The Mental Health Minister's defending claiming his Government's inherited Hillmorton Hospital and its failings from the Labour-led Government of the time.
A review of Canterbury's mental health services reveals significant failings, contributing to murders by patients in 2022 and 2024.
Minister Matt Doocey told John MacDonald it's a fact.
He says the report lays bare the state of Hillmorton in June 2022, and that is the reality of the system they inherited.
Labour's Megan Woods told MacDonald this needs to not be about politics.
She says it’s something they all have to take responsibility for, and it’s something they’ve got to work on.
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 TALKSB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
It's time for Politics, Friday Laters, Meighan woods Is Weather's
Morning Megan, Morning John. Pologies for calling you duncan Web earlier,
but I'm sure that.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
I've been called much worse.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
There have been worse things, so that I mean, it's
pretty it's pretty bad. I've been called duncan Web. But
I mean, anyway, I've set myself up for another abuse
of Christmas card from him and Matt Doucy.
Speaker 4 (00:31):
Morning Morning, John, Morning Meghan. I've never been called duncan Web.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
There's no risk of that happening.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
Yeah, maybe John McDonald, but not duncan Web.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Oh yeah, all right, Brothers from another mother. Just talk
about the situation in Brindle with this week. We've been
discussing for the past hour on the show whether or
not this has changed people's stances or views on arming
the police. What about you, Meghan?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
And look, this is as complex and as complicated. My
general view is that we shouldn't have a widely armed
police force. That obviously there's tactical units that do need
to be armed, but first and foremost in any discussion
about this. For me is the safety of the police
in the safety of the public. What I don't want
(01:17):
to see is a literal arms race around criminals thinking
with the police are armed, I'm going to arm toe
and that in gien or members of the public are
more at risk.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
See that's theoretical, whereas one fact in front of us
is that we had that survey from the Police Association
which found that sixty nine percent of police want to
be armed regularly.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Yeah, and as I said, this is complicated and complex,
and I think it's something that.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Was a more ideological fosun right, it's not ideological.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I think it's something that we need to continue to
keep discussing to make sure that we've got the police
in the community as safe as they can be. For me,
it's about not wanting the community to be further at
risk with more criminals having guns. And we do know
that from other places around the world that you can
get that starting to build up. But look, I absolutely
(02:05):
I kind of mentionined for some police officers going into
situations and feeling they're at risk, obviously non fatal means
of control or always something that it's good to be
able to have, but I do think there needs to
be technical units of police who are well trained in
the use of those things that when they're required, they
are used.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Mat doc are you the same or you you on
the other side.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
I mean, first to acknowledge the fatality and the loved
ones of that individual and the individual and critical condition
in hospital as well, and also thinking of the police
officers who were put in that position. And the reality is,
as we know, the police officers go out and put
themselves in harms way to keep us safe. So look,
(02:51):
the risk here is we extrapolaid out from a specific
situation to a more generalist view quite binary. Should police
be armed or not? Every situation is specific, and I
think that's why police quote rightly look at decisions like
that as operational. But I would put one view out
(03:11):
there that I have is potentially what might have happened
if the police had not been armed, And that is
concerning as well about ensuring that we maintain our police
force safely as well.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
So it was a tragic outcome. A couple of other
tragedies in recent history, the two innocent people who have
been killed by patients from Hilmorton Hospital and this report
came out this week on conditions in the running of
Hilmarton Hospital. As you were aware, Matt. As you'll know,
Megan wasn't flash and it was initiated after the killing
(03:48):
of the woman in Sockburn by the patient. Now I've
got a bit of a beef with your response, Matt,
because in the comments you made after the report came
out the other day, you said a few things and
your promise changes and all of that, But then you
banged on the usual drum of blaming the last government.
(04:09):
Can you explain the justification for doing that or you
have to explain a bit more? Would I've said, Well,
you said we inherited this from the last government. Well,
the same old line that you're saying, but you're not
saying about everything.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
Well, well, I suppose that that is the report lays
bare the state of Hillmorton in that specific point of
time June twenty twenty two, and that is the reality
of the system that we inherited. There's also I actually
went further to talk about the finding specifically in page
(04:42):
thirty three of the report that laid bear the challenges
of dealing with the COVID response and restructuring the health
system and what was taken away was regional decision making
and time and time again in the report it talked
about business cases put up to get resources to change
some of the situations, people not knowing who the decision
(05:06):
makers were. That this report is based on looking at
the systemic issues. So I do want to acknowledge there
is two individuals here that sadly lost their lives. Those
individual reports are in front of the coroner at the moment,
so there is non publication orders. But this is about
the wider systemic issues where they found failings right from
(05:31):
staff shortages as an example of a new graduate nurse
who turned up to work one day and been told
she was the team leader, no experience or knowledge, so
we had staff shortages. We also had beds that were
being capped that led to early discharges and delayed admission.
