November 25, 2025 • 9 mins
Labour Leader Chris Hipkins says he's not clear what the Government's aiming for in its plans to change local government.
It's proposing replacing the country's 11 regional councils with boards made up of local mayors.
Hipkins agrees there's an obvious need for change.
But he told John MacDonald he thinks this looks like an attempt to make councils amalgamate.
Hipkins says if that's what they wanted, they should have told councils to go away and amalgamate.
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 Talk Z'B.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And every second Win's out the time we catch up
with Labor and Opposition leader Cross Spkins. Go Chris, good a, John,
how are you very well? Thank you?
Speaker 3 (00:20):
You're right, I'm very good. Thank you. I'm good. That
feels like some as on the way.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Well there, but a winning planning happening too, are here?
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Oh yeah, Well that might be a bit further away
than the summer. Maybe maybe next summer.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Okay, might pressure on that one, but I will look
forward to the invitation. Let's talk about regional councils. When
when you heard that the government that came out with
this announcement day it wants to get rid of regional councils.
What was the immediate thought that went through your head?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Well, there is a case for local government reform. So
my immediate question was what exactly are they proposing and
will it work? Because I think, you know, we can
all see that that we need to make some changes
to the way our local government system works. I'm not
convinced that what they've come up with is going to work,
but we're into having a conversation about how we can
do local government better.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
All right, okay, so what makes you not convinced?
Speaker 3 (01:13):
Well, but sort of back to the nineteen eighties really previously,
I think they called them united councils that we had
prior to the nineteen eighties reforms which looked quite similar
to what the government are proposing now, and they didn't work.
So the feedback from people who were involved in the
reforms in the nineteen eighties where regional councils were established
in their current form, was it Having this sort of
(01:35):
united council model where mayors made up the regional committees
just led to parochialism, that led to stuff not happening
because people couldn't agree, and ultimately, you know, things just
got run down.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
See the idea of having the mayor's taken on the
job of running regional councils over two years and then
also in parallel with that, coming up with a plan
for local democracy. What does that actually mean? Because I
can't imagine why the government would tolerate different areas coming
up with different models. Do you see that that is
being a sticky point?
Speaker 3 (02:09):
I mean, ultimately, I think it's clear the government wants
to see a whole lot of local government amalgamation. If
they want that, they should just come out exactly. If
they want local councils to amalgamate, then they should just
say go away and come up with an amalgamation plan.
But so I think this is a very convoluted way.
If amalgamation is what they want, this is a very
convoluted way of achieving it.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
So what do you want.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I think there is a case for amalgamation in some areas.
I mean, I'm a Wellingtonian. We've got five metro councils
in Wellington that doesn't really make much sense. So I'm
in favor of some local government consolidation, and we do
need to consider where regional councils fit within that. You know,
I was pretty critical of the Auckland supersity proposal when
it was ushered through, but it's actually working pretty well.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
And that's what I said to someone else earlier, because
my view is we need unitary authorities, and certainly the
Great Christ a chariot. I think having a regional council
and three other councils, you know, full and total, is
over kill, and I'd bring them all to get all
together into a unitary authority and someone said to me
last hour. They said, oh, well, yeah, look at the
super city in Auckland that hasn't worked. But there's differences
(03:16):
you learn from what hasn't worked. And also we're much
smaller than Auckland.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Yeah, and I'm not saying that Auckland's perfect. There's certainly
still some improvements to make. And I agree with the
decisions that they've made in the last year or two
to give some power back to Auckland Council and away
from the with the ceeos, you know, the council controlled organizations.
I think, you know, put a bit more control back
in the hands of the elected council. So I agree
(03:41):
with changes. I think Auckland's still got room to improve.
But just be up front, you know. My message to
the government is just be upfront with New Zealanders with
what you actually want. It's still not clear what the
government actually wants here.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Okay, in relation to christ Church, do you think there'd
be if you were you know, local government minister or
even Prime Minister in christ said we want to have
a unitary authority, you know, blending the regional council and
the two district councils and the city council. Why don't
you say that.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
If people in christ Church said, you know, this is
what we want, we'd be absolutely open to that. One
of the things I'm concerned about in the current government's
proposal is that they're actually shutting out local voice. They're
basically saying the government's going to decide on behalf of
local communities. I think there does need to still be
some local community voice here. Remember National campaigned on putting
(04:28):
the decisions back in the hands of locals. They're now
taking it away again.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
They're also talking about putting in a government having a
government appointment on these transitionary entities.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
Again, it sort of looks a bit like they've got
a plan, but they're just not willing to be upfront
about it. So are they going to put these commissioners
in place so that they can ram through an agenda
that they're not telling New Zealanders about? You know what
are they actually trying to achieve?
