Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

This year’s local government elections have seen the lowest voter turnout in 36 years, with less than a third - or 32% - bothering to have their say. Of those who did, the contrast between the urban rural divide was stark. In metro areas, only 28.8% cast their votes, provincial people made up 38.3% while rural turnout was 43.6% Local Government New Zealand says it is clear local elections have to change urgently - they'd like  to see a voter turnout of at  least 80%. University of Otago Law Professor Andrew Geddis told Kerre Woodham that moving away from postal ballots could be the way forward.  'We can't keep using postal ballots because the postal service is disintegrating.'  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dame Wendy Pye is one of the most successful businesspeople in New Zealand. She’s a rich-lister, her publishing company Sunshine Books has sold over 300 million books worldwide, she's met countless more world leaders, and she was the first living woman to be inducted into the New Zealand Business Hall of Fame.   But it hasn’t all been easy. Dame Wendy has gone through a life changing redundancy, legal battles, and had many deals that couldn't be closed.   She joined Newstalk ZB's Kerre Woodham in studio for the first episode of Bosses Unfiltered.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Orini Kaipara gave her maiden speech in Parliament yesterday, and she's just the sort of person you want to see entering politics – she's young, she's smart, she's passionate. And I don't know about you, but I love seeing an electorate MP, somebody who has been overwhelmingly selected by voters, given a mandate by voters to be their person in Parliament, as opposed to sliding in on the list.   But when she agreed to enter Parliament, surely she is agreeing then to the rules and conventions that govern Parliament. Her maiden speech focused on the importance of te reo and that we must respect and honour everybody, despite the colour of their skin, despite the language that they speak. All well and good.   But the message was marred by a number of violations of House rules. Her maiden speech ran well over time, causing clear frustration for Speaker Gerry Brownlee. Maiden speeches are allocated 15 minutes of Parliament's time, and Kaipara's went well over that.   "This is not on," the Speaker thundered, as he rang the bell for a third time to signal she had run out of time for her speech. I have no doubt she felt moved to tell the House and her supporters what it had taken to get her there, what inspired her, her reason for being there.   But every maiden MP has a story. Every maiden MP from every party has a group of people who have guided them to where they are today and their very, very real reasons for being there. Kaipara's are important, but no more important than any other MPs from any other party in the House.   Then, after a waiata and a haka followed her overlong speech, Gerry Brownlee had enough and suspended the House. He had given permission for a waiata, but not a haka. Permission has to be sought before you can do either. And before anyone jumps up and down and says a haka should be able to be performed anytime, anywhere, whenever the wairua takes you, rules are rules, man.   As Brownlee put it, when the House resumed after half an hour, "We have a protocol here. This is our tikanga. That tikanga is based on agreement." He said there'd been no agreement for the haka, nor for the speech to go on and on as it did. And he said he was going to investigate whether the haka had been spontaneous —I suspect it was, that's what you do at graduation ceremonies and the like and as a sign of enormous respect— or planned by a political party. He says for people to decide they are not going to participate in that process, they put themselves very firmly in contempt of Parliament.   Would Te Pāti Māori members accept breaches of protocol on the marae? Continued breaches of protocol? I doubt it – especially if they were deliberate. Ignorance you can kind of accept. It's annoying that people don't know the rules of your church or your golf club or your marae or your Parliament, but hey ho, that's life. Gentle correction and people are back on course. Continual breaches, when you know better, it's a different story. That's contempt. If a person or a group of people continually stick two fingers to your organisation and the way you do things, would you keep them in that organisation?   So what does the Speaker do about Te Pāti Māori, who have made it abundantly clear time and time again that they simply do not respect the values and the rules of Parliament? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A former Speaker of the House is reiterating the importance of the rules of Parliament after a haka disrupted proceedings.  The House was suspended last night, after a haka broke out in the public gallery, following Te Pati Māori MP Oriini Kaipara's maiden speech.  Speaker Gerry Brownlee said the agreement was that a haka was not to take place.  Former speaker Sir Lockwood Smith told Kerre Woodham rules are there for good reason.  He says there are plenty of opportunities for culture to be expressed, but it has to be done in accordance with the rules and agreements with the Speaker.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Reserve Bank's continuing to walk a fine line, with its move to cut the OCR 50-basis points to 2.5%.  