Episoder
-
The report out that workplace bullying is costing the country in terms of productivity and lost earnings is nothing new. Bullying and harassment are conservatively estimated to cost employers $1.5 billion a year, according to a new study by KPMG, published for Friday's Pink Shirt Day.
Years ago, there was a story on workplace bullying that surfaced in the news and the Department of Labour had to scramble to get extra staff to man the phones when a helpline they set up to take calls was overwhelmed. They had to keep it running for far longer than they ever imagined they would need to, such was the response.
I'd like to think things have changed since I was a young journalist, but I don't think they have, and the report seems to confirm they have not.
I grew up in newsrooms which were no place for the fainthearted. Sure, there was no physical hazing or pranking, but journos are good with words and there was some brutal sledging. I wasn't often on the receiving end of it, but on the rare occasion, I had a boss lean over me screaming into my face that I was effing useless and that I didn't deserve to be there and who the âfâ had I slept with to be on the team was fairly memorable. To be fair, I was a bit rubbish. Most people new to any job make mistakes and haven't developed into the best versions of themselves, and yes, I probably didn't deserve to be there. I knew I hadn't slept my way into the job and the others knew I hadn't so that bit didn't really matter. So, after a bit of a cry in the toilets and being mopped up by my colleagues it was onwards and upwards. A different person might have been scarred for life. Given up on their chosen career and done something else.
And I rather fear it is still happening because todayâs study used data from the Human Rights Commissionâs 2022 report, which surveyed 2500 workers across Aotearoa and found 29% of workers experienced at least one bullying or harassment behaviour in the year before the survey. The report found that 58% of the total cost of ($780m) in 2021-22 arose from impacts on female workers as they are disproportionately affected by bullying or harassment, according to the report. Or maybe itâs more likely that they will report it or that they will find offence and hurt from words other workers might not.
It found that every worker affected cost employers about $1600, which could be broken down into absenteeism ($219), presenteeism ($450), where youâre there, but youâre not there. Youâre at your desk but youâre not working. Increased staff turnover ($674), and internal procedures such as dealing with complaints ($270). Big numbers, no doubt about that.
At least now there are procedures for dealing with complaints. Back then, it was âsuck it up and get on with itâ. But I mean, nobody in the olden days was trained to be a boss. After a certain period of time you were promoted, you became one whether you were good at dealing with people or not. These days, I think the training is a little bit better if you want to be a manager. Youâre given a bit more support once you become a manager, but back then, it just simply didnât happen.
But itâs also difficult to know how people are going to receive your words. I mean, we were talking about this before and the boss is, you know, sometimes he will say âI'd like you to do thisâ, and a young worker will say, âyeah, no, not really for me.â And he goes âit wasn't, this isn't a workshop. This is, this is not a discussion. This is what I need you to do to do your job.â And that can be construed in this day and age as bullying.
A bit of banter between work mates, fine. A bit of banter with the wrong workmate? Not fine.
It all has to be so nuanced, doesn't it? And I know that I have got the height of a rhinoceros, I know that I will go for the one liner wherever I can and sometimes that can be hurtful. So, I have tried to give younger workers, you know, when they feel that they might, I might have gone too far, a way of letting me know that. I know that I'm older, I've been around longer, I can be bolshy, so I try to let them know that they can tell me if I'm a bit much. So far they haven't, and I hope that's not because they're not cowering in their crocs.
I try to be mindful that we're all of different generations, that we all grew up with different expectations. But it must be incredibly difficult to manage when you are a manager with numerous generations of workers. When you need a job done. When people respond in different ways to different instructions.
I have no doubt that there are some toxic, nasty, petty people who exist to make others' lives misery, but I do sometimes wonder whether some of these figures Are not toxic bullying but crossed wires.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Finances are tough for many Kiwis at the moment, with costs skyrocketing across the board.
Mortgages are going up, as is inflation, food costs, gas, and electricity. Banks are expecting the value of âbad mortgage debtâ to increase by 40% by the end of 2024, and around 90% of the countryâs fixed mortgage debt has an interest rate about 4%.
An estimated 40,000 people had their power cut in 2023 due to unpaid bills, and one in five had trouble paying their monthly bill on time.
Much like low earners, middle-income taxpayers are living paycheque to paycheque, struggling to keep up with increasing costs amidst calls for more taxpayer funded benefits.
Donna, a caller on Kerre Woodham Mornings, is one such taxpayer. Her yearly income is around $90,000, which she said becomes only $70,000 after tax and over half of which then goes towards her mortgage.
âI canât go to my boss and just say, âhey, give me a pay riseâ more than once a year,â she told Kerre.
âAnd even then, Iâm lucky, you know, if it happens.â
Her income goes not only to her mortgage and her general living expenses, but also to rates and life insurance, to ensure she has some stability should she become disabled.
âIâm 57, so Iâm nowhere near getting a benefit, and all these extras that the government uses taxpayersâ money for donât go to people like me.â
âIâm not saying they should,â Donna explained.
âIâm just saying I canât afford any more.â
Itâs becoming more and more difficult to build up a decent financial safety net, as any spare money can quickly get sucked up by unexpected costs that would be minor or inconsequential in any other situation.
Donna said that she used to have three months' worth of looking forward in savings, but now sheâs literally living paycheque to paycheque.
âI hurt my back three and a half weeks ago and I have a regular appointment to see the doctor this week, and I couldnât afford to go any earlier,â she told Kerre.
While the appointments are only $20, thatâs $20 of an already dwindling supply as all of her payments went out the night before.
âI mean, I get it.â
âI try to help people, you know, if I see someone whoâs sitting on the street, even if I can just give them a smile and sayâ hello, how are you?â I try to do that,â she continued, mentioning that she buys people sandwiches when she can, but canât do much more than she already does.
âI donât get any extra help, and Iâm not asking for it,â she reiterates.
