Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

National outplays Labour according to this year's rankings from business leaders.  More than 100 CEOs and business leaders have ranked MPs in the Herald's Mood of the Boardroom survey.  Luxon comes out on top with 3.24 out of five, compared to Chris Hipkins' 2.95.  Jarden Managing Director and Co-Head of Investment Banking Silvana Schenone told Kerre Woodham that businesses are very concerned with the future because they will really need to plan for it.  She said that people would make totally different decisions based on who was in power.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I wanted to start by saying it is no secret that we're in the poo.    As a country economically, and in Auckland and Wellington's case, quite literally in the poo as aging infrastructure fails and stormwater and sewage pipes collapse. Right now, Auckland city engineers are battling to deal with a tennis court sized sinkhole and sewage flowing into Waitemata Harbour. The third sinkhole they've had to deal with in as many months and there will be many, many more to come.   There needs to be a major investment in infrastructure right around the country. One of the reasons, of course, why the Government came up with the ill-fated Three Waters plan. There's nothing sexy about pipes and engineering projects that happen under the ground. But it's even less sexy having sewage bubbling up into your home and worse, into the harbour.   But that means we have to pay for it. And councils right around the country are sharpening their pencils, looking at ways they can get blood out of a stone. Nobody wants services cut. Nobody wants rates increases.   But nobody wants sewerage in the harbour either.   The West Coast Regional Council approved a nearly 17% general rates rise during a midyear meeting, but for some households the increase is likely to be 100% increase, with ratings for flood protection schemes in the combined district plan.   And sure, the rates aren't as high as they might be in other cities or towns, but that's why you're living in Greymouth. You've chosen to live there. You've chosen to stay there if you were born there because you like the region, and you like the fact that its houses aren't going to cost you as much, rates aren't going to cost you as much, You’re not going to have as much taken out of the money coming in.   So going from $25 a fortnight to $50 a fortnight might not sound a lot, but it still means you have to find the extra.   Aucklanders have been warned the starting point for rates is 13%, and water bills could rise by more than 20%. Mayor Wayne Brown says the funding mechanisms for the Council are simply unsustainable and has called for a return of GST on rates, rates to be paid on crown properties (seems fair), and a nationally funded solution to managed retreat.   Because under the $2 billion cost sharing flood buyout scheme, where more than 700 homes that are uninhabitable are going to be bought, the Council still has to find nearly $900 million.   So in a cost-of-living crisis for all of us, households are in crisis, councils are in crisis, the Government is in crisis.   We're in for a tough couple of years.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last night's leaders' debate was vastly more entertaining than the first one.   Was it a debate? Well, Sister Philippa, my old debating coach at Sacred Heart Girls College, wouldn't have seen it as a debate per say. I think it was more of a bit of infotainment.   Chris Hipkins, the leader of Labour, showed up and heaven knows we love a politician who shows up. He no longer looked like a dead man walking like in the first debate. He looked like he didn't care, was over it, was going through the motions. Last night he looked more like someone who's woken up to the fact he needs to fight for his political skin.   Christopher Luxon got caught a few times on not specifically answering questions and resorting to slogans but seemed composed despite the increased intensity of the set to. And I think the quickness will come with more time in the House and the ability to be able to answer on your feet.   Paddy Gower got in a couple of zingers. When Christopher Luxon said he didn't know Winston Peters, Paddy Gower was quite right in saying it's Winston Peters, who doesn't know Winston Peters?!   So ultimately it was more energetic, more peppy. But did it change anything for you? Give you any information you didn't know before? Give you an insight into the leaders of the parties that you didn't have before last night?   Apparently, these sorts of debates help to get non-voters engaged and into the voting booths, but God help us if our election is decided by people who watch 90 minutes of television infotainment and base their votes on that.   Interesting though, that in both debates policies seem to be made-up on the fly by both leaders. We're banning fizzy drinks in secondary schools in the first debate -that seemed to come out of nowhere. I mean well. Fizzy drinks are banned in primary schools, but Chris Hipkins was like right, we're going to ban them in secondary schools as well.   Both leaders said they would lower the age for bowel cancer screening in this last night's debate, which you know, both worthwhile. Don't get me wrong, both worthwhile. But I do find it a wee bit alarming that politicians can just whip a policy out of their kerchief pocket without Select Committee, consultation and the like, as infotainment.   Fine. I can't imagine the sort of people that I talk to on a daily basis on this show, I can't imagine people thinking, uh, you know what, because of that zingy one liner or because they looked more energetic, I'm going to change my vote from National to Labour or Labour to National. I just can't see that happening.   