on your government is this.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
Look, the job wasn't finished and I'm not going to
resist for I mean, I think that every government would
have to say that because we have not got this
right in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (02:31):
Right, So you're saying it's decades in the making. So
as the Chief Children's Commissioner dreaming when she said on
the radio this morning that we need to fix this
with urgency is a pipe dream, No, not at all.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
We have to well, how can I fix.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Something with urgency that's been decades in the making according
to you.
Speaker 3 (02:46):
Look, I think one of the things that comes up
time and time again, and this isn't the first report
that said, and it points to the fact of how
difficult it is to get the various bits of wrap
around support to work together around families. I mean, I
think one of the things that we have to listen to,
and it came through really clearly in the Raw Commission
(03:07):
on Abuse and State keyre too, is what we absolutely
have to do is have confidence when you do raise
a flag, if an agency raise a flag, that there's
got to be absolute confidence that there is going to
be acted on and taken seriously, because I think what
we saw with the Potassi report was actually there were
some concerns in some FLEs that were raised in regard
(03:28):
to to to this child.
Speaker 5 (03:30):
But where is it?
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Where does it say in How can we make sure
that ultimately there is responsibility and accountability for acting on that,
because I think that is the most challenging thing.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Well, Hamisch kem Will, You're in the position of being
in the government that has an opportunity to do something
about this. What are you going to do?
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Yeah? Look, and I think I think, first of all,
I think we do need to acknowledge families that have
lost children in these very trying situations. So I think
that's that's that's number one. I think kind of Megan's right,
This is this is a matter there has been happening
over over decades and.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
The last washing your hands as well, No, I would.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Say, is something that we don't want to turn into
a political football. I think of both sides, and I
think Megan Meghan's not in an agreement. This is something
that we need to face as a country on both
sides of the house. Look, we do need to make
sure that the government agencies are working together. There's probably
there's multiple different agencies working that they are in the
(04:27):
space of child and family services, and I think we
need to make sure everybody's working together. And I think
the Minister for Children is focused on making sure that
all the government departments are making sure they put children
safety first.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
Yeah, they won't, that will never happen. I mean, you know, Megan,
you know government parts that don't work together. All they
care about is the minister. You would have learn that
from from a minister. When you're a minister your departments
about Megan Happy mean, No, that's not the case.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
And I think one of the changes that we made
when we were in government was actually to be able
to bring together into departmental groups and the cees to
have jointed accounterbility.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
I think that works probably and COVID, but no other time, No,
I know, and it.
Speaker 5 (05:09):
Has to work. John.
Speaker 3 (05:10):
I think one of the things that the problems that
is important in as complex as this do require multi
agency approach.
Speaker 5 (05:20):
But they also it's not just about the government.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
This is also about how it is that we as communities,
how we as schools, as early childhoods, and families, families, neighbors, all.
Speaker 4 (05:32):
This, and I think kind of also mental health also
comes into it as well, so I think there's a
lot lot to do. So we of course have a
Minister for mental health. Look, I'm not saying that it's
going to be the silver bullet that's going to solve
solve all the problems, but we do need to work together.
I think kind of a lot of people in these departments,
and I know for myself we appearance ourselves and we
see the vulnerability of children. We know that we have
(05:54):
to have their safety first.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
I think one of the things John, the one thing
I would say, and I agree that we should not
make this a political issue. This is something that we
as as politicians need to work parties. Can I just
finish this thought chain, I'll say one thing that whoever
is Government of the day has to make sure, particularly
in the context of service cuts, they have to have
(06:18):
absolute confidence that we are not cutting services.
Speaker 5 (06:22):
There will come to be on this erm.
Speaker 3 (06:24):
I'm not going to get into a political argument about it,
because it's not just about funding in children, it's right
across all our services.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
I think we'd be able to respond to that.
Speaker 5 (06:36):
Will you will say they are hamish.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
What I'm saying is I think the Government of the day,
whoever there is, has to have absolute confidence that cuts
that they are making are not going to have consequences
that put the safety of our kids at risk.
Speaker 4 (06:51):
Look, I think we just need to be focused on
the outcomes to make sure our children are safe.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Yeah, I know, well the Prime Minister would say that,
any of your cabinet ministers would say that. But what
does that mean? How are you going to do that?
