Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Teachers say they are shocked with how new curriculum material is being rolled out.   Changes to NCEA Level One are being put in place before changes to Level Two and Three come into force in four years.   However, a scathing survey by the Post Primary Teachers Association shows the vast majority are dissatisfied with the new material.   Union President Chris Abercrombie told Kerre Woodham that resources were late and not good enough, with many exemplars being poorly done.  He said many teachers were worried about how this is going to impact students and their outcomes.   LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I am really not surprised to see more people signing up for health insurance, even though we're going through a cost of living crisis and the premiums are not cheap.   Southern Cross is the country's largest private health insurer and they've seen eight years of growth in their membership, with almost one in five Kiwis on their books. A Kantar survey for Southern Cross from last month showed that cost of living was the top concern for 91% of respondents, but 84% were concerned about not having access to affordable health care. So yes, they're concerned that there's not a lot of disposable, what disposable they have they're putting into their health and their health care.   Two thirds of those who responded said they had experienced a long-term impact to their physical and mental health from Covid-19. They were also very concerned about long wait times and the unavailability of health care professionals. Half of Southern Cross members made a claim on their health insurance in the latest year, up from a third prior to the pandemic in 2019.   The cost of claims has also risen due to the high cost of everything and more claims for expensive procedures, and that means premiums have to go up to pay for this. It's a not-for-profit organisation, it's not there to make squillions for shareholders, it's there to put the money back into its membership. If it's costing more, then members have to pay more and that's the way it works. Southern Cross has been increasing premiums by 10-15% as policies come due, but they are expected to normalize back to around 6-6.5% next year as inflation is brought under control.   I am so glad I have health insurance. I've had it for years and I've never needed it till the last few years, which is the way of it. When you are in your 20s, 30s, 40s, you generally don't need much more than a general checkup. If you're lucky to have been born with relatively good health, you don't need to spend a lot of money on your healthcare. Once you get into your 50s and 60s, then you start to see a little bit of wear and tear. And if you don't have healthcare, you will be waiting years for elective surgeries, things like knees and hips. If you've done them in because of hard physical labour, you will not get ACC paying for them, they'll just say wear and tear.   Other things, like me with a constantly blocked nose which I thought was just a head cold, it's acute sinusitis. I would be forever getting head colds thinking it was just being prone to head colds. No, it's something that I need surgery for. It's not life threatening, it's really annoying, it means I have to take time off work. Those of you have listened for a while know when I've got it. In fact, Toni Street’s ear nose and throat surgeon diagnosed me over the wireless and said I needed to get in and see him. As it was, I'd already booked the surgery and I was lucky enough to be able to do that because of the premiums I've been paying for years and years and years.   It does get more expensive but I will prioritise paying it, paying the premiums even as they rise, as long as I can because why live with this sort of thing if you don't have to? It's painful, it's uncomfortable, it takes me off work, and that could be the same for many non-life threatening ailments that many of us suffer. People with knees, hips, hernias, all of those sorts of things that are deemed not to be urgent, not to be critical, not to be acute but have a huge impact on people's day-to-day lives and their ability to work, their ability to be full members of the family, full members of the community. I am counting the hours till the operation next week as are my colleagues.   I know that the premiums will only get more expensive, but I know I'm only going to need it more if I'm lucky enough to make it into my twilight years.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I reckon the Government’s argument in favour of increasing speed limits is looking more and more wobbly. There’s no question that it’s going to happen, with Transport Minister Simeon Brown confirming at the weekend that faster speed limits will be all-go next year.  But it seems to me that his case as to why it’s needed and why it’s a good idea, is starting to look pretty weak. There’s an expert who is trying to sell an alternative idea which will probably have Simeon Brown laughing his head off. He’ll think it’s balmy. But I reckon it’s got some merit to it. Simon Kingham is this expert. He’s a university academic and he used to be the Ministry of Transport’s chief science advisor.  He’s saying that, instead of increasing the speed limits, the Government should be setting the same speed limit for every vehicle on the road. That way, there wouldn’t be any need for cars to overtake trucks because - and for drivers to increase their risk of death or serious injury - because everyone would be doing the same speed. This is his solution to an issue the outfit representing the trucking industry has highlighted. Which is the fact that when the speed limits go up next year it won't be for every vehicle on the road - and the maximum speed limit for trucks will stay what it is now. Which is 90 kph per hour. So, cars will be going faster. And trucks won’t. And Professor Simon Kingham says, all that’s going to do, is encourage more drivers to overtake and more people will die, as a result. He says if everyone was going the same speed - no need for any risky overtaking maneuvers. And I think, on paper, he’s right. On paper, it sounds like a great idea.  