June 11, 2024 • 9 mins
Tonight on The Huddle, Jordan Williams from the Taxpayers' Union 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!
It's been revealed agriculture will be taken off the Emissions Trading Scheme. Is this the right call for New Zealand's emissions profile?
Waikato authorities have offered 80,000 to finally find the missing Marokopa father and children. Will this help flush out anyone with information?
Labour's Chris Hipkins has pulled ahead in the latest Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll, and National is lagging. How much should voters read into this? Can the coalition turn public opinion around?
Labour's Kieran McAnulty raised a few eyebrows for claiming a political housing perk to live in his wife's apartment - is it time we scrapped this entitlement for MPs?
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):
The huddle with New Zealand. Southby's international realty unparalleled reach
and results.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm the huddle with us this evening. We've go Jordan
Williams of the Taxpayers Union and Jack Tame, host of
Saturday Mornings in Q and a lads, Hello, Jordan. Big
news for the farmers today because they don't have to
pay for their emissions. Do you think it's a smart move.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Well, it's a huge win for the fed farmers, beef
and lands as ground swell, et cetera, et cetera. Yes,
huge win. And I mean it is stupid that we'd
shoot ourselves in the foot and say, look, you New
Zealand farmers need to pay for agricultural emissions when no
one else in the world is the kill comes back
to New Zealand. It hass a third world style emissions
(00:40):
profile and then it's you know, the big, the bigger,
we're bigger misss of methane, but we've signed on to
first world carbon agreements. It is a real problem from
an economic perspective and a tax paising perspective. We don't
We're pretty uncomfortable with the government playing favorites in terms
of industry and the eat yes. Of course, these other
industries that are internationally competitive having to pay under easy Yes,
(01:05):
why should agriculture be different. But it deppends if you
take a purist approach or a you're on the side
of farmers. But certainly what it's been about three years
of hard work for those organizations and today they.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Won't Jackie, are you going to say what I think
you're going to say?
Speaker 4 (01:21):
What do you think I'm going to say?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
A smart move?
Speaker 4 (01:25):
No, I think it was an entirely predictable move. I mean,
I you know it does feel you love it? Well,
I mean it feels like a predictable move in that
in that I think Hewak was looking pretty dead. And
I mean the associate minister you now have you know,
contributing to the government's position on these issues, was themselves
(01:45):
vehemently opposed having been part of that you love, I
love what smart move? Now, I didn't say it was
a smart move? Well, I mean, I think at some
point we do have to reckon with our with the
role that methane plays. And Jordan's I mean made an
interesting comment right, says we've signed up to these international
agreements regarding carbon but in a sense we have a
(02:07):
third world emissions profile because methane makes up so much
of our emissions profile. But of course that the current
zero commitments that we have don't include methane. They do,
they do include a significant reduction, but it's a band
for reduction and methane and in lieu of anything any
technologies to bring down our methane reductions that have yet
been proven. I do think it's going to be a
(02:29):
challenge for future generations to face. And I do find
it interesting that so often the industry position on this
is one of leakage, right, Like, if New Zealand starts
charging methane then you know, charging for methane emissions, then
that that industry will move overseas. I looked up the
climate courses and stuff, because they did a big report
on this, and consequently, the risk of leakage does not
(02:53):
appear high enough to provide a convincing argument for New
Zealand not to implement solitay to reduce its own emissions. So,
I mean, they don't take the Climate Change Commission.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
But here's own report said that leakage was going to
be significant.
Speaker 3 (03:10):
Yeah, but that's industry lead, right, No, it was joined
that was a point of rocket you know, we're you know,
we're together. The other point that the farmers would look on.
I arrived at field days this afternoon. We're over the
next few days, and so I'm going to fit to
put the farmer's head on here. One of the problems
with methane, and it's a it's a valid argument that
no one's really tackled, is that, unlike CEO two, it
(03:33):
breaks down in twenty years. So if you can make
the argument that as long as you're not producing more
methane than we were twenty years ago, we are actually neutral.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Yeah, which is a fair point, Jack.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
It breaks It breaks down in twenty years. But but
but let me ask does it do Does it have
more or less of a warming effect than those twin.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
More of a warming effect? But as long as you're
not producing more.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
No, but Jack saying you're only replacing what you were
doing two, you're neutral.
