Matt Doocey and Duncan Webb joined John MacDonald in studio for Politics Friday. They discussed Helen Clark’s recent comments around New Zealand’s relationship with the United States – do they agree?
On the topic of privacy versus safety, when it comes to mental illness, is keeping people safe a higher priority than keeping someone’s health private?
And Tourism New Zealand’s new 100% Pure marketing campaign has been launched, and Duncan Webb is not a fan.
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.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
That'd be Las Duncan Web Morning Duncan.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Good to be here on this chilli day, Matte.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Do see morning Matt. Yeah, they've both got your jackets
on cold, bloom and cold. It is bloom and cold?
Are you? Are you superstitious? You guys, I suppose being
you know, politicians, you possibly are the semi final tonight
on Friday the thirteenth. Anything to be read into that map?
Speaker 4 (00:35):
No, not at all. Good things happen on Friday the thirteenth.
I was born on Friday the thirteenth.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Yeah, it's just now.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Yeah, yeah, tell you what if that happened to happened,
we wouldn't have the wood End bypass, would we.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Well that's right, Well how was that going? I mean,
I know that they've had surveyors out there and they
call that shovels on the ground, But what's that? What's
that going to cough it?
Speaker 2 (00:57):
You going to toll it?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Question?
Speaker 4 (00:59):
Hold on, it's been a bit slow, Duncan, about six
years too since you canceled you.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
He told that is a bit rich of you, Duncan.
I remember that is rich because I remember the Labor
Party was I should have say, the Labor government put
out this press real Is saying work was beginning on
the new stadium. Right, work was beginning, and I thought, oh,
I'm go and have a look. There was one guy
doing some geotech work.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Testing. At least there was ground being made rather than.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
Those days transformation or I think the Labor government.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Actually, Matt, you should have maybe you should have done
a bit more geotech before we started building the swimming pool,
so I could have taken something back to the question
are you going to told the wood end bypass.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Well, we've made it very clear that n z TA
will review all roads of national significance. If they make
the recommendation to toll a road, we will accept that.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So you, like you won't even just take it as advice,
you'll do what they say.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
We've said, if they make the recommendation to toll it,
then we will accept that recod It's.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
About the only advice they take across government, I think,
because half the time they get all this great advice,
they go thanks, it's a policy commandment. We're doing it anyway.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
Anyone duncan just at least acknowledge. I answered the question clarity.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Come on, we've been talking about ORCUS during the first
hour of the show, bit of ants in Australia as
to whether Donald Trump is going to pull the pin
on their involvement. What's your reading of it, duncan.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
Look the pressure being put on Australia to increase its
spending to an enormous amount of money four percent of GDP.
That is that's that is a war footing that kind
of spending, which is pretty extraordinary. I'm very glad that
we've kind of kept our distance from ORCUS. I know
that there is this next pillar being talked about. But
(02:53):
we are non aligned. We are not aligned with the
United States, and that's where we should stay.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
So you're with Helen Clark when she says she doesn't
want to see us being an ally.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Ever again, well, we're not an ally. We were an
ally in the eighties and she doesn't want No, I
don't think we should be allied to the United States
in that sense.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
No.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Now, we want to cooperate with the United States and
we want to cooperate with China, and we can only
do that if we have an independent foreign policy.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Now do you see what's happening with the pillar talk.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
Well, we're still reviewing Pillar two. I mean, look, you know,
let's be very clear. Helen Clark can continue to try
and make herself relevant with their statements. But look, we've
been very clear with our position and we are reviewed,
have you.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
Well we are.
Speaker 4 (03:40):
We've said we're reviewing Pillar two.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
What does that mean, Well, it means we're looking into it.
So what does Judith Colin's silence mean.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
I don't think it's silence from Judith Collins quite rightly,
when we're talking about a foreign affairs issue like this,
it's not being led by the Prime Minister in Winston
Peters and I think they have been very clear.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Okay, seven past ten. We spoke about this week on
the show about the terrible case of the woman in
Mount Play Isn't Phelps being murdered by her gardener and
the fact that he was a resident, or was still
a resident of Pilmore in the hospital. As the Minister
for Mental Health, how do you feel about patients being
(04:21):
able to come and go and members of the community
having no awareness of their mental health status.
