Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

They say when one door closes, another one opens.   That’s certainly been the case for Lisa King. In the same breath she closed her first business Eat My Lunch and started a drinks brand AF Drinks. AF stands for alcohol free - and it's a range of booze free cocktails. The brand has picked up on a huge rise in people who want to drink less or not at all.   It’s a change not just seen in New Zealand, but across the world. Within two years in the US market, AF Drinks are now available in 4000 stores in America.  Lisa King joined Kerre Woodham in studio for the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Extreme winds are battering Wellington, Wairapa and the South Island.  Winds of up to 150km/h are expected today as red strong wind warnings are in place for much of the South Island's eastern regions and southern parts of the North Island.  More than 100 flights have been cancelled, along with some of the planned strikes in tehe affected areas.   Transpower Executive General Manager of Grid Delivery Mark Ryall told Kerre Woodham that three the Canterbury to Nelson power lines 'trip out' due to the extreme weather.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Talkback isn't really the place for good news. Generally, it's a forum where we can vent our respective spleens, express our frustrations, have a good old moan, and yes, we do share stories and we exchange information, but mainly it's to bristle about things that we feel aren't going right and could be better. Good news, we tend to think that, oh, good, yes, things are back on track. They've listened to what we have to say, and things are as they should be, and then you don't bother phoning in because you just think, well, that's as it should be.   But the news that youth offending has come down dramatically is simply too good not to share. Especially given the amount of bristling that went on when it was at its peak. There has been a 16% reduction in children and young people with serious and persistent offending behaviour. And if you take that number and think of it as children, as young people, whose lives are now not going to be blighted and off course and may stay off course forever, these are lives that have been saved, pretty much. Minister for Children Karen Chhour said in her press release, "I am proud to announce that the government's target has not only been achieved but surpassed." The target's been reached four years early in terms of bringing youth offending down. She should be proud. She really should be. As should the government agencies involved in short-circuiting the trajectory of these young people's lives. Youth crime, you will recall, was an absolute blight back in 2022/2023. Prior to then, it had been steadily declining both here and the Western world over, over the past decade, and nobody really knows why, but youth offending had come down. But then along came Covid, and post-Covid, with all the isolation that was caused, all the rules being up in the air, lack of consequences for anyone at the time, given the be kind, be nice attitude, schools being closed,parents going quietly mad in some parts of the country, child offending went nuts. It was a campaign issue. People were absolutely fed up to the back teeth with youth ram raids, with parents taking their kids out in the middle of the night to steal and rob other people's homes. Remember all that terrible footage of the time from people's home security cameras where you'd see the cars pull up and these littlies of 9-10 years old, in their pyjamas, getting out and doing the robbing for their gutless, malevolent, evil caregivers? It was absolutely shocking. And the waste of young lives was just cruel. But now, and to be fair, it is building on what the previous government started with the multi-agency approach. Youth crime has come down and it's come down dramatically. The Minister for Children Karen Chhour was on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning explaining just why it's dropped. Some of it is young people no longer believe that they can avoid this accountability. I'm hearing it all across our communities, that they know that there's going to be consequences if they're caught. Other parts of it are better coordination between courts, Oranga Tamariki and police. And then we've taken some of the learnings from the military style academy pilot and put better investment into transitional support for young offenders coming out of youth justice. And we're investing in a number of safety and quality improvements to facilities in youth justice residences. So there's a lot of work that's been going on in the background, all around rehabilitation and making sure we are helping these young people be the best versions of themselves. This is good for them, and it's good for our community. Absolutely. I could not agree more. And when you think of the flak that poor woman took from Māori MPs in Labour and Te Pāti Māori, who accused her of not being Māori enough and being a traitor to her race and all. She has done more to help children , to help because unfortunately Māori children were overrepresented in the youth offending stats. She has done more to help them than they have done with their posturing and their infighting and their race baiting. She has made