August 13, 2024 • 21 mins
The government is introducing a new traffic light system for beneficiaries, laying out potential sanctions if they don't meet their obligations. So what does Labour make of it?
Labour leader and MP for Remutaki Chris Hipkins joined Nick Mills to discuss whether it will result in more people entering the workforce.
Also on the agenda was the country's energy shortage, and the ongoing situation over an earthquake prone block at Wellington Girls College.
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 Talk Said.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
B joining us now as labor leader and MP for
rum Taker. Chris Hipkins. Good morning, Chris, good morning. How
are you feeling.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
I'm feeling really good. I mean, the sun's coming out again.
It's you know, it feels like spring is on the way.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Earlier this year, did you cop that bad weather or Upperhut,
because we didn't. We missed it completely in Wetington. I mean,
we've got a bit of wind and a bit of
a dark cloud, but we didn't get the hail in
the rain. But someone from Upper Heart said, oh no,
we got the whole lot over there.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Yeah, well I my house did. I wasn't there, but
when I got home there were big puddles of look
like icicles on my back deck and I think it was,
you know, clearly the hail from the from the storm
earlier in the day.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
All right, very quickly, before we get into the deep stuff.
We obviously kicked off this morning on the show with
the ocr decision today at two o'clock. I feel deeply
that this is probably one of the biggest times and
biggest decisions that I can remember and I'm quite old
of ocr where we're down on our knees. We're going
through times and we need to see some sunlight. As
(01:09):
you just said, how desperately do you think that New
Zealand needs to cut.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
I think for businesses, for mortgage holders. You know, I
hope that they'll see a cut today. For my gut
instinct probably tells me that the Reserve Bank won't be
quite that bold and that they're more likely to hold.
They're still going to be waiting to see what happens
with tax cuts. You know, the tax cuts have literally
just come through. Now they're going to be looking at
what kind of stimulus that creates and what impact that
(01:34):
has on inflation before they make their call. That's my pack.
It's not what I hope for, but I think that's
probably the most likely outcome.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Now, you know Adrian or better than most of us.
You would have had several meetings with them, spent several
spend several amounts of time with him. Is he boyent enough,
is he positive enough? Is he out there enough to
make a change today?
Speaker 3 (01:54):
Well, he's a very sharp mind, but he's been given
a single goal by the current government. So remember they
changed the Reserve Bank law pretty much as soon as
they became government. His only goal is to bring inflation
back down below three percent, so that is the only
thing that he will be looking at now. Inflation still
later stats still just above that magical three percent marker.
(02:17):
He'll be looking at the effect that tax cuts will
have on that and various other things, you know, rates
going up, insurance going up, rents going up, and so on,
and he'll be weighing all that up as to whether
now is the right time to lower interest rates. Previously
he had a dual mandate which included you know, keeping
people in work for example. The government took that away.
(02:37):
I reckon, if he still had the dual mandate, we'd
probably see interest rates being cut now.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Okay. Do you so you think we're gonna actually wait
till November.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
My gut tells me that we're going to be waiting
a bit longer.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Gosh, you reckon, We can afford to it.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
I know that for a lot of businesses, particularly now
is pretty tough going and that they're looking for something
a bit more soon.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Are you getting that a lot? Are you? Are you
people stopping you in the street and saying, hey, you
know we're in troublehead. Does anyone care?
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, And you know a different sectors. I mean,
Hospite's been absolutely hammered. Ellington here particularly. You only have
to walk through the CBD and you'll find, you know,
Hospow business is going to the wall, right, left and center.
It's pretty tough going for Hospow. Building and constructions. The
other surprise one you would think now with the infrastructure
deficit in the housing crisis we've got that building in
(03:22):
construction would be booming, but actually there's six thousand fewer
people working in building construction now than there were at
the last election. So there's overall eighteen thousand fewer jobs
today than they were at the last elections. That's, you know,
at least in part a consequence of the decisions that
the government have taken.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Absolutely, and I think we because it's not quite as
glamorous as HOSPO. I think the building trades get sort
of we don't talk about it as much. I think
they're doing it just as tough.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Oh they are doing it really tough. And the government
have pulled back spending in those areas. So you know,
if you think about local trade is where are they
working while they're building houses or the government have stopped
the public sector of the state house build program. They're
upgrading schools. The government have put all those projects on
hold while they rescope them. They are doing things like
hospital improvements and you know that kind of stuff. Well,
(04:10):
a lot of that's on hold as well. So you know,
the government is a big purchaser of building and construction
work work, and they've dialed it all right back. So
that probably explains the lion's share of that six thousand
fewer jobs in that sector.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Let's talk government moves. Yesterday. That yesterday or the day before,
they introduced a new traffic light system for sanctions against
beneficiaries not meeting their obligations. New sanctions include a community
training program and putting half the benefit on a payment
card that can only be used in certain places. Labor,
you guys have come out strongly against this. What's wrong
(04:47):
with consequences for not meeting your obligation?
Speaker 3 (04:49):
I do want to see beneficiaries getting back into work.
What I get frustrated by is the fact free nature
of some of this debate. You know, I know people think, oh,
you know, the Labor Party is just all about keeping
people on benefits. Quite the contrary. I believe in the
value of work. I want to see people in work.