On the leadership and government's issue, it's so fine these
(05:53):
are laid be in so lightly Health New Zealand has
taken responsibility right, have implemented eighteen new recommendation.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Now you're rapiting on stuff that I'm going to ask you.
I'm going to ask you something. How can you and
I'm not saying your pick favorites, But how can you
trop this out and the report puts it out black
and white that this place is in the crap and
you can justify suddenly writing out a check of twenty
four million bucks to Mike King. How can you say
pick favorites and mental health in this way?
Speaker 4 (06:21):
Well, excuse me, John. I also announced fifty one million
dollars to forensic inpatient facilities. So in fact, there's a
range of issues we need to address in the mental
health system. This year. The Mental Health and Addiction Ring
Fence funding is two point eight billion, and you're focusing
on a funding contract of six million out of two
(06:43):
point eight billion, Megan Woods.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
So I'm pretty close to one of these cases. Will
Mordern Hospital was in my electorate and have worked extensively
with some of the people that were very closely impacted
by one of these incidents. I think there are times
when politicians have to rise above the talking points, have
(07:06):
to rise above the blame game, and I think we
all have to face facts, the staffing shortages and mental
health of something that have been going on for decades.
It is in terms of the workforce development, we started
work mets continued some of that work. We've all got
to take this opportunity to look at this and look
at why.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
I remind you too that Labor did not deliver on
its commitments.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
In terms of the workforce. That is a challenge in
mental health and it takes time. You can't just create
psychiatric nurses overnight, and we had started their training. We're
also committed money to the upgrade of the facilities at Hillmorton,
and that had begun under us. But I don't want
to say Labor National. This is something we all have
to take responsibility for and it's something that we've got
(07:52):
to work. It's the care of the patients in that facility,
it's the staff who are at risk every day when
they go to work, and it's also the community. I
live in Hillmorton, in the suburb of Hillmorton and for
the community around the makeing sure that we've had this
facility in our neighborhood for well over one hundred years,
(08:13):
but making sure that we can ensure the safety of
everyone is a really important thing. And we've got to
rise above three year politic political cycles and thinking about it.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
All Right, Megan, here's your chance, here's your chance to
defend Chris Hipkins, Dame de Cinder and durn Grant Robinson
and Niasha Vereal for being no shows at the COVID inquiry.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Look, I think I've read the minute that the Royal
Commission put out this week really carefully. I think one
of the things that that lays really clear is how
cooperative all four of those people have been. They have
and there's sentences in that.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Maybe you love you, are you laughing more? Or am I?
Speaker 3 (08:51):
Well? I mean read the minute and it makes really
clear that every question that has been put to those
former ministers has been answers.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
I know, pages pages, but you and you know as
much as I know that there is no follow up
question when you do a written submission, and you know
as much as I know, they're quite often those follow
up questions are the questions that shine the real light
on things.
Speaker 3 (09:16):
So you know as much as I as well as
I know, John, that the last section of that minute
also says that a procedure for those follow up questions
will be developed. So it's not saying that this is it,
this is the end of the questions. It makes really
clear that there will be a procedure for those follow
up questions and that is perfectly acceptable. What else that
(09:37):
minute makes really clear is that there were safety concerns
that the Royal Commission.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
Yeah, you will hold on, hold on. A set of
lawyers told them, A set of lawyers told them, and
your guys say, oh brilliant, we'll take that, Thank you
very much.
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No, I think there are real safety concerns and that
has been taken into account by the Royal Commission. But
in terms of let's look what we're trying to achieve here,
and of course we should take the opportunity to learn
everything we can for what we through in a global pandemic.
Should there be questions? Yes, should there be follow up?
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Tell me, I'll come to MAP. I kind of know
what Ma's going to say. Tell me why people should
even listen to Chris Hipkins when he stands up next
gen says vote me as prime minister, after this lot,
after this carry on? Why should people listen to him?
