March 10, 2025 • 12 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Monday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) Even Wrong Perceptions Are Reality/What Key Would Do/Yak Yak/The Health Report Is All Bad/The Art of Achieving Nothing
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 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from news Talks dB. Follow
this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio Rewrap.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Okay there and welcome to the Rewrap for Tuesday, all
the best butts from the Mike Hosking Breakfast on News Doks.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
He'd be in a sillier package. I am ben Hart and.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Today, what's it like interviewing Christopher Luckson? What's it like
to be interviewed by Mike Hosking if you are Christopher Luxon?
Speaker 3 (00:39):
And should you have given Andrew Bailey leave? If you're
Christopher Luxon? The health targets, the health stuff and achieving nothing?
What's it like doing that for a living? But before
any of that.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Yes, So we've got a poll out, But poles don't
matter if the results don't agree with what you think.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
I think that's what we've learned from this poll.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
Now for the better part of the afternoon, Various Digital
Science Lab with the poll that has won the labor
group forming a GOV and two Hipkins overtaking Luxen as
preferred leader. Now, the pole, I'm here to tell you
this morning is full of holes and I wouldn't put
any more weight on it than I would any other
individual set of numbers, But was the fact that was
so heavily covered. In fact, it's on the print version
of the Herald as a lead story this morning, It's
(01:23):
on the television last night, television news last night as well.
Was the fact that was so heavily covered, so widely
and so long because one, the media are biased and
this suits their narrative, or two it is in fact
significant when one leader leapfrogs another and the government grouping
is no longer supported by enough people to stay in power?
Should the imaginary election be held today? Forgetting for a
(01:44):
moment that a pole is only a snapshot, and more importantly,
all over the world these days, poles increasingly count for
little of anything. Let us just quickly dissect why it
is not worth much. The Greens are up over three
to ten, not real? They have grown almost a third
more support, have they? How it hasn't happened? The Maori
Party up over two to six. Hasn't happened? They've grown
(02:05):
a third more of their support have they as well?
To reach an they've never come close to. How's that happened?
It's not real? Act have dropped over two to seven
point seven now that might might have happened if the
lunch pushback is real. Hipkins up three possible. He's had
some good coverage of late still barks at most cars.
But if you're sick of Luxen and Hipkins isn't irritating
(02:25):
you too much, maybe you're warming to them. But here
is what I know from forty odd years of radio
rating small players ie the Murray Party, of the Green Party,
of the Act Party, they don't move in such large
numbers unless something materially has changed, and nothing materially has changed.
But big butt, whether you accept the numbers or not,
it comes at a very bad time for the government,
who are dealing with an ongoing, if not mounting, amount
(02:47):
of commentary around the PM and his ability to be
a PM. We can all connect with quite a bit
of recent commentary may or may not have come directly
from his appearance on this show. So these numbers merely
extend out the broader idea that, for whatever reason, Old
Luso has never really got alongside your average key. We
have been accepted as one of us. And whether you
accept the numbers or not, the real politic is backbenches
(03:09):
get nervous and when they're nervous, the chatter starts.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Yeah, so despite these pole holes, there does seem to
be a perception out there that Lackson isn't popular, and
perception is reality and politics, isn't it?
Speaker 3 (03:24):
So rewrap? So yeah, he was on with Mike this morning.
Do you think he enjoys that? Do you think Mike
enjoys it? Which one of them enjoys it more? Do
you reckon?
Speaker 4 (03:35):
I'm holding back my main negotiating weapon. They just rang
back and they were whining already about the hours and
how we're going to do this and how we're going
to sort it out. My main weapon and negotiation is
John Key used to do it. How do you think
that's going to go down?
Speaker 3 (03:52):
Mike?
Speaker 4 (03:52):
What a delight? And he did too. He used to
infuriate the gallery because of course, the idea is the
gallery travel with the Prime Minister, and so they get
the Prime Minister exclusively to themselves, and then he'd ring
me and they'll go.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Hack him, your ringing Hostking.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
I think he used to infuriate his own staff as well.
