Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

The state of Palestine is recognised as a sovereign nation by 157 UN member states, and that represents 81% of members. New Zealand is not one of them. Not yet. Like Singapore, like Japan, Germany, South Korea, most Pacific states. New Zealand says, oh, sure, we support recognition, just not yet. Winston Peters, in his speech to the UN over the weekend, said Palestine did not meet the traditional benchmarks for state recognition. But as the Herald's Audrey Young points out in her column, Palestine is a unique and complex situation, not a post-colonial independence state where it's easier to apply the markers of statehood. I don't even know where to begin on this because so much damage has been done by so many people over so many years. Starting with the British who kicked off the whole mess more than 100 years ago with the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, 77 years after the creation of Israel and the British mandate of Palestine. And you've got to look to the various governments led by Benjamin Netanyahu, who have propped up Hamas, to try and prevent President Mahmoud Abbas or anyone else in the Palestinian Authority's West Bank government from achieving its goal of a Palestinian state. As the Israeli Times put it, thanks to Netanyahu, in the bid to hobble Abbas, Hamas was upgraded from a mere terror group to a legitimate organisation with which Israel held indirect negotiations, and one that was allowed to receive infusions of cash from abroad.  Winston Peters in his speech said recognising Palestine just gave Hamas more metaphorical ammunition in the propaganda war without actually improving the lot of the poor benighted souls who live there. With a war raging, Hamas still in place, and no clarity on next steps, we do not think that time is now. Recognising Palestine now will likely prove counterproductive. That is, Hamas resisting negotiation in the belief that it is winning the global propaganda war. Well, it kind of is, when you've got 81% of the UN recognising Palestine as a state, when you have image after image of those children starving in the arms of their mothers. It kind of is. And although we might think no one cares about what we do as a nation, Israel will use this. It needs to take what it can get in terms of international support. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has killed more than 66,000 Palestinians across Gaza. On the 7th of October 2023, of course, Hamas attacked Israel, killing about 1,200 people, taking 251 hostages, and there are 47 Israeli hostages still held in the most appalling, you can't even imagine what kind of conditions they're being held in captivity. Hamas justified the attack knowing full well what would happen, knowing exactly what was going to happen. They justified the attack because of what it sees as decades of Israeli oppression, the killing of Palestinians, and the years-long blockade of the Gaza Strip. Of course, you've also got Egypt who's complicit in that. They also said their attack on Israelis had put the plight of the Palestinians on the world's political agenda.  It was necessary, they said, to raise an alarm in the world, to tell them that here, there is a people who have a cause and have demands that must be met. So they launched an all-out attack on Israelis at a music festival to raise the alarm to the world. They felt that the ends justified the means. That by killing these people, knowing full well the wrath and the fire and the brimstone that would come down upon the Palestinian state, to raise alarm and attention.  Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour says he's proud of the fact that New Zealand hasn't the hasn't followed the mob. I mean, why say anything? It seems extraordinary that the best chance of attaining peace in that desperate strip of land that has the same population of New Zealand living in a total land area of 6,000 square kilometres, we are 268,000 square kilometres, to give you some kind of context - 5 million of them jammed into 6,000 square kilometres, we've got 268,000 square kilometres - but it seems extraordinary that the best chance of attaining peace now rests on the shoulders of Donald Trump. The Trump administration has proposed a 21-point Gaza peace plan that calls for all hostages held by Hamas to be released within 48 hours of an agreement and sets out a road map for Gaza once the war ends, looking at a two-state solution. US President Donald Trump has voiced optimism about resolving the conflict, saying on Friday they are very close to the deal, speaking out at the Ryder Cup as well, saying that he hoped for a solution and you can only hope and pray that in this, Donald Trump is right.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Good news for renters as prices are on the decline.  At least a third of those taking out new tenancies this year are paying less in rent than the prior tenants, according to Ministry of Housing and Urban Development data.  TradeMe Property has also seen rents fall, with supply outstripping demand. They say the market is offering more options and less competition.   