John MacDonald was joined by National’s Matt Doocey and Labour’s Reuben Davidson for Politics Friday.
They discussed whether the Government should intervene on the replanting regulations for pine trees on the Port Hills after the multiple intense blazes.
It’s been an emotional week in Parliament with the release of the Abuse in Care Report, so what needs to happen now? And, can we really get our response to mental health and addiction services back on track?
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 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talks'd be.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
So later on after eleven, we're going to talk about
the Olympic Games and what sports you only watch during
the Olympics but you have no interest or pay any
attention to in the time between the four years between
there's a four Where was it? How us a politicians?
It's four years? Is it the Olympics? Four years between them?
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
I understand that to be. What do you think, Reuben?
Speaker 4 (00:35):
Look, I couldcur I think four years sounds like a
good amount of time between.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
So it's longer than a parliamentary term.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Well, maybe parliament can learn from that if.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Only the Olympics seem to come around a lot quicker
than elections. Do it just drags on? You guys, just
get out.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
We have Winter Olympics too, you see and Commonwealth Game?
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Do we need a winter Parliament in the summer parliament? Well,
I've heard it? Good, Yeah, I don't How did that work?
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Well, let's think about the Olympics shift round every four years.
Do you think maybe Parliament could move round every four years?
I think it would do very well.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Out in the wy market, eding now I know how
some of parliament would work. Some aparliament. You have a
whole lot of tents outside. Oh that's been done before already.
Speaker 4 (01:16):
I think what would have been good as if this
current current government had been all done and dusted as
quickly as in the I want to.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Say, Ruben knows what it's like to lose in a hurry.
He saw last last year.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
So he's so he labors the rugby sevens.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
That's right?
Speaker 2 (01:32):
And does that make does that make you? The Ferns
Labor was flying a drone around trying tonic all your ideas,
rub but actually.
Speaker 4 (01:42):
Been driving drone through the opening ceremony of of this
national government's Olympic Games or Olympic or political term just
involved a lot of people walking around with scissors cutting
as many vital services as they could. And they're laughing about.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
It, butughing about it.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
That's outrageous.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
Just on that hold list of topics and we haven't
touch one of them. Just on the Olympics. Do you
know what do you know the thing I use I'm
not gonna use the word hate, but the thing I
dislike most about the Olympics, what do you reckon?
Speaker 1 (02:16):
It is.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
John you'd dislike a lot of things, so I couldn't
narrow it.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Down the drawn out opening ceremonies. If I was the
rugby sevens and I was out of the whole thing,
I'd be thinking, oh, great, that gets us out of
the opening ceremony. Possibly I find those things.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
But do you know what's good in a liberal democracy? John,
you have the power and the choice to turn your
TV to not watch.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
That's amazing. All right? What about you, Reuben? Do you
like the opening ceremonies?
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Look, I actually really love the Olympics. I think it's
one of those great things that because it only comes
around every four years, it's a real opportunity for us
to watch things we wouldn't normally watch. Yes, but it's
also an opportunity for us to see ourselves on the
world stage. It's an opportunity for us to see a
whole bunch of amazing spectacles and human achievement. And depending
(03:05):
where it's it's also an opportunity to wake up incredibly
early in the morning or stay up very late at
night and watch.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
Television exactly right. Pine plantations, Do you reckon the porthills
is a place for pine trees? Matt Doocy.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Well, I suppose what we have in New Zealand is
private property rights. It's for people to decide the use
of their land. Surely there has to be some controls.
I think what you're alluding to is the propensity for
fires on the porthills, and clearly I think forests can
contribute to that, but ultimately I think it's a decision
(03:42):
for the land owner to comply with fire protections and
ensure that fire barriers and other protections are in place.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Well that's the issue, though, is that the councils in
christ Church actually don't share that view of yours. And
they've been to the government, they've been to the Forestryman's
wanting some changes in the forestry regulations, and here has
come back and said, and in some ways quite rightly,
we don't want to tink it with the rules just
to make it suit christ Church. But I think that
what the councils need to do now is go to
your other cabinet colleague, the Climate Change Minister, and present
(04:12):
the argument. Argument against more pines on the port hills
has been very consistent with your climate change strategy, which
talks about ecosystems that protect people's homes from the impacts
of climate change and talks about also more native forests.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Well, I think Todd McLay, who's the Forestry Minister, has
made it very clear that with the regulations we do
need national consistency and that's the issue here. I mean,
no surprise, we don't always agree with local government. And look,
you know there is an ability to look through the
lens through climate change. But equally, like I say, it
(04:47):
comes back to private property rights and very hard to
dictate to people what type of trees they planned. And
I'd take a step back and say, do we want
to live in a country where a government decides what
trees you have in the backyard. I think they've tried
draw I think they've tried that centralist planning and it failed.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
It's a long bow you're drawing there, isn't it. No,
we're not talking backyard.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
I believe in the principle of private property rights and
land use. Yeah, I mean there should be a framework.