âEveryoneâs going on about these, whatâs happening with this coalition with giving tax back very shortly, you know what? I need it.â
âI need that $20 a fortnight that Iâm going to get.â
While itâs only a small amount, Donna said sheâs tired of hearing politicians fight when people are struggling to survive.
"I live in South Auckland and theyâre all... itâs all around me and itâs just, no one... I donât know what else to say. I donât know what else to do or how to stop it.â
âI just feel so helpless.â
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Manglende episoder?
-
If you woke up this morning and you turned on the heater because it was a bit chilly, not as chilly as it has been, but a bit chilly, good for you. Did you think about the cost? If you didnât, lucky you.
An estimated 40,000 New Zealand households had their power cut due to unpaid bills in 2023, which is a phenomenal number of households. One in five had trouble paying their monthly power bill and this is at a time when the âbig fourâ power companies are earning more than $7 million every day while some households struggle to heat their homes.
These figures are according to Consumer NZ. According to their financial reports, Meridian, Contact, Genesis and Mercury had combined earnings of $2.7 billion over the last year â about $7.4m a day. But while the consumer watchdog says the numbers are a bad look for the generation and retail power companies (retailers), the industry says it is ploughing earnings back into developments to help New Zealand transition to a carbon-zero economy.
So, theyâre not all just bloated fat cats puffing on cigars with the profits, and those aren't the profits, those are just the earnings, they are putting any profits back into transitioning to a carbon zero economy, so the wind farms and the like.
Consumer NZ chief executive Jon Duffy said 60% of New Zealanders were concerned about the cost of energy and âthe optics of huge profits at the height of a cost-of-living crisis arenât great.â Itâs the same problem with the banks, theyâre making profits while people are struggling to pay the rent and to pay the mortgage.
The coalition government, mindful of this. has continued the Winter Energy Payment introduced by the Labour Government to help with the cost of heating homes during winter but Auckland law professor Jodi Gardiner says that doesn't cover nearly enough households who are around the edges of poverty.
If youâre not getting the Winter Energy payment, itâs because you donât qualify. It arrives in your bank account automatically from the first of May through to the end of September, and if youâre entitled to it, youâll be receiving it. Jodie Gardner says not nearly enough families are being taken into account for that Winter energy payment, and besides, it doesnât go far enough.
Many New Zealand houses, particularly social housing, were built during the era of cheaper electricity and were reliant for warmth on electric heating rather than insulation. Now, thatâs changed with the Healthy Homes legislation being passed, but again, Kainga Ora and the statehouse providers were given longer to ensure their homes meet Healthy Home standards than private landlords. So, there are still people living in poorly insulated homes, drafty homes, who are reliant on electricity for their warmth and their cooking, and for everything else.
It is estimated that now 25% of these occupants nationwide and more than 40% in the South suffer energy poverty, contributing to avoidable hospitalisation. So, you have a choice if youâre on limited income, either a benefit, or the super, or wages that cannot be raised, you either pay the power bill or you buy food, or you know, you have to make those sorts of crunch decisions.
Jodie Gardner says a return to state ownership of electricity isn't realistic right here right now, she argues a simpler â and more appropriately targeted â approach is to implement âsocial tariffsâ for electricity.
These are targeted discount energy deals funded by the government for qualifying low-income consumers. There are examples of social tariffs being used overseas to reduce the harm being caused by profit-driven companies operating in essential sectors.
She says in the UK some private telecommunications providers have voluntarily chosen to bring in subsidised social tariffs for broadband and telephone for customers on certain welfare benefits because access to the internet, like electricity, is seen as a basic human right in developed countries.
So, if you are having to make decisions about what you spend money on right now as we head towards winter, especially those who are living in the South where the temperatures are colder, do you worry about paying the bill? Is it one of those low-level anxieties? When paying the power bill, do you take measures to ensure that you use the least amount possible of electricity to cook and heat your home?
There's nothing new in this. You know the only new thing is the fact that we now acknowledge it. People during winter ring me and tell me they go to bed at about 6pm so that they are living in one room and keeping warm in their bed rather than trying to heat their home.
Do you consider the provision of electricity a basic human right, which in turn means that the rest of us, has an obligation to ensure that you are not in hardship when it comes to paying the bill?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Late in the show yesterday, Police Commissioner Andrew Coster along with Police Minister Mark Mitchell announced they would be introducing a National Gang Unit to crack down on gang crime and gangsâ anti-social behaviour.
Coster said police know gang members commit a large amount of the crime in New Zealand. I donât think itâs a state secret. I think most of us are well aware that the gangs are either committing it, or behind a large amount of the crime in New Zealand. He says 8% of all violence and 18% of serious violence. I'd love to know how many robberies and ram raids they were behind too, using young children to do the actual dirty work.
The National Gang Unit would be a dedicated, specialised gang unit of 25-30 people with ring-fenced staff of up to seven staff in every police district across the country.
Coster said this action will be a continuation of Operation Cobalt. Fabulous. You mightâve seen the results of Operation Cobalt in the crime and the court news, numbers of gang members up before the courts getting prosecuted, getting assets stripped. The proceeds of the Crime Act are well and truly in force and in play with all the bling, and the diamond studs, and the gold chains, and the cars, and the motorbikes being seized by police, all as a result of Operation Cobalt.
All well and good, and precisely what this coalition Government campaigned on. And to be fair, Operation Cobalt was in play in the last administration as well, but people were sick to death of seeing gang violence, senseless deaths in the name of protecting patches, the flouting of laws on a daily basis, and just the general swagger. I live outside the law. I donât obey the same rules, I donât care, two fingers to you. And they were allowed to get away with it for far too long.
So, cool. Iâm glad the government is doing what they said they were going to do and cracking down on the gangs, but you have to get the buy in from the police, and according to the Police Association President Chris Cahill there won't be any extra resources or staff for this new national gang unit.
