Are the accommodation entitlements for MP fit for purpose, and what will more oil and gas exploration mean for New Zealand?
Those were the questions for our politics panel this week, with Act party leader David Seymour and Labour's police spokesperson Ginny Andersen.
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 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talks at b focusing in on the issues
that matter politics Thursday on Wellington Mornings News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Said Blazi Shane, can you make a right decision for
all of us, for all of joining.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Us for politics Thursday? This week is Regulation Minister and
Act Party leader David Seymour.
Speaker 4 (00:37):
Good morning, David, Hey, good morning from Field Days.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
I'm going to say, you sound like you're having a party.
Where are you?
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I'm in the Rural Living pavilion at the X stand.
Actually are you?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Say hello to everyone from us in Wellington and Labor
Police spokesperson Ginny Anderson, Good morning, Jenny.
Speaker 5 (00:56):
Good morning Mack.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
I'm just in Lower Hart.
Speaker 5 (00:57):
I'm sorry, no excitements from me.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
I'm going to say it's hard to beat that, isn't it? Really?
Speaker 4 (01:02):
What are you going to say?
Speaker 6 (01:05):
That's pretty cold?
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Oh my gosh. All right, there's been a lot of
talk talking about Lower Hut and living in Lawhart. There's
been a lot of talk this week, including on our show,
about MP's perks. Twenty three MP's are taking the Accommodation
Allowance offer to all MPs for their own kite, you know,
for them to stay in Wellington, but they're paying for
their own properties, renting properties back to themselves. It includes
(01:27):
Tim Costley who lives forty minutes away and why can
I and Karen McNaulty who lives in his wife's home
that takes the money to pay her David Seymour, Are
the rules around accommodation fit for purpose?
Speaker 4 (01:43):
Yeah? I think ultimately they are. I mean, I think
the way that this whole debate's being done is it's
about the particular politician and are they up to something wrong.
I start from the point of view of the tax
payer and a few things I think, you know indisputable.
One is that we're proud to have a representative democracy.
(02:06):
Is that that involves members of Parliament traveling from the
communities they represent, in my case EPSOM Central Auckland to
the capital where we all meet together in the debating
chamber and try and represent people as best we can.
And three is that you know, if you want people
to do that, then you're going to have to have
(02:29):
some outlay on travel and accommodation. If you accept all
of those things, then the next question is does it
matter who the landlord is because if it's a hotel
and you're allowed to use your allowance to stay in
a hotel, then you could say, well, is it fair
that a hotel's making money out of this? It could
(02:51):
be a private landlord I've always rented off, just a
person who happens to have an apartment they're renting out.
You know that there they are making money. I guess.
I guess they're probably paying off their mortgage. It's not
really my business. And in some cases, can you.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Not even see that this doesn't look quite right? I mean,
you come in as a politician, you pay your you
buy your apartment, you pay your mortgage through the government,
then you sell your apartment when you get dropped or
you retire, you make a huge capital gain. That's a win,
one win. Can you not even see that there's something
that's not quite right with us?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Well, I can see where you're going with it. But
my challenge is to raise the standard of debates. So, yep,
you've got to representative of tomocracy. Yep, you're going to
have to pay for some sort of travel and accommodation. Yep.
Somebody is going to actually make money out of that,
one way or another from a taxpayer's point of view,
it actually makes no difference whether it's a hotel, the
(03:50):
third party landlord, or that MP reading to themselves. I mean,
I don't do it, but I just think if this
is the biggest issue we have in New Zealand, then
our work is done. Unfortunately, there's a few bigger issues around.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Yeah, I get that, but this is transparency and and
you know, we are ast a living crisis and we
are we are doing it tough.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
But look, it's totally it's totally transparent. The reason you
know about this is everyone's totally above board about it.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
Yeah, okay, all right, ginny should someone like Tim Costley,
who lives forty to forty five fifty minutes at worst
minutes away be taking the money for a CBD apartment
by the way, he owns it himself.
Speaker 5 (04:27):
It is really tough when you're working till eleven o'clock
plus at night, and then if you're expecting MPs, irrespective
of what party, to then get in their car and
drive for forty five an hour, hour and a half
often rural outside of the city, and then be back
on deck by eight am the next morning. That's a
(04:49):
big ask. So I guess I take the approach that
in terms of health and safety driving over the Ramatucker
Hills at eleven thirty.
Speaker 6 (04:57):
Yeah on our day.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Yeah, I'm not bringing You need.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
To be you need to be based in Wellington, and
you need to have funding to be based in Wellington
just to be able to have a good crack at
doing your job. And I think most people would sort
of respect that if you're doing long hours late at night,
you need to get yourself to be and get some
sleep at some point.
Speaker 3 (05:17):
Jinny, I was in Lower Hut two saturdays ago and
it took me an hour and ten minutes to come
into town. Why don't you get an apartment in town?
Speaker 5 (05:26):
Because I'm not entitled under the rules. On a good day,
it takes me less than half an hour if I
go early or if I go late at night. So
I'm fortunate that I'm leaving my home at So there's
my question. And when I'm coming back.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
There's my question. Should Tim Costly be doing it when
he lives in Way And I'd love to live in
Way and I and drive when I do. Surely this
is going too far.
Speaker 6 (05:50):
Well, personally, I want to live.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
I feel really, I feel really I feel really lucky
that I was sorry ill finished ovid. I feel really
lucky and I feel privileged as a Wellington based in
P that I get to see my kids during the week,
that I get to still crook my family and meal,
I get to you know, I sort of a washing,
which isn't great, but I still get to be in
and around my family during a parliamentary week. All of
(06:13):
those other MPs, someone from Northland, it takes them a
whole day to get down to Willington and they basically
have to say goodbye to their family for that entire
parliamentary sitting week. So I actually feel quite privileged and
I wouldn't be wanting to be paid an additional amount
of money each year to not see my family during
the sitting week.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
David, you wanted to say something, Oh.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
I just make the point that as I and Jenny
will know the raw better than me being an awfuland MP,
it's about academic. But yeah, you know, I think it's
fifty kilometers from the beehive, so obviously there's going to
be someone who lives, you know, fifty one kilometers and
someone that lives forty nine kilometers and we can have
the big argument about is that there, and should the
(06:57):
person who's fifty one intelligible take it and the person
that's forty nine kilometers away? We can have that whole debate,
but I just I just think, you know, if you're
worried about a living crisis than I am, then the
big issues are the efficiency of government spending. We're pulling
that back because it takes pressure off inflation, the regulatory
environment because regulation adds costs to doing business and make
(07:18):
stuff for Yeah, I mean yeah, And it's also our
supply of investment capital. Those are kind of the issues
rather than whether an MPs forty nine or fifty one
kilometers from the behave.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
Okay, I'm not going to let this quite go just yet,
because it's something that's needling me. I'm just going to
quickly both ask you both the same question. Should it
be changed that you can't own the accommodation that you're
claiming the cost of.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
No, because it would make zero difference to the taxpayer,
And that's how I'm concerned about. The taxpayer would still
be paying the same amount, It'll just be ultimately rented
off a different person.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
Okay, Jinny.
