August 13, 2025 • 12 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Thursday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) The Mike Hosking Royal Inquiry
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 Talk said b
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio, rewrap.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Ood there and welcome to the rewrap for Thursday. All
the best buts from the Mic Husking Breakfast on News
Talk said be in a sillier package.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Ian glen Hart ECTUF.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
It's not really that silly today, unfortunately, because everybody keep saying, oh,
this is one of the best shows of the year
blah blah blah blah blah, because we interviewed Chris Havepgunners
and made them look silly. So I'm just basically going
to put that and weren't actually Ironically, when you do
a show like that, there aren't there's not much time
for other silly bits because it's mostly that interview took
(00:57):
up like over eight minutes, and then Mike did this
way before it.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Look, I'm assuming the instigators of the second COVID inquiry
are deeply disappointed in what is unfolding in terms of accountability.
Inquiry Part one was a Labour government's stitch up of
course and exercise and Smoke and Mirrors Inquiry Part two
a coalition deal driven by act in New Zealand First
was designed to look into areas not touched in Part one,
access to vaccine, lockdown's economic damage and so on. I've
(01:23):
argued since the start we needed actually an adversarial approach,
in other words, British style call people to a witness stand,
hold them accountable. We didn't do that, and now we're
paying the price. Madern and Hipkins, along with Robinson and Verel,
declined to appear. No kidding A what a surprise. I
wonder why Now Grant Illingworth KC, who's in charge of
the current work, has the power apparently to pull them in.
(01:45):
He's choosing not to do so, hence my assumption of
disappointment at a political party level. The Illingworth justification is
the aforementioned operators are cooperating with proceedings not good enough
in my book, or indeed anywhere close. So simple question,
is there a broad expectation among ordinary everyday New Zealanders
that those who made life changing calls and a life
(02:07):
changing period of this cast country owe it to us
all to front and be questioned under oath about why
they did what they did. Another question, what does it
say about the morals and character of said people who
seek public mandate and public support and approval that when
things get a bit orkies, they're nowhere to be seen.
Where is the courage of their conviction? Where are their
(02:28):
spines and their gonads? How can a person like Hipkins
and indeed veryl who also is refusing to front, possibly
present themselves to the voting public next year with a
straight face and ask once again for the power to
round the country having been the same people who in
August of this year ran for the hills when accountability
came calling. The rules of engagement were lacking at the
(02:48):
COVID inquiry, So we are being let down. Illingworth's head
with a power to do better apparently is letting us down,
but nowhere near Adern Hipkins, Robertson and Verel, who should
be ashamed of themselves.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
It's funny when you sort of try and look at
the back of a subjectively. You know, we all agree
that everything turned a shit after and because of COVID,
but yet we blame the people who were in charge
while COVID was happening. So I always come back to
that was an unprecedented event and so there wasn't a playbook.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Anyway. Enough of that sort of silly talk.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
So rewrap.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
Let's get to the business at hand.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
This is probably the moment where things really started blowing
up in press Apkinson's face.
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Did you coalesce with Robertson and Verel and Adern to
make this sort of a collective decision?
Speaker 5 (03:43):
We had representatives in common who corresponded with the Royal Commission,
but each of us individually briefed that representative.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
Who's the representative.
Speaker 5 (03:55):
Well at the moment that's been Dentons.
Speaker 4 (03:58):
Who of the company?
Speaker 5 (04:00):
You mean, yes, that is great?
Speaker 4 (04:02):
Okay, So they advised you not to appear or you
advised them that you wouldn't be appearing.
Speaker 5 (04:09):
Well, see again, you're mischaracterizing.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
And I said it was question no appearing publicly, just
just for future reference, for the future, for the rest
of the questions in this interview, I'm referring to you
appearing publicly. Right, So was it Denton's who advised you
not to appear publicly or did you advise them?
Speaker 5 (04:25):
Well, but you're misrepresenting my position, Like I have appeared
before the Commission.
Speaker 4 (04:29):
You have not appeared publicly before the Commission?
Speaker 5 (04:33):
Well I have, I have answered all of the Commission.
Speaker 4 (04:36):
I'm not saying that I've said, you have not appeared
publicly before the Commission. Did they advise you not to
appear publicly? Denton's.
Speaker 5 (04:44):
I indicated to the Commission that I was.
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Did Denton's d Did Denton's advise you not to appear publicly?
