September 11, 2025 • 28 mins
On Friday Faceoff this week, Nick was joined by former Labour MP and Pasifika leader Dame Winnie Laban, and outgoing Wellington City Councillor Tim Brown.
They discussed the fate of the City to Sea Bridge, the mood of the nation in the wake of the Tom Phillips saga, and comments by Winston Peters about the state of Wellington.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talks B.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Friday face off is the time that we have some
fun on the show. And we have former mana MP
and labor minister and pacifica community leader. And I think
she's a friend of mine. I classify her, Ayeinger, as
friends of mine, so I think that she I classify
her as a friend. Dame I'll name drop Dame Winnie Laban. Firstly,
(00:37):
welcome to the show and love you to have you here.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Yeah, cured a tuller for lover and Nick, and thank
you for having me on the show. And yes we
are all Ayeinger.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Yeah, colorful and outgoing Wellington City Councilor Tim Brown. Disappointing
for me, Tim that you're leaving. I mean I think
that you know, we don't agree on a lot of
things politically, but I think that you are exactly the
stereotype of what I want on Warlington City Council. So
I think personally it's a very sad loss for our
(01:08):
counsel Oh.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
Thank you for those card words, Nick. Well. Hopefully the
incoming new counselors will make up for my departure.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
I'm not sure whether anything could make way for your departure. Myself,
I think that you you know, you've been excellent at
what you're doing. You've always been honest, and I think
that's all we want from our politicians is honesty.
Speaker 4 (01:28):
It does not I think you want a bit more
than honesty. You do what effectiveness? You do want people
to actually deliver something?
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, but I think it starts with honesty. I think
if people trust you, then then that's a start.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
Look, it's a necessary starting point. But I do feel
effectiveness is critically important as well.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
And do you think can I just ask you that,
do you think? I mean, if you look back, I
think you'll be a harsh critic on yourself. But do
you think you've been effective?
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Yes? I genuinely believe I have been, which is why
I've enjoyed myself and I actually do feel rather proud
of what I have achieved. I mean, I think I
was identified by the Post as being the counselor who
voted against the bost spending projects, for instance, But I
think I actually was able to work across the room,
so I was very good, I would say by Miller
to endorse myself at actually being flexible enough to actually
(02:13):
work with other counselors of all sorts of different political
stripes and achieved all sorts of things because of that flexibility.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Really, when he would, do you reckon he's politically motivated?
I mean, do you reckon he's one side or the other?
I mean, I know what side you are. I mean,
I'm not going to try to argue that with you,
but I mean some.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Of us movable size and positions. But I think Counselor
Tom has done a wonderful job, and you're absolutely right.
He brings a lot of pragmatism, he's smart, and you know,
his position on reducing spending is a good thing because
(02:49):
we've got to continually look at value for money, value
for people. As you know, you can't do everything at once,
but it is important to prioritize but consult with stakeholders
who are impacted and listen to them and don't use
consultation as an excuse for a decision that's already been made.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
And they do, don't they many times they do.
Speaker 4 (03:11):
I just point out that the High Court decision around
our consultation over the bridge gave us a five star
rating in terms of the open mindedness of our consultation,
so at least on the bridge, we consulted with a
very open mind.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Well, that's true, some consultation does.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
Do you want to start with the bridge as a discussion,
because I mean the Wellington Wellington City to See bridge
has had a life line, with the council putting off
its decision to pull it down till after the new
government's earthquake guidelines, which we've been pushing on the show continuously,
that we should be waiting for that before we make
a final decision. The fences around it have already gone up. Tim.
(03:49):
This is I mean, I don't care what the court says.
This is a mess.
Speaker 4 (03:54):
No, I would completely disagree with you. I think that
for me the issue was always there were several key
points to keep in mind. The first is risk. What
is the real it completely its completely extrad as to
the government's rules around earthquake risk. So for me, there
was a substantial risk which engineers identified that that bridge
(04:17):
will fall down some point in the next thirty to
forty years if there's a major earthquake.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
But can I just interrupt you there one second, because
we had an ex mayor on the show just unlessa
saying that has to be an eight point something ricked
to scale earthquake, which means the whole of Wellington's and
a hell of a lot of trouble, and it had to
have at least ten thousand people on it or something some.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
Stupid I mean, that's rubbish. I mean the reality is
is that that you know, Wellington is facing, which is
why I also supported the establishment of an insurance fund,
as you know I've discussed in the past, because there
is a very high probability that there will be a
major earthquake in Wellington in the next fifty years, and
especially on the A lot of these fault lines do
have certain sort of predictable processes, and Wellington has got
(04:58):
a lot of faults that run through it. So the
first thing is risk. So that's the first thing, nothing
to do with regulation. No matter what Chriss Penk does
with the re galations, the risk isn't going to change.
The second point is the cost. So what is the
least cost option to remediate the risk, and the least
cost option by far is removal of the bridge. And
then the third point is the esthetic. If you like,
(05:21):
the sort of overall value you know is an iconic structure.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
You know, it would be better if we can't go
around driving around Wellington and looking at buildings and say
that's ugly. That should come down because it's ugly.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Should we But as it's only the third point. So
the first was the risk, the second is the cost,
and the third is the sort of aesthetic.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Let me bring Winni in this as somebody that lives
outside of the city itself driving into the city and
the use of that bridge. I mean, what do you think?
What was your ideas on it?
Speaker 3 (05:50):
Well, you know, I think the whole issue is is that,
you know, people get very emotional and attached to buildings,
and I think I remember reading somewhere about a tongue.
But there are all these benefits, but there are all
those risks. And I think that the fact the court
has made the decision and now Wellington City Council are
(06:11):
waiting on this review by government on earthquake prone buildings,
this Waitton see is helpful because hopefully we'll be able
to look at the outcome from that and see whether
we can without a decision.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
As a culturally sensitive person that you are, is the
tom not there for that bridge?