But as I said, there's eighteen thousand fewer jobs today
than they were at the last election. So going and
(05:09):
beating beneficiaries with a big stick and saying go get
off to work you when there aren't the jobs for
them to go into, I think is pretty harsh. Bear
in mind too, that the vast majority of people who
go on to a benefit come off a benefit within
six months. So that's a fact that gets missed in
this debate.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Why do we not talk about that because I didn't.
I mean I knew that that was you know, obviously
obviously fact, But we don't talk about that. Do we
talk about the ones that have been on for ten years?
Speaker 3 (05:36):
That's right, and frankly, hitting those ones who are on
for ten years with the big stick's not going to
change anything. If they haven't got employable skills, then no
one's going to give them a job. So let's focus
on that problem. You know. We as a government, we
reinstated a thing called the Training Incentive Allowance, which was
basically about saying to someone, if you're on a benefit,
actually get yourself trained up to do something that's going
(05:58):
to increase your future employment prospects. You know the latest
move yesterday, you know the money management stuff where basically
they're saying to benefit fisheries, well, we're going to manage
your money for you. All that's going to do is
create a deeper culture of dependence, because you're basically taking
away people's ability to make decisions for themselves. Some of
(06:19):
the problem for people who are on long term welfare
dependence is that they are too dependent. Making them more
dependent is not going to solve that problem.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Do you actually think that this plan will actually reduce
the number on people on the benefits? Do you think
it will help?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
No? I mean, I think, as government finding in a
lot of areas now, slogans don't change things. You know,
talking tough on crime hasn't reduced retail crime, it's continuing
to increase. And talking tough on beneficiaries hasn't reduced the
number of people on benefits. There's actually twenty something thousand
more people on benefits now than there were when they
became the government.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
Do you think that, I mean, I hoping that you
will that we've actually have got too many people on benefits.
Do you reckon that we are becoming a benefit country?
Speaker 3 (06:59):
No. I think during the you know, the boom in
the labor market where we had a number there are
people on benefits who we really needed to get out
into work. I think there was more that we should
have done in that area, focused particularly around training people
for the jobs that were available. And I think that's
a fair cop. We should have done more around, you know,
(07:20):
preparing people for the work that was available. But we're
into a different labor market now to the one we
were in two years ago, And.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Would you do things differently? What would you do if
your empower right now?
Speaker 3 (07:29):
A much greater emphasis on training? You know, I really
think if we upskill people who are on benefits, recognizing
and now, you know, when there are more people on
benefits and there's fewer jobs for them to go into,
it's a good time to invest in training them because
then when the jobs do come along, they're going to
have more skills and they're going to be more likely
to be employed.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Does it frustrate you that we have these people that
we bring in from overseas all the time for the
fruit picking and stuff like that, when we've got unemployed
people sitting in the same suburbs doing nothing.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Yeah, it does. Although there are locality issues here, you know.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
The people I'm saying, the ones that are in the
same area. I'm not expecting exactly from Wellington to go
to hawks By and pick apples for two weeks and
then come back. But I'm saying, if you're in Hawk's
Bay and you're on a benefit and you can walk
up and down the line and pick some fruit shorter,
you should be doing.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
And in many of those areas, those areas where the
unemployment is lower and the number of people on benefits
is lower, you know, it tends to if you look
at the people we need to activate, if you like,
they're not always living in those provincial areas where we
can get them out doing some of the primary sector work,
and so that's why we need to train them for
other jobs.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
So would you do that? Do you think we should
be doing that? Should be even looking at doing that?
Speaker 3 (08:34):
Training people for me, No.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Getting people to actually do the RSA jobs, you know,
getting them to actually do the jobs that are in
the area if they're there.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Yeah, yes, definitely. But you've also got to look at
some of the underlying barriers to that, because those employers
will tell you that they have tried and that they
often find that those the people that they're getting don't
sustain it, you know, they don't stay. And so that's
where the training is important, because you've got to in
some cases, if someone's never worked, you've actually got to
(09:02):
get a bit of a work culture to them. And
you need to do that before you get putting them
in an environment where the employer is going to get
frustrated and annoyed by them not doing duicy a share
of the work.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
We have Leader of the Opposition. We don't actually call
you the leader of the opposition anymore, do we? Labor leader?
Why do they not call the leader? Are you called
the leader? I'm still the leader of the opposition.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
I mean, people call me lots of things these days,
so I don't really pay a lot of it t.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
It's almost like labor leaders rather than the leader of
the opposition. But I want to talk about opposition shortly,
but first congestion charging. The government's introduced a law which
will allow local is about to introduce a law that
allow local councils to introduce congestion charging. Auckland seems to
be the first cab off the rank, but you'd have
to assume that highly likely Wontington would be there too.
(09:47):
Labor actually, I think of this as a labor move
because Labor were the first to bring it out, talked
about the benefits of congestion charging. What does the government?
Does this government's plan actually make any sense to you?
Speaker 3 (09:59):
I support the concept of congestion charging, but there's two
issues around it. One is timing and the second is alternate.