Speaker 5 (07:56):
Parliamentary Service weighs up all those rules, and I think
it's really important that those are kept in a distance
from politicians. They look at what's it, they look at
what's cost effective, and they look at the best spend
for taxpayers money, and I think it's appropriate that someone
separate from MPs who can benefit from it, make those
crucial decisions.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
The government is reversing the last government's oil and gas
exploration van, meaning drilling off the coast of Taranaki's on
the cards again, Ginny, is this the right move at
the right time.
Speaker 5 (08:26):
Well, I think if you can't trust Shane Jones with
a credit card, you can't trust them with our ocean.
As one of view, I'm really skeptical about what this
means about big business exploiting New Zealand, and I'm really
concerned about the long term damage to our environment. This,
coupled with the fast Track Bill, basically gives free range
(08:49):
to big overseas companies to come in and just exploit
New Zealand. And people will profit from that, but it
won't be weak in Key Weete.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Surely, David, we need to find some more oil and
gas and this is the right move.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Well, I just woke a point of it. But what
this band was that people often missed it was actually
a ban on exploring for it, so you're not allowed
to go and look for it. And what that means
for our future is one of two things. Either you know,
there will be better technologies, more solar, more wind, more hydro,
(09:27):
you know, more geothermal, and it won't matter because New
Zealand won't actually need oil and gas, so whether you
found it or not doesn't really matter. But there's an
alternative where actually we get to some point in the
not too distant future where we say, you know what,
having a bit of natural gas right now would solve
(09:48):
some big problems, But no one was allowed to look
for it, so we don't know where it is, so
we can't actually get it. So, you know, banning even
looking for it, all that really did was it closed
down our options and choices. And of course, as we've seen,
when there's a gas shortage, the most immediate substitute is coal,
(10:09):
which is actually worse in terms of carbon emission. So
it wasn't a very well thought through policy. It would
have been better to let people keep looking for it
so that we have options in the future to use
it or not. Use it depending on what the energy
mixes are optimal for New Zealand in the future. But
the other big issue with this that I'm think is
totally wrong is that, you know, people complain now about
(10:32):
the fasttrap bill and not making laws through due process,
all these accusations, but I don't think are quite fair,
because if they were, they would all apply to later's
COVID fast track in the previous government.
Speaker 5 (10:43):
But putting that, it's quite different, David.
Speaker 4 (10:47):
Putting this aside. Putting this aside, what Labor did with
this soil and Gas band is to Sindradan wanted to
give a speech at Victoria. She went along, she gave
the speech. They didn't do proper consultation. They rammed it
through basically in a press release, and destroyed the world's
confidence in New Zealand as a safe place to go
(11:08):
and invest.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
Well, this sounds like the Act Party conference we've just
tuned into, crikey.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
Well, well, it's because we say good things there and
we say good things here.
Speaker 5 (11:16):
You should Richard Prebble didn't think so. Richard Preble thought
it wasn't that great. I read about that. Look, I
think it's great, David, and I think I think that's
that's a fair point. But the point where we need
to transition away from fossil fuels, that's a reality. And
we had a plan in place for a thirty year
to give those all those big companies and heads up
(11:38):
that we would transition away what National has done and
what act has done.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
Well, and we done to the university and gave speech
and then the policy and then you've got to be
the nation.
Speaker 5 (11:52):
On top of that, you have cut funding for climate
solutions by three billion.
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Out of the past budgets zero.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
You have no meaningful plan or vision to take New
Zealand forward to meet zero by twenty fifty, and will
are that we are educating, we won't be able.
Speaker 4 (12:10):
To sell our stuff over see, we're just what you
oil and gas.
Speaker 3 (12:14):
Then that's what we're That's what the question was, Jenny, Let's.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
Keep it to that place totally.
Speaker 5 (12:19):
Well, how is being met zero by twenty fifty? That
is directly related to opening up oil and glass exploration,
That is directly.
Speaker 4 (12:28):
Related tohip with respect, we need a more sophisticated discussion here.
So as I've laid out, you know, gas is a
very good transition, feel much better than coal. But if
we ban industry from looking at it and damage the
world's confidence in New Zealand as a safe and reliable
place to invest, we actually narrow our options and may
(12:49):
actually end up worse off as a result. And here's
another thought. You know, decarbonization is only going to happen
through better technology. So I was at the Glenbrook Steel
Mill a couple of months back and they were explaining
that right now, they take iron oxide or iron ore
and they combine it with coke, which is really carbon,
and they use the carbon to take the oxygen off
(13:11):
the iron to make iron, which is then combined for
coke to create steel. Now there is the possibility of
using hydrogen to strip the oxygen off the iron that
gives you water H two O and iron with no
carbon dioxide produced. But you know what, if the Glenbrook
Steel Mill is going to start making steel in a
lower carbon way, then they're going to need a supply
(13:34):
of hydrogen to replace the carbon that they're currently using.
And the best place to get that is actually through
the natural gas ecosystem. So, once again, you know, by
being really prescriptive and narrow and not doing good policy analysis,
previous governments ban on exploration actually narrowed our options for
decarbonization because they don't understand the science.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Right, let's move on. Well, do you want to quickly?
Do you want to quickly respond to that, Jenny?
Speaker 5 (14:02):
I think that those arguments are used to open up
New Zealand a free range exploration to multinational companies that
will destroy our natural environment.
Speaker 6 (14:11):
Keepers know that.