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Well, my understanding is I think was a patchet. I'm
not sure who the marty there mary artists.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
Look, I can answer the question really really clearly because
I sat through, you know, the whole thing. There was
a very strong pale stale male advocacy for attention of
the bridge. Bart are opposed to retention of the bridge
of the artworks. So the Barta Fenuer statement has been
extremely clear that they do not see the artworks as
representative of Wellington's Marta Fenua. It's very important. Around this
(07:02):
point we had lots of elderly white architects turning up
to the and to the council saying, you know that
this is a ta you know there's a great barrier
work of arts, blah blah blah. And we had we
had our tiatiawa poi wei on council saying no, this
is not the case.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
So what so I rest my case because satiawa amana.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
So to your gut as it's coming down.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
Look, I think the risk of the bridge is substantial.
Just remember one of the critical point about this structure
it was it was opened in nineteen ninety five. Within
fifty years it had been deemed to be a major
earthquake risk that the very first earthquake report of it,
which came out of twenty ten, identified structural deficiencies and
how it was actually built so effectively right from the
(07:51):
day one. It was poorly engineered and it's just been
an ongoing problem.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Do you want to see it come down with pardon?
Speaker 5 (07:58):
Well?
Speaker 3 (07:59):
You know, well, I think that might be a good
pragmatic decision. But safety is paramount.
Speaker 4 (08:06):
Safety paramount.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
But how I mean, how many people are going to
be standing on it when the big earthquake comes? I mean,
that's my if you want to be pragmatic about it.
I mean, at the end of the day, are we
going to have you know, if there's a big earthquake,
there's gonna be a lot of us that lose our lives.
And if we're going to be standing on that bridge,
how does it really make that much different? That's me,
But I mean that's just my personal thing. Let's talk
(08:28):
about the fal Malay, Pacific Island Theme Cultural Center that's
been getting it's got council sign off this week. When
we talk us through this, explain to our listeners because
I'm a little bit ignorant. I thought there was giant,
big building it tell us a little bit about it.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Well, you know, if people just go on the website
full in Malay, you'll see the beautiful pictures and so basically,
phile in Malay is a statement. It's a symbol of
a beautiful building that connects us as New Zealanders to
the ocean where people of the Pacific Ocean. It's going
to be on the waterfront. It's going to be a
(09:03):
place for all communities and all cultures. But more than anything,
it celebrates the fact that altered or in New Zealand
is a Pacific nation, that we're part of the family.
I mean, many families like your own, Nick have lived
in some or come from the Pacific, and many of
our communities here their parents' grandparents have come from here.
So also it's about Wellington. I mean Ken and I
(09:24):
were born my brother Ken and I were born in Wellington.
We loved the city, we love this region. We've lived
in this region all our lives. But it's also important
to acknowledge the huge contribution that Pacific communities have made
to our country. And it's about giving back, you know,
it's about celebrating our place.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
How tough was it for you to get it over
the line.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Well I probably started him, probably when I started at
the university, probably over ten years ago. We've had a
fabulous trust cheered by Adrian Orr and Adrian Women's is
a deputy chair, people like John Feesaw. We've got engineers
like Vic O'Connor. We've got Pacific people on it who
(10:08):
actually work pro by no because they believe in this vision.
It's been hard, it's been long, you know what it's like.
There's legal obstacles at times. There are a lot of
communities who see that this lationships be somewhere else and
racist objection, oh yes, and I think it's ignorance. And
New Zealand has always been I have always felt a
(10:30):
place that respects diversity in different views, but is a
beautiful country that looks after people.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
But you're too nice, Tim tell Us. I mean there
would have been you know, you classically mentioned about the bridge,
the old white middle aged men objection stuff. I mean
there would have been a bit of objection against us,
wouldn't they.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
I don't think there was much objection about this. I
think it was generally regarded as as very good for Wellington,
very good for the pacifica community, and very good for
the relationship between Wellington and the Pacifica community. So the
fact that it was always your odius around the council
table indicates I think the very diverse range of interests
that supported this initiative. I feel that the bit that
(11:15):
I would be slightly I had a reservation about how
this went through council because which I spoke to when
we actually did pass the resolution on Thursday, and that
was that the relative City Council has made it much
greater financial commitment towards restoring and maintaining the Bogonia House.
And I just look at the pale stale females who
were the main advocates for the Bogonia House and how
(11:37):
successful they were getting a significant multiple of addish of
funding for that structure versus the support that the Pacifica
community has got out of Council for the file MLI
and I think that there is an element of it's
not exactly institutional racism, but I think that there are
certainly interests within the community who have more sway than others.
(12:00):
So I think it was tremendous that the councilors did
show their support, but I would have liked this to
have shown more support.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
The voting was pretty unanimous. There's only one person that
was one one council that voted against it. Do we
know why she voted against.
Speaker 4 (12:14):
She refused to speak and afterwards when I asked her
please to explain because I'm really curious, she refused to
explain to me, even in a private setting. So I
have no idea why she voted against it.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Do you like that know why this one particular council
voted against democracy?
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Is can be quiet?
Speaker 4 (12:32):
This is the election campaign.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
It would have been nice to have you unanimous, but
we're one. We are so grateful we got seventeen.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
So and it is great. Two questions, where exactly is
it going to be and is it going to have
like a Pacific a cafe in there that people can use?
Speaker 3 (12:48):
Yes, yes, well one of the issues is that, and
we've got very savvy people, business people. We've worked with
a lot of key stakeholders in Wellington including business. And yes,
it has to pay for itself, Nick, and we want
to have a sort of a Pacific cafe. We have
Pacific Fusion food where people can come. It has to
(13:10):
pay for itself, so we have to where we're going
to do that Secondly, we'll have beautiful venue where people
can have lots of cultural activities or business can have
their events. For example, the ambassador for Chile, she's got
a rippernui independence stay up at the university. Well, it
would be ideal to have it a wedding. Yeah, absolutely right.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
And where you haven't explained exactly where it is on.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Top of Frankett's Park. You know where the car park
beneath it?
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Oh okay, I thought it was closer to Michael Fallers
and I got that wrong. So it's going to be
right in the middle. Yes, and beautiful views and that's.
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Right, And I mean it is absolutely beautiful and there's
there is a lot of support for it and Wellington
could do with something vibrant and beautiful.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Friday face off with PACIFICA leader Dame Winnie Laban and
outgoing Wellington City councilor Tim Brown. The Tom Fill Maricopa
cases dominated the headlines this week and we cannot have
Friday face all without having a bit of a discussion
about it. Whennie, the whole odeal, whole situation has been
really tough to watch and follow. What's your take on it?