So in order to you know, doing it right in
the middle of the cost of living crisis could be
pretty challenging for people if there aren't alternatives because part
of what you're trying to you're trying to achieve two
things with congestion charging. One is changing the time of
day when people drive, and the other is getting them
(10:21):
to do something other than drive, you know, catch a bus,
catch a train, whatever. So you've got to have alternatives
for people.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
So for those who.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Can't change when they drive, you need to have an alternative,
whether it's a bus, a train, or whatever. And so
my concern about the government announcements yesterday is that I
think they've got the timing a bit wrong here. I
think doing it right in the middle of a cost
of living crisis when people just are struggling to make
ends meet. Not great timing. But the second is they've
(10:48):
pulled back a lot of the investment and the alternatives
for people. And so I think so yeah, in principal,
congestion charging happens around the world, works really well, helps
helps to really ease congestion and mean that those who
have to travel at a certain time can actually get there,
you know. So think about career drivers and the people
who are doing whose business relies on them being on
(11:08):
the road at certain times. It's much better for them.
So it's good for business. So there's a lot of
good reasons to do it, but you've got to make
sure you've got the alternatives nailed down.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
You think it could You keep talking about this alternative
roots which I can't work out in my head how
it would work in Wantington, the alternative route part. But
would it work in Welltington?
Speaker 3 (11:25):
You think potentially in parts. So, I mean there are
good train services in Wellington, for example, So you know
we do have alternatives here. You know, you've got some
people who you know easily could switch to public transport
without too much inconvenience. Then you've got others who would
be a real challenge for So if you've got kids
and you're dropping them at school and you're picking them
(11:45):
up and you're doing a regular hours and stuff, it
can be more challenging. But if you're just driving from
you know, out where I live in Upper Hut into
Wellington to work in a public sector job and then
driving back at the other end of the day, well,
I think we should be looking to make public transport
more attractive for people who are in that camp. Who
are in that camp, we.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
Do need to do something in wanting to do. Are
you in favor of the meg if you had to
look at that, I.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
I think the Mega Tunnel is obsurd. It'll never happen.
I mean the cost involved in that.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
We said that about Transmission Gully. I'm old enough to
understand when they said it, but.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
I've always supported Transmission Gully. I'm very, very skeptical about
the Mega Tunnel. But you know, the Mount of Wact Tunnel,
I think has got to be the first priority getting
an extra tunnel through there, and the National Party promised
that that would be started before the next election, so
there is hope. I certainly hope that they'll fulfill that commitment,
because that Mount Vic Tunnel will really help to ease
(12:36):
in a city congestion.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
What do you think of the idea of, you know,
trying to actually get people back into the city. Do
you think that we need to get people back in
the city, working back in the city. I mean it
just we talked or fair. I think about how Wellington
feels so damn miserable. Is there a chance we can
actually try and drive people back into the city. Is
a government doing enough to do that?
Speaker 3 (12:58):
I don't think you can move against what is largely
an international trend of people wanting to live and work
more closely, you know, so work closer to home, if
not work at home. That's happening around the world, and
you know, cities all over the world are grappling with
the fact that there are few people in CBDs everywhere.
And I don't think that we can set ourselves apart
(13:18):
from that international trend. But you can do things to
make being back at work and being back in the
city more attractive for people. And I think that employers
can do that and then that will be you have
a flow on positive effect for businesses.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
There's been a lot of talk in the last week
about New Zealand's energy shortage, running low on gas and
the hydro lakes now with no rain, they're unusually low,
led to some businesses actually having to reduce or shutting
operations because they can't access the energy that they need.
And our electricity prices well, they are another thing. There
are second or the highest in the western world. How
much responsibility does labor have to take for this due
(13:54):
to the oil and gas ban?
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Well, look, our chickens are coming home to roost as
a country. But anyone who says that the oil and
gas band is the chicken that's coming home to roost
is just absurd really, So let's let's deal with some facts.
We haven't had a significant oil and gas find in
New Zealand since two thousand and one. So the idea
that because there was a ban on it for the last.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Time, there's a band for stopping new people coming and
trying to find it.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
Yeah, but they spent well more than a decade before
that trying to find it. They didn't find any. The
reality here is we've got to invest in renewable generation.
But why haven't we done that? Well, pretty simple maths.
The last national government sold off the electricity gen tailors,
you know, through the mixed ownership model as they call it,
and the time since that happened, those companies have paid
(14:38):
out ten billion dollars more than ten billion dollars in
dividends to their shareholders and invested less than half of
that in maintaining.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
An upgrade them holders.
Speaker 3 (14:50):
The government are a shareholder, but these companies are now
operate on the stock exchange, so they have to operate
with you know, to maximize shareholder value. That ten billion
dollars in dividends. Even if they'd spent just half of
that expanding generation, we wouldn't be in this position.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Can we fix it?
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Of course we can fix it, but it's going to
require quite a significant change to the way the market operates. Interestingly,
the last two or three years we've seen a significant
increase in generator an investment in new generation, but we've
got to sustain that for a good five to ten years.
And that also includes looking at things that can take
demand off the grid. So solar panels, for example, they're
(15:27):
getting cheaper and cheaper. China is manufacturing them in large
scale and selling them cheap we should be buying them,
getting them onto people's roofs.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Why isn't the government doing that as an assistant thing
because those sholders in the big gen, you know, is
that why it's happening.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
I don't know why they're not doing it, but I mean,
this is an opportunity that really is going begging at
the moment. So if you think about the price of
electricity that you pay, a good chunk of that is
the cost of getting the electricity to you, So from
the hydro lake or from wherever it's generated the wind
farm to your house. That's a big part of the
power bill that you pay. You stick a solar panel
on your roof, you're generating your own and you're not
(16:02):
paying lines transmission fee.