I'm not saying it should be unfettered, but if we
have an issue around fires on the port Hills, I
think there should be able to be mitigations put in place.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
What do you think Reuben, what should happen?
Speaker 4 (05:29):
Well, for a start, I think we're very lucky this
morning that we've got the only Cabinet minister from the
South Island in the studio to talk about this issue,
because we do only have one, right Matt.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
There we do.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
Yeah, And I think what this highlights this issue in
particular is that there's been a plea here from Sam,
the mayor of Selwyn Fill, the mayor of christ Church,
and from the acting chair of our Regional Council to
Wellington and it has absolutely fallen on deaf ears.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
So you're saying Labor would have approved what they're asking for.
Speaker 4 (06:02):
No, not necessarily, But I'm saying I'm safe.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
What would labor have done well.
Speaker 4 (06:07):
I'm not sure of the exact specifics in this case.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Let's say, what are you're the Forestry minister, all right,
what would you have done?
Speaker 3 (06:13):
Well?
Speaker 4 (06:13):
I think what needs to be considered here is that
this is this is a very clear ask for support
here the impacts on it. One of the other impacts
we've got to look at here is what this does,
What this uncertainty does to property insurance premiums for those
(06:34):
people who live in that area. And we know that
insurance premiums are going up and up and up because
risks are being seen to be going up and up
and up. This is one of the huge pressures that
people are faced with. This is a fairly simple step
that central government could have taken to give some certainty
and ease some of that pressure, and it's falling on defeas.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
It must have been a pretty well, it was a
big day. Was it a heroin day? When the Abuse
and Care Inquiry report was tabled?
Speaker 3 (07:03):
Matte harrowing reading the reports and there's a somber day
in Parliament and you could literally feel the weight of
responsibility and expectation from the survivors in the gallery. I
(07:27):
thought the speeches in the house, we're a start. There's
a clear need for a response from governments over successive terms,
and there will be a.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Need to.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Look at what can be done immediately and also in
the longer term. I mean, for me, I've been saying
to people, when you read the reports, it's just the
evilness of individuals, but then how organizations enabled those individuals
(08:08):
as well. But then you're really confronted by how a
number of people came forward and how society just turned
their backs on them and how they were not heard,
and that is that is very confronting for the country.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
I think what do you think that does in relation
to trust? I mean that's a big point for me.
I think we are all direct and indirect victims of
this because trust was placed in people in organizations and
that trust was abuse. What do you think what do
you think it says about the future of trust in
these types of organizations in the future.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
Yeah, and that's that's a big question because clearly we
need to rebuild that trust. And it's not only the
apology that the Prime Minister will make on November the twelfth,
which is very important and it's been made very clear
by surviving is that they want to hear that apology.
(09:09):
There will be the redress as well around compensation and
ensuring appropriate services for the survivors as well. But a
big piece of work will be how do we ensure
we have a care system in New Zealand that is
not going to repeat that experience?
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Do you know, Reuben. One of the things in terms
of the list of what one hundred and thirty eight
recommendations I think there are report there's one of them.
The government's focusing on redress. Fine, no arguments for me
on that. The other one that needs to be prioritized.
But also at the same time, it astounds me that
this is still required to be a recommendation in twenty
twenty four, is that cares and staff, all cares and
(09:52):
staff are vetted. I mean that's incredible, because nothing's going
to change. All the strategies and reports and plans, they
will just be token if this vetting doesn't happen. I
can't believe that it has to be recommended to be
acted on. What's your reaction to that?
Speaker 4 (10:12):
Yeah, Look, I think I want to start by acknowledging,
as Matt has and have you and as you have John,
the weight of what took place in Parliament this Wednesday
and the point that that was, and also want to
thank those people who took part in that process for
their bravery and for their trust to step into that process,
(10:33):
because to engage with with with ultimately with the state
through that process takes a huge amount of courage, and
so I think it's important that we acknowledge that. And
the resounding message that came through through most of the
speeches in the House that afternoon was not just that
(10:55):
their experience and their stories were believed, but also that
that we will care as a government for the redress
of this. Some of those steps, as you as you've
been quite specific about, John, are really seemingly very straightforward,
right like vetting of people who work in the sector.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
But does it blow your way that even that is
seen as something that has to be acted on. You
would take that as a given, wouldn't you?
