May 13, 2026 • 9 mins
Tonight on The Huddle, Phil O'Reilly from Iron Duke Partners and Jack Tame from ZB's Saturday Mornings and Q&A joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more!
Chris Luxon made a speech to a Business NZ audience in Auckland ahead of the 2026 Budget. He's indicated that this year's Budget won't splash the cash despite the ongoing global conflicts impacting New Zealand. Are we surprised by this?
The idea of the All Blacks being downgraded to premium economy has been floated in order to help bring down NZ Rugby's costs. What do we make of this idea? Do they need to stay in business class?
How can Waitaki District Council justify a 45 percent rates increase?
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):
On the huddle with us this evening. We have fellow
Riley Iron Duke Partners and former Business New Zealand chief
executive and Jack tam who's the host of Saturday Mornings
in Q and A. Lads, welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
To be here.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
All right, Phil, are you impressed with the fiscal restraint
from the government? And I am being sarcastic by the way.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
I'm not being sarcastic and saying issue. I thought they
could have used as an excuse to push out the
surplus another year and they didn't, So you know.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
It's breathing down your neck and moodies.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
Well, exactly, no, they're right. I mean they're under pressure
of course. But also I think what they're doing is
setting up a bit of a political thing where they say, well,
we're not going to spend anything that labour's doing. They're
going to spend some more, you know, to tell me
how incredible that is. And so I thought that was
it's the politics of it. Of course. The other thing
that I thought was interesting was the primers to talking
about security and resilience in terms of in terms of
(00:50):
the you know, the monetary position of the government. I
think that's actually that's technical all around the world, but
the first time I've seen a prime minister in New
Zealand in the last few years use it quite that bluntly.
You know, the world's a dangerous place, hard for us.
We need to make sure that we're being responsible with
the day. And I thought that was actually quite a sensible,
clever thing for him to say, because I think that's
what the public will be feeling too.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Well, do you think that that's going to like, are
people going to follow the logic on that? Is that
going to work?
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well?
Speaker 3 (01:13):
Of course it sets them up the capacity to attack
the other side when they say we're going to spend
some more money on this, so we're going to do
something else there. And I saw you know, Crsipkins the
other day saying the government's not doing enough around the
fuel crisis, and that leads into you know, well, what
are you going to do? You're going to spend some more,
are you? Well, you know, we're in an uncertain world,
so you can see them setting up the debate to
attack any other spending that's being promised by other parties.
Speaker 1 (01:34):
Okay, Jack, what do you think.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
I think we have a structural deficit and a government
that came to power promising to improve our fiscal situation. Ultimately,
they have borrowed more money than they said they would borrow. Ultimately,
they have pushed out their path to surplus a couple
of years. They even changed the accounting measure by which
they record whether or not they're getting to surplus. So
I think if you were to compare their position today
(01:58):
with the position they promisbly would be in when they
were about to come to power, they are pretty distinct.
That being said, would be unreasonable for any of us
to suggest that the state of the world doesn't require
some pretty serious thinking. I actually think there is a
really big opportunity for any political party to go into
no end of election talking about resilience. You've already seen
this across the ditch, but I think resilience could be
(02:20):
a central theme for policy platforms for our big parties
going to the election. I actually think it would be
really popular.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Yeah, but what resilience Resilience on the energy electricity market?
Speaker 2 (02:30):
I think you can look at resilience and all I
think it can guide lots of things. So I think
energy absolutely, I think security absolutely. I mean, the stuff
obviously costs money, and that's where the government's going to
find itself in a tricky position. Although obviously there's a
bit of difference between capital spending and operational spending. But
I think if they wanted to undertake some pretty bold
(02:51):
capital projects around stuff like energy, now is the time
that they can do it, and they would be more
likely to have support from the public force and really
big little projects because people could see, actually, we can't
rely on the world being the kind of benign strategic
environment that has been for the last.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
Somebody was somebody had dinner with me recently and was
saying to me the word sustainability has been replaced by
the word resilience as kind of the thing that everybody
harps on about. Was that you phil?
Speaker 3 (03:18):
It was me, don't you remember the dinners we have here?
Speaker 1 (03:21):
I no, I do?
