February 20, 2025 • 33 mins
Vision for Wellington - the advocacy group led by some of the capital's high-flyers, has held its first event in Wellington. Acclaimed director James Cameron told the crowd of 1000 that the film industry could be the answer to Wellington's growth. Is it?
Also, three powerful Chinese warships are currently sailing through the Tasman Sea - but the Chinese haven't told the New Zealand government what their intentions are. How should the government respond?
PSA assistant secretary Fleur Fitzsimons and lawyer and political commentator Brigitte Morten joined Nick Mills for Friday Faceoff.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from news Talk said b Wellington's official week interview. It's
Friday fatime with property Management a better rental experience for all.
Visit Quovi dot cot In's head starts Friday, joining.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Us to Friday. Based off this week is lawyer and
political commentator Bridget Morning Morton.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Good morning, Bridget, good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
How are you?
Speaker 3 (00:42):
I'm very good. It's beautiful on Sunday and it's Friday.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
So what could be Betther?
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Yeah? What could be better? Friday? Yeah? Lawyers Friday started
about now too, don't they? And and PSA Assistant Secretary
Flir fitz Simon's morning, Flir, Good morning. Union. People don't
finish at three at eleven or twelve o'clock on a Friday.
Do they work right through to seven o'clock at night?
Driving for us to get us a better deal?
Speaker 5 (01:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (01:07):
There's a lot of week to do, Nick, I.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Know there's a lot of work to get. How many
people are getting pay rises at the moment?
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Not enough.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Nobody's getting a pay rise. You had a pay rise lately, Bridget?
Speaker 3 (01:17):
I have, but so have our staff.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
That's what we do in small business is you've got
a reward everyone, Gosh.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
I've had a pay rise for a well, have you
had a.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
Pay rise for I've talked you about this before, Nack.
You need to join the union and we'll sort it
out for here.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
That's a big promise.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I loan it.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Have you looked at me? Be reading the papers, ladies.
A lot of people are out our organization, losing their jobs.
I don't think I've a guard near the union right now.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
Exactly the wrong attitude. Time to join.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Okay, is there a union for talk back hosts?
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Yeah? Absolutely too, would be the one.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Okay, Ethan says he's and it doesn't help him much anyway.
Let's talk about.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
The topics disagree.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Let's talk about he's always moding about his wages, like
every person, everybody. You know what, I probably have more
conversations about money with everyone and works a life than
anything else. People always worry what they're getting paid, an't they?
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Well it's yeah, it's how you really has a direct
correlation with your quality of life. So that's pretty important.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Yeah, of course it is. Right. Let's start with the
China warships. Judith Collins has come out and said she'd
wish that she'd known. I'll start with you on this one, Bridget,
she wished that she'd known. There's it's a major force.
I mean, it's not just one little tug boat like
the Americans sent in from Hawaii into Wellington. This is
pretty major. Why are they here? What should we do?
Speaker 5 (02:36):
Yeah, I mean it's a tricky one, right. I don't
have any direct connections to the Chinese government, so I
can't give any any state secrets about what's happening. But
it is quite just concerning to have them there and
to have that sort of forces sitting there on the
sort of almost on the horizon as such. So I think, yeah,
I'm going to live it to the experts on this
one to how to deal with this, because that is
a very tricky space for us to manage flur.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Can we do anything at all?
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Well offish?
Speaker 5 (03:01):
Right?
Speaker 4 (03:01):
I just want to say that I was quite impressed
by the comments I've seen reported from Judith Collins. It's
clear that she is sensitively and delicately dealing with this issue,
but she has rightly described it as a wake up call,
and I think it is a wake up call about
our influence in the Pacific and the importance of that
and just the involvement of China is something that we
need to take note of and think carefully about how
(03:22):
we continue to maintain those close relationships with our Pacific partners.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
And the problem isn't it rigid that they're our biggest
trading partner by a mile, So we can't annoy them,
can we?
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (03:36):
And I think we in some ways it's better to
work constructively in terms of that We're not going to
be able to outspend them in the Pacific. We have
to be realistic about that, and many of the Pacific
nations need a lot of support.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
So to sort of.
Speaker 5 (03:48):
Say to them that you shouldn't be taking resources or
anything from them is I think a little bit possibly
patronizing of us or a naive of us to sort
of just claim that.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
I think also, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 5 (03:59):
There's a huge part of our population that relies on
the money that comes in through exporting to China, and
their business is built on it, and we would struggle
with that was cut off.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Yes, we would as an economy really struggle that was
cut off. So we've got to be very very careful
how we play it, don't.
Speaker 4 (04:14):
We flu Well you have to be take some care.