New Zealand Property Investors Federation President Peter Ambrose told Kerre Woodham the reason behind increased supply is twofold.  He says there’s been a fair bit of new construction coming onto the market, and at the same time, people are increasingly leaving major cities and the country itself.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you're a renter, it's jolly good news. At least a third of people taking out new tenancies this year are paying less rent than the tenants who lived there before them.   According to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, for new tenancies since January 1, 30% were paying weekly rent lower than the initial weekly rent for the previous tenancy at that address. The data used a 500-day limit between the start of the last tenancy and the start of the newest tenancy, which gave a sample of around 33,000 homes, so, you know, a fairly sizable sample.   Trade Me Property has also seen rents fall as supply outstrips demand. According to Trade Me Property, after a period of record highs in 2024, we're now seeing a market that offers more options and less competition, which is driving prices down in most regions.   Nationally, rental listings on Trade Me Property were up 13% year on year in July, while demand fell 19%. Wellington recorded the largest drop. The median weekly rent there fell $50 or 7.7% to $600 compared with July of 2024. Wellington also saw a 27% rise in rental stock and a 6% fall in demand. Auckland's median weekly rent dropped $20 to $660 in July. And most other regions also saw rents go down, except for Southland, Nelson-Tasman and Taranaki. Southland hit a record high of $500 a week – what's happening in Southland? Taranaki climbed 3.3% to $620, so you'd be paying more for rent than you would be if you were renting in Wellington.    So what does all that mean for landlords? Yesterday, I read an email from Bob, which in part said the tax cuts should never have happened except for the most needy. And I received a text in response saying, well, remind Bob, Kerre, that are rents not the lowest they've been for years? Is that not a direct result of the tax clawback for landlords? Well, I don't know, is it? Is it the fact that landlords can now get the rebate and claim for expenses? Does that mean that is being passed on to tenants, or is it simply that supply is outstripping demand, and when supply outstrips demand, prices fall, which is a fundamental principle of the law of supply and demand. Is that what it is?   There are more places to rent available, new builds, perhaps people holding on to their homes but renting them out while they either go overseas or go into a retirement village or whatever it is they've decided to do, holding on to the homes and renting them out while they wait for the property market to recover. I don't know.    The texter says it's because of the tax clawbacks for landlords and that's why we've seen the drop in rent. I'd love to know from landlords if that is in fact the case. And I'd love to hear from renters. Are you able now to do some horse trading over the rent? Instead of taking a number and going to the back of a very, very long line, waiting to get into see an overpriced piece of mouldy tat, are you now being able to be a bit more selective? And if you're in a place you like, are you able to negotiate for a better rent? Now, when your lease comes up, you say, yes, I'd like to stay here, but given the state of the property market, could I pay a bit a little bit less?   I also wonder whether when times got tough, the part-time landlords, the ones that been felt the pressure to get onto the property ladder and save for your retirement, thanks to all the ads we played, buying up investment properties. It wasn't really your bag, it wasn't really your thing, you just thought you had to do it, otherwise you'd be missing out. Is that another reason that the part-time landlords got out of the business, leaving only the professional landlords there now? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New Zealand Inc. is in trouble and it's on us —you and me— to fix it. Not politicians, not economists, not even our blessed farmers who've got us out of trouble time and time again – it is on us, New Zealand voters.  It doesn't matter whether we vote left or right, red, blue, green, yellow, or black. We all have to give our political parties the cojones they need to enact the policies that will save this country. Treasury's been warning us for years now, decades. Current government policies —whichever government has been in— are not sustainable.  Treasury's 2025 long-term fiscal statement says population ageing is going to put unbearable pressure on New Zealand's long-term fiscal position. You know this. If you know anything about news, if you know anything about New Zealand politics, if you know anything about New Zealand society, you know this to be true.  ANZ senior economist Miles Workman says Treasury's report should be on the reading list of every New Zealander. Because, he says, I don't think politicians are going to be able to make the changes that are needed here until the voting public is behind those changes. And he's right.  