Speaker 5 (14:12):
We saw twenty thousand people protest in Auckland over the
past weekend. We know that there are reliable and cost
effective energy sources available to New Zealand that can be
used without destroying our country. And as the Road plan
that we have all our natural environment and were prepared
to destroy it to make a profit.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
Right, let's move on. I think I think we've gone
a round that long enough. It seems to be no
budget boost for the government. And the latest Taxpayer Union's
Caurrier poll nationals on thirty five point four percent, down
two points, Act up zero point three percent to nine
point seven percent. New Zealand first basically steady on five
point six percent. Labor is down zero point six percent
(14:55):
to twenty nine point four percent, the Greens were up
two point five percent to twelve point seven percent, and
to party mari were up one to four percent. David,
why was there no boost for the government after that budget?
Speaker 4 (15:10):
Well, I mean ACT has gone up, so I guess
you know. I'm very grateful for people that keep trusting
us with their support. I think if you take the
wider picture, I believe that things in the economy are
worse than is being commonly reported. And this is just
from talking to people and a whole range of different industries.
(15:31):
You know, it's everyone from people making coffee to being
our electricians, to driving trucks or whatever people may be doing.
Accountants are really interesting because they often have it an
overview of a lot of companies. So things are really
tough out there. And of course you know, when the
economy is in a slump, that's a headwind for the
government because people's immediate reaction as well. There must be
(15:53):
these guys. But labor went through this and winter twenty
twenty so two thousand and two, you may remember the
so called winter of discontent, but they did recover and
they won in two thousand and five. So I would
just say, look, things are tough. I think the actions
the government has taken through the budget through deregulation through
trying to really heal New Zealand and get rid of
(16:15):
some of the division. Like I'm here at the field days,
people are really grateful that farmers are not being made
out to the public enemy number one and having a
conversation with the government about their rule. So that sense
of going forward together and healing some of the divisive
politics with a lot of groups have felt the cold window.
All of those things I believe will lead to a
recovery and if we pull that off then the government
(16:37):
will be handsomely credited with it. But I acknowledge that
right now for a range of reasons, most of which
I know people don't like to hear it. Most of
it is actually beyond the current government's control. We've inherited
a lot of negative momentum. You know, you can understand
why people are pretty down. And when people are down,
that's not good for the incumbent.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Jenny Labor is slightly down, but the left is actually
up three point five points. It's a pretty good bump.
Why has that happened? Right now?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
People were let down by that budget. They were promised
a lot at the election. They will promised tax cuts,
they will promised cancer drugs, they were promised a relief
from cost of living crisis and that budget simply did
not deliver any.
Speaker 6 (17:21):
Of those things.
Speaker 5 (17:22):
I've spoken to people who are personally really broken the
broken promise of not delivering those cancer drug.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
People will die as a result of the fact that.
Speaker 5 (17:33):
They did not fund those. People voted national on the
hope that that would happen. That's broken trust. So people
are already doing it tough right now and to have
that slap in the face is just a real kick
in the guts for a lot of Kiwis. You know,
David is tied to this government, he is part of it,
and his ambitious goal of getting Act to sixteen percent
is looking incredibly oblique off the back of this poll.
(17:57):
Keywis are disheartened at what this government has done and
we will continue to work as an effective opposition that
holds this government to account.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
I love it, slap in the face, kicking the gut,
told this government to account that you should actually give
your listeners bingo cards for when Jenny's on.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Take a short break and have some news headlines Ginny
Anderson and I'm not laughing, Jenny. I'm not laughing at you.
I'm not laughing with him.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
Yeah, that's a great one.
Speaker 3 (18:26):
Yeah, that was just a very good light at the
right time. Politics Thursday with Jenny Anderson and David Seymour.
Something that's really getting under my skin and it's got
under my skin for a while. As National MP more
In Pugh was allegedly assaulted by a placard outside an
event in Takaka this week. As David, I'm going to
come to you first, and this, as the MP is
often how often do you actually worry about your safety
(18:49):
and your safety of someone you know more? And I
don't say this in any gender push man, I'm more
concerned about the female politicians because they seem to be
the ones that get to attack more easily.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
Yeah, I'm to be honest. For some reason, I I
don't worry about it, but I do worry about my
MPs and occasionally expressed concern about safety. I think it's
why it's so important that the Julie and Genter behavior
in Parliament a couple of months back, going across the
(19:25):
carpet and shaking her fist and waving her books at
another MP is going to be dealt with anden referred
to the Privilegeous Committee because we've got to maintain standards here.
The other thing I was thinking about this after I
read the news about more imper I can't think of
a good movement in the history of our country or
(19:45):
actually anywhere, that has been achieved by violence. I mean,
you think about Gandhi, you think about votes for women,
you think about homosexual law reform, you think about marriage equality.
You know, every movement I can think of that has
led to good in the long term has been done
(20:05):
by east for persuasion. No good has ever come from
resorting to violence. And I just say, look, you know,
I've been in a few debates in my time. You
can't be a good debate if you need to hit
your opponent with a placard. In fact, I would say
at that point you've lost. And these losers actually need
to recognize that whatever their views may be, they've got
(20:29):
a right to their opinion, but they don't have the
right to tear down our civil society and our tradition
of respectful debate and progress. And I'm not allowed to
say anything about what I think the police should do
or not do, because you know, some way that minister's
got in trouble with that that you can probably guess
(20:49):
what someone like me would think, Jinny.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
I was concerned for your safety at some stages when
you're a police minister, because you're not the biggest person
in the world. I know you're I know you're as
tough as nails, and I don't want for you to
think that I'm picking on you for bigger female. I'd
go to war with you any day a week. But
you know, when are we going to take security for
MP's More.
Speaker 5 (21:10):
Seriously, I tend to agree with David on this one.
I think anybody.
Speaker 6 (21:15):
Who takes that step too far.