But actually what our government has consistently done governments of
both stripes is raised difficult issues with China when the
opportunity presents, including issues around human rights. And I imagine
we will also be raising this difficult issue about them
coming close to our waters and to our borders, and
(04:35):
I think we should do that because actually you can't
just be cowered by economic interests. You have to have
an independent foreign policy and you have to make sure
that you raise difficult things with countries like China.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Right, let's move on to the vision for Wellington's first event.
They brought in star Power. Couldn't have brought in bigger
star power? Did that? James Cameron spoke about how the
film industry could be the answer to Wellington's growth, but
he noted support from the government would also be needed.
Flu did you go to the event.
Speaker 4 (05:08):
I didn't. I was out of town, but I probably
wouldn't have gone anyway. But credit to them, they got
a sizeable crowd and I really respect people that want
to organize people around how we make Wellington better. I
would say that the reporting of it's been clear about
who that crowd was. A much older demographic and a
very white demographic, so I'm not surprised given those demographics
(05:28):
in the crowd that things like cycle ways and concerns
around parking were reportedly raised as as some of the
main issues at people, except.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
That they were mentioned in the forum, which which really
surprised me.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
I understand there were crowd reactions when aspects of those
things were raised, but I do think it was good
that they did lift it to talk about the film
industry and the potential that offers, and quite interesting looking
at the comments from James Cameron around been quite defensive
about government involvement in the film industry, and I think
we're right to be cynical about handouts to the film industry.
(06:03):
We should expect something in return for them, but we
do get.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I mean he set himself for every dollar we get
where he said we get seven or eight back.
Speaker 4 (06:11):
You could make that argument for most government subsidy into
different industries. What I think I want to see from
a film industry in Wellington as a commitment to New
Zealand content and a commitment to well paid, stable jobs,
and we don't have that at the moment. In Australia.
There are far higher requirements around Australian content and that's
why we're getting so many good Australian dramas coming out.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
And we are two tenor I mean in Wellington Wellington
based movie I think it was Wellington Base was it's
just been released and the release was in Wellington bridget
What are your thoughts on the whole movie thing. I mean,
the whole idea of him James Cameron speaking was he
was going to use it for his forum to speak.
It wasn't anything to do with Vision Wellington, was it? Really?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (06:50):
And I think the problem you've got is James Cameron
as possibly the worst salesperson of industry subsidies.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Could be a billionaire everitar.
Speaker 5 (06:58):
Film in like biggest grossing film of all time, like
two point nine billion or something, and he personally made
something like ninety five million out of it. So in
terms of supporting that film industry, I think you'd actually
have a much powerful voice for the industry from some
of those amazing gaming industry that we've got in Willington.
Some of those more independent set of filmmakers.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Well they were there as well, Yeah, but they.
Speaker 5 (07:20):
Obviously weren't put you know, they didn't have as much
that voice has not come through like James Cameron because
he is James Cameron. I think also I'm pretty skeptical
as well in terms of, you know, whether we're not
in the government subsidy because of those big profits that
can be made. I probably differ here with Flur though,
in terms of what you can actually do to support them,
and I think some deregulation and allowing some more flexibility
(07:42):
we know to make big movies that you need to
just you've got to have some more flexibility around your
employment laws. I think you can make it easier in
terms of some of the consenting and things to make
them more attractive to be here. So I think without
a doubt that has to be something that we can
look at to make actually a more attractive place to
come and make movies.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Now you've put some really interesting slides to that, because
I'm concerned that Flur, if we get too tough on them,
we're going to lose more and more too. I mean,
now we know Melbourne's starting to go hard, Sydney's going hard,
Auckland's going hard. Surely we've got to work to keep
this industry. And you take the film industry out of
Wellington over the last twenty years. You know what have
(08:22):
we got?
Speaker 4 (08:23):
Well I totally disagree with deregulating employment relations in that
film industry further, they already have a special deal. But
also what we need to see is the workers of
the film industry looked after. I know many people have
worked in the film industry when they were younger, and
they would love to go back there now, but they
can't because of the ridiculous long hours and huge pressure
(08:45):
put on them as workers in that industry, and they
are all contracted out. It is a very difficult job
to do under intense pressure with long hours. Now, that's
not a good job, that's not a decent life. That's
not going to deliver for those people doing that work.
When they need to have a wake up call and
treat the people working on the film in film with
respect and give them a decent life as well as
(09:05):
doing this important interesting work.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Can I tell you a very interesting story that once
was told to me when I was young, when I
first got into hospitality. A guy was working in this
local circus that came around town right and his job
was he had a big shovel and he walked behind
the elephant and all he did was pick up the
poo from the from the elephant, and all day while
the circus was going on, this guy was there with
his shovel. And so guy walks up to him at
(09:29):
the end of the end of the show and end
of the circus and system gosh, you've got a horrible
hard job. Do you want me to come and work
for me? And the guy looked him and said, what
and give up showers? I mean, that's show bers, I mean,
it's a long story to tell you that. You know,
those long hours and hard work, that's we all do
it in showers.