All sent so far I was cut, cut, cut.
Speaker 4 (07:03):
No, it's about making sure that there's efficiencies and that
the department areas to be working.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
To get that.
Speaker 4 (07:08):
Keep people saying it's focusing on outcomes. It's not about
the inputs. It's about the outcomes.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
So what's we're going to move on. What's what's the
outcome then that it is going to fix the situation
that led to the death of Malachai.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
Look, I think one of the things that has been
highlighted is that when flags have been raised, there hasn't
been action, and also that there's multiple agencies working in
the space and they need to work together and make
sure we get the best outcomes for us.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
There's a report today in the Medical Journal. Some surgeons
or medical people are talking about in christ Church in particular.
They say that there is a drinking culture, evidence of
which they have talked about some cases of people turning
up in hospital with bottletops needing to be removed from
their Stomach's Hamish Campbell. And they are saying this in
(07:58):
the article that they've written for the Medical Journal, that
christ Church in particular has a problematic drinking culture following
the earthquakes, covid oscar texts. What do you think?
Speaker 4 (08:08):
Oh, look, I think alcohol is a harmful substance. Anything
the government does it is going to be a fine
balance between kind of people being able to enjoy themselves
and that sort of culture. And I think I think
New Zealand we probably do have a drinking culture. Hopefully
things that are guing slightly better. We see a lot
more of alcohol free beers, alcohol free wines being available.
(08:31):
We're seeing people getting into sports, so watching what they
drink probably a little bit, yeah, I think so. And
so that's I think is probably you like a drink.
I don't mind a drink or two. It's quite nice
to be able to relax. I think kind of going
to the pub. There's great pubs inn Ireland downward trading
(08:51):
coats Friday night, just kind of catch up with people
and have a casual drink. I think it's a very
but it's a very important part of our society.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
But as a medical someone with a medical background yourself,
would you concur with what these people are saying that
there was a particul your problem in christ Church?
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Look, I think there's always I think it's not just
christ which I think it's probably country wide. I think
we do have a problem with drinking. I think we
have problem with drugs, and so yeah, it's about kind
of how we can minimize that.
Speaker 2 (09:19):
Or drugs are illegal, that's true, but.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
It doesn't stop kind of consumption here in New Zealand.
What I think fourteen percent of the population use cannabis
at some stage. So as New Zealanders, we probably are
kind of We probably drink probably too much. We probably
partaken things that were protion.
Speaker 2 (09:39):
So what do we need to do well?
Speaker 4 (09:41):
I think kind of. I think having a conversation about
it is that.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Doesn't stop people turning up at emergency department with bottletops
and there and their stomach does up. Megan Woods, what
do you think we should do?
Speaker 3 (09:51):
Maybe we should put a warning on beer bottles, do
not induce the bottle top. I mean, I mean, I
have to say, I can't imagine a scenario where people
think that that is a good thing to in cheat.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
As a result of a drinking game.
Speaker 5 (10:06):
Okay, I mean that's all I think we should just so.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
When we have the Canoby Mornings the end of your party,
don't we'll be lining you up for the game.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
I think one of the critical things that we do
have to do, and it's been a long time in
the making, and I think the Council has started it,
which is the local alcohol plans, because actually I think
actually having communities in neighborhoods being able to make decisions
about what is the best fit for their local area
is really important. So people in a local neighborhood know
(10:40):
the tipping point of having too many bottle stores and
having alcohol is too available, and to have people to
actually have some say and what's happening in their local
area is really important. I understand. I think the Council
has started the work. I think they started heck in
May on those local alcohol plans. I don't think that's
a silver bullet. I don't think that's going to solve everything.
People can still get access to alcohol. But I think
(11:03):
actually communities getting together and look what is the right
balance for us?
Speaker 2 (11:09):
But how much how much of a problem then, do
you think can be attributed to the change in the
drinking age in the late nineties.
Speaker 5 (11:15):
Oh, look, very little.
Speaker 3 (11:18):
I mean I I still when I was young, there
was still a drinking age of twenty. I cannot hand
on heart stand here and tell you I did not
go to the pub before us twenty and it was.