Speaker 5 (21:17):
As as that person did, worth more in PEW. I
think they lose port, they lose any real strong argument
for the point they're trying to make publicly. And I
think it's good that we live in a country. New
Zealanders are very good at recognizing that that's not acceptable behavior,
and so all MP's from across their house, irrespective of
(21:37):
what party or what their beliefs are, will agree that
we need to respect each other and have some basic
rules and threatening behavior and violence is absolutely unacceptable. From
a personal point of view, I traveled independently. I traveled
on my own for nearly three years around the world,
and I went to a number of countries that were
(22:00):
quite dangerous, and I traveled on my own, so I
learned to be very careful of my personal safety. I
looked always behind me, around me. I was really cautious
of the situations that I put myself in, and those
years of traveling serve me really well. Now as a politician,
I'm pretty quick to pack up someone in a roam
or an environment that looks like they might be threatening
(22:21):
and to try and diffuse that as soon as possible.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Jenny, surely that you shouldn't have to do that. Surely,
David both, I'm going to come to you. Surely they
should have more security area.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
So the other point I should have made, you have
parliamentary security, so you do have a good circum place,
and if you have someone that you find early on
who is threatening or is contacting you, we have a
system on place. We were able to either carry a
jerusalarm which can be activated, or we are able to
phone and identify people who we think are potentially a
(22:51):
risk to us.
Speaker 6 (22:52):
So is a good system on face?
Speaker 3 (22:53):
So just a yes or no from both of you.
Do you think that we need to do anything more
or Is it just something that's happened.
Speaker 5 (23:01):
No, Jenny, No, And I think it's important.
Speaker 6 (23:06):
We may Sorry that's not a straight answer, but yeah,
that's all right.
Speaker 4 (23:08):
I mean I just yea, I think it's it's important.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I think it's a yes. I think it's a strong
yes because I think, you know, I think back to
what happened in England. Someone got murdered. Two MP's are
being murdered. So I have more concern than you.
Speaker 5 (23:25):
Two important that it's still important that people can access
politicians can access imps and New Zealand does really go
that you can come and meet me in a cafe
and tell.
Speaker 6 (23:36):
Me your problems.
Speaker 5 (23:37):
And I think that's incredibly important for democracy one hundred percent.
Speaker 3 (23:40):
But have security there twenty one minutes to twelve.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
I mean, here's the here's the reason why you shouldn't.
You know. My political career started. I walked out of
my house and knocked on the door of my neighbors.
Nobody had a clue who I was outside of my
family and two friends. And then I kept knocking and
I hopped on thirteen fourteen thousand doors. I won the
(24:03):
It's An electorate and became a member of Parliament. Now,
if you need your own security team to start doing
politics in New Zealand, then there'll be a whole lot
of people who start like that and don't have the opportunity.
So I'll do anything to preserve New Zealand's tradition that
we have one of the most intimate and accessible democracies
(24:23):
in the world. I don't want us to end up
like America. So rather than blaming the victim and saying
oh more in Pew should have had security, I certainly
hope that there will be severe consequences for the alleged offender.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
The Chinese premier has landed in New Zealand is visiting
Wellington today. He'll be hosted by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.
He'll be eyeing any opportunities to grow trade. David, this
meeting meeting is a pretty big deal. What's the government
actually hoping to get out of it.
Speaker 4 (24:53):
Well, we're going to maintain the relationship, but we're also
going to ensure that there is some very clear parameters
around it. So yes, we are happy to trade, we'd
like to continue trading, but we're also not going to
hide our light under a bushel when it comes to
saying we disagree, and there are activities of the PRC
(25:15):
with which the New Zealand government disagrees, some of their
activity in the South China Sea, for example, some of
their interference that has been detected in New Zealand's IT systems,
including our Parliament. So I think what we hope will
come out of this as an understand that we have
separate views in an independent voice, and we won't shy
(25:38):
from expressing our views because we think it's important to
stand up and being heard as an independent entity at
an independent power when it comes to foreign policy. But
we also did not wish for that to interfere with
a trade agreement which is actually actually bet official ie.
Both countries get more out of it than they put
(25:59):
in because both countries end up with things that they
couldn't have produced themselves for the same price.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
Jenny, these reports today that the Chinese government has been
interfering in New Zealand for years, and you, as Police
Minister would have heard this sort of stuff going on.
We've always suspected. Do you think New Zealand properly raises
these concerns with China or are we too scared to
potentially affecting our trade relationship.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Well, I think it's important that New Zealand, as David says,
has an independent foreign policy, and we see that and
speak our minds when we're concerned about issues. But it's
a pretty pivotal moment for the government right now. They're
sending in number two.
Speaker 6 (26:37):
It's a big deal.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
This is the highest ranking Chinese official that's been to
New Zealand and I think seven or eight years. And
I think this goes to sort the heart of the
fact that Walcus is sort of coming up, and so
whether or not New Zealand commits to that may have
some significant impacts upon big business. It's our big dairy
(27:02):
in agriculture parts that are exporting to China through abdiate
billion dollars, so we need to be careful. I'm not
saying either way. I'm just saying there's a delicate balancing
exercise going on right now between UCUS and also what
the impact is on New Zealand's export China, because that's
(27:26):
a market we could continue to grow quite significantly and
that would have huge benefits for our economy.
Speaker 3 (27:33):
David, are you going to be part of the meet
and greet and get to know?
Speaker 4 (27:38):
Oh? No, No, they can't take me anywhere. They keep
me in the back working on things like regulation and
education and finance and justice and so on.
Speaker 3 (27:51):
They can't control you yet. I haven't got to you yet.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
Well no, I mean I think I think the main
point is that I don't actually have any portfolios that
are outwork facing. I've got five different portfolios in the government,
but all of them healthy education, just as finance and
regulation are all very much inside New Zealand's borders. And
I think it's important that you know, people show up
(28:15):
to do the job that they heard, rather than show
up just because they want to meet someone or whatever.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
It is a pretty big deal for New Zealand, though
there's something obviously happening for them to come here, so
I mean, obviously we'll find out in the next couple
of days. But they'll want something or want us to
do something, that's for sure. Jenny Anderson, great to have
you on the show again. Thank you and appreciate you.
David Seymour, act leader. Great to have you on the show.
Enjoy Field days. Catch you when you're next in Wellington.
(28:43):
Don't say anything you shouldn't say. Well, the Chinese premier
is in town.
Speaker 4 (28:47):
David please, more microphones as live.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
That's right. Don't you go up sitting our trade deal.
Don't you start. I'm a bit nervous.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
Thank you very.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Much, both of you. Enjoy your afternoons, both of you.
Thank you for more.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
From Willing to Mornings with Nick Mills. Listen live to
news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays, or
follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talks at b focusing in on the issues
that matter politics Thursday on Wellington Mornings News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Said Blazi Shane, can you make a right decision for
all of us, for all of joining.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Us for politics Thursday? This week is Regulation Minister and
Act Party leader David Seymour.
