The college of Caridinals has elected a new Pope - and he's the first to hail from the United States. Will he continue Francis' liberal legacy?
Also, outgoing Labour MP David Parker says New Zealand's MMP system has led to more polarisation in our politics and is in favour of a preferential voting system. Is MMP working?
To answer those questions, former Minister Peter Dunne and BusinessDesk property editor Maria Slade joined Nick Mills for Friday Faceoff.
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 B Wellington's official week interview. It's
Friday face off with Kudovic Property Management a better rental
experience for all. Visit on its head.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
By join us for Friday face Off.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
This week is former minister and good guy Wellingtonian Cantabrian
Kiwi Peter Dunn. Good morning, help, I'm better turn your
mic on. How shall we start that again?
Speaker 4 (00:56):
So say the same things again?
Speaker 3 (00:58):
No, I'm not going to repeat myself. No, good morning,
good morning. Good to have you here. And we've asked
a very very special guest to join us today. She
is the Business Desk Property Editor, Maria Slide. Good morning, Maria,
good morning. So can you tell our listeners a bit
about your position as Business Desk Property Editor? Tell us
explain what you do and could you come a little
(01:19):
bit close to your micast.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (01:21):
So. Business Desk is n ze Toemy's premium business subscription
service if you like. So we're a business news service
for people who are interested in reading the business news.
We have the New Zealand Herald of course and their
business section and that is behind the paywall as well.
Of course, but ours is a bit more in depth.
I suppose a bit more for business people and profession
(01:42):
people in the professions and that kind of thing who
want a bit more in depth analysis of what's going
on in the New Zealand business scene.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
And more in depth writing as well.
Speaker 5 (01:50):
Yes, indeed, indeed, and we are focusing more and more
on sort of investigations and current affairs kind of pieces.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Well welcome and it's lovely to have you in our
building and working out at Wellington, so we thought we'd
grab you and you can get your ideas and information.
Remind me to ask you after the show about some
Auckland stories as well that I've got running around in
my head. We have a new pope, American Cardinal Robert
(02:18):
de Fross, who will be Premost Is that pre most
primos premos Leo the fourteenth I'm going to call them,
who will be the first ever American pope. Pope Maria,
what was the thoughts? Did you know anything about him?
Did you know what was going on? Did you have
an inkling?
Speaker 5 (02:35):
No? Look, I was brought up, you know, going to
Catholic schools and everything, and I was just commenting actually
the other day that We never know who these guys are.
Unless you're a particular hard out Catholic. Perhaps you might
follow some of these cardinals, but no, I'd never heard
of him. It is interesting he's an American. Of course,
that's a new one. But I also find it kind
of interesting that's leading all the bulletins. I mean, Okay,
(02:57):
there are one point four billion Catholics in the world,
I suppose, so that's quite a chunk of people. But
there's also a great other chunk of people that do
not adhere to any kind of Christian religion, and so
it is kind of weird that it's such a big
deal today.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
You know what, I agree with you one hundred percent.
I mean, when I first walked in this morning, obviously
Ethan said, well, we better do a story story about
the new pope. I said, what, who's going to want
to talk about the new Pope? They don't know anything
about him. We don't have any idea who really cares.
Apart from Catholics. I do not want to get a
Catholics upset. But apart from Catholics, Peter, you're looking at me,
(03:29):
are you a Catholic? You're looking at me very strange.
Speaker 4 (03:31):
I think I think that the issue. It is unusual
for the papal election to get this amount of attention worldwide,
and I think it's a tribute really to Pope Francis
because he internationalized the papacy. I think because he took
it from being not just the sort of the religious leadership,
but his social and moral leadership. And I think that's
what's created the interest now. Now, obviously it puts a
(03:53):
huge pressure on the new pope, who I gather only
became a cardinal last year, so he's relatively new in
the hierarchy. You know that people are saying by taking
the name of Leo the fourteenth is a clue because
Leo the thirteenth and the late nineteenth century was a
reformist worker's advocate pope and did a lot of promotion
(04:14):
in that area, so that this is a clue.
Speaker 3 (04:17):
So you think it's going to be to carry on
the same.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Look, I don't know anything about him, but I'm just
saying there's an early clue in the name choice. The
fact that he's been working in South America rather than
in Chicago, I think is again another clue. But look,
everyone will be watching for signs over the next little
while to see what he's going to do. While he's
the head of the hierarchy. He's got a college of
cardinals around him, and they're going to be a constraint
(04:40):
one way or the other on what he does.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Right. I mean, do we, Maria, want to see the
carry on legacy? I mean, we did see changes. Some
say we didn't see them as strong as we could have,
but we saw some changes. Do we want to keep
seeing changes and them being more liberal?
Speaker 5 (04:58):
Well, the Catholic Church moves at a glacial pace, so
that the changes we have seen are pretty minor in
the grand scheme of things. I mean, still women are
not allowed to be priests, are not allowed to marry.
They've still got pretty odd views on things like contraception
and so forth. So from a woman's point of view,
that the Catholic Church is not changing anywhere near fast enough,
(05:18):
I don't think. But yes, yes, I think it would
be a good thing if they do continue along a
slightly more progressive line.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Making me smile and sigh because when I saw the
group of one hundred and thirty five men no woman
get locked in behind the door. I mean, Peter, how
long is it going to be able to carry on.
Speaker 4 (05:38):
I mean, I don't know, and I think that the
driver in the end will be less theological than practical.
You know, the numbers of people joining the priest to
the declining worldwide, and I think that the celibacy issue
is a huge part of that would throw on from
the whole child abuse scandal. I suspect it's inevitable to
be changed. I agree with Maria it will be glacial,
(06:00):
but I don't think it'll be driven by theological factors
as much as practical factors as how you sustain the organization.
It seems to me that the first step might be
I think Francis had moved a little, but I don't
understand the term. But he had deacons and which are
not priests to allow female deacons, And I suspect you
get that in place, then you move up to the priesthood.
(06:22):
But it'll be driven by the fact they need the
numbers more than anything else.
Speaker 3 (06:25):
Right, Yeah, I mean it's twenty twenty five. I mean,
it's pretty a male orientated thing to have, you know,
and and we just the world just puts up with it.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Well, you know, it's the largest, I think, one of
the largest religions in the world, isn't it. And it's
interesting that when people were touting some of the African
cardinals as possible people contenders, they are the most conservative
and rigid of the lot. So, you know, while the
church has moved away from being Italian dominated, the new
(06:59):
forces that are dominating it might not be as liberal
as some of the ones previously. So who knows.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
Right, let's move on. The biggest story of the week
was the government changing legislation surrounding pay equity, tightening the
criteria for making a claim. The move is expected to
save billions of dollars and has been rushed through through
urgency ahead of the budget and a fortnight Maria, what
did you put this down to? Did you put it
down to just simply saving money or do you think
(07:29):
there was you know, the union push for trying to
incorporate a whole lot of things and hit them through.
What did you make of it? This is something that
you would write about I have.
Speaker 5 (07:38):
Written about it in the past, yes, indeed, talking about
the position of women, I think you just cauterized a
whole section of the female vote with that move. You
know there will be a chunk of women that will
vote against this government just on principle on this issue.
And it's not going to go away. You know, there's
already protests brewing. There may be a legal challenge for
all we know, anything done under urgency is a bad
(08:02):
idea in my view. This is a different topic, but
the media density residential standards, if we remember those, I
write about property, So that was sort of a big
one for me. That was pushed through within decent haste
right on Christmas Eve. It was a bypassed partisan deal
between the then Labor government and the National government. Well
that didn't work out so well. Now the current government's
(08:22):
walked right back from it and wants to make them
volunching and it was the worst piece of lawmaking now
that's gone through that parliament. So look, just pushing things
through was never a good idea. They're saying that the
current legislation is a bit too broad. All right, fine,
let's take a proper look at it.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
What's the rush, Peter, what was your thoughts when you
felt you had no inkling this was happy, no, none
of us.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
In the media, and you had just even ministers only
had two days notice. Ministers, I don't know when the
Government Caucus found out probably a couple of hours beforehand.
