Today on Politics Wednesday, Mark Mitchell and Ginny Andersen joined Mike Hosking to discuss the biggest topics of the week so far.
They discussed the shoplifting directive issued to Police – will officers still be attending retail crime incidents if the value of the theft is less than $500?
And why is Labour against the use of private hospitals to lower the public surgery backlog?
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):
Jinny Anderson and Mark Mitchell for Politics Wednesday. Good morning
to you both.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Good morning, Mike, morning Jenny.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Now brought a broad subject that you both will have
dealt with in your ministerial roles over the time. Now, Mark,
you weren't on this program yesterday when there I suggest
you needed to be when all of this, this this
retail crime stuff was breaking and there were memos flying
all over the place, and the police weren't looking at
you know, small time crime anymore. And we rang your
office and we were told Mark's not doing any more
interviews on the subject. Now, what one, What the hell
(00:26):
does that mean? And where were you and why aren't
you more accountable on this stuff given you you hung
your hat on crime and getting it down.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Well, I didn't. I didn't.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
I didn't have visibility on that. If I knew that
you wanted to come on the show would have come immediately.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
I was on with Kerry, I was on with Heather.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
So office that's blocking you because this is bollocks, because
we're having the same and I won't bore you guys
with it, but I'll do it after eight thirty. We're
having the same problem with the Prime Minister at the
moment and this all these little people running around an
officer gar I'm sorry, the monster is not available at
that time of the day, I think tells that about.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Well, the only the only thing that I can put
it down to is because all the media requests that
I got you today, I went on, I wasn't aware
of this one. But maybe there's a decision made because
I was meeting with all my local Saint John's leadership,
and it's possible that I depend on what time you
asked that I was in a meeting with them, because
I did meet and spend the morning with them yesterday.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
But here's my thing and what we always say, and
we're doing this with the Prime Minster at the moment,
I'm here at three in the morning, available anytime. You're like, mate,
we'll pre record it from three in the morning. And
you can't tell me there's a single minister in any
government anyone in the world you know, is not available
or busy at three o'clock in the morning. So there's
something going on with your comms and government. And for you,
this doesn't look good because we had to explain you
weren't doing interviews and you weren't available and on a
(01:39):
subjects that's critical for you.
Speaker 3 (01:42):
Look, I agree with you entirely, and I have to
say that my entire time as police minister. I don't
I think I've missed maybe one or two interviews because
I've been tied up or been traveling. I do every
media request I get, I front up to because I
think part of democracy we need to do that. I
don't know what happened yesterday. I apologize for that.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
I hadn't done apologies and I don't want I don't
want to make this about me, and it's like, I'm
so important, you must front up. All I'm saying is
from your you guys point of view, and you would
understand this journey when you've said what you've said about
retail crime and what was unfolding yesterday. You need to
be front and center on that, don't you.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Yeah, I think that I think she would have. I
think you Cholly Checks might have hit the rob button again.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
But look, no, I'm here, I'm here, I.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
Am here, and I thought he was asking you. I thought,
not me.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
No, I just I just say, might I agree with
you? You do have to front up.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
I did.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
I did front up to all the media. I don't
know what happened with yours. I'll go back and find out.
You've got my number.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
You text me.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
No, that's that's that's for another day. I guess, Jenny,
do you have any sympathy on this? I mean, more importantly,
I suppose is by the time Chambers fronted up yesterday
we seem to have an answer or are you not
convinced with the answer.
Speaker 5 (02:52):
I'm not convinced with the answer. The person whose response
was a superintendent that's very high up in police. So
even Sunny Crew, whose Mark's head of Retail Crime group,
as skeptical about what the order is for it to
be that high up the chain, and a memo given
out as indicative that there is real pressure on the
front line to be able to investigate these crimes.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
But having said, do we get an answer, Mark, because
the words were there in a memo and that doesn't
seem to doubtail with what you promise the people of
this country poorlywooded memo.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Both both myself and the Commission have been very clear
about that. We've also been very clear that no, there
are no threesholds that if a member of the public
reports a crime regardless of the value of it, there'll
be a police response.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Now, they've always had to trios.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
They've always had to prioritize because there is only so
many frontline police officers and they have to work out
and prioritize around the serious of the job. There's risks
to someone's you know, there's risk of harm, so that's
always happened, but we've been very clear that there's no threesholds.