Speaker 4 (04:28):
Yeah. The first thing I'm going to say is there
is still the coronial in quest underway and an external review,
so I won't be commenting on a specific case, but
it poses some real questions. But what I would say
(04:48):
is there when you look around confidentiality, it's a very
value laden a judgment because what you are asking is
is someone with mental health issues a risk to me?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
And we see that.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
Play out quite often with employment processes when people are
asked a question do you have a mental illness? And
at that point a person can answer yes if they do.
But what is a mental illness? Is it I had
depression in the last twelve months, or I've been under
(05:26):
the Mental Health Act or me? If you disclose that
really an employment process that should be used to support you.
It is health information. But quite often we hear people
are excluded from employment by disclosing health information and then
(05:48):
they probably think to themselves, well would I disclose that again? So,
like I say, I think it is quite specific to
the person's specific mental health issues slash condition.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
Okay, well let me just let me clarify that down
because you've taken quite a broad approach the well what
about what about what about someone who threatens to kill people?
And then they're still allowed to go into the community
and members of the community they have dealings with have
no knowledge of that well, and how acceptable?
Speaker 4 (06:19):
In health and mental health there is confidentiality if we
think about mental health patients, but actually there is a
provision for health and mental health professionals to breach that
confidentiality if they think the individual or others at risk,
(06:40):
so that that that is already there.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
So you had the staff helping the sky tidy up
his room, which I think we can assume he interpreted
that as being ready to be moved out. He had
told staff at Hilmwarten that if they forced him out
of the place, he would kill someone. Has there been
an oversight here?
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Well, Like I said, John, and let's be clear, I'm
not going to comment on an individual case when there
is a two reviews underway who will look specifically at
those issues, and when you look more generally across the country,
that is what external reviews and coronial inquests look at
and make recommendations.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
You might think this is unfair, but if a member
of your family was impacted in this way, would you
have wanted them to know?
Speaker 4 (07:30):
Well, John, you're asking me about a specific case where
I don't have the Moodma, let's say it's another case altogether.
And so, like I said with my opening comments, around
the individual specifically, if we are asking a question, there
is quite a wide ranging situation there of how you
(07:51):
would respond to that specific question. So are you asking
me about the disclosure of a New Zealander who had
depression in the last twelve months? Are we talking about
someone currently under the Act? Are we talking about someone
who's previously been under the Act several years ago? And
that is why we have specific reviews into individual cases
(08:15):
and coronial inquest to make that finding. So just making
a sort of a hypothetical case, I don't think does
anyone any good.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
Don't And web I was quite surprised. I didn't know
that you could be a voluntary mental health patient, which
is what this guy has been.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, and I guess that's the real point, right. He
was free to come and go, and it appears that
the staff at hill Morton were of the view that
he didn't need to be in their care and so
they were going to essentially move them on and discharge them.
And it's clear that you can if you think there
is a risk to someone, someone in the community or
(08:52):
the patient themselves. You can make a compulsory treatment order.
That's when they can't leave. Now that wasn't the case here,
And I guess I'm not sure if the real issue
is about the confidentiality, because Matt makes a point that
you don't want people tagged as mentally unwell as they
go about the community. But if someone is a potential risk,
(09:13):
it is up to staff at places like her Morton
to consider those risks and to make compulsory orders if
putting that person in the community would put them or
someone else at risk. I do think you know, this
is a horrible, horrible incident and you've got to feel
for the family here.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
Are you saying that based on I'll take that comment
at the end there and we do have to move on.
But based on that last comment you think hill Morton
failed them?
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Well, you know, I'm not going to say that, but
the powers worthyre to detain someone if all the evidence
was that there was a risk to someone in the community.