Speaker 2 (16:03):
Why wouldn't that be a simple thing for the government
to say, we'll give you that you're free. I mean,
you pay it off favor ten years or something, and
we'll pay for that and help them.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
It's how we finance it, And that's exactly the issue. So,
I mean, I've done the maths for my own house.
If I stuck solar panels on my roof and put
a battery in, I'd have largely free electricity, but you know,
unlimited pretty much, I wouldn't be paying a power bill.
So then I look at the money that you know,
I currently put on my power bill. I'd easily pay
back the cost of the solar panels within somewhere between them.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
We're in the cost of living. No one can afford
to do that exactly.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
So if the government comes up with options, working with
local councils, working with you know, electricity companies, to allow
people to spread the payment for their solar panels over
a ten year period, we could have We could be
massively rolling out you know, large scale solar panels across
the country, and then a lot of our energy wos
start to disappear.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Wellington Girls College, Yeah, that's closed for two days after
they found their main block earthquake was earthquake prone. But
the school sets of Ministry is nine for years but
never told them. You announced the redevelopment of the schools
as Education Minister in twenty nineteen, So did you know
that it was earthquake problem? Then in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
We certainly knew that there were earthquake prone at buildings there.
I don't think I had the report on the latest
building that they've revealed issues with. At that stage, we
knew that the tower block had to come down and
that has now been demolished, and we put money into
supporting them through there. But I do think the Ministry
of Education have really botched this process, and so as
a Minister of Education for some of that time, I'm
(17:37):
very clear to the school community. I'm sorry they've had
to go through this. I don't think the Ministry has
handled it well. It certainly hasn't met the expects.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Could you have done more when you were Education minister
if you knew that this was a problem, Well we did.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
I mean we did we based you know, we gave
them the extra money for the building project. But I
think the Ministry has badly handled the relationship with the school.
It hasn't shared the information with the school that it
had and that's just not good enough.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
So just finally on running to Girls School, what's going
to happen there? What do you think will have to
happen there? Because we've got a problem. We can't where
we're going to put all these kids.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
I think they need an urge and emphasis on some
temporary accommodation for them that you know, I guess the
good news of the downturn and Wellington is there is
a lot more space going. You know, it might have
to be that they convert some office space for a
short period of time to see them through. That's a
challenging site and so they're probably going to need to
get as many of those girls off site somewhere.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
That's not a good thing.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
Well, it depends how you do it, you know, sharing
with other schools, finding off of space and converting it.
They need to work with urgency, but bearing in mind
that the more people they get off the site, the
faster they'll be able to get the buildings done.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
All right. There was an interesting piece from Audrey Young
last week. She said a crack at you, saying that
your political radar is all few were asking petty questions
and need to focus on issues that matter to Keiwis.
I mean there's been quite a bit of talk whether
you have been strong enough in opposition. Do you think
that's a bit harsh.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
I mean, Audrey's column was frustrating, but you know, I
don't disagree with all of it. I think it probably
was a particularly petty exchange that we had at question time.
But I'm amazed that Audrey Young has chosen on, you know,
to pick on that one particular question time when if
you listen to the Prime Minister's answers to almost every
question that I ask him every day, he's one of
the pettiest prime ministers I've ever seen.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Do do you feel that you're doing the country of service?
Do you think that the opposition is strong enough?
Speaker 1 (19:25):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (19:25):
Absolutely, But I mean the Prime Minister begins almost every
answer to a question with an attack on the person
who's asked the question, usually very pity. I mean, he
could be an arsonist. You know, he's accused us of vandalism.
You know he's and here's then telling everyone else to
calm down with their rhetoric. He's certainly not leading by
example in that regard. I think our job as opposition
is important, but I was also very clear that we're
(19:48):
going to use this time and opposition to engage in
developing new ideas rather than just bark at every passing car.
I'm not going to criticize the government for doing things
if we would have done them as well.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
Yeah, but I kind of get the feeling, and you
know that you could do more and taking them.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
To task, and we will. I mean, you know, we'll
continue to hold them accountable for what they're doing. But
as I said, I think people are a bit over
the idea that politicians just snipe at each other without
offering any constructive solutions. So that's what we've been focused on.
People didn't vote for us in twenty twenty three, that
was less than a year ago. If we want to
(20:26):
offer some real alternatives to them at the next election,
we have to actually do the work to make sure
we've got those.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
If I asked you to score yourself out of ten
as opposition, where you would you put the number?
Speaker 3 (20:36):
I wouldn't give it. I don't I hate the scales
of one to ten. I'd give us a pass mark
at the moment. But you know it's we're in the
first year of a three year term, so we'll get
you know, we'll get stronger and stronger as we head
towards the election.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
All it's great to have you in the studio. We
appreciate it. Rumatucker, MP and Labor leader Chris Hipkins in
the studio. Thank you, catch you next month.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Yeah, catch you next month.
Speaker 2 (20:57):
Great to talk to you you too.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills. Listen live
to news talks There'd Be Wellington from nine am week days,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk Said.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
B joining us now as labor leader and MP for
rum Taker. Chris Hipkins. Good morning, Chris, good morning. How
are you feeling.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
I'm feeling really good. I mean, the sun's coming out again.