I think this is a bad move. I want to
put that up front. I'm not supporting it. I understand, however,
why they've done it, and why they've done it the
way they did it. You take things through under urgency
(09:04):
to get them out of the way quickly. I'm not
saying that's a good thing. That's what happens. What invariably
also happens is it's a bit like what's that old
saying about something something something repent at leisure. They after
the bill has passed, I'll see all the fishawks, and
you'll wait, there'll be an amendment down the track to
try and tidy up things that they missed it should
have gone.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Do you think it was rushed? Do you think that
the actual bill was rushed?
Speaker 4 (09:25):
Yes, I think it was rushed in its development. I
think certainly rushed through the House, and I think the
intent was to rightly or wrongly get this off the
agenda and move on to the budget. This will haunt
them for some time. Had it gone to a select committee,
there would have been the chance for submissions. There would
have been uncomfortable submission, certainly, But they could have ironed
out all the bugs before it became law. Having said that,
(09:49):
I think there were some problems that needed to be
resolved with the existing law, and that's why I'm a
little surprised that they hadn't that they didn't sort of
lay the ground by saying, you know, we support pay equity,
but it doesn't work in its current form. Here the
sort of changes we want to make and socialize the
ideas first before ramming in the legislation and closing off
the debate. Unfortunately, all they've done is just opened up
(10:10):
more widely.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
I want to ask you both this because it was
something that was a little point in time for me.
Heather Duplicy Allen came out very strongly and said that
this could be a game changer at the next election,
could be part of a game, you know, like be significant. Maria,
do you think it could be that significant? Will it
upset the female vote as much as what Heathers say?
Speaker 5 (10:31):
I think there's a certain sector of the female vote. Definitely, yes.
I do think also that you've got to look at
the sort of wider context of this. Brook Brook van Velden,
who's been driving a lot of these workplace kind of changes.
She's very ideological and in my view a bit myopic,
you know's it comes from this ideological idea of fewer
protections around employment and the market will decide to kind
(10:55):
of standpoint that kind of underpins a lot of what
she's doing. That the four step thing that she's brought
in in terms of contractor regulation. Ideally they would want
to move the ability for workers to challenge their employment
status as they currently can under the Employment Act. They
can say, look, I'm really being an employee without any
(11:16):
of the benefits here. And there's been a number of
those cases that have been taken successfully that the Uber
case being the story one, yes, which may well go
to the Supreme Court, so that one's not over yet.
But yeah, I think it's this political kind of ideology that,
you know, really you need to have as few protections
regulations as possible and let the market decide. But look,
(11:39):
that doesn't work to protect a whole cohort of vulnerable workers,
and when a whole chunk of those vulnerable workers are female,
that becomes discrimination on the basis of sex.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
But the issue did I see, and I'm probably making
it far too simplisticly. Apeter is that it's not their
voters anyway.
Speaker 4 (11:58):
Well, that was the point I was going to make.
I think there will be some people, some women particularly
will be turned off by this, but I suspect them
majority of women who are likely to be affected would
not have been a government voters anyway. There's an irony
in this though. I think what's going to happen is
if there's a hit electorally, it will be the National
Party that takes it, even though it was an act
(12:20):
piece of legislation, because act voters quite like this sort
of stuff. But we won't know for a little while.
I mean, I was talking to a group of Labor
MPs yesterday and they said to me, you know, we
just can't get over the fact that this government's just
doing everything it can to lose the next election. And
they were really quite buoyant. And I went home and
I thought about this, because I keep a track of
all the opinion polls. This government would still be re
(12:42):
elected if there was an election tomorrow. Yes, on the
latest round of polls and all the averaging of them.
So there's a degree of sort of delusion taking place.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Can I just ask you, while you got that thought, though,
how much of that is based on the note we
know how bad a spot we were in, and we
know that we have to dig ourselves out of that spot.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
I think there's an element of that, but I think
there's also the fact that there's a sense of the
sorts of things that the government is doing really are
appealing enough to its base to sustain them. Now that
sounds a bit cynical, but I think they're doing things
to keep their own voters on site enough. Their problem
still was with their fringes. New Zealand first and Act
that could go rogue at any point, and you could
(13:22):
argue that the way in which the pay equity legislation
has been handled, where obviously very few people were in
the know, it was dropped on the table of the
House and ram through, is a case of Act going rogue,
which may pay a very negative dividend in time. But look,
we've got eighteen months to the next election. I think
the National Party will be wanting to get this behind them,
just like they wanted to get the Treaty Principles Bill
(13:44):
behind them and then move on with their own agenda.
But what happens next.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
We've got a thing called a memory. Take a short
break through. I mean, it could be all rejuvenated Friday
face off for Maria Slade and Peter Dunn. On average,
now I don't know whether you knew about this, you guys,
but on average, people employed in the public sector are
earning ten dollars an hour more than those working in
the private sector, according to stats in New Zealand's latest figures. Peter,
(14:11):
is it acceptable that public servants now paid more than
what they are in the private sector.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
I must confess these figures came as a surprise to
me after hearing all of the complaints from the state
sector unions about how poorly paid state servants are in
their conditions, et cetera, to find that actually they're doing
better than their private sector allies. I think the comparison
is really a false one in a way. I think
it's a matter of what's what's the job and what's
the best rate for it. But it does put a
(14:39):
bit of a pressure I think now on the State
Services Commission in terms of the next wage ground, how
whether it tries to redress the balance a little bit
by offering lower settlements and that brings the prospective industrial action,
et cetera.
Speaker 3 (14:51):
So yeah, but do you think it might be a
little bit of publicity by the government to try and
make everyone pull back anymore?
Speaker 1 (14:59):
So?
Speaker 3 (14:59):
I do.
Speaker 4 (14:59):
I think there's an element of that, because this government's
not particularly sympathetic to public servants and sort of painting
them was you know, the classic bloated, overpaid, lazy, you know,
working from home and they shall be all that sort
of stuff. This plays into that narrative a little bit.
But I just think it did surprise me, given, as
I say, the allegedly tough conditions and the comparison with
(15:22):
the private sector.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
Maria, when you first saw this, heard this, I mean,
you write about this stuff. Did you know it was
going on? Did you hear? I mean, I didn't know,
and I'm in business.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
I think you need to look at the look into
the statistic. Actually, I mean you can make a statistic
out of anything, aren't you. And I think, as one
economist that was interviewed on the subject said, it depends
on the composition of the jobs involved. What was the
makeup of the data that they used to come up
with that statistic. And you could argue that a lot
of public sector roles require quite well educated, skilled people
(15:56):
and perhaps they're not comparing apples with pears here, So
you know, that's one point I'd make. The second one
would be that it would seem that a lot of
the health and education settlements fed into that, and so
that's against sector specific And then you've got other issues
like in health, for example, the private sector providers saying
(16:16):
the government's not funding us enough to pay the rates
to meet the public sector workers. So that that's a
separate kind of challenge. So I think there's a few
moving parts in there, and I think you can draw
a direct line.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Although we did have a caller on the show that
was a registered nurse working in private sector saying that
she if she went and worked at Wellington Hospital, she
earned five dollars an hour more to straighten like that.
Speaker 5 (16:39):
Yeah, that is the problem. That's been a long running
problem in health that has got to be addressed at
some point.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
How do we address it?
Speaker 4 (16:46):
Peter Well, I think the simple answers you've got to
pay more, But then that creates a whole lot of
other issue.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
You can't do that in private They've got to make money.
It's not like the government take us more and make
more money.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
You increase those those wages that increases fees to patients,
that increases the danger of people not making access to
the system, et cetera, et cetera, a whole lot of
flow on problem. So it's not as easy as it sounds.
