October 5, 2025 • 11 mins
Chris Luxon says the Government's taking steps to ban further protests outside politicians' homes.
Protesters gathered outside Foreign Minister Winston Peters' Auckland house on Thursday, in support of the Kiwis detained by Israel, while travelling in a flotilla to Gaza.
The Prime Minister says legislation is currently before select committee to ban such activity.
He says [told Mike Hosking] there is a time and place for protests.
Luxon says there is lots of places to protest a public figure, but you don't need to do it outside their homes, impacting their families.
He says these protests outside homes are "not the Kiwi way".
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 (00:00):
We've got the Prime Minister with us. A very good
morning to you.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Morning Mike.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Do you think that the announcement yesterday which was bringing
forward to the original idea? Firstly, just quickly, why did
you bring it forward?
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Because we can? I mean, it takes a while to
get through legislation and regulations. It's sort of often a
twelve month plus process, and we want to bring it
forward as we can in November next year. The bigger
issue here is we're trying to reset expectations with young
people that you just can't partially attend school and then
just drift on into unemployment benefit. And it is a
bit of a reset for under twenty five to say,
(00:30):
I'm sorry, you're expected to get connected with work or
employment or training or education.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Sixty five thousand dollars. How did you land on that?
Speaker 2 (00:39):
It's basically the income cut out point for the supported
living payment, and so it basically says, if you're coming
from very low income families, we're exempting you. But we
know it's quite low. But the reality is it puts
the pressure back on parents to say get those young
people into worker education.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
What I was going to say is, I'm assuming it's
going to be like the traffic light system, and that
is when you put a bit of pressure on most
people will respond.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
I'm trying to get this notion of rights and responsibilities understood.
Whether it's around benefit sanctions for not showing up and
looking for a job, whether it's in this case young
people taking responsibility getting connected with work and other things,
whether it's unruly tenants at KO frankly, prisoner voting, all
of those kinds of things. It's the principle of there
are rights to manchemi and there are responsibilities as well.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Okay, now Peter's on Friday. Now I know you're working
on some sort of law, but the idea that and
I happen to know where Peters lives and he's on
a small street and it's an unfortunate house. That's right
on the foot part. There's something fundamentally wrong with allowing
people to ruin a neighbour's neighborhoods day, isn't there?
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Yeah? Look, I mean, minister's an MP signed up for
public life, but your neighbors don't write. And you know
when you're getting families impacted by protesters coming to your home,
that's not on. It's not the key. We way. And
so what we're doing is we've got legislation to stop that.
It's in this leat committee phase at the moment, will
come back for second and third reading before it becomes
a law. But yeah, there's lots of places you can
(02:01):
protest a public figure, but you don't need to do
it at their home, upsetting the kids and the families
around them.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Did do you know what actually happened? Did anyone go
and round them up or not?
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, so there's a protocol. I have a similar thing. Obviously,
I get a lot of protests at my house as well.
But yeah, but we's not great. I mean, you know,
you got neighbors with young kids who were sort of
woken up at eleven or twelve at night or four
in the morning or whenever they come. But the upshot
is that essentially the protocol is the police will come
out from very very quickly and and yeah and do
(02:33):
what moved them on or with them on. They can
make a risk if they can, but the new legislation
will make it a lot easier.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Okay, this open letter you tried on with Hepkins and
he said what he said, were you genuine?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Yeah? I was if you go back and look at
the House and the Parliament. I've been calling on him
to do this for a long time. I've done so publicly.
Simon Wats and Megan Woods have had an interchange about
wanting to be bipartisan energy policy. But the first thing,
as sign and what's I said to Megan Woods and
as I've said to Hipkins, is look, if you can't
get over yourself and over the oil and gas band,
we need that repealed and we need that repelled for
(03:10):
at least a decade. So why don't you just commit
to that pretty basic sort of requirement because it's your
mess and your ideology that put us in this place.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
But the problem is, and they've got you by the
shortened curlies in that sense. Happen though, because if I'm
looking at this country and I don't have any sight
beyond next year, why would I invest when I don't
know what's going to happen?