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Will?
Speaker 4 (11:25):
I would like to think that we would be able
to win twenty twenty four. But yeah, I mean, it's obviously,
it's obviously essential. There's a lot of work to do.
The important thing is that you know, we'll support the
government to move swiftly through the redress process. But also
worth looking at what these one hundred and thirty eight
(11:45):
recommendations are.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Okay, another one that's stood out to me in relation
to Gloria Veil, and it stood out for two reasons.
One the brevity of the reference to Glory Vale one
sentence in the report, and I'll go for remembering something
along the lines the government should take all practicable steps
to protect or maintain the safety of children and adults
at Gloria Vale. It seemed rather brief to me. The
(12:12):
other point, though, is you talk about and people have
talked about on Wednesday and since then, making sure this
sort of thing never happens again. This sort of thing
is happening right now at Gloria Vale. What should happen there?
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Yeah, well, there is investigations into Gloria Vale. It happened
to multiple government departments as well. It is before the courts,
so I need to be careful what I say as well.
But the reality is for all care organizations, we need
to take the recommendations and ensure that that is reflected
(12:50):
within care and that is going to be a big
piece of work. I'm comforted recently when you look at
the inclusion of independent advocates within our ke system who
can speak on people's behalf. That is a good example
(13:12):
of what we need to do more of to ensure
that people's rights are respected and reported on. But quite rightly,
the report shows that even when issues were raised, they
were not responded to as well, So there is a
lot of work to be done in those recommendations or before.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
We move on Ruben, do you think there is such
a thing as a practicable step that the state can
take to protect people in outfits like Gloria Ofvlle.
Speaker 4 (13:41):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think that's recommendation eighty eight right
of the one hundred and thirty eight, is that one
specifically speaking to Gloria Vail. I think what's disappointing to
see is that the government's already removed the Gloria of
Vale working group, a monitoring group, brother, and also removed
the modern slavery workforce work that was underway. And those
(14:02):
to me were two very ordinated collaborative processes that enabled
the monitoring and regulation that you speak of, Matt, to
take place specifically for Glory.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
They sound like a practical, a practicable step, don't they, Matt.
Speaker 3 (14:22):
Like I say, the agencies investigating Glory Vale and it
is before.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
The court, well we can find out what you think
about sandwich boards. You bang into them, trip over them.
I think we should be doing here what they're proposing
a Nelson getting rid of sandwich boards. So that's coming
up shortly. Stop laughing, guys, this w.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
Went politically correct these days to call them sandwiches.
Speaker 4 (14:43):
Well, I think as long as you can have a
gluten free sandwich.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Board, could you have a vegan sandwich board, absolutely organic
sandwich board.
Speaker 4 (14:52):
I can't see why not.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Okay, all right, brilliant, it's going to get very crowded
out there. We were talking, we were talking this week
about the harm caused by drugs. Drug use in New Zealand. Yes,
around twenty million bucks a week, so about a billion
dollars a year, alcohol eight billion, drugs one billion. You
would expect more harm to be caused though by a
(15:14):
legal drug. So a lot of conversations about well, what
do we do have we lost the battle and meth
is the real, the many, the nasty in terms of
the harm being caused. I saw this week that you
were talking about your your mental health or the government's
mental health and addiction targets. It's the addiction one that
I'm interested in. What do you think you can do
(15:36):
to address the harm that is caused by the likes
of myth?
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Well, the first thing I'd say is we need to
ensure we have timely access to support. But on saying that,
I'd premise it by saying we just don't want to
wait for people to have drug problems before they can
access support.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Okay, what about somebody rung there who wanted to get there,
one of the kids into rehab treatment was told yeah, yeah, yeah,
we can, we can do it in eight months.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
Yeah, well that's clearly not good enough, quite frankly, and
that is why we have put in targets to access.