Speaker 2 (04:53):
You? It seems that the fashional thing in Wellington at
the moment is writing up a kV Saber policies of
you come up does the Labor Party come up with one?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Well Funnily enough, we have actually been working on some
changes to Kiwi Savor since the last election and we
will have a key We Saver policy next year. You know,
we're really proud of ki We Saver. We introduced it,
we've been very supportive of it, and I do welcome
the fact that the National Party now, finally after about
forty years of dithering on the topic, now seemed to
be in favor of retirement savings every time. As an
(05:27):
undermined it, isn't.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
It a bit rich to say that you've been working
on something for what is now two years and you're
not going to be releasing anything till next year, and
then you accuse the current government of dithering.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
Well, if you go back over the last forty years,
John Labor introduced to a universal retirement saving scheme under
Norman Kirk and it was Moulding government that have bolished it.
We introduced Kei Saver and the National Party's cut it twice.
The fact that they're now talking about expanding key We
Saver for the first time is a very very welcome change.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
And your policy, will it be consistent with what's already
been proposed by National consistent with what has already been
proposed by New Zealand first, or something completely different.
Speaker 3 (06:06):
A lot of gaps and what National have proposed. I'm
in favor of increasing New Zealand's retirement savings, so I
think getting up to retirement savings level similar to Australia
is a good aspiration for us to have. So you'll
find some agreement with National in that area. I think
there's big gaps around what they're doing to They've got
no support in there for people on low incomes who
(06:26):
aren't currently in KIV Saver. There's no support for people
who are not in the workforce, I stay at home
parent and so on, so there's nothing in their policy
for them. There's no protections to stop employers cutting people's
pay in order to cover the cost of increased KIV
Saver contributions. So I think, you know, there's huge gaps
in Nationals policy. So it's not the aspiration that we
(06:48):
have any issue with. I agree with the aspiration of
increasing savings. I think we just need to have a
longer term strategic view on how we achieve that.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
So you're talking about government contributions for example for people
who are not working, all people on benefits as that
what you're talking.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
About, not necessarily, but there needs to be some port
for people who armed in q We Saver to get
into Kiwi Saver. So what do we know about the
people who aren't in ke We Savior? Now? They tend
to be higher amongst self employed, so few are self
employed people in Kiwi Saver. There's higher rates of non
enrollment amongst people who are on low incomes, and of
(07:25):
course the people who are not in the workforce and
the real challenges. We're going to create a real problem
further down the track if we don't do something for
those people.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
So what could be done?
Speaker 3 (07:34):
They reach retirement where they won't have the savings that
everybody else does.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
So what could be done for those people?
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Chris, Well, you just have to wait and see. John.
We've got some policy coming on that area ourselves next year.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Next year, absolutely all right, just in time for the election.
You were calling on the government to be upfront about
its plans for local government and resource management all of that.
Can you be upfront in relation to Labour's relationship with
his Zealand first, because I'm getting some really mixed messages.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yes, sure, we don't really have one. I don't know
if I can be much more our friends than that.
You know, Winston Peters is all over the show who knows.
I think that one of the messages out of Winston
Peter's the latest posturing is if you're voting for Winston Peters,
who knows what you're voting for? If you want a
change of government and the next election vote Labor.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Are you open to working with New Zealand first? Or
is that doorstore closed?
Speaker 3 (08:27):
I think it's you know, I think our public comments
on that would suggest that, you know, it would be
a very difficult working relationship. I've said that what we'll
do before the election has set out who we can
and can't work with, and I'm going to be very
clear with New Zealand is about that. As I was
at the last election.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
You talk about your public statements, what's your private sentiment, It's.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Exactly the same as my public statements. And I'll see
that I was out closer to the election.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Do you see that changing?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Look? You know, a lot can happen in a year.
We're still a year away from the election, but you know,
I think it's it's pretty clear that if people want certainty,
if they wants to build. If they want a change
of government, then voting labor is the best way to
achieve those things.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
If it meant you becoming prime minister again, would you
swallow the dead rat?
Speaker 3 (09:16):
Look, before the election, I'll set out of the parties
that we can work with and areas that we have
in common with the other parties. But you know those
some of those parties are changing their position rapidly by
the day.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
All right, But but at this point you're not ruling
them out.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
I'm not ruling anyone in or out at this point.
I think it's too early for that.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
All right. Catch up in a fortnight. We will be
getting close to Christmas.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
Thanks Chris cool and indeed, well it salts you in
a fortnite, brilliant.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Thank you for more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald.