Speaker 5 (11:32):
An exception.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Did you get caught? I did several times, multiple times.
Speaker 3 (11:35):
I was about quacker than that, John Gott.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
I got caught multiple times on one night and the
cops said, you still have gone home the first time.
Speaker 3 (11:43):
What a good thing about the duckster lax in the
summer was you could always get out around the mpitheater.
We just saw the police coming through the door.
Speaker 4 (11:50):
Join I do, I think, John, there's also been a
change in the way, especially probably younger people drink, probably
a lot more drinking at house parties rather than going
to pubs and establishments. And I think that that kind
of means is probably more drinking and unsupervised condition. Not
saying that people need to be supervised when they're drinking.
But I think it kind of has been a slight
(12:11):
change in the way people have been consuming alcohol.
Speaker 2 (12:14):
Do you think that drinking age should change or the
age for purchasing alcohol should change.
Speaker 4 (12:19):
If I'm not, I don't like Megan. I actually don't
think it's necessarily an age age thing. I think kind
of it's about actually introducing people to alcohol.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Sensibly, Megan the ethnicity box ticking exercise when it came
to prioritizing surgical treatment, why did labor bring that in
in the first place?
Speaker 3 (12:43):
Well, I think the first thing is clinical need always
came first, always did.
Speaker 5 (12:48):
And one of the things.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Clinical need came first, why did you even bother ticking
a box in relation to a person's MARI or Pacific
Island ethnicity.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
It wasn't just around ethnicity, John, There were five factors
that were identified and quantifiable. The evidence told us that
these were people were at greater risk. So as well
as ethnicity, there was also people from rural communities because
we know that the provision of health services and rural communities,
so that was one of the equity tools that was
(13:17):
in there, as well as people on low income from
low income households, and you just need to look at
the evidence. So, if you're Mari in New Zealand in
the twenty first century, you have a life expendency that
is on average about ten years lower than me, and
that is not okay. So if we want a health
system that is addressing need, we do have to take
into account various factors.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Did this approach save people?
Speaker 5 (13:41):
It didn't have time John, that it was brought in.
Speaker 3 (13:44):
I think if you were going to look at any
kind of data to see whether or not it saved people,
I think the fact that it's been scrapped means that
we wouldn't have time to look at that. I think
what needs to happen now because I actually think this
is just ideological posturing from the government that what we
need to see now, what are they going to do
to address the fact that we have a group of people,
(14:07):
because of their ethnicity, have a life expediency that is
about ten years less than me, and that's not ok okay.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
How much Campbell your medical research background, do you honestly
back what your government is doing with this?
Speaker 4 (14:20):
Yes? I do, and it's actually very clear, John, and
I think there is the outcome that we both agree
on and I don't think anybody wants to see any
sector of our society works off or having poor healthcare. Now,
the thing is, I think it's very clear that we
need to be treating on need, not on race and John,
let me finish, we're going to interrupt. I think prostate
(14:43):
cancer is actually a prime example. There's data showing that,
of course there's immortality in Mari males from prostate cancer,
but when you actually look at the cause of it,
what we see is actually it's mainly because they are
presenting for treatment later than non Mari males. So once
you account for that, actually the outcomes are the same.
(15:04):
So it's actually but time it gets a hospital and
you're picking a box on ethnicity, you've actually missed the boat.
It's actually about kind of making sure that we get
treatment early, and that's why we're introducing that way.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
I don't have adoctors at Tagable hospital.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
No, that's why we're introducing targets. So there's quicker, quicker
first specialists, faster cancer treatments. It is why we're actually
investing in more pharmaceutical interventions. You can have this wait
list and then try and prioritize on it. Or you
can actually do something to actually deal with it. And
that is what we're doing to get better health outcomes
for all New Zanders.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
All right, what do you make of a Tiger and
Aalkland universities coming up without that report coming out with
that report saying oh, we don't need another medical school
at one cutterre? Is that genuine or is that patch protection?