But what I was going to say in my original
point was, you know, there's no surprise with the proliferation
of gangs that we have got increased drug harm. They
peddle this stuff, so we need to crack down on
(16:20):
the supply, and then we need to make sure that
those who get themselves in a position and want support
can get timely support. I've worked in drug and alcohol
services both here and in London. There's a small window
of opportunity when people take that step to get support,
and we need to make sure it's there. So that's
why I've set very clear expectations that in New Zealand,
(16:43):
if people want to access primary mental health and addiction support,
we've set a target eighty percent of them within seven days,
and for those who need specialist support for mental health
and addictions of services eighty percent to them to get
that within three weeks.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
So they're the targets. What is the current reality.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
If you look at specialist service for mental health and addictions,
the moment, young people would be sitting at about sixty
five percent, maybe sixty six percent within that timeframe for
three weeks. Yep. Overall it's probably sitting. I would say
maybe around seventy to seventy five. However, few things. Data
(17:24):
quality is not very good. And second that figure probably
looks better because what I would say is that if
you are mardy, the excess rate will be significantly less.
If you are rural it'll be less. So it gives
us an ability to drill down if you live in
Northland that rate will be significantly less and raise that
(17:45):
to a standard consistently across all group.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Reuben Davidson, So the prolification proliferation of drug use, particularly methamphetamine,
is something which has happened under Labour's watch. What do
you think labor could have done differently That might have
meant the conversation would be a bit different today. Well,
the numbers would be different today.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
Yeah, Look, I think I mean one of the things
that we're able to do now is pinpoint really accurately
where this abuse is happening through the water testing, right
waste water testing, so that gives us a really accurate
picture of where it's happening, and then when we ask
the question of why it's happening, we're able to see
that areas of deprivation are the areas that we're seeing
the spikes in the use of drugs like meth. And
(18:28):
I also think that there's there it's almost impossible to
separate drug and alcohol harm and mental health and mental
health crisis and issues. So I think we would always
welcome money and attention being put into the mental health sector.
But I think we've also got to look at the
reality of the fact that there's a hiring phrase in
(18:51):
this space.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Not mental health and addictions.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
There isn't and that whilst you came in promising that
a mental Health and Addiction workforce plan and we welcome
the focus on that, we're still waiting to see anything
on Ruben.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
Let's be very clear. The Order to General reported two
months ago there was no Mental Health and Addiction Workforce plan. So, yep,
you can beat me up. Why six months into this
government we're working quack on it. But you got asked
why under six years you didn't have a plan. The
reason why it's taking this time is we're starting from scratch.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Yeah, why wasn't there a planned rubin this. That was
the base of my question earlier.
Speaker 4 (19:29):
Well there was a lot of work going on.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
And it's all great to say works. It's all great
to say work, But what about the woman who wrung me,
another person who rung me the other day and she
was just off to take her grandchild to preschool I
think it was, And your son was at home and
he was going to spend the rest of his day
just blotted, blotted on drugs. But I mean saying with
(19:53):
saying politicians and Wellington have done a lot of work.
I mean, with respect Ruben only say that one it's
Didley squad. It comes to Dilley squad. But banging on
about that means nothing.
Speaker 4 (20:04):
But this requires a real across a number of agencies
and parts of government, and we saw that in some
of the support that we provided into mental health areas,
some of the social service support that we provided to
try and get ahead of these issues reaching chrisis point.
What I'm seeing in my community of christ Church East
(20:24):
at this point in time is that social services are
being cut. We're seeing budgeting services across christ Church being
absolutely cut to the core. And we all know, surely
the three of us in the studio know that the
kinds of pressures that the removal of those services placed
on people put huge strain on people's mental health, put
(20:46):
huge strain on people's well being, and are some of
the key drivers. We know this, it's not new information.
There's some of the key drivers into those addiction risk
areas and into those addiction spirals that we so want
to stay away from.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
Leave it there, well, I may got a bit of
week to do. It says it all, really, isn't it,
And it's all inputs that the truth is, it's about outcomes.
We can't be any more accountable than putting a clear
line in the sand. I will be accountable to these targets,
and I want to be very clear how ambitious these
targets are. I meet my counterpart from Scotland on Monday
(21:25):
night a zoom meeting Minister for Mental Health Comparable Population.
Their target for young people accessing specialist mental health and
addiction services is eighteen weeks. We've set one of three weeks.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Just when will that change start to be apparent?
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Well, we're going to report quarterly and we will want
to see change right from the start.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
Or at Matt Doocy think for time Today. Let's see
it Reuben Davison.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
In Pots and Outcomes. It's about people.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Nice to see Reuben Davis, Nice to see you.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news Talks It Be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talks'd be.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
So later on after eleven, we're going to talk about
the Olympic Games and what sports you only watch during
the Olympics but you have no interest or pay any
attention to in the time between the four years between
there's a four Where was it? How us a politicians?