But, the reality is, people are idiots. They think the fast way is the only way. And, even if cars and trucks had the same speed limit, drivers would still gun it well into the hundreds. Can you imagine, at the peak of summer, people being content to sit behind a truck all the way? Of course they wouldn’t. Because it’s all about getting there as soon as you can, isn’t it? There’s none of this “life’s all about the journey” talk once kiwis get behind the wheel. So, Simeon Brown’s not going to be liking what the professor is saying today about having the same 90 kph speed limit for every vehicle on the road. I’m picking he’s also not going to be liking everything the trucking industry is saying today, either. Because remember how he’s been banging on about how increasing speed limits is going to get us all going faster and it’s going to increase productivity blah blah blah. But, when it comes to productivity, that won’t be the case at all. Because, as the head of the outfit that represents the transport sector, Transporting NZ has confirmed the speed limit increases will have no direct impact on them because trucks will still be restricted to doing 90 kph. But where Dom Kalasih does see benefits in cars being allowed to go faster, is that he says drivers will be able to pass trucks more quickly. Which he reckons will reduce the amount of time car drivers spend in risky situations. He does concede, though, that if the cars are going faster past the trucks - then any supposed reduction in risk might be outweighed by the fact that drivers are going at higher speeds which, of course, increases the chance of something going wrong. So, as far as I’m concerned, I see these increases in speed limits confirmed by the Government as a lose-lose. I also think that this idea being floated by this academic today is a win-win, but only in la-la land. And we’re not in la-la land. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Hastings youth council has made a successful bid to get voting rights. Hastings District Council has narrowly voted in support of giving unelected youth councillors the ability to vote on council issues alongside other councillors at a committee level. Their mayor thinks giving youth councillors voting rights will bolster their future opportunities. Mayor Sandra Hazlehurst told Kerre Woodham this was thought through very carefully. She says it'll encourage young people into local government, which isn't easy, because people definitely don't do it for the money. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For the love of all that is holy - can we just introduce a capital gains tax and be done with it?  I am so sick of it dominating the headlines. The issue is never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever going to go away, despite two Labour Prime Ministers ruling it out, despite Christopher Luxon ruling it out - it comes up. It's like a nagging child, “I want a capital gains tax. I want a capital gains tax, I want a capital gains tax, I want a capital gains tax”, and then in the end you give in. This time it's because ANZ's Chief Executive, Antonia Watson, said in an interview yesterday that “the time has arrived for a capital gains tax”. Well, the time actually arrived with the Tax Working Group's recommendation in recent times, but nonetheless. She says look, there might be compliance costs introducing a tax, she also made it very clear she was opposed to any tax on unrealised gains, but she says a capital gains tax should be introduced and it should be introduced now. And her intervention adds another voice in a growing group of New Zealanders, influential and otherwise, who are calling for a capital gains or wealth tax.   As I say, the issue really came to the fore when the tax working group, chaired by Sir Michael Cullen and convened by the Ardern government, recommended a CGT be introduced. But then NZ First dug in their toes and refused to budge, so Jacinda Ardern ruled it out and she didn't just rule it out, she said it would never happen on her watch as Prime Minister, and it didn't. Then Chris Hipkins became Prime Minister leading a Labour government, and he ruled it out too. But that was then, and this is now. Now he's singing a different song as he was to Ryan Bridge on Early Edition this morning”  “I think what we've got to acknowledge is at the moment the New Zealand tax system is loaded against working people. Working people end up paying more tax because we're not taxing other forms of income as our other comparable countries do. There’s capital gains tax here in the UK, there's capital gains tax in Australia, and so many other countries, that there isn't in New Zealand and what does that mean? It means that salary and wage earners, the people who work hard every day for a living, end up paying a disproportionate share of the tax because we're not taxing other forms of income.”  