Speaker 4 (09:53):
And can I understand to that With what Duncan's saying,
those risks and the thresholds Duncan's quite rightly talking about
are legislated for They're in legislation there are requirements and
that's what review whos and cronial inquests will look.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
At the head of the police's Alcohol Harm Prevention Unit
saying that there needs to be a crackdown on cheap
alcohol being sold at supermarkets and bottle stores, Matt doo See.
He says it could reduce alcohol consumption and save the
police a lot of work.
Speaker 4 (10:22):
What do you reckon in principle, I'm broadly in agreement
around the issue of alcohol consumption, not only in the
impact on health and mental health, but I think around
crime and law and order issues. There is a range
of mechanisms. One is a minimum pricing unit, which I
(10:43):
think has been referred to here. Look, the UK did this,
It didn't really shift the dial. I think it impacted
consumption by less than three percent is what it showed.
I'm actually very encouraged and supportive of what the local
alcohol policy is doing here about restricting bottle stores to
(11:05):
nine o'clock. And look off set round the ministerial table
where we've looked at the issue of crime and anti
social behavior and CBDs and the police that one of
the biggest things they say is people will go to
a bottle store during the day they consume that, and
then when they go back out late at night to
get more, that's when the problems happen. So I think
(11:26):
there is a real case to made about reducing the
opening hour. So good on the local alcohol policy.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Here, all right, but you don't agree with the police
that needs to be a highking prisis or a ban
on selling cheap alcohol.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
Well all I'm saying there's a couple things there. One
is if you used the UK as comparator, didn't really
seem to shift the dial. And also, you know, what
are we really saying If you struggle to afford it
by putting the price up, we're happy. But for those
who can afford it and go on to consume problematically,
it's fine.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
What do you reckon?
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Yeah, always has some to agree with, Matt Doocy, But
I do think I do think there's been even drinking
there are you know there's some really around here, right,
And this is about people buying alcohol and taking it home.
And I had a good read of that article and
it's actually skewed because it suggests that more alcohol harm
(12:17):
occurs at home, but in fact, proportionately it doesn't. And
this looks like a big pitch by the Hotel Association
to actually increase their market share. So look, I don't
want it to be the case that only wealthy people
can get a bottle of wine and take it home,
and I think there is a risk there. And I
also want to make it clear that yes, we do
(12:39):
have some problems with alcohol and we do need to
address them. And I do think that MAT's right that
local alcohol plans which restrict the hours of opening of
bottle stores and other licensed premises, are actually a good idea.
It's for the communities to decide, and I'm glad that
we've got some rules in place where that can happen.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Right, very quick question, if you got a super market
and you see a bottle of your favorite wine at
ten bucks, you inclined to buy more than you normally would.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
You might get an extra bottle, not just for that
night though, just just put it just saying all right.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
After midnight's next day.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Matt, No, because if I'm buying it at ten bucks,
it means I can't find one at nine.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
We go areas cheapskate, Matt, do see the government has
slashed the funding of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority.
Why have you done that.
Speaker 4 (13:30):
Well, Look, we've gone through probably line by line, through
all the government agencies and looked at the wasteful spending.
I did look at for IKEA, they had a sixty
million dollar budget about rolling out EV charges. Look, we've
done it through the private sector with concessionary loans, so
we don't need that. So quite rightly, we're just looking
at where the last government prioritized funding and if we've
(13:52):
got different priorities, we're shifting that.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
And so energy efficiency is not a priority.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
No.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
I think when you look at it, it's just more
having a different approach really same outcome. But we're pretty
confident through the private market with concessionary loans, we can
loan private providers to roll out EV charges, so we
don't need to give an organization like this sixty million dollars.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
I don't think it's about just about EV chargers. These
guys did a great job just in helping people understand
how they could make real savings, and not just savings
on their powerable although that was part of it, but
also making their homes warmer and healthier, and so helping
someone with a heat pump or a bit of insulation
preferably both actually had a whole lot of positive outcomes.
(14:36):
Not only did it make the home warmer, but they
didn't end up in hospital with the respiratory illness, you know,
And that kind of stuff is massively important. And I
don't think it's true that the private sector can just
step up. Not everyone can borrow money like that. So
the kind of work that was being done by Eka,
the advice and the financing, was really really important work.