Economic data suggests inflation has now hit 3%.  Finance Minister Nicola Willis is blaming rising rates, saying they’re having a disproportionate impact on overall inflation, whereas other sectors are stabilising.  NZ Herald Business Editor Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham we almost seem to be in a self-fulfilling negative spiral.  He says we should be feeling better, but we aren't, and then we start questioning ourselves and the economy.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hopes for an economic recovery have been given a significant boost by yesterday's decision from the Reserve Bank to frontload cuts to the official cash rate. The RBNZ delivered a 50 basis point cut to the OCR and indicated it was prepared to cut again in November if required. After that, they're kind of starting to run out of ammo.    Dropping mortgage interest rates though is not the panacea to cure all economic ills. Mortgage holders account for around a third of households. So of all the households in New Zealand, one third are paying mortgages. Two thirds, those who rent and those who've paid off their homes, and who are watching in horror as interest rates on their savings accounts plummet, do not have mortgages.   Is the country's economy really going to be invigorated because a third of householders will see their mortgage reduced by a few hundred to a $1,000 a month? It'll be a good start, I suppose. And the 50 point cut will cut the costs of those with business loans, most of those are on floating rates, but what businesses really want to see is not reduced costs, but increased spending, increased revenue, and that is only going to come with confidence in the economy.   I know a number of people who are seeing their mortgages coming onto a lower rate before the end of the year, but they're not planning a big spend up, even with Christmas on the horizon. They've been burned by the higher interest rates, and yes, yes, yes, I know Boomers had 22% and they managed and we don't know we're living, but it's all relative. It's much bigger mortgages. For many people seeing them go to 7 - 8% was a shock after mortgage interest rates were around 2%.   So they are coming onto a a lower rate, but they have been burned, and the increased cost of living has also scared them. They've run down their savings, and over the next few months they're going to pay a few bills, get ahead of the bills, and start stashing some money away in case there's another economic shock. Which is probably not what businesses want to hear.   Nor would the government be all that thrilled to hear that anecdotal story. They need people, they need us to start feeling better and soon, given the parlous state of the National Party's fortunes in the latest poll. They really need people to feel better. It's not good enough to say look at law and order, look at the ram raids, look at the changes we've made to education which are going to be the most positive thing we can do with our young people. Look at what we're doing with housing, increased housing which will bring the cost of first homes down. They can point to a whole lot of things that they have done and are doing and we're like, “ Still tough out there. It's really hard. You said we'd feel better. We don't." And that's what the polls are reflecting, so we need to start feeling better soon.    It's a tricky balancing act with the Reserve Bank trying to stimulate the moribund economy while at the same time keeping a weather eye out for inflation. And there are no absolute answers about what is right and what is wrong.  What is the best way to restore confidence?  Look at the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research. Their members know a bit about how economies work, and they have a monetary policy shadow board. They look at the same figures as the Reserve Bank monetary policy committee and they make their own decisions.  They look at monetary policy and come up with their reckons based on that. Their Monetary Policy Shadow Board recommended a 25 point basis cut, reflecting the view that excess capacity in the New Zealand economy provided scope for a small cut to support recovery and activity without affecting inflation.   Several of their members said that because of the much weaker than expected June quarter GDP, there should be a 50 basis point cut now. One said it should stay on hold, given the recent spike in inflation and the fact that the OCR cuts to date have yet to work through the economy.   Cities always recover last. Out on the farm, when they've got good prices, it slowly starts to trickle through, but the cities recover last. So stimulate but not too much.   Nicola Willis has directed her pointy finger in the direction of councils and says rates are having a disproportionate effect on inflation. Other sectors are stabilising but really, it's a confidence game, isn't it? We've got to feel confident and that we're not clawing our way through each and every pay cycle before we can start spending and businesses can start making profits. And voters have to feel confident and businesses have to start doing better before National can be confident about not being a one-term government. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A new report from the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists says the health of New Zealanders is declining.  