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Because Chris Hipkins fronts up every day. I mean, I
think people are getting confused John that this is absolutely correct.
It's not like this is a person who's unwilling to
front and answer questions. He fronts up each and every
day in his job as leader of the opposition and
will continue to do so. He's given full answers. In fact,
he put aside two hours to go and answer any
(10:47):
questions that the cod they only had symbols. Okay, now
I'm going to pull you up on that, John, then
so symbolic that the Royal Commission has found his safety concerns.
What is the point? What we need is a country
as answers and that will happen.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
Matt douci, Well, I might surprise you John and your listeners.
I mightn't actually have much to say, because I actually
think kiwis see this for what it is and they
don't need it to be explained to them. And you know,
it was supposed to be the most open and transparent government, but.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
They didn't say they'd be an open transparent opposition. Remember
that they didn't say that.
Speaker 4 (11:23):
And look, people will see it for what it is.
Every reason Megan's given you her new explanation just quite
frankly begs the question, well then why not front up?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Then very surely we'll get to these plane in creases
for some of these local councilors. First, though, Matt Doocey,
the wood End Bypass, you've got Dan Gordon, he's obviously
in campaign mode, he's upset about the toll. But what
did come through this week when we talked about it
on the show, people saying people calling up saying they
were in favor of road tolls, but not for such
(11:54):
a tiny stretch of road, which the wood End Bypass
is going to be. What's your response to that?
Speaker 4 (11:58):
Well, you know, with respect, it's that classic statement, I'm
in favor of something, just not here and you know
I respect our mea Dan Gordon and why MUKADEDI but
he's been well over the issues for a long time.
In fact, it's been a frequent appearer on the front
page of local newspapers that it will be the first
(12:19):
road to be potentially told in the South Island. So look,
I get it. When the actual consultations out, it gets
a bit sporty and people get concerned and naturally when
you're talking about added costs to individuals, I understand it
as well. So that's why it's important with n ZTA
they get their modeling right. Everyone should have a free alternative.
(12:42):
And also what we want to do is ensure that
actually we're not displacing people and if the cost is
too high, then people will actually take the free alternative
and then people won't pay the tolls. Actually counterproductive to
what we're trying to do here.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
What are you trying to do? Actually?
Speaker 4 (13:02):
Well, actually we've been very clear and we stood on
a mandate in the election and Bishop where see Simeon Brown,
our Transport minister and our Chris Bishop been very clear
about introducing new funding and financing tolls roads. That means told,
but what.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Are you trying to do with the bypass?
Speaker 4 (13:18):
Well, tolls will pay for the construction and the ongoing
maintenance as well as we see internationally and even in
the North Island as well, the use of tolls. So
I get it. It's new and people will be concerned
about the displacement. I know Jason at Kaipo in naw School,
the principal there.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
So histors aren't warranted.
Speaker 4 (13:39):
No, I think they're very warranted, and that's why NZTA
needs to be looking at that, because the reality is
it's no point tolling if people are going to be
displaced into the other road.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Right, So are you saying that there is a chance
that people will convince NZTA not to apply a toll.
Speaker 4 (13:56):
Well, I think that's the whole point of the consultation,
is that is that what you'd like to say, No,
But it's the trade off between the price and people's behavior, right,
And if they don't get the right, that's what their
modeling's about to ensure that actually they get the full
capture using tolling, but not actually displacing everyone because that's
counterproductive to the toll in the first place. Right, there's
(14:18):
a balance.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
So all of those people who called up the other day, right,
and you don't want to pay the toll, this is
what you do. It closes on September the ninth. Put
in your submission nineteenth. You've got more ten days more
than I was given you, and you've got a chance.
And if NZTA, if they get enough submissions against your
saying that the toll will go.
Speaker 4 (14:38):
Well know that we've got to hear what their concerns
about the toll are. So some people are saying, look,
what we don't want to see is displacement of traffic
into the free alternatives. That's correct. And if they're saying,
actually that the toll is going to cause that, but
then what we would quite rightly want to hear from
n ZTA who have done the modeling, what their evidence
(15:00):
to say that actual behavior isn't going to happen. So
that's the process we're going through.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Megan, Once there's no toll on transmission Gully, do you
think there should be a toll on more?
Speaker 3 (15:08):
Then by I think the South Island's getting really short changed.
