August 10, 2026 • 9 mins
Tonight on The Huddle, Child Fund CEO Josie Pagani and Phil O'Reilly from Iron Duke Partners joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more!
New polling data shows Labour, the Greens and Te Pati Māori have lower odds of getting into Parliament, while Opportunity's political probability has shot up. What could this mean for the election?
National says they won't introduce new taxes, and higher fuel tax, the bed tax and the bank levy were already up for discussion. How does this campaign make National look? What will voters think of all this?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Nine on the Huddle of Us this evening, Josephgani, Child
Fund's chief executive and Fillo Riley Iron Duke Partners in
former Business New Zealand chief.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Executive High You tun Hello. You see in the polar
polls today, Josie, Yeah, I.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
Was just listening to David Seymour. Than everybody's ruling everybody out,
aren't they. It's like Love Island. It is, in fact,
everyone's goosing tunity.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
So think about this, Opportunity Now has a seventy six
point six percent probability of entering Parliament. So that's greater
than greater than fifty to fifty that it's there. If
it's there, it's a chippy government, isn't it.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
So, and if you look at wow aspect, Yeah, And
if you look at who's voting Opportunity Now or who's
supporting Opportunity Now in those polls, it's it's very much
labor voters. They're urban, they're sort of urban liberals. They're
so they're cannibalizing Labour's vote, probably some of Green main
well the looks of things, yeah, but also labor Labour's
(00:54):
gone down. That's there's a reason for that. So it's
interesting that that I think the Prime Minister the National
rule out Opportunity because they identify that they're going with Labor.
The problem with that is that if they are going,
Opportunity hasn't ruled them out. So if they need Opportunity,
they're going to have to negotiate with them. But yes,
it doesn't the probability of polar polls hither though, is
(01:16):
still got even an opportunity to get in. It's still
a more likely scenario that the coalition comes back.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
Phil that's right, as Josey's right in fact that there's
a million opportunity. There's a million things that could happen
in the polls right now, which is really what the
poll of poll stuff is telling you. There's twenty or
thirty permutations out there right now. But Jose's abstuarly right.
What the Opportunity Party is doing is fundamentally taking votes
off the left because their policies are relatively left. Actually,
(01:46):
I mean, that's the reality of it, and so you
could easily see Labors vote going down and even with
an Opportunity Party in parliament, and really the improbable thought
of a four party coalition that would really would be
quite interesting, and they still lose the election. They still
lose because the center right gets home. The one positive
(02:08):
out of this I suspect for Crucipkins will be if
he does deal with Opportunity, potentially he doesn't have to
deal with to Party Mari, which who are of course
going to scare some of those liberal voters. Are no
criticism to Partymera particularly, but it'll scare some of those voters,
and so maybe that's there. But Opportunity Party is potentially
more of a negative to the left that it is
(02:28):
to the right and electoral terms because of that voter
shoe that Josie's talking about.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
But it's interesting, isn't it, because the support for Opportunity
is very much a vibe rather than anyone's going I
want a UBI universal basic income and what it's kind
of like the protest vote at the moment. So National
and Labor just haven't quite made the sale, and so
people are going, well, I don't want to go with
New Zealand first moments, I don't like what Winston said
(02:54):
in Parliament.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
I'll go for Opportunity.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
So I think you know the pressure on National and Labor,
both of them to come up with something that's going
to get the attention. And also I think rather ruling
out each other as parties, they should start ruling out
the policies. I mean, you know, will labor rule out
a pause on data centers and banning fertilizer? Will national
(03:18):
rule out acts? No more new taxes? You know? So
start well, will everybody rule out universal basic income from
opportunity parties so that the light is going to go
on opportunity party policies? And people should start ruling out policies,
not parties.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
To all right, guys, we'll take a break, come back
and talk about this taxes business. Right, you're back of
the huddle, fellow Riley, Joseph Guarny, Phil. This business about
talking about the taxes is weird, isn't it. It's backfiring
on the next.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Isn't it.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
I thought it wasn't a strange a sum And if
they're going to say we're not going to put any
texes on them, they sort of say we might, we
will in it. And the fuel text actually does actually
hit everybody in New Zealander you use as a car
or a truck, So it was a very strange thing
to say, and and it kind of got them on
the front page of the news and really they should
have been prosecuting labor and top on these other guys
to say look at them, they're they're putting taxes up
(04:05):
on The one big issue for me was in fact
the tourism the bed levy, because actually that's not a
tax that will be collected for local for central government.