more practical difference to the lives of kids who didn't have a show when they're born to parents who just use them as tools in their offending because they know, and knew then, that there wouldn't be any consequences. Now there are. So bloody hats off to her. And good on her for staying focused on the kids, which was the reason she got in to Parliament, rather than being distracted and put off . She stuck in there because she believed in what she was doing and she believed as a child of state agencies herself, she wanted to make a difference for the kids, and she really has. And again, there's many reasons for that. It's building on what was started under the previous government who thought, bloody hell, we can't go on like this - the multi-agency approach proved to be very effective and that is continued. But if you also look at truancy - the data shows rising attendance every term since David Seymour made it his mission to get kids back into the classroom. In term two of 2025, 58.4% of students attended school regularly. In 2022, that was 39%. There's been a huge increase in the number of kids going to school.  It wasn't the school lunches that got them there. That was the carrot. I thought it would. I really did. I thought, yes, go the school lunches, starving kids, desperate kids will go to school and they'll turn up and they'll learn because they'll be fed and they'll see school as a safe place. No, didn't happen. What happened was a a carrot and a stick approach. An expectation that you will turn up for school. And if you're behind your desk, you're not behind the wheel of a stolen car, are you? This is good news. It's not perfect. There's still room for improvement. I'm not entirely sure about the boot camps, we haven't seen any figures from those, but that multi-agency approach is working. The expectation that kids will be in school is working. The fact that there are consequences for offending is working. This has got to be good news.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Labour released some policies yesterday. Very late in the piece, and you can kind of see why. Just like that, we're back to 2017 with a cut and paste of lofty rhetoric, promises to spend lots of money, and little to no detail. It's a dud, I think it's fair to say. And it's not just me saying that. Oh, we'd expect you to say that, you hate Labour. No, I don't hate Labour. I just hate really, really dumb ideas. I hate the fact that they think that we're all idiots. I hate the fact that they're relying on the fact we have short memories. I hate the fact that apparently, they have been working on this idea since 2017, and this is all they can come up with. When you have Radio New Zealand's political analysts calling it a flop, it’s a flop. You know, they are about as sympathetic as you can possibly get. Basically, if you missed it yesterday, it was the announcement of a Future Fund. The Future Fund will sit alongside and be operated by the New Zealand Super Fund, with the Minister of Finance acting as the sole shareholder. Chris Hipkins (and this terrifies me), Chris Hipkins said the policy would be one of the cornerstones of the next Labour government. We want to back New Zealand businesses and invest in New Zealand. We need to see more of our wealth being invested back here in New Zealand rather than flowing overseas. So by using some of our existing public assets, our existing state assets, putting them into a Future Fund, using the returns from them to reinvest in growing New Zealand businesses, we can create jobs and keep more wealth here at home. You're putting in $200 million in cash. Are you also putting in assets? That's right. So we're not being specific right now on which companies, which, you know, existing companies would go in because there are market disclosure issues and so on. Some of those are pub, you know, partially publicly listed companies. But we'll set all of that out in government.  Set all of that out in government. Just trust us. We're not going to give you any detail. We'll just trust us to fix it in government. There is so much wrong with this thought bubble policy, I don't know where to start, so I'll let Chris Bishop do it. I thought it was a bit of a brain fart put to paper. I mean, honestly, like I had a read of it. Like my like there's more detail on my Uber Eats order than there is in what they've put in their document. I mean, honestly, it's just it's 11 pages - three of them are photos. One of them is like something that you take out of a clip art manual and chuck on the front page. I mean, honestly, it's there's nothing there. No, there's not. As Nat Rad said, Labour is most vulnerable to the criticism around the thin details, as it feeds National's well-established attack line that Labour is all slogans, no substance.  The policy documents came with no figures and no list of assets. And that glib Chris Hipkins, ‘I will fix that in government’, really? How did that work out last time? Not so well. To think that Grant Robertson began work on the Future Fund in 2017. Even allowing for the COVID years, that is the best they can do. Another concern is, as the PM pointed out, those crown assets provide profits that fund health and education. If the money is being diverted to the fund, where will the shortfall in funding come from? Probably increased taxation.  