We've got two roads of national significance, fifty percent of
them are being told. I want to know a fifty
percent of North Island roads being told because it looks
like we're only getting two and we're having to pay
for one of the labor. But one of the things
that's simply not correct, man, But one of the things
that I'm also.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Concerned about you or you a chance.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Concerned about from a broader South Island perspective. Not only
is it the thirty up to thirteen hundred dollars a year,
it's going to cost individuals that are going to be
using this.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
For the I don't know where Dan Gordon got that.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Messache no, and I'm citing his figure there. But the
one that I've been thinking about that's really worrying John.
I know Matt will let you come back on this
one is actually what it's going to do to the
cross of freight in the South Island, so that we
know that we're having to use trucks we don't have
the rail enabled ferry there that it's two dollars fifty
(16:08):
at each of those points. That's five dollars one way,
ten dollars return on every track movement at a time
when costs are rising, that we're going to be adding
to the cost of freight in the South Island, and
that does really concern me. We're being let down in
terms of the infrastructure that's going in here. We've only
got two I'm really pleased to hear Matt say that
(16:29):
this decision can be turned over and the Wooden Bypass
won't be told. So we look forward to you coming
back on the show and saying you've stood up for
the South Island and you've stood up.
Speaker 4 (16:38):
And you've.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
We got some music.
Speaker 3 (16:42):
No, I'm really hartened to hear me on the show.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Full orchestra. I'd say, John, it's like the Titanic movie.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
The first one you're told the front of the boat.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
Yeah, you're told you're.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
On your own the lifeboat.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
Mate.
Speaker 4 (17:03):
The first thing i'd say, the world, you know, the
crocodile tears from a former labor minister who was part
of a government that canceled the Wooden Bypass in twenty eighteen.
And I just put the question what would be the
cost of building it back then? That is today and
actually the cost of an action has added cost to that.
(17:25):
The second thing I say is I've challenged previously hold
on about whether they would reverse the toll, and clearly
they don't.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Anyway on you, we don't have to because you will
have over ten are you to everyone on it?
Speaker 2 (17:40):
I'm just going to do that. I'm going to do that.
You see what I've done. I've just turned your microphones off.
So now I'm going to hear what you're doing. And
now what we're going to do is on the topic
of money, I'm going to find out how you feel.
I'm glad you're laughing, becuse I've got no trouble once
for doing that for someone else, and I won't say
I won't say who it was. How do you feel
Let's start with way macarerni Man, because it's relevant to you.
How do you feel about counselors at Wayne mcaherny being
(18:01):
in line for a twenty two percent pay increase.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Look, I think it's always concerning when we talk about
pay increases, especially for elected representatives. There's no friends to
be made when we talk about ourselves and our salaries.
I mean it is independent, renunrational authority.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
You're losing that, you're losing thateses Well, no.
Speaker 4 (18:26):
Because the decisions are made external to them. But the
reality is people will have a choice because democracy, they're
going to get a choice of selection.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
I'm saying they've got a moral obligation to say no
to pay increases of that sort.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
Well, that's up for people standing for counsel all right,
Well let's a Megan'll put Selwyn to you.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
The councils there in line for a twenty six twenty
six percent pay increase. What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Oh yeah, and look, I mean for every family that's
out there struggling, it's hard to feed them someone getting
twenty six percent pay increase. I completely get that. One
of the things you're saying people should say no to
those pay increases. One of the issues when that hap
is this bank's up. So what it means is when
the remunerational theory that has to come back by law
(19:13):
to then value the job down the track that there's
all this deferred stuff. I actually think the way we
set the pay for politicians, I don't think it's particularly
well done.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
I'll say that.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
No, I think no. I actually think that what we
need to do is actually talk about it in terms
of yearly increases. These are usually three years, so we're
talking about pay increases that are spread over three years.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
Someone got a three point seven percent increase in July.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
Yeah. What I'm saying is, I think this is really
hard for people to to fare them. They're struggling. Yeah,
They're absolutely hard for people to feare them, and I
think there's probably a better way to do this. I
think what we need to be doing is building trust
in people who are elected and not you know, people
there thinking how the hell am I going to pay
(20:07):
my mortgage on my rent and then reading in the
paper someone's getting a twenty six percent and crazy, it's
really difficult.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Crazy. Hey, thank you both, nice to say it, Thank you,
thank you, thank you. Politics right it back next week.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald. Listen live
to news talks at 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 TALKSB.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
It's time for Politics, Friday Laters, Meighan woods Is Weather's
Morning Megan, Morning John. Pologies for calling you duncan Web earlier,
but I'm sure that.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
I've been called much worse.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
There have been worse things, so that I mean, it's
pretty it's pretty bad. I've been called duncan Web. But
I mean, anyway, I've set myself up for another abuse
of Christmas card from him and Matt Doucy.