In short, fiscal pressures will accelerate in coming decades with costs of superannuation and healthcare expected to rise significantly as the population ages. There is no one solution. In 1965, there were seven working-age New Zealanders for every person over 65. So that was seven working New Zealanders paying taxes for every person over 65, and for the most part, in 1965, those people on the Super weren't working. Today, we have four working-age New Zealanders to one person over 65. In 40 years, which is not a very long time, it'll be just two working New Zealanders to every person over 65. Successive governments have known this. Voters have known this.  But political parties need the support of voters to make the changes that are needed, as Infometrics principal economist Brad Olsen told Ryan Bridge last night.  “The worry a little bit is that we've had these warnings before. We had something very similar from the Treasury four years ago in 2021. And realistically, I think what the Treasury is continuing to highlight is that there's, there's a lot of big challenges in front of us. We don't have to solve them all tomorrow, but we really do have to start sometime soon to get us out of what looks like a very unsustainable pathway going forward. But, and here's the biggest kicker for me, you can't do any one thing and it will magically solve our sort of fiscal challenges. There's a lot that's going to have to happen that will be unpalatable to politicians across the political spectrum, but by goodness, we've got to start soon.”  It's only going to be “unpalatable” if political parties expect voters to act out of self-interest. And that's what I mean, it's on us to affect the changes.  I was talking earlier this week about the need for political parties to have a bipartisan approach to important issues like infrastructure and health and education curriculum. It's absolutely imperative. They can tinker around the edges, but it is incumbent upon them to have an infrastructure plan to stop the waste of money. And it's incumbent upon us to take a grown-up approach and look at the good of the country as a whole, not our immediate needs.  If you've got your Super, calm the farm – your gin money's quite safe. Nobody's taking it off you now. But those of us in the 45 to 60-year age group need to realise that we're the ones that need to affect the changes needed to keep the country alive by allowing politicians to introduce policies that if they tried to introduce them previously would have sent them to political oblivion.  There are options: raising the age of Super eligibility, broadening the tax base, (euphemism for fiscal drag and wealth taxes), index linking super payments to inflation rather than wages, means testing – these are all options.  And another option is that New Zealand grows its wealth, that we become wealthier so we can afford it all. That's not looking likely. Treasury notes in the report that recent productivity trends have diverged from past projections, which means productivity growth over the past two decades has been weaker than predicted, averaging just 0.7% per year, and they expect that to last.  So, ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.  I would like to think if we make the changes necessary, the Super will be there for those who need it. I would like to think that if we make the changes necessary, young people starting off in life, starting off with their families, will not be crippled by the burden of looking after people who were too lazy and self-interested to vote for the changes needed to spread the burden.  It's on us. We can't just look to the politicians – what are they going to do? They are only going to come out with policies that they think will appeal to us. Are we that childlike that we just want the sweets before we'll vote a political party in? We have to be grown-ups. We have to grasp the nettle and say this is tough and this is going to be ugly, but we're going to do our bit to ensure that New Zealand is a better society for future generations. That's the way it used to be, and we've dropped the ball.  You know, we can moan and grizzle all we like about the waste of money and the lack of purpose and the dithering around and the incompetence, but ultimately, if we want to affect change, it's on every voter in this country to do so. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A former Finance Minister's discussing the Superannuation age in the wake of an alarming Treasury report.  Treasury's long term fiscal statement notes the importance of responding to challenges with an ageing population.  It suggests the cost of NZ Super could be kept stable by steadily increasing the age of eligibility, requiring it to rise to 72, by 2065.  Steven Joyce told Kerre Woodham Superannuation policy gets more urgent every time it's left alone.  He believes the age should be getting gradually older as we live longer, and says he had a plan to lift it with 20 years notice before doing so.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I have to say that the Herald's Mood of the Boardroom survey pretty much sums up my mood too. Yes, there are some excellent and capable ministers doing great work within their portfolios, and let's not forget how rare and wonderful that is, given the past administration. Come in Erica Stanford, Winston Peters, Chris Bishop, Simeon Brown – all good performers, all doing well, all delivering.   