It'll be collected actually for local government. It's the councils
that want that, and I actually think in many ways
they've got a bit of a point about side of
the councils. I mean, the best example is Queenstown where
tourists use all of the infrastructure that's sitting in Queenstown
(04:27):
and all the strain of the infrastructure there and in
fact Queenstown Council doesn't get a bean for that they
in fact, the government gets all the tax out of it,
the GST and all the rest. So if it was
that shuld the debate to be had And I know
Wayne Brown and Orkrands is the same thing. There's a
debate to be had about this fact. I don't think
it's the silly thing for the Nance to say they
might do that, and that's not much of a tax
on working people in reality. So I think there was
(04:50):
a debate, but I thought the way that that's put
it was a bit ham fisted. I thought it was
a bit it was just an unhelpefully put it, because
it put the term to light back on them to say,
I'll see, you can have some more taxes here. What
are these taxes them? And of course you the people
in the media spent to spent last than twenty four
hours asking every question.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
We welcome to ngize on the left like this is
like a mirror of what they did yesterday. Right, So
we're talking about we're supposed to be talking about how
Labour's going to tax us, instead we're talking about how
the Nats are planning to tax us. In yesterday, they
go out there with the budget responsibility rules in order
to kind of, you know, show how they're going to
be all, you know, fiscally responsible, and all it did was,
just as Thomas Coglan said, underscore their failure in doing
(05:27):
the thing that they had announced three years ago.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
I mean, I think their whole campaign on tax has
been weird. Yeah, I mean I know what you're saying, Phil,
go out and go oh the other side are going
to tax more. But actually, when you look at the
IPSOS polling, all anyone cares about, or at least three
quarters of the country is cost of living, and you're
not really dealing with that in a campaign where you're going,
look how bad the other side are going to be.
They're going to tax, tax, tax you. It's not talking
(05:51):
to that key issue. And then you've got a quarter
of the population who don't have cost of living even
in their top ten. You think, wow, we're really divided
country at the moment, and it's like national and put
themselves on the side of the quarter that don't worry
about cost of living and they're talking about, you know,
the other side of It's not a direct match though,
(06:15):
Phil Like if you think about what the Burnham government's
done in the UK, where they've gone, right, we're a
cost of living government and we're going to take the
tax off pubs and we're gonna and we're going to
give you some we're going to pay for your power
bills or whatever. It's not particularly direct, but I do
think that Luxon made quite a good job this morning
on Hosking where he explained in a sense their whole
(06:36):
theory of growth right, which is that prudent management, slow
the rate of spending and no new taxes, et cetera.
The problem with that message and that theory is that
it hasn't delivered.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
It hasn't worked yet in three years. Listen, Phil, that
was a tough weekend for Luxin in the papers. I like,
he got ripped shreds.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Didn't he much and he needed?
Speaker 4 (06:58):
And I thought the apology this more was, this was
the correct thing to do. And I was talking to
a small business audience the day after those comments, who
I think two days after those comments were made, and
after hed To apologized, then it was there was a
feeling that, you know, that was pretty tone deaf of them.
But I've got for apologizing, and he moves on, and
let's hope he has a stronger week this week. From
his perspective, I guess to make sure that he starts
(07:20):
getting back to the kind of words and phrases that
he needs to use in order to justif himself. But
you're a tough week, no question, I mean.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
And somebody's coming for him, right Jose. They're potting out
the numbers of about what happened in that caucus. But
he will survive that s. Don't you think it's too
late to change him?