They would tell us quite specifically that he wouldn't do it, and.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Then then he did.
Speaker 4 (04:14):
Yeah exactly. So anyway, so we're still negotiating on that.
And I will not take no for an answer, no
reason why the prime ministers just because in India can't
ring us and talk to us on the program. It's
not like something magical happens. And I'm sorry, I'm overseas.
The phones don't work. I mean you could say, look,
I took it, I took the air Force plane and
I don't know where I am and there's no communication.
Now maybe I fully understand that. Mike, what a delight,
(04:36):
thank you? Oh no, sorry, but what a delight. What
other prime minister would have such a relaxed professional relationship
and a good old laugh with the radio host. Good
on you, Thank you, Peter. Mike, you're ongoing attempts to
belittle lux and a starting to do with and well,
I don't know where I'm at. I mean, what's what's
going on? I got to love I got to hate her. Hey,
stop demanding exact dates and times. Well I wasn't demanding
(04:56):
exact dates and times. I said, have you got a
time frame? It's not really I'm not saying is it tuesday?
Is it tuodat twelve? Is it choose that one fifteen?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
It would be good.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
It would be good, of course it would be good.
But me, I'd be demeaning the them. I'd be belittening them.
So I don't do that. I just to ask for
rough time frames. But at least one of you thought
I did a good job. I don't have to be here,
you know, I'm only I'm only I'm only here for them.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
When you past retirement age, I don't have to be
You won't be gone.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
Get rid of me.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Yeah, that's all because luck Thing's going to be in
another country next week when we would normally talk to him.
But he seems pretty committed to be here, so I'll
see what happens. I mean, some people go to other countries,
probably for the express reason that you can't get hold
(05:45):
of them, especially if it's like base camp at Everest.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
I don't watch TV one news much these days. I
love people who start with that. I don't watch television anymore.
But just on the one night I happened to I
saw this last night Andrew Bailey coverage. No, you've got
this wrong. They were waiting for him at the airport.
No they weren't. That was old footage. It was file
foot You don't get too confused. The point I raised
(06:09):
with the Texan spear point is was Andrew Bailey not
a story? Or is that not a story? The guy
has gone on holiday? Are we now covering people who
go on holiday? And just because he's gone to base
camp at Everest, who doesn't go to base camp at Everest.
We've all been to base camp Everest. Come on and
he rides a yack and he wanders to run. You know,
good luck to the guy. So he made a very
(06:31):
good If you want an insight into Luxeon, have a
look at his press conference yesterday post cabinet and when
the person I think it was Ben at cumber Patch
of TV one who asked that question, and I think
you watch Luckson's face, he literally physically reacted to it,
and it gives you an insight into the fact he's
actually a nice guy. And the inference being that somehow,
(06:53):
because you quit, you're not allowed to have a holiday
and the country's going to stop. You gotta remember this.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Let's go squeally into your moan. If your bum's on fire,
you put it out.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Guy question because we wanted a guy in charge of
the country knows how to run a business. But then
when he runs the country like a business. We don't
like it because in a business, regardless of whether somebody's resigned,
if they ask us some leave, you generally give them
some leak.
Speaker 4 (07:20):
You've got to generally give them.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
But if you're in trouble as a politician.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Like if you're not a nice guy and ask for leave,
we want you to stay staying there so we can
really in the studies and.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Throw some vegetables at you. Other than let you write
a yack.
Speaker 4 (07:34):
Couldn't agreement.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
You ride the X. You just put your stuff on
the Yet don't you I know you don't know much
about YAX. Why don't we have YX? Surely we could
get some Yet we've got l peckers and lamas. Let's
(07:59):
get some X. Right.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
So the Health report, it's certainly been a big talking
point for people. Is it worse than we thought? Or
is it just as horrendous as we thought? And we
thought it was really horrendous.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
My long held suspicion oft produced for the Prime Minister
on Tuesday mornings, that the public service might well be
working against the government seems to have been laid bare
on the Deloitte report into the failed health system. So
as you'll be aware, we're going back to a board
from the commissioner. But what the report seems to indicate
is the board or commissioner is not really the issue.