(14:56):
And I think we all step backwards.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Oh well, we'll see. We'll see if Matt's way of
thinking pays dividends. We'll see.
Speaker 4 (15:03):
Are you aligned with my way of thinking?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Johnst I'm waiting to see what are they say? Well,
I'll let you listen. Are you saying that you have
you have members of your electorate commenting on your appearance
on the show? No, not at all, all right, Yeah,
just winding out one hundred percent pure. So New Zealand
Tourism's updated, it's stuck with this whole one hundred hundred
(15:25):
percent pure thing. Are we are we still? Is that
a fair reflection?
Speaker 3 (15:29):
Stephen Joyce would say, we're pretty pure, pretty pure. You know,
the fact of the matter is that they've just stopped
funding for predator free in fact, good getting rid of
of the Predator Free.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Agency, which is started by John Key.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
Yeah, I know.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
It was one of his big pictures and it was
doing some really good work. And our rivers, you know,
they're they're not swimmable, you know, they're barely waitable in
some cases. So to suggest that with this crystal clear,
you know, there's bits of the country that are fantastic,
but there's swathes of it which are really under siege environmentally.
And now we've just got this fast track, but it's
(16:06):
going to allow more mining, more pollution with subsidizing gas exploration.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
I don't want to put words in your mouth. Are
you saying it's bullshit?
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Yes, bullshit, it is bullshit. You can put that word
in my mouth. It's just not true anymore. And we're
actually going in the wrong direction. We are losing biodiversity,
we are becoming more polluted, and we need to change
the needle on that we were working on that. This
government doesn't have a climate pan. It's got ets and
that's it, you know, it's it's just we really are
(16:34):
going backwards on just about every measure in terms of
the environment under this government.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Good luck to you, Matt trying and argue against Sam Well.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Duncan from a government that hey, look quite a wide
ranging answer, o'bviously four words and you're shutting me down.
Look that Duncan forgot to acknowledge that we're an outlier
being the only country transitioning back to coal under the
last Labor government. Look, it's a very smart marketing headline.
(17:02):
We're one hundred percent pure New Zealand. Well, by definition,
we clearly are one hundred percent.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Let's just test that with you, right, So let's someone
comes here at summertime for a visit to christ Church.
I have a great time. I'll go for a swim
and they look up that you can website where in
Littles and Harbor they can go for a swim. I
bet it's probably one out of all the bays. The
website says it's healthy enough to swim. Yeah, but look,
I'll let you into a secret, John. Not everyone thinks
(17:31):
the same. So that's why it's a great marketing headline,
because what you think of New Zealand is quite individual,
and you'll think that it's pure. So for some it
might be around environmental. Others might think of New Zealand
as amazing ski fields. Others might think of us as
the amazing Mardi culture. That's what they think is one
(17:52):
hundred percent pure. So it's basically your own where of
what one hundred percent pure is. You've decided to go
down the route of looking at environmental standards. But look,
what I'd say to you is when you look at
the increasing tourism demand into New Zealand, clearly people want
to come for the one hundred percent pure experience and
(18:13):
we should celebrate that. Talk about we celebrate there.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
There's a great place to great place on the.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
At the apps you.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Honestly, what have you drunk this morning?
Speaker 3 (18:26):
Matt, Well, it's actually it's a McDonald's cappuccino. Just saying
I can see it in front of me, which is
pretty much about the.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Nut support local, support local, and so I summarize it.
Maybe Duncan, you might think one hundred percent pureate might
be more.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
That's about right.
Speaker 4 (18:42):
Nice to see you both, John, Thanks Duncan, go who
go to the Crusader.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
It is all right.
Speaker 4 (18:50):
Some of us are still scarred from nineteen eighty five,
been on the embankment for that and fully shield game
long time ago. But you had about yeah, a lot
younger than that, probably about three or four.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Still unresolved. He knows next.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Winter or more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald. Listen
live to news talks at be Christchurch from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talks.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
That'd be Las Duncan Web Morning Duncan.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Good to be here on this chilli day, Matte.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Do see morning Matt. Yeah, they've both got your jackets
on cold, bloom and cold. It is bloom and cold?