Oh, Chris Hipkins, champion of the working man. Where were you when you had a government that had a mandate to do anything at jolly well liked? Oh, that's right, you were there and you ruled it out. This is the same Chris Hipkins who had the best opportunity of any government since MMP was introduced to reform the tax system, he had a cabinet that was champing at the bit to reform the tax system. This is the Chris Hipkins who said no to a capital gains tax. David Parker resigned over the fact he said no to a capital gains tax, he resigned his portfolio - “untenable for me to continue”. Grant Robertson admitted he'd had to swallow a dead rat by standing by his Prime Minister when he wanted to introduce a capital gains tax. This is the Chris Hipkins who released a statement saying I am confirming today that under a government I lead, there will be no wealth or capital gains tax after the election, end of story.   So this is why you cannot have former Prime Ministers leading in opposition because they have absolutely no credibility when their statements from only a few months back come back to haunt them. His credibility on his capital gains tax is shot. Barbara Edmonds, get her up there talking about it, she's untainted. She doesn't have the ghost of Chris Hipkins from yesteryear, well, yestermonth, coming back to haunt her. Carmel Sepuloni. Hell, Jim, the guy who serves the drinks at 3.2, get him up there to say I think a capital gains tax would be fabulous.   You cannot have Chris Hipkins calling for a capital gains tax, he has absolutely no credibility. But the issue is simply not going to go away. And I think sooner rather than later, we need to adopt. I even think Sir Michael Cullen's recommendations were not unreasonable. There will come a time where it will be introduced, and we need to do it credibly and not in a knee jerk reaction, and with the best interests of the entire country at heart. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Whatever happened to a ‘morning driver’ and a ‘thank you driver’ as you hopped on and off the bus? The violence and racial abuse of bus drivers and indeed their commuters, their passengers using public transport, has got so bad in recent times that the Bus and Coach Association is calling for more security officers to ride along on bus routes, for safety screens to be installed on buses, and now the Government is making offences against public transport workers an aggravating factor in sentencing. Along with the tougher sentences, the Government’s investing $15 million specifically for practical improvements to driver safety, like retrofitting the aforementioned safety screens and real time CCTV monitoring.   Auckland Transport's general manager for safety said earlier this year that there's an ongoing trend of drivers being attacked that began in the last few years coming out of Covid. And it isn't just the drivers being attacked, there have been awful racially-motivated attacks on passengers as well, that have been well covered in the media. Bus and Coach Association CEO Delaney Myers spoke to the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning and agreed that the problems on public transport are definitely getting worse.   “It's not just violence, you know, we've got threats, aggression and, in particular racial slurs going on and it's just unacceptable. No one should be abused in their workplace. It is getting worse. And look, we know many of these incidents involve people who are on the fringes of society with mental health and drug and alcohol issues. You know, for us, we're not seeing this as just a public transport problem, it's a complex societal issue. But you know the ramifications on us at the end of it and, you know, delivering public transport services significant and we do need more help to keep people safe.   “It is unfortunate things have come to this because most of our passengers love engaging, you know, most of the drivers love engaging with the passengers, but we do need to keep them safe and a physical barrier is part of that, but it doesn't help stop the threats and the racial abuse or keep passengers safe. So really what we'd like to see in addition is increased personnel support on buses because we know that the presence of authority figures helps to moderate behaviour.”  Auckland Transport has about 40 transport officers who are on the worst routes to provide safety and security for drivers, as well as diffusing situations when they occur. Security personnel have been hired by Otago Regional Council since December of last year to monitor the bus hub, to discourage incidents of disorder and threatening conduct, and in March of this year, services were extended to cover a targeted security presence on buses.  Delaney Myers is right, though, it's a bigger issue than just disruptive commuters. It's a complex societal issue, but how on Earth did it get to this? We've always had drunks and aggressive bullies and people whose mental disorders take them down a violent path. Not everybody's does, some do, but they've always been in our communities. What made them able to become a huge problem rather than an aberrant individual that you saw perhaps once every couple of years? Is it letting them get away with it? If somebody is racially abusing or threatening a poor bus driver or fellow passenger, do other people step in? I can well understand why people might not given how vicious and unpredictable humans are today. Would you run the risk of stepping in to stop somebody racially abusing some poor young kid when it means you might not get home to your own? And is that is that how they've been able to take hold?   These bad eggs, there is so much money being spent on them. They've caused so much pain and so much fear. When one schoolboy is racially attacked, he’s attacked purely and simply because of his race, because of how he looks, that's going to have a ripple effect throughout the entire community. How has that come to this?   