It may have confirmed people's decisions to look at the minor parties. They might have looked at both leaders and thought ‘I need more than this.’  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A little bit of politics, because we didn't really get a chance to talk about Christopher Luxon and David Seymour saying yes, okay, if we have to, we will work with New Zealand First.  Commentators have got themselves into quite the lather over that. A sign of weakness, they were saying, being bullied by the media and all that sort of carry-on. And it's not often I agree with the leader of New Zealand First, but like him, I think that the only poll that really matters is the one on Election Day.   Polls have become less reliable than they used to be, with people being mistrustful of giving any information to anybody. It's harder to reach people these days. Those who only have mobile phones, those who live in apartment buildings.   Certainly, the polls are showing that Labour support is tanking, but the Greens are picking up a lot of those dissatisfied voters. Enough to cobble together a coalition of Labour, Greens, and Te Pati Māori? Who knows? Not according to statisticians and Poll of Polls simulations.   But ultimately voters will have the final say, and I think that's what Christopher Luxon understands. He has overtaken the other Chris as preferred prime. But last night's poll also showed support for the main parties and ACT dropping slightly.  It also had TOP doubling its support, so make that what you want.   And as I say, commentators got themselves into a complete lather yesterday over National and ACT saying they would work with New Zealand First if they absolutely had to. But surely that's just pragmatism. If people insist on voting for New Zealand First (I shan't go on, but you know my thoughts about that), then parties have to work with what's voted in. Ruling out New Zealand First would have shown arrogance in the extreme by National.  Christopher Luxon comes from a business background, not a political one, and I think that's a very good thing. I think by saying he would work with New Zealand First if they absolutely had to is being respectful of democracy, the MMP process and the voters. (Although whether anyone who votes New Zealand First deserves respect is another matter entirely. But I shan’t go on).   You know my thoughts. What are your thoughts on this? We didn't get to discuss it yesterday and I'd love to hear from you whether you think that is showing respect for the parliamentary process, respect for MMP and respect for the voters. I can't see it as being a sign of weakness, which is what I heard a lot of yesterday. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Watch live as Act Leader David Seymour joins Newstalk ZB Kerre Woodham Mornings live in studio to take your calls. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Newstalk ZB rugby commentator Elliott Smith joined Kerre Woodham to recap Wales’ 40-6 thrashing of Australia, to all but knock the Wallabies out of the Rugby World Cup.  LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

David Seymour and ACT are nothing if not pragmatists.   After taking in the impact of the PREFU, the pre-election fiscal and economic update provided by the Government, Seymour has made some changes to ACT’s alternative budget, principally softening tax cuts to account for economic conditions.   Previously, ACT had proposed a two tier tax system with a top rate of 28%. Now it's going to get there, but it'll get there slowly and via a three tier tax system with a top rate of 33%. So few figures here for you. But ACT is advocating for all those earning under 60K to be taxed at 17.5%. Between 60 and 70K at 30, between 70 and 180K 33%, earnings above that at 39%. From the fiscal years 25/26, the 30% tax bracket would be expanded to include those earning between 70 and 180K - quite a big jump. The following year the top tax rate of 180K plus would be lowered from 39% to 33%.   Basically, what he's done is looked at the Government's books, crunched the numbers and realised we can't afford the tax cuts he proposed as quickly as he would like and has made changes. He has also delayed increased spending to defence and will speed up the rate at which the age for super will rise to 67. The age hike was to increase by two months every year from 2024, so even then that would have still been 12 years before the age of super went up to 67. The age hike was to be increased by two months every year from 2024. The latest document has increased the rate of change to three months every year. So it's eight years, not 12, if you take my maths for anything. So there's still plenty of time for people to plan and prepare for the change.   You know, if you're sitting here at 60, thinking the miserable buggars, you should still be fine. Anybody younger will be okay. They'll have time to plan. Seymour defends the refinement of the alternative budget as reflecting the challenging economic environment. He said PREFU showed Labour has no plans to pay off debt. Every year forecast, the country borrows more and more until we lose first world status, and that just is unacceptable to them. He says we can't offer the same tax cuts we previously proposed because Grant Robertson has left the cupboard bare. Which does rather make me wonder whether National can still afford their proposed tax cuts.   So do you see it as common sense from ACT? Seymour is a leader of a minor party, but he's certainly carrying himself like a man with expectations post October 14. And I didn't see all of the minor parties debate last night because #Winston Peters. I don't even know why he was there. I thought it was supposed to be the existing minor party leaders. I mean cause why not TOP? I mean, they must have a formula by which they do it, any party that's polling 5% is welcome, but none the less, I would have had more stringent rules!   