âThe real problem with this announcement is itâs come with no actual facts around what the extra resourcing will be, what the extra budget will be. And if it doesn't have those things attached to it, youâre just asking the same staff to do more work, or youâre just moving stuff around, and so we really want to see the facts behind that.
âLook, itâs great to have a focus, but as I say, weâre already overworked and what are we gonna drop? I mean, the Commissioner yesterday said weâll be doing less mental health and less family harm, but weâve been hearing that story for a couple of years now and it just hasnât happened. So, thereâs a fair bit of scepticism out there. I mean, officers are pretty keen to get into these gangs, they know theyâve had, you know, far too much leeway and not enough emphasis on policing them, but theyâre just bogged down with the amount of work theyâve got at the moment.â
I know that the Police Association is in the middle of pay negotiations with the government so there'll be a bit of âargy bargyâ and a little bit of jockeying for position going on, but seriously - wouldn't it have been a much more powerful statement if you'd had the PA standing alongside the Minister and the Commissioner? If they had all come out together and said we are united in reducing the harm being done to families, to communities, and to society from the gangs and the misery they perpetuate.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
David Seymour says the Government is diversifying education by bringing back charter schools.
More than $150 million from the Budget will go towards setting up 15 new charter schools and converting 35 state schools.
Charter schools get government funding but operate independently.
They were abolished by the Labour-led coalition in 2018.
The Associate Education Minister told Kerre Woodham that thereâs no shortage of demand in teaching for the basic proposition of âget the results, weâll leave you alone, stop meddlingâ.
He said thereâs also a demand from parents who want to see schools run in accordance with the values of their communities, rather than the latest ideas to come out of the capitol.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Charter schools are making a comeback.
So, what happened last time?
When ACT was in confidence and supply with the John Key government, they were able to establish charter schools and they managed to establish 11 of them.
Charter schools were designed to be a place for children who didn't fit into mainstream education. They had different structures, a different layout, and a different form of teaching. They still must follow a curriculum, but it is different from your normal education.
I was wondering, given this story on neurodivergent children yesterday, are parents really feeling that the education system is failing their children? It's not just parents of neurodivergent children who feel the education system is failing them, though, is it? To be clear. Your average kiwi kid is going to their local state school, and theyâre learning with great teachers who are doing their best, and their best is very good. They have a great relationship with their teachers and with the principal. They have a great relationship with each other. They're having fun and they're learning.
But if you have children who are particularly bright, or if they are neurodivergent, or if they're incredibly anxious, or if they come from families where education is not a priority, what do you do?
We've seen falling rates of international achievement, the nonattendance of children in our public schools has reached all-time highs or lows depending on which way you look at it. As a parent, have you looked at alternative forms of education? Homeschooling is up for all sorts of reasons that came out of the COVID-19 years, but it's still starting from a very small base, and homeschooling is not for everyone. It's more a lifestyle than just homeschooling.
Private schools are prohibitively expensive. We saw a story in the Herald this morning where middle-class families who were looking to upgrade the home are being turned back by the banks because they have too much debt. They've got the private schools and the cars, but they are struggling to meet the payments on the credit cards. It's not just first-home buyers. The religious schools, the integrated religious schools have waiting lists as long as your arm.
So, what do you do if you feel that the local school is failing your child or grandchild? And I know that we're in an era where every child is special, every child is unique, and every education system needs to cater specifically to that one child, but there are large groups of kids for whom state school doesn't work. And we've seen that both in the falling achievement rates and in the fact they are not turning up for school at all.
And it is not just kids from families who do not care. They're parents who care very much, but they cannot get their kids to school. I could not imagine how awful the battle would be to try and make your child go to school every single day, and I've heard from parents that they bargain. They barter, they plead, they pay.
Would an alternative form of education from David Seymour work? Would that be an option for you? We used to have a great education in this country. It was something we were known for and now it is gone.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
How on earth can the IRD allow child support arrears to get to more than $1 billion?
I could understand it if chasing up payments involved men and women using telephones and ledger books, sharpening their pencils to make fresh calculations - but in this age of technology and electronic payments and with IRD having the power to rifle through bank accounts, it seems inconceivable that it could be allowed to get to this.
Even taking into account much of the money owed will be made up on interest and penalties... $1 billion. $1.023 billion to be precise, is a staggering amount. One of the overdue payments is a debt of $2.5 million, now 10 years old. Inland Revenue (IRD) wonât say how it came to be that size. All it will say is that the amount is âcurrently under a payment arrangementâ.
Nor will the IRD be drawn on just how the amount of unpaid child support reached $1.023 billion, owed by 97,597 debtors as at April 30 this year. Nearly $434.2m of the total is in penalty fees. The oldest debt dates back 32 years since the IRD began administering the Child Support Act in 1992.
Family lawyer, Sharon Chandra, says it comes down to resourcing.
âThey either don't have sufficient resources to allocate towards the debt recovery side of things or that I suppose it's not enough of a priority to reallocate some of their existing resources. And the natural consequence of that is that you've just got this accumulating debt which obviously has, has reached a billion dollars."
Now, how can chasing up a billion dollars, a billion with a bit, not a myth, a billion dollars not be a priority.
It seems extraordinary and I know that there are all sorts of different areas that IRD you know, can be working in with student loans and with companies and with Covid payments and with chasing up small business holders and the like and also the rich people who use sophisticated accounts to hide as much of their funds as possible.
So, they don't have to pay tax on them.
So, I get that they've got plenty to be getting on with.
But a billion dollars we could do a lot with.
Would an amnesty work? According to an AUT senior lecturer in taxation, it could. Ranjana Gupta says that offering voluntary disclosure would substantially reduce administrative costs in cross-checking the millions of lines of additional data received under the AEOI policy.