Speaker 4 (00:37):
Good morning, David, Hey, good morning from Field Days.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
I'm going to say, you sound like you're having a party.
Where are you?
Speaker 4 (00:45):
I'm in the Rural Living pavilion at the X stand.
Actually are you?
Speaker 3 (00:50):
Say hello to everyone from us in Wellington and Labor
Police spokesperson Ginny Anderson, Good morning, Jenny.
Speaker 5 (00:56):
Good morning Mack.
Speaker 6 (00:56):
I'm just in Lower Hart.
Speaker 5 (00:57):
I'm sorry, no excitements from me.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
I'm going to say it's hard to beat that, isn't it? Really?
Speaker 4 (01:02):
What are you going to say?
Speaker 6 (01:05):
That's pretty cold?
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Oh my gosh. All right, there's been a lot of
talk talking about Lower Hut and living in Lawhart. There's
been a lot of talk this week, including on our show,
about MP's perks. Twenty three MP's are taking the Accommodation
Allowance offer to all MPs for their own kite, you know,
for them to stay in Wellington, but they're paying for
their own properties, renting properties back to themselves. It includes
(01:27):
Tim Costley who lives forty minutes away and why can
I and Karen McNaulty who lives in his wife's home
that takes the money to pay her David Seymour, Are
the rules around accommodation fit for purpose?
Speaker 4 (01:43):
Yeah? I think ultimately they are. I mean, I think
the way that this whole debate's being done is it's
about the particular politician and are they up to something wrong.
I start from the point of view of the tax
payer and a few things I think, you know indisputable.
One is that we're proud to have a representative democracy.
(02:06):
Is that that involves members of Parliament traveling from the
communities they represent, in my case EPSOM Central Auckland to
the capital where we all meet together in the debating
chamber and try and represent people as best we can.
And three is that you know, if you want people
to do that, then you're going to have to have
(02:29):
some outlay on travel and accommodation. If you accept all
of those things, then the next question is does it
matter who the landlord is because if it's a hotel
and you're allowed to use your allowance to stay in
a hotel, then you could say, well, is it fair
that a hotel's making money out of this? It could
(02:51):
be a private landlord I've always rented off, just a
person who happens to have an apartment they're renting out.
You know that there they are making money. I guess.
I guess they're probably paying off their mortgage. It's not
really my business. And in some cases, can you.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Not even see that this doesn't look quite right? I mean,
you come in as a politician, you pay your you
buy your apartment, you pay your mortgage through the government,
then you sell your apartment when you get dropped or
you retire, you make a huge capital gain. That's a win,
one win. Can you not even see that there's something
that's not quite right with us?
Speaker 4 (03:29):
Well, I can see where you're going with it. But
my challenge is to raise the standard of debates. So, yep,
you've got to representative of tomocracy. Yep, you're going to
have to pay for some sort of travel and accommodation. Yep.
Somebody is going to actually make money out of that,
one way or another from a taxpayer's point of view,
it actually makes no difference whether it's a hotel, the
(03:50):
third party landlord, or that MP reading to themselves. I mean,
I don't do it, but I just think if this
is the biggest issue we have in New Zealand, then
our work is done. Unfortunately, there's a few bigger issues around.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Yeah, I get that, but this is transparency and and
you know, we are ast a living crisis and we
are we are doing it tough.
Speaker 4 (04:09):
But look, it's totally it's totally transparent. The reason you
know about this is everyone's totally above board about it.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
Yeah, okay, all right, ginny should someone like Tim Costley,
who lives forty to forty five fifty minutes at worst
minutes away be taking the money for a CBD apartment
by the way, he owns it himself.
Speaker 5 (04:27):
It is really tough when you're working till eleven o'clock
plus at night, and then if you're expecting MPs, irrespective
of what party, to then get in their car and
drive for forty five an hour, hour and a half
often rural outside of the city, and then be back
on deck by eight am the next morning. That's a
(04:49):
big ask. So I guess I take the approach that
in terms of health and safety driving over the Ramatucker
Hills at eleven thirty.
Speaker 6 (04:57):
Yeah on our day.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Yeah, I'm not bringing You need.
Speaker 5 (05:01):
To be you need to be based in Wellington, and
you need to have funding to be based in Wellington
just to be able to have a good crack at
doing your job. And I think most people would sort
of respect that if you're doing long hours late at night,
you need to get yourself to be and get some
sleep at some point.
Speaker 3 (05:17):
Jinny, I was in Lower Hut two saturdays ago and
it took me an hour and ten minutes to come
into town. Why don't you get an apartment in town?
Speaker 5 (05:26):
Because I'm not entitled under the rules. On a good day,
it takes me less than half an hour if I
go early or if I go late at night. So
I'm fortunate that I'm leaving my home at So there's
my question. And when I'm coming back.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
There's my question. Should Tim Costly be doing it when
he lives in Way And I'd love to live in
Way and I and drive when I do. Surely this
is going too far.
Speaker 6 (05:50):
Well, personally, I want to live.
Speaker 5 (05:51):
I feel really, I feel really I feel really lucky
that I was sorry ill finished ovid. I feel really
lucky and I feel privileged as a Wellington based in
P that I get to see my kids during the week,
that I get to still crook my family and meal,
I get to you know, I sort of a washing,
which isn't great, but I still get to be in
and around my family during a parliamentary week. All of
(06:13):
those other MPs, someone from Northland, it takes them a
whole day to get down to Willington and they basically
have to say goodbye to their family for that entire
parliamentary sitting week. So I actually feel quite privileged and
I wouldn't be wanting to be paid an additional amount
of money each year to not see my family during
the sitting week.
Speaker 3 (06:34):
David, you wanted to say something, Oh.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
I just make the point that as I and Jenny
will know the raw better than me being an awfuland MP,
it's about academic. But yeah, you know, I think it's
fifty kilometers from the beehive, so obviously there's going to
be someone who lives, you know, fifty one kilometers and
someone that lives forty nine kilometers and we can have
the big argument about is that there, and should the
(06:57):
person who's fifty one intelligible take it and the person
that's forty nine kilometers away? We can have that whole debate,
but I just I just think, you know, if you're
worried about a living crisis than I am, then the
big issues are the efficiency of government spending. We're pulling
that back because it takes pressure off inflation, the regulatory
environment because regulation adds costs to doing business and make
(07:18):
stuff for Yeah, I mean yeah, And it's also our
supply of investment capital. Those are kind of the issues
rather than whether an MPs forty nine or fifty one
kilometers from the behave.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
Okay, I'm not going to let this quite go just yet,
because it's something that's needling me. I'm just going to
quickly both ask you both the same question. Should it
be changed that you can't own the accommodation that you're
claiming the cost of.