Speaker 4 (04:00):
That fast a young But it's not. It's hardly met
zero though, is it.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
As long as you're not producing more, you're you're only
producing what's breaking down. You're not having a net warming effect.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
My point is it's not net zero, which is which
is which is to go back to your initial points
around the international targets we're signed up to. It's not
neat zero, it's less than what.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
We might Now I'm going to confuse Jack, because now
I feel like you don't think it's a good idea.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
I don't think what's a good idea.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Making the farmers taking the farmers out of the ets.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
No all, I'm saying, I'm.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Just trying to get you off.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
You've got your bum pricked on in.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Lieu of another option. I think this is going to
be an issue that at some point we have to
reckon with. We're going to fall out of step with
when it comes to when it comes to our missions profile.
It's not to say that ECONO was necessarily going to
be the best option, but it is to say that
I think future generations are probably going to have to
reckon with this in some ways.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Maybe they calm down, Jack, there's an alternative.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
There is an alternative that.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
Can actually do anything about that.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
There's an alternative which is that actually everybody just calms
the farm and realizes climate change may not be priority
number one.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Will the huddle with New Zealand Southerby's International Realty Exceptional
Marketing for every property.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
All right, we're back of the huddle, Jack, Tam Jordan Williams. Jack,
do you reckon eighty k is enough to get someone
to knarck on that missing Dad and matter corps? I
would for eighty k just put that out there.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
I think it probably is. If indeed there are people
who have information which they think they could find them with,
then yep, I reckon, I reckon eighty K is probably
worth it to someone.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Yeah, I mean, children, you could buy yourself a nice
high Lucks and still have money left over.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
You'd have to have a heck of a lot of
loyalty to be involved in sheltering the scare that poor
poor family.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
True.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Hey, listen, while I've got your Jordan on that pole today,
do you reckon? Because you're responsible for this, I need
to say that you guys pay for this pole? Do
you reckon? The Coalition government will ever really improve their popularity?
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Well, Bulger was never particularly popular, and yet you know
I had a had at least the first three years
of that government was pretty successful. I mean, the thing
that I'm worried about is not a huge amount of movement.
You know, I'm not going to do a Mikey Sherman
and jump up and down and say this is the
best pole ever. But it is the first of the
major polls post budget. Not a hell of a heat
(06:24):
of a lot of movement. I thought that the hero
saying that it was some shock for the Gnats, well
it was. It's all margin of era stuff. I thought
it was significant the Maray Party were up a bit
that you know that then they actually moved more than
than the competence into it or the margin of era.
It does suggest, though the NATS didn't move a lot
of votes with that budget. And as I said to
(06:47):
our donors that get the full report, that the concerning
thing is is the sort of breakdown on confidence of
the two major parties on the various issues the NATS
or this government's really you're going to have to do
a heat of a lot more than or do some
actual reform deliver will convince your electorate at in two
and a half years time. But they delivered the change
(07:08):
of direction or brighter future, whatever you want to call us.
Because simply managing it to suggest that you know the
public is losing faith.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Yeah, what do you reckon?
Speaker 4 (07:19):
Jack?
Speaker 2 (07:19):
It's going to take for them to get popular.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
I think a period of sustained economic growth that we're
unlikely to have for at least twelve months. I mean,
I just cannot see them massively improving their popularity stakes
until the economy starts notably turning for the better. And
I think that would honestly be the same regardless of
what parties were in government. Right now, it's just so
bleak for so many Kiwis. And look, maybe they'll see
(07:44):
a very kind of small bump once people start noticing
that the tax cuts in their in their take home pay.
But honestly, I think regardless of who is in government
for at least the next twelve months, they'd be facing
a pretty tough time.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Probably, So listen, Jordan, I think there's nothing wrong technically
with MP's claiming an accommodation allowance like Karen mcinnaughty for
living in properties that they themselves or their wives own
or whatever. But the perception is wrong, and I just
wonder if we need to change the rules just for
that perception. What do you think?
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Yeah, we had a long debate the last few days,
and think there was in that MP a few days ago,
you know, living in a TACKI and you know, finishing
at ten thirty and you know, and the PM is saying,
you know he's going to be back at work at seven. Well,
I mean, come on, I mean a hotel two nights
a week would would be a heck of a lot
cheaper than the entitlement. And then now you've got and
it's actually it's a pox on the wallhouses. Well, you
(08:36):
know you got from Willie Jackson through I'm sure there's
that VMPs to do it too, that they buy the
house and then pay themselves the accommodation allowed so they
can pay their own mortgage. It's irrelevant whether it's owned
by the wife or the MP. But it just like
we didn't come out and have a go at it.