Speaker 4 (09:47):
Well, that's right, and that's actually really important work. You know,
we needed that work done because that's a very important
aspect of hygiene and running of a circus. So I
respect him and the work that he's done.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
But what I'm saying is that that that you've got
to accept that that's just part of the gig.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Now. That's why he was rightly proud of his work
and got on him.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Yeah, But I.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
Think what you're sort of saying though, that there's a
bargain to be made in terms of that your wages
or your hours are not the only thing that you
get job satisfaction from and I worked in many, many
years in politics. I could earn much more outside of politics.
I could have worked considerably less hours, had considerably less stress.
But I loved working there and the beility to be
in that environment and make a difference made it all
(10:27):
worth it to me. And I think that's where we
really risk if we are going too far on employment
laws or putting too many of those restrictions in is
that the opportunities just won't be there for Kiwis and
you won't get that opportunity for those younger Kiwi kids
to easy the movies getting made in their backyard and
b for them to come in and do the shovel
job on the grassroots because that job will be in
(10:49):
Canada or will be in the UK.
Speaker 4 (10:50):
I just don't buy this line that that's needed. We
already have a long hours and low wage culture in
New Zealand, including in the film industry. We don't need
it to get worse. We need better conditions for workers
life we see overseas.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Can you agree with the fact that the film industry
has been absolutely unique and great.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
For willing It has been great.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
I when you think about to where when we're in
our heyday. We had the Hobbit movies and we had
the movies where you know, there's two thousand people living
in Wellington right now that are directly connected to working
at Wetter, you know, and they are some of the
brightest of best from all around the world. We've got
to celebrate that and got to try and bring it in,
don't we.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
Yeah. Absolutely, But if you talk to many of those people,
they will say that the conditions of work are too
difficult and the pay is too low, and they will
tell you that, and they will tell you that very honestly.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
Bridget Morton and Flurfitt Simon's joining us for Friday Faceoff.
The US President has labeled the Ukrainian president as a
dictator as he meets with Putin to try and put
an end to the war, likely by giving away Ukraine territory.
I know we don't normally do a lot of international
stuff on Friday Face Off because it's about Wellington things.
But I think this could play out very interestingly. Fleir,
(11:58):
What are your thoughts, How does this play out? Where
do you think this ends?
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Well, I'm really worried about where it ends, and I
think what we're seeing from Donald Trump is an attempt
to undermine democracy in Europe and give some voice to
those far right groups that are already having too much
influence in those countries. He is spouting absolute nonsense when
it comes to Zelenski and when it comes to him
(12:22):
being a dictator, which is not true as we haven't
had an election, but people don't have elections during wartime.
He has had elections. He's not a dictator. And Judith
Collins this morning on the radio was very clear about
that and took a very firm stance. And now I'm
agreeing with Judith Collins twice on one day.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
But I'm getting concerned by that. It's not what you'd
be brought in the show now.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
No, No, I'm getting concerned about it too. But I
would say that I think it's there is a lot
of destabilization happening in the world at the moment, and
it is hard to pin down where it is going
and what it means. But we are seeing the rise
of the far right in Europe and that is a
deep concern.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
You know what concerns me a little bit about this
whole thing, Bridget, is that we could see the situation
very easily that Trump and Putin actually do the deal
in the background and Ukraine loses some land.
Speaker 5 (13:10):
Yeah, and I don't think it's just them losing some land,
but they would actually, I think lose their security because
it's they made you take a portion of the actual
sort of territory off them. But actually that would mean
that Russia feels powerful, feels validated, and the actions feels
like they can do this again because the other very
powerful actor in this space, the US, has basically endorsed them.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
That's where we're getting to.
Speaker 5 (13:31):
And it seems to be that it's completely on the
basis of Trump's ego and some pettiness that he, you know,
wants to be the leader out there. Zelenski has got
you know, his self brands pretty good. He's out there,
there's a lot of supportive run You just got to
see how many other will Europe.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Be strong enough to actually do something on their own
without America though, That's what really concerns me, and I
don't think they would be. I think that they could
tail just as quickly as everyone else.
Speaker 5 (13:57):
Yeah, I mean, it is certainly worrying in terms of,
you know, we are relying on Europe to come together
in those leaders. There's a lot of rhetoric and there's
a lot of supportive narrative I think out there. But
the fact that we actually haven't seen anything really certifically
happened in terms of Ukraine since this conflict started indicates
that perhaps Europe is not as strong and united as
(14:18):
they're betraying themselves to be.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
Well, that's saying America is holding the whole thing together.