Speaker 5 (04:55):
Well? One of the things that Denton's did raise with us.
They raised several issues. One was that you know, no
ministers had previously done this, and that it would create
a precedent if we did so. The second thing they
raised was concerned about the fact that people who had
already appeared publicly before the Royal Commission had been the
subject of significant abuse, and there's concerned that the Commission themselves,
(05:20):
the Royal Commission themselves have acknowledged in the decision that
they took yesterday.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
So the spin doctors told you not to appear publicly,
and you went, thanks very much, I'll take that advice.
Speaker 5 (05:30):
No, I don't think that's correct.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Yeah, because apparently if you appeared publicly, people might send
mean texts and emails and posts to you, because they
definitely won't now after their performance anyway a rerap.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
So yeah, entered the mean response.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Here it comes, but let's go through some of the feedback. OMG, Mike,
what on earth? Who would even consider voting for such incompetence?
Who needs to go, Mike, I'm sure you had a
thousand texts, but the bottom line is that the Chipocrit
I think. Unfortunately, that's going to stick. The Chippercrit not
fit for public office. Hopefully the interview was the end
(06:10):
of it. The most infuriating interview I've ever heard is
arrogance and Smami comments horrifically poor. Well done, Mike, He's
on the ropes. Arrogance is unbelievable. And with that, how
could anyone have confidence in his ability to run a
country when he's not prepared to be publicly accountable? Mike
F Pheladen. This guy is so arrogant. I wish the
rest of the political journalists held them to account. Never
(06:34):
argue with stupid people, Mike. They will drag you down
to their level and then beat you with the experience. Mike,
the best interview ever, Well, I don't think that's true.
Slipkins chipercrital Slipkins Hipkins interview who said they were going
to be the most transparent open government. I should have
used that line to him, of course, it's a very
good point, Mike, and he's digging himself up in many respects.
(06:56):
It's not about the performance of the interviews. In many respects,
as far as I can as an observer, he's digging
himself a monumental hole. And I'm assuming someone got to
him with this. Maybe they just can't read the room.
Maybe you got your Willow Jene Primes and they just
sit there in their bubble and they honestly don't see
how bad they look. I mean, what he presented in
(07:17):
front of the country this morning was shocking. Now he's
allowed to do it, and it's his view and he's
entitled to it, and he might, in his quiet moments,
genuinely believe that filling out some paperwork from Illingworth KC.
Is all he needs to do. But I find it
hard to believe that no one anywhere got to him
at some point. Indeed, robertson a deern. They're so arrogant
(07:40):
they probably don't care, they don't need to care anymore,
but veryl does, and he does that somebody didn't get
to them, And go, Mate, no matter how much you
hate this, you've got to be seen to be doing
the right thing. If you feel you've got the answers
to the questions what's your problem? Front up, turn the
spotlight on and go for it. Mike, he is a sloppy, smirky,
(08:02):
arrogant prick. There's a lot of that. I could read
out several hundred versions of that. Jeez, Mike, thanks for trying.
He's slippery as an eel, Morning Mike. That guy could
walk under a snake with a top hat. I haven't
heard that before. That's not actually bad ffs and he
wants to be leader again, re Chippy, did you expect
anything different from him? You know what? Yes, even in
(08:25):
his worst moments, he's got the experience. And I thought
the wherewithal to see? I could blame Dentins, couldn't I?
I mean, the lawyers obviously said, mate, this is more
trouble than it's worth. But lawyers are like that, aren't they.
The lawyers never have to go to the public and
ask for a vote. How this guy fronts an election
year and talks about honesty and transparency and stuff without
(08:46):
everyone bursting out laughing. I don't know. Does the New
Zealand taxpayer pay Dentons to defend these public Well? Yes,
they do. That's part of the commission process, and you
and I are paying for all this. Hence the whole
argument around transparency, openness, and honesty, the singular source of truth.
Remember that.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Yes, I sort of became a competition then to come
up with a good nickname.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
So, yeah, the Chippocrat was running pretty hot there for
a while. Chris Slipkins was another one. People like. My
contribution to that off here was chicken chickens the rewrap.
I'm not sure if you're allowed to say that on
the radio.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
I hope you're allowed to say it on podcasts anyway,
And the heads kept coming right through the show. Actually,
I mean this was after eight thirty.