But it feels it's a pretty bad stinch to it,
(08:58):
isn't it? Because no one else. I mean I traveled
to Wellington almost every week. But at the idea that
my employer would would pay me at an allowance to
be in Wellington and I'd own the apartment down there
and pay the mortgage, I think, come on, that's that's
taking Okay, thank.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
You you've given me a sense check on it, because yeah,
I think even though the rules are the rules and
I understand why just the thing feels off. Guys, thank
you so much, Jack, Tam, Jordan Williams a huddle seven
Away from six
Speaker 1 (09:23):
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
The huddle with New Zealand. Southby's international realty unparalleled reach
and results.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm the huddle with us this evening. We've go Jordan
Williams of the Taxpayers Union and Jack Tame, host of
Saturday Mornings in Q and a lads, Hello, Jordan. Big
news for the farmers today because they don't have to
pay for their emissions. Do you think it's a smart move.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
Well, it's a huge win for the fed farmers, beef
and lands as ground swell, et cetera, et cetera. Yes,
huge win. And I mean it is stupid that we'd
shoot ourselves in the foot and say, look, you New
Zealand farmers need to pay for agricultural emissions when no
one else in the world is the kill comes back
to New Zealand. It hass a third world style emissions
(00:40):
profile and then it's you know, the big, the bigger,
we're bigger misss of methane, but we've signed on to
first world carbon agreements. It is a real problem from
an economic perspective and a tax paising perspective. We don't
We're pretty uncomfortable with the government playing favorites in terms
of industry and the eat yes. Of course, these other
industries that are internationally competitive having to pay under easy Yes,
(01:05):
why should agriculture be different. But it deppends if you
take a purist approach or a you're on the side
of farmers. But certainly what it's been about three years
of hard work for those organizations and today they.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Won't Jackie, are you going to say what I think
you're going to say?
Speaker 4 (01:21):
What do you think I'm going to say?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
A smart move?
Speaker 4 (01:25):
No, I think it was an entirely predictable move. I mean,
I you know it does feel you love it? Well,
I mean it feels like a predictable move in that
in that I think Hewak was looking pretty dead. And
I mean the associate minister you now have you know,
contributing to the government's position on these issues, was themselves
(01:45):
vehemently opposed having been part of that you love, I
love what smart move? Now, I didn't say it was
a smart move? Well, I mean, I think at some
point we do have to reckon with our with the
role that methane plays. And Jordan's I mean made an
interesting comment right, says we've signed up to these international
agreements regarding carbon but in a sense we have a
(02:07):
third world emissions profile because methane makes up so much
of our emissions profile. But of course that the current
zero commitments that we have don't include methane. They do,
they do include a significant reduction, but it's a band
for reduction and methane and in lieu of anything any
technologies to bring down our methane reductions that have yet
been proven. I do think it's going to be a
(02:29):
challenge for future generations to face. And I do find
it interesting that so often the industry position on this
is one of leakage, right, Like, if New Zealand starts
charging methane then you know, charging for methane emissions, then
that that industry will move overseas. I looked up the
climate courses and stuff, because they did a big report
on this, and consequently, the risk of leakage does not
(02:53):
appear high enough to provide a convincing argument for New
Zealand not to implement solitay to reduce its own emissions. So,
I mean, they don't take the Climate Change Commission.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
But here's own report said that leakage was going to
be significant.
Speaker 3 (03:10):
Yeah, but that's industry lead, right, No, it was joined
that was a point of rocket you know, we're you know,
we're together. The other point that the farmers would look on.
I arrived at field days this afternoon. We're over the
next few days, and so I'm going to fit to
put the farmer's head on here. One of the problems
with methane, and it's a it's a valid argument that
no one's really tackled, is that, unlike CEO two, it
(03:33):
breaks down in twenty years. So if you can make
the argument that as long as you're not producing more
methane than we were twenty years ago, we are actually neutral.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
Yeah, which is a fair point, Jack.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
It breaks It breaks down in twenty years. But but
but let me ask does it do Does it have
more or less of a warming effect than those twin.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
More of a warming effect? But as long as you're
not producing more.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
No, but Jack saying you're only replacing what you were
doing two, you're neutral.
Speaker 4 (04:00):
That fast a young But it's not. It's hardly met
zero though, is it.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
As long as you're not producing more, you're you're only
producing what's breaking down. You're not having a net warming effect.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
My point is it's not net zero, which is which
is which is to go back to your initial points
around the international targets we're signed up to. It's not
neat zero, it's less than what.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
We might Now I'm going to confuse Jack, because now
I feel like you don't think it's a good idea.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
I don't think what's a good idea.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Making the farmers taking the farmers out of the ets.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
No all, I'm saying, I'm.
Speaker 1 (04:34):
Just trying to get you off.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
You've got your bum pricked on in.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
Lieu of another option. I think this is going to
be an issue that at some point we have to
reckon with. We're going to fall out of step with
when it comes to when it comes to our missions profile.