(08:36):
The issue is in competence. The factor board was replaced
is not about whether it's a board. It's about the
fact they never had control of the money. They didn't
have a plan. They were hopeless, and hopelessness is hopelessness
no matter what the shape of it is. Structurally, more
worryingly is the reportage that tells us what they wanted
wasn't it hered to, It wasn't listened to, it wasn't
(08:58):
acted on. Obviously, in theory, a good governance structure would
see this particular pushback in that go and fix it.
But you had in competence and rejection dovetailing together, the
end result being the chaos that ensued. Now, the report
in furs the government would have been better sticking with
twenty health boards for goodness sake. Now, my argument, if
you've been listening to the program for a few years,
my argument was always in a country the size I reckon,
we needed about four DHBs. That felt about right to me.
(09:21):
The Andrew Little centralized system always had a Soviet vibe
about it, and then when your centralized system was overseen
by buffoons, you got the result. You did critical critical
line in the report. The center made requests, the district
ignored them. That's sabotage. There were no supporting action plans, ownership,
(09:43):
budget impacts, tracking, reporting or governments none. Health New Zealand
did not have the right executable board level controls. This
is yet more labour, party and competency. Of course, all ideology,
no delivery. By the time you had the Brian Roch
report out the other day into the public service generally,
surely we have a case that shows not only do
we have a bloated structure of too many people, but
(10:05):
many of those in that bloated structure and bloating are
hopefully and or undermining what is trying to be done.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
Doge anyone, to be perfectly honest, I think I'd rather
have the bureaucratic inefficiencies than have Ramaswamy and been on
mask anywhere near us.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
It might just be me.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
For re rat.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Unfortunately, it does seem like there.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Are a lot of people out there whose job it
is specifically to do nothing.
Speaker 3 (10:36):
Sometimes for years.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Maybe you can be bothered. Get hold of the Deloitte report.
It's only seventy seven pages. It won't kill you, just
gives you an insight into the level of incompetence in
this country that we are dealing with. And a very
good and related matter. It's to be found on the
Herald this morning in the media world. This is at
Auckland Transport. They're outdoor advertising contracts. It's a massive contract.
(10:58):
It's a three hundred and fifty million dollar contract over
a ten year period. It's been going on forever. The
new contract should have started on Gen one, did it?
Speaker 3 (11:06):
No?
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Why not? They won't say it's all public money, it's
all rate payers money. They're going to send out another
run RFPA request for proposal process this week. They hope
the new contracts will be in placed by the end
of the year, just the one year late. So they
pulled the pin back in December after an eighteen month process,
eighteen months to achieve literally nothing. And in the article
(11:28):
this morning's very good. Sea have three contractors who've collectively
dedicated six hundred hours to the outdoor tender between June
of twenty three and December of twenty four. That's eight
hundred thousand dollars down the toilet. Two full time eighty
staff members. They're earning somewhere between one hundred and ten
and one hundred and seventy. The other win earning between
one hundred and thirty and a couple one hundred thousand dollars.
That's right, working for eight couple hundred thousand dollars. Very nice.
(11:51):
So add those together, you've got well in excess of
a million dollars that has been spent of rate payers
money conducting officially thirty five meetings to achieve as of
this point, literally nothing. And it's that sort of an
adequacy and incompetency that is holding this country back, both
at local and national level.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
So I'm torn about this because I think I quite
like one of those jobs where it's your job to
not do anything. I love not doing anything, but if
it involves going to meetings, I'm out. And that's the
mystery of me. I love doing nothing, but not enough
to go to a meeting and do nothing. Do you
see the distinction? I am Glen Hart, though I did
(12:34):
this today. That's one of my things that I could
put in an email to say what I've been, what
I've done. Thank you for doing it with me, and
we'll do it together again tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
See it then.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from news Talks dB. Follow
this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio Rewrap.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Okay there and welcome to the Rewrap for Tuesday, all
the best butts from the Mike Hosking Breakfast on News Doks.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
He'd be in a sillier package. I am ben Hart and.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Today, what's it like interviewing Christopher Luckson? What's it like
to be interviewed by Mike Hosking if you are Christopher Luxon?