Speaker 2 (03:22):
And as he was inspiring youth.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
Isn't fair harping? Is what I do? You were simply
eloquently explaining a concept to me.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
That's right, Well, this is the point that you know,
we worry about. The buzzword used to be sustainability. And
I used to say to people, if you want to
be persuasive, certainly was sin just say sustainable? Lot It
was became a buzzword. It was really quite ridiculous actually,
and I'm more for sustainability, you don't get me wrong.
What that's been replaced with is actually the word resilience,
and at least to much the same stuff. Actually at
(03:55):
leads to, you know, we need a more resilient environment,
we need a more resilient response to timate change and
so on. And actually it actually I think unites people
a bit more because they can see it in their face.
You know, what's the solution to what's technic in Australia
for moves Well, at least part of it is to
make sure that we electrofi our economy more quickly, you know,
which is the same saying sustainability. So I think that
the conversation is becoming a lot more grounded, and I
(04:17):
agree with Jack. Actually, resilience is a big word all
around the world, not just in New Zealand, as we've
seen in Australia in the last day or two. I
think any government saying we need to be resilient, and
that includes government spending, that includes giving ourselves a bit
of a war chest if things continue to go wrong
around the world, I think that will resonate and anybody's
not using those words left to justify why not?
Speaker 1 (04:36):
All right, we'll take a break. Come back to you
guy shortly quick.
Speaker 4 (04:39):
The Huddle with New Zealand Southeby's International Real Team, the
only truly global.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
Brand thirteen or actually really twelve away from sixt and
year Back of the Huddle, Jack Tayman Pillow Riley, Jack,
what do you make of the forty five percent increase
from White Tacking?
Speaker 2 (04:52):
Oh? Do you know? I receive multiple emails from residents
in y Tacky today saying can you believe this to clear.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
At the moment?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
It's a proposal, right, and it's the highest of the
three options. But I would have thought if the Whitehacking
counselors were looking to give the strongest argument for amalgamation
possible to their rate payers, they have done it by
introducing this. I mean, forty five percent is extraordinary, especially
given when you consider the rates rises that had over
the last couple of years. Yes, water infrastructure costs a lot. Yes,
(05:23):
this might be a good example of a council that
in the past hasn't necessarily maintained levels and so they're
trying to make up for things on that front, but
forty five percent is not going to be a goer,
and I am not surprised to see residents revolting.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
I mean, this is phil and I understand what they're
trying to do, right, They're trying to explain to people
that is expensive to pay for the infrastructure. But I
think this is backfired on them. What do you think?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
I quite quite agree, and I'm completely agree with Jack. Obviously,
if I'm a resident of y Techi, I'll be saying, well,
where's the amault of a motion? Then this is ridiculous.
We need to spread the cost of these things over
a much bigger population. It's also, of course going to
just feed into the narrative around rates caps government. Right
it's talking about regislation and rates camping, and I actually
don't think that will work issue. I mean, I'm obviously
(06:05):
I don't know that's going to work. But nevertheless, you
can see what's so popular when this sort of thing happens, Right,
So I think, what Whyteching needs to do get on
and try and save themselves instead of wanting for the
government to do it to them. If I was there,
might be out there right now talking to other councils
in that part of the part of the country but
saying hey, let's can we get together here and save
some money, because if you can't do that, then what
(06:26):
you're going to see is a death spiral in that
part of the country, and you're seeing it in Wellington.
I think the fact that the council has been putting
up the rates so excessively over the last few years
is definitely contributing to the hollowing out of Wellington. Businesses
just don't want to be here. People can't afford housing
here because of the rates of insurance here, you know.
So I think the council has a real need and
a role to make the place that they are in
(06:50):
liveable and whye tech he's not doing that. So you know,
with the best rule in the world, they just got
to sort that out and start again.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
But here's the problem with the voluntary and malformation. Why
would the council neighboring White Tucky hear us talking right
now and go forty five percent rates increase? Oh yeah,
let's join up with those.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
Sended for those councils. You know.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Yeah, this is where the government retains the ability to
force the thing right and they have to jack. What
do you think about this idea of bumping the All
Blacks back from business class?