Are you? Are you superstitious? You guys, I suppose being
you know, politicians, you possibly are the semi final tonight
on Friday the thirteenth. Anything to be read into that map?
Speaker 4 (00:35):
No, not at all. Good things happen on Friday the thirteenth.
I was born on Friday the thirteenth.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Yeah, it's just now.
Speaker 2 (00:44):
Yeah, yeah, tell you what if that happened to happened,
we wouldn't have the wood End bypass, would we.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
Well that's right, Well how was that going? I mean,
I know that they've had surveyors out there and they
call that shovels on the ground, But what's that? What's
that going to cough it?
Speaker 2 (00:57):
You going to toll it?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Question?
Speaker 4 (00:59):
Hold on, it's been a bit slow, Duncan, about six
years too since you canceled you.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
He told that is a bit rich of you, Duncan.
I remember that is rich because I remember the Labor
Party was I should have say, the Labor government put
out this press real Is saying work was beginning on
the new stadium. Right, work was beginning, and I thought, oh,
I'm go and have a look. There was one guy
doing some geotech work.
Speaker 3 (01:27):
Testing. At least there was ground being made rather than.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
Those days transformation or I think the Labor government.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
Actually, Matt, you should have maybe you should have done
a bit more geotech before we started building the swimming pool,
so I could have taken something back to the question
are you going to told the wood end bypass.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Well, we've made it very clear that n z TA
will review all roads of national significance. If they make
the recommendation to toll a road, we will accept that.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So you, like you won't even just take it as advice,
you'll do what they say.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
We've said, if they make the recommendation to toll it,
then we will accept that recod It's.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
About the only advice they take across government, I think,
because half the time they get all this great advice,
they go thanks, it's a policy commandment. We're doing it anyway.
Speaker 4 (02:12):
Anyone duncan just at least acknowledge. I answered the question clarity.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Come on, we've been talking about ORCUS during the first
hour of the show, bit of ants in Australia as
to whether Donald Trump is going to pull the pin
on their involvement. What's your reading of it, duncan.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
Look the pressure being put on Australia to increase its
spending to an enormous amount of money four percent of GDP.
That is that's that is a war footing that kind
of spending, which is pretty extraordinary. I'm very glad that
we've kind of kept our distance from ORCUS. I know
that there is this next pillar being talked about. But
(02:53):
we are non aligned. We are not aligned with the
United States, and that's where we should stay.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
So you're with Helen Clark when she says she doesn't
want to see us being an ally.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
Ever again, well, we're not an ally. We were an
ally in the eighties and she doesn't want No, I
don't think we should be allied to the United States
in that sense.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
No.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Now, we want to cooperate with the United States and
we want to cooperate with China, and we can only
do that if we have an independent foreign policy.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Now do you see what's happening with the pillar talk.
Speaker 4 (03:22):
Well, we're still reviewing Pillar two. I mean, look, you know,
let's be very clear. Helen Clark can continue to try
and make herself relevant with their statements. But look, we've
been very clear with our position and we are reviewed,
have you.
Speaker 2 (03:39):
Well we are.
Speaker 4 (03:40):
We've said we're reviewing Pillar two.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
What does that mean, Well, it means we're looking into it.
So what does Judith Colin's silence mean.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
I don't think it's silence from Judith Collins quite rightly,
when we're talking about a foreign affairs issue like this,
it's not being led by the Prime Minister in Winston
Peters and I think they have been very clear.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Okay, seven past ten. We spoke about this week on
the show about the terrible case of the woman in
Mount Play Isn't Phelps being murdered by her gardener and
the fact that he was a resident, or was still
a resident of Pilmore in the hospital. As the Minister
for Mental Health, how do you feel about patients being
(04:21):
able to come and go and members of the community
having no awareness of their mental health status.