I know it's not on every bus route. I know that there are people who are perfectly able to get from point A to point B and have a very pleasant ride. It's not on every train route, but it's a big enough problem that it's increasingly difficult to get people wanting to be drivers. There's not only their long hours and the poor pay, but being spat at and abused and threatened by low lives, why would you? Well, you wouldn't, and that's why it's so difficult to get the drivers. How have we let it get to this? This isn't a brand-new phenomenon. As I say, drunks and people who behave badly have always been amongst us, but how have they been allowed to become such a problem? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The big corporations have already started ordering their staff back into the office, now the Government’s had enough too. Nicola Willis made the announcement yesterday. While carefully defined, working from home arrangements can benefit workers and employers, she said, if the pendulum swings too far in favour of working from home, there are downsides. And that's even before we consider the effects for the CBD retailers, restaurants and cafes. She said there are good reasons why employees have traditionally been physically brought together for work. It allows for face-to-face conversation, the sharing of skills and experience, and relationship building. It supports younger and newer employees to observe, learn from and form connections with their more experienced colleagues. She said many good employers have been taking active steps to ensure their working from home policies are fit for purpose. Nicola Willis said its time at the government did the same.   Damn straight. Conor Whitten from the Wellington Chamber of Commerce told the Mike Hosking Breakfast that the directive will indeed have a positive impact.   “We do think that this has the real potential to make a difference for Wellington and it's important to recognise that at a time when public finances are pretty tight, it's something that really doesn't cost the government a cent. We all know it's been a hard time for businesses in Wellington, but particularly for retail and hospitality, working from home trends are definitely a very big part of that. "And look, you're right, the numbers are a little bit hard to quantify but we will have those numbers because public sector CEOs will be required to report on it. But look it’s the ballpark figures, there are 28,000 public servants who still work in Wellington according to the Public Service Commission, if they're working from home and average of two days a week, that's more than 50,000 fewer potential customers for businesses in the CBD and in a city the size of Wellington, that makes a real impact. So if we get some of those people back in the city, not everyone's going to buy a coffee or go shopping or head out for a Friday drink, but tens of thousands more people in the city the size of Wellington, it’s going to make a real impact at a time when businesses are doing it tough.”  So sure benefits, but I cannot imagine that workers are being ordered back to work simply to save Wellington's cafes. From the release, it would appear that the Government is simply looking for the public service bosses to be a little bit more aware of who's working from home and whether they're earning their keep or not. I find it incredible that, according to the press release, data is not currently being centrally collected by the Public Service Commission regarding the prevalence of working from home arrangements. So if you asked the Public Service Commission how many public servants are working from home, reading that line, you'd expect them to say, oh, I don't know. A few I suppose.   If you're a boss, wouldn't you want to know how many of your team were actually working from home and how many were expected in the office? And if they were working from home, what are they doing there? Are they meeting KPI's? The people we talked to last week who either phoned in or texted in said that they had KPI's that they had to meet, that there was an expectation about what their role would be, that for some of them there was flexibility - they could look after a sick child or they could go for a long run if they're training for a marathon or something, and then the work would be done in the evening. There was no real need for them to work between 9 – 5 pm so long as the work got done. But reading between the lines here, it would appear that many public service bosses have absolutely no idea who's at home, who's not, who's expected to be. And it's that sort of sloppy record keeping that I think the government's going after, and I think the taxpayer was getting sick of. If you go into any Public Service department and said how many of your people are working from home and what are they doing there, as a minister, I'd expect them to know. But the line in this press release says data is not currently being centrally collected by the Public Service Commission regarding the prevalence of working from home arrangements. Does that sound like a breach of business management 101?   The bosses that we talked to last week said it can work. They were quite happy to have staff working from home. There were clear expectations of what they would do, they were regularly checked on – where there was a high level of trust, the arrangement worked. But when you've got somebody going “oh whatevs”, it's not going to work. People will extract the Michael if they think there are no controls on what they can do, or no checks and balances on what they do and how they do it. They also made the point that it doesn't mean there won't be any working from home arrangements, you can still negotiate to be able to have flexible working hours, hello Wellington civil service, but they are not an automatic entitlement.   