It's you know, it feels like spring is on the way.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Earlier this year, did you cop that bad weather or Upperhut,
because we didn't. We missed it completely in Wetington. I mean,
we've got a bit of wind and a bit of
a dark cloud, but we didn't get the hail in
the rain. But someone from Upper Heart said, oh no,
we got the whole lot over there.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Yeah, well I my house did. I wasn't there, but
when I got home there were big puddles of look
like icicles on my back deck and I think it was,
you know, clearly the hail from the from the storm
earlier in the day.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
All right, very quickly, before we get into the deep stuff.
We obviously kicked off this morning on the show with
the ocr decision today at two o'clock. I feel deeply
that this is probably one of the biggest times and
biggest decisions that I can remember and I'm quite old
of ocr where we're down on our knees. We're going
through times and we need to see some sunlight. As
(01:09):
you just said, how desperately do you think that New
Zealand needs to cut.
Speaker 3 (01:13):
I think for businesses, for mortgage holders. You know, I
hope that they'll see a cut today. For my gut
instinct probably tells me that the Reserve Bank won't be
quite that bold and that they're more likely to hold.
They're still going to be waiting to see what happens
with tax cuts. You know, the tax cuts have literally
just come through. Now they're going to be looking at
what kind of stimulus that creates and what impact that
(01:34):
has on inflation before they make their call. That's my pack.
It's not what I hope for, but I think that's
probably the most likely outcome.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
Now, you know Adrian or better than most of us.
You would have had several meetings with them, spent several
spend several amounts of time with him. Is he boyent enough,
is he positive enough? Is he out there enough to
make a change today?
Speaker 3 (01:54):
Well, he's a very sharp mind, but he's been given
a single goal by the current government. So remember they
changed the Reserve Bank law pretty much as soon as
they became government. His only goal is to bring inflation
back down below three percent, so that is the only
thing that he will be looking at now. Inflation still
later stats still just above that magical three percent marker.
(02:17):
He'll be looking at the effect that tax cuts will
have on that and various other things, you know, rates
going up, insurance going up, rents going up, and so on,
and he'll be weighing all that up as to whether
now is the right time to lower interest rates. Previously
he had a dual mandate which included you know, keeping
people in work for example. The government took that away.
(02:37):
I reckon, if he still had the dual mandate, we'd
probably see interest rates being cut now.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Okay. Do you so you think we're gonna actually wait
till November.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
My gut tells me that we're going to be waiting
a bit longer.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
Gosh, you reckon, We can afford to it.
Speaker 3 (02:48):
I know that for a lot of businesses, particularly now
is pretty tough going and that they're looking for something
a bit more soon.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Are you getting that a lot? Are you? Are you
people stopping you in the street and saying, hey, you
know we're in troublehead. Does anyone care?
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, And you know a different sectors. I mean,
Hospite's been absolutely hammered. Ellington here particularly. You only have
to walk through the CBD and you'll find, you know,
Hospow business is going to the wall, right, left and center.
It's pretty tough going for Hospow. Building and constructions. The
other surprise one you would think now with the infrastructure
deficit in the housing crisis we've got that building in
(03:22):
construction would be booming, but actually there's six thousand fewer
people working in building construction now than there were at
the last election. So there's overall eighteen thousand fewer jobs
today than they were at the last elections. That's, you know,
at least in part a consequence of the decisions that
the government have taken.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
Absolutely, and I think we because it's not quite as
glamorous as HOSPO. I think the building trades get sort
of we don't talk about it as much. I think
they're doing it just as tough.
Speaker 3 (03:49):
Oh they are doing it really tough. And the government
have pulled back spending in those areas. So you know,
if you think about local trade is where are they
working while they're building houses or the government have stopped
the public sector of the state house build program. They're
upgrading schools. The government have put all those projects on
hold while they rescope them. They are doing things like
hospital improvements and you know that kind of stuff. Well,
(04:10):
a lot of that's on hold as well. So you know,
the government is a big purchaser of building and construction
work work, and they've dialed it all right back. So
that probably explains the lion's share of that six thousand
fewer jobs in that sector.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Let's talk government moves. Yesterday. That yesterday or the day before,
they introduced a new traffic light system for sanctions against
beneficiaries not meeting their obligations. New sanctions include a community
training program and putting half the benefit on a payment
card that can only be used in certain places. Labor,
you guys have come out strongly against this. What's wrong
(04:47):
with consequences for not meeting your obligation?
Speaker 3 (04:49):
I do want to see beneficiaries getting back into work.
What I get frustrated by is the fact free nature
of some of this debate. You know, I know people think, oh,
you know, the Labor Party is just all about keeping
people on benefits. Quite the contrary. I believe in the
value of work. I want to see people in work.
But as I said, there's eighteen thousand fewer jobs today
than they were at the last election. So going and
(05:09):
beating beneficiaries with a big stick and saying go get
off to work you when there aren't the jobs for
them to go into, I think is pretty harsh. Bear
in mind too, that the vast majority of people who
go on to a benefit come off a benefit within
six months. So that's a fact that gets missed in
this debate.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Why do we not talk about that because I didn't.