David Seymour sort of looked like he didn't really want to be there, that he felt that he was slightly better than the other three party leaders. He should have been with the grown-ups, not with the children. And interesting that every single one of the leaders of the minor parties that were shown are Māori. Do we need co-governance to enforce giving Māori a seat at the table? It shows if they want one, they can jolly well go out and get one if they so wish.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The economy grew 0.9 per cent in the second quarter, lifting the country out of recession and exceeding expectations. In fact, based on revisions to earlier numbers, the economy may not have been in a technical recession at all. GDP rose 3.2 per cent in the year ended June 2023. Strong net migration buoyed the numbers but the better than expected performance from sectors like manufacturing meant growth remained marginally positive even on a per capita basis. Economists had forecast New Zealand would rebound back into growth in the second quarter of the year. Estimates for June quarter GDP (gross domestic product) ranged from growth of 0.4 per cent to growth of 0.8 per cent. But higher dairy, forestry, and meat exports helped drive the growth of 0.9 per cent in the second quarter. Read the full article here.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There was a spirited community meeting in the Coromandel township last night over recent gang violence.  Locals called the emergency meeting after a video, obtained by Newstalk ZB, showed Rebel gang members attacking people in the town last weekend.  Police say no complaints have been laid, but they're aware of three people receiving hospital treatment.  National's Mark Mitchell was at that meeting and he said that the town is tired of the gang presence and are drawing a line in the sand.  He said that the challenge now is for the mayor, their councillors, and their local MP to come up with a solution that works.   LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I was really interested to hear the broad outline of ACT’s education policy goes a little further than National’s, but still with the aim of working towards a lift in New Zealand children's educational outcomes through rigour and testing.   It includes standards for early childhood education providers because educators are concerned at the number of children arriving at school completely unprepared for the classroom. The littlest one in our house is due to start school in the next couple of months, and when her mother had to fill out the before school checks, she was stunned at some of the questions that were covered off in the in the questionnaire. Is your child toilet trained at nearly five? Can they hold a pencil? Do they know how to hold a book?   Anecdotally, there are children turning up to school who don't have the language skills necessary to participate in class. Without language skills, they can't read, they can't articulate their needs. It is absolutely extraordinary the range of abilities new entrant teachers have to deal with.   And that's something that ACT says they want to address through the early childhood education providers. Of course, to benefit from the ECE, you'd have to send your child off to an early childhood education provider. And short of having people going around and lifting the children from the homes they're in and actually physically taking them there, there are going to be some who miss out.   Broadly, schools would be able to develop their own curriculum under ACT’s policy. It would just have to be approved by a central body and any curriculum would have to cover off the standards that would be tested at the end of the school year.   I like it. I need to read more of it. I've only read the news reports. I'd like to read the policies themselves. But then any party that says we have a problem with low achieving kids and who knows that education is vitally important in getting children out of poverty, that education will empower children by giving them more choices as adults, will absolutely get my vote.   For me, education and the economy are the two big issues. I was thundering away about this policy to anyone who would care to listen to. My poor friends, you know you'd think I'd have enough opportunity to air my views between 9am and midday, but no, they get it on my down-time. So I was banging on about education yet again and that really is something that I am utterly, utterly passionate about, it’s a way of it's a way of being able to level the playing field as much as you can. Education and the economy are the two big ones for me.    And I'd love to know what you're focused on. A million viewers tuned into the leaders debate on Tuesday night, not all at the same time. I think those figures also take into account on demand viewing. But for terrestrial television, that's not bad going. It means that people are interested, that they're engaged, that they're invested in the future of this country.   What do you consider are the most important issues that we're facing and that we have to deal with? There is so much that needs to be done by the next Government. Where would you list the priorities? Where, where would you start? What do you consider are the most important issues we're facing and who do you think is doing a better job of presenting the best management plan for getting us back to where we should be? What's the best way of getting our groove back?   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.