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Yeah, Look, I mean there are things that I think,
you know, we're going to have to think through about
how we might support that investment going forward through legislation.
And all I'm saying is it would be helpful if
he could come out and say, look, we're going to
need gas for the next decade or two. For the
next decade. We're going to honor the investments that people
are making in this country to try and get gas
exploration and gas generation up and right.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Okay, so what are you doing in legislation?
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Well, there are things you know, first and almost we're
putting into chihundred million dollars. You know, we've overcome, not
turned over the oil and gas. But if there's things
we have to do further to give reassurance. So it's
confidence uncertain.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
So what are you going to do?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Right?
Speaker 1 (04:06):
A contract? This is if you sign up, we're going
to give you twenty five years, right, So whatever correct.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
There might be ways you can think about.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
That because what have you thinked about?
Speaker 2 (04:14):
It depends on how we're not We're not at that
point yet. But what I'm saying is that what we're
trying to do is give confidence and clarity to that
industry that had it absolutely shattered, you know, on them
by eating that oil and gas ban or eating oil
and gas.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
But that but that twenty five years, twenty years, whatever
it may be, certainty of tenure is we're.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Trying to do everything we can to give certainty. So
if you think about what was announced last week, I
know people have their views of, you know, it was
bold enough or whatever. The bottom line is it is
it's quite you know, some pretty strong stuff in there.
The fact that the government will follow its own money.
If Gen Taylors want to explore therm or firming capacity,
that's good. That gives some certainty to those guys that
(04:51):
they can invest in those in that form of energy. Likewise,
the two undred million dollars set side. Likewise, the repeal
of the oil and gas band with legislation, that's got
some leads to it that can last.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Were you disappointed on that announcement last week on energy
reform the reaction to it.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Well, I get it. I mean everyone's got their reckons
and everyone comes out saying, oh, I wish it was bolder.
And then when you say, well, okay, well, you know,
if there was anything, if there was anything I thought
would make a difference, I would do it. I'm pretty
pragmatic and practical about it. You know, we have actually
said to the Gen Taylors, you've got to sell at
the same price now to all players that you would
to your own retailing operation. That's sort of a sort
(05:25):
of an approach to separation, but I think it's the
better way to go. We've said we've got to back
up the tournament, as we said, we'll actually back up
any capital that goes into thermal energy generation. All of
those things are setting a message to the industry. Look,
we want certainty clarity, so you can make that investment,
and we're happy to co invest with you if need be.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
So you're happy with what you did.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, I am, because I think there's a lot of
there's a lot of people on energy. Everyone's got their
reckons and their ideas. I don't get that, but if
they were, if they were real, and they were I
thought they'd make a difference. I would have done it.
Speaker 1 (05:53):
Okay. My only criticism of it was that you perhaps
played it to a point that we expected something big
the big didn't come.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Yeah. Maybe, But I mean, I think what we've done
is pretty pretty serious, you know, and it's been a
series of actions that it gets you to a place
that gives that certainty to the industry to crack on
and invest. Right at its simplest, we've got to do
two things. We've got to double renewables that Actra generations
coming on stream pretty quickly. If you look at what's
happened even in fifteen months versus the previous five years,
(06:21):
that's pretty good. But our big issue is this gas
issue that we've got because of the ALLWN guests. Man.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
So, Penny Simmons, I don't see your story here. Is
there a story? Is this going to be pumped along
for another week and some sort of scandal.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
On the press gallery. I'm sure to go into a
process story, but the bottom line is there's no contravention
of the Cabinet Manual. She's doing exactly what we need
her to do, which is too She's un similarly for
e Can's down on the South Island as well, So
there's nothing there.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Okay. The Reserve Bank Wednesday.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Fifty points. I remember this conversation last time. Can I
just say asterix, I fully respect the independence of the
Reserve Bank. Would you like to see Well, like, I'm
not going to get into that. I'll just say, yeah,
you've seen commentators say somewhere we're doing twenty five and fifty,
but let's see what.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
Would you like fifty more than twenty five? Do we
need something? See how in the grief.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
You got me into last time, my friend, and outline,
it's not that long.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
So what is the role do you see of the
Reserve Bank in the here and now of the economy
versus what you're doing?