Speaker 3 (00:39):
And should you have given Andrew Bailey leave? If you're
Christopher Luxon? The health targets, the health stuff and achieving nothing?
What's it like doing that for a living? But before
any of that.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Yes, So we've got a poll out, But poles don't
matter if the results don't agree with what you think.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
I think that's what we've learned from this poll.
Speaker 4 (01:03):
Now for the better part of the afternoon, Various Digital
Science Lab with the poll that has won the labor
group forming a GOV and two Hipkins overtaking Luxen as
preferred leader. Now, the pole, I'm here to tell you
this morning is full of holes and I wouldn't put
any more weight on it than I would any other
individual set of numbers, But was the fact that was
so heavily covered. In fact, it's on the print version
of the Herald as a lead story this morning, It's
(01:23):
on the television last night, television news last night as well.
Was the fact that was so heavily covered, so widely
and so long because one, the media are biased and
this suits their narrative, or two it is in fact
significant when one leader leapfrogs another and the government grouping
is no longer supported by enough people to stay in power?
Should the imaginary election be held today? Forgetting for a
(01:44):
moment that a pole is only a snapshot, and more importantly,
all over the world these days, poles increasingly count for
little of anything. Let us just quickly dissect why it
is not worth much. The Greens are up over three
to ten, not real? They have grown almost a third
more support, have they? How it hasn't happened? The Maori
Party up over two to six. Hasn't happened? They've grown
(02:05):
a third more of their support have they as well?
To reach an they've never come close to. How's that happened?
It's not real? Act have dropped over two to seven
point seven now that might might have happened if the
lunch pushback is real. Hipkins up three possible. He's had
some good coverage of late still barks at most cars.
But if you're sick of Luxen and Hipkins isn't irritating
(02:25):
you too much, maybe you're warming to them. But here
is what I know from forty odd years of radio
rating small players ie the Murray Party, of the Green Party,
of the Act Party, they don't move in such large
numbers unless something materially has changed, and nothing materially has changed.
But big butt, whether you accept the numbers or not,
it comes at a very bad time for the government,
who are dealing with an ongoing, if not mounting, amount
(02:47):
of commentary around the PM and his ability to be
a PM. We can all connect with quite a bit
of recent commentary may or may not have come directly
from his appearance on this show. So these numbers merely
extend out the broader idea that, for whatever reason, Old
Luso has never really got alongside your average key. We
have been accepted as one of us. And whether you
accept the numbers or not, the real politic is backbenches
(03:09):
get nervous and when they're nervous, the chatter starts.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Yeah, so despite these pole holes, there does seem to
be a perception out there that Lackson isn't popular, and
perception is reality and politics, isn't it?
Speaker 3 (03:24):
So rewrap? So yeah, he was on with Mike this morning.
Do you think he enjoys that? Do you think Mike
enjoys it? Which one of them enjoys it more? Do
you reckon?
Speaker 4 (03:35):
I'm holding back my main negotiating weapon. They just rang
back and they were whining already about the hours and
how we're going to do this and how we're going
to sort it out. My main weapon and negotiation is
John Key used to do it. How do you think
that's going to go down?
Speaker 3 (03:52):
Mike?
Speaker 4 (03:52):
What a delight? And he did too. He used to
infuriate the gallery because of course, the idea is the
gallery travel with the Prime Minister, and so they get
the Prime Minister exclusively to themselves, and then he'd ring
me and they'll go.
Speaker 3 (04:04):
Hack him, your ringing Hostking.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
I think he used to infuriate his own staff as well.
They would tell us quite specifically that he wouldn't do it, and.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Then then he did.
Speaker 4 (04:14):
Yeah exactly. So anyway, so we're still negotiating on that.