Speaker 4 (04:28):
Yeah. The first thing I'm going to say is there
is still the coronial in quest underway and an external review,
so I won't be commenting on a specific case, but
it poses some real questions. But what I would say
(04:48):
is there when you look around confidentiality, it's a very
value laden a judgment because what you are asking is
is someone with mental health issues a risk to me?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
And we see that.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
Play out quite often with employment processes when people are
asked a question do you have a mental illness? And
at that point a person can answer yes if they do.
But what is a mental illness? Is it I had
depression in the last twelve months, or I've been under
(05:26):
the Mental Health Act or me? If you disclose that
really an employment process that should be used to support you.
It is health information. But quite often we hear people
are excluded from employment by disclosing health information and then
(05:48):
they probably think to themselves, well would I disclose that again? So,
like I say, I think it is quite specific to
the person's specific mental health issues slash condition.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
Okay, well let me just let me clarify that down
because you've taken quite a broad approach the well what
about what about what about someone who threatens to kill people?
And then they're still allowed to go into the community
and members of the community they have dealings with have
no knowledge of that well, and how acceptable?
Speaker 4 (06:19):
In health and mental health there is confidentiality if we
think about mental health patients, but actually there is a
provision for health and mental health professionals to breach that
confidentiality if they think the individual or others at risk,
(06:40):
so that that that is already there.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
So you had the staff helping the sky tidy up
his room, which I think we can assume he interpreted
that as being ready to be moved out. He had
told staff at Hilmwarten that if they forced him out
of the place, he would kill someone. Has there been
an oversight here?
Speaker 4 (07:00):
Well, Like I said, John, and let's be clear, I'm
not going to comment on an individual case when there
is a two reviews underway who will look specifically at
those issues, and when you look more generally across the country,
that is what external reviews and coronial inquests look at
and make recommendations.
Speaker 2 (07:22):
You might think this is unfair, but if a member
of your family was impacted in this way, would you
have wanted them to know?
Speaker 4 (07:30):
Well, John, you're asking me about a specific case where
I don't have the Moodma, let's say it's another case altogether.
And so, like I said with my opening comments, around
the individual specifically, if we are asking a question, there
is quite a wide ranging situation there of how you
(07:51):
would respond to that specific question. So are you asking
me about the disclosure of a New Zealander who had
depression in the last twelve months? Are we talking about
someone currently under the Act? Are we talking about someone
who's previously been under the Act several years ago? And
that is why we have specific reviews into individual cases
(08:15):
and coronial inquest to make that finding. So just making
a sort of a hypothetical case, I don't think does
anyone any good.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
Don't And web I was quite surprised. I didn't know
that you could be a voluntary mental health patient, which
is what this guy has been.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, and I guess that's the real point, right. He
was free to come and go, and it appears that
the staff at hill Morton were of the view that
he didn't need to be in their care and so
they were going to essentially move them on and discharge them.
And it's clear that you can if you think there
is a risk to someone, someone in the community or
(08:52):
the patient themselves. You can make a compulsory treatment order.
That's when they can't leave. Now that wasn't the case here,
And I guess I'm not sure if the real issue
is about the confidentiality, because Matt makes a point that
you don't want people tagged as mentally unwell as they
go about the community. But if someone is a potential risk,
(09:13):
it is up to staff at places like her Morton
to consider those risks and to make compulsory orders if
putting that person in the community would put them or
someone else at risk. I do think you know, this
is a horrible, horrible incident and you've got to feel
for the family here.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
Are you saying that based on I'll take that comment
at the end there and we do have to move on.
But based on that last comment you think hill Morton
failed them?
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Well, you know, I'm not going to say that, but
the powers worthyre to detain someone if all the evidence
was that there was a risk to someone in the community.
Speaker 4 (09:53):
And can I understand to that With what Duncan's saying,
those risks and the thresholds Duncan's quite rightly talking about
are legislated for They're in legislation there are requirements and
that's what review whos and cronial inquests will look.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
At the head of the police's Alcohol Harm Prevention Unit
saying that there needs to be a crackdown on cheap
alcohol being sold at supermarkets and bottle stores, Matt doo See.