The police are doing an outstanding job and they make
nomous We had a big mountain to climb. As the
(04:01):
incoming government, we'll be focused on retail violent retail crime.
We've seen some good success there, but we're also focusing
on the nonviolent retail crime that can't be solved entirely
by itself by police. We're working with the stakeholders with
the retail sector that we're doing some really good work
around there. Sonny Kelshall and his group means forward some
very very good advice around additional powers and things that
(04:24):
we can do to help them facial recognition, food stuffs
around an outstanding trial on that that's been very successful.
So there's lots of things that are happening in that
space to make sure that we're a safer country and
that retail employees can go to their workplace and not
feel threatened.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
All right, Ginny your comment, I.
Speaker 5 (04:41):
Was just interested to know why the memo was written
in the first place. It's superintendent within police with very
specific amounts of money that have been obviously talked about
and decided that doesn't just materialize that a funny. I mean,
where did that come from and why did it occur?
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Well, I mean the simple So there's that You've got
to like all of our police officers, including our senior
police leadership, they're trying to do the best that they can.
They're trying to provide the best possible service to the public,
and of course they have to be able to manage resources.
Probably the problem with that memos that everyone agrees that
it was poorly worded and it left the impression that
there's going to be thresholds around response by police and
(05:21):
both myself.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
That's a question though, Mark from Jet why put a
number on it? Because all it does, I suspect, unfortunately,
is confirm what most people would believe, rightly or wrongly,
that if it's not worth much value, you're never going
to see the cops.
Speaker 5 (05:34):
And people know that already, right, people know that under
a certain amount is really hard to get placed to
turn that. So, I mean, I don't accept the word
it was poorly wounded. It's pretty clear what it said.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
That's nothing new.
Speaker 3 (05:45):
And as the incoming policemanness, so that had been happening
under the previous government.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Quite simply.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
What we're trying to do is we're trying to free
up those resources. We've got the police head a sixty
percent increase in attending mental health callouts.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
Many of those they don't need to be at.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
It needs a proper health response to so time we've
free up resource so they can actually get to these events.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Genny, let me ask you this, this, this, and it
seems to be perpetrated by you guys and as far
as I can work out radio in New Zealand, but
this obsession you guys have with having elective operations in
private hospitals, what's wrong with that?
Speaker 5 (06:17):
That's one of the blue Well you guys being on
and on and on about it.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Suddenly you know elective elective surgery because the public health
system is the way it is, and because you should
have staff, and because you can't get so you're you're
sending some stuff out to private hospitals. Elective operations are
being done in private hospitals and all of a sudden,
all Health's breaking list because there's something wrong with that.
I just can't for the life problem, it was the problem.
Speaker 5 (06:39):
The problem I understand is what happened under the last
National government is when they put in these goals of
how many elective surgeries they need to meet. One of them,
for example, is cataracts, which is really easy to do
it to quick one so you can show very quickly
that you get high numbers because it doesn't specify which
what is the electric surgery. So under the last National
(06:59):
government we saw that being used to tick the box
for reducing weight lists for elective sujeries majority of those
with cataracts, which let me finish. Let me finish, because cataracts,
because it's not knees or hips and they're the main things.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
But that's sort of off the subjects as well.
Speaker 6 (07:17):
If somebody is being used for low level performing operations
and they're reducing waiting lists and people are getting what
they want, who do what it is where it's done.
Speaker 5 (07:28):
No, it's not, because it's other things cataracts are not
important as knees and hips, which are mobility. And who
see the quality of life?
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Who says we.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
Who are waiting three years for a knee or hip operation.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
We see targets and you ballish them. So we do
set targets because we think that we should.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Because they're not targets driving them because I.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Think, because I think when you set targets, it does
drive outcomes and it provides accountability. You scrapped all the targets.