Speaker 4 (09:32):
Mike, move on from the COVID inquiry. You're talking about
talk about the state of today's cost of living. You
sound like a cry baby this morning. See, this is
what worries me about this. Why if you want me
to talk about the cost of living, one of the
first things I'd raise would be is why are we
having the cost of living crisis that we are? And
the answer is the COVID period, isn't it. So if
(09:52):
you can't join those two dots together, there's no hope
for any of us, Mike, doesn't the state of play
now lie with Illingworth? Who summons the Gang of four.
The lines you guys have come up with this morning
have been exceptional. Congratulations now the Gang of Ford, of
the public hearings of the Royal It is Debbie, the
great unanswered question of the morning. Ellingworth isn't talking to
(10:12):
a degree. I cut him some slack. He's running an inquiry.
He can't pop into the media every five minutes. I
get that. But and brookvin Velden was on with Ryan
before six o'clock. She was disappointing in her answer, said,
it's really more on the politicians than Illingworth. Probably technically
she's correct, but she must, in her heart of hearts
(10:34):
be thinking to herself, was this the right bloke to call?
If because the pressure is on him, if they are
so spineless they won't front, I'd call their bluff and
call them without a shadow of it out because my credibility.
Ellingworth's credibility is on the line if he presents a report,
and obviously the question is going to be asked, well
(10:55):
did you ask him this? Did you ask them that?
And when we read what was done, we then go well,
hold on what about that bit there or where is
the bit I wanted to hear about that isn't in
this report, because then it's all benefit of hind slight stuff,
and then it becomes a problem.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
I certainly would like to move on. I've said before,
I just want to forget that it ever happened. And
I'm assuming that there will never be another worldwide pandemic
ever again, because we've learned those lessons so well, and
if there is one, nobody will make any mistakes and
we will all do everything perfectly and we'll.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
Just shake it off like it's not even happening. So
that's good.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Admittedly, if there is a vote for or against the pandemic,
I'll be voting against it.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
And you know, I think we've wrapped that up now.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So that was the the Mike Hoskins Royal Inquiry on
newstalks HEB. Who knows what we'll do an inquiry are next.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
For more from News Talks 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 Talk said b
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio, rewrap.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Ood there and welcome to the rewrap for Thursday. All
the best buts from the Mic Husking Breakfast on News
Talk said be in a sillier package.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Ian glen Hart ECTUF.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
It's not really that silly today, unfortunately, because everybody keep saying, oh,
this is one of the best shows of the year
blah blah blah blah blah, because we interviewed Chris Havepgunners
and made them look silly. So I'm just basically going
to put that and weren't actually Ironically, when you do
a show like that, there aren't there's not much time
for other silly bits because it's mostly that interview took
(00:57):
up like over eight minutes, and then Mike did this
way before it.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
Look, I'm assuming the instigators of the second COVID inquiry
are deeply disappointed in what is unfolding in terms of accountability.
Inquiry Part one was a Labour government's stitch up of
course and exercise and Smoke and Mirrors Inquiry Part two
a coalition deal driven by act in New Zealand First
was designed to look into areas not touched in Part one,
access to vaccine, lockdown's economic damage and so on. I've
(01:23):
argued since the start we needed actually an adversarial approach,
in other words, British style call people to a witness stand,
hold them accountable. We didn't do that, and now we're
paying the price. Madern and Hipkins, along with Robinson and Verel,
declined to appear. No kidding A what a surprise. I
wonder why Now Grant Illingworth KC, who's in charge of
the current work, has the power apparently to pull them in.
(01:45):
He's choosing not to do so, hence my assumption of
disappointment at a political party level. The Illingworth justification is
the aforementioned operators are cooperating with proceedings not good enough
in my book, or indeed anywhere close. So simple question,
is there a broad expectation among ordinary everyday New Zealanders
that those who made life changing calls and a life
(02:07):
changing period of this cast country owe it to us
all to front and be questioned under oath about why
they did what they did. Another question, what does it
say about the morals and character of said people who
seek public mandate and public support and approval that when
things get a bit orkies, they're nowhere to be seen.