Speaker 4 (07:44):
No, because it would make zero difference to the taxpayer,
And that's how I'm concerned about. The taxpayer would still
be paying the same amount, It'll just be ultimately rented
off a different person.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
Okay, Jinny.
Speaker 5 (07:56):
Parliamentary Service weighs up all those rules, and I think
it's really important that those are kept in a distance
from politicians. They look at what's it, they look at
what's cost effective, and they look at the best spend
for taxpayers money, and I think it's appropriate that someone
separate from MPs who can benefit from it, make those
crucial decisions.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
The government is reversing the last government's oil and gas
exploration van, meaning drilling off the coast of Taranaki's on
the cards again, Ginny, is this the right move at
the right time.
Speaker 5 (08:26):
Well, I think if you can't trust Shane Jones with
a credit card, you can't trust them with our ocean.
As one of view, I'm really skeptical about what this
means about big business exploiting New Zealand, and I'm really
concerned about the long term damage to our environment. This,
coupled with the fast Track Bill, basically gives free range
(08:49):
to big overseas companies to come in and just exploit
New Zealand. And people will profit from that, but it
won't be weak in Key Weete.
Speaker 3 (08:58):
Surely, David, we need to find some more oil and
gas and this is the right move.
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Well, I just woke a point of it. But what
this band was that people often missed it was actually
a ban on exploring for it, so you're not allowed
to go and look for it. And what that means
for our future is one of two things. Either you know,
there will be better technologies, more solar, more wind, more hydro,
(09:27):
you know, more geothermal, and it won't matter because New
Zealand won't actually need oil and gas, so whether you
found it or not doesn't really matter. But there's an
alternative where actually we get to some point in the
not too distant future where we say, you know what,
having a bit of natural gas right now would solve
(09:48):
some big problems, But no one was allowed to look
for it, so we don't know where it is, so
we can't actually get it. So, you know, banning even
looking for it, all that really did was it closed
down our options and choices. And of course, as we've seen,
when there's a gas shortage, the most immediate substitute is coal,
(10:09):
which is actually worse in terms of carbon emission. So
it wasn't a very well thought through policy. It would
have been better to let people keep looking for it
so that we have options in the future to use
it or not. Use it depending on what the energy
mixes are optimal for New Zealand in the future. But
the other big issue with this that I'm think is
totally wrong is that, you know, people complain now about
(10:32):
the fasttrap bill and not making laws through due process,
all these accusations, but I don't think are quite fair,
because if they were, they would all apply to later's
COVID fast track in the previous government.
Speaker 5 (10:43):
But putting that, it's quite different, David.
Speaker 4 (10:47):
Putting this aside. Putting this aside, what Labor did with
this soil and Gas band is to Sindradan wanted to
give a speech at Victoria. She went along, she gave
the speech. They didn't do proper consultation. They rammed it
through basically in a press release, and destroyed the world's
confidence in New Zealand as a safe place to go
(11:08):
and invest.
Speaker 5 (11:09):
Well, this sounds like the Act Party conference we've just
tuned into, crikey.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
Well, well, it's because we say good things there and
we say good things here.
Speaker 5 (11:16):
You should Richard Prebble didn't think so. Richard Preble thought
it wasn't that great. I read about that. Look, I
think it's great, David, and I think I think that's
that's a fair point. But the point where we need
to transition away from fossil fuels, that's a reality. And
we had a plan in place for a thirty year
to give those all those big companies and heads up
(11:38):
that we would transition away what National has done and
what act has done.
Speaker 4 (11:43):
Well, and we done to the university and gave speech
and then the policy and then you've got to be
the nation.
Speaker 5 (11:52):
On top of that, you have cut funding for climate
solutions by three billion.
Speaker 6 (11:57):
Out of the past budgets zero.
Speaker 5 (12:00):
You have no meaningful plan or vision to take New
Zealand forward to meet zero by twenty fifty, and will
are that we are educating, we won't be able.
Speaker 4 (12:10):
To sell our stuff over see, we're just what you
oil and gas.
Speaker 3 (12:14):
Then that's what we're That's what the question was, Jenny, Let's.
Speaker 6 (12:17):
Keep it to that place totally.
Speaker 5 (12:19):
Well, how is being met zero by twenty fifty? That
is directly related to opening up oil and glass exploration,
That is directly.
Speaker 4 (12:28):
Related tohip with respect, we need a more sophisticated discussion here.
So as I've laid out, you know, gas is a
very good transition, feel much better than coal. But if
we ban industry from looking at it and damage the
world's confidence in New Zealand as a safe and reliable
place to invest, we actually narrow our options and may
(12:49):
actually end up worse off as a result. And here's
another thought. You know, decarbonization is only going to happen
through better technology. So I was at the Glenbrook Steel
Mill a couple of months back and they were explaining
that right now, they take iron oxide or iron ore
and they combine it with coke, which is really carbon,
and they use the carbon to take the oxygen off
(13:11):
the iron to make iron, which is then combined for
coke to create steel. Now there is the possibility of
using hydrogen to strip the oxygen off the iron that
gives you water H two O and iron with no
carbon dioxide produced. But you know what, if the Glenbrook
Steel Mill is going to start making steel in a
lower carbon way, then they're going to need a supply
(13:34):
of hydrogen to replace the carbon that they're currently using.
And the best place to get that is actually through
the natural gas ecosystem. So, once again, you know, by
being really prescriptive and narrow and not doing good policy analysis,
previous governments ban on exploration actually narrowed our options for
decarbonization because they don't understand the science.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Right, let's move on. Well, do you want to quickly?
Do you want to quickly respond to that, Jenny?
Speaker 5 (14:02):
I think that those arguments are used to open up
New Zealand a free range exploration to multinational companies that
will destroy our natural environment.
Speaker 6 (14:11):
Keepers know that.
Speaker 5 (14:12):
We saw twenty thousand people protest in Auckland over the
past weekend. We know that there are reliable and cost
effective energy sources available to New Zealand that can be
used without destroying our country. And as the Road plan
that we have all our natural environment and were prepared
to destroy it to make a profit.