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Yeah, so their role with respect to monetary policy, our
role is with respect to fiscal policy. The two have
to work together. That's why you're seeing good spending discipline
from our government, which is helping contribute to lower inflation.
We changed the mandate. I saw Liam Dan saying he
didn't think that was a good thing on the weekend,
but the reality is it was because we needed a
single focus on inflation, which actually is the as the
(07:43):
precursor to lowering interest rates. But look, we've got two
cuts potentially before Christmas. That would be a good thing.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Okay. The tennis roof and I know this didn't get
as much coverage. How great it is great. But what
I can't understand, having been to that facility many times
over the years, is why is something that only costs
fifteen million dollars takes so much time. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Look, I mean I've watched that tournament for years. I
remember two years ago it got rained out. They end
up having to televise from an indoor, practiced stadium and
you go, it's just not a good projection of New
Zealand to the world. The other thing is those events
are under huge attraction from other cities around the world
as well, and actually the standard keeps being lifted each
and every time, so that roof idea is not just
(08:25):
similar to what exists in Adelaide or Queens Queens Queensland.
Similar things exist. It's a no brainer, right, I mean,
it's fifteen million dollars, five from US, five from the council,
five from tennis, and let's get the thing.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Hard hard can it be? Tap into your business leadership?
How would you handle the Nolintail situation.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
It's a difficult one. I mean, obviously there's a lot
of legal issues going on there, and there's people who
are silence and can't say what they should there be well,
I mean I don't think we I don't actually I've
tried to sort of follow it from the outside, just
as a fan and as a as a curiosity, but
I can't work out what the problem actually and no
one's talking about it.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
You're the chief executive, so a couple of players come
to you, a couple of employees come to you and go,
we don't like the boss, and you drag the boss
in and she goes. You can get stuffed. I do
things the way I do it. Take it a level would.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Well as a see, I'd have a pretty clear view
as well. I think that manager is doing a great
job or otherwise jobs. And as to the employees, we
might have a different conversation. Exactly my manager, who I've
put into that job, I'm backing them.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Okay, so you would back the coach in other words, Well,
I mean you've employed the coach to do a job,
and that coach.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Long sometimes you know, employees don't like their boss. I
get all that. I'm just saying from my point of view,
i'd want to understand the manager where they're coming from.
Where what the employees' concerns are. I'd raise that with
a manager. Things that they could do differently or better.
It's no different. How long should we give?
Speaker 1 (09:48):
How long should a meeting go on for? If you
have it, they had a ten hour meeting a number
of meetings like a lot of time, one of which
was ten hours long. Has has the leadership been lost
at that point? If you're having ten hour me.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
I'm not going to comment on this. You're dragging me
into this. But from a process point of view, Sat,
there go. There's no way ten hour meetings that is
what you need. It all. You shouldn't have any meaning.
It goes along the half an hour in my view
maybe an hour at most. But I just be very
clear about you want to know your people, and so
for me, you know, it's the same way I think
about my ministers. It's like I know their strengths, their weaknesses,
(10:21):
will have conversations about what they're doing well and encourage
them on that and things that they need to step
up and do better. And if you've got that feedback culture,
that should be pretty straightforward, you know. And likewise you
take feedback from employees. I always used to have something
called three sixty feedback, so your employees would talk about
their managers and what they did well, what they didn't
do well. They'd take that one border's feedback to develop
(10:42):
and grow. But you know, so I don't know, I
don't know the specifics this one.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Thanks for dragging me into It's always a fund sation.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
On For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live
to News talks that'd be from six am weekdays, or
follow the podcast on radio
We've got the Prime Minister with us. A very good
morning to you.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
Morning Mike.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Do you think that the announcement yesterday which was bringing
forward to the original idea? Firstly, just quickly, why did
you bring it forward?