I mean I knew that that was you know, obviously
obviously fact, But we don't talk about that. Do we
talk about the ones that have been on for ten years?
Speaker 3 (05:36):
That's right, and frankly, hitting those ones who are on
for ten years with the big stick's not going to
change anything. If they haven't got employable skills, then no
one's going to give them a job. So let's focus
on that problem. You know. We as a government, we
reinstated a thing called the Training Incentive Allowance, which was
basically about saying to someone, if you're on a benefit,
actually get yourself trained up to do something that's going
(05:58):
to increase your future employment prospects. You know the latest
move yesterday, you know the money management stuff where basically
they're saying to benefit fisheries, well, we're going to manage
your money for you. All that's going to do is
create a deeper culture of dependence, because you're basically taking
away people's ability to make decisions for themselves. Some of
(06:19):
the problem for people who are on long term welfare
dependence is that they are too dependent. Making them more
dependent is not going to solve that problem.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Do you actually think that this plan will actually reduce
the number on people on the benefits? Do you think
it will help?
Speaker 3 (06:33):
No? I mean, I think, as government finding in a
lot of areas now, slogans don't change things. You know,
talking tough on crime hasn't reduced retail crime, it's continuing
to increase. And talking tough on beneficiaries hasn't reduced the
number of people on benefits. There's actually twenty something thousand
more people on benefits now than there were when they
became the government.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
Do you think that, I mean, I hoping that you
will that we've actually have got too many people on benefits.
Do you reckon that we are becoming a benefit country?
Speaker 3 (06:59):
No. I think during the you know, the boom in
the labor market where we had a number there are
people on benefits who we really needed to get out
into work. I think there was more that we should
have done in that area, focused particularly around training people
for the jobs that were available. And I think that's
a fair cop. We should have done more around, you know,
(07:20):
preparing people for the work that was available. But we're
into a different labor market now to the one we
were in two years ago, And.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Would you do things differently? What would you do if
your empower right now?
Speaker 3 (07:29):
A much greater emphasis on training? You know, I really
think if we upskill people who are on benefits, recognizing
and now, you know, when there are more people on
benefits and there's fewer jobs for them to go into,
it's a good time to invest in training them because
then when the jobs do come along, they're going to
have more skills and they're going to be more likely
to be employed.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Does it frustrate you that we have these people that
we bring in from overseas all the time for the
fruit picking and stuff like that, when we've got unemployed
people sitting in the same suburbs doing nothing.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Yeah, it does. Although there are locality issues here, you know.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
The people I'm saying, the ones that are in the
same area. I'm not expecting exactly from Wellington to go
to hawks By and pick apples for two weeks and
then come back. But I'm saying, if you're in Hawk's
Bay and you're on a benefit and you can walk
up and down the line and pick some fruit shorter,
you should be doing.
Speaker 3 (08:13):
And in many of those areas, those areas where the
unemployment is lower and the number of people on benefits
is lower, you know, it tends to if you look
at the people we need to activate, if you like,
they're not always living in those provincial areas where we
can get them out doing some of the primary sector work,
and so that's why we need to train them for
other jobs.
Speaker 2 (08:31):
So would you do that? Do you think we should
be doing that? Should be even looking at doing that?
Speaker 3 (08:34):
Training people for me, No.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Getting people to actually do the RSA jobs, you know,
getting them to actually do the jobs that are in
the area if they're there.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
Yeah, yes, definitely. But you've also got to look at
some of the underlying barriers to that, because those employers
will tell you that they have tried and that they
often find that those the people that they're getting don't
sustain it, you know, they don't stay. And so that's
where the training is important, because you've got to in
some cases, if someone's never worked, you've actually got to
(09:02):
get a bit of a work culture to them. And
you need to do that before you get putting them
in an environment where the employer is going to get
frustrated and annoyed by them not doing duicy a share
of the work.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
We have Leader of the Opposition. We don't actually call
you the leader of the opposition anymore, do we? Labor leader?
Why do they not call the leader? Are you called
the leader? I'm still the leader of the opposition.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
I mean, people call me lots of things these days,
so I don't really pay a lot of it t.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
It's almost like labor leaders rather than the leader of
the opposition. But I want to talk about opposition shortly,
but first congestion charging. The government's introduced a law which
will allow local is about to introduce a law that
allow local councils to introduce congestion charging. Auckland seems to
be the first cab off the rank, but you'd have
to assume that highly likely Wontington would be there too.
(09:47):
Labor actually, I think of this as a labor move
because Labor were the first to bring it out, talked
about the benefits of congestion charging. What does the government?
Does this government's plan actually make any sense to you?
Speaker 3 (09:59):
I support the concept of congestion charging, but there's two
issues around it. One is timing and the second is alternate.
So in order to you know, doing it right in
the middle of the cost of living crisis could be
pretty challenging for people if there aren't alternatives because part
of what you're trying to you're trying to achieve two
things with congestion charging. One is changing the time of
day when people drive, and the other is getting them
(10:21):
to do something other than drive, you know, catch a bus,
catch a train, whatever. So you've got to have alternatives
for people.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
So for those who.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Can't change when they drive, you need to have an alternative,
whether it's a bus, a train, or whatever. And so
my concern about the government announcements yesterday is that I
think they've got the timing a bit wrong here. I
think doing it right in the middle of a cost
of living crisis when people just are struggling to make
ends meet. Not great timing. But the second is they've
(10:48):
pulled back a lot of the investment and the alternatives
for people. And so I think so yeah, in principal,
congestion charging happens around the world, works really well, helps
helps to really ease congestion and mean that those who
have to travel at a certain time can actually get there,
you know. So think about career drivers and the people
who are doing whose business relies on them being on
(11:08):
the road at certain times. It's much better for them.