It showed working age people reporting excellent health almost halved between 2011 and 2024, while psychological distress had increased among all adults.  The report called on the government to address and reverse the decline by investing in housing, poverty reduction, education, improved nutrition and physical activity, as well as a stronger commitment to addressing the impact of tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy food.  Hutt Hospital ED Specialist Dr Tanya Wilton told Kerre Woodham she sees people who have struggled to obtain adequate income, housing, and security, and it’s harder to eat and stay healthy when you don’t have the money to do so.   She says you can’t get away from those social determinants of health in terms of those key areas.  Tauranga-based Psychologist Mark Lawrence told Woodham that when it comes to psychological distress, the biggest challenge is a lack of extensive long-term investment to addressing societal stressors.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A new report says the health of New Zealanders is declining, and that it's costing us dearly- in the billions of dollars with more billions to come. The report, released by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists showed working-age people who reported they were in excellent health almost halved between 2011 and 2024, while psychological distress had increased amongst all adults. The report called on the government to address and reverse the decline by investing in housing and poverty reduction and education, improved nutrition, physical activity, as well as a stronger commitment to addressing the impact of tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food. If the trend continues, the report estimates that only 6.6% of adults will be in excellent health, while almost 20% would be in fair or poor health. How can this be so? What is the point of spending more on education when you know, and everybody knows, what we need to do to live a healthy life?  We have never been more aware of how to live a healthy life. We know how to do it. Whether we choose to do it is entirely another matter. Social media provides recipes for those who are on slim budgets. If you think, well, I don't know how to cook, there's Tik Tok and Instagram that will show you how to cook, or YouTube tutorials. If you say, "but I've only got this amount of money to spend on food", there are endless accounts that will show you what to do with meagre resources. You might not be able to afford the finest organic meats, most people can't. But there are ways of turning out nutritious food using the most basic ingredients. There are free exercise programmes for any exercise you care to think of. You can even walk barefoot around the block. You don't need special exercise gear or gym memberships or to belong to a swimming club or a Taekwondo club or a basketball club. There are so many ways that you can move if you want to. Why would we spend more on physical activity when people are choosing not to?  There are accounts that you can follow for free to assist you in coping with the world. If you're suffering from anxiety, there's anti-addiction programmes. There has never been a time where people have been more open in discussing mental health issues, where there's been greater acceptance of people who are struggling with mental health issues, where mental health days are a matter of course.  How can we be declining? How can you not know what is good for you and how you can improve your mental health and your physical health? Whether you want to or not is another matter.  I'm not pointing the finger, I'm looking at myself in the mirror. I knew the amount I was drinking wasn't healthy for me, but I did it anyway, until I stopped. Until I thought, no this can't go on. This is silly. You're fat, you're unhealthy, you're falling over, broke a bone, enough. And so you stop. But you do it until you don't.  I cannot believe that the kids that are going into the dairies before school that I used to see on my commute, who were buying the virulently coloured soft drink and the pie for breakfast, I cannot believe that they did not know that was an unhealthy breakfast. They know it's unhealthy, but they choose to do it.   You could throw all the money in the world at education programmes. Until people decide they're worth more, they deserve more in their life. They are the ones, individuals are the ones who have to decide for themselves that they deserve better in life, that they deserve to look after their bodies.  And I don't know how you do that. I would love to hear from you on this. Is there anybody in the world that doesn't know how to live a healthy life? It's all a matter of choice.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When I heard the Green Party co-leaders were holding a press conference yesterday, I thought fleetingly, ever the optimist, "Oh, they might be holding a press conference calling for the cessation of protests outside the home of a fellow parliamentarian."   Undoubtedly they'd couch it in greeny language – they would call out the Foreign Affairs Minister for his lack of courage at the UN, etc, etc, but ultimately they would make the point that protesting in a personal sphere is wrong, and they would call off the hounds and remind people that yes, we have a right to protest, but with that right comes responsibility and it is quite clearly irresponsible to make the attacks personal and bring the protest to the door of an MP's home. That's what I thought, fleetingly. But no, nothing of the sort.   