It's not to say that ECONO was necessarily going to
be the best option, but it is to say that
I think future generations are probably going to have to
reckon with this in some ways.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
Maybe they calm down, Jack, there's an alternative.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
There is an alternative that.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
Can actually do anything about that.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
There's an alternative which is that actually everybody just calms
the farm and realizes climate change may not be priority
number one.
Speaker 1 (05:11):
Will the huddle with New Zealand Southerby's International Realty Exceptional
Marketing for every property.
Speaker 2 (05:17):
All right, we're back of the huddle, Jack, Tam Jordan Williams. Jack,
do you reckon eighty k is enough to get someone
to knarck on that missing Dad and matter corps? I
would for eighty k just put that out there.
Speaker 4 (05:26):
I think it probably is. If indeed there are people
who have information which they think they could find them with,
then yep, I reckon, I reckon eighty K is probably
worth it to someone.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
Yeah, I mean, children, you could buy yourself a nice
high Lucks and still have money left over.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
You'd have to have a heck of a lot of
loyalty to be involved in sheltering the scare that poor
poor family.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
True.
Speaker 2 (05:49):
Hey, listen, while I've got your Jordan on that pole today,
do you reckon? Because you're responsible for this, I need
to say that you guys pay for this pole? Do
you reckon? The Coalition government will ever really improve their popularity?
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Well, Bulger was never particularly popular, and yet you know
I had a had at least the first three years
of that government was pretty successful. I mean, the thing
that I'm worried about is not a huge amount of movement.
You know, I'm not going to do a Mikey Sherman
and jump up and down and say this is the
best pole ever. But it is the first of the
major polls post budget. Not a hell of a heat
(06:24):
of a lot of movement. I thought that the hero
saying that it was some shock for the Gnats, well
it was. It's all margin of era stuff. I thought
it was significant the Maray Party were up a bit
that you know that then they actually moved more than
than the competence into it or the margin of era.
It does suggest, though the NATS didn't move a lot
of votes with that budget. And as I said to
(06:47):
our donors that get the full report, that the concerning
thing is is the sort of breakdown on confidence of
the two major parties on the various issues the NATS
or this government's really you're going to have to do
a heat of a lot more than or do some
actual reform deliver will convince your electorate at in two
and a half years time. But they delivered the change
(07:08):
of direction or brighter future, whatever you want to call us.
Because simply managing it to suggest that you know the
public is losing faith.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Yeah, what do you reckon?
Speaker 4 (07:19):
Jack?
Speaker 2 (07:19):
It's going to take for them to get popular.
Speaker 4 (07:22):
I think a period of sustained economic growth that we're
unlikely to have for at least twelve months. I mean,
I just cannot see them massively improving their popularity stakes
until the economy starts notably turning for the better. And
I think that would honestly be the same regardless of
what parties were in government. Right now, it's just so
bleak for so many Kiwis. And look, maybe they'll see
(07:44):
a very kind of small bump once people start noticing
that the tax cuts in their in their take home pay.
But honestly, I think regardless of who is in government
for at least the next twelve months, they'd be facing
a pretty tough time.
Speaker 3 (07:58):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:58):
Probably, So listen, Jordan, I think there's nothing wrong technically
with MP's claiming an accommodation allowance like Karen mcinnaughty for
living in properties that they themselves or their wives own
or whatever. But the perception is wrong, and I just
wonder if we need to change the rules just for
that perception. What do you think?
Speaker 3 (08:13):
Yeah, we had a long debate the last few days,
and think there was in that MP a few days ago,
you know, living in a TACKI and you know, finishing
at ten thirty and you know, and the PM is saying,
you know he's going to be back at work at seven. Well,
I mean, come on, I mean a hotel two nights
a week would would be a heck of a lot
cheaper than the entitlement. And then now you've got and
it's actually it's a pox on the wallhouses. Well, you
(08:36):
know you got from Willie Jackson through I'm sure there's
that VMPs to do it too, that they buy the
house and then pay themselves the accommodation allowed so they
can pay their own mortgage. It's irrelevant whether it's owned
by the wife or the MP. But it just like
we didn't come out and have a go at it.
But it feels it's a pretty bad stinch to it,
(08:58):
isn't it? Because no one else. I mean I traveled
to Wellington almost every week. But at the idea that
my employer would would pay me at an allowance to
be in Wellington and I'd own the apartment down there
and pay the mortgage, I think, come on, that's that's
taking Okay, thank.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
You you've given me a sense check on it, because yeah,
I think even though the rules are the rules and
I understand why just the thing feels off. Guys, thank
you so much, Jack, Tam, Jordan Williams a huddle seven
Away from six
Speaker 1 (09:23):
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
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.
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
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!