He says it could reduce alcohol consumption and save the
police a lot of work.
Speaker 4 (10:22):
What do you reckon in principle, I'm broadly in agreement
around the issue of alcohol consumption, not only in the
impact on health and mental health, but I think around
crime and law and order issues. There is a range
of mechanisms. One is a minimum pricing unit, which I
(10:43):
think has been referred to here. Look, the UK did this,
It didn't really shift the dial. I think it impacted
consumption by less than three percent is what it showed.
I'm actually very encouraged and supportive of what the local
alcohol policy is doing here about restricting bottle stores to
(11:05):
nine o'clock. And look off set round the ministerial table
where we've looked at the issue of crime and anti
social behavior and CBDs and the police that one of
the biggest things they say is people will go to
a bottle store during the day they consume that, and
then when they go back out late at night to
get more, that's when the problems happen. So I think
(11:26):
there is a real case to made about reducing the
opening hour. So good on the local alcohol policy.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Here, all right, but you don't agree with the police
that needs to be a highking prisis or a ban
on selling cheap alcohol.
Speaker 4 (11:38):
Well all I'm saying there's a couple things there. One
is if you used the UK as comparator, didn't really
seem to shift the dial. And also, you know, what
are we really saying If you struggle to afford it
by putting the price up, we're happy. But for those
who can afford it and go on to consume problematically,
it's fine.
Speaker 2 (11:56):
What do you reckon?
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Yeah, always has some to agree with, Matt Doocy, But
I do think I do think there's been even drinking
there are you know there's some really around here, right,
And this is about people buying alcohol and taking it home.
And I had a good read of that article and
it's actually skewed because it suggests that more alcohol harm
(12:17):
occurs at home, but in fact, proportionately it doesn't. And
this looks like a big pitch by the Hotel Association
to actually increase their market share. So look, I don't
want it to be the case that only wealthy people
can get a bottle of wine and take it home,
and I think there is a risk there. And I
also want to make it clear that yes, we do
(12:39):
have some problems with alcohol and we do need to
address them. And I do think that MAT's right that
local alcohol plans which restrict the hours of opening of
bottle stores and other licensed premises, are actually a good idea.
It's for the communities to decide, and I'm glad that
we've got some rules in place where that can happen.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Right, very quick question, if you got a super market
and you see a bottle of your favorite wine at
ten bucks, you inclined to buy more than you normally would.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
You might get an extra bottle, not just for that
night though, just just put it just saying all right.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
After midnight's next day.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
Matt, No, because if I'm buying it at ten bucks,
it means I can't find one at nine.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
We go areas cheapskate, Matt, do see the government has
slashed the funding of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority.
Why have you done that.
Speaker 4 (13:30):
Well, Look, we've gone through probably line by line, through
all the government agencies and looked at the wasteful spending.
I did look at for IKEA, they had a sixty
million dollar budget about rolling out EV charges. Look, we've
done it through the private sector with concessionary loans, so
we don't need that. So quite rightly, we're just looking
at where the last government prioritized funding and if we've
(13:52):
got different priorities, we're shifting that.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
And so energy efficiency is not a priority.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
No.
Speaker 4 (13:57):
I think when you look at it, it's just more
having a different approach really same outcome. But we're pretty
confident through the private market with concessionary loans, we can
loan private providers to roll out EV charges, so we
don't need to give an organization like this sixty million dollars.
Speaker 3 (14:13):
I don't think it's about just about EV chargers. These
guys did a great job just in helping people understand
how they could make real savings, and not just savings
on their powerable although that was part of it, but
also making their homes warmer and healthier, and so helping
someone with a heat pump or a bit of insulation
preferably both actually had a whole lot of positive outcomes.
(14:36):
Not only did it make the home warmer, but they
didn't end up in hospital with the respiratory illness, you know,
And that kind of stuff is massively important. And I
don't think it's true that the private sector can just
step up. Not everyone can borrow money like that. So
the kind of work that was being done by Eka,
the advice and the financing, was really really important work.