But when it comes to the economy, one of the main platforms upon which National campaigned, the performance is less than impressive. CEOs have sent a clear message to Finance Minister Nicola Willis in the survey. She has to hold the pro-growth line, sharpen delivery, and set out a long-term vision that brings investors back on side. The Government's going for growth agenda has five key pillars: developing talent, competitive business settings, global trade and investment, innovation, technology and science, and infrastructure, which form the backbone of Willis's economic strategy.   In the beginning, New Zealand's business leaders gave Willis the benefit of the doubt. In 2024, the CEOs credited her with a strong start. Not anymore. She failed to make the top 10 top performers in the survey. As did Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. He came in for some criticism. Business leaders said he needs to listen more. He's got a mantra that's started to grate, and he knows that. They say he rates very highly when it comes to ensuring his cabinet ministers are focused and delivering. True. He actually rates reasonably well on keeping a coalition together. But the report found Luxon did not score well for building business confidence, his own political performance, and on transforming the economy. So, on those areas, he's got a lot of work to do, as Forsyth Barr managing director Neil Paviour-Smith told Mike Hosking this morning.    “There are reasons to be optimistic, but hoping is not a strategy. And the business community is looking for stronger leadership from the Prime Minister and Finance Minister around some of these core long-term issues and the structural deficits of New Zealand.”  They are mainly concerned, the business leaders, with boosting productivity. They want a step change that includes a boost in skill, innovation, and technology, not tinkering around the edges. They say they need to see a programme for retraining and reorienting the workforce, especially those at the lower end of the wage spectrum. They say that tax and regulatory settings need to be reformed. We need to accelerate research and development and grow high-value sectors. Infrastructure, well we talked about that yesterday. There's a need for delivery of infrastructure, not just more announcements. They want shovel-worthy projects ready as financing costs ease. Immigration and education settings came through strongly. We've lost a lot of highly skilled people out of the construction industry in the last 18 months.  Now with the taps about to turn on, how do we ramp up to ensure there's capacity in the market? They also called for a compelling vision that stretches beyond a three-year election cycle. Again, what we were discussing yesterday. So there's a lot to work on. And Christopher Luxon and Nicola Willis would do well to heed the advice, the criticism, and the positive remarks made by the business leaders. All of these things we know, and all of these things we've said.   And while it is true that Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori aren't inspiring confidence amongst business leaders to put it mildly. As a country, we need more, we should want more than the least rubbish of two coalition governments. Waiting for the economic cycle to finish its rotation is not the vision New Zealanders were promised when a centre-right government was elected.   They said there would be growth, there would be productivity, that good times were coming. Yes, it was a mess. They said they had the answer. They promised that. This coalition government, the National Party in particular, has to do better. Not just for the sake of their own political futures, but for the sake of the country. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Infrastructure in New Zealand is being called out for being too political.  A significant jolt to the construction sector thanks to Government investment to hospital and school infrastructure.  Almost half a billion dollars will go towards upgrades and maintenance projects across the country.  Construction activity is at a six year low, with thousands of jobs lost in the last two years.  Infrastructure NZ CEO Nick Leggett told Kerre Woodham the mindset we apply to infrastructure is too political – too stop/start.   He says there’s often too much division within government, with each portfolio responsible for their own projects, and we don’t centralise the good skills and capabilities.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government hopes to give a much-needed boost to the building and construction industry with the announcement of $413 million worth of accelerated school infrastructure projects. This follows a raft of school property announcements and the establishment of a new school property agency in July to oversee the planning, building, and maintenance of new school buildings.   