We've put targets back in place. I think that's a
good thing. I've done that with raw and or as well.
But the reality of it is the labor governments. It's
a philosophical thing, like to say, with their education system.
They want us to be like the Soviet They want
to they want us to be like a Soviet term
(08:06):
Russian everything.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Your question, though, Jenny, do you as as as an individual,
just doesn't it? Is that do you care if you
get your knee operation in a private hospital or a
public hospital? Do you care?
Speaker 5 (08:19):
At the point is, though, Mike, is that what is
the quality of the public system and if it's used
to erode the quality of service in our hospitals, which
we see in you don't have doctors, we don't have newses.
We need to invece war into the service.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
In the meantime, this is all I'm trying to get
to the bottom. In the meantime. If I get wrung
up and saying, Mike, your knee operations next Tuesday at
a private facility, who cares?
Speaker 5 (08:45):
It really depends on what the operation is and whether
it's helping the wait list and if it if it is,
I see in the heart. I see in the heart
people with the services.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Like private medical provision.
Speaker 5 (08:58):
It's because it's used to fudge the box.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
It's a socialist view of the world.
Speaker 3 (09:03):
More people depending on the government, keep everything the same,
embrace mediocrity.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
Don't sit targets.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
And that's what under socialist goverments, that's what happens, that
you drive towards mediocrity.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Right. So I know that Mike, I've got.
Speaker 3 (09:17):
Norcial Hospital is my local hospital for my electorate, and
I want to do a shout out to them, because
I know that health is in the media a lot.
I get that, but the staff and there are quite
simply outstanding. And the feedback that I get from my
own constituents when they have to go to hospital. Is
the service they get as it about public health services?
Speaker 5 (09:37):
Morning this morning, isn't it. The problem we do have, though,
is that there was no extra money and the budget
at all for health services and the population has increased
and health complexities.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Have been a massive increase in the budget.
Speaker 4 (09:50):
Not for health, not for for health.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Absolutely not money.
Speaker 4 (09:56):
The hospital and hospital under the last time.
Speaker 5 (10:02):
It was the cancer drugs. You didn't pay for it
in the last budget that was funded by this one.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Which one of you, which one of you is inviting
me to the pint of order?
Speaker 2 (10:12):
The point you to that? Absolutely?
Speaker 3 (10:15):
See as how I didn't come on the show yesterday.
I can make up for it by taking you to
the point.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Do you not know what the pint of order is?
Speaker 5 (10:20):
Jenny, I don't think I don't know. It's in your pub.
It's exactly in the I snack in there when it's
not funny, you go, I've got to tell. But I
saw a workman in yet and I said, can I
have a luck? And he said sure. He was from
Cape Town. He was very nice and he gave me
a little tour.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Not an labor Johnny, not another migrant. Goodness, he was
lovely guy.
Speaker 5 (10:38):
He had lots to say about the National Party to Italy.
He wasn't a National supporter. I can tell you that
I've got the plumbing stone very well.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
He showed me what he doesn't look good.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
It's quite small the cap that's read so Mark going
like that. But it looks quite lovely. It's the sort
of tiling almost Elfrisco type tiling and are and it
looks really pretty.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Did they have always put some ruggs?
Speaker 3 (11:03):
We put some rugs read some very alarm color so
you can cover that up.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Did they have a priist?
Speaker 5 (11:09):
Mike will be rolling around on the floor anyway.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
All right, nice, nice to see you guys, Jilly Anderson,
Mark Mitchell. The Pint of Order, by the way, is
the pub that's been closed ever since they expanded Parliament
buildings for new offices. And that's been finished and as
of Tuesday, the Pint of Order is going to be
open for business, not for you and I just for them.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
For more from the My Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.