Listen live to news Talks It'd 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 Talk Z'B.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
And every second Win's out the time we catch up
with Labor and Opposition leader Cross Spkins. Go Chris, good a, John,
how are you very well? Thank you?
Speaker 3 (00:20):
You're right, I'm very good. Thank you. I'm good. That
feels like some as on the way.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
Well there, but a winning planning happening too, are here?
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Oh yeah, Well that might be a bit further away
than the summer. Maybe maybe next summer.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Okay, might pressure on that one, but I will look
forward to the invitation. Let's talk about regional councils. When
when you heard that the government that came out with
this announcement day it wants to get rid of regional councils.
What was the immediate thought that went through your head?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Well, there is a case for local government reform. So
my immediate question was what exactly are they proposing and
will it work? Because I think, you know, we can
all see that that we need to make some changes
to the way our local government system works. I'm not
convinced that what they've come up with is going to work,
but we're into having a conversation about how we can
do local government better.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
All right, okay, so what makes you not convinced?
Speaker 3 (01:13):
Well, but sort of back to the nineteen eighties really previously,
I think they called them united councils that we had
prior to the nineteen eighties reforms which looked quite similar
to what the government are proposing now, and they didn't work.
So the feedback from people who were involved in the
reforms in the nineteen eighties where regional councils were established
in their current form, was it Having this sort of
(01:35):
united council model where mayors made up the regional committees
just led to parochialism, that led to stuff not happening
because people couldn't agree, and ultimately, you know, things just
got run down.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
See the idea of having the mayor's taken on the
job of running regional councils over two years and then
also in parallel with that, coming up with a plan
for local democracy. What does that actually mean? Because I
can't imagine why the government would tolerate different areas coming
up with different models. Do you see that that is
being a sticky point?
Speaker 3 (02:09):
I mean, ultimately, I think it's clear the government wants
to see a whole lot of local government amalgamation. If
they want that, they should just come out exactly. If
they want local councils to amalgamate, then they should just
say go away and come up with an amalgamation plan.
But so I think this is a very convoluted way.
If amalgamation is what they want, this is a very
convoluted way of achieving it.
Speaker 2 (02:28):
So what do you want.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I think there is a case for amalgamation in some areas.
I mean, I'm a Wellingtonian. We've got five metro councils
in Wellington that doesn't really make much sense. So I'm
in favor of some local government consolidation, and we do
need to consider where regional councils fit within that. You know,
I was pretty critical of the Auckland supersity proposal when
it was ushered through, but it's actually working pretty well.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
And that's what I said to someone else earlier, because
my view is we need unitary authorities, and certainly the
Great Christ a chariot. I think having a regional council
and three other councils, you know, full and total, is
over kill, and I'd bring them all to get all
together into a unitary authority and someone said to me
last hour. They said, oh, well, yeah, look at the
super city in Auckland that hasn't worked. But there's differences
(03:16):
you learn from what hasn't worked. And also we're much
smaller than Auckland.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
Yeah, and I'm not saying that Auckland's perfect. There's certainly
still some improvements to make. And I agree with the
decisions that they've made in the last year or two
to give some power back to Auckland Council and away
from the with the ceeos, you know, the council controlled organizations.
I think, you know, put a bit more control back
in the hands of the elected council. So I agree
(03:41):
with changes. I think Auckland's still got room to improve.
But just be up front, you know. My message to
the government is just be upfront with New Zealanders with
what you actually want. It's still not clear what the
government actually wants here.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
Okay, in relation to christ Church, do you think there'd
be if you were you know, local government minister or
even Prime Minister in christ said we want to have
a unitary authority, you know, blending the regional council and
the two district councils and the city council. Why don't
you say that.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
If people in christ Church said, you know, this is
what we want, we'd be absolutely open to that. One
of the things I'm concerned about in the current government's
proposal is that they're actually shutting out local voice. They're
basically saying the government's going to decide on behalf of
local communities. I think there does need to still be
some local community voice here. Remember National campaigned on putting
(04:28):
the decisions back in the hands of locals. They're now
taking it away again.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
They're also talking about putting in a government having a
government appointment on these transitionary entities.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
Again, it sort of looks a bit like they've got
a plan, but they're just not willing to be upfront
about it. So are they going to put these commissioners
in place so that they can ram through an agenda
that they're not telling New Zealanders about? You know what
are they actually trying to achieve?