Speaker 3 (07:36):
I don't think it's too late. I mean I wrote
a column about this over the weekend. I think if
they don't make a change, the country will. And that's
that's the challenge that National is facing. I think they've
been facing it for a long time. Whether anyone think
they will.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
Lose the election, well, if they don't change him out, yeah,
I do you look you reckon?
Speaker 2 (07:53):
I seem to left government will come in now.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
They won't necessarily lose the election, but of a week
National party in a cold is a problem. And I think.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
A week National party and a coalition is a good thing, Josie,
because they are they're just a handbreak.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
They don't want to do anything.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
So at least if you've got a big New Zealand
first big act, they'll force change.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
It's cat sort of chicken her egg.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Right.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
If you if you're not going to get a big
vote as National, if all you've got to say is
the other side are going to tax you too much? Right,
If you can't articulate a plan and say something, then look,
I look at the one thing I look at is
the billboards and they're not really putting Luxeon to board.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
So I can hear you just panting go.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
To say that, to say that this government is a handbreak.
It's one of the most reforming governments through.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
I said the National Party is a handbreak.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
Chris Bishop has been behind much of that reform.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
Actually one of the most performing hundred percent. I'm going
to there are carve outs here.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
I'll go carve out Chris Bishop, carve out Erica Stanford,
carve out Todd McLay with his trade stuff.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
The rest of them are doing bugger all.
Speaker 4 (08:56):
Well, welcome to governments. There usually are one or two
reforming and that's really good.
Speaker 3 (09:03):
That's really good argument for a smaller cabinet.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Actually, let's just be on.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
Let's have a small cabinet of the people who are actually.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
Act and and Bush and Todd.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
The end, we're going to leave it there. Thank you
so much.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Appreciated, Joseph Ghney and fellow Ralia Huddle this evening.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news Talks it'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Nine on the Huddle of Us this evening, Josephgani, Child
Fund's chief executive and Fillo Riley Iron Duke Partners in
former Business New Zealand chief.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Executive High You tun Hello. You see in the polar
polls today, Josie, Yeah, I.
Speaker 3 (00:11):
Was just listening to David Seymour. Than everybody's ruling everybody out,
aren't they. It's like Love Island. It is, in fact,
everyone's goosing tunity.
Speaker 1 (00:19):
So think about this, Opportunity Now has a seventy six
point six percent probability of entering Parliament. So that's greater
than greater than fifty to fifty that it's there. If
it's there, it's a chippy government, isn't it.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
Yes.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
So, and if you look at wow aspect, Yeah, And
if you look at who's voting Opportunity Now or who's
supporting Opportunity Now in those polls, it's it's very much
labor voters. They're urban, they're sort of urban liberals. They're
so they're cannibalizing Labour's vote, probably some of Green main
well the looks of things, yeah, but also labor Labour's
(00:54):
gone down. That's there's a reason for that. So it's
interesting that that I think the Prime Minister the National
rule out Opportunity because they identify that they're going with Labor.
The problem with that is that if they are going,
Opportunity hasn't ruled them out. So if they need Opportunity,
they're going to have to negotiate with them. But yes,
it doesn't the probability of polar polls hither though, is
(01:16):
still got even an opportunity to get in. It's still
a more likely scenario that the coalition comes back.
Speaker 4 (01:23):
Phil that's right, as Josey's right in fact that there's
a million opportunity. There's a million things that could happen
in the polls right now, which is really what the
poll of poll stuff is telling you. There's twenty or
thirty permutations out there right now. But Jose's abstuarly right.