Where is the courage of their conviction? Where are their
(02:28):
spines and their gonads? How can a person like Hipkins
and indeed veryl who also is refusing to front, possibly
present themselves to the voting public next year with a
straight face and ask once again for the power to
round the country having been the same people who in
August of this year ran for the hills when accountability
came calling. The rules of engagement were lacking at the
(02:48):
COVID inquiry, So we are being let down. Illingworth's head
with a power to do better apparently is letting us down,
but nowhere near Adern Hipkins, Robertson and Verel, who should
be ashamed of themselves.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
It's funny when you sort of try and look at
the back of a subjectively. You know, we all agree
that everything turned a shit after and because of COVID,
but yet we blame the people who were in charge
while COVID was happening. So I always come back to
that was an unprecedented event and so there wasn't a playbook.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Anyway. Enough of that sort of silly talk.
Speaker 5 (03:29):
So rewrap.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
Let's get to the business at hand.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
This is probably the moment where things really started blowing
up in press Apkinson's face.
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Did you coalesce with Robertson and Verel and Adern to
make this sort of a collective decision?
Speaker 5 (03:43):
We had representatives in common who corresponded with the Royal Commission,
but each of us individually briefed that representative.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
Who's the representative.
Speaker 5 (03:55):
Well at the moment that's been Dentons.
Speaker 4 (03:58):
Who of the company?
Speaker 5 (04:00):
You mean, yes, that is great?
Speaker 4 (04:02):
Okay, So they advised you not to appear or you
advised them that you wouldn't be appearing.
Speaker 5 (04:09):
Well, see again, you're mischaracterizing.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
And I said it was question no appearing publicly, just
just for future reference, for the future, for the rest
of the questions in this interview, I'm referring to you
appearing publicly. Right, So was it Denton's who advised you
not to appear publicly or did you advise them?
Speaker 5 (04:25):
Well, but you're misrepresenting my position, Like I have appeared
before the Commission.
Speaker 4 (04:29):
You have not appeared publicly before the Commission?
Speaker 5 (04:33):
Well I have, I have answered all of the Commission.
Speaker 4 (04:36):
I'm not saying that I've said, you have not appeared
publicly before the Commission. Did they advise you not to
appear publicly? Denton's.
Speaker 5 (04:44):
I indicated to the Commission that I was.
Speaker 4 (04:48):
Did Denton's d Did Denton's advise you not to appear publicly?
Speaker 5 (04:55):
Well? One of the things that Denton's did raise with us.
They raised several issues. One was that you know, no
ministers had previously done this, and that it would create
a precedent if we did so. The second thing they
raised was concerned about the fact that people who had
already appeared publicly before the Royal Commission had been the
subject of significant abuse, and there's concerned that the Commission themselves,
(05:20):
the Royal Commission themselves have acknowledged in the decision that
they took yesterday.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
So the spin doctors told you not to appear publicly,
and you went, thanks very much, I'll take that advice.
Speaker 5 (05:30):
No, I don't think that's correct.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
Yeah, because apparently if you appeared publicly, people might send
mean texts and emails and posts to you, because they
definitely won't now after their performance anyway a rerap.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
So yeah, entered the mean response.
Speaker 4 (05:49):
Here it comes, but let's go through some of the feedback. OMG, Mike,
what on earth? Who would even consider voting for such incompetence?
Who needs to go, Mike, I'm sure you had a
thousand texts, but the bottom line is that the Chipocrit
I think. Unfortunately, that's going to stick. The Chippercrit not
fit for public office. Hopefully the interview was the end
(06:10):
of it. The most infuriating interview I've ever heard is
arrogance and Smami comments horrifically poor. Well done, Mike, He's
on the ropes. Arrogance is unbelievable. And with that, how
could anyone have confidence in his ability to run a
country when he's not prepared to be publicly accountable? Mike
F Pheladen. This guy is so arrogant. I wish the
rest of the political journalists held them to account. Never
(06:34):
argue with stupid people, Mike. They will drag you down
to their level and then beat you with the experience. Mike,
the best interview ever, Well, I don't think that's true.
Slipkins chipercrital Slipkins Hipkins interview who said they were going
to be the most transparent open government. I should have
used that line to him, of course, it's a very
good point, Mike, and he's digging himself up in many respects.
(06:56):
It's not about the performance of the interviews. In many respects,
as far as I can as an observer, he's digging
himself a monumental hole. And I'm assuming someone got to
him with this. Maybe they just can't read the room.