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Bad call, bad call.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
No, it's such a bad call.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
We need the All Blacks to win. I actually think
I was thinking, like, what what is a reasonable middle
ground given the state of afairs at the moment and
given the state of New Zealand rugby box. First of all,
I think the All Blacks have to fly business class.
I don't know that the sevens teams and the underage
teams necessarily needed to five business class. I know that
they've got kind of different players association agreements there. I
(07:43):
don't think they need to. But I think the All
Blacks and the Blacks and should be flying business class.
How about when they fly home, maybe we maybe we
put them in premium a conne that a common right.
The management could go for.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Back and they play here as well. All they come
back for a quick wrist and they're off somewhere.
Speaker 2 (08:03):
For the long haul flights. So yeah, I mean it
depends if that's if they're going on the European tour
at the end of the year, we put them in
row seventy six.
Speaker 3 (08:15):
If they lose. If they lose they go economy. If
they win, they come first class.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
That might work.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
I'll tell you what, though, Phil, I reckon that they
do have to revise how many people they're taking. I mean,
it's a fifteen man game and they're taking forty four
players and what was it thirty five staff or something.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
You do.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
You don't need every you don't need every physio and
every sort of press person and every marketing person and
someone to fly up there with them. And maybe they don't.
Actually maybe I'm maybe I'm making things unfair for them.
Another reason, though, there's another reason the heather. You don't
want to flying economy or premium economy. I sat next
to a super rugby player and an A three twenty
the other day going from I think walking to Welles,
and I think it was he was right.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Next to me.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I'm quite a big guy and he is a massive guy,
and it made it made my back sore by the
end because he was crowding out my seat. So I
want them to fly business class so they don't have
to sit back next to me the back of the
plane and make my job, make my chitty uncomfortable.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
No, that's quite right. You don't want any of them
sitting next to you. Thank you very much, guys, appreciate
and enjoy your evening. That is fellow Riley and Jack
Tamar huddle.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive. Listen live to
news talks it'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
On the huddle with us this evening. We have fellow
Riley Iron Duke Partners and former Business New Zealand chief
executive and Jack tam who's the host of Saturday Mornings
in Q and A. Lads, welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
To be here.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
All right, Phil, are you impressed with the fiscal restraint
from the government? And I am being sarcastic by the way.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
I'm not being sarcastic and saying issue. I thought they
could have used as an excuse to push out the
surplus another year and they didn't, So you know.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
It's breathing down your neck and moodies.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
Well, exactly, no, they're right. I mean they're under pressure
of course. But also I think what they're doing is
setting up a bit of a political thing where they say, well,
we're not going to spend anything that labour's doing. They're
going to spend some more, you know, to tell me
how incredible that is. And so I thought that was
it's the politics of it. Of course. The other thing
that I thought was interesting was the primers to talking
about security and resilience in terms of in terms of
(00:50):
the you know, the monetary position of the government. I
think that's actually that's technical all around the world, but
the first time I've seen a prime minister in New
Zealand in the last few years use it quite that bluntly.
You know, the world's a dangerous place, hard for us.
We need to make sure that we're being responsible with
the day. And I thought that was actually quite a sensible,
clever thing for him to say, because I think that's
what the public will be feeling too.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Well, do you think that that's going to like, are
people going to follow the logic on that? Is that
going to work?
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well?
Speaker 3 (01:13):
Of course it sets them up the capacity to attack
the other side when they say we're going to spend
some more money on this, so we're going to do
something else there. And I saw you know, Crsipkins the
other day saying the government's not doing enough around the
fuel crisis, and that leads into you know, well, what
are you going to do? You're going to spend some more,
are you? Well, you know, we're in an uncertain world,
so you can see them setting up the debate to
attack any other spending that's being promised by other parties.
Speaker 1 (01:34):
Okay, Jack, what do you think.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
I think we have a structural deficit and a government
that came to power promising to improve our fiscal situation. Ultimately,
they have borrowed more money than they said they would borrow. Ultimately,
they have pushed out their path to surplus a couple
of years. They even changed the accounting measure by which
they record whether or not they're getting to surplus. So
I think if you were to compare their position today
(01:58):
with the position they promisbly would be in when they
were about to come to power, they are pretty distinct.