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Because we can? I mean, it takes a while to
get through legislation and regulations. It's sort of often a
twelve month plus process, and we want to bring it
forward as we can in November next year. The bigger
issue here is we're trying to reset expectations with young
people that you just can't partially attend school and then
just drift on into unemployment benefit. And it is a
bit of a reset for under twenty five to say,
(00:30):
I'm sorry, you're expected to get connected with work or
employment or training or education.
Speaker 1 (00:36):
Sixty five thousand dollars. How did you land on that?
Speaker 2 (00:39):
It's basically the income cut out point for the supported
living payment, and so it basically says, if you're coming
from very low income families, we're exempting you. But we
know it's quite low. But the reality is it puts
the pressure back on parents to say get those young
people into worker education.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
What I was going to say is, I'm assuming it's
going to be like the traffic light system, and that
is when you put a bit of pressure on most
people will respond.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
I'm trying to get this notion of rights and responsibilities understood.
Whether it's around benefit sanctions for not showing up and
looking for a job, whether it's in this case young
people taking responsibility getting connected with work and other things,
whether it's unruly tenants at KO frankly, prisoner voting, all
of those kinds of things. It's the principle of there
are rights to manchemi and there are responsibilities as well.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Okay, now Peter's on Friday. Now I know you're working
on some sort of law, but the idea that and
I happen to know where Peters lives and he's on
a small street and it's an unfortunate house. That's right
on the foot part. There's something fundamentally wrong with allowing
people to ruin a neighbour's neighborhoods day, isn't there?
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Yeah? Look, I mean, minister's an MP signed up for
public life, but your neighbors don't write. And you know
when you're getting families impacted by protesters coming to your home,
that's not on. It's not the key. We way. And
so what we're doing is we've got legislation to stop that.
It's in this leat committee phase at the moment, will
come back for second and third reading before it becomes
a law. But yeah, there's lots of places you can
(02:01):
protest a public figure, but you don't need to do
it at their home, upsetting the kids and the families
around them.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Did do you know what actually happened? Did anyone go
and round them up or not?
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Yeah, so there's a protocol. I have a similar thing. Obviously,
I get a lot of protests at my house as well.
But yeah, but we's not great. I mean, you know,
you got neighbors with young kids who were sort of
woken up at eleven or twelve at night or four
in the morning or whenever they come. But the upshot
is that essentially the protocol is the police will come
out from very very quickly and and yeah and do
(02:33):
what moved them on or with them on. They can
make a risk if they can, but the new legislation
will make it a lot easier.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
Okay, this open letter you tried on with Hepkins and
he said what he said, were you genuine?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
Yeah? I was if you go back and look at
the House and the Parliament. I've been calling on him
to do this for a long time. I've done so publicly.
Simon Wats and Megan Woods have had an interchange about
wanting to be bipartisan energy policy. But the first thing,
as sign and what's I said to Megan Woods and
as I've said to Hipkins, is look, if you can't
get over yourself and over the oil and gas band,
we need that repealed and we need that repelled for
(03:10):
at least a decade. So why don't you just commit
to that pretty basic sort of requirement because it's your
mess and your ideology that put us in this place.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
But the problem is, and they've got you by the
shortened curlies in that sense. Happen though, because if I'm
looking at this country and I don't have any sight
beyond next year, why would I invest when I don't
know what's going to happen?
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Yeah, Look, I mean there are things that I think,
you know, we're going to have to think through about
how we might support that investment going forward through legislation.