Jinny Anderson and Mark Mitchell for Politics Wednesday. Good morning
to you both.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Good morning, Mike, morning Jenny.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Now brought a broad subject that you both will have
dealt with in your ministerial roles over the time. Now, Mark,
you weren't on this program yesterday when there I suggest
you needed to be when all of this, this this
retail crime stuff was breaking and there were memos flying
all over the place, and the police weren't looking at
you know, small time crime anymore. And we rang your
office and we were told Mark's not doing any more
interviews on the subject. Now, what one, What the hell
(00:26):
does that mean? And where were you and why aren't
you more accountable on this stuff given you you hung
your hat on crime and getting it down.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Well, I didn't. I didn't.
Speaker 3 (00:35):
I didn't have visibility on that. If I knew that
you wanted to come on the show would have come immediately.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
I was on with Kerry, I was on with Heather.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
So office that's blocking you because this is bollocks, because
we're having the same and I won't bore you guys
with it, but I'll do it after eight thirty. We're
having the same problem with the Prime Minister at the
moment and this all these little people running around an
officer gar I'm sorry, the monster is not available at
that time of the day, I think tells that about.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Well, the only the only thing that I can put
it down to is because all the media requests that
I got you today, I went on, I wasn't aware
of this one. But maybe there's a decision made because
I was meeting with all my local Saint John's leadership,
and it's possible that I depend on what time you
asked that I was in a meeting with them, because
I did meet and spend the morning with them yesterday.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
But here's my thing and what we always say, and
we're doing this with the Prime Minster at the moment,
I'm here at three in the morning, available anytime. You're like, mate,
we'll pre record it from three in the morning. And
you can't tell me there's a single minister in any
government anyone in the world you know, is not available
or busy at three o'clock in the morning. So there's
something going on with your comms and government. And for you,
this doesn't look good because we had to explain you
weren't doing interviews and you weren't available and on a
(01:39):
subjects that's critical for you.
Speaker 3 (01:42):
Look, I agree with you entirely, and I have to
say that my entire time as police minister. I don't
I think I've missed maybe one or two interviews because
I've been tied up or been traveling. I do every
media request I get, I front up to because I
think part of democracy we need to do that. I
don't know what happened yesterday. I apologize for that.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
I hadn't done apologies and I don't want I don't
want to make this about me, and it's like, I'm
so important, you must front up. All I'm saying is
from your you guys point of view, and you would
understand this journey when you've said what you've said about
retail crime and what was unfolding yesterday. You need to
be front and center on that, don't you.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
Yeah, I think that I think she would have. I
think you Cholly Checks might have hit the rob button again.
Speaker 4 (02:23):
But look, no, I'm here, I'm here, I.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
Am here, and I thought he was asking you. I thought,
not me.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
No, I just I just say, might I agree with
you? You do have to front up.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
I did.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
I did front up to all the media. I don't
know what happened with yours. I'll go back and find out.
You've got my number.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
You text me.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
No, that's that's that's for another day. I guess, Jenny,
do you have any sympathy on this? I mean, more importantly,
I suppose is by the time Chambers fronted up yesterday
we seem to have an answer or are you not
convinced with the answer.
Speaker 5 (02:52):
I'm not convinced with the answer. The person whose response
was a superintendent that's very high up in police. So
even Sunny Crew, whose Mark's head of Retail Crime group,
as skeptical about what the order is for it to
be that high up the chain, and a memo given
out as indicative that there is real pressure on the
front line to be able to investigate these crimes.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
But having said, do we get an answer, Mark, because
the words were there in a memo and that doesn't
seem to doubtail with what you promise the people of
this country poorlywooded memo.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Both both myself and the Commission have been very clear
about that. We've also been very clear that no, there
are no threesholds that if a member of the public
reports a crime regardless of the value of it, there'll
be a police response.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Now, they've always had to trios.
Speaker 3 (03:40):
They've always had to prioritize because there is only so
many frontline police officers and they have to work out
and prioritize around the serious of the job. There's risks
to someone's you know, there's risk of harm, so that's
always happened, but we've been very clear that there's no threesholds.
The police are doing an outstanding job and they make
nomous We had a big mountain to climb. As the
(04:01):
incoming government, we'll be focused on retail violent retail crime.