And that's fine, but give us the details so that we can then make an assessment on it. If you're going to get the extra funding through a capital gains tax or through raising income tax or whatever - tell us, and then we can decide whether that's where we want the money to go. Is there even a need for this fund to back New Zealand businesses? What is this trope that, plucky little New Zealanders have to have a stake in amazingly successful New Zealand businesses? The CEO of Icehouse was on with Mike this morning, and he pointed out that capital investors are always available for good ideas. There is no shortage of professional investors awash with money who know a good idea when they see one and will pay for it. Is it the government's business to be picking winners when it comes to SMEs? Didn't work with the DFC, which was created in the 60s, the Development Finance Corporation, to support industrial development in New Zealand through loans and equity. It failed spectacularly in the late 80s, costing the country billions.   Pattrick Smellie from BusinessDesk says Labour's claim that their future fund is comparable to Singapore's state investment house Temasek is completely and utterly unsustainable. Temasek has a mandate to trade in its assets and to invest offshore. Labour's proposal doesn't contemplate, he says, either of those things. He writes, the party remains wedded to an approach to public ownership that traps New Zealand in restricted choices about capital deployment, constrained returns, and a strategic straitjacket that says if the state already owns something, it should automatically continue to do so. The real concern here is that Labour is not worried about what informed commentators, like Pattrick Smellie, have to say about its policies. They don't care. Because they know that the vast majority of the voting public don't care. They're backing on people having short memories of its complete and utter ineptitude and failure to deliver on almost every metric the last time it was in government. All people know right now is that they're hurting. They're still hurting. This coalition government isn't setting them a fire. This coalition government promised a lot and really has yet to deliver. And I, you know, I know it's going to take time. But Labour is quite right to back on the fact that the vast majority of people just don't care. They won't read the detail. They won't even know that there is detail to look for. They won't even know that there is no detail. I think Pattrick Smellie put it brilliantly too. “The Labour proposal of the Future Fund suggests either that the party is economically illiterate or that its target audience is presumed to be”. Which is so true. The Future Fund criticises New Zealand Super Fund for only investing 11% of its assets in New Zealand. As Pattrick Smellie points out, the reason for that, and you know and I know, but the vast majority don't, is that the Super Fund's job is to fund pensions and get the best possible results from its investable capital, which means not overexposing itself to a small, vulnerable economy like New Zealand's. It is basic risk management. But no, this cornerstone of the next Labour government criticises the Super Fund for not investing all of the funds in New Zealand.   It is really concerning if this is the best they can do. They know that everybody who cares has been waiting to hear what its policy is going to be so we can compare and contrast. The coalition government has not set us on fire -okay, let's see what Labour can do. Wow. That's it. That is simply not good enough, and it is quite frankly, for those of us who care, terrifying.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Annual inflation has risen to a 15-month high of 3%.  Economists had been expecting inflation to reach or surpass the 3% upper limit of the Reserve Bank's target band.  The central bank's expected to look past this current spike when it reviews the OCR next month.  New Zealand Herald Business Editor-at-large Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham that, “this this drip feeding of the rate cuts means that everybody just waits.”   LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Beneficiaries who break the Government's job hunt rules face more intensive sanctions to prove they are hunting for employment.  From today, they will be required to report on at least three job search activities a week and participate in four weeks of training courses.  Minister for social development and employment Louise Upston told Kerre Woodham that the rules are for people, “who aren't doing their best, who aren't fulfilling their responsibilities, and this is a non-financial consequence of their inaction.”  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand's first sports school will open next year, in a partnership with Wellington Phoenix.  The New Zealand Performance Academy in Upper Hutt will operate as a charter school for serious aspiring sportspeople.  The academy will initially offer elite football training alongside the Wellington Phoenix Academy, as well as rugby training.  New Zealand Performance Academy Aotearoa Board Member Brett O’Riely told Kerre Woodham that, “a lot of the momentum came from the students and parents.”  