And all I'm saying is it would be helpful if
he could come out and say, look, we're going to
need gas for the next decade or two. For the
next decade. We're going to honor the investments that people
are making in this country to try and get gas
exploration and gas generation up and right.
Speaker 1 (03:53):
Okay, so what are you doing in legislation?
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Well, there are things you know, first and almost we're
putting into chihundred million dollars. You know, we've overcome, not
turned over the oil and gas. But if there's things
we have to do further to give reassurance. So it's
confidence uncertain.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
So what are you going to do?
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Right?
Speaker 1 (04:06):
A contract? This is if you sign up, we're going
to give you twenty five years, right, So whatever correct.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
There might be ways you can think about.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
That because what have you thinked about?
Speaker 2 (04:14):
It depends on how we're not We're not at that
point yet. But what I'm saying is that what we're
trying to do is give confidence and clarity to that
industry that had it absolutely shattered, you know, on them
by eating that oil and gas ban or eating oil
and gas.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
But that but that twenty five years, twenty years, whatever
it may be, certainty of tenure is we're.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
Trying to do everything we can to give certainty. So
if you think about what was announced last week, I
know people have their views of, you know, it was
bold enough or whatever. The bottom line is it is
it's quite you know, some pretty strong stuff in there.
The fact that the government will follow its own money.
If Gen Taylors want to explore therm or firming capacity,
that's good. That gives some certainty to those guys that
(04:51):
they can invest in those in that form of energy. Likewise,
the two undred million dollars set side. Likewise, the repeal
of the oil and gas band with legislation, that's got
some leads to it that can last.
Speaker 1 (05:00):
Were you disappointed on that announcement last week on energy
reform the reaction to it.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Well, I get it. I mean everyone's got their reckons
and everyone comes out saying, oh, I wish it was bolder.
And then when you say, well, okay, well, you know,
if there was anything, if there was anything I thought
would make a difference, I would do it. I'm pretty
pragmatic and practical about it. You know, we have actually
said to the Gen Taylors, you've got to sell at
the same price now to all players that you would
to your own retailing operation. That's sort of a sort
(05:25):
of an approach to separation, but I think it's the
better way to go. We've said we've got to back
up the tournament, as we said, we'll actually back up
any capital that goes into thermal energy generation. All of
those things are setting a message to the industry. Look,
we want certainty clarity, so you can make that investment,
and we're happy to co invest with you if need be.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
So you're happy with what you did.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Yeah, I am, because I think there's a lot of
there's a lot of people on energy. Everyone's got their
reckons and their ideas. I don't get that, but if
they were, if they were real, and they were I
thought they'd make a difference. I would have done it.
Speaker 1 (05:53):
Okay. My only criticism of it was that you perhaps
played it to a point that we expected something big
the big didn't come.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Yeah. Maybe, But I mean, I think what we've done
is pretty pretty serious, you know, and it's been a
series of actions that it gets you to a place
that gives that certainty to the industry to crack on
and invest. Right at its simplest, we've got to do
two things. We've got to double renewables that Actra generations
coming on stream pretty quickly. If you look at what's
happened even in fifteen months versus the previous five years,
(06:21):
that's pretty good. But our big issue is this gas
issue that we've got because of the ALLWN guests. Man.
Speaker 1 (06:26):
So, Penny Simmons, I don't see your story here. Is
there a story? Is this going to be pumped along
for another week and some sort of scandal.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
On the press gallery. I'm sure to go into a
process story, but the bottom line is there's no contravention
of the Cabinet Manual. She's doing exactly what we need
her to do, which is too She's un similarly for
e Can's down on the South Island as well, So
there's nothing there.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Okay. The Reserve Bank Wednesday.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Fifty points. I remember this conversation last time. Can I
just say asterix, I fully respect the independence of the
Reserve Bank. Would you like to see Well, like, I'm
not going to get into that. I'll just say, yeah,
you've seen commentators say somewhere we're doing twenty five and fifty,
but let's see what.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
Would you like fifty more than twenty five? Do we
need something? See how in the grief.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
You got me into last time, my friend, and outline,
it's not that long.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
So what is the role do you see of the
Reserve Bank in the here and now of the economy
versus what you're doing?