We've seen some good success there, but we're also focusing
on the nonviolent retail crime that can't be solved entirely
by itself by police. We're working with the stakeholders with
the retail sector that we're doing some really good work
around there. Sonny Kelshall and his group means forward some
very very good advice around additional powers and things that
(04:24):
we can do to help them facial recognition, food stuffs
around an outstanding trial on that that's been very successful.
So there's lots of things that are happening in that
space to make sure that we're a safer country and
that retail employees can go to their workplace and not
feel threatened.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
All right, Ginny your comment, I.
Speaker 5 (04:41):
Was just interested to know why the memo was written
in the first place. It's superintendent within police with very
specific amounts of money that have been obviously talked about
and decided that doesn't just materialize that a funny. I mean,
where did that come from and why did it occur?
Speaker 3 (04:58):
Well, I mean the simple So there's that You've got
to like all of our police officers, including our senior
police leadership, they're trying to do the best that they can.
They're trying to provide the best possible service to the public,
and of course they have to be able to manage resources.
Probably the problem with that memos that everyone agrees that
it was poorly worded and it left the impression that
there's going to be thresholds around response by police and
(05:21):
both myself.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
That's a question though, Mark from Jet why put a
number on it? Because all it does, I suspect, unfortunately,
is confirm what most people would believe, rightly or wrongly,
that if it's not worth much value, you're never going
to see the cops.
Speaker 5 (05:34):
And people know that already, right, people know that under
a certain amount is really hard to get placed to
turn that. So, I mean, I don't accept the word
it was poorly wounded. It's pretty clear what it said.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
That's nothing new.
Speaker 3 (05:45):
And as the incoming policemanness, so that had been happening
under the previous government.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Quite simply.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
What we're trying to do is we're trying to free
up those resources. We've got the police head a sixty
percent increase in attending mental health callouts.
Speaker 2 (05:57):
Many of those they don't need to be at.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
It needs a proper health response to so time we've
free up resource so they can actually get to these events.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Genny, let me ask you this, this, this, and it
seems to be perpetrated by you guys and as far
as I can work out radio in New Zealand, but
this obsession you guys have with having elective operations in
private hospitals, what's wrong with that?
Speaker 5 (06:17):
That's one of the blue Well you guys being on
and on and on about it.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Suddenly you know elective elective surgery because the public health
system is the way it is, and because you should
have staff, and because you can't get so you're you're
sending some stuff out to private hospitals. Elective operations are
being done in private hospitals and all of a sudden,
all Health's breaking list because there's something wrong with that.
I just can't for the life problem, it was the problem.
Speaker 5 (06:39):
The problem I understand is what happened under the last
National government is when they put in these goals of
how many elective surgeries they need to meet. One of them,
for example, is cataracts, which is really easy to do
it to quick one so you can show very quickly
that you get high numbers because it doesn't specify which
what is the electric surgery. So under the last National
(06:59):
government we saw that being used to tick the box
for reducing weight lists for elective sujeries majority of those
with cataracts, which let me finish. Let me finish, because cataracts,
because it's not knees or hips and they're the main things.
Speaker 1 (07:14):
But that's sort of off the subjects as well.
Speaker 6 (07:17):
If somebody is being used for low level performing operations
and they're reducing waiting lists and people are getting what
they want, who do what it is where it's done.
Speaker 5 (07:28):
No, it's not, because it's other things cataracts are not
important as knees and hips, which are mobility. And who
see the quality of life?
Speaker 2 (07:35):
Who says we.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
Who are waiting three years for a knee or hip operation.
Speaker 2 (07:40):
We see targets and you ballish them. So we do
set targets because we think that we should.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
Because they're not targets driving them because I.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Think, because I think when you set targets, it does
drive outcomes and it provides accountability. You scrapped all the targets.
We've put targets back in place. I think that's a
good thing. I've done that with raw and or as well.
But the reality of it is the labor governments. It's
a philosophical thing, like to say, with their education system.
They want us to be like the Soviet They want
to they want us to be like a Soviet term
(08:06):
Russian everything.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Your question, though, Jenny, do you as as as an individual,
just doesn't it? Is that do you care if you
get your knee operation in a private hospital or a
public hospital? Do you care?