It's four years? Is it the Olympics? Four years between them?
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (00:32):
I understand that to be. What do you think, Reuben?
Speaker 4 (00:35):
Look, I couldcur I think four years sounds like a
good amount of time between.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
So it's longer than a parliamentary term.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Well, maybe parliament can learn from that if.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Only the Olympics seem to come around a lot quicker
than elections. Do it just drags on? You guys, just
get out.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
We have Winter Olympics too, you see and Commonwealth Game?
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Do we need a winter Parliament in the summer parliament? Well,
I've heard it? Good, Yeah, I don't How did that work?
Speaker 3 (01:00):
Well, let's think about the Olympics shift round every four years.
Do you think maybe Parliament could move round every four years?
I think it would do very well.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Out in the wy market, eding now I know how
some of parliament would work. Some aparliament. You have a
whole lot of tents outside. Oh that's been done before already.
Speaker 4 (01:16):
I think what would have been good as if this
current current government had been all done and dusted as
quickly as in the I want to.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Say, Ruben knows what it's like to lose in a hurry.
He saw last last year.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
So he's so he labors the rugby sevens.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
That's right?
Speaker 2 (01:32):
And does that make does that make you? The Ferns
Labor was flying a drone around trying tonic all your ideas,
rub but actually.
Speaker 4 (01:42):
Been driving drone through the opening ceremony of of this
national government's Olympic Games or Olympic or political term just
involved a lot of people walking around with scissors cutting
as many vital services as they could. And they're laughing about.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
It, butughing about it.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
That's outrageous.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
Just on that hold list of topics and we haven't
touch one of them. Just on the Olympics. Do you
know what do you know the thing I use I'm
not gonna use the word hate, but the thing I
dislike most about the Olympics, what do you reckon?
Speaker 1 (02:16):
It is.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
John you'd dislike a lot of things, so I couldn't
narrow it.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
Down the drawn out opening ceremonies. If I was the
rugby sevens and I was out of the whole thing,
I'd be thinking, oh, great, that gets us out of
the opening ceremony. Possibly I find those things.
Speaker 3 (02:32):
But do you know what's good in a liberal democracy? John,
you have the power and the choice to turn your
TV to not watch.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
That's amazing. All right? What about you, Reuben? Do you
like the opening ceremonies?
Speaker 4 (02:44):
Look, I actually really love the Olympics. I think it's
one of those great things that because it only comes
around every four years, it's a real opportunity for us
to watch things we wouldn't normally watch. Yes, but it's
also an opportunity for us to see ourselves on the
world stage. It's an opportunity for us to see a
whole bunch of amazing spectacles and human achievement. And depending
(03:05):
where it's it's also an opportunity to wake up incredibly
early in the morning or stay up very late at
night and watch.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
Television exactly right. Pine plantations, Do you reckon the porthills
is a place for pine trees? Matt Doocy.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Well, I suppose what we have in New Zealand is
private property rights. It's for people to decide the use
of their land. Surely there has to be some controls.
I think what you're alluding to is the propensity for
fires on the porthills, and clearly I think forests can
contribute to that, but ultimately I think it's a decision
(03:42):
for the land owner to comply with fire protections and
ensure that fire barriers and other protections are in place.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
Well that's the issue, though, is that the councils in
christ Church actually don't share that view of yours. And
they've been to the government, they've been to the Forestryman's
wanting some changes in the forestry regulations, and here has
come back and said, and in some ways quite rightly,
we don't want to tink it with the rules just
to make it suit christ Church. But I think that
what the councils need to do now is go to
your other cabinet colleague, the Climate Change Minister, and present
(04:12):
the argument. Argument against more pines on the port hills
has been very consistent with your climate change strategy, which
talks about ecosystems that protect people's homes from the impacts
of climate change and talks about also more native forests.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Well, I think Todd McLay, who's the Forestry Minister, has
made it very clear that with the regulations we do
need national consistency and that's the issue here. I mean,
no surprise, we don't always agree with local government. And look,
you know there is an ability to look through the
lens through climate change. But equally, like I say, it
(04:47):
comes back to private property rights and very hard to
dictate to people what type of trees they planned. And
I'd take a step back and say, do we want
to live in a country where a government decides what
trees you have in the backyard. I think they've tried
draw I think they've tried that centralist planning and it failed.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
It's a long bow you're drawing there, isn't it. No,
we're not talking backyard.