If they walk, they're in trouble. I mean. The other
thing is should we be sending peacekeepers? I mean there's
talk now that we're going to send peacekeepers to Ukraine.
I mean, Fleur, is that a smart move to do
right now? I mean that could really infuriate Donald, couldn't it.
Speaker 4 (14:34):
I think we should absolutely be open to it. And
I think what this whole dispute and conflict is doing
is testing international institutions. And the approach that Trump seems
to be taking is to completely ignore them, ignore all
the norms of international law, and instead do deals himself.
And it's dangerous. Those institutions have been set up in
many cases in the aftermath of terrible conflict across the world,
(14:58):
and they are durable for a reason, and they need
to be respected, and so I'm deeply concerned about where
this is going.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Do you think, Bridget, that we should be sending some
peacekeeping people to Ukraine? Do you think that's a good
move right now?
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Well, I think we have to be a good international actor.
We are a small country at the bottom of the world,
and we do need to play our parts. So Whilist
we can say, you know, Europe is not doing enough
or not strong enough, we have to sort of do
that as well. It's a little bit like their bargain.
We're just talking about it the top of the hour
about China. You do have to balance your economic and
your international obligations. But I do think in this instance
(15:31):
that it is really important that we back in behind democracy,
that we are making sure that small countries like that
are not going to be abused in this way, because,
to be honest, we are as vulnerable.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Bridget, I want to start with you on this one
because I know that exactly what flu is going to say.
The Public Service Commissioner has says the conversation is needed
whether we have too many government departments. Now I've just
taken my seventeen page file at Ethan I said to
Ethan the other day and we talked about I said,
can you give me a list of all the government departments?
And suddenly there was smoke coming out at the bottom
of mind where my printer is, because there's seventeen pages
(16:05):
of government departments. Seventeen pages of them.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
Here's one page in an act schedule, one ay of
the public service.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
There's seventeen pages that printed out.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
For he did one department per page.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
No, he did not. He did about fortyh Can.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
We just stop using Ethan on the show. I think
he's got a look slack.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
What are you thinking when you read that?
Speaker 3 (16:24):
For me, there's always a mix up between the two issues.
Speaker 5 (16:27):
One is a department and b is the outcome or
the policy outcome. So the ones that are always up for,
you know, being cut off of the Ministry for Women
and the Ministry for Ethnic a years. When I look
at for the Ministry Woman, there is absolutely work that
needs to be done in terms of pay gap. You know,
key we save a savings. What we're doing around maternity
leave and having the right ranges, all of that kind
of stuff is really important. What I worry about by
(16:48):
having a separate department is that they are not as
powerful as they could be. Because what happens, and I
know this from being in government, as the cabinet paper
goes out to consultation around all of the key kind
of departments, comes back and then there's this one paragraph
that gets what did the Ministry women think about the
impact could have on gender issues? If we she had
a system in which all departments actually had to think
about these issues rather than just doing the token is
(17:11):
stick go and have a chat to the department, we
actually get probably better outcomes a woman. I don't know
if we need a whole separate department.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
Don't start me on department for women, because my wife
absolutely hates it with a vengeance. She doesn't need anyone
to look after her. She looks after herself. Flu what
do you think about having cutting the departments down?
Speaker 4 (17:32):
Well, look, there is a lot of duplication and unfortunately
we've been concerned for many years around the competition between
government departments. But it's hard to take this government seriously
when it has imposed horrific cuts on government departments with
no plan. So it does just seem like another performative
act too, because it thinks I think that there is
value in attacking the public service or public servants in
(17:56):
the minds of the public, there's a populist element to it.
But look, there is.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
A populist attitude to trying to save money, isn't there.
I mean, I mean, I know this whole person. You're
trying to make it too personally.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
They do beat up on the public service and on
public servants in a way, and they did it all
through the election campaign and it played well for them.
But I think it's lazy politics, and I think if
they were serious about the performance of the public sector,
we'd be having a different conversation. Look, where the workers
within the public service are certainly open and up for
a discussion about how you get greater efficiency, better outcomes,
(18:28):
and how you drive for better decision making, but it
needs to be done in a considered way where those
voices are actually elevated and taken into account.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
We are trying here.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
It is the public service commissioner is a public servant.
He made this.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
He's made racist as an issue, So he is a
public servant making this comedy about publicIt. This is not
Nikola Willis or Luxon. No lu Luxeon headed comments is
like the public service commissioner has come in. He's pretty
new in the role, but his rare experience and has said, actually,
I'm looking across waters within most of there, and I
think we have to have a conversation about departments.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
So I don't think you can actually smash together.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
The things around budget cuts and what Ryan Rosch is saying,
actually from refision see an outcomes point of view, we're
actually