Hopefully, there will be some opposition input into this new agency, some opposition oversight. Because back in 2019, Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins, surrounded by adoring children, announced funding of $1.2 billion over four years for school property – a new primary school, 200 new classrooms in Auckland amongst them. The new buildings would be needed for the estimated 100,000 extra students who will enter the school system over the next 10 years. So far, so good.   At the time, Ms Ardern said there were too many kids getting taught in cold school halls and prefabs, and our plan, she said, will turn that around. It's important we plan ahead for growth, so parents can be confident they can send their child to their local school, and their local school will have enough warm, dry and modern classrooms to learn in, something the previous government failed to do.   Then they were voted out in 2023 and in came National, and the next year the Education Ministry put hundreds of projects on hold. Now, why would they do that? Obviously, there are more young people who are going to need classrooms, schools are already overcrowded. There are children being taught in halls and prefabs that are less than ideal.   Well, they did that because Labour had absolutely no concept of fiscal control. Their idea of building new classrooms was to go to a groovy young architect and say, "Come up with something fabulous," and they did. Groovy young architects have got amazing ideas and visions, and they can help children reach their full potential and development with the kind of environment that they can create with an unlimited chequebook.   So, in came boring, grumpy old National. Hundreds of projects went on hold and $2 billion was saved, they say. The value for money review considered 352 projects at 305 schools with a combined estimated cost of $4.6 billion. It decided 110 projects would go ahead with changes such as removing non-essential aspects of the build or using off-the-shelf rather than bespoke design.   If you are going to have an agency that's going to look ahead and plan and build and maintain school buildings, you've all got to be on the same page. Otherwise, what is the point? It makes sense to plan ahead for the future. It makes sense to build new schools where they're needed and to build new classrooms. But not if they're going to be, oh, I don't know, a vision came to me and I just drew something on paper and then it's like, you know, my ancestors are speaking to me and all of a sudden I've got this amazing creation for the cost of a billion dollars.   If you could have three schools built for the same amount of money, then that's the way you go. We go for bespoke award-winning design buildings when we are an oil-rich nation who just doesn't know what to do with its money. What will we do? Oh, I know. We'll give gorgeous young architects, brilliant young things, the opportunity to use their talents and create amazing public buildings. This is a good thing if you can afford it, and we cannot.   Do school buildings really need to be architecturally designed and award-winning buildings? I would argue right now they don't. They're beautiful and they're clever, but that level of expense is not necessary.   It's the same with social housing. We all know Kāinga Ora was given a mandate under the last government to build houses at whatever cost, and away they went. Architecturally designed, beautifully appointed housing communities, which again is all very well and good if you can afford it. But the triumph of ideology over pragmatism saw Kāinga Ora completely blow its budget, leading to debt for generations of taxpayers to pay back. And again, housing projects were stalled while evaluations were made by those with fiscal discipline, who did the sums to see whether Kāinga Ora was giving value for the money spent.   And again, this was necessary, but in the meantime, the construction industry who'd been working overtime, all of a sudden were told everything that they were working on or intended to be working on was on hold, while boring, sensible people did the sums. They had to down tools, and what do you do if there's no work? You go where the work is. They can't wait. It's a nightmare. Yes, we do need infrastructure built, but surely not award-winning designer infrastructure built at any cost.   And what was the Infrastructure Commission doing while all this, ‘I have a vision’ stuff was going on? The Infrastructure Commission, Te Waihanga, was created in 2018. So presumably they saw this vision for Kāinga Ora, they saw the vision for the schools. I mean, why weren't they saying, "Hang on a minute. For that amount of money, we could get three times the value. Put the brakes on. Taihoa. Let's look ahead for 20 years down the track and see what we can get for that money. It's our money that's being wasted and wasted, and it's not being spent wisely.   We need schools, we need hospitals, we need roads. These are beyond party politics. The leaders of the parties need to knock their heads together and come up with a plan to give to us, to say, "This is how we'll be spending your money, wisely, prudently, and looking ahead to the years to come."   