Speaker 4 (00:31):
Morning Morning, John, Morning Meghan. I've never been called duncan Web.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
There's no risk of that happening.
Speaker 4 (00:36):
Yeah, maybe John McDonald, but not duncan Web.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Oh yeah, all right, Brothers from another mother. Just talk
about the situation in Brindle with this week. We've been
discussing for the past hour on the show whether or
not this has changed people's stances or views on arming
the police. What about you, Meghan?
Speaker 3 (00:54):
And look, this is as complex and as complicated. My
general view is that we shouldn't have a widely armed
police force. That obviously there's tactical units that do need
to be armed, but first and foremost in any discussion
about this. For me is the safety of the police
in the safety of the public. What I don't want
(01:17):
to see is a literal arms race around criminals thinking
with the police are armed, I'm going to arm toe
and that in gien or members of the public are
more at risk.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
See that's theoretical, whereas one fact in front of us
is that we had that survey from the Police Association
which found that sixty nine percent of police want to
be armed regularly.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Yeah, and as I said, this is complicated and complex,
and I think it's something that.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Was a more ideological fosun right, it's not ideological.
Speaker 3 (01:44):
I think it's something that we need to continue to
keep discussing to make sure that we've got the police
in the community as safe as they can be. For me,
it's about not wanting the community to be further at
risk with more criminals having guns. And we do know
that from other places around the world that you can
get that starting to build up. But look, I absolutely
(02:05):
I kind of mentionined for some police officers going into
situations and feeling they're at risk, obviously non fatal means
of control or always something that it's good to be
able to have, but I do think there needs to
be technical units of police who are well trained in
the use of those things that when they're required, they
are used.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Mat doc are you the same or you you on
the other side.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
I mean, first to acknowledge the fatality and the loved
ones of that individual and the individual and critical condition
in hospital as well, and also thinking of the police
officers who were put in that position. And the reality is,
as we know, the police officers go out and put
themselves in harms way to keep us safe. So look,
(02:51):
the risk here is we extrapolaid out from a specific
situation to a more generalist view quite binary. Should police
be armed or not? Every situation is specific, and I
think that's why police quote rightly look at decisions like
that as operational. But I would put one view out
(03:11):
there that I have is potentially what might have happened
if the police had not been armed, And that is
concerning as well about ensuring that we maintain our police
force safely as well.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
So it was a tragic outcome. A couple of other
tragedies in recent history, the two innocent people who have
been killed by patients from Hilmorton Hospital and this report
came out this week on conditions in the running of
Hilmarton Hospital. As you were aware, Matt. As you'll know,
Megan wasn't flash and it was initiated after the killing
(03:48):
of the woman in Sockburn by the patient. Now I've
got a bit of a beef with your response, Matt,
because in the comments you made after the report came
out the other day, you said a few things and
your promise changes and all of that, But then you
banged on the usual drum of blaming the last government.
(04:09):
Can you explain the justification for doing that or you
have to explain a bit more? Would I've said, Well,
you said we inherited this from the last government. Well,
the same old line that you're saying, but you're not
saying about everything.
Speaker 4 (04:21):
Well, well, I suppose that that is the report lays
bare the state of Hillmorton in that specific point of
time June twenty twenty two, and that is the reality
of the system that we inherited. There's also I actually
went further to talk about the finding specifically in page
(04:42):
thirty three of the report that laid bear the challenges
of dealing with the COVID response and restructuring the health
system and what was taken away was regional decision making
and time and time again in the report it talked
about business cases put up to get resources to change
some of the situations, people not knowing who the decision
(05:06):
makers were. That this report is based on looking at
the systemic issues. So I do want to acknowledge there
is two individuals here that sadly lost their lives. Those
individual reports are in front of the coroner at the moment,
so there is non publication orders. But this is about
the wider systemic issues where they found failings right from
(05:31):
staff shortages as an example of a new graduate nurse
who turned up to work one day and been told
she was the team leader, no experience or knowledge, so
we had staff shortages. We also had beds that were
being capped that led to early discharges and delayed admission.