What the Opportunity Party is doing is fundamentally taking votes
off the left because their policies are relatively left. Actually,
(01:46):
I mean, that's the reality of it, and so you
could easily see Labors vote going down and even with
an Opportunity Party in parliament, and really the improbable thought
of a four party coalition that would really would be
quite interesting, and they still lose the election. They still
lose because the center right gets home. The one positive
(02:08):
out of this I suspect for Crucipkins will be if
he does deal with Opportunity, potentially he doesn't have to
deal with to Party Mari, which who are of course
going to scare some of those liberal voters. Are no
criticism to Partymera particularly, but it'll scare some of those voters,
and so maybe that's there. But Opportunity Party is potentially
more of a negative to the left that it is
(02:28):
to the right and electoral terms because of that voter
shoe that Josie's talking about.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
But it's interesting, isn't it, because the support for Opportunity
is very much a vibe rather than anyone's going I
want a UBI universal basic income and what it's kind
of like the protest vote at the moment. So National
and Labor just haven't quite made the sale, and so
people are going, well, I don't want to go with
New Zealand first moments, I don't like what Winston said
(02:54):
in Parliament.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
I'll go for Opportunity.
Speaker 3 (02:57):
So I think you know the pressure on National and Labor,
both of them to come up with something that's going
to get the attention. And also I think rather ruling
out each other as parties, they should start ruling out
the policies. I mean, you know, will labor rule out
a pause on data centers and banning fertilizer? Will national
(03:18):
rule out acts? No more new taxes? You know? So
start well, will everybody rule out universal basic income from
opportunity parties so that the light is going to go
on opportunity party policies? And people should start ruling out policies,
not parties.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
To all right, guys, we'll take a break, come back
and talk about this taxes business. Right, you're back of
the huddle, fellow Riley, Joseph Guarny, Phil. This business about
talking about the taxes is weird, isn't it. It's backfiring
on the next.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Isn't it.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
I thought it wasn't a strange a sum And if
they're going to say we're not going to put any
texes on them, they sort of say we might, we
will in it. And the fuel text actually does actually
hit everybody in New Zealander you use as a car
or a truck, So it was a very strange thing
to say, and and it kind of got them on
the front page of the news and really they should
have been prosecuting labor and top on these other guys
to say look at them, they're they're putting taxes up
(04:05):
on The one big issue for me was in fact
the tourism the bed levy, because actually that's not a
tax that will be collected for local for central government.
It'll be collected actually for local government. It's the councils
that want that, and I actually think in many ways
they've got a bit of a point about side of
the councils. I mean, the best example is Queenstown where
tourists use all of the infrastructure that's sitting in Queenstown
(04:27):
and all the strain of the infrastructure there and in
fact Queenstown Council doesn't get a bean for that they
in fact, the government gets all the tax out of it,
the GST and all the rest. So if it was
that shuld the debate to be had And I know
Wayne Brown and Orkrands is the same thing. There's a
debate to be had about this fact. I don't think
it's the silly thing for the Nance to say they
might do that, and that's not much of a tax
on working people in reality. So I think there was
(04:50):
a debate, but I thought the way that that's put
it was a bit ham fisted. I thought it was
a bit it was just an unhelpefully put it, because
it put the term to light back on them to say,
I'll see, you can have some more taxes here. What
are these taxes them? And of course you the people
in the media spent to spent last than twenty four
hours asking every question.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
We welcome to ngize on the left like this is
like a mirror of what they did yesterday. Right, So
we're talking about we're supposed to be talking about how
Labour's going to tax us, instead we're talking about how
the Nats are planning to tax us. In yesterday, they
go out there with the budget responsibility rules in order
to kind of, you know, show how they're going to
be all, you know, fiscally responsible, and all it did was,
just as Thomas Coglan said, underscore their failure in doing
(05:27):
the thing that they had announced three years ago.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
I mean, I think their whole campaign on tax has
been weird. Yeah, I mean I know what you're saying, Phil,
go out and go oh the other side are going
to tax more. But actually, when you look at the
IPSOS polling, all anyone cares about, or at least three
quarters of the country is cost of living, and you're
not really dealing with that in a campaign where you're going,
look how bad the other side are going to be.