I think that, you know, what would be really nice, actually,
if the longer waited health reforms could finally be completed.
(17:18):
I'm involved with a PHO and the uncertainty within the
sector as to just what the long term plan is
it's just growing day by day. And that plan was
Andrew Little as Minister of Health announced this in twenty
twenty one. That's nearly four years ago, and there's still
uncertainty about what the future looks like. And I think
that's the biggest unresolved.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
Issue and will we get that result?
Speaker 4 (17:40):
Who knows that? You know, we keep being promised that
new wait decisions are imminent, and deadlines that appear pass
by and nothing happens. And the patients still want service,
the staff still want to work in a good environment
and to do their best with this lingering uncertainty about funding,
about structure, about role, just carries on and on and on.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
Friday Faith Off with Maria Slade and Peter Dunn convicted
double murderer Mark Lundy is out of prison, supposedly posing
no risk at all to the public, but we don't
have a clue where he's living. Meanwhile, a coroner's hearing
is on going into the death of Juliana Boonvela Hanauda,
who was killed by her neighbor, a convicted rapist. He
(18:25):
was living right next door to her, without her knowing
that he did so, Peter, should the public know where
convict and violent criminals are living.
Speaker 4 (18:34):
Look, I've got very few concerns about mister Lundy. I
think that he's probably he's been in prison for a
long time, twenty three years, you know. I don't think
he'll pose a long term threat. I am very concerned, however,
about the sort of situation that occurred in christ Church
where that person should never have been released to a
circumstance where he was able to offend again so horrifically
(18:56):
and so easily. And it seems to me that the
public's got a much it got absolute right to be
protected from those sorts of things occurring. But for people
who've been in prison for long periods of time, serve
their sentences and go back into the community, I think
they should be allowed to just sort of drift into obscurity.
Speaker 3 (19:13):
Maria, what were your thoughts when you saw this case
in christ I mean, I'm sorry, but I found it
apparent that this could actually happen, and she had no warning.
Someone screwed up and didn't tell her. If someone had
actually told her, she could have got the hell out
of there, couldn't she.
Speaker 5 (19:29):
Yeah, the case of Juliana Bonilla Hado is horrendous and
it's every woman living alone's worst nightmare. The coronial inquest is,
you know, quite rightly looking into what happened, and COVID
did seem to get in the way. There was a
few processes that didn't happen that may have otherwise happened.
His parole officer had concerns, but yes, it just seems
(19:51):
nonsensical that he should have been allowed to live right
next door to a single woman, and the prole officer
didn't have the power to go and knock on doors
and find out who lived there. Although you could argue
that even if she had found out who her neighbor was,
she would moved, probably like any sensible woman would have.
Speaker 3 (20:08):
But why should she be any sensible person.
Speaker 5 (20:10):
Any sensible person. Why would do sheieve to be the
one that has to move At least she.
Speaker 3 (20:16):
Would have had the opportunity, you know. And I'm sorry,
I don't want to hear the excuses from everyone about
what happened and what didn't happen. A young person with
their life in front of them, life was taken by
someone screwing up, system, screwing up.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
I'm going to be really interested to see what this
inquest comes out with, what the lessons are going to be,
because it just seems like there's big holes in the
system to allow a situation like that to occur.
Speaker 4 (20:42):
Yeah, and I think that people have a right to
live in safety and security. I think if you're making
plans to release people from prison under certain circumstances, the
area in which they to be released has got to
be a significant part of that decision. And it seems
to me in this particular case, for whatever reason, this
guy was released into an environment where trouble was inevitable.
(21:03):
It was you know, don't blame the woman concerned at all,
but but it's just that situation was inevitably going to occur,
and I think just a bit of wisdom before the
decision about where he was to be sent might have
prevented a horrible tragedy.
Speaker 5 (21:16):
And there's a lot and there's a local case too,
isn't in it with Paul Deally.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
I was about to bring that up because I was
very young when that all happened, and that I don't know, Peter,
where you were living in Willington when that happened. That
was a massive, massive story and there was even I
mean horrific story. And he's not getting getting parolled poor
daily and I for one, are pleased about that.
Speaker 4 (21:39):
Yeah, look I am too. I think that that was
a terrible situation. It was that that poor young girl
who's named.
Speaker 3 (21:46):
Temporarily biking down to get a bottle, and the.
Speaker 4 (21:52):
Whole horrific circumstances of how she was discovered, et cetera,
and Deli's constant lack of remorse over a long period
of time. So I have no qualms about his not
being released, although I do know. I read a report
on the paper this morning saying as Maria introjector not yet,
he's he's close to it, but he's been thirty one
years in jail.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Yeah, isn't it funny how at a certain time in
your life. Some cases stick with you. That case stuck
with me. It was a case that stopped the nation
at the time. You know, how can someone go and
get an ice cream and a bottle of milk and
we found, you know, buried in Eastbourne and a few
days data anyway, that's a horrible case. I want to
(22:34):
talk elections quickly. Yes, I've got time to talk the election.
I'd be very interested in Peter Dunn's thoughts on this.
Anthony Albaneze he has won historic second term as Australian
Prime minist, defying poles. I mean four months out, two
months out, call it what you want. You know it
was he was gone dusted and had it. You know,
it suddenly partly been attributed to the Trump you know,
(22:59):
a nigma would call it what you want? Could we
see something happened like that in New Zealand? And what
are you think thoughts on that? I mean you would
have been glued to your TV.
Speaker 4 (23:10):
Look, I said, the last polls in Australia before the
election gave a foretaste of what was to come on
the day, so the move had shifted and some of
them were being dismissed as being hopelessly optimistic. For the
Labor Party, but they to be correct. To me, I
think there were two factors that play in Australia which
and I think both irrelevant to New Zealand. Trump was one,
and that whole identity with Trump and that the Liberals
(23:33):
tried to develop was a factor. But I think the
other one that's just more fundamental is Albanesey on election Nights,
said in his victory speech, this was a victory for
Australian values this election. And to me that's quite a
telling point that what it suggests is that don't import
solutions from overseas, be they Trumpist or be they left
(23:57):
wing economics or whatever. You need to develop viable solutions
that draw on your own country's values and traditions. And
he argued that's what the Labor Party did in Australia.
I think it's a very pertinent point to New Zealand
as we looking ahead to our election next year. Trump
may well still be a factor, either diminished or enhanced.
(24:19):
But I think the key will be which of the
parties can develop solutions that fit the New Zealand way
of doing things and are in tune with our aspirations
and values, and they will be the ones that prosper
Maria Slade.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
For me, it was just a very simple fact that
I felt it months out. Peter Dutton is not popular.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
No, he didn't seem to be having a good campaign.
That's what a lot of the commentators in Australia were
saying that, yes, there was the Trump effect, but also
they didn't run a great campaign.
Speaker 3 (24:49):
And he wasn't popular.
Speaker 5 (24:50):
Yeah, so that seemed to be a big part of
the factor as well. I think what Peter our Peter
had done is saying.
Speaker 4 (24:58):
Great, Dutton's gone because people wishes to confuse the names
Peter Dutton, Peter Dunne.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
He's got you look nothing, no, no, But I think you
make a very good point, and I was going to
make the point that I don't think we're as polarized
to the right here as perhaps they are in the US.
And maybe you see elements of that in Australia too.
We're very centrist here. You know, people think the Democrats
in America are practically communist, but you know, to us,
(25:25):
they're a shade of the National Party. So we haven't
got that same politics. So I'm not sure that the
same effect would play here a little bit you know,
we're conscious of what Trump's doing to the world, but
I don't think it would be quite the same effect.