On the leadership and government's issue, it's so fine these
(05:53):
are laid be in so lightly Health New Zealand has
taken responsibility right, have implemented eighteen new recommendation.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
Now you're rapiting on stuff that I'm going to ask you.
I'm going to ask you something. How can you and
I'm not saying your pick favorites, But how can you
trop this out and the report puts it out black
and white that this place is in the crap and
you can justify suddenly writing out a check of twenty
four million bucks to Mike King. How can you say
pick favorites and mental health in this way?
Speaker 4 (06:21):
Well, excuse me, John. I also announced fifty one million
dollars to forensic inpatient facilities. So in fact, there's a
range of issues we need to address in the mental
health system. This year. The Mental Health and Addiction Ring
Fence funding is two point eight billion, and you're focusing
on a funding contract of six million out of two
(06:43):
point eight billion, Megan Woods.
Speaker 3 (06:45):
So I'm pretty close to one of these cases. Will
Mordern Hospital was in my electorate and have worked extensively
with some of the people that were very closely impacted
by one of these incidents. I think there are times
when politicians have to rise above the talking points, have
(07:06):
to rise above the blame game, and I think we
all have to face facts, the staffing shortages and mental
health of something that have been going on for decades.
It is in terms of the workforce development, we started
work mets continued some of that work. We've all got
to take this opportunity to look at this and look
at why.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
I remind you too that Labor did not deliver on
its commitments.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
In terms of the workforce. That is a challenge in
mental health and it takes time. You can't just create
psychiatric nurses overnight, and we had started their training. We're
also committed money to the upgrade of the facilities at Hillmorton,
and that had begun under us. But I don't want
to say Labor National. This is something we all have
to take responsibility for and it's something that we've got
(07:52):
to work. It's the care of the patients in that facility,
it's the staff who are at risk every day when
they go to work, and it's also the community. I
live in Hillmorton, in the suburb of Hillmorton and for
the community around the makeing sure that we've had this
facility in our neighborhood for well over one hundred years,
(08:13):
but making sure that we can ensure the safety of
everyone is a really important thing. And we've got to
rise above three year politic political cycles and thinking about it.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
All Right, Megan, here's your chance, here's your chance to
defend Chris Hipkins, Dame de Cinder and durn Grant Robinson
and Niasha Vereal for being no shows at the COVID inquiry.
Speaker 3 (08:35):
Look, I think I've read the minute that the Royal
Commission put out this week really carefully. I think one
of the things that that lays really clear is how
cooperative all four of those people have been. They have
and there's sentences in that.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Maybe you love you, are you laughing more? Or am I?
Speaker 3 (08:51):
Well? I mean read the minute and it makes really
clear that every question that has been put to those
former ministers has been answers.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
I know, pages pages, but you and you know as
much as I know that there is no follow up
question when you do a written submission, and you know
as much as I know, they're quite often those follow
up questions are the questions that shine the real light
on things.
Speaker 3 (09:16):
So you know as much as I as well as
I know, John, that the last section of that minute
also says that a procedure for those follow up questions
will be developed. So it's not saying that this is it,
this is the end of the questions. It makes really
clear that there will be a procedure for those follow
up questions and that is perfectly acceptable. What else that
(09:37):
minute makes really clear is that there were safety concerns
that the Royal Commission.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
Yeah, you will hold on, hold on. A set of
lawyers told them, A set of lawyers told them, and
your guys say, oh brilliant, we'll take that, Thank you
very much.
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No, I think there are real safety concerns and that
has been taken into account by the Royal Commission. But
in terms of let's look what we're trying to achieve here,
and of course we should take the opportunity to learn
everything we can for what we through in a global pandemic.
Should there be questions? Yes, should there be follow up?
Speaker 2 (10:11):
Tell me, I'll come to MAP. I kind of know
what Ma's going to say. Tell me why people should
even listen to Chris Hipkins when he stands up next
gen says vote me as prime minister, after this lot,
after this carry on? Why should people listen to him?
Speaker 3 (10:26):
Because Chris Hipkins fronts up every day. I mean, I
think people are getting confused John that this is absolutely correct.