In fact, it was a PR stunt for the flotilla to Palestine. No mention was made of the protesters outside Winston Peters' home. In fact, one of them was alongside the Green co-party leaders. Chlöe Swarbrick lectured us again about our responsibility to ensure the safety of the three New Zealand citizens detained by the Israeli government after the flotilla was intercepted, and that was that. A bit of tearful beseeching of the government to do something. Love for the detainees, and that was about it.   Can you imagine what would happen if Groundswell decided to protest Green policies, and they decided to take that protest to the door of Marama Davidson's home or Chlöe Swarbrick's home? I would be absolutely appalled, and I would demand they be arrested or leave immediately. There is absolutely no excuse for it. You might disagree vehemently with policies, you might think you have moral, intellectual, scientific right on your side, on the side of whatever argument you're putting forward, but there are standards and there are limits and there are boundaries.   The lot outside Winston's house, you're perfectly entitled to hold a point of view. You may well feel that you're on the right side of history. That does not give you carte blanche to invade a man's home, and that's exactly what you're doing, and that of his neighbours. The noise invading somebody's home. You know, if you have had really ugly neighbours who have made your life hell because of the noise they're making, It's an invasion. So too is the bloody rock through the window.   If anybody thinks that the new legislation around protests at people's homes is going to provide any protection at all for public figures, for anybody, think again. The bill is before the Justice Select Committee. Submissions on it closed yesterday, but critics say it's way too vague to do much good. Constitutional law expert Graeme Edgeler said as much to Mike Hosking this morning.   “There are offences which deal with this already. And I, my suspicion is that the new offence, that the draft, at least at the moment, is so complex, perhaps so difficult to prove, you know, was that the reason they're doing that? Was it, you know, just all the difficulties in proving it, that police may just continue to use the criminal offences that already exist, which kind of have the similar penalties.   “And when people aren't sure what's covered and it's a criminal offence, courts tend to err on the side of, well, if you wanted to make this clearly legal, you'd have done a better job of writing it. So if it's not clear, you tend to favour on the side of the criminal for criminal cases. And so, hopefully the government can sort of narrow this and fix it to cover exactly what it is they want. I mean, it's sort of protests near residential areas. I mean, Queen Street's got massive apartment buildings on it – are those residential areas and no protests down Queen Street? I mean, no one's going to apply the law that way. The police aren't going to apply that law that way. The courts aren't going to apply the law that way. And so it’s really going to do much of anything.”  No, it's not. So we're going to have to rely on existing laws to give people a measure of protection in their own homes. That and inculcating a sense of decency and fair play.   If anyone attempted to disturb or frighten or harass the Green Party co-leaders and members of their families in their own homes, it would be absolutely inexcusable. The Green Party co-leaders have pointed out how inexcusable the internet trolling and the abuses of their MPs, and indeed of other women MPs, but mainly theirs, but women MPs, non-gender specific MPs, they are absolutely ropeable about the level of vitriol and harassment and violent language being used against MPs on social media. What difference is it being outside somebody's home?   Absolutely no difference whatsoever. They are the first to point the digeridoo at people who have a different point of view and express it vocally and violently, and rightly so. Nobody should be subject to that. They want the police protection, they demand the people have a right to be safe and secure in their workplaces and to be able to do their jobs. What the hell do they think these people are doing? Their internet trolls come to life and on the backyard of the home of a fellow parliamentarian.   It would be absolutely inexcusable if they were experiencing the same thing from those who had a different political viewpoint. The weight of the law should come down upon any protesters who did that to them, and to these righteous, sanctimonious vandals outside Winston Peters' house. Any point they are trying to make is being drowned out by their own noise. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On the face of it, it seems tough. Telling young people to get out there and get a job when the economy is tanked and unemployment is high, is you'd think, unrealistic. From November of next year, young people wanting to get job seeker support or the equivalent emergency benefit will have to take a parental income test to see whether their parents can support them instead of the taxpayer.  About 4,300 18 and 19-year-olds were estimated to become ineligible for support, with 4,700 remaining eligible in the 27-28 financial year. As I said, this kicks in from November of next year, so from 2026. As of June, there were just over 15,000 18 and 19-year-olds on job seeker support.  