And I think that there are issues that are going
to impact much more greatly, such as the economy, such
as New Zealand's sort of perennial productivity challenges, and you know,
(25:47):
we can't seem to build infrastructure in under about ten years,
and those sorts of issues I think are going to
play more.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
Okay, Friday face off with Peter Dunn and Maria Slade. Now,
the story intrigued me and I liked it and I'm
jealous of it. A Talpo family took their four children
out of school. I think they were six, nine, eleven,
and fifteen or something around those ages. Don't quote me
on that. Maria and homeschooled them along the way. They
walked from one end of the country to the other
(26:14):
at two hundred and something days. They say, it's a
hell of a success. Would you ever do something like that?
Is that a would you take your kids out of
school for a year? Near enough a year?
Speaker 5 (26:25):
I think it's pretty brave taking a six year old
were walking all that way, But look, no, I thought
it was a great thing. What a what a learning opportunity,
learning about meeting challenges and overcoming adversity and you know,
bonding as a family and stuff, and put a homeschooling
along the way. For what did you say? Two hundred days?
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Two hundred and eighty six days to be precise by memory.
Speaker 5 (26:45):
That's fine for a while, you know that, I've been
learning a lot of other things. I think it's I
think it's fantastic. I mean, I'm not a big fan
of homeschooling per se me need it? I think I
will think why do you pay your taxes to pay
teachers if you're going to it's homeschool them. But anyway,
that's another issue.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
And your school buddies are such important part of you.
Speaker 5 (27:03):
Yes, the socialization side of school I think is very
import and learning how to deal with different types of
people and when they get to the pointy end of exams,
you know, in their final school years. I think it
seems to me you need the professionals in there. But
an experience like this, you know, good on them, sounds fantastic.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
Now.
Speaker 3 (27:19):
I remember, many many years ago, on Father's Day, I
was working in at a restaurant in town, and you
came in with your son. You wouldn't know who I
was at the time, and you had like a Father's Day,
and I kind of like thought, well, that's a very
close family bond. They're having Father's Day together with your son.
Would you take them out of school and walked and
led to the country.
Speaker 4 (27:37):
Not sure that I would, although I can understand the
attraction of doing so, but I think I'm probably too
set in my ways to ever imagine that was a possibility. Look,
I can see the advantages of the kids in terms
of new experiences. I'm just worried about the education because
at that age, when you lose a few months, it's
not a big deal, you know. I keep saying to
people in their late twenties, Look, take your time to
(27:59):
sort yourself out when you get to fifty and look back,
a couple of years doing other things are not a
big deal. So no real problem there. Synicon me just says, hmm.
So they wanted the length of the country for two
hundred and something days. Okay, fine, mister what's his name
Phillips and his kids in Maracopa wandering the bush. They're
(28:19):
doing the same thing. One we approve of, one we
don't well.
Speaker 3 (28:23):
Ones are legal, and yes.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
There is that aspect to it. But I just think this,
you know, before we get too sort of carried away
about the romanticism of taking the kids on the road
for a year, just remember there are other circumstances where
US happens where we don't approve, and I think what
it comes down to is what's the best interest of
the child at the time.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
I think there's a pretty long boat to pull all
that one.
Speaker 5 (28:47):
Give it.
Speaker 4 (28:48):
I'll give it.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
I think you're pushing. I'll give it a J. Phillips
to a family that.
Speaker 5 (28:52):
Taking them away from their mother, by gosh, you've.
Speaker 4 (28:57):
Got to put some controversy in.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
It is Friday, it is faced off. Long serving labor
MP David Parker gave us valedictory speech says that MMP
has polarized New Zealand politics and we benefit we would
benefit from moving to an STV system Like councilors. I
don't like st V systems. I'm really not sure that
(29:20):
I like MMP. Come on, Peter Dunham, Sorry, Maria, I've
got to go to better on this verse.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
He's kind of got a bit of a background me
and you're on this one.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
I am an unashamed STV supporter. I was one of
the few MPs prior to the referendum in nineteen ninety
three to back STV and the.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
What makes it Tell an ignorant person like me what.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
And my view of Max at Farah is that under
an STV system, and you saw it, the Australian election
is pretty much an STV everyone gets elected. Everyone who's
elected to Parliament has a patch of territory they can
claim they represent. Under our system, with a number of
MP's nearly half coming off the party list, you don't
know who they are. They owe their loyalty to the
(30:01):
party for their placement on the list, not to the
electorate that they're seeking to serve. And the number of
you know.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
Tell me the difference between that and first past the
post that well, because first past the post you know
where they're come from.
Speaker 4 (30:13):
Yes, voted the first past The difference is under the
under STV, the candidate who wins has achieved the majority support.
Under first past the post, if I get thirty five
thousand votes and you get thirty five thousand and one
and Maria gets thirty four thousand, you're elected. Well, that's right,
(30:33):
it's my one vote, even though even though you've got
less than probably a third of.
Speaker 5 (30:37):
The total vote, so you have to have the majority.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
You have to have the majority. Yeah. So under the
STV system, take my example, you would drop out and
your second preferences that will then be reallocated between Nick
and me, and depending who came out on top.
Speaker 5 (30:52):
Would be clarify that because I was going to ask you, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
But surely at the Olympics of the one hundred meters
winner wins by one second, who gives it dat's I.
Speaker 4 (31:01):
Think that's a slightly different situation because that's a series
of individual contests. Here, you're talking about a national political
contest where you're trying to get a representative government as
the outcome.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
Maria, do you understand it? I?
Speaker 5 (31:12):
Well, I do now, but I am going to respectfully
disagree with the Honorable pitted under No. I think m
MP is gloriously missy and it served us well. I
think we have seen far more representation in Parliament from
women and minorities. And you know what makes our you know,
it makes parliamentarians work hard for what they achieve, and
(31:35):
what makes our system so good I think, I always
think is the select committee process where all the MP's
from all sides of the House are involved in that,
and having wide representation there I think helps achieve good
results in legislation.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
Yeah, and I get that, But why do we have
to wear have MPs wearing cowboy hats because we've pushed
the barrow to across by bald Well. Why do we
have to have people wearing shorts? And you know I needed.
Speaker 1 (32:04):
The Friday fidet right down much.
Speaker 3 (32:09):
Your hots are not well.
Speaker 4 (32:10):
Mine's are tippid and are not my tepperd is for
the Wellington City Council finally doing something about the Johnsonville Mall.
I don't think anything's gonna happen. It's warm, righterture, okay,
so good on them for that, but I don't think
anything's going to happen. Mine not is. I'm not a
motor racing fan. I've got no interest in it. But
I'm sick and tired of the attention being given to
(32:31):
Liam Lawson. I just don't think it's fair. I know
he comes across like a spoiled brat at times, but
look he's a young kid trying to make his way
in that in that sport and should be left to
get on with without all the sort of attention he's
been receiving here.
Speaker 3 (32:43):
And I don't want the city Council to do another
reading cinema.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
No, that's that's that's my point.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Okay, Marius Lade give us your hots and knots for
the week.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
Hot well I grew up in Wellington. I don't get
down here that often these days, and just walking around
the last couple of days, we keep hearing in Auckland
about how the center of Wellington's dying. It's not, by
the way, it's looking quite good. Love Lampton, key, love
the shops all in one place, much better than anything
you get in Auckland. What's not hot Well? Honestly think
the pay equity decision. That's just set us back years.
(33:12):
It's depressing.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
Thank you for coming on and joining us. I know
you're a very busy woman. It's great to have your voice,
and as a welling TONI and you can't take you
might live somewhere else, but you can't take that away
from you. Thank you. Peter Dune. Peter had done. By
the way, everybody's wearing a boat tie and looks a
million dollars. You ain't got no cowboy hat. On that's
the politician that we need and Maria they could be
both in politics, but no, we've got cowboy hats.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
For more from Wellington 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 Talk said B Wellington's official week interview. It's
Friday face off with Kudovic Property Management a better rental
experience for all. Visit on its head.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
By join us for Friday face Off.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
This week is former minister and good guy Wellingtonian Cantabrian
Kiwi Peter Dunn. Good morning, help, I'm better turn your
mic on. How shall we start that again?