It's not like this is a person who's unwilling to
front and answer questions. He fronts up each and every
day in his job as leader of the opposition and
will continue to do so. He's given full answers. In fact,
he put aside two hours to go and answer any
(10:47):
questions that the cod they only had symbols. Okay, now
I'm going to pull you up on that, John, then
so symbolic that the Royal Commission has found his safety concerns.
What is the point? What we need is a country
as answers and that will happen.
Speaker 4 (11:02):
Matt douci, Well, I might surprise you John and your listeners.
I mightn't actually have much to say, because I actually
think kiwis see this for what it is and they
don't need it to be explained to them. And you know,
it was supposed to be the most open and transparent government, but.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
They didn't say they'd be an open transparent opposition. Remember
that they didn't say that.
Speaker 4 (11:23):
And look, people will see it for what it is.
Every reason Megan's given you her new explanation just quite
frankly begs the question, well then why not front up?
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Then very surely we'll get to these plane in creases
for some of these local councilors. First, though, Matt Doocey,
the wood End Bypass, you've got Dan Gordon, he's obviously
in campaign mode, he's upset about the toll. But what
did come through this week when we talked about it
on the show, people saying people calling up saying they
were in favor of road tolls, but not for such
(11:54):
a tiny stretch of road, which the wood End Bypass
is going to be. What's your response to that?
Speaker 4 (11:58):
Well, you know, with respect, it's that classic statement, I'm
in favor of something, just not here and you know
I respect our mea Dan Gordon and why MUKADEDI but
he's been well over the issues for a long time.
In fact, it's been a frequent appearer on the front
page of local newspapers that it will be the first
(12:19):
road to be potentially told in the South Island. So look,
I get it. When the actual consultations out, it gets
a bit sporty and people get concerned and naturally when
you're talking about added costs to individuals, I understand it
as well. So that's why it's important with n ZTA
they get their modeling right. Everyone should have a free alternative.
(12:42):
And also what we want to do is ensure that
actually we're not displacing people and if the cost is
too high, then people will actually take the free alternative
and then people won't pay the tolls. Actually counterproductive to
what we're trying to do here.
Speaker 2 (13:01):
What are you trying to do? Actually?
Speaker 4 (13:02):
Well, actually we've been very clear and we stood on
a mandate in the election and Bishop where see Simeon Brown,
our Transport minister and our Chris Bishop been very clear
about introducing new funding and financing tolls roads. That means told,
but what.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Are you trying to do with the bypass?
Speaker 4 (13:18):
Well, tolls will pay for the construction and the ongoing
maintenance as well as we see internationally and even in
the North Island as well, the use of tolls. So
I get it. It's new and people will be concerned
about the displacement. I know Jason at Kaipo in naw School,
the principal there.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
So histors aren't warranted.
Speaker 4 (13:39):
No, I think they're very warranted, and that's why NZTA
needs to be looking at that, because the reality is
it's no point tolling if people are going to be
displaced into the other road.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Right, So are you saying that there is a chance
that people will convince NZTA not to apply a toll.
Speaker 4 (13:56):
Well, I think that's the whole point of the consultation,
is that is that what you'd like to say, No,
But it's the trade off between the price and people's behavior, right,
And if they don't get the right, that's what their
modeling's about to ensure that actually they get the full
capture using tolling, but not actually displacing everyone because that's
counterproductive to the toll in the first place. Right, there's
(14:18):
a balance.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
So all of those people who called up the other day, right,
and you don't want to pay the toll, this is
what you do. It closes on September the ninth. Put
in your submission nineteenth. You've got more ten days more
than I was given you, and you've got a chance.
And if NZTA, if they get enough submissions against your
saying that the toll will go.
Speaker 4 (14:38):
Well know that we've got to hear what their concerns
about the toll are. So some people are saying, look,
what we don't want to see is displacement of traffic
into the free alternatives. That's correct. And if they're saying,
actually that the toll is going to cause that, but
then what we would quite rightly want to hear from
n ZTA who have done the modeling, what their evidence
(15:00):
to say that actual behavior isn't going to happen. So
that's the process we're going through.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
Megan, Once there's no toll on transmission Gully, do you
think there should be a toll on more?
Speaker 3 (15:08):
Then by I think the South Island's getting really short changed.
We've got two roads of national significance, fifty percent of
them are being told. I want to know a fifty
percent of North Island roads being told because it looks
like we're only getting two and we're having to pay
for one of the labor. But one of the things
that's simply not correct, man, But one of the things
that I'm also.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Concerned about you or you a chance.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Concerned about from a broader South Island perspective. Not only
is it the thirty up to thirteen hundred dollars a year,
it's going to cost individuals that are going to be
using this.