Speaker 2 (04:53):
You? It seems that the fashional thing in Wellington at
the moment is writing up a kV Saber policies of
you come up does the Labor Party come up with one?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
Well Funnily enough, we have actually been working on some
changes to Kiwi Savor since the last election and we
will have a key We Saver policy next year. You know,
we're really proud of ki We Saver. We introduced it,
we've been very supportive of it, and I do welcome
the fact that the National Party now, finally after about
forty years of dithering on the topic, now seemed to
be in favor of retirement savings every time. As an
(05:27):
undermined it, isn't.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
It a bit rich to say that you've been working
on something for what is now two years and you're
not going to be releasing anything till next year, and
then you accuse the current government of dithering.
Speaker 3 (05:38):
Well, if you go back over the last forty years,
John Labor introduced to a universal retirement saving scheme under
Norman Kirk and it was Moulding government that have bolished it.
We introduced Kei Saver and the National Party's cut it twice.
The fact that they're now talking about expanding key We
Saver for the first time is a very very welcome change.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
And your policy, will it be consistent with what's already
been proposed by National consistent with what has already been
proposed by New Zealand first, or something completely different.
Speaker 3 (06:06):
A lot of gaps and what National have proposed. I'm
in favor of increasing New Zealand's retirement savings, so I
think getting up to retirement savings level similar to Australia
is a good aspiration for us to have. So you'll
find some agreement with National in that area. I think
there's big gaps around what they're doing to They've got
no support in there for people on low incomes who
(06:26):
aren't currently in KIV Saver. There's no support for people
who are not in the workforce, I stay at home
parent and so on, so there's nothing in their policy
for them. There's no protections to stop employers cutting people's
pay in order to cover the cost of increased KIV
Saver contributions. So I think, you know, there's huge gaps
in Nationals policy. So it's not the aspiration that we
(06:48):
have any issue with. I agree with the aspiration of
increasing savings. I think we just need to have a
longer term strategic view on how we achieve that.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
So you're talking about government contributions for example for people
who are not working, all people on benefits as that
what you're talking.
Speaker 3 (07:02):
About, not necessarily, but there needs to be some port
for people who armed in q We Saver to get
into Kiwi Saver. So what do we know about the
people who aren't in ke We Savior? Now? They tend
to be higher amongst self employed, so few are self
employed people in Kiwi Saver. There's higher rates of non
enrollment amongst people who are on low incomes, and of
(07:25):
course the people who are not in the workforce and
the real challenges. We're going to create a real problem
further down the track if we don't do something for
those people.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
So what could be done?
Speaker 3 (07:34):
They reach retirement where they won't have the savings that
everybody else does.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
So what could be done for those people?
Speaker 3 (07:38):
Chris, Well, you just have to wait and see. John.
We've got some policy coming on that area ourselves next year.
Speaker 2 (07:47):
Next year, absolutely all right, just in time for the election.
You were calling on the government to be upfront about
its plans for local government and resource management all of that.
Can you be upfront in relation to Labour's relationship with
his Zealand first, because I'm getting some really mixed messages.
Speaker 3 (08:05):
Yes, sure, we don't really have one. I don't know
if I can be much more our friends than that.
You know, Winston Peters is all over the show who knows.
I think that one of the messages out of Winston
Peter's the latest posturing is if you're voting for Winston Peters,
who knows what you're voting for? If you want a
change of government and the next election vote Labor.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Are you open to working with New Zealand first? Or
is that doorstore closed?
Speaker 3 (08:27):
I think it's you know, I think our public comments
on that would suggest that, you know, it would be
a very difficult working relationship. I've said that what we'll
do before the election has set out who we can
and can't work with, and I'm going to be very
clear with New Zealand is about that. As I was
at the last election.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
You talk about your public statements, what's your private sentiment, It's.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
Exactly the same as my public statements. And I'll see
that I was out closer to the election.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Do you see that changing?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
Look? You know, a lot can happen in a year.
We're still a year away from the election, but you know,
I think it's it's pretty clear that if people want certainty,
if they wants to build. If they want a change
of government, then voting labor is the best way to
achieve those things.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
If it meant you becoming prime minister again, would you
swallow the dead rat?
Speaker 3 (09:16):
Look, before the election, I'll set out of the parties
that we can work with and areas that we have
in common with the other parties. But you know those
some of those parties are changing their position rapidly by
the day.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
All right, But but at this point you're not ruling
them out.
Speaker 3 (09:32):
I'm not ruling anyone in or out at this point.
I think it's too early for that.
Speaker 2 (09:35):
All right. Catch up in a fortnight. We will be
getting close to Christmas.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
Thanks Chris cool and indeed, well it salts you in
a fortnite, brilliant.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Thank you for more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald.
Listen live to news Talks It'd 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.
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.
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.