But you can't really blame the workers, if nobody's checking up on you, nobody cares, nobody has an expectation that you'll turn up in the office, nobody is requiring you to account for yourself, when you haven't been in the office for a week or so, why wouldn't you? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last week, Kerre was fortunate to MC the New Zealand Citrus Growers conference in Gisborne/Tai Rawhiti.  There were many fantastic stories about how the region and growers have bounced back after Cyclone Gabrielle.   However, there was also a warning on the horizon about a real danger to the industry – one that we can all help keep a watch on and prevent from taking hold here.  CEO of First Fresh NZ and Citrus NZ board member, Ian Albers joins Kerre Woodham to discuss the challenges facing the industry here in NZ.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It looks like there's going to be a referendum after all.   Not the one that David Seymour wants, but a referendum on whether the four-year political term should be legislated. We've got three years at the moment.   For years, people have been saying it's too short and now in National's coalition agreement with both ACT and NZ First, there are provisions to introduce legislation extending the political term.   Yesterday, the Prime Minister said the issue could well be put to the electorate at the next election in a referendum. He said it's a commitment each party made to one another, and although work on legislation around a four-year term hadn't kicked off yet as there were other priorities right now, Christopher Luxon said it will come onto the radar fairly shortly.  They wouldn't have to do that much work.  I mean, it's been looked at time and time again by a number of parties of both hues. And I wouldn't have thought it would be that difficult to extend the term one year.   For the record, New Zealand has one of the world's shortest parliamentary terms and it is commonly said and understood that governments spend the first of their three years acclimatising, second is getting down to business, third year at campaigning. Another actual year of hard work would be a bonus.   I'm all for a four-year term.   And in effect, because we voters like to be fair players, we give party’s six years, even if they've been a bit rubbish after the first three years. Only once since 1960 has a government failed to win a second term and that was the third Labour government led by Bill Rowling.   Although you'd have to say it was touch and go whether the 6th Labour government would have got another term under Jacinda Ardern. Hard to know, but in October 2019, one year before the election, Labour was down 9.2% in the polls, National was up 6.5. At that poll, a year out from the election, the Greens could have kept Labour in power, but certainly Labour's false promises were coming home to roost, so we’ll never know along came Covid, the rest is history.   So, a four-year term to me makes sense.   One year to get used to it, two years of actually understanding the mechanics and the levers that need to be pushed and pulled to make stuff happen, fourth year campaigning.   I would actually like to see too, the opposition parties, given a yearly report card.   We can all measure what the Coalition Government has said, has promised. We're going to reduce the victims of crime by 30,000. We're going to make sure the potholes are fixed straight away, and these are our targets. So we can measure whatever government is in power, they've made promises, we can see that hasn't happened. What's going on here?   I would love to see that with opposition parties too, because it still sticks in my craw when Chris Hipkins said, we weren't really ready to govern.   Nine years in opposition and you're not ready to govern?    Nine years of being paid by the taxpayer to do what? To do what?   If you're not ready to govern, what in the name of all that is holy were you doing?    All very well and good to say that you're trying to find a new leader, but you've still got people who are in charge of portfolios, who should be passionate about those portfolios, who should have spent those nine years, provided they were reelected, saying here this is what needs to be done. These are the priorities right now. This is what we can do, this is what we can't and I would love to see the opposition parties given a report card after every year to show that they are there for a reason that they are opposing, that they are doing the work that's required to keep the government of the day on its toes, held to account, and so that when the time comes, they are actually ready to govern.   I don't think that's unreasonable.   I'd really like to see an account of the work that they have done throughout the year paid for by the taxpayer. I don't think it's unreasonable to say, well, what value have we got for our money while you have been in Opposition.   Not unreasonable.    LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A decision around extending political terms from three years to four may be put to voters in the next election.  Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says the Government may put the matter to referendum in 2026.  Luxon expressed confidence there is support for a four-year term across the House.  University of Otago New Zealand Politics PhD candidate Michael Swanson tells Kerre Woodham a four-year term could change voter behaviour from keeping the current government in power to allow them time to implement their policies.  The state of the opposition’s readiness to govern should be constant, so that when new parties are voted in there is no warm-up period whilst in power.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.