Speaker 3 (14:34):
Right, let's move on. I think I think we've gone
a round that long enough. It seems to be no
budget boost for the government. And the latest Taxpayer Union's
Caurrier poll nationals on thirty five point four percent, down
two points, Act up zero point three percent to nine
point seven percent. New Zealand first basically steady on five
point six percent. Labor is down zero point six percent
(14:55):
to twenty nine point four percent, the Greens were up
two point five percent to twelve point seven percent, and
to party mari were up one to four percent. David,
why was there no boost for the government after that budget?
Speaker 4 (15:10):
Well, I mean ACT has gone up, so I guess
you know. I'm very grateful for people that keep trusting
us with their support. I think if you take the
wider picture, I believe that things in the economy are
worse than is being commonly reported. And this is just
from talking to people and a whole range of different industries.
(15:31):
You know, it's everyone from people making coffee to being
our electricians, to driving trucks or whatever people may be doing.
Accountants are really interesting because they often have it an
overview of a lot of companies. So things are really
tough out there. And of course you know, when the
economy is in a slump, that's a headwind for the
government because people's immediate reaction as well. There must be
(15:53):
these guys. But labor went through this and winter twenty
twenty so two thousand and two, you may remember the
so called winter of discontent, but they did recover and
they won in two thousand and five. So I would
just say, look, things are tough. I think the actions
the government has taken through the budget through deregulation through
trying to really heal New Zealand and get rid of
(16:15):
some of the division. Like I'm here at the field days,
people are really grateful that farmers are not being made
out to the public enemy number one and having a
conversation with the government about their rule. So that sense
of going forward together and healing some of the divisive
politics with a lot of groups have felt the cold window.
All of those things I believe will lead to a
recovery and if we pull that off then the government
(16:37):
will be handsomely credited with it. But I acknowledge that
right now for a range of reasons, most of which
I know people don't like to hear it. Most of
it is actually beyond the current government's control. We've inherited
a lot of negative momentum. You know, you can understand
why people are pretty down. And when people are down,
that's not good for the incumbent.
Speaker 3 (16:58):
Jenny Labor is slightly down, but the left is actually
up three point five points. It's a pretty good bump.
Why has that happened? Right now?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
People were let down by that budget. They were promised
a lot at the election. They will promised tax cuts,
they will promised cancer drugs, they were promised a relief
from cost of living crisis and that budget simply did
not deliver any.
Speaker 6 (17:21):
Of those things.
Speaker 5 (17:22):
I've spoken to people who are personally really broken the
broken promise of not delivering those cancer drug.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
People will die as a result of the fact that.
Speaker 5 (17:33):
They did not fund those. People voted national on the
hope that that would happen. That's broken trust. So people
are already doing it tough right now and to have
that slap in the face is just a real kick
in the guts for a lot of Kiwis. You know,
David is tied to this government, he is part of it,
and his ambitious goal of getting Act to sixteen percent
is looking incredibly oblique off the back of this poll.
(17:57):
Keywis are disheartened at what this government has done and
we will continue to work as an effective opposition that
holds this government to account.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
I love it, slap in the face, kicking the gut,
told this government to account that you should actually give
your listeners bingo cards for when Jenny's on.
Speaker 3 (18:14):
Take a short break and have some news headlines Ginny
Anderson and I'm not laughing, Jenny. I'm not laughing at you.
I'm not laughing with him.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
Yeah, that's a great one.
Speaker 3 (18:26):
Yeah, that was just a very good light at the
right time. Politics Thursday with Jenny Anderson and David Seymour.
Something that's really getting under my skin and it's got
under my skin for a while. As National MP more
In Pugh was allegedly assaulted by a placard outside an
event in Takaka this week. As David, I'm going to
come to you first, and this, as the MP is
often how often do you actually worry about your safety
(18:49):
and your safety of someone you know more? And I
don't say this in any gender push man, I'm more
concerned about the female politicians because they seem to be
the ones that get to attack more easily.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
Yeah, I'm to be honest. For some reason, I I
don't worry about it, but I do worry about my
MPs and occasionally expressed concern about safety. I think it's
why it's so important that the Julie and Genter behavior
in Parliament a couple of months back, going across the
(19:25):
carpet and shaking her fist and waving her books at
another MP is going to be dealt with anden referred
to the Privilegeous Committee because we've got to maintain standards here.
The other thing I was thinking about this after I
read the news about more imper I can't think of
a good movement in the history of our country or
(19:45):
actually anywhere, that has been achieved by violence. I mean,
you think about Gandhi, you think about votes for women,
you think about homosexual law reform, you think about marriage equality.
You know, every movement I can think of that has
led to good in the long term has been done
(20:05):
by east for persuasion. No good has ever come from
resorting to violence. And I just say, look, you know,
I've been in a few debates in my time. You
can't be a good debate if you need to hit
your opponent with a placard. In fact, I would say
at that point you've lost. And these losers actually need
to recognize that whatever their views may be, they've got
(20:29):
a right to their opinion, but they don't have the
right to tear down our civil society and our tradition
of respectful debate and progress. And I'm not allowed to
say anything about what I think the police should do
or not do, because you know, some way that minister's
got in trouble with that that you can probably guess
(20:49):
what someone like me would think, Jinny.
Speaker 3 (20:52):
I was concerned for your safety at some stages when
you're a police minister, because you're not the biggest person
in the world. I know you're I know you're as
tough as nails, and I don't want for you to
think that I'm picking on you for bigger female. I'd
go to war with you any day a week. But
you know, when are we going to take security for
MP's More.
Speaker 5 (21:10):
Seriously, I tend to agree with David on this one.
I think anybody.
Speaker 6 (21:15):
Who takes that step too far.
Speaker 5 (21:17):
As as that person did, worth more in PEW. I
think they lose port, they lose any real strong argument
for the point they're trying to make publicly. And I
think it's good that we live in a country. New
Zealanders are very good at recognizing that that's not acceptable behavior,
and so all MP's from across their house, irrespective of
(21:37):
what party or what their beliefs are, will agree that
we need to respect each other and have some basic
rules and threatening behavior and violence is absolutely unacceptable. From
a personal point of view, I traveled independently. I traveled
on my own for nearly three years around the world,
and I went to a number of countries that were
(22:00):
quite dangerous, and I traveled on my own, so I
learned to be very careful of my personal safety. I
looked always behind me, around me. I was really cautious
of the situations that I put myself in, and those
years of traveling serve me really well. Now as a politician,
I'm pretty quick to pack up someone in a roam
or an environment that looks like they might be threatening
(22:21):
and to try and diffuse that as soon as possible.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Jenny, surely that you shouldn't have to do that. Surely,
David both, I'm going to come to you. Surely they
should have more security area.