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New rules come into force for job seekers today, as the government continues efforts to get more young people off a benefit and into work. It's a very worthwhile enterprise. Do not let young people drift onto a benefit because there they will stay for around about 18 years, which is a hell of a life to condemn any young person to. Hang on a minute though, weren't there sanctions announced in May? You're right, there were. They targeted beneficiaries with money management and community work sanctions if they failed to meet one of their obligations, which involved preparing for or looking for work.  But wait, there's more. Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston has announced that from today, beneficiaries failing an obligation for the first time will face two new rules. They are to undertake and report on a minimum of three job search activities every week for four weeks.  There is now a requirement to attend and participate in one or more employment-related training courses or programs for a minimum of five hours per week over four weeks. Lot of numbers, lot of stats, but it's basically saying you've got to show that you're looking for work, you've got to show that you're willing to train yourself up to be ready for work.  The two non-financial sanctions will operate under the traffic light system. If you're at green, you're on track and meeting your obligations. Orange, you move to orange if you don't meet your obligations and you don't have a good reason. And if you don't contact Social Development agencies and get back on track within five working days when you're on orange, you move to red, and once you're at red, your benefit will reduce or stop.  Upston was at pains to point out that fewer than 2% of beneficiaries are on orange or red light settings. That's a tiny proportion of people who are on benefits, and the overwhelming majority of job seekers are meeting their obligations.  So that's the info around the new standards, the new expectations of people who are receiving a benefit and looking for work.  And I have no problem with people being expected to look for work when they are able to, and when they're receiving the dole. My only gripe is that these sanctions would have been really good when our borders were closed and employers were screaming for workers to do anything and everything.  Remember the number of employers from all over the country that were phoning and saying, "Please, for the love of all that's holy, if you can stagger out the door and to our front gate, we'll offer you a job. We'll offer you all kinds of incentives and bonuses to come and work for us." They were being crippled because they could not find workers. That would have been the time for the sanctions. In '21 and '22, you could have had your choice of jobs.  But now our unemployment rate is the highest it's been since the Covid shutdowns, 5.2% in three months ending June. Unemployment has been rising due to the weak economy and the lack of business confidence.  Employers are nervous about expanding their operations, growing their business. The uncertainty over a consistent affordable power supply has seen manufacturers shutter their businesses or scale them down, meaning more people looking for work.  And some regions of the country have been absolutely savaged. Looking at you, the Central North Island, Tokoroa, Nelson.  Let me be perfectly clear, to channel the Prime Minister. These sanctions are only going to affect the very worst of the malingerers, and precious few of those.  People who have been in work want to be in work again. They know the value of earning their keep. But getting back into work right now is not entirely the responsibility of the job seeker, I would argue.  The government has to give employers sufficient confidence to grow their businesses and to therefore grow their workforce. To paraphrase, build the economy and the workers will come.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Rod Duke has been selling things since he was 16. First shoes, then appliances, and eventually homewares and sportswear.   Born in Adelaide, Duke came to New Zealand in 1988 to spruce up a flailing Briscoes for sale. Two years later he scored the best Briscoes deal ever, he bought the whole company himself for $2.   He ended up with 12 shabby stores, where dusty wine glasses were sitting on the shelf for $2.71 each.   But it didn’t take long for Duke to turn the business around. Today, there are almost 100 Briscoes and Rebel Sports stores around the country, and Briscoes is a listed company that’s been defying the odds of the economic downturn.  The Briscoes boss unpacks it all with Kerre Woodham on the latest episode of Bosses Unfiltered.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I can't think of much worse than being labelled a child abuser, a child pornographer. It's such an abhorrent, vile, aberrant perversion of a crime. All crime is evil. But when it involves children, there's something particularly sickening about it.  Those who collect images of babies and children being sexually abused, in my opinion, are as culpable for the torture of these children as the men and women who actually inflict the damage. They deserve a special place in hell. And let's face it, the next world may be the only place where true justice will be delivered, because justice doesn't often get delivered in this world.  