That being said, would be unreasonable for any of us
to suggest that the state of the world doesn't require
some pretty serious thinking. I actually think there is a
really big opportunity for any political party to go into
no end of election talking about resilience. You've already seen
this across the ditch, but I think resilience could be
(02:20):
a central theme for policy platforms for our big parties
going to the election. I actually think it would be
really popular.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
Yeah, but what resilience Resilience on the energy electricity market?
Speaker 2 (02:30):
I think you can look at resilience and all I
think it can guide lots of things. So I think
energy absolutely, I think security absolutely. I mean, the stuff
obviously costs money, and that's where the government's going to
find itself in a tricky position. Although obviously there's a
bit of difference between capital spending and operational spending. But
I think if they wanted to undertake some pretty bold
(02:51):
capital projects around stuff like energy, now is the time
that they can do it, and they would be more
likely to have support from the public force and really
big little projects because people could see, actually, we can't
rely on the world being the kind of benign strategic
environment that has been for the last.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
Somebody was somebody had dinner with me recently and was
saying to me the word sustainability has been replaced by
the word resilience as kind of the thing that everybody
harps on about. Was that you phil?
Speaker 3 (03:18):
It was me, don't you remember the dinners we have here?
Speaker 1 (03:21):
I no, I do?
Speaker 2 (03:22):
And as he was inspiring youth.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
Isn't fair harping? Is what I do? You were simply
eloquently explaining a concept to me.
Speaker 3 (03:34):
That's right, Well, this is the point that you know,
we worry about. The buzzword used to be sustainability. And
I used to say to people, if you want to
be persuasive, certainly was sin just say sustainable? Lot It
was became a buzzword. It was really quite ridiculous actually,
and I'm more for sustainability, you don't get me wrong.
What that's been replaced with is actually the word resilience,
and at least to much the same stuff. Actually at
(03:55):
leads to, you know, we need a more resilient environment,
we need a more resilient response to timate change and
so on. And actually it actually I think unites people
a bit more because they can see it in their face.
You know, what's the solution to what's technic in Australia
for moves Well, at least part of it is to
make sure that we electrofi our economy more quickly, you know,
which is the same saying sustainability. So I think that
the conversation is becoming a lot more grounded, and I
(04:17):
agree with Jack. Actually, resilience is a big word all
around the world, not just in New Zealand, as we've
seen in Australia in the last day or two. I
think any government saying we need to be resilient, and
that includes government spending, that includes giving ourselves a bit
of a war chest if things continue to go wrong
around the world, I think that will resonate and anybody's
not using those words left to justify why not?
Speaker 1 (04:36):
All right, we'll take a break. Come back to you
guy shortly quick.
Speaker 4 (04:39):
The Huddle with New Zealand Southeby's International Real Team, the
only truly global.
Speaker 1 (04:44):
Brand thirteen or actually really twelve away from sixt and
year Back of the Huddle, Jack Tayman Pillow Riley, Jack,
what do you make of the forty five percent increase
from White Tacking?
Speaker 2 (04:52):
Oh? Do you know? I receive multiple emails from residents
in y Tacky today saying can you believe this to clear.
Speaker 3 (05:00):
At the moment?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
It's a proposal, right, and it's the highest of the
three options. But I would have thought if the Whitehacking
counselors were looking to give the strongest argument for amalgamation
possible to their rate payers, they have done it by
introducing this. I mean, forty five percent is extraordinary, especially
given when you consider the rates rises that had over
the last couple of years. Yes, water infrastructure costs a lot. Yes,
(05:23):
this might be a good example of a council that
in the past hasn't necessarily maintained levels and so they're
trying to make up for things on that front, but
forty five percent is not going to be a goer,
and I am not surprised to see residents revolting.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
I mean, this is phil and I understand what they're
trying to do, right, They're trying to explain to people
that is expensive to pay for the infrastructure. But I
think this is backfired on them. What do you think?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
I quite quite agree, and I'm completely agree with Jack. Obviously,
if I'm a resident of y Techi, I'll be saying, well,
where's the amault of a motion? Then this is ridiculous.