Speaker 3 (05:12):
I believe in the principle of private property rights and
land use. Yeah, I mean there should be a framework.
I'm not saying it should be unfettered, but if we
have an issue around fires on the port Hills, I
think there should be able to be mitigations put in place.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
What do you think Reuben, what should happen?
Speaker 4 (05:29):
Well, for a start, I think we're very lucky this
morning that we've got the only Cabinet minister from the
South Island in the studio to talk about this issue,
because we do only have one, right Matt.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
There we do.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
Yeah, And I think what this highlights this issue in
particular is that there's been a plea here from Sam,
the mayor of Selwyn Fill, the mayor of christ Church,
and from the acting chair of our Regional Council to
Wellington and it has absolutely fallen on deaf ears.
Speaker 3 (05:58):
So you're saying Labor would have approved what they're asking for.
Speaker 4 (06:02):
No, not necessarily, But I'm saying I'm safe.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
What would labor have done well.
Speaker 4 (06:07):
I'm not sure of the exact specifics in this case.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Let's say, what are you're the Forestry minister, all right,
what would you have done?
Speaker 3 (06:13):
Well?
Speaker 4 (06:13):
I think what needs to be considered here is that
this is this is a very clear ask for support
here the impacts on it. One of the other impacts
we've got to look at here is what this does,
What this uncertainty does to property insurance premiums for those
(06:34):
people who live in that area. And we know that
insurance premiums are going up and up and up because
risks are being seen to be going up and up
and up. This is one of the huge pressures that
people are faced with. This is a fairly simple step
that central government could have taken to give some certainty
and ease some of that pressure, and it's falling on defeas.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
It must have been a pretty well, it was a
big day. Was it a heroin day? When the Abuse
and Care Inquiry report was tabled?
Speaker 3 (07:03):
Matte harrowing reading the reports and there's a somber day
in Parliament and you could literally feel the weight of
responsibility and expectation from the survivors in the gallery. I
(07:27):
thought the speeches in the house, we're a start. There's
a clear need for a response from governments over successive terms,
and there will be a.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Need to.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Look at what can be done immediately and also in
the longer term. I mean, for me, I've been saying
to people, when you read the reports, it's just the
evilness of individuals, but then how organizations enabled those individuals
(08:08):
as well. But then you're really confronted by how a
number of people came forward and how society just turned
their backs on them and how they were not heard,
and that is that is very confronting for the country.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
I think what do you think that does in relation
to trust? I mean that's a big point for me.
I think we are all direct and indirect victims of
this because trust was placed in people in organizations and
that trust was abuse. What do you think what do
you think it says about the future of trust in
these types of organizations in the future.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
Yeah, and that's that's a big question because clearly we
need to rebuild that trust. And it's not only the
apology that the Prime Minister will make on November the twelfth,
which is very important and it's been made very clear
by surviving is that they want to hear that apology.
(09:09):
There will be the redress as well around compensation and
ensuring appropriate services for the survivors as well. But a
big piece of work will be how do we ensure
we have a care system in New Zealand that is
not going to repeat that experience?
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Do you know, Reuben. One of the things in terms
of the list of what one hundred and thirty eight
recommendations I think there are report there's one of them.
The government's focusing on redress. Fine, no arguments for me
on that. The other one that needs to be prioritized.
But also at the same time, it astounds me that
this is still required to be a recommendation in twenty
twenty four, is that cares and staff, all cares and
(09:52):
staff are vetted. I mean that's incredible, because nothing's going
to change. All the strategies and reports and plans, they
will just be token if this vetting doesn't happen. I
can't believe that it has to be recommended to be
acted on. What's your reaction to that?
Speaker 4 (10:12):
Yeah, Look, I think I want to start by acknowledging,
as Matt has and have you and as you have John,
the weight of what took place in Parliament this Wednesday
and the point that that was, and also want to
thank those people who took part in that process for
their bravery and for their trust to step into that process,
(10:33):
because to engage with with with ultimately with the state
through that process takes a huge amount of courage, and
so I think it's important that we acknowledge that. And
the resounding message that came through through most of the
speeches in the House that afternoon was not just that
(10:55):
their experience and their stories were believed, but also that
that we will care as a government for the redress
of this. Some of those steps, as you as you've
been quite specific about, John, are really seemingly very straightforward,
right like vetting of people who work in the sector.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
But does it blow your way that even that is
seen as something that has to be acted on. You
would take that as a given, wouldn't you?