Speaker 4 (00:56):
So say the same things again?
Speaker 3 (00:58):
No, I'm not going to repeat myself. No, good morning,
good morning. Good to have you here. And we've asked
a very very special guest to join us today. She
is the Business Desk Property Editor, Maria Slide. Good morning, Maria,
good morning. So can you tell our listeners a bit
about your position as Business Desk Property Editor? Tell us
explain what you do and could you come a little
(01:19):
bit close to your micast.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Yeah.
Speaker 5 (01:21):
So. Business Desk is n ze Toemy's premium business subscription
service if you like. So we're a business news service
for people who are interested in reading the business news.
We have the New Zealand Herald of course and their
business section and that is behind the paywall as well.
Of course, but ours is a bit more in depth.
I suppose a bit more for business people and profession
(01:42):
people in the professions and that kind of thing who
want a bit more in depth analysis of what's going
on in the New Zealand business scene.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
And more in depth writing as well.
Speaker 5 (01:50):
Yes, indeed, indeed, and we are focusing more and more
on sort of investigations and current affairs kind of pieces.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Well welcome and it's lovely to have you in our
building and working out at Wellington, so we thought we'd
grab you and you can get your ideas and information.
Remind me to ask you after the show about some
Auckland stories as well that I've got running around in
my head. We have a new pope, American Cardinal Robert
(02:18):
de Fross, who will be Premost Is that pre most
primos premos Leo the fourteenth I'm going to call them,
who will be the first ever American pope. Pope Maria,
what was the thoughts? Did you know anything about him?
Did you know what was going on? Did you have
an inkling?
Speaker 5 (02:35):
No? Look, I was brought up, you know, going to
Catholic schools and everything, and I was just commenting actually
the other day that We never know who these guys are.
Unless you're a particular hard out Catholic. Perhaps you might
follow some of these cardinals, but no, I'd never heard
of him. It is interesting he's an American. Of course,
that's a new one. But I also find it kind
of interesting that's leading all the bulletins. I mean, Okay,
(02:57):
there are one point four billion Catholics in the world,
I suppose, so that's quite a chunk of people. But
there's also a great other chunk of people that do
not adhere to any kind of Christian religion, and so
it is kind of weird that it's such a big
deal today.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
You know what, I agree with you one hundred percent.
I mean, when I first walked in this morning, obviously
Ethan said, well, we better do a story story about
the new pope. I said, what, who's going to want
to talk about the new Pope? They don't know anything
about him. We don't have any idea who really cares.
Apart from Catholics. I do not want to get a
Catholics upset. But apart from Catholics, Peter, you're looking at me,
(03:29):
are you a Catholic? You're looking at me very strange.
Speaker 4 (03:31):
I think I think that the issue. It is unusual
for the papal election to get this amount of attention worldwide,
and I think it's a tribute really to Pope Francis
because he internationalized the papacy. I think because he took
it from being not just the sort of the religious leadership,
but his social and moral leadership. And I think that's
what's created the interest now. Now, obviously it puts a
(03:53):
huge pressure on the new pope, who I gather only
became a cardinal last year, so he's relatively new in
the hierarchy. You know that people are saying by taking
the name of Leo the fourteenth is a clue because
Leo the thirteenth and the late nineteenth century was a
reformist worker's advocate pope and did a lot of promotion
(04:14):
in that area, so that this is a clue.
Speaker 3 (04:17):
So you think it's going to be to carry on
the same.
Speaker 4 (04:19):
Look, I don't know anything about him, but I'm just
saying there's an early clue in the name choice. The
fact that he's been working in South America rather than
in Chicago, I think is again another clue. But look,
everyone will be watching for signs over the next little
while to see what he's going to do. While he's
the head of the hierarchy. He's got a college of
cardinals around him, and they're going to be a constraint
(04:40):
one way or the other on what he does.
Speaker 3 (04:42):
Right. I mean, do we, Maria, want to see the
carry on legacy? I mean, we did see changes. Some
say we didn't see them as strong as we could have,
but we saw some changes. Do we want to keep
seeing changes and them being more liberal?
Speaker 5 (04:58):
Well, the Catholic Church moves at a glacial pace, so
that the changes we have seen are pretty minor in
the grand scheme of things. I mean, still women are
not allowed to be priests, are not allowed to marry.
They've still got pretty odd views on things like contraception
and so forth. So from a woman's point of view,
that the Catholic Church is not changing anywhere near fast enough,
(05:18):
I don't think. But yes, yes, I think it would
be a good thing if they do continue along a
slightly more progressive line.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Making me smile and sigh because when I saw the
group of one hundred and thirty five men no woman
get locked in behind the door. I mean, Peter, how
long is it going to be able to carry on.
Speaker 4 (05:38):
I mean, I don't know, and I think that the
driver in the end will be less theological than practical.
You know, the numbers of people joining the priest to
the declining worldwide, and I think that the celibacy issue
is a huge part of that would throw on from
the whole child abuse scandal. I suspect it's inevitable to
be changed. I agree with Maria it will be glacial,
(06:00):
but I don't think it'll be driven by theological factors
as much as practical factors as how you sustain the organization.
It seems to me that the first step might be
I think Francis had moved a little, but I don't
understand the term. But he had deacons and which are
not priests to allow female deacons, And I suspect you
get that in place, then you move up to the priesthood.
(06:22):
But it'll be driven by the fact they need the
numbers more than anything else.
Speaker 3 (06:25):
Right, Yeah, I mean it's twenty twenty five. I mean,
it's pretty a male orientated thing to have, you know,
and and we just the world just puts up with it.
Speaker 4 (06:38):
Well, you know, it's the largest, I think, one of
the largest religions in the world, isn't it. And it's
interesting that when people were touting some of the African
cardinals as possible people contenders, they are the most conservative
and rigid of the lot. So, you know, while the
church has moved away from being Italian dominated, the new
(06:59):
forces that are dominating it might not be as liberal
as some of the ones previously. So who knows.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
Right, let's move on. The biggest story of the week
was the government changing legislation surrounding pay equity, tightening the
criteria for making a claim. The move is expected to
save billions of dollars and has been rushed through through
urgency ahead of the budget and a fortnight Maria, what
did you put this down to? Did you put it
down to just simply saving money or do you think
(07:29):
there was you know, the union push for trying to
incorporate a whole lot of things and hit them through.
What did you make of it? This is something that
you would write about I have.
Speaker 5 (07:38):
Written about it in the past, yes, indeed, talking about
the position of women, I think you just cauterized a
whole section of the female vote with that move. You
know there will be a chunk of women that will
vote against this government just on principle on this issue.
And it's not going to go away. You know, there's
already protests brewing. There may be a legal challenge for
all we know, anything done under urgency is a bad
(08:02):
idea in my view. This is a different topic, but
the media density residential standards, if we remember those, I
write about property, So that was sort of a big
one for me. That was pushed through within decent haste
right on Christmas Eve. It was a bypassed partisan deal
between the then Labor government and the National government. Well
that didn't work out so well. Now the current government's
(08:22):
walked right back from it and wants to make them
volunching and it was the worst piece of lawmaking now
that's gone through that parliament. So look, just pushing things
through was never a good idea. They're saying that the
current legislation is a bit too broad. All right, fine,
let's take a proper look at it.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
What's the rush, Peter, what was your thoughts when you
felt you had no inkling this was happy, no, none
of us.
Speaker 4 (08:43):
In the media, and you had just even ministers only
had two days notice. Ministers, I don't know when the
Government Caucus found out probably a couple of hours beforehand.