So it's good for business. So there's a lot of
good reasons to do it, but you've got to make
sure you've got the alternatives nailed down.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
You think it could You keep talking about this alternative
roots which I can't work out in my head how
it would work in Wantington, the alternative route part. But
would it work in Welltington?
Speaker 3 (11:25):
You think potentially in parts. So, I mean there are
good train services in Wellington, for example, So you know
we do have alternatives here. You know, you've got some
people who you know easily could switch to public transport
without too much inconvenience. Then you've got others who would
be a real challenge for So if you've got kids
and you're dropping them at school and you're picking them
(11:45):
up and you're doing a regular hours and stuff, it
can be more challenging. But if you're just driving from
you know, out where I live in Upper Hut into
Wellington to work in a public sector job and then
driving back at the other end of the day, well,
I think we should be looking to make public transport
more attractive for people who are in that camp. Who
are in that camp, we.
Speaker 2 (12:03):
Do need to do something in wanting to do. Are
you in favor of the meg if you had to
look at that, I.
Speaker 3 (12:07):
I think the Mega Tunnel is obsurd. It'll never happen.
I mean the cost involved in that.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
We said that about Transmission Gully. I'm old enough to
understand when they said it, but.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
I've always supported Transmission Gully. I'm very, very skeptical about
the Mega Tunnel. But you know, the Mount of Wact Tunnel,
I think has got to be the first priority getting
an extra tunnel through there, and the National Party promised
that that would be started before the next election, so
there is hope. I certainly hope that they'll fulfill that commitment,
because that Mount Vic Tunnel will really help to ease
(12:36):
in a city congestion.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
What do you think of the idea of, you know,
trying to actually get people back into the city. Do
you think that we need to get people back in
the city, working back in the city. I mean it
just we talked or fair. I think about how Wellington
feels so damn miserable. Is there a chance we can
actually try and drive people back into the city. Is
a government doing enough to do that?
Speaker 3 (12:58):
I don't think you can move against what is largely
an international trend of people wanting to live and work
more closely, you know, so work closer to home, if
not work at home. That's happening around the world, and
you know, cities all over the world are grappling with
the fact that there are few people in CBDs everywhere.
And I don't think that we can set ourselves apart
(13:18):
from that international trend. But you can do things to
make being back at work and being back in the
city more attractive for people. And I think that employers
can do that and then that will be you have
a flow on positive effect for businesses.
Speaker 2 (13:31):
There's been a lot of talk in the last week
about New Zealand's energy shortage, running low on gas and
the hydro lakes now with no rain, they're unusually low,
led to some businesses actually having to reduce or shutting
operations because they can't access the energy that they need.
And our electricity prices well, they are another thing. There
are second or the highest in the western world. How
much responsibility does labor have to take for this due
(13:54):
to the oil and gas ban?
Speaker 3 (13:55):
Well, look, our chickens are coming home to roost as
a country. But anyone who says that the oil and
gas band is the chicken that's coming home to roost
is just absurd really, So let's let's deal with some facts.
We haven't had a significant oil and gas find in
New Zealand since two thousand and one. So the idea
that because there was a ban on it for the last.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
Time, there's a band for stopping new people coming and
trying to find it.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
Yeah, but they spent well more than a decade before
that trying to find it. They didn't find any. The
reality here is we've got to invest in renewable generation.
But why haven't we done that? Well, pretty simple maths.
The last national government sold off the electricity gen tailors,
you know, through the mixed ownership model as they call it,
and the time since that happened, those companies have paid
(14:38):
out ten billion dollars more than ten billion dollars in
dividends to their shareholders and invested less than half of
that in maintaining.
Speaker 2 (14:48):
An upgrade them holders.
Speaker 3 (14:50):
The government are a shareholder, but these companies are now
operate on the stock exchange, so they have to operate
with you know, to maximize shareholder value. That ten billion
dollars in dividends. Even if they'd spent just half of
that expanding generation, we wouldn't be in this position.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Can we fix it?
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Of course we can fix it, but it's going to
require quite a significant change to the way the market operates. Interestingly,
the last two or three years we've seen a significant
increase in generator an investment in new generation, but we've
got to sustain that for a good five to ten years.
And that also includes looking at things that can take
demand off the grid. So solar panels, for example, they're
(15:27):
getting cheaper and cheaper. China is manufacturing them in large
scale and selling them cheap we should be buying them,
getting them onto people's roofs.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Why isn't the government doing that as an assistant thing
because those sholders in the big gen, you know, is
that why it's happening.
Speaker 3 (15:40):
I don't know why they're not doing it, but I mean,
this is an opportunity that really is going begging at
the moment. So if you think about the price of
electricity that you pay, a good chunk of that is
the cost of getting the electricity to you, So from
the hydro lake or from wherever it's generated the wind
farm to your house. That's a big part of the
power bill that you pay. You stick a solar panel
on your roof, you're generating your own and you're not
(16:02):
paying lines transmission fee.