(14:56):
And I think we all step backwards.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Oh well, we'll see. We'll see if Matt's way of
thinking pays dividends. We'll see.
Speaker 4 (15:03):
Are you aligned with my way of thinking?
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Johnst I'm waiting to see what are they say? Well,
I'll let you listen. Are you saying that you have
you have members of your electorate commenting on your appearance
on the show? No, not at all, all right, Yeah,
just winding out one hundred percent pure. So New Zealand
Tourism's updated, it's stuck with this whole one hundred hundred
(15:25):
percent pure thing. Are we are we still? Is that
a fair reflection?
Speaker 3 (15:29):
Stephen Joyce would say, we're pretty pure, pretty pure. You know,
the fact of the matter is that they've just stopped
funding for predator free in fact, good getting rid of
of the Predator Free.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Agency, which is started by John Key.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
Yeah, I know.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
It was one of his big pictures and it was
doing some really good work. And our rivers, you know,
they're they're not swimmable, you know, they're barely waitable in
some cases. So to suggest that with this crystal clear,
you know, there's bits of the country that are fantastic,
but there's swathes of it which are really under siege environmentally.
And now we've just got this fast track, but it's
(16:06):
going to allow more mining, more pollution with subsidizing gas exploration.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
I don't want to put words in your mouth. Are
you saying it's bullshit?
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Yes, bullshit, it is bullshit. You can put that word
in my mouth. It's just not true anymore. And we're
actually going in the wrong direction. We are losing biodiversity,
we are becoming more polluted, and we need to change
the needle on that we were working on that. This
government doesn't have a climate pan. It's got ets and
that's it, you know, it's it's just we really are
(16:34):
going backwards on just about every measure in terms of
the environment under this government.
Speaker 2 (16:38):
Good luck to you, Matt trying and argue against Sam Well.
Speaker 4 (16:41):
Duncan from a government that hey, look quite a wide
ranging answer, o'bviously four words and you're shutting me down.
Look that Duncan forgot to acknowledge that we're an outlier
being the only country transitioning back to coal under the
last Labor government. Look, it's a very smart marketing headline.
(17:02):
We're one hundred percent pure New Zealand. Well, by definition,
we clearly are one hundred percent.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Let's just test that with you, right, So let's someone
comes here at summertime for a visit to christ Church.
I have a great time. I'll go for a swim
and they look up that you can website where in
Littles and Harbor they can go for a swim. I
bet it's probably one out of all the bays. The
website says it's healthy enough to swim. Yeah, but look,
I'll let you into a secret, John. Not everyone thinks
(17:31):
the same. So that's why it's a great marketing headline,
because what you think of New Zealand is quite individual,
and you'll think that it's pure. So for some it
might be around environmental. Others might think of New Zealand
as amazing ski fields. Others might think of us as
the amazing Mardi culture. That's what they think is one
(17:52):
hundred percent pure. So it's basically your own where of
what one hundred percent pure is. You've decided to go
down the route of looking at environmental standards. But look,
what I'd say to you is when you look at
the increasing tourism demand into New Zealand, clearly people want
to come for the one hundred percent pure experience and
(18:13):
we should celebrate that. Talk about we celebrate there.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
There's a great place to great place on the.
Speaker 4 (18:20):
At the apps you.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
Honestly, what have you drunk this morning?
Speaker 3 (18:26):
Matt, Well, it's actually it's a McDonald's cappuccino. Just saying
I can see it in front of me, which is
pretty much about the.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
Nut support local, support local, and so I summarize it.
Maybe Duncan, you might think one hundred percent pureate might
be more.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
That's about right.
Speaker 4 (18:42):
Nice to see you both, John, Thanks Duncan, go who
go to the Crusader.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
It is all right.
Speaker 4 (18:50):
Some of us are still scarred from nineteen eighty five,
been on the embankment for that and fully shield game
long time ago. But you had about yeah, a lot
younger than that, probably about three or four.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Still unresolved. He knows next.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Winter or more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald. Listen
live to news talks at be Christchurch from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.