I think this is a bad move. I want to
put that up front. I'm not supporting it. I understand, however,
why they've done it, and why they've done it the
way they did it. You take things through under urgency
(09:04):
to get them out of the way quickly. I'm not
saying that's a good thing. That's what happens. What invariably
also happens is it's a bit like what's that old
saying about something something something repent at leisure. They after
the bill has passed, I'll see all the fishawks, and
you'll wait, there'll be an amendment down the track to
try and tidy up things that they missed it should
have gone.
Speaker 3 (09:22):
Do you think it was rushed? Do you think that
the actual bill was rushed?
Speaker 4 (09:25):
Yes, I think it was rushed in its development. I
think certainly rushed through the House, and I think the
intent was to rightly or wrongly get this off the
agenda and move on to the budget. This will haunt
them for some time. Had it gone to a select committee,
there would have been the chance for submissions. There would
have been uncomfortable submission, certainly, But they could have ironed
out all the bugs before it became law. Having said that,
(09:49):
I think there were some problems that needed to be
resolved with the existing law, and that's why I'm a
little surprised that they hadn't that they didn't sort of
lay the ground by saying, you know, we support pay equity,
but it doesn't work in its current form. Here the
sort of changes we want to make and socialize the
ideas first before ramming in the legislation and closing off
the debate. Unfortunately, all they've done is just opened up
(10:10):
more widely.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
I want to ask you both this because it was
something that was a little point in time for me.
Heather Duplicy Allen came out very strongly and said that
this could be a game changer at the next election,
could be part of a game, you know, like be significant. Maria,
do you think it could be that significant? Will it
upset the female vote as much as what Heathers say?
Speaker 5 (10:31):
I think there's a certain sector of the female vote. Definitely, yes.
I do think also that you've got to look at
the sort of wider context of this. Brook Brook van Velden,
who's been driving a lot of these workplace kind of changes.
She's very ideological and in my view a bit myopic,
you know's it comes from this ideological idea of fewer
protections around employment and the market will decide to kind
(10:55):
of standpoint that kind of underpins a lot of what
she's doing. That the four step thing that she's brought
in in terms of contractor regulation. Ideally they would want
to move the ability for workers to challenge their employment
status as they currently can under the Employment Act. They
can say, look, I'm really being an employee without any
(11:16):
of the benefits here. And there's been a number of
those cases that have been taken successfully that the Uber
case being the story one, yes, which may well go
to the Supreme Court, so that one's not over yet.
But yeah, I think it's this political kind of ideology that,
you know, really you need to have as few protections
regulations as possible and let the market decide. But look,
(11:39):
that doesn't work to protect a whole cohort of vulnerable workers,
and when a whole chunk of those vulnerable workers are female,
that becomes discrimination on the basis of sex.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
But the issue did I see, and I'm probably making
it far too simplisticly. Apeter is that it's not their
voters anyway.
Speaker 4 (11:58):
Well, that was the point I was going to make.
I think there will be some people, some women particularly
will be turned off by this, but I suspect them
majority of women who are likely to be affected would
not have been a government voters anyway. There's an irony
in this though. I think what's going to happen is
if there's a hit electorally, it will be the National
Party that takes it, even though it was an act
(12:20):
piece of legislation, because act voters quite like this sort
of stuff. But we won't know for a little while.
I mean, I was talking to a group of Labor
MPs yesterday and they said to me, you know, we
just can't get over the fact that this government's just
doing everything it can to lose the next election. And
they were really quite buoyant. And I went home and
I thought about this, because I keep a track of
all the opinion polls. This government would still be re
(12:42):
elected if there was an election tomorrow. Yes, on the
latest round of polls and all the averaging of them.
So there's a degree of sort of delusion taking place.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
Can I just ask you, while you got that thought, though,
how much of that is based on the note we
know how bad a spot we were in, and we
know that we have to dig ourselves out of that spot.
Speaker 4 (13:00):
I think there's an element of that, but I think
there's also the fact that there's a sense of the
sorts of things that the government is doing really are
appealing enough to its base to sustain them. Now that
sounds a bit cynical, but I think they're doing things
to keep their own voters on site enough. Their problem
still was with their fringes. New Zealand first and Act
that could go rogue at any point, and you could
(13:22):
argue that the way in which the pay equity legislation
has been handled, where obviously very few people were in
the know, it was dropped on the table of the
House and ram through, is a case of Act going rogue,
which may pay a very negative dividend in time. But look,
we've got eighteen months to the next election. I think
the National Party will be wanting to get this behind them,
just like they wanted to get the Treaty Principles Bill
(13:44):
behind them and then move on with their own agenda.
But what happens next.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
We've got a thing called a memory. Take a short
break through. I mean, it could be all rejuvenated Friday
face off for Maria Slade and Peter Dunn. On average,
now I don't know whether you knew about this, you guys,
but on average, people employed in the public sector are
earning ten dollars an hour more than those working in
the private sector, according to stats in New Zealand's latest figures. Peter,
(14:11):
is it acceptable that public servants now paid more than
what they are in the private sector.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
I must confess these figures came as a surprise to
me after hearing all of the complaints from the state
sector unions about how poorly paid state servants are in
their conditions, et cetera, to find that actually they're doing
better than their private sector allies. I think the comparison
is really a false one in a way. I think
it's a matter of what's what's the job and what's
the best rate for it. But it does put a
(14:39):
bit of a pressure I think now on the State
Services Commission in terms of the next wage ground, how
whether it tries to redress the balance a little bit
by offering lower settlements and that brings the prospective industrial action,
et cetera.
Speaker 3 (14:51):
So yeah, but do you think it might be a
little bit of publicity by the government to try and
make everyone pull back anymore?
Speaker 1 (14:59):
So?
Speaker 3 (14:59):
I do.
Speaker 4 (14:59):
I think there's an element of that, because this government's
not particularly sympathetic to public servants and sort of painting
them was you know, the classic bloated, overpaid, lazy, you know,
working from home and they shall be all that sort
of stuff. This plays into that narrative a little bit.
But I just think it did surprise me, given, as
I say, the allegedly tough conditions and the comparison with
(15:22):
the private sector.
Speaker 3 (15:23):
Maria, when you first saw this, heard this, I mean,
you write about this stuff. Did you know it was
going on? Did you hear? I mean, I didn't know,
and I'm in business.
Speaker 5 (15:31):
I think you need to look at the look into
the statistic. Actually, I mean you can make a statistic
out of anything, aren't you. And I think, as one
economist that was interviewed on the subject said, it depends
on the composition of the jobs involved. What was the
makeup of the data that they used to come up
with that statistic. And you could argue that a lot
of public sector roles require quite well educated, skilled people
(15:56):
and perhaps they're not comparing apples with pears here, So
you know, that's one point I'd make. The second one
would be that it would seem that a lot of
the health and education settlements fed into that, and so
that's against sector specific And then you've got other issues
like in health, for example, the private sector providers saying
(16:16):
the government's not funding us enough to pay the rates
to meet the public sector workers. So that that's a
separate kind of challenge. So I think there's a few
moving parts in there, and I think you can draw
a direct line.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Although we did have a caller on the show that
was a registered nurse working in private sector saying that
she if she went and worked at Wellington Hospital, she
earned five dollars an hour more to straighten like that.
Speaker 5 (16:39):
Yeah, that is the problem. That's been a long running
problem in health that has got to be addressed at
some point.
Speaker 3 (16:45):
How do we address it?
Speaker 4 (16:46):
Peter Well, I think the simple answers you've got to
pay more, But then that creates a whole lot of
other issue.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
You can't do that in private They've got to make money.
It's not like the government take us more and make
more money.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
You increase those those wages that increases fees to patients,
that increases the danger of people not making access to
the system, et cetera, et cetera, a whole lot of
flow on problem. So it's not as easy as it sounds.
I think that, you know, what would be really nice, actually,
if the longer waited health reforms could finally be completed.