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Will?
Speaker 4 (11:25):
I would like to think that we would be able
to win twenty twenty four. But yeah, I mean, it's obviously,
it's obviously essential. There's a lot of work to do.
The important thing is that you know, we'll support the
government to move swiftly through the redress process. But also
worth looking at what these one hundred and thirty eight
(11:45):
recommendations are.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Okay, another one that's stood out to me in relation
to Gloria Veil, and it stood out for two reasons.
One the brevity of the reference to Glory Vale one
sentence in the report, and I'll go for remembering something
along the lines the government should take all practicable steps
to protect or maintain the safety of children and adults
at Gloria Vale. It seemed rather brief to me. The
(12:12):
other point, though, is you talk about and people have
talked about on Wednesday and since then, making sure this
sort of thing never happens again. This sort of thing
is happening right now at Gloria Vale. What should happen there?
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Yeah, well, there is investigations into Gloria Vale. It happened
to multiple government departments as well. It is before the courts,
so I need to be careful what I say as well.
But the reality is for all care organizations, we need
to take the recommendations and ensure that that is reflected
(12:50):
within care and that is going to be a big
piece of work. I'm comforted recently when you look at
the inclusion of independent advocates within our ke system who
can speak on people's behalf. That is a good example
(13:12):
of what we need to do more of to ensure
that people's rights are respected and reported on. But quite rightly,
the report shows that even when issues were raised, they
were not responded to as well, So there is a
lot of work to be done in those recommendations or before.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
We move on Ruben, do you think there is such
a thing as a practicable step that the state can
take to protect people in outfits like Gloria Ofvlle.
Speaker 4 (13:41):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think that's recommendation eighty eight right
of the one hundred and thirty eight, is that one
specifically speaking to Gloria Vail. I think what's disappointing to
see is that the government's already removed the Gloria of
Vale working group, a monitoring group, brother, and also removed
the modern slavery workforce work that was underway. And those
(14:02):
to me were two very ordinated collaborative processes that enabled
the monitoring and regulation that you speak of, Matt, to
take place specifically for Glory.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
They sound like a practical, a practicable step, don't they, Matt.
Speaker 3 (14:22):
Like I say, the agencies investigating Glory Vale and it
is before.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
The court, well we can find out what you think
about sandwich boards. You bang into them, trip over them.
I think we should be doing here what they're proposing
a Nelson getting rid of sandwich boards. So that's coming
up shortly. Stop laughing, guys, this w.
Speaker 3 (14:40):
Went politically correct these days to call them sandwiches.
Speaker 4 (14:43):
Well, I think as long as you can have a
gluten free sandwich.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Board, could you have a vegan sandwich board, absolutely organic
sandwich board.
Speaker 4 (14:52):
I can't see why not.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
Okay, all right, brilliant, it's going to get very crowded
out there. We were talking, we were talking this week
about the harm caused by drugs. Drug use in New Zealand. Yes,
around twenty million bucks a week, so about a billion
dollars a year, alcohol eight billion, drugs one billion. You
would expect more harm to be caused though by a
(15:14):
legal drug. So a lot of conversations about well, what
do we do have we lost the battle and meth
is the real, the many, the nasty in terms of
the harm being caused. I saw this week that you
were talking about your your mental health or the government's
mental health and addiction targets. It's the addiction one that
I'm interested in. What do you think you can do
(15:36):
to address the harm that is caused by the likes
of myth?
Speaker 3 (15:40):
Well, the first thing I'd say is we need to
ensure we have timely access to support. But on saying that,
I'd premise it by saying we just don't want to
wait for people to have drug problems before they can
access support.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
Okay, what about somebody rung there who wanted to get there,
one of the kids into rehab treatment was told yeah, yeah, yeah,
we can, we can do it in eight months.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
Yeah, well that's clearly not good enough, quite frankly, and
that is why we have put in targets to access.
But what I was going to say in my original
point was, you know, there's no surprise with the proliferation
of gangs that we have got increased drug harm. They
peddle this stuff, so we need to crack down on
(16:20):
the supply, and then we need to make sure that
those who get themselves in a position and want support
can get timely support. I've worked in drug and alcohol
services both here and in London. There's a small window
of opportunity when people take that step to get support,
and we need to make sure it's there. So that's
why I've set very clear expectations that in New Zealand,
(16:43):
if people want to access primary mental health and addiction support,
we've set a target eighty percent of them within seven days,
and for those who need specialist support for mental health
and addictions of services eighty percent to them to get
that within three weeks.