The leaders of the parties need to get together and say to the construction industry, "We can guarantee there will be this work for the next 20 years because this is what we need. It's not that hard. This is what we need for the planned population growth. Here is where we'll be building it. These are the designs, and we've all got certainty for the next 20 years. How bloody hard can it be?" See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Is there anything good about pine trees? Apart from for the people who own the commercial forests, the foresters. What earthly good do they do? Sure, they bring in much-needed export earnings, an estimated $5.89 billion for the year ending June 2025. So that helps towards the GDP. But look at the costs associated with the Pinus radiata. And they're mainly on the taxpayer, not on the industry itself. The foresters have said, look, if we had to pay the true cost of cleaning up the damage, cleaning up the rubbish, cleaning up the slash, we wouldn't have a business. And when you look at the sums, you can see why. We've seen the extensive damage that slash causes to farms and to infrastructure and beaches during floods. The debris chokes rivers, creates devastating debris dams and leads to environmental disasters with long-term ecological impact. And this is creating ongoing crises for local communities, for tourism, for fisheries. And last night, Country Calendar on TVNZ1 highlighted another problem with the pine forests, wilding pines. Steve Satterthwaite, who with his wife Mary owns and operates Muller Station in the Awatere Valley in Marlborough, says we absolutely need to act now to tackle the problem of wilding pines. If we don't stop these trees, eventually, the pastoral country from here to Kaikoura will succumb to being a forest of wilding pines. The downstream effects of that are water yield. So the Marlborough grape industry would be massively at risk of the rivers running dry, particularly the Awatere. And then you've got the risk of fire. If these mountain ranges got covered in pine trees, then the fire risk would be horrendous. It is so frustrating that despite it being the biggest environmental wilding disaster in New Zealand, it has not been funded at all under the national wilding conifer control programme. Well not strictly true Steve. In May of this year, the government announced a 20% increase in funding to tackle the spread of wilding pines. Then in August, it was announced that $3 million over three years of this international visitor levy revenue will go to the National Wilding Conifer Control programme, in particular for work in the Molesworth and Mc Kenzie Basin areas. This government says, and successive governments, previous governments have said  that they've understood the risk that wilding pines pose to the environment. And they've said the government is focused on protecting the productive heart of New Zealand's economy. Agriculture and Forestry Minister Todd McClay said wilding pines cost the rural community significantly, often the bane of farmers' lives, we have an obligation to work with them to control their spread and reduce on-farm burden. More than 2 million hectares are affected by wilding infestations with more to come, as Steve pointed out. The baby trees are already seeding and spreading their seed. It's only going to get worse. Untreated areas are expanding by an estimated 5% each year. Left unchecked, the economic impact could reach $3.6 billion over 50 years. So you add that the cost of the cleanup of the slash to the cost of the wilding pines. Are we really making any money from our export earnings? The reason that commercial forests and the Department of Conservation planted pines were good initially, in the first instance there was a desire to prevent the spread of erosion. It was thought that the pine trees would help stabilise land. It hasn't been entirely successful in some parts of the country, but it was thought that would happen. Yet again, it's unintended consequences. Now we've got more problems really than the pines are worth, haven't we? If the foresters are saying they can't really afford to clean up after themselves, otherwise their business is unsustainable. If you look at the cost of the wilding pine control, and hasn't the horse bolted? I mean, can you ever really get it back under control now? If you look at the cost of the slash, and then you balance that with the export earnings. Is it worth it?  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Wilding pines, the invasive species also known as Pinus contorta, are posing a massive threat to the environment. It was highlighted on Country Calendar last by Steve Satterthwaite, who runs Muller Station in the Awatere Valley in Marlborough. He said the wilding pines don't just choke up pastoral land, there's also the downstream effect of  loss of water yield into the rivers, and in Marlborough, that effects the vineyards. Federated Farmers pest animal and weed spokesperson Richard Dawkins told Kerre Woodham that more funding and support is needed to properly tackle the spread of these invasive plants. 'It is possible to get it under control, but it just comes down to resourcing, right? So we need more funding.' LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.