(17:18):
I'm involved with a PHO and the uncertainty within the
sector as to just what the long term plan is
it's just growing day by day. And that plan was
Andrew Little as Minister of Health announced this in twenty
twenty one. That's nearly four years ago, and there's still
uncertainty about what the future looks like. And I think
that's the biggest unresolved.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
Issue and will we get that result?
Speaker 4 (17:40):
Who knows that? You know, we keep being promised that
new wait decisions are imminent, and deadlines that appear pass
by and nothing happens. And the patients still want service,
the staff still want to work in a good environment
and to do their best with this lingering uncertainty about funding,
about structure, about role, just carries on and on and on.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
Friday Faith Off with Maria Slade and Peter Dunn convicted
double murderer Mark Lundy is out of prison, supposedly posing
no risk at all to the public, but we don't
have a clue where he's living. Meanwhile, a coroner's hearing
is on going into the death of Juliana Boonvela Hanauda,
who was killed by her neighbor, a convicted rapist. He
(18:25):
was living right next door to her, without her knowing
that he did so, Peter, should the public know where
convict and violent criminals are living.
Speaker 4 (18:34):
Look, I've got very few concerns about mister Lundy. I
think that he's probably he's been in prison for a
long time, twenty three years, you know. I don't think
he'll pose a long term threat. I am very concerned, however,
about the sort of situation that occurred in christ Church
where that person should never have been released to a
circumstance where he was able to offend again so horrifically
(18:56):
and so easily. And it seems to me that the
public's got a much it got absolute right to be
protected from those sorts of things occurring. But for people
who've been in prison for long periods of time, serve
their sentences and go back into the community, I think
they should be allowed to just sort of drift into obscurity.
Speaker 3 (19:13):
Maria, what were your thoughts when you saw this case
in christ I mean, I'm sorry, but I found it
apparent that this could actually happen, and she had no warning.
Someone screwed up and didn't tell her. If someone had
actually told her, she could have got the hell out
of there, couldn't she.
Speaker 5 (19:29):
Yeah, the case of Juliana Bonilla Hado is horrendous and
it's every woman living alone's worst nightmare. The coronial inquest is,
you know, quite rightly looking into what happened, and COVID
did seem to get in the way. There was a
few processes that didn't happen that may have otherwise happened.
His parole officer had concerns, but yes, it just seems
(19:51):
nonsensical that he should have been allowed to live right
next door to a single woman, and the prole officer
didn't have the power to go and knock on doors
and find out who lived there. Although you could argue
that even if she had found out who her neighbor was,
she would moved, probably like any sensible woman would have.
Speaker 3 (20:08):
But why should she be any sensible person.
Speaker 5 (20:10):
Any sensible person. Why would do sheieve to be the
one that has to move At least she.
Speaker 3 (20:16):
Would have had the opportunity, you know. And I'm sorry,
I don't want to hear the excuses from everyone about
what happened and what didn't happen. A young person with
their life in front of them, life was taken by
someone screwing up, system, screwing up.
Speaker 5 (20:32):
I'm going to be really interested to see what this
inquest comes out with, what the lessons are going to be,
because it just seems like there's big holes in the
system to allow a situation like that to occur.
Speaker 4 (20:42):
Yeah, and I think that people have a right to
live in safety and security. I think if you're making
plans to release people from prison under certain circumstances, the
area in which they to be released has got to
be a significant part of that decision. And it seems
to me in this particular case, for whatever reason, this
guy was released into an environment where trouble was inevitable.
(21:03):
It was you know, don't blame the woman concerned at all,
but but it's just that situation was inevitably going to occur,
and I think just a bit of wisdom before the
decision about where he was to be sent might have
prevented a horrible tragedy.
Speaker 5 (21:16):
And there's a lot and there's a local case too,
isn't in it with Paul Deally.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
I was about to bring that up because I was
very young when that all happened, and that I don't know, Peter,
where you were living in Willington when that happened. That
was a massive, massive story and there was even I
mean horrific story. And he's not getting getting parolled poor
daily and I for one, are pleased about that.
Speaker 4 (21:39):
Yeah, look I am too. I think that that was
a terrible situation. It was that that poor young girl
who's named.
Speaker 3 (21:46):
Temporarily biking down to get a bottle, and the.
Speaker 4 (21:52):
Whole horrific circumstances of how she was discovered, et cetera,
and Deli's constant lack of remorse over a long period
of time. So I have no qualms about his not
being released, although I do know. I read a report
on the paper this morning saying as Maria introjector not yet,
he's he's close to it, but he's been thirty one
years in jail.
Speaker 3 (22:13):
Yeah, isn't it funny how at a certain time in
your life. Some cases stick with you. That case stuck
with me. It was a case that stopped the nation
at the time. You know, how can someone go and
get an ice cream and a bottle of milk and
we found, you know, buried in Eastbourne and a few
days data anyway, that's a horrible case. I want to
(22:34):
talk elections quickly. Yes, I've got time to talk the election.
I'd be very interested in Peter Dunn's thoughts on this.
Anthony Albaneze he has won historic second term as Australian
Prime minist, defying poles. I mean four months out, two
months out, call it what you want. You know it
was he was gone dusted and had it. You know,
it suddenly partly been attributed to the Trump you know,
(22:59):
a nigma would call it what you want? Could we
see something happened like that in New Zealand? And what
are you think thoughts on that? I mean you would
have been glued to your TV.
Speaker 4 (23:10):
Look, I said, the last polls in Australia before the
election gave a foretaste of what was to come on
the day, so the move had shifted and some of
them were being dismissed as being hopelessly optimistic. For the
Labor Party, but they to be correct. To me, I
think there were two factors that play in Australia which
and I think both irrelevant to New Zealand. Trump was one,
and that whole identity with Trump and that the Liberals
(23:33):
tried to develop was a factor. But I think the
other one that's just more fundamental is Albanesey on election Nights,
said in his victory speech, this was a victory for
Australian values this election. And to me that's quite a
telling point that what it suggests is that don't import
solutions from overseas, be they Trumpist or be they left
(23:57):
wing economics or whatever. You need to develop viable solutions
that draw on your own country's values and traditions. And
he argued that's what the Labor Party did in Australia.
I think it's a very pertinent point to New Zealand
as we looking ahead to our election next year. Trump
may well still be a factor, either diminished or enhanced.
(24:19):
But I think the key will be which of the
parties can develop solutions that fit the New Zealand way
of doing things and are in tune with our aspirations
and values, and they will be the ones that prosper
Maria Slade.
Speaker 3 (24:33):
For me, it was just a very simple fact that
I felt it months out. Peter Dutton is not popular.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
No, he didn't seem to be having a good campaign.
That's what a lot of the commentators in Australia were
saying that, yes, there was the Trump effect, but also
they didn't run a great campaign.
Speaker 3 (24:49):
And he wasn't popular.
Speaker 5 (24:50):
Yeah, so that seemed to be a big part of
the factor as well. I think what Peter our Peter
had done is saying.
Speaker 4 (24:58):
Great, Dutton's gone because people wishes to confuse the names
Peter Dutton, Peter Dunne.
Speaker 5 (25:04):
He's got you look nothing, no, no, But I think you
make a very good point, and I was going to
make the point that I don't think we're as polarized
to the right here as perhaps they are in the US.
And maybe you see elements of that in Australia too.
We're very centrist here. You know, people think the Democrats
in America are practically communist, but you know, to us,
(25:25):
they're a shade of the National Party. So we haven't
got that same politics. So I'm not sure that the
same effect would play here a little bit you know,
we're conscious of what Trump's doing to the world, but
I don't think it would be quite the same effect.