Speaker 5 (08:19):
At the point is, though, Mike, is that what is
the quality of the public system and if it's used
to erode the quality of service in our hospitals, which
we see in you don't have doctors, we don't have newses.
We need to invece war into the service.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
In the meantime, this is all I'm trying to get
to the bottom. In the meantime. If I get wrung
up and saying, Mike, your knee operations next Tuesday at
a private facility, who cares?
Speaker 5 (08:45):
It really depends on what the operation is and whether
it's helping the wait list and if it if it is,
I see in the heart. I see in the heart
people with the services.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Like private medical provision.
Speaker 5 (08:58):
It's because it's used to fudge the box.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
It's a socialist view of the world.
Speaker 3 (09:03):
More people depending on the government, keep everything the same,
embrace mediocrity.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
Don't sit targets.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
And that's what under socialist goverments, that's what happens, that
you drive towards mediocrity.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Right. So I know that Mike, I've got.
Speaker 3 (09:17):
Norcial Hospital is my local hospital for my electorate, and
I want to do a shout out to them, because
I know that health is in the media a lot.
I get that, but the staff and there are quite
simply outstanding. And the feedback that I get from my
own constituents when they have to go to hospital. Is
the service they get as it about public health services?
Speaker 5 (09:37):
Morning this morning, isn't it. The problem we do have, though,
is that there was no extra money and the budget
at all for health services and the population has increased
and health complexities.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Have been a massive increase in the budget.
Speaker 4 (09:50):
Not for health, not for for health.
Speaker 2 (09:52):
Absolutely not money.
Speaker 4 (09:56):
The hospital and hospital under the last time.
Speaker 5 (10:02):
It was the cancer drugs. You didn't pay for it
in the last budget that was funded by this one.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Which one of you, which one of you is inviting
me to the pint of order?
Speaker 2 (10:12):
The point you to that? Absolutely?
Speaker 3 (10:15):
See as how I didn't come on the show yesterday.
I can make up for it by taking you to
the point.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Do you not know what the pint of order is?
Speaker 5 (10:20):
Jenny, I don't think I don't know. It's in your pub.
It's exactly in the I snack in there when it's
not funny, you go, I've got to tell. But I
saw a workman in yet and I said, can I
have a luck? And he said sure. He was from
Cape Town. He was very nice and he gave me
a little tour.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Not an labor Johnny, not another migrant. Goodness, he was
lovely guy.
Speaker 5 (10:38):
He had lots to say about the National Party to Italy.
He wasn't a National supporter. I can tell you that
I've got the plumbing stone very well.
Speaker 1 (10:47):
He showed me what he doesn't look good.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
It's quite small the cap that's read so Mark going
like that. But it looks quite lovely. It's the sort
of tiling almost Elfrisco type tiling and are and it
looks really pretty.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Did they have always put some ruggs?
Speaker 3 (11:03):
We put some rugs read some very alarm color so
you can cover that up.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Did they have a priist?
Speaker 5 (11:09):
Mike will be rolling around on the floor anyway.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
All right, nice, nice to see you guys, Jilly Anderson,
Mark Mitchell. The Pint of Order, by the way, is
the pub that's been closed ever since they expanded Parliament
buildings for new offices. And that's been finished and as
of Tuesday, the Pint of Order is going to be
open for business, not for you and I just for them.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
For more from the My Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news talks.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
It'd be from six am 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.
Boysober
Have you ever wondered what life might be like if you stopped worrying about being wanted, and focused on understanding what you actually want? That was the question Hope Woodard asked herself after a string of situationships inspired her to take a break from sex and dating. She went "boysober," a personal concept that sparked a global movement among women looking to prioritize themselves over men. Now, Hope is looking to expand the ways we explore our relationship to relationships. Taking a bold, unfiltered look into modern love, romance, and self-discovery, Boysober will dive into messy stories about dating, sex, love, friendship, and breaking generational patterns—all with humor, vulnerability, and a fresh perspective.
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