We need to spread the cost of these things over
a much bigger population. It's also, of course going to
just feed into the narrative around rates caps government. Right
it's talking about regislation and rates camping, and I actually
don't think that will work issue. I mean, I'm obviously
(06:05):
I don't know that's going to work. But nevertheless, you
can see what's so popular when this sort of thing happens, Right,
So I think, what Whyteching needs to do get on
and try and save themselves instead of wanting for the
government to do it to them. If I was there,
might be out there right now talking to other councils
in that part of the part of the country but
saying hey, let's can we get together here and save
some money, because if you can't do that, then what
(06:26):
you're going to see is a death spiral in that
part of the country, and you're seeing it in Wellington.
I think the fact that the council has been putting
up the rates so excessively over the last few years
is definitely contributing to the hollowing out of Wellington. Businesses
just don't want to be here. People can't afford housing
here because of the rates of insurance here, you know.
So I think the council has a real need and
a role to make the place that they are in
(06:50):
liveable and whye tech he's not doing that. So you know,
with the best rule in the world, they just got
to sort that out and start again.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
But here's the problem with the voluntary and malformation. Why
would the council neighboring White Tucky hear us talking right
now and go forty five percent rates increase? Oh yeah,
let's join up with those.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
Sended for those councils. You know.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Yeah, this is where the government retains the ability to
force the thing right and they have to jack. What
do you think about this idea of bumping the All
Blacks back from business class?
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Bad call, bad call.
Speaker 3 (07:20):
No, it's such a bad call.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
We need the All Blacks to win. I actually think
I was thinking, like, what what is a reasonable middle
ground given the state of afairs at the moment and
given the state of New Zealand rugby box. First of all,
I think the All Blacks have to fly business class.
I don't know that the sevens teams and the underage
teams necessarily needed to five business class. I know that
they've got kind of different players association agreements there. I
(07:43):
don't think they need to. But I think the All
Blacks and the Blacks and should be flying business class.
How about when they fly home, maybe we maybe we
put them in premium a conne that a common right.
The management could go for.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Back and they play here as well. All they come
back for a quick wrist and they're off somewhere.
Speaker 2 (08:03):
For the long haul flights. So yeah, I mean it
depends if that's if they're going on the European tour
at the end of the year, we put them in
row seventy six.
Speaker 3 (08:15):
If they lose. If they lose they go economy. If
they win, they come first class.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
That might work.
Speaker 1 (08:20):
I'll tell you what, though, Phil, I reckon that they
do have to revise how many people they're taking. I mean,
it's a fifteen man game and they're taking forty four
players and what was it thirty five staff or something.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
You do.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
You don't need every you don't need every physio and
every sort of press person and every marketing person and
someone to fly up there with them. And maybe they don't.
Actually maybe I'm maybe I'm making things unfair for them.
Another reason, though, there's another reason the heather. You don't
want to flying economy or premium economy. I sat next
to a super rugby player and an A three twenty
the other day going from I think walking to Welles,
and I think it was he was right.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Next to me.
Speaker 3 (08:51):
I'm quite a big guy and he is a massive guy,
and it made it made my back sore by the
end because he was crowding out my seat. So I
want them to fly business class so they don't have
to sit back next to me the back of the
plane and make my job, make my chitty uncomfortable.
Speaker 1 (09:04):
No, that's quite right. You don't want any of them
sitting next to you. Thank you very much, guys, appreciate
and enjoy your evening. That is fellow Riley and Jack
Tamar huddle.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive. Listen live to
news talks it'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Bleep! with Ana Navarro
Fear thrives in silence and confusion. Ana Navarro rejects both. Her voice is an antidote to today’s chaos. Her new podcast, Bleep! with Ana Navarro, takes on today’s most pressing issues with the voices most connected to it: decision-makers, political leaders, cultural shapers, and people on the frontlines of the story. The conversations acknowledge the emotions we all feel—despair, sadness, fear— but emerge with knowledge, perspective, and hope. The belief is simple: fearless dialogue can transform fear into courage, and courage into change. When fear dominates the headlines, this show digs deeper. Because information, debate, and conversation don’t just ease fear, they give us power to shape the future.
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.