Speaker 2 (16:03):
Why wouldn't that be a simple thing for the government
to say, we'll give you that you're free. I mean,
you pay it off favor ten years or something, and
we'll pay for that and help them.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
It's how we finance it, And that's exactly the issue. So,
I mean, I've done the maths for my own house.
If I stuck solar panels on my roof and put
a battery in, I'd have largely free electricity, but you know,
unlimited pretty much, I wouldn't be paying a power bill.
So then I look at the money that you know,
I currently put on my power bill. I'd easily pay
back the cost of the solar panels within somewhere between them.
Speaker 2 (16:32):
We're in the cost of living. No one can afford
to do that exactly.
Speaker 3 (16:35):
So if the government comes up with options, working with
local councils, working with you know, electricity companies, to allow
people to spread the payment for their solar panels over
a ten year period, we could have We could be
massively rolling out you know, large scale solar panels across
the country, and then a lot of our energy wos
start to disappear.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Wellington Girls College, Yeah, that's closed for two days after
they found their main block earthquake was earthquake prone. But
the school sets of Ministry is nine for years but
never told them. You announced the redevelopment of the schools
as Education Minister in twenty nineteen, So did you know
that it was earthquake problem? Then in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3 (17:15):
We certainly knew that there were earthquake prone at buildings there.
I don't think I had the report on the latest
building that they've revealed issues with. At that stage, we
knew that the tower block had to come down and
that has now been demolished, and we put money into
supporting them through there. But I do think the Ministry
of Education have really botched this process, and so as
a Minister of Education for some of that time, I'm
(17:37):
very clear to the school community. I'm sorry they've had
to go through this. I don't think the Ministry has
handled it well. It certainly hasn't met the expects.
Speaker 2 (17:44):
Could you have done more when you were Education minister
if you knew that this was a problem, Well we did.
Speaker 3 (17:48):
I mean we did we based you know, we gave
them the extra money for the building project. But I
think the Ministry has badly handled the relationship with the school.
It hasn't shared the information with the school that it
had and that's just not good enough.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
So just finally on running to Girls School, what's going
to happen there? What do you think will have to
happen there? Because we've got a problem. We can't where
we're going to put all these kids.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
I think they need an urge and emphasis on some
temporary accommodation for them that you know, I guess the
good news of the downturn and Wellington is there is
a lot more space going. You know, it might have
to be that they convert some office space for a
short period of time to see them through. That's a
challenging site and so they're probably going to need to
get as many of those girls off site somewhere.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
That's not a good thing.
Speaker 3 (18:29):
Well, it depends how you do it, you know, sharing
with other schools, finding off of space and converting it.
They need to work with urgency, but bearing in mind
that the more people they get off the site, the
faster they'll be able to get the buildings done.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
All right. There was an interesting piece from Audrey Young
last week. She said a crack at you, saying that
your political radar is all few were asking petty questions
and need to focus on issues that matter to Keiwis.
I mean there's been quite a bit of talk whether
you have been strong enough in opposition. Do you think
that's a bit harsh.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
I mean, Audrey's column was frustrating, but you know, I
don't disagree with all of it. I think it probably
was a particularly petty exchange that we had at question time.
But I'm amazed that Audrey Young has chosen on, you know,
to pick on that one particular question time when if
you listen to the Prime Minister's answers to almost every
question that I ask him every day, he's one of
the pettiest prime ministers I've ever seen.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Do do you feel that you're doing the country of service?
Do you think that the opposition is strong enough?
Speaker 1 (19:25):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (19:25):
Absolutely, But I mean the Prime Minister begins almost every
answer to a question with an attack on the person
who's asked the question, usually very pity. I mean, he
could be an arsonist. You know, he's accused us of vandalism.
You know he's and here's then telling everyone else to
calm down with their rhetoric. He's certainly not leading by
example in that regard. I think our job as opposition
is important, but I was also very clear that we're
(19:48):
going to use this time and opposition to engage in
developing new ideas rather than just bark at every passing car.
I'm not going to criticize the government for doing things
if we would have done them as well.
Speaker 2 (19:59):
Yeah, but I kind of get the feeling, and you
know that you could do more and taking them.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
To task, and we will. I mean, you know, we'll
continue to hold them accountable for what they're doing. But
as I said, I think people are a bit over
the idea that politicians just snipe at each other without
offering any constructive solutions. So that's what we've been focused on.
People didn't vote for us in twenty twenty three, that
was less than a year ago. If we want to
(20:26):
offer some real alternatives to them at the next election,
we have to actually do the work to make sure
we've got those.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
If I asked you to score yourself out of ten
as opposition, where you would you put the number?
Speaker 3 (20:36):
I wouldn't give it. I don't I hate the scales
of one to ten. I'd give us a pass mark
at the moment. But you know it's we're in the
first year of a three year term, so we'll get
you know, we'll get stronger and stronger as we head
towards the election.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
All it's great to have you in the studio. We
appreciate it. Rumatucker, MP and Labor leader Chris Hipkins in
the studio. Thank you, catch you next month.
Speaker 3 (20:56):
Yeah, catch you next month.
Speaker 2 (20:57):
Great to talk to you you too.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills. Listen live
to news talks There'd Be Wellington from nine am week days,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.