It's a lot of young kids. There is no doubt it is difficult right now for young people to find work, to be taken on as apprentices. When the economy contracts, young people tend to be the first laid off, having fewer skills and less work experience. Last on, first off kind of thing. As well, they can be in casual or part-time employment, jobs that are more easily dispensed with.  But of course, look beyond the headlines. They're not being told to go out and find a job in a really tight labour market. They have to find a job, they have to be studying, or they have to be training. They have three options. What they can't be, according to this government and the Prime Minister, is reliant on the taxpayer.  The bigger issue here is we're trying to reset expectations with young people that you just can't partially attend school and then just drift on into unemployment benefit. And it is a bit of a reset for under 25s to say, I'm sorry, you're expected to get connected with work or employment or training or education.   $65,000, where do you why how do you land on that?  It's basically the income cut-out point for the supported living payment. And so it basically says if you're coming from very low-income families, we're exempting you. But we know it's quite low, but the reality is it puts the pressure back on parents to say get those young people into work or education.  That was Chrisopher Luxon, Prime Minister, talking to Mike Hosking this morning on the Mike Hosking Breakfast. A youth worker who was spoken to in relation to the story, to the announcement, said, and I quote, "I've never met a young person that doesn't want to find work." Really? You need to get out more. I think the vast majority of young people do want to work. They want to study, they want to train to be able to work so that they can become self-determining, to stand on their own two feet. Not all of them. We have had young people say as much on this show. Nature boy, anyone?   And you'd have to wonder about Barbecue Man, whether his children are fine upstanding productive citizens, because generally welfare dependency leads to welfare dependency and further down the generations it goes. There are fantastic stories of young people who were struggling, who got the kick up the bum they needed and managed to achieve beyond their wildest expectations.  One of the owners of a New World supermarket started life as a trolley boy in Whakatāne when his mum said, "If you're not going to go to school, you are getting a job. You are not staying under my roof and not contributing." "Oh, I can't find an apprenticeship." Well, get any job, she said. And he started life as a trolley boy. And one thing led to another. He discovered not only did he actually like work, he was actually productive and respected by his peers, he was really good at it, to the extent that he ended up owning his own supermarket.  And I could not agree more with Rod Bell, Chief Operating Officer for Blue Light, who spoke to Mike too this morning.  The big danger is if a young person starts down the track where a benefit becomes part of their life, as the stat shows, that they end up probably at least a minimum of 18 years of their life on the benefit.  That's amazing.   Yeah, we want to break that. You break that once and you've actually paid then probably for 20 people. So financially it makes a huge sense, but for anybody, they want to have worth and worth is doing something positive and proactive, whether it's work or training or education is what will make people feel better about themselves and make a difference to the young people.  Absolutely. And it's that stat that's really really hard to read that if you are a kid that goes straight onto a benefit out of school that you might have been attending haphazardly, you've got no habit of getting up and being somewhere presentable, ready to go, because you haven't been attending school. It's been a very haphazard, spotty, patchy attendance record.  The number of people I've spoken to in the Far North who want to give young people jobs to the extent that they kit them out in the clothing they'll need for the job, they'll drive to their house, they will get them out of bed, get them into the shower them, get them into the van, take them into work, pay well above minimum wage, and the kids don't last a week. I haven't heard of one success story. This is only anecdotal, but not one success story in the Far North. It didn't used to be like this.  If you come from a family where work is what's expected of you, then you work. I could no more have imagined going on the DPB than flying to the moon.  When I found myself pregnant, I wasn't unable to work, I was just pregnant. When I had the baby, I worked. You know, it's tough and it's it's tough for two parents and it's tough for one parent, and not everybody can, but I worked because the idea of not working is completely alien to who I am and where I've come from.  But for people who think that it's actually legitimately okay to leave school or sort of drift away from school, I don't think it's anything quite so dramatic as leaving school, and not do anything, not study, not train, not volunteer, not work, that's come from somewhere.  And you have to take a long hard look in the mirror if you've got kids that think they can go onto a DPB or onto a benefit and that's the level of their aspiration.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.