And I will not take no for an answer, no
reason why the prime ministers just because in India can't
ring us and talk to us on the program. It's
not like something magical happens. And I'm sorry, I'm overseas.
The phones don't work. I mean you could say, look,
I took it, I took the air Force plane and
I don't know where I am and there's no communication.
Now maybe I fully understand that. Mike, what a delight,
(04:36):
thank you? Oh no, sorry, but what a delight. What
other prime minister would have such a relaxed professional relationship
and a good old laugh with the radio host. Good
on you, Thank you, Peter. Mike, you're ongoing attempts to
belittle lux and a starting to do with and well,
I don't know where I'm at. I mean, what's what's
going on? I got to love I got to hate her. Hey,
stop demanding exact dates and times. Well I wasn't demanding
(04:56):
exact dates and times. I said, have you got a
time frame? It's not really I'm not saying is it tuesday?
Is it tuodat twelve? Is it choose that one fifteen?
Speaker 3 (05:03):
It would be good.
Speaker 4 (05:04):
It would be good, of course it would be good.
But me, I'd be demeaning the them. I'd be belittening them.
So I don't do that. I just to ask for
rough time frames. But at least one of you thought
I did a good job. I don't have to be here,
you know, I'm only I'm only I'm only here for them.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
When you past retirement age, I don't have to be
You won't be gone.
Speaker 4 (05:22):
Get rid of me.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
Yeah, that's all because luck Thing's going to be in
another country next week when we would normally talk to him.
But he seems pretty committed to be here, so I'll
see what happens. I mean, some people go to other countries,
probably for the express reason that you can't get hold
(05:45):
of them, especially if it's like base camp at Everest.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
I don't watch TV one news much these days. I
love people who start with that. I don't watch television anymore.
But just on the one night I happened to I
saw this last night Andrew Bailey coverage. No, you've got
this wrong. They were waiting for him at the airport.
No they weren't. That was old footage. It was file
foot You don't get too confused. The point I raised
(06:09):
with the Texan spear point is was Andrew Bailey not
a story? Or is that not a story? The guy
has gone on holiday? Are we now covering people who
go on holiday? And just because he's gone to base
camp at Everest, who doesn't go to base camp at Everest.
We've all been to base camp Everest. Come on and
he rides a yack and he wanders to run. You know,
good luck to the guy. So he made a very
(06:31):
good If you want an insight into Luxeon, have a
look at his press conference yesterday post cabinet and when
the person I think it was Ben at cumber Patch
of TV one who asked that question, and I think
you watch Luckson's face, he literally physically reacted to it,
and it gives you an insight into the fact he's
actually a nice guy. And the inference being that somehow,
(06:53):
because you quit, you're not allowed to have a holiday
and the country's going to stop. You gotta remember this.
Speaker 3 (06:59):
Let's go squeally into your moan. If your bum's on fire,
you put it out.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Guy question because we wanted a guy in charge of
the country knows how to run a business. But then
when he runs the country like a business. We don't
like it because in a business, regardless of whether somebody's resigned,
if they ask us some leave, you generally give them
some leak.
Speaker 4 (07:20):
You've got to generally give them.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
But if you're in trouble as a politician.
Speaker 4 (07:24):
Like if you're not a nice guy and ask for leave,
we want you to stay staying there so we can
really in the studies and.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
Throw some vegetables at you. Other than let you write
a yack.
Speaker 4 (07:34):
Couldn't agreement.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
You ride the X. You just put your stuff on
the Yet don't you I know you don't know much
about YAX. Why don't we have YX? Surely we could
get some Yet we've got l peckers and lamas. Let's
(07:59):
get some X. Right.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
So the Health report, it's certainly been a big talking
point for people. Is it worse than we thought? Or
is it just as horrendous as we thought? And we
thought it was really horrendous.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
My long held suspicion oft produced for the Prime Minister
on Tuesday mornings, that the public service might well be
working against the government seems to have been laid bare
on the Deloitte report into the failed health system. So
as you'll be aware, we're going back to a board
from the commissioner. But what the report seems to indicate
is the board or commissioner is not really the issue.