Speaker 5 (22:30):
So the other point I should have made, you have
parliamentary security, so you do have a good circum place,
and if you have someone that you find early on
who is threatening or is contacting you, we have a
system on place. We were able to either carry a
jerusalarm which can be activated, or we are able to
phone and identify people who we think are potentially a
(22:51):
risk to us.
Speaker 6 (22:52):
So is a good system on face?
Speaker 3 (22:53):
So just a yes or no from both of you.
Do you think that we need to do anything more
or Is it just something that's happened.
Speaker 5 (23:01):
No, Jenny, No, And I think it's important.
Speaker 6 (23:06):
We may Sorry that's not a straight answer, but yeah,
that's all right.
Speaker 4 (23:08):
I mean I just yea, I think it's it's important.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I think it's a yes. I think it's a strong
yes because I think, you know, I think back to
what happened in England. Someone got murdered. Two MP's are
being murdered. So I have more concern than you.
Speaker 5 (23:25):
Two important that it's still important that people can access
politicians can access imps and New Zealand does really go
that you can come and meet me in a cafe
and tell.
Speaker 6 (23:36):
Me your problems.
Speaker 5 (23:37):
And I think that's incredibly important for democracy one hundred percent.
Speaker 3 (23:40):
But have security there twenty one minutes to twelve.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
I mean, here's the here's the reason why you shouldn't.
You know. My political career started. I walked out of
my house and knocked on the door of my neighbors.
Nobody had a clue who I was outside of my
family and two friends. And then I kept knocking and
I hopped on thirteen fourteen thousand doors. I won the
(24:03):
It's An electorate and became a member of Parliament. Now,
if you need your own security team to start doing
politics in New Zealand, then there'll be a whole lot
of people who start like that and don't have the opportunity.
So I'll do anything to preserve New Zealand's tradition that
we have one of the most intimate and accessible democracies
(24:23):
in the world. I don't want us to end up
like America. So rather than blaming the victim and saying
oh more in Pew should have had security, I certainly
hope that there will be severe consequences for the alleged offender.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
The Chinese premier has landed in New Zealand is visiting
Wellington today. He'll be hosted by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.
He'll be eyeing any opportunities to grow trade. David, this
meeting meeting is a pretty big deal. What's the government
actually hoping to get out of it.
Speaker 4 (24:53):
Well, we're going to maintain the relationship, but we're also
going to ensure that there is some very clear parameters
around it. So yes, we are happy to trade, we'd
like to continue trading, but we're also not going to
hide our light under a bushel when it comes to
saying we disagree, and there are activities of the PRC
(25:15):
with which the New Zealand government disagrees, some of their
activity in the South China Sea, for example, some of
their interference that has been detected in New Zealand's IT systems,
including our Parliament. So I think what we hope will
come out of this as an understand that we have
separate views in an independent voice, and we won't shy
(25:38):
from expressing our views because we think it's important to
stand up and being heard as an independent entity at
an independent power when it comes to foreign policy. But
we also did not wish for that to interfere with
a trade agreement which is actually actually bet official ie.
Both countries get more out of it than they put
(25:59):
in because both countries end up with things that they
couldn't have produced themselves for the same price.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
Jenny, these reports today that the Chinese government has been
interfering in New Zealand for years, and you, as Police
Minister would have heard this sort of stuff going on.
We've always suspected. Do you think New Zealand properly raises
these concerns with China or are we too scared to
potentially affecting our trade relationship.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
Well, I think it's important that New Zealand, as David says,
has an independent foreign policy, and we see that and
speak our minds when we're concerned about issues. But it's
a pretty pivotal moment for the government right now. They're
sending in number two.
Speaker 6 (26:37):
It's a big deal.
Speaker 5 (26:38):
This is the highest ranking Chinese official that's been to
New Zealand and I think seven or eight years. And
I think this goes to sort the heart of the
fact that Walcus is sort of coming up, and so
whether or not New Zealand commits to that may have
some significant impacts upon big business. It's our big dairy
(27:02):
in agriculture parts that are exporting to China through abdiate
billion dollars, so we need to be careful. I'm not
saying either way. I'm just saying there's a delicate balancing
exercise going on right now between UCUS and also what
the impact is on New Zealand's export China, because that's
(27:26):
a market we could continue to grow quite significantly and
that would have huge benefits for our economy.
Speaker 3 (27:33):
David, are you going to be part of the meet
and greet and get to know?
Speaker 4 (27:38):
Oh? No, No, they can't take me anywhere. They keep
me in the back working on things like regulation and
education and finance and justice and so on.
Speaker 3 (27:51):
They can't control you yet. I haven't got to you yet.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
Well no, I mean I think I think the main
point is that I don't actually have any portfolios that
are outwork facing. I've got five different portfolios in the government,
but all of them healthy education, just as finance and
regulation are all very much inside New Zealand's borders. And
I think it's important that you know, people show up
(28:15):
to do the job that they heard, rather than show
up just because they want to meet someone or whatever.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
It is a pretty big deal for New Zealand, though
there's something obviously happening for them to come here, so
I mean, obviously we'll find out in the next couple
of days. But they'll want something or want us to
do something, that's for sure. Jenny Anderson, great to have
you on the show again. Thank you and appreciate you.
David Seymour, act leader. Great to have you on the show.
Enjoy Field days. Catch you when you're next in Wellington.
(28:43):
Don't say anything you shouldn't say. Well, the Chinese premier
is in town.
Speaker 4 (28:47):
David please, more microphones as live.
Speaker 3 (28:51):
That's right. Don't you go up sitting our trade deal.
Don't you start. I'm a bit nervous.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
Thank you very.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Much, both of you. Enjoy your afternoons, both of you.
Thank you for more.
Speaker 1 (29:05):
From Willing to Mornings with Nick Mills. Listen live to
news talks It'd be Wellington 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.
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.