And I think that there are issues that are going
to impact much more greatly, such as the economy, such
as New Zealand's sort of perennial productivity challenges, and you know,
(25:47):
we can't seem to build infrastructure in under about ten years,
and those sorts of issues I think are going to
play more.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
Okay, Friday face off with Peter Dunn and Maria Slade. Now,
the story intrigued me and I liked it and I'm
jealous of it. A Talpo family took their four children
out of school. I think they were six, nine, eleven,
and fifteen or something around those ages. Don't quote me
on that. Maria and homeschooled them along the way. They
walked from one end of the country to the other
(26:14):
at two hundred and something days. They say, it's a
hell of a success. Would you ever do something like that?
Is that a would you take your kids out of
school for a year? Near enough a year?
Speaker 5 (26:25):
I think it's pretty brave taking a six year old
were walking all that way, But look, no, I thought
it was a great thing. What a what a learning opportunity,
learning about meeting challenges and overcoming adversity and you know,
bonding as a family and stuff, and put a homeschooling
along the way. For what did you say? Two hundred days?
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Two hundred and eighty six days to be precise by memory.
Speaker 5 (26:45):
That's fine for a while, you know that, I've been
learning a lot of other things. I think it's I
think it's fantastic. I mean, I'm not a big fan
of homeschooling per se me need it? I think I
will think why do you pay your taxes to pay
teachers if you're going to it's homeschool them. But anyway,
that's another issue.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
And your school buddies are such important part of you.
Speaker 5 (27:03):
Yes, the socialization side of school I think is very
import and learning how to deal with different types of
people and when they get to the pointy end of exams,
you know, in their final school years. I think it
seems to me you need the professionals in there. But
an experience like this, you know, good on them, sounds fantastic.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
Now.
Speaker 3 (27:19):
I remember, many many years ago, on Father's Day, I
was working in at a restaurant in town, and you
came in with your son. You wouldn't know who I
was at the time, and you had like a Father's Day,
and I kind of like thought, well, that's a very
close family bond. They're having Father's Day together with your son.
Would you take them out of school and walked and
led to the country.
Speaker 4 (27:37):
Not sure that I would, although I can understand the
attraction of doing so, but I think I'm probably too
set in my ways to ever imagine that was a possibility. Look,
I can see the advantages of the kids in terms
of new experiences. I'm just worried about the education because
at that age, when you lose a few months, it's
not a big deal, you know. I keep saying to
people in their late twenties, Look, take your time to
(27:59):
sort yourself out when you get to fifty and look back,
a couple of years doing other things are not a
big deal. So no real problem there. Synicon me just says, hmm.
So they wanted the length of the country for two
hundred and something days. Okay, fine, mister what's his name
Phillips and his kids in Maracopa wandering the bush. They're
(28:19):
doing the same thing. One we approve of, one we
don't well.
Speaker 3 (28:23):
Ones are legal, and yes.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
There is that aspect to it. But I just think this,
you know, before we get too sort of carried away
about the romanticism of taking the kids on the road
for a year, just remember there are other circumstances where
US happens where we don't approve, and I think what
it comes down to is what's the best interest of
the child at the time.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
I think there's a pretty long boat to pull all
that one.
Speaker 5 (28:47):
Give it.
Speaker 4 (28:48):
I'll give it.
Speaker 3 (28:49):
I think you're pushing. I'll give it a J. Phillips
to a family that.
Speaker 5 (28:52):
Taking them away from their mother, by gosh, you've.
Speaker 4 (28:57):
Got to put some controversy in.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
It is Friday, it is faced off. Long serving labor
MP David Parker gave us valedictory speech says that MMP
has polarized New Zealand politics and we benefit we would
benefit from moving to an STV system Like councilors. I
don't like st V systems. I'm really not sure that
(29:20):
I like MMP. Come on, Peter Dunham, Sorry, Maria, I've
got to go to better on this verse.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
He's kind of got a bit of a background me
and you're on this one.
Speaker 4 (29:28):
I am an unashamed STV supporter. I was one of
the few MPs prior to the referendum in nineteen ninety
three to back STV and the.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
What makes it Tell an ignorant person like me what.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
And my view of Max at Farah is that under
an STV system, and you saw it, the Australian election
is pretty much an STV everyone gets elected. Everyone who's
elected to Parliament has a patch of territory they can
claim they represent. Under our system, with a number of
MP's nearly half coming off the party list, you don't
know who they are. They owe their loyalty to the
(30:01):
party for their placement on the list, not to the
electorate that they're seeking to serve. And the number of
you know.
Speaker 3 (30:08):
Tell me the difference between that and first past the
post that well, because first past the post you know
where they're come from.
Speaker 4 (30:13):
Yes, voted the first past The difference is under the
under STV, the candidate who wins has achieved the majority support.
Under first past the post, if I get thirty five
thousand votes and you get thirty five thousand and one
and Maria gets thirty four thousand, you're elected. Well, that's right,
(30:33):
it's my one vote, even though even though you've got
less than probably a third of.
Speaker 5 (30:37):
The total vote, so you have to have the majority.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
You have to have the majority. Yeah. So under the
STV system, take my example, you would drop out and
your second preferences that will then be reallocated between Nick
and me, and depending who came out on top.
Speaker 5 (30:52):
Would be clarify that because I was going to ask you, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (30:55):
But surely at the Olympics of the one hundred meters
winner wins by one second, who gives it dat's I.
Speaker 4 (31:01):
Think that's a slightly different situation because that's a series
of individual contests. Here, you're talking about a national political
contest where you're trying to get a representative government as
the outcome.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
Maria, do you understand it? I?
Speaker 5 (31:12):
Well, I do now, but I am going to respectfully
disagree with the Honorable pitted under No. I think m
MP is gloriously missy and it served us well. I
think we have seen far more representation in Parliament from
women and minorities. And you know what makes our you know,
it makes parliamentarians work hard for what they achieve, and
(31:35):
what makes our system so good I think, I always
think is the select committee process where all the MP's
from all sides of the House are involved in that,
and having wide representation there I think helps achieve good
results in legislation.
Speaker 3 (31:50):
Yeah, and I get that, But why do we have
to wear have MPs wearing cowboy hats because we've pushed
the barrow to across by bald Well. Why do we
have to have people wearing shorts? And you know I needed.
Speaker 1 (32:04):
The Friday fidet right down much.
Speaker 3 (32:09):
Your hots are not well.
Speaker 4 (32:10):
Mine's are tippid and are not my tepperd is for
the Wellington City Council finally doing something about the Johnsonville Mall.
I don't think anything's gonna happen. It's warm, righterture, okay,
so good on them for that, but I don't think
anything's going to happen. Mine not is. I'm not a
motor racing fan. I've got no interest in it. But
I'm sick and tired of the attention being given to
(32:31):
Liam Lawson. I just don't think it's fair. I know
he comes across like a spoiled brat at times, but
look he's a young kid trying to make his way
in that in that sport and should be left to
get on with without all the sort of attention he's
been receiving here.
Speaker 3 (32:43):
And I don't want the city Council to do another
reading cinema.
Speaker 4 (32:46):
No, that's that's that's my point.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Okay, Marius Lade give us your hots and knots for
the week.
Speaker 5 (32:50):
Hot well I grew up in Wellington. I don't get
down here that often these days, and just walking around
the last couple of days, we keep hearing in Auckland
about how the center of Wellington's dying. It's not, by
the way, it's looking quite good. Love Lampton, key, love
the shops all in one place, much better than anything
you get in Auckland. What's not hot Well? Honestly think
the pay equity decision. That's just set us back years.
(33:12):
It's depressing.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
Thank you for coming on and joining us. I know
you're a very busy woman. It's great to have your voice,
and as a welling TONI and you can't take you
might live somewhere else, but you can't take that away
from you. Thank you. Peter Dune. Peter had done. By
the way, everybody's wearing a boat tie and looks a
million dollars. You ain't got no cowboy hat. On that's
the politician that we need and Maria they could be
both in politics, but no, we've got cowboy hats.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
For more from Wellington 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
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.