Last month, a member of an affluent New Zealand family convicted of having extreme child abuse material gave $50,000 and a bit of change to charities days before he was due to be sentenced.  The judge worked out his sentence this way: a starting point of five and a half years imprisonment with no mitigating features to his offending. So five and a half years, I think that's a bit light, given that without sick creeps like him, there wouldn't be an industry in child abuse, but there we go.  So five and a half years is the starting point. Then we get a 25% discount for the early guilty plea, 5% for remorse, 10% for rehabilitation attempts. He's had 50 one-on-one counselling sessions, and isn't he lucky he comes from an affluent family, so he can afford them, there was a further 3% reduction to represent the donations he made, for previous good character, there was another 5% discount. And the judge also outlined his long history of mental unwellness. ADHD and referred to a traumatic incident the man had suffered. For these factors, his sentence was reduced by a further 8%. An overall discount of 56%. He ended up with two years and five months imprisonment. He'll be out in no time. The man was automatically placed on the child sex offenders register. So that's good, isn't it? Because then you'll be able to find out who he is and if he's going to be working around children again, or if you decide to take up with him because he seems like a well-presented educated man and you're single and he's single, and oh, then you find out he's on the child sex offenders register.  But no, the man's name, his family's name and their high-profile company were permanently suppressed.  As we all know, nature abhors a vacuum, and human nature abhors a vacuum when it comes to information on offenders from prominent families. So, if the court won't name him, the internet will. And it doesn't matter if they get the wrong person because the internet's the wild west and no one's accountable. If the court's not going to give us the right person, well, bugger it. We'll just go out and we'll name everybody. Anybody and everybody, even if they're not 46. Even if they're not in prison. We'll just name them anyway. I simply do not believe anything I read or see on the socials. Mainstream media gets it wrong all the time, but at least we are accountable. If we go out and name Wayne Wright Jr or Matt Mowbray as the prominent New Zealander with child abuse material, we have to retract, we have to expunge the content off the internet, we have to apologise, we have to pay enormous fines.  Spreaders of disinformation on the net don't have to do a thing. And so anyone and everyone can be named and shamed, and if you come from a prominent or an affluent family, and a member of your ilk, your social cohort has received name suppression, well, you're in the firing line.  Same if you're a prominent sportsperson. They use the term prominent sportsman or prominent sportsperson, if you've once played pickleball for a masters age group tournament in Noosa. They use it for just about everybody and everything. So anybody who's ever played sport at any level, could be included as a prominent sportsperson.  In the case of this child abuser, Wayne Wright Jr and Matt Mowbray have already had to come out and declare they are not and have never been in any way linked to anything to do with child harm. They've got nothing to do with it.  Both of them have been named through social media, despite the fact that neither of them is in fact 46 and neither of them is in fact in custody. You think that might be a stumbling block for those on the net, but no.  Both of them have also come out and said people convicted of sexual offenses against children should never ever have name suppression, and they should not. They are quite right on that. I think name suppression is used far too often. I can understand it being used in the early days of a trial when somebody has been charged. It gives people time to tell the family or do whatever it is they have to do, but then once they're sentenced, no.  I think the bar is very low for permanent name suppression right now. And if you are convicted of sex offenses against children, why? Why should you have name suppression?  There are far fewer affluent families than there used to be, given the cost of living crisis that, you know, brings it down to a very small pool of people, so the wild speculation will continue.  So the courts have got it wrong when it comes to suppression, but people should also have a really healthy scepticism of anything that is said about anyone on social media, I simply do not believe anything until I've tested about three or four different sources, or until I'm stepping over the people who are supposed to be involved in the illicit act or you see the court papers. It's getting harder and harder to trust anyone or anything. And while we have the name suppression being applied willy-nilly, way too liberally, this kind of rank disinformation is going to be spread. You know, and it's fine when it's somebody else, but what about when you, you're the subject of the TikTok rumours, how do you defend your name when you haven't done a thing? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.