They're going to tax, tax, tax you. It's not talking
(05:51):
to that key issue. And then you've got a quarter
of the population who don't have cost of living even
in their top ten. You think, wow, we're really divided
country at the moment, and it's like national and put
themselves on the side of the quarter that don't worry
about cost of living and they're talking about, you know,
the other side of It's not a direct match though,
(06:15):
Phil Like if you think about what the Burnham government's
done in the UK, where they've gone, right, we're a
cost of living government and we're going to take the
tax off pubs and we're gonna and we're going to
give you some we're going to pay for your power
bills or whatever. It's not particularly direct, but I do
think that Luxon made quite a good job this morning
on Hosking where he explained in a sense their whole
(06:36):
theory of growth right, which is that prudent management, slow
the rate of spending and no new taxes, et cetera.
The problem with that message and that theory is that
it hasn't delivered.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
It hasn't worked yet in three years. Listen, Phil, that
was a tough weekend for Luxin in the papers. I like,
he got ripped shreds.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Didn't he much and he needed?
Speaker 4 (06:58):
And I thought the apology this more was, this was
the correct thing to do. And I was talking to
a small business audience the day after those comments, who
I think two days after those comments were made, and
after hed To apologized, then it was there was a
feeling that, you know, that was pretty tone deaf of them.
But I've got for apologizing, and he moves on, and
let's hope he has a stronger week this week. From
his perspective, I guess to make sure that he starts
(07:20):
getting back to the kind of words and phrases that
he needs to use in order to justif himself. But
you're a tough week, no question, I mean.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
And somebody's coming for him, right Jose. They're potting out
the numbers of about what happened in that caucus. But
he will survive that s. Don't you think it's too
late to change him?
Speaker 3 (07:36):
I don't think it's too late. I mean I wrote
a column about this over the weekend. I think if
they don't make a change, the country will. And that's
that's the challenge that National is facing. I think they've
been facing it for a long time. Whether anyone think
they will.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
Lose the election, well, if they don't change him out, yeah,
I do you look you reckon?
Speaker 2 (07:53):
I seem to left government will come in now.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
They won't necessarily lose the election, but of a week
National party in a cold is a problem. And I think.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
A week National party and a coalition is a good thing, Josie,
because they are they're just a handbreak.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
They don't want to do anything.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
So at least if you've got a big New Zealand
first big act, they'll force change.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
It's cat sort of chicken her egg.
Speaker 4 (08:13):
Right.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
If you if you're not going to get a big
vote as National, if all you've got to say is
the other side are going to tax you too much? Right,
If you can't articulate a plan and say something, then look,
I look at the one thing I look at is
the billboards and they're not really putting Luxeon to board.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
So I can hear you just panting go.
Speaker 4 (08:33):
To say that, to say that this government is a handbreak.
It's one of the most reforming governments through.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
I said the National Party is a handbreak.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
Chris Bishop has been behind much of that reform.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
Actually one of the most performing hundred percent. I'm going
to there are carve outs here.
Speaker 1 (08:48):
I'll go carve out Chris Bishop, carve out Erica Stanford,
carve out Todd McLay with his trade stuff.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
The rest of them are doing bugger all.
Speaker 4 (08:56):
Well, welcome to governments. There usually are one or two
reforming and that's really good.
Speaker 3 (09:03):
That's really good argument for a smaller cabinet.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
Actually, let's just be on.
Speaker 3 (09:06):
Let's have a small cabinet of the people who are actually.
Speaker 1 (09:08):
Act and and Bush and Todd.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
The end, we're going to leave it there. Thank you
so much.
Speaker 1 (09:14):
Appreciated, Joseph Ghney and fellow Ralia Huddle this evening.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news Talks it'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
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