Speaker 3 (14:21):
Yeah, Well, my take on it is we can only
go on what we know, we can't go on what
we don't know. So my take on as I'm really
sad that the case has ended with the death of
Tom Phillips, but also the shooting of the police officer
who's still recovering in hospital, and also more than anything,
(14:44):
the children. His three children will have to make major
adjustments after the loss of their father. So after four
years in the bush and away from home and the
rest of the family, school and community, the children will
require time and careful and sensitive support, and I hope
they are well supported. The documentary that's been proposed. I
(15:12):
have concerns about that because it might satisfy public interests,
but it could be unhelpful for the children and the
Whier family. It's time to close the chap to let
the kids get back to a normal life out of
the public spotlight.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So that's what I really agree with you on the
documentary thing. I've taken umbrants against it. I think the
fact that it's been going on and they've been getting
behind closed doors interviews and stuff that no other media
has been able to get. So they've been having access
to information and photo shoots that the rest of New
Zealand doesn't get that's not right. No, that's not no, Tim,
(15:51):
what do you feel about it? I mean, you know,
what are your thoughts?
Speaker 4 (15:56):
I think this guy is a complete bastard. And the
pit that worries me is the mythologizing that it's likely
to follow, you know, the sort of the al Capone,
you know, type of gangsters who become famous and developed
the sense of myth about them. So and it's a
shame that his name is now so familiar because of course,
you know, one reason that we don't mythologize around the
(16:17):
Christ to a shoot her is we don't even know
what the guy's name is. And so I totally agree
with you around a documentary about it, because again it's
going to create this mythology thing around this chap who
you know, went bush and evaded the police and gave
everyone the fact that they've.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Been getting behind closed doors interviews and it's been they've
been involved, the documentary has been involved for years.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
Yeah, I mean, I mean, you can't stop people, you know,
being nosy, but it's a shame if they have been
a given special access. But the bit that worries me
about all of these sort of extremely antisocial people who
are doing very destructive things. Is that there's more myth
about them grows up and in ten years from now
will remember the myth and we won't remember the evil.
(17:00):
And I just hope that isn't the case with this guy.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
So the police, do you think it's been like good
pr for them? You know? I mean the fact that
they are allowing a documentary and they are giving the
information to the documentary makers. I mean, it just doesn't
work for me in any formal anyway. What are your thoughts?
Speaker 4 (17:19):
Look, I agree with you. I mean I don't feel
that again, the police participation of this process. You know
that the media part of it doesn't strike me as
a comfortable thing. So yeah, I would rather that we
tried to forget this guy as quickly as possible and
move on, and we have tried to do everything possible
to avoid creating a myth around him, which I think
may well happen.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Thank you, Thank you. It's a difficult subject to bring
up and just discuss. It's also raw. The government wants
to deal with shoplifting offenses in a quicker way instead
of going through the entire court system. The Justice Minister
has got a proposal that the burden of proof should
fall on the suspect to prove their innocence. Now, I
know that you know Whenni, you haven't got a huge
(18:03):
legal background, but your brother was a policeman and you
grew up with the policemans, so you know that you're
innocent til proven guilty. Does that change? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (18:12):
No, no, absolutely, And you know justice delayed is justice tonight?
Speaker 2 (18:17):
Right?
Speaker 3 (18:18):
And so if a shoplifting case is proven and guilt
accepted by the offend, I see no problem if a
quick judgment is made and a reasonable penalty is applied
and life goes on. But if a case is contested,
then the normal, often rather lengthy processes can be undertaken.
I don't see that the New Zealand Bill of Rights
(18:38):
is at risk.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You don't know, no, I mean, tim, is it the
same as getting a speeding ticket?
Speaker 4 (18:45):
Exactly the same. I mean there's lots of opportunity. There's
lots of situations that you said in now where you're
guilty until you prove yourself in this. And if you
get a tax bill for its, it's the ID said
you are well, you pay it or you know, basically
they can do whatever they have the right to do so.
It's exactly the same with you driving your car and
the bus lanes. I mean, there are lots of instances
where you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. And
(19:06):
I think that in a case like this, this is
a good example where it actually does look would be
the right way of going. So the Bill of rights
thing throw out, Well, the bill of rights is this
is where the Bill of rights has got to have
a level of proportionality, you know. That's that's what the
Bill of rights is to stop genuine situations of oppression
on individuals by the state, amongst other things. And I
(19:27):
don't see this as an example of oppression on the
individual because the individual will have as we see with
parking fines and whatever else, there's endless opportunities for people
to actually protest their innocence.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
Why the people that are objecting to this, Polynesia and
Marud say that you know that they are going to
be affected unfairly on this change of law. Do you
agree with that or not?
Speaker 3 (19:49):
No, I don't agree with that. I mean, people know
what is right and what is wrong right, so.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
It doesn't you're not you're not taking it personally like
some are no good good on Friday face off with
Dame Winnie Laban and Tim Brown. On Tuesday we had
the honor of having Winced Peters in the studio and
I asked him what he thought of Wellington. I'm so sad.
I what to see? What's happened to?
Speaker 5 (20:13):
Oh God, this place was a live once and now
it's just been choked off and choked off. And I
have a contempt for these How can I call these
impractical planners? Who doesn't realize that the purpose of planning
is to increase the happiness of people?
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Tim Brown, what did you think of that?
Speaker 4 (20:32):
Look? I mean, it's very easy for central government politicians
to beat down on any region, but I'd just like
to point out that in Wellington there is obviously a
bit of vacant space. I mean, you'll have said it
when you walk around, but apparently the latest figures from
Colliers and Bailey's indicate that one shop in twelve is empty,
but at Auckland that one shop in eight is empty.
(20:53):
So in fact Auckland, if you walk I was at
Auckland over the last weekend to watch the rugby and
I was walking around a number of retail areas it's
way more bombed out than Wellington. So the reality is
that across you Zealand, the economic bite is being felt,
as we've heard Rod Druke on the Duke on the
radio the last couple of days talking about other retail failures.