Speaker 2 (16:58):
So they're the targets. What is the current reality.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
If you look at specialist service for mental health and addictions,
the moment, young people would be sitting at about sixty
five percent, maybe sixty six percent within that timeframe for
three weeks. Yep. Overall it's probably sitting. I would say
maybe around seventy to seventy five. However, few things. Data
(17:24):
quality is not very good. And second that figure probably
looks better because what I would say is that if
you are mardy, the excess rate will be significantly less.
If you are rural it'll be less. So it gives
us an ability to drill down if you live in
Northland that rate will be significantly less and raise that
(17:45):
to a standard consistently across all group.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Reuben Davidson, So the prolification proliferation of drug use, particularly methamphetamine,
is something which has happened under Labour's watch. What do
you think labor could have done differently That might have
meant the conversation would be a bit different today. Well,
the numbers would be different today.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
Yeah, Look, I think I mean one of the things
that we're able to do now is pinpoint really accurately
where this abuse is happening through the water testing, right
waste water testing, so that gives us a really accurate
picture of where it's happening, and then when we ask
the question of why it's happening, we're able to see
that areas of deprivation are the areas that we're seeing
the spikes in the use of drugs like meth. And
(18:28):
I also think that there's there it's almost impossible to
separate drug and alcohol harm and mental health and mental
health crisis and issues. So I think we would always
welcome money and attention being put into the mental health sector.
But I think we've also got to look at the
reality of the fact that there's a hiring phrase in
(18:51):
this space.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Not mental health and addictions.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
There isn't and that whilst you came in promising that
a mental Health and Addiction workforce plan and we welcome
the focus on that, we're still waiting to see anything
on Ruben.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
Let's be very clear. The Order to General reported two
months ago there was no Mental Health and Addiction Workforce plan. So, yep,
you can beat me up. Why six months into this
government we're working quack on it. But you got asked
why under six years you didn't have a plan. The
reason why it's taking this time is we're starting from scratch.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
Yeah, why wasn't there a planned rubin this. That was
the base of my question earlier.
Speaker 4 (19:29):
Well there was a lot of work going on.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
And it's all great to say works. It's all great
to say work, But what about the woman who wrung me,
another person who rung me the other day and she
was just off to take her grandchild to preschool I
think it was, And your son was at home and
he was going to spend the rest of his day
just blotted, blotted on drugs. But I mean saying with
(19:53):
saying politicians and Wellington have done a lot of work.
I mean, with respect Ruben only say that one it's
Didley squad. It comes to Dilley squad. But banging on
about that means nothing.
Speaker 4 (20:04):
But this requires a real across a number of agencies
and parts of government, and we saw that in some
of the support that we provided into mental health areas,
some of the social service support that we provided to
try and get ahead of these issues reaching chrisis point.
What I'm seeing in my community of christ Church East
(20:24):
at this point in time is that social services are
being cut. We're seeing budgeting services across christ Church being
absolutely cut to the core. And we all know, surely
the three of us in the studio know that the
kinds of pressures that the removal of those services placed
on people put huge strain on people's mental health, put
(20:46):
huge strain on people's well being, and are some of
the key drivers. We know this, it's not new information.
There's some of the key drivers into those addiction risk
areas and into those addiction spirals that we so want
to stay away from.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
Leave it there, well, I may got a bit of
week to do. It says it all, really, isn't it,
And it's all inputs that the truth is, it's about outcomes.
We can't be any more accountable than putting a clear
line in the sand. I will be accountable to these targets,
and I want to be very clear how ambitious these
targets are. I meet my counterpart from Scotland on Monday
(21:25):
night a zoom meeting Minister for Mental Health Comparable Population.
Their target for young people accessing specialist mental health and
addiction services is eighteen weeks. We've set one of three weeks.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Just when will that change start to be apparent?
Speaker 3 (21:41):
Well, we're going to report quarterly and we will want
to see change right from the start.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
Or at Matt Doocy think for time Today. Let's see
it Reuben Davison.
Speaker 4 (21:50):
In Pots and Outcomes. It's about people.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
Nice to see Reuben Davis, Nice to see you.
Speaker 1 (21:55):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news Talks It Be christ Church from nine 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.
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
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.