Speaker 4 (15:45):
Oh? Look, I think that there's there's advantages of having
a third medical school, And of course some of the
things is going to be slightly different. It's going to
be a postgraduate entry medical school and it's going to
be focusing more on kind of reyal health and kind
of I think it's a very useful, useful thing thing
to do. We do need more doctors. We've probably needed
more doctors over the last couple of years, so we're
(16:06):
doing something about it.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Of us postgraduate that doesn't necessarily mean more people more
doctors on the wards overnight, does it.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
Oh, there's a lot of people that there's a lot
of people that already have their degree already.
Speaker 2 (16:17):
So it doesn't mean more doctors.
Speaker 4 (16:19):
It's going to take time for us to grow our workforce,
but we do need to grow our locally homegrown workforce.
Is going to be a shortage of doctors worldwide, and
we need to make sure we're training more doctors.
Speaker 3 (16:31):
I've never been convinced that necessarily setting up a whole
new medical school is.
Speaker 5 (16:36):
The way to achieve that.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
That we have medical schools, that funding could be put
in place for them to up there and.
Speaker 4 (16:43):
Take and we are doing that as well.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
And that they could actually do that, but they could
do graduate and take as well. The costs of setting
up a third medical school and the time it's going
to take hanging on Hamish, the time it's going to
take to get it up and running. I'm not convinced
it's the best way to do it, but I do
just want to go back that we're hearing a lot
of talk about outcomes in inputs. What I want to
(17:06):
start hearing from this government is what they are going
to do to ensure that New Zealanders, regardless of their ethnicity,
have the same treatment in our health sustain either that's
the two stree or primary. We have not heard that
yet and the government needs to front up. They can
cut things, but they happen.
Speaker 2 (17:25):
One final thing, one final thing, one final thing. I
was about to say, you guys have been extremely well behaved,
and I hope that one hundred and twenty eight of
your parliamentary colleagues have tuned in today and listened. Come on,
don't disappointment the slate stage, Hamish, you've been very well behaved.
How did you feel, I'll ask you first, Hamish, when
(17:46):
you saw Karen in tears on the news this week
talking about bullying at Parliament?
Speaker 4 (17:52):
Look, I think kind of. It's never nice when people
are facing hostilities. So I feel very sorry for But
can I just say.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
Done? Move on because you don't want the truth?
Speaker 5 (18:09):
Hold on, I played by the rules.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
I'm the speaker. Hold on that one that that won't
sound because you guys don't have faith faith in the speaker.
Megan Woods, how did you feel when you saw Karen
Shua in tears on the news this week?
Speaker 3 (18:22):
Look, I mean it's it's never nice to see anyone
like that, and it's never nice to to see people
who are under who are being put under that much pressure.
Speaker 5 (18:32):
And I don't mean pressure in their job.
Speaker 3 (18:34):
I mean that they that they're finding the way in
which they're being treated difficult.
Speaker 5 (18:38):
That's never nice.
Speaker 3 (18:39):
I've seen colleagues and tears and it's it's not a
nice thing to see. And I think Parliament does have
to be a place that it is robust, we debate,
but it does have to be a place that recognizes
that all of us sitting around there, we may be
from political parties, but we are all humans and that
we do have Yes, yes it's breaking news, John, you
(18:59):
can run that on your news, but you know, everybody
comes to that place with a desire to do better.
And it's even nice to see someone who was that upset.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Easy talk. It's been said before, but nothing's changed.
Speaker 3 (19:14):
Look, John, actually I think if you watch what happened
in the house yesterday the speaker asked that two questions
were heard in silence, both her but asked and answered
in silence, and she was the opposition that adhered to
that what we had was we had we did actually
(19:36):
we had the watch that can see the chastising that guy.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
If you're listening to this, they're not the great example
that I said, if you're listening to something else.
Speaker 3 (19:55):
What Jerry needed to do with the government benches, because
they weren't the ones that were hearing to the fact
he is trying to take out.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
Of it with respect. Megan, you're now going down the
down the but hold, David Seymour went down the speeen.
You talk about my new shi the rest of us.
To be honest, don't.
Speaker 5 (20:11):
Really care if you asked the question.
Speaker 2 (20:13):
Jaw, I know, thank you, Thank you both. Hey, we
can we get same to you, John means relief. We oh,
thank you.
Speaker 5 (20:20):
Enjoy the Olympics in kep War.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
All right.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
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
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
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.