(21:15):
So I think it's a bit of a it's just
a bit rich when a central government politicians blame local
government for what is a central government type faults. But
also I would also like to say, I mean.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
You can't possibly try and sit across the table from
me and say that the council has done nothing wrong
and not assisting and not trying to help and not
trying to fix things in the city.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
The council, I feel, has been a sleep at the
wheel in the space big time, and as a business
friendly counselor, I feel very disappointed by our inaction. But
I do feel that, for instance, there is a lot
of positive stuff coming And for instance, I just want
to talk about one specific thing, the government's allowance of
Victoria University to remove the Gordon Wilson Flats and replace
(22:00):
it with over five hundred student accommodation units. That is
going to be major for Wellington because that will mean
that the university can accommodate five hundred more out of
town students. Now, once that is actually in place, that
is going to have a significant economic impact on the city.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Yeah. And I've said this one he all the time
on the show since I've been doing the show. A
buoyant Victoria University is a boy at Wellington. Now people
say to me, you know, how can you say that?
But you know you can feel it in the city
when the university's doing well. But going back to I
know that's two questions for you because of your ex
university had. But going back to Winston Peter's comments, I
(22:36):
mean what you're smiling.
Speaker 3 (22:41):
You know, politics is interesting. I beg to differ in that.
I know Winston loves Wellington. I mean he's been elected
now fifteen elections from nineteen seventy nine. Wellington has been
his other home in terms of Parliament. What I think
(23:02):
is really important, Nick, is that we often have to
advocate quite strongly for Wellington to be included and high
up in the agenda for economic development and regional investment.
The infrastructure that's happening is how it is useful, but
also to acknowledge the enormous contribution that the business community
(23:26):
have made. You're a classic example around having bought the Saints.
What happened to the sevens tournament that was at Westpac?
Why aren't we looking much more innovatively at other events
that we can generate more income and support businesses. And
I think with all the building stuff going on in
(23:46):
the road stuff, it's hindering some of our business people
and I think they need to feel they're being supported
more in ways where they can also express their views
and be heard. I think we've just got to go
for it in terms of Wellington because it is a
fabulous city.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
And surely to your last five weeks you can but
a few heads and say why are we not being
more business friendly?
Speaker 4 (24:11):
Well, I'm not too sure in the next five weeks,
but but I think that the next council will be
more business friendly. That would be my take. I think
that the less that Andrew Little does become the mayor,
I don't think it takes a rocket scientists to work
out that if you can't create high paying jobs in
the city, you know the city has no future. And
I think there is definitely an understanding of amongst the candidates.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
And can I just quickly get your opinion whether it's
changed or not with me, because I remember we spoken
New World a year ago, maybe maybe longer, and you
said that the nightlife economy, do people really understand what
it's worth to our city? And they don't do they?
Speaker 4 (24:52):
No, they totally don't know it's and it's a critically
important part of our economy. So I do feel that's
another area where you know, the city does do its bit.
I mean, you know it supported the New Year's Eve
party in Courtney Place, but I feel like an activation
is very important and this is something where the city
needs to continue to do well. And it's doing quite
a good job, but it could do more.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
It could do a lot more.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
Well, everything costs money, and I mean that's the how
that restrained.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Okay, do you think that we could do more to
get their economy going? Do you think the council could
win it?
Speaker 3 (25:23):
I think we could do more. I mean, I think
we underestimate the importance of innovation and also a lot
of the startup companies that are in willing to learn
from also the younger generation are very entrepreneurial. And I'll
give you a classic example, Nick, because you've put skin
in the game, right, Our business people have put skin
in the game. They also employ people, and then they
(25:43):
also have to respect the fair you know, fair practices
that happen in the workplace. But the Hurricanes, for exp
this is an example, are playing more on a Pacific
in February next year at Westpac. Now here's an opportunity
to look at Okay, how can we put packages together
so people will come and have maybe a Pacific experience,
(26:06):
because you know they all love Rugby, spend money on food,
enjoy hospitality and entertainment, stay in the hotels, bring money
to the city. So I think we actually have the
brains here. It's just the will and to be bold, lovely.
Speaker 4 (26:22):
Sky by the way, Sky, not respect.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Next year the Friday, okay time we'll start with you.
What's your hots?
Speaker 1 (26:36):
And not?
Speaker 4 (26:37):
Well, there was a couple of real hots for me.
One was the support I think that was tremendous. I
was really proud of the council passing that through. The
other was, which was actually in some ways closer to
home for me, was Madam Moana, which is the what's
Pentinicula the mirror my peninsula where finally, after years and
(26:58):
years and years of just kind of prevarication. The government
has finally agreed to do the deal. So this has
been something which the community and Miramar, the Wality, City Council,
the Tiatiawa, everybody has been massively in support of and
finally the deal has been done.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
So you've becomes a public reserve now that.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
You've got Peter Jackson doing his incredible works in Schalley Bay,
which is just absolutely, you know, jaw droppingly impressive, with
the rejuvenation of their officer's mess and with what's happening
with Chocolate Fish, and now you're going to have the
reserve to that's just going to be so good for Wellington.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
I agree, and I haven't done much about it, but
I will next week, not quickly because I've got to
get into it.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
But Nepple.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
D Wonnie Laban, what's your hots and knots for this week?
Speaker 3 (27:50):
So the council voted seventeen to one to formalize landowner
approval and key commercial terms for our Fulimalai proposal to
move forward. That's fantastic until it tells us about collaboration
about people having ears and probably removing some red tape
times and attitudes and not the one counselor who voted
(28:10):
against the proposal. They know who they are.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Good and I'm glad we didn't name them. I'm glad
I purposely didn't name them. Tim Brown, all the very
very best. We will have you on again before before
you finished, because we will we can use you. We're
he lovely to have you on the show, and hopefully
you'll you'll be acceptance of another invitation when we ask you,
thank you, I tell you love.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
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 Talks B.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Friday face off is the time that we have some
fun on the show. And we have former mana MP
and labor minister and pacifica community leader. And I think
she's a friend of mine. I classify her, Ayeinger, as
friends of mine, so I think that she I classify
her as a friend. Dame I'll name drop Dame Winnie Laban. Firstly,
(00:37):
welcome to the show and love you to have you here.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Yeah, cured a tuller for lover and Nick, and thank
you for having me on the show. And yes we
are all Ayeinger.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Yeah, colorful and outgoing Wellington City Councilor Tim Brown. Disappointing
for me, Tim that you're leaving. I mean I think
that you know, we don't agree on a lot of
things politically, but I think that you are exactly the
stereotype of what I want on Warlington City Council. So
I think personally it's a very sad loss for our
(01:08):
counsel Oh.