Maybe you got your Willow Jene Primes and they just
sit there in their bubble and they honestly don't see
how bad they look. I mean, what he presented in
(07:17):
front of the country this morning was shocking. Now he's
allowed to do it, and it's his view and he's
entitled to it, and he might, in his quiet moments,
genuinely believe that filling out some paperwork from Illingworth KC.
Is all he needs to do. But I find it
hard to believe that no one anywhere got to him
at some point. Indeed, robertson a deern. They're so arrogant
(07:40):
they probably don't care, they don't need to care anymore,
but veryl does, and he does that somebody didn't get
to them, And go, Mate, no matter how much you
hate this, you've got to be seen to be doing
the right thing. If you feel you've got the answers
to the questions what's your problem? Front up, turn the
spotlight on and go for it. Mike, he is a sloppy, smirky,
(08:02):
arrogant prick. There's a lot of that. I could read
out several hundred versions of that. Jeez, Mike, thanks for trying.
He's slippery as an eel, Morning Mike. That guy could
walk under a snake with a top hat. I haven't
heard that before. That's not actually bad ffs and he
wants to be leader again, re Chippy, did you expect
anything different from him? You know what? Yes, even in
(08:25):
his worst moments, he's got the experience. And I thought
the wherewithal to see? I could blame Dentins, couldn't I?
I mean, the lawyers obviously said, mate, this is more
trouble than it's worth. But lawyers are like that, aren't they.
The lawyers never have to go to the public and
ask for a vote. How this guy fronts an election
year and talks about honesty and transparency and stuff without
(08:46):
everyone bursting out laughing. I don't know. Does the New
Zealand taxpayer pay Dentons to defend these public Well? Yes,
they do. That's part of the commission process, and you
and I are paying for all this. Hence the whole
argument around transparency, openness, and honesty, the singular source of truth.
Remember that.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Yes, I sort of became a competition then to come
up with a good nickname.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
So, yeah, the Chippocrat was running pretty hot there for
a while. Chris Slipkins was another one. People like. My
contribution to that off here was chicken chickens the rewrap.
I'm not sure if you're allowed to say that on
the radio.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
I hope you're allowed to say it on podcasts anyway,
And the heads kept coming right through the show. Actually,
I mean this was after eight thirty.
Speaker 4 (09:32):
Mike, move on from the COVID inquiry. You're talking about
talk about the state of today's cost of living. You
sound like a cry baby this morning. See, this is
what worries me about this. Why if you want me
to talk about the cost of living, one of the
first things I'd raise would be is why are we
having the cost of living crisis that we are? And
the answer is the COVID period, isn't it. So if
(09:52):
you can't join those two dots together, there's no hope
for any of us, Mike, doesn't the state of play
now lie with Illingworth? Who summons the Gang of four.
The lines you guys have come up with this morning
have been exceptional. Congratulations now the Gang of Ford, of
the public hearings of the Royal It is Debbie, the
great unanswered question of the morning. Ellingworth isn't talking to
(10:12):
a degree. I cut him some slack. He's running an inquiry.
He can't pop into the media every five minutes. I
get that. But and brookvin Velden was on with Ryan
before six o'clock. She was disappointing in her answer, said,
it's really more on the politicians than Illingworth. Probably technically
she's correct, but she must, in her heart of hearts
(10:34):
be thinking to herself, was this the right bloke to call?
If because the pressure is on him, if they are
so spineless they won't front, I'd call their bluff and
call them without a shadow of it out because my credibility.
Ellingworth's credibility is on the line if he presents a report,
and obviously the question is going to be asked, well
(10:55):
did you ask him this? Did you ask them that?
And when we read what was done, we then go well,
hold on what about that bit there or where is
the bit I wanted to hear about that isn't in
this report, because then it's all benefit of hind slight stuff,
and then it becomes a problem.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
I certainly would like to move on. I've said before,
I just want to forget that it ever happened. And
I'm assuming that there will never be another worldwide pandemic
ever again, because we've learned those lessons so well, and
if there is one, nobody will make any mistakes and
we will all do everything perfectly and we'll.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
Just shake it off like it's not even happening. So
that's good.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Admittedly, if there is a vote for or against the pandemic,
I'll be voting against it.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
And you know, I think we've wrapped that up now.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
So that was the the Mike Hoskins Royal Inquiry on
newstalks HEB. Who knows what we'll do an inquiry are next.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
For more from News Talks B, listen live on air
or online, and keep our shows with you wherever you
go with our 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.