(08:36):
The issue is in competence. The factor board was replaced
is not about whether it's a board. It's about the
fact they never had control of the money. They didn't
have a plan. They were hopeless, and hopelessness is hopelessness
no matter what the shape of it is. Structurally, more
worryingly is the reportage that tells us what they wanted
wasn't it hered to, It wasn't listened to, it wasn't
(08:58):
acted on. Obviously, in theory, a good governance structure would
see this particular pushback in that go and fix it.
But you had in competence and rejection dovetailing together, the
end result being the chaos that ensued. Now, the report
in furs the government would have been better sticking with
twenty health boards for goodness sake. Now, my argument, if
you've been listening to the program for a few years,
my argument was always in a country the size I reckon,
we needed about four DHBs. That felt about right to me.
(09:21):
The Andrew Little centralized system always had a Soviet vibe
about it, and then when your centralized system was overseen
by buffoons, you got the result. You did critical critical
line in the report. The center made requests, the district
ignored them. That's sabotage. There were no supporting action plans, ownership,
(09:43):
budget impacts, tracking, reporting or governments none. Health New Zealand
did not have the right executable board level controls. This
is yet more labour, party and competency. Of course, all ideology,
no delivery. By the time you had the Brian Roch
report out the other day into the public service generally,
surely we have a case that shows not only do
we have a bloated structure of too many people, but
(10:05):
many of those in that bloated structure and bloating are
hopefully and or undermining what is trying to be done.
Speaker 2 (10:13):
Doge anyone, to be perfectly honest, I think I'd rather
have the bureaucratic inefficiencies than have Ramaswamy and been on
mask anywhere near us.
Speaker 3 (10:26):
It might just be me.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
For re rat.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Unfortunately, it does seem like there.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Are a lot of people out there whose job it
is specifically to do nothing.
Speaker 3 (10:36):
Sometimes for years.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Maybe you can be bothered. Get hold of the Deloitte report.
It's only seventy seven pages. It won't kill you, just
gives you an insight into the level of incompetence in
this country that we are dealing with. And a very
good and related matter. It's to be found on the
Herald this morning in the media world. This is at
Auckland Transport. They're outdoor advertising contracts. It's a massive contract.
(10:58):
It's a three hundred and fifty million dollar contract over
a ten year period. It's been going on forever. The
new contract should have started on Gen one, did it?
Speaker 3 (11:06):
No?
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Why not? They won't say it's all public money, it's
all rate payers money. They're going to send out another
run RFPA request for proposal process this week. They hope
the new contracts will be in placed by the end
of the year, just the one year late. So they
pulled the pin back in December after an eighteen month process,
eighteen months to achieve literally nothing. And in the article
(11:28):
this morning's very good. Sea have three contractors who've collectively
dedicated six hundred hours to the outdoor tender between June
of twenty three and December of twenty four. That's eight
hundred thousand dollars down the toilet. Two full time eighty
staff members. They're earning somewhere between one hundred and ten
and one hundred and seventy. The other win earning between
one hundred and thirty and a couple one hundred thousand dollars.
That's right, working for eight couple hundred thousand dollars. Very nice.
(11:51):
So add those together, you've got well in excess of
a million dollars that has been spent of rate payers
money conducting officially thirty five meetings to achieve as of
this point, literally nothing. And it's that sort of an
adequacy and incompetency that is holding this country back, both
at local and national level.
Speaker 2 (12:11):
So I'm torn about this because I think I quite
like one of those jobs where it's your job to
not do anything. I love not doing anything, but if
it involves going to meetings, I'm out. And that's the
mystery of me. I love doing nothing, but not enough
to go to a meeting and do nothing. Do you
see the distinction? I am Glen Hart, though I did
(12:34):
this today. That's one of my things that I could
put in an email to say what I've been, what
I've done. Thank you for doing it with me, and
we'll do it together again tomorrow.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
See it then.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our 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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.