Speaker 4 (01:09):
Thank you for those card words, Nick. Well. Hopefully the
incoming new counselors will make up for my departure.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
I'm not sure whether anything could make way for your departure. Myself,
I think that you you know, you've been excellent at
what you're doing. You've always been honest, and I think
that's all we want from our politicians is honesty.
Speaker 4 (01:28):
It does not I think you want a bit more
than honesty. You do what effectiveness? You do want people
to actually deliver something?
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, but I think it starts with honesty. I think
if people trust you, then then that's a start.
Speaker 4 (01:38):
Look, it's a necessary starting point. But I do feel
effectiveness is critically important as well.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
And do you think can I just ask you that,
do you think? I mean, if you look back, I
think you'll be a harsh critic on yourself. But do
you think you've been effective?
Speaker 4 (01:50):
Yes? I genuinely believe I have been, which is why
I've enjoyed myself and I actually do feel rather proud
of what I have achieved. I mean, I think I
was identified by the Post as being the counselor who
voted against the bost spending projects, for instance, But I
think I actually was able to work across the room,
so I was very good, I would say by Miller
to endorse myself at actually being flexible enough to actually
(02:13):
work with other counselors of all sorts of different political
stripes and achieved all sorts of things because of that flexibility.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
Really, when he would, do you reckon he's politically motivated?
I mean, do you reckon he's one side or the other?
I mean, I know what side you are. I mean,
I'm not going to try to argue that with you,
but I mean some.
Speaker 3 (02:29):
Of us movable size and positions. But I think Counselor
Tom has done a wonderful job, and you're absolutely right.
He brings a lot of pragmatism, he's smart, and you know,
his position on reducing spending is a good thing because
(02:49):
we've got to continually look at value for money, value
for people. As you know, you can't do everything at once,
but it is important to prioritize but consult with stakeholders
who are impacted and listen to them and don't use
consultation as an excuse for a decision that's already been made.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
And they do, don't they many times they do.
Speaker 4 (03:11):
I just point out that the High Court decision around
our consultation over the bridge gave us a five star
rating in terms of the open mindedness of our consultation,
so at least on the bridge, we consulted with a
very open mind.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Well, that's true, some consultation does.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
Do you want to start with the bridge as a discussion,
because I mean the Wellington Wellington City to See bridge
has had a life line, with the council putting off
its decision to pull it down till after the new
government's earthquake guidelines, which we've been pushing on the show continuously,
that we should be waiting for that before we make
a final decision. The fences around it have already gone up. Tim.
(03:49):
This is I mean, I don't care what the court says.
This is a mess.
Speaker 4 (03:54):
No, I would completely disagree with you. I think that
for me the issue was always there were several key
points to keep in mind. The first is risk. What
is the real it completely its completely extrad as to
the government's rules around earthquake risk. So for me, there
was a substantial risk which engineers identified that that bridge
(04:17):
will fall down some point in the next thirty to
forty years if there's a major earthquake.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
But can I just interrupt you there one second, because
we had an ex mayor on the show just unlessa
saying that has to be an eight point something ricked
to scale earthquake, which means the whole of Wellington's and
a hell of a lot of trouble, and it had to
have at least ten thousand people on it or something some.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
Stupid I mean, that's rubbish. I mean the reality is
is that that you know, Wellington is facing, which is
why I also supported the establishment of an insurance fund,
as you know I've discussed in the past, because there
is a very high probability that there will be a
major earthquake in Wellington in the next fifty years, and
especially on the A lot of these fault lines do
have certain sort of predictable processes, and Wellington has got
(04:58):
a lot of faults that run through it. So the
first thing is risk. So that's the first thing, nothing
to do with regulation. No matter what Chriss Penk does
with the re galations, the risk isn't going to change.
The second point is the cost. So what is the
least cost option to remediate the risk, and the least
cost option by far is removal of the bridge. And
then the third point is the esthetic. If you like,
(05:21):
the sort of overall value you know is an iconic structure.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
You know, it would be better if we can't go
around driving around Wellington and looking at buildings and say
that's ugly. That should come down because it's ugly.
Speaker 4 (05:31):
Should we But as it's only the third point. So
the first was the risk, the second is the cost,
and the third is the sort of aesthetic.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Let me bring Winni in this as somebody that lives
outside of the city itself driving into the city and
the use of that bridge. I mean, what do you think?
What was your ideas on it?
Speaker 3 (05:50):
Well, you know, I think the whole issue is is that,
you know, people get very emotional and attached to buildings,
and I think I remember reading somewhere about a tongue.
But there are all these benefits, but there are all
those risks. And I think that the fact the court
has made the decision and now Wellington City Council are
(06:11):
waiting on this review by government on earthquake prone buildings,
this Waitton see is helpful because hopefully we'll be able
to look at the outcome from that and see whether
we can without a decision.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
As a culturally sensitive person that you are, is the
tom not there for that bridge?
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Well, my understanding is I think was a patchet. I'm
not sure who the marty there mary artists.
Speaker 4 (06:37):
Look, I can answer the question really really clearly because
I sat through, you know, the whole thing. There was
a very strong pale stale male advocacy for attention of
the bridge. Bart are opposed to retention of the bridge
of the artworks. So the Barta Fenuer statement has been
extremely clear that they do not see the artworks as
representative of Wellington's Marta Fenua. It's very important. Around this
(07:02):
point we had lots of elderly white architects turning up
to the and to the council saying, you know that
this is a ta you know there's a great barrier
work of arts, blah blah blah. And we had we
had our tiatiawa poi wei on council saying no, this
is not the case.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
So what so I rest my case because satiawa amana.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
So to your gut as it's coming down.