Speaker 2 (07:23):
Yeah, so their role with respect to monetary policy, our
role is with respect to fiscal policy. The two have
to work together. That's why you're seeing good spending discipline
from our government, which is helping contribute to lower inflation.
We changed the mandate. I saw Liam Dan saying he
didn't think that was a good thing on the weekend,
but the reality is it was because we needed a
single focus on inflation, which actually is the as the
(07:43):
precursor to lowering interest rates. But look, we've got two
cuts potentially before Christmas. That would be a good thing.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
Okay. The tennis roof and I know this didn't get
as much coverage. How great it is great. But what
I can't understand, having been to that facility many times
over the years, is why is something that only costs
fifteen million dollars takes so much time. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Look, I mean I've watched that tournament for years. I
remember two years ago it got rained out. They end
up having to televise from an indoor, practiced stadium and
you go, it's just not a good projection of New
Zealand to the world. The other thing is those events
are under huge attraction from other cities around the world
as well, and actually the standard keeps being lifted each
and every time, so that roof idea is not just
(08:25):
similar to what exists in Adelaide or Queens Queens Queensland.
Similar things exist. It's a no brainer, right, I mean,
it's fifteen million dollars, five from US, five from the council,
five from tennis, and let's get the thing.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Hard hard can it be? Tap into your business leadership?
How would you handle the Nolintail situation.
Speaker 2 (08:44):
It's a difficult one. I mean, obviously there's a lot
of legal issues going on there, and there's people who
are silence and can't say what they should there be well,
I mean I don't think we I don't actually I've
tried to sort of follow it from the outside, just
as a fan and as a as a curiosity, but
I can't work out what the problem actually and no
one's talking about it.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
You're the chief executive, so a couple of players come
to you, a couple of employees come to you and go,
we don't like the boss, and you drag the boss
in and she goes. You can get stuffed. I do
things the way I do it. Take it a level would.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Well as a see, I'd have a pretty clear view
as well. I think that manager is doing a great
job or otherwise jobs. And as to the employees, we
might have a different conversation. Exactly my manager, who I've
put into that job, I'm backing them.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Okay, so you would back the coach in other words, Well,
I mean you've employed the coach to do a job,
and that coach.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
Long sometimes you know, employees don't like their boss. I
get all that. I'm just saying from my point of view,
i'd want to understand the manager where they're coming from.
Where what the employees' concerns are. I'd raise that with
a manager. Things that they could do differently or better.
It's no different. How long should we give?
Speaker 1 (09:48):
How long should a meeting go on for? If you
have it, they had a ten hour meeting a number
of meetings like a lot of time, one of which
was ten hours long. Has has the leadership been lost
at that point? If you're having ten hour me.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
I'm not going to comment on this. You're dragging me
into this. But from a process point of view, Sat,
there go. There's no way ten hour meetings that is
what you need. It all. You shouldn't have any meaning.
It goes along the half an hour in my view
maybe an hour at most. But I just be very
clear about you want to know your people, and so
for me, you know, it's the same way I think
about my ministers. It's like I know their strengths, their weaknesses,
(10:21):
will have conversations about what they're doing well and encourage
them on that and things that they need to step
up and do better. And if you've got that feedback culture,
that should be pretty straightforward, you know. And likewise you
take feedback from employees. I always used to have something
called three sixty feedback, so your employees would talk about
their managers and what they did well, what they didn't
do well. They'd take that one border's feedback to develop
(10:42):
and grow. But you know, so I don't know, I
don't know the specifics this one.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Thanks for dragging me into It's always a fund sation.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
On For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live
to News talks that'd be from six am weekdays, or
follow the podcast on radio
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.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.