To administer such a program effectively, the IRD must use the best strategies to encourage voluntary declaration. For example, the opportunity to declare should be offered once only. Enforcement strategies and sanctions for non-compliance should be credible, consistent and clear.
Tougher penalties and interest would apply to those who choose not to take advantage of the program. Research shows a well-administered tax amnesty program facilitates strong engagement.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Consumers will be feeling unsettled as the reliability of electricity supply is tested.
A cold snap and low wind generation meant the country faced a potential supply shortfall, and Transpower asked people to reduce electricity use between 7 and 9am.
Consumer Advocacy Council chair Deborah Hart says this kind of situation is not new, but the market model is obviously not working.
She said that we need to turn our attention from only building infrastructure to delivering energy efficiency and innovation.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Ah, another cold snap, another example of our power industry being unable to cope. I hope you all had cold showers and turned off the heated towel rails and ate cold gruel this morning to do your bit to reduce power consumption. The reason for the latest orange alert is that there has been a surge in demand and the wind turbines haven't been turning - yada, yada, yada. Different excuses same result. It gets cold, and our electricity suppliers can't cope. David Seymour says it's Third World stuff âit isâ and Simeon Brown says it's all the fault of the last lot.
To be fair, according to the experts, there's been a lack of investment in new renewable generation during most of the past 10 years. Although generators will be quick to point out the renewables they're in the process of developing, and New Zealandâs electricity supply is set for a welcome boost in the second half of winter with Meridianâs newest wind farm on track for early completion. When completed, Harapaki will be the countryâs second largest wind farm, offering enough electricity to power most of Hawkeâs Bay.
So one of the reasons for the shortage in power this morning, one of the reasons given was that the wind hadnât been turning the turbine. So if the wind doesnât turn them, you need a backup, you need a plan B.
Gentailers were also reluctant to invest too much into new energy sources as they waited to hear the fate of the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter. Had it closed, it would have released 572 megawatts of excess generating capacity on to the market. The electricity market model provides strong disincentives against power companies bringing on extra capacity until they are sure it will be fully absorbed.
The International Energy Authority noted arguments that the kind of market model New Zealand has adopted could result in underinvestment in new generation as far back as in 2001. And you can see that if your primary motivation is to make money, youâre not going to dump the market full of the product that youâre trying to sell, youâre going to hold of.
Okay theyâre building a new hydro lake. Oh, no theyâre not. Tiwai Point might close and we might get more electricity into the market. No it isnât. So then they try and play catchup with major electricity users.
Major Electricity Users Group chairman John Harbord warned in April that generators were incentivised to keep the market on the âprecipice of shortageâ. And that is precisely where we are this morning. Ladies and gentlemen, where we are on the precipice of shortage yet again, while successive governments argue who did least, and as power companies claim to be doing their bit to invest and build in alternative energy sources. We shiver in our kitchens, while the Teslas languish in the garage, having cold gruel and dripping on untoasted bread to do our bit.
Just as we did last winter and the winter before that and will no doubt continue to do so until our grandchildren have grandchildren.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
There are more calls to further lower the bowel cancer screening age.
An Otago University study shows rates of early onset colorectal cancer have risen by 26% each decade over the past 20 years.
Rates for MÄori aged under 50 years rose 36%.
Professor Frank Frizelle told Kerre Woodham that the screening age needs to be lowered from the current age of 60 to at least 45.
He said that a lot of the issue is that young people having bowel cancer is unexpected, so symptoms are often ignored.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
You have to wonder whether the strident critics of the coalition government ever stop and look at the facts. Maybe read the press releases. Listen to the interviews. Do they just see something coming from the office of the Honourable Shane Reti or the Honourable David Seymour and bin it? Hear Christopher Luxon on the wireless and just switch off and go âOh! Canât come bear it! Let me replay some of the 1oâclock briefings during COVID and restore my equilibrium.â
You know, do they ever stop and think that what they're saying is absurd. Like, this government is racist, and anti-MÄori, and wants to exterminate MÄori. There's been some hysterical rhetoric coming from some quarters, dangerous and hysterical rhetoric. Two of the party leaders that make up the coalition government can whakapapa back to their MÄori ancestry. There are more MÄori in Parliament than in any other time in Parliament's history, 155 years after New Zealand's first MÄori MP's were elected. And so we've been, you know, mostly have been part of democracy for a very, since we all sort of came together. We now have more MÄori representation than ever before. There are 33 MÄori MPs across all of the parties in Parliament. Nine in Labour, Te Pati MÄori, obviously six. Green, six, National, five! Shock me. New Zealand First, four, ACT, three.
So, when you say we have a racist, extremist government, do you mean they're just not the right sort of MÄori for you? They don't think like you do. They don't do the things you want them to do, in your way. Or say the things you want them to say. Well, you know, this is diverse community. Even if you're MÄori youâre allowed to have a different point of view from another MÄori. News alert! Same with women. Same with men. You know, so when you say that this government is racist and anti-MÄori, we'll tell that to the 33 MÄori who are in Parliament.
Is it really the same with school lunches? We had David Seymour on yesterday around 11:30. So we didn't have much time and we won't take much time, it'll just cover it off a little this morning. But people are so anti the coalition government that even when they keep the school lunches, and even when they keep the school lunches and then extend it to pre-schoolers, so not only have they not scrapped it, they've extended it, the critics are vocal and fevered. Some are even anxious.
This is Haeata Community Campus Principal Peggy Burrows on Heather Du-Plessis Allen last night.
PB: If the government is going to be buying food and the argument is that they have the, you know, the buying power to save money, what does that look like? Does that mean that we're going to get huge cartoons of pre-packaged food and generic food and things like that? And that's not what we have been used to.
HDPA: Yeah, but what's wrong with that, Peggy?
PB: Well, if you have a. Child. That's celiac. Then you have to have a diet that is accommodating a better you have a vegetarian child. If you have a child that has, you know, those sorts of things have to be taken into consideration, I think.