Speaker 4 (07:29):
Look, I think the risk of the bridge is substantial.
Just remember one of the critical point about this structure
it was it was opened in nineteen ninety five. Within
fifty years it had been deemed to be a major
earthquake risk that the very first earthquake report of it,
which came out of twenty ten, identified structural deficiencies and
how it was actually built so effectively right from the
(07:51):
day one. It was poorly engineered and it's just been
an ongoing problem.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Do you want to see it come down with pardon?
Speaker 5 (07:58):
Well?
Speaker 3 (07:59):
You know, well, I think that might be a good
pragmatic decision. But safety is paramount.
Speaker 4 (08:06):
Safety paramount.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
But how I mean, how many people are going to
be standing on it when the big earthquake comes? I mean,
that's my if you want to be pragmatic about it.
I mean, at the end of the day, are we
going to have you know, if there's a big earthquake,
there's gonna be a lot of us that lose our lives.
And if we're going to be standing on that bridge,
how does it really make that much different? That's me,
But I mean that's just my personal thing. Let's talk
(08:28):
about the fal Malay, Pacific Island Theme Cultural Center that's
been getting it's got council sign off this week. When
we talk us through this, explain to our listeners because
I'm a little bit ignorant. I thought there was giant,
big building it tell us a little bit about it.
Speaker 3 (08:43):
Well, you know, if people just go on the website
full in Malay, you'll see the beautiful pictures and so basically,
phile in Malay is a statement. It's a symbol of
a beautiful building that connects us as New Zealanders to
the ocean where people of the Pacific Ocean. It's going
to be on the waterfront. It's going to be a
(09:03):
place for all communities and all cultures. But more than anything,
it celebrates the fact that altered or in New Zealand
is a Pacific nation, that we're part of the family.
I mean, many families like your own, Nick have lived
in some or come from the Pacific, and many of
our communities here their parents' grandparents have come from here.
So also it's about Wellington. I mean Ken and I
(09:24):
were born my brother Ken and I were born in Wellington.
We loved the city, we love this region. We've lived
in this region all our lives. But it's also important
to acknowledge the huge contribution that Pacific communities have made
to our country. And it's about giving back, you know,
it's about celebrating our place.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
How tough was it for you to get it over
the line.
Speaker 3 (09:47):
Well I probably started him, probably when I started at
the university, probably over ten years ago. We've had a
fabulous trust cheered by Adrian Orr and Adrian Women's is
a deputy chair, people like John Feesaw. We've got engineers
like Vic O'Connor. We've got Pacific people on it who
(10:08):
actually work pro by no because they believe in this vision.
It's been hard, it's been long, you know what it's like.
There's legal obstacles at times. There are a lot of
communities who see that this lationships be somewhere else and
racist objection, oh yes, and I think it's ignorance. And
New Zealand has always been I have always felt a
(10:30):
place that respects diversity in different views, but is a
beautiful country that looks after people.
Speaker 2 (10:38):
But you're too nice, Tim tell Us. I mean there
would have been you know, you classically mentioned about the bridge,
the old white middle aged men objection stuff. I mean
there would have been a bit of objection against us,
wouldn't they.
Speaker 4 (10:52):
I don't think there was much objection about this. I
think it was generally regarded as as very good for Wellington,
very good for the pacifica community, and very good for
the relationship between Wellington and the Pacifica community. So the
fact that it was always your odius around the council
table indicates I think the very diverse range of interests
that supported this initiative. I feel that the bit that
(11:15):
I would be slightly I had a reservation about how
this went through council because which I spoke to when
we actually did pass the resolution on Thursday, and that
was that the relative City Council has made it much
greater financial commitment towards restoring and maintaining the Bogonia House.
And I just look at the pale stale females who
were the main advocates for the Bogonia House and how
(11:37):
successful they were getting a significant multiple of addish of
funding for that structure versus the support that the Pacifica
community has got out of Council for the file MLI
and I think that there is an element of it's
not exactly institutional racism, but I think that there are
certainly interests within the community who have more sway than others.
(12:00):
So I think it was tremendous that the councilors did
show their support, but I would have liked this to
have shown more support.
Speaker 2 (12:07):
The voting was pretty unanimous. There's only one person that
was one one council that voted against it. Do we
know why she voted against.
Speaker 4 (12:14):
She refused to speak and afterwards when I asked her
please to explain because I'm really curious, she refused to
explain to me, even in a private setting. So I
have no idea why she voted against it.
Speaker 2 (12:25):
Do you like that know why this one particular council
voted against democracy?
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Is can be quiet?
Speaker 4 (12:32):
This is the election campaign.
Speaker 3 (12:34):
It would have been nice to have you unanimous, but
we're one. We are so grateful we got seventeen.
Speaker 2 (12:40):
So and it is great. Two questions, where exactly is
it going to be and is it going to have
like a Pacific a cafe in there that people can use?
Speaker 3 (12:48):
Yes, yes, well one of the issues is that, and
we've got very savvy people, business people. We've worked with
a lot of key stakeholders in Wellington including business. And yes,
it has to pay for itself, Nick, and we want
to have a sort of a Pacific cafe. We have
Pacific Fusion food where people can come. It has to
(13:10):
pay for itself, so we have to where we're going
to do that Secondly, we'll have beautiful venue where people
can have lots of cultural activities or business can have
their events. For example, the ambassador for Chile, she's got
a rippernui independence stay up at the university. Well, it
would be ideal to have it a wedding. Yeah, absolutely right.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
And where you haven't explained exactly where it is on.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Top of Frankett's Park. You know where the car park
beneath it?
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Oh okay, I thought it was closer to Michael Fallers
and I got that wrong. So it's going to be
right in the middle. Yes, and beautiful views and that's.
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Right, And I mean it is absolutely beautiful and there's
there is a lot of support for it and Wellington
could do with something vibrant and beautiful.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Friday face off with PACIFICA leader Dame Winnie Laban and
outgoing Wellington City councilor Tim Brown. The Tom Fill Maricopa
cases dominated the headlines this week and we cannot have
Friday face all without having a bit of a discussion
about it. Whennie, the whole odeal, whole situation has been
really tough to watch and follow. What's your take on it?
Speaker 3 (14:21):
Yeah, Well, my take on it is we can only
go on what we know, we can't go on what
we don't know. So my take on as I'm really
sad that the case has ended with the death of
Tom Phillips, but also the shooting of the police officer
who's still recovering in hospital, and also more than anything,
(14:44):
the children. His three children will have to make major
adjustments after the loss of their father. So after four
years in the bush and away from home and the
rest of the family, school and community, the children will
require time and careful and sensitive support, and I hope
they are well supported. The documentary that's been proposed. I
(15:12):
have concerns about that because it might satisfy public interests,
but it could be unhelpful for the children and the
Whier family. It's time to close the chap to let
the kids get back to a normal life out of
the public spotlight.
Speaker 2 (15:27):
So that's what I really agree with you on the
documentary thing. I've taken umbrants against it. I think the
fact that it's been going on and they've been getting
behind closed doors interviews and stuff that no other media
has been able to get. So they've been having access
to information and photo shoots that the rest of New
Zealand doesn't get that's not right. No, that's not no, Tim,
(15:51):
what do you feel about it? I mean, you know,
what are your thoughts?
Speaker 4 (15:56):
I think this guy is a complete bastard. And the
pit that worries me is the mythologizing that it's likely
to follow, you know, the sort of the al Capone,
you know, type of gangsters who become famous and developed
the sense of myth about them. So and it's a
shame that his name is now so familiar because of course,
you know, one reason that we don't mythologize around the
(16:17):
Christ to a shoot her is we don't even know
what the guy's name is. And so I totally agree
with you around a documentary about it, because again it's
going to create this mythology thing around this chap who
you know, went bush and evaded the police and gave
everyone the fact that they've.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
Been getting behind closed doors interviews and it's been they've
been involved, the documentary has been involved for years.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
Yeah, I mean, I mean, you can't stop people, you know,
being nosy, but it's a shame if they have been
a given special access. But the bit that worries me
about all of these sort of extremely antisocial people who
are doing very destructive things. Is that there's more myth
about them grows up and in ten years from now
will remember the myth and we won't remember the evil.
(17:00):
And I just hope that isn't the case with this guy.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
So the police, do you think it's been like good
pr for them? You know? I mean the fact that
they are allowing a documentary and they are giving the
information to the documentary makers. I mean, it just doesn't
work for me in any formal anyway. What are your thoughts?
Speaker 4 (17:19):
Look, I agree with you. I mean I don't feel
that again, the police participation of this process. You know
that the media part of it doesn't strike me as
a comfortable thing. So yeah, I would rather that we
tried to forget this guy as quickly as possible and
move on, and we have tried to do everything possible
to avoid creating a myth around him, which I think
may well happen.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Thank you, Thank you. It's a difficult subject to bring
up and just discuss. It's also raw. The government wants
to deal with shoplifting offenses in a quicker way instead
of going through the entire court system. The Justice Minister
has got a proposal that the burden of proof should
fall on the suspect to prove their innocence. Now, I
know that you know Whenni, you haven't got a huge
(18:03):
legal background, but your brother was a policeman and you
grew up with the policemans, so you know that you're
innocent til proven guilty. Does that change? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (18:12):
No, no, absolutely, And you know justice delayed is justice tonight?
Speaker 2 (18:17):
Right?
Speaker 3 (18:18):
And so if a shoplifting case is proven and guilt
accepted by the offend, I see no problem if a
quick judgment is made and a reasonable penalty is applied
and life goes on. But if a case is contested,
then the normal, often rather lengthy processes can be undertaken.
I don't see that the New Zealand Bill of Rights
(18:38):
is at risk.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
You don't know, no, I mean, tim, is it the
same as getting a speeding ticket?
Speaker 4 (18:45):
Exactly the same. I mean there's lots of opportunity. There's
lots of situations that you said in now where you're
guilty until you prove yourself in this. And if you
get a tax bill for its, it's the ID said
you are well, you pay it or you know, basically
they can do whatever they have the right to do so.
It's exactly the same with you driving your car and
the bus lanes. I mean, there are lots of instances
where you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. And
(19:06):
I think that in a case like this, this is
a good example where it actually does look would be
the right way of going. So the Bill of rights
thing throw out, Well, the bill of rights is this
is where the Bill of rights has got to have
a level of proportionality, you know. That's that's what the
Bill of rights is to stop genuine situations of oppression
on individuals by the state, amongst other things. And I
(19:27):
don't see this as an example of oppression on the
individual because the individual will have as we see with
parking fines and whatever else, there's endless opportunities for people
to actually protest their innocence.
Speaker 2 (19:38):
Why the people that are objecting to this, Polynesia and
Marud say that you know that they are going to
be affected unfairly on this change of law. Do you
agree with that or not?
Speaker 3 (19:49):
No, I don't agree with that. I mean, people know
what is right and what is wrong right, so.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
It doesn't you're not you're not taking it personally like
some are no good good on Friday face off with
Dame Winnie Laban and Tim Brown. On Tuesday we had
the honor of having Winced Peters in the studio and
I asked him what he thought of Wellington. I'm so sad.
I what to see? What's happened to?
Speaker 5 (20:13):
Oh God, this place was a live once and now
it's just been choked off and choked off. And I
have a contempt for these How can I call these
impractical planners? Who doesn't realize that the purpose of planning
is to increase the happiness of people?
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Tim Brown, what did you think of that?
Speaker 4 (20:32):
Look? I mean, it's very easy for central government politicians
to beat down on any region, but I'd just like
to point out that in Wellington there is obviously a
bit of vacant space. I mean, you'll have said it
when you walk around, but apparently the latest figures from
Colliers and Bailey's indicate that one shop in twelve is empty,
but at Auckland that one shop in eight is empty.
(20:53):
So in fact Auckland, if you walk I was at
Auckland over the last weekend to watch the rugby and
I was walking around a number of retail areas it's
way more bombed out than Wellington. So the reality is
that across you Zealand, the economic bite is being felt,
as we've heard Rod Druke on the Duke on the
radio the last couple of days talking about other retail failures.