Speaker 2 (15:42):
For the I don't know where Dan Gordon got that.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
Messache no, and I'm citing his figure there. But the
one that I've been thinking about that's really worrying John.
I know Matt will let you come back on this
one is actually what it's going to do to the
cross of freight in the South Island, so that we
know that we're having to use trucks we don't have
the rail enabled ferry there that it's two dollars fifty
(16:08):
at each of those points. That's five dollars one way,
ten dollars return on every track movement at a time
when costs are rising, that we're going to be adding
to the cost of freight in the South Island, and
that does really concern me. We're being let down in
terms of the infrastructure that's going in here. We've only
got two I'm really pleased to hear Matt say that
(16:29):
this decision can be turned over and the Wooden Bypass
won't be told. So we look forward to you coming
back on the show and saying you've stood up for
the South Island and you've stood up.
Speaker 4 (16:38):
And you've.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
We got some music.
Speaker 3 (16:42):
No, I'm really hartened to hear me on the show.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Full orchestra. I'd say, John, it's like the Titanic movie.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
The first one you're told the front of the boat.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
Yeah, you're told you're.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
On your own the lifeboat.
Speaker 3 (17:03):
Mate.
Speaker 4 (17:03):
The first thing i'd say, the world, you know, the
crocodile tears from a former labor minister who was part
of a government that canceled the Wooden Bypass in twenty eighteen.
And I just put the question what would be the
cost of building it back then? That is today and
actually the cost of an action has added cost to that.
(17:25):
The second thing I say is I've challenged previously hold
on about whether they would reverse the toll, and clearly
they don't.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Anyway on you, we don't have to because you will
have over ten are you to everyone on it?
Speaker 2 (17:40):
I'm just going to do that. I'm going to do that.
You see what I've done. I've just turned your microphones off.
So now I'm going to hear what you're doing. And
now what we're going to do is on the topic
of money, I'm going to find out how you feel.
I'm glad you're laughing, becuse I've got no trouble once
for doing that for someone else, and I won't say
I won't say who it was. How do you feel
Let's start with way macarerni Man, because it's relevant to you.
How do you feel about counselors at Wayne mcaherny being
(18:01):
in line for a twenty two percent pay increase.
Speaker 4 (18:04):
Look, I think it's always concerning when we talk about
pay increases, especially for elected representatives. There's no friends to
be made when we talk about ourselves and our salaries.
I mean it is independent, renunrational authority.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
You're losing that, you're losing thateses Well, no.
Speaker 4 (18:26):
Because the decisions are made external to them. But the
reality is people will have a choice because democracy, they're
going to get a choice of selection.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
I'm saying they've got a moral obligation to say no
to pay increases of that sort.
Speaker 4 (18:39):
Well, that's up for people standing for counsel all right,
Well let's a Megan'll put Selwyn to you.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
The councils there in line for a twenty six twenty
six percent pay increase. What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (18:52):
Oh yeah, and look, I mean for every family that's
out there struggling, it's hard to feed them someone getting
twenty six percent pay increase. I completely get that. One
of the things you're saying people should say no to
those pay increases. One of the issues when that hap
is this bank's up. So what it means is when
the remunerational theory that has to come back by law
(19:13):
to then value the job down the track that there's
all this deferred stuff. I actually think the way we
set the pay for politicians, I don't think it's particularly
well done.
Speaker 2 (19:26):
I'll say that.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
No, I think no. I actually think that what we
need to do is actually talk about it in terms
of yearly increases. These are usually three years, so we're
talking about pay increases that are spread over three years.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
Someone got a three point seven percent increase in July.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
Yeah. What I'm saying is, I think this is really
hard for people to to fare them. They're struggling. Yeah,
They're absolutely hard for people to feare them, and I
think there's probably a better way to do this. I
think what we need to be doing is building trust
in people who are elected and not you know, people
there thinking how the hell am I going to pay
(20:07):
my mortgage on my rent and then reading in the
paper someone's getting a twenty six percent and crazy, it's
really difficult.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Crazy. Hey, thank you both, nice to say it, Thank you,
thank you, thank you. Politics right it back next week.
Speaker 1 (20:19):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald. Listen live
to news talks at be Christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio,
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.