I'm sure they will be Pegs. You know. For heaven's sake, when she talks about saving money she spits out the words like theyâre anathema to her. Heaven forfend that we keep a close eye on the taxpayer dollar. It's not the government paying for it, itâs you, me and her. And you know, news alert, food is pre-packaged. If you go and buy a sandwich from the dairy, it's in a package, it's been made hours earlier. It's pre-packaged. And I'm absolutely certain David Seymour's not going to be serving up lamb chops for all and you don't get up from the table till you've eaten it. You know, everybody understands these days that serving up food involves catering for special needs.
And this is Boyd Swinburn, Auckland University's Boyd Swinburne on the Mike Hosking Breakfast. He has not much faith in the changes.
MH: If you wanna get a sandwich and some fruit in a kid's stomach, that's no bad thing. That's what we're doing. And there are more kids getting it than were previously.
BS: Well, that's what he's claiming. But I don't see how I can do it when he so brings the money down.
Claiming he said that about three times, that's what he's claiming. What David Seymourâs lying? About being able to produce sandwiches? And I don't know about you, but when it was first discussed about feeding hungry kids at school, I was all for it, but I didn't imagine it would be butter chicken, and vegetarian nachos, and lasagne, and all being delivered by numerous providers right around the country. I thought it would be a no-frills lunch that would feed hungry kids. The sort of lunch that your kids get, my kids get, our grandkids get. There were some providers who were doing a really great job and there were some providers who simply were not. Schools were ordering lunches for ghost kids. Food was going to waste. There was no evaluation on whether the lunches were doing their job or not, other than comments like I feel good when my tummy is full. Me too.
I have no problem with providing a basic lunch for kids at school at all, but my hackles rise when I hear these people going âhmph. Government. Looking to save money. What about these beautiful, delicious, nutritious meals that we've been able to offer kids for hot cooked meals? Food from around the world? Just not right.â
Well, you know what's not right? What is not right like are hungry kids, kids who cannot learn because they're starving, that is plain wrong. And if we can fix that, we should. Does that mean we have to offer an extensive, international range of hot and cold food that is designed to cater to every single individual taste we have? We have breakfast in schools that is no frills that has been working for years. Nobody has complained about that and we're now going to have to have an international smorgasbord buffet for these kids instead of the Sanitarium products, the milk, and the toast. That's been working just fine. Nobody's worried about shame about going along to The Breakfast Club. Nobody's been concerned about, what about the coeliacs? What about halal? What about the vegans? Nobody. They've just fed hungry kids. Going about their business.
And on a day when David Seymour said not only am I not going to scrap it, despite the fact I think he really wanted to, not only am I not going to scrap it, I'm going to extend it. There's just been strident criticism. What the Dickens? What is this world coming to?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
The Associate Education Minister says a revamped school lunches programme is better bang for buck.
Every student who received a free school lunch under the previous Government will still be fed, but the programme will save $107 million a year.
David Seymour told Kerre Woodham that instead of having multiple providers, schools will order lunches from an online portal.
He says they'll look less like couscous and quinoa, and more like sandwiches and fruit.
He says previously a quarter of a million lunches were being ordered each day, at a cost of $8.60, and the Government's going to get a much better deal than that.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Lifeline is calling for a lifeline as they celebrate their 60th anniversary.
The Mental Healthline is struggling to keep up with demand, taking around 7,000 calls and 20,000 texts a month.
On average, 17 people at high risk of self harm or suicide call Lifeline every day.
Presbyterian Support Northern is the charity behind Lifeline, CEO Dr Bonnie Robinson telling Kerre Woodham that while the Police are often called to do mental health checks, they donât want them doing that.
She said that Lifeline would love to take on more of the demand but theyâre unable to as they simply donât have the staff.
Robinson said that even if organisations were to consolidate, the capacity issue wouldn't go away, as demand currently outstrips the resources the sector has as a whole.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
You will remember there was some alarm in some quarters when the New Zealand Police Service announced they'd be looking to step back from attending calls from people in psychological distress.
Over the past decade police say the number of mental health events officers attend has increased by more than 150% to 77,043 in the past year. The vast majority of these were low to moderate risk and safety and didn't require a police presence, they were simply there as empathetic, compassionate, highly skilled babysitters. So, the police are saying that it could be a better use of our time, but because they say there is nobody else to attend to these people who are suffering horribly, then they do it. They're the last man standing, last man and woman standing, they are the ones that have to step into the breach.
So, these are people, when they dial 111 or their families dial 111, who have varied reasons for experiencing distress. Not all of them have a diagnosable mental illness. One consistent thing, though, is that services can be fragmented, confusing, unresponsive, and hard to access when these people need help. So, they can't get the help they need, they or their families dial 111 as a last resort.
So they go through to 111, where under the existing arrangements the police are looking to change, the only practical assistance a dispatcher can usually provide is sending a police officer to check on the distressed person and that's when the police officer talks them down, not necessarily off a literal ledge, but a metaphorical one, takes them to hospital, then sits with them while they wait for the hospital to see them. Generally, it's a jolly long wait because they're not acute. They're fine now that they've got somebody there, somebody cares about them, somebody who knows what to say and do, and there the police officer sits for 7, 8, 9 hours.
But why do these 77,043 people call 111 when in psychological distress when there are so many organisations getting funding from the taxpayer, getting funding from kind souls to provide the sorts of services that deal specifically with these sorts of people and that sort of pain. You know, low to moderate risk and safety, not necessarily a diagnosable mental illness, but somebody who's just exhausted from having to put one foot in front of the other, who has reached the end of their rope. They don't know what to do anymore. They just want to stop. Make everything stop, I can't cope anymore.
If there were no charities, organisations and services available you could understand the calls to the police. But there are so many that say they deal specifically with that sort of distress. We have the national helpline 1737. Did you know it existed? There's a website, there's an app, there's a phone. 1737. We have Youth line free text 234, we have Samaritans, we have Suicide Crisis Helpline, we have depression helpline free text 4202. We have Outline, we have The Lowdown, especially for children. We have What's Up with 24/7 trained councillors, come on, how many do we need? How many can we continue to justify funding when for all the pretty advertising billboards, all the high profile people fronting the different services, all the different niche specific councillors you have them for gay men and women, gay kids, you have them for young people 5 to 18, you have them for young adults, you have them for adult adults. We've got all of these. There's probably more than I've missed. But we have all of these helplines and yet it's 111 and the police that people of all ages turn to in distress.
More than a billion dollars in funding for mental health services from the previous administration, with specially trained nurses at GP practices being one of the jewels in this particular funding crown. We've got funding drives every month for a different mental health service and everyone rings 111 and calls the police. What is the point of these services if they're not being used to their full capacity? Can they be amalgamated so that you only have to remember one number? And then it can direct you to the perhaps a Councillor who's trained, specifically worked for Rainbow Youth, or specifically for a young child who's suffering anxiety?
So you got more than a billion dollars in funding for mental health. We've got funding drives every month for a different form of this service. The latest is Lifeline, who's launched a public appeal to help it keep going as it celebrates its 60th year, it says that it needs to keep going as it fills a big gap in the primary mental health space that people may otherwise simply fall through. Well, they'll only fall through to the next telephone number, or they'll only fall through to 111 and the poor old cops have to go out again. Why do we have so many? Surely, surely, surely, they cannot all be sustainable. And given that the police are the first port of call and are actually doing the job of picking up these very distressed people and helping them see that there is another day. What are the rest of the organisations doing?
There's got to be a better way of doing this.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
We thought we'd start with the announcement on law and order and Corrections, given that this was one of the big drivers for National and ACT, and indeed New Zealand Firstâs election campaigns, and one in which the coalition government was elected upon.
Still, when you've got a big announcement to make on law and order, one of the foundations of your government's policies, it does pay to get it right. I mean numbers. I know, but pesky journalists will drill you on them. It was unfortunate for Corrections Minister Mark Mitchell that he muddied the waters, as the PM and put it, around numbers when they made the announcement yesterday as that became the focus, not the actual announcement of what the government was promising to deliver. Still, we all make mistakes. I'm sure the announcement, whatever the numbers, will be appreciated by many New Zealanders.
It's a $1.9 billion investment that will bring hundreds more new beds to Waikeria Prison, deliver 685 new frontline staff at Corrections, including 470 Corrections officers who will be recruited and trained to respond to growing prison numbers. And $78 million, and this is one I was really pleased to see, $78 million to extend rehabilitation programs for the 45% of prisoners who are on remand. At the moment if you're on remand, you don't have access to rehabilitation programs. With this announcement, you will.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon did the number crunching this morning. How many beds are there going to be in Waikeria? Well, I'll tell you, he said, there are 455 beds there currently. There are 600 beds that will be added next year. There's a further 810 beds and that means you'll end up with Waikeria with capacity for more than 1800 beds in total. That sounds like a hell of a lot. A super prison, if you will.
Floyd du Plessis, the corrections union spokesperson said, there is no problem with super prisons, no problem with having a large number of prisoners in one place. To me, intuitively, instinctively, there seems to be something very wrong with housing so many people in one spot. I'd rather a more bespoke boutique approach to trying to rehabilitate people and punish them, you know, which is, after all, what they're there for. It's a deprivation of their liberties. It's supposed to be a punishment, I get that, but I'm really glad to see that there is money in there for rehab. He said there is no problem with the super prisons, but all I can see in my mind's eye are those huge American prisons, which just look like places where souls go to die, really.
But what you're seeing, says Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, is a big focus on law and order. They've got tougher laws on gangs. They've got serious young offenders and military academies coming for them. They've put the three strikes back in. He says we're recruiting an extra 500 police officers, little bit hard to do until the pay dispute is settled. And now we've got this big package of $1.9 billion for Corrections, he says. We're also going to work really hard on social investment and rehab for prisoners as well. Again, that is something I think we really, really need to see the prevention as well as the âcureâ. And I'd say cure with inverted commas because I don't think going to prison cures many people.
So, I'd love to hear your take on this. Is locking people up, more of them, going to make a difference long term? Probably not but locking them up short term surely will. While you're locking people up so they cannot just be put back out onto the streets and continue to commit crime, which is what we saw over the last few years. We work on social investment, the programs that work with young offenders, we keep. We invest even more money in if we have to. We work with the families where these law breakers are coming from. For some people, going to prison is enough to scare them straight. For those who haven't really got their hearts into being a crim, for those who have the foundations in their childhood to have choices, to be able to say, you know what? This is not for me. I don't like it. They can turn themselves around.
For those that are just fed up of being inside, not seeing their kids, not seeing the partner that they love, they've finally met a good one. They don't want to stuff it up. That generally, anecdotally from what ex-cons have told me, is what turns them around the most. Having the love of a good woman, as nobody has yet said it was the love of a good same sex partner, so I'm going to go with woman. The love of a good woman and their kids, that's made them think, âfor all that is holy, I am 36 years old. I don't want to keep doing this. I don't want to keep going on the merry go round I've been on for the last 18 years.â It has to come from the prisoner themself; to say I don't want to do this anymore. And then they need the help to be able to support them and to going straight.
So sure, lock them up in the short term, but we're going to have to have a long-term view of social investment, rehabilitation, and giving these predominantly men, a stake in society to say you can belong if you if you choose to, it's going to be worth your while to join society, to be a part of this community. So, we've all got a part to play there.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
A new policy guide for New Zealand schools, titled âStudents and Social Transition: A Gender Identity Policy Guideâ, has been emailed to schools across the country today.
It was created by Ethos, a charity that supports people with questions about freedom of conscience and belief.
Ethos had been contacted by a number of parents and schools with questions about the best way to help children experiencing gender identity questions.
The guide advocates for schools to follow a âwatchful waitingâ policy which is now best practice in countries like Sweden, Finland, and England.
Ethos CEO Alex Penk told Kerre Woodham that itâs important to have a holistic approach like this, that can provide support to a child that is in their best interests and fits within the schoolâs legal responsibilities.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Last week, I think it must have been Wednesday or Thursday, I was harrumphing and muttering away like Waldorf and Statler from The Muppets. I was doing a little bit of that while I was reading about the latest sewage spill into a waterway in Wellington Harbour. I'm like, how in this day and age, can this still be? This is an outrage - and Helen tries to tune it out until she hears her name, and I said Helen, let's see if we can get Simeon Brown on... this is unacceptable. Sure. OK, fine.
Not Three Waters under Nanaia Mahuta, she sold it badly and things wrong with, but if not Three Waters, then what? Get him on the line to explain himself ...back to Statler and Waldorf! Helen's yes, all right, knowing that once our host was on one, it's probably better to try and sort it out a few minutes later!
She was back saying sorry Local Government Minister Simeon Brown can't talk, but he did say expect some news next week. And what do you know? Here's the news. I can see why he was busy over the weekend.
Simeon Brown, Christopher Luxon and Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown announced a new water deal that will see government, council and Watercare work together to improve infrastructure and water delivery in the region. And it is hoped that this will be a template for other deals around the country. Obviously, they might have to be tweaked a bit when you're looking at the smaller regions with a smaller base with lower value water assets, but nonetheless it's been done. Deal done. Simeon Brown says Local Water Done Well is putting the responsibility for delivering the three waters that we require into the hands of the councils rather than overlaying its management and delivery with layers of bureaucracy and middle managers, will be the way to go. But councils won't be left entirely to their own devices.
âIt is ultimately local councils putting forward their solutions for a financially sustainable approach. Rather than government coming and saying have four entities or ten entities or whatever number of entities, which are co- governed and spend $1.2 billion on it - we're actually going to let local communities put forward their solutions.
What's going to stop a water entity doing what many councils around the country have done and borrow, go nuts and find themselves up against a wall?
Well, we are going to put in place economic regulation and so that will mean that they will be regulated in similar ways to how electricity distribution companies are regulated. They'll have to outline their price path, they outline their capital expenditure, outline their asset management plans, that's about sensible economic regulations to assure that consumers are not blocked off and then their assets aren't being gold plated, And as part of that, we're putting a crown monitor in place, straight away, for Watercare, to make sure that there is better oversight over their investment plans and make sure that Auckland is getting value for money.â
That was Simeon Brown talking to Mike Hosking this morning. So, at least it's movement. We can't be paralyzed, sitting on our hands trying to work out the best possible way, while allowing raw sewage to be pumped into all of our waterways. And it's happening right around the country.
Wellington is particularly bad in terms of its drinking water, in terms of its sewage, in terms of the age of its pipes, in terms of they put out one fire and another one erupts somewhere else. There are some councils who have done a brilliant job and have invested ratepayer money sensibly and have got their water assets well and truly up-to-date and future proofed. Others haven't even started.
But, at least when you have a deal that's been announced, a deal that looks workable, it will see water rates rise by 7.2 percent rather than the 25.8 percent forecast. And that was what Watercare was warning, we're going to have to put it at that rate. We're now under this one going to be able to borrow more money to invest in infrastructure with the cost of borrowing spread over a longer period.
Not all councils are created equal. Not all councils are the same, so they're going to have to tweak and adapt and modify this deal to make it suit themselves. But at least we're moving.
There are going to be challenges. They're going to be wondering what happens when one council has invested for years in upgrading its water assets, its ratepayers, have been responsible and said, yep, we understand that. Other councils have not, and how you work out who pays for what? But, at least there is movement.
Mergers and coalitions and works programs are being announced and that's what we need to be doing. We cannot, we simply cannot, leave it to the next generation to fix up our polluted waterways, our droughts, our dead rivers, our toxic drinking water. We can't. If there's one thing we can leave behind us, it should be clean streams, pristine seas and first World water services. That should be our gift to the next generation and at least we're making a start right now.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
May is New Zealand Music Month, the theme for this year âAmplifying Aotearoaâ, aiming to shine a light on those who are the heartbeat of the nationâs music scene.
One of the artists being highlighted is Tami Neilson, a country and soul singer-songwriter.
Sheâs fresh off a plane from Nashville where she paid tribute to Patsy Cline on the sacred stage of the Rhyman, rewarded with a standing ovation from the audience.
Neilson told Kerre Woodham that it was so overwhelming and unexpected.
âI still havenât really processed it.â
Despite the accolades, making a living as a musician is no easy feat, most artists waiting by the phone until they can snatch up a gig.
âThis business is, is not for the faint of heart.â
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Remember the Tau Henare-Trevor Mallard stauch back in 2007?
Senior Cabinet Minister Trevor Mallard said the punch he threw at National MP Tau Henare is âone of the most stupid things I've ever done in my lifeâ and in a life full of them, that's saying something. The scuffle broke out in the parliamentary lobbies. Allegedly, Henare had made some snide remarks about Trevor Mallard's personal life, which is pretty nasty, but Mallard lost the plot and then promptly lost his Sports Minister portfolio and was demoted by then PM Helen Clark.
He was allowed to stay in cabinet, though, which some thought was very lenient on Helen Clarke's behalf, but she was always incredibly loyal to those who showed devotion to her, so I guess that's how he stayed and then went on to have a fabulous career and is now living on the pig's back in Ireland. Oh me, oh my. If only you'd been sacked then and there, it could have spared us a lot. But there we go.
That was a particularly unsavoury moment in parliamentary history. More recently, Nationals Tim Van de Molen was judged to be in contempt of Parliament after he was found to have threatened and intimidated Labour MP Shanan Halbert in a Transport committee hearing. He accepts he stood over him, Van de Molan stood over Halbert and generally behaved like an oak. He was censured effectively, a public telling off in the House of Parliament, and stripped of his portfolios by Christopher Luxon.
Now we have Green MP Julie Anne Genter committing a sin at least as egregious as Mallardâs, certainly, far more egregious than Van de Molen. By marching across the house and standing over National MP Matt Doocey, getting right up in his grills and behaving in a totally intimidating manner. She apologized and says she was trying to impart information.
What, by shoving it down his throat? It was completely unacceptable and over the top and I cannot believe that there are texters who are defending the behaviour, why? How, how can you defend that? It doesn't matter if she's a Green or if she's a woman, God, imagine if it was a man had done that. We all, we all know how bad that would have looked, even if Matt Doocey had stood up. He was probably just gob smacked because she was behaving completely irrationally. And when you're confronted like that, it's really quite shocking and you turn into a flight and fight response and the adrenaline surges cause you're thinking, what is the mad tart going to do next.
I cannot believe already there have been texts this morning saying, oh, come on, itâs fake news, you know. Bigger things to worry about. I don't think so. What is it about Transport Committee hearings that excites so much passion? Because that's what happened with Van de Molen and Halbert. And the last one, it was a transport committee. And here we had Simeon Brown answering questions from the floor.
I don't know how much the Debbie Francis review into bullying in Parliament cost, but it doesn't seem to have improved matters much, does it? Julie Anne Genter deserves all the censure Parliament can throw at her, as would any MP of any hue who behaved in that fashion?
And as an aside, she has taken the gloss of James Shaw's valedictory speech. He should be the ones getting the headlines. He should be the Green MP that everybody's talking about. He has shown dignity and professionalism throughout his career, and to have been upstaged by one of his own MPs, one of his own party members with her appalling lack of professionalism is extremely disappointing.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
-
Happy International Workers Day to all the labourers and workers out there. All right, brother. All right, sister. Dedicated to recognizing the contributions and achievements of workers worldwide and taking the opportunity to promote workers rights and opportunities so. Go us, all of us paid grunts.
MPs, would you consider them paid grunts? Not really public servants, sure, and reasonably well-paid public servants. Too much? Well, who decides that? The remuneration authority, that's who. A very good idea to leave the setting of certain public servants pay to an independent authority. And let's face it, it is never a right time for MPs to be accepting pay rises, they're on a hiding to nothing. Particularly tough, though, when the government has been calling for financial restraint when it's been calling for cost cutting in every government department. At a time when hundreds, if not thousands, of workers are being made redundant, you get the remuneration authority saying âlook time for a pay rise for MPs.â On a sliding scale, depending on what job you do. It doesn't matter that many of those who were sucking off the public tit shouldn't have been there anyway. That hiring spree in the last six months of â23 was an outrage. Redundancies are punishing and create uncertain times for those on the receiving end of a âdon't come Mondayâ.
The Remuneration Authority has announced pay rises backdated to October 2023 and coming in tranches through to 2026. It will be the first increase to MPs salaries since 2017 and the first major overview of the remuneration package since in about 20 years. The Prime Minister's salary will rise by almost $50,000 over six years, from $471k to $520k. Which you know, if you're the CEO of a big company, as he likes to see it, or if you're the Prime Minister, you probably wouldn't begrudge.
I don't think people begrudge the big money for the big job. It's when you look at some of the backbenchers from numerous parties that you start to get a little sniffy and a little bit, what about me-ism starts to creep in. The Prime Minister has said he'll donate the extra to charity, as has become almost customary.
So, what to do? What to do?
Now we can all say they don't deserve it, but that's not true. Some of them do deserve the money they get, be they a backbencher from any party, be they a minister, be they a leader of an opposition party, some of them work hard for the money. They understand the concept of public servant. They are there to do their best for their constituents, for their party, for the country. Some of them are underpaid. Others would be overpaid if they were on the dole.
So, what do you do? Would you do the job for the money? I heard the man from the Remunerations Authority saying, look, it's a matter of looking at what similar jobs pay in the private sector. It's a matter of attracting people to do the job and it's a matter of retention. Now, I know you've got to look for comparisons, but when it's attracting people to the job, you wouldn't do it for the money, would you? When you look at the hours they work, the scrutiny they're under, the pressure they're under, the meetings they have to sit through, the numpties they have to listen to. I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't be in a backbench MP. Not for the money. I might do it if I thought I could add something and help create a New Zealand that's fair and just in the way I want to see it, but I certainly wouldn't do it for the money.
As for retention, quite frankly that's not up to a wage band, that's up to a voter. If you're doing a good job, you'll be retained. The voters will vote you back in. It's got nothing to do with the money.
So, when it comes to the backbenches, some of them are overpaid, massively, given what they do, others are underpaid. If you look at the work of the ministers, I think it's too soon to tell from the current government as to whether theyâre value for money.
The last lot? Well. You know my views on that. Very few of them I think could have commanded a ministerial salary in the private sector, and I'd be really interested to find out from those who have left Parliament, got bundled out of Parliament, what they're doing now and whether they're earning anywhere near as much as they were earning as a minister. Somehow, I doubt it. Other than Grant Robertson, who managed to land himself, get his trotters inpossibly the biggest trough in the country, 600 odd thousand at the Otago University.
They're on a hiding to nothing. Well, how else do we set their pay? An independent authority does it? They haven't had a pay rise since 2017. It's the wrong time to do it. Absolutely the wrong time to do it. When is the right time? We get value for money for some, not for the others. And still again, the question: would you do it for any money?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
- Vis mere