(21:15):
So I think it's a bit of a it's just
a bit rich when a central government politicians blame local
government for what is a central government type faults. But
also I would also like to say, I mean.
Speaker 2 (21:28):
You can't possibly try and sit across the table from
me and say that the council has done nothing wrong
and not assisting and not trying to help and not
trying to fix things in the city.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
The council, I feel, has been a sleep at the
wheel in the space big time, and as a business
friendly counselor, I feel very disappointed by our inaction. But
I do feel that, for instance, there is a lot
of positive stuff coming And for instance, I just want
to talk about one specific thing, the government's allowance of
Victoria University to remove the Gordon Wilson Flats and replace
(22:00):
it with over five hundred student accommodation units. That is
going to be major for Wellington because that will mean
that the university can accommodate five hundred more out of
town students. Now, once that is actually in place, that
is going to have a significant economic impact on the city.
Speaker 2 (22:16):
Yeah. And I've said this one he all the time
on the show since I've been doing the show. A
buoyant Victoria University is a boy at Wellington. Now people
say to me, you know, how can you say that?
But you know you can feel it in the city
when the university's doing well. But going back to I
know that's two questions for you because of your ex
university had. But going back to Winston Peter's comments, I
(22:36):
mean what you're smiling.
Speaker 3 (22:41):
You know, politics is interesting. I beg to differ in that.
I know Winston loves Wellington. I mean he's been elected
now fifteen elections from nineteen seventy nine. Wellington has been
his other home in terms of Parliament. What I think
(23:02):
is really important, Nick, is that we often have to
advocate quite strongly for Wellington to be included and high
up in the agenda for economic development and regional investment.
The infrastructure that's happening is how it is useful, but
also to acknowledge the enormous contribution that the business community
(23:26):
have made. You're a classic example around having bought the Saints.
What happened to the sevens tournament that was at Westpac?
Why aren't we looking much more innovatively at other events
that we can generate more income and support businesses. And
I think with all the building stuff going on in
(23:46):
the road stuff, it's hindering some of our business people
and I think they need to feel they're being supported
more in ways where they can also express their views
and be heard. I think we've just got to go
for it in terms of Wellington because it is a
fabulous city.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
And surely to your last five weeks you can but
a few heads and say why are we not being
more business friendly?
Speaker 4 (24:11):
Well, I'm not too sure in the next five weeks,
but but I think that the next council will be
more business friendly. That would be my take. I think
that the less that Andrew Little does become the mayor,
I don't think it takes a rocket scientists to work
out that if you can't create high paying jobs in
the city, you know the city has no future. And
I think there is definitely an understanding of amongst the candidates.
Speaker 2 (24:34):
And can I just quickly get your opinion whether it's
changed or not with me, because I remember we spoken
New World a year ago, maybe maybe longer, and you
said that the nightlife economy, do people really understand what
it's worth to our city? And they don't do they?
Speaker 4 (24:52):
No, they totally don't know it's and it's a critically
important part of our economy. So I do feel that's
another area where you know, the city does do its bit.
I mean, you know it supported the New Year's Eve
party in Courtney Place, but I feel like an activation
is very important and this is something where the city
needs to continue to do well. And it's doing quite
a good job, but it could do more.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
It could do a lot more.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
Well, everything costs money, and I mean that's the how
that restrained.
Speaker 2 (25:17):
Okay, do you think that we could do more to
get their economy going? Do you think the council could
win it?
Speaker 3 (25:23):
I think we could do more. I mean, I think
we underestimate the importance of innovation and also a lot
of the startup companies that are in willing to learn
from also the younger generation are very entrepreneurial. And I'll
give you a classic example, Nick, because you've put skin
in the game, right, Our business people have put skin
in the game. They also employ people, and then they
(25:43):
also have to respect the fair you know, fair practices
that happen in the workplace. But the Hurricanes, for exp
this is an example, are playing more on a Pacific
in February next year at Westpac. Now here's an opportunity
to look at Okay, how can we put packages together
so people will come and have maybe a Pacific experience,
(26:06):
because you know they all love Rugby, spend money on food,
enjoy hospitality and entertainment, stay in the hotels, bring money
to the city. So I think we actually have the
brains here. It's just the will and to be bold, lovely.
Speaker 4 (26:22):
Sky by the way, Sky, not respect.
Speaker 2 (26:26):
Next year the Friday, okay time we'll start with you.
What's your hots?
Speaker 1 (26:36):
And not?
Speaker 4 (26:37):
Well, there was a couple of real hots for me.
One was the support I think that was tremendous. I
was really proud of the council passing that through. The
other was, which was actually in some ways closer to
home for me, was Madam Moana, which is the what's
Pentinicula the mirror my peninsula where finally, after years and
(26:58):
years and years of just kind of prevarication. The government
has finally agreed to do the deal. So this has
been something which the community and Miramar, the Wality, City Council,
the Tiatiawa, everybody has been massively in support of and
finally the deal has been done.
Speaker 2 (27:15):
So you've becomes a public reserve now that.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
You've got Peter Jackson doing his incredible works in Schalley Bay,
which is just absolutely, you know, jaw droppingly impressive, with
the rejuvenation of their officer's mess and with what's happening
with Chocolate Fish, and now you're going to have the
reserve to that's just going to be so good for Wellington.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
I agree, and I haven't done much about it, but
I will next week, not quickly because I've got to
get into it.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
But Nepple.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
D Wonnie Laban, what's your hots and knots for this week?
Speaker 3 (27:50):
So the council voted seventeen to one to formalize landowner
approval and key commercial terms for our Fulimalai proposal to
move forward. That's fantastic until it tells us about collaboration
about people having ears and probably removing some red tape
times and attitudes and not the one counselor who voted
(28:10):
against the proposal. They know who they are.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Good and I'm glad we didn't name them. I'm glad
I purposely didn't name them. Tim Brown, all the very
very best. We will have you on again before before
you finished, because we will we can use you. We're
he lovely to have you on the show, and hopefully
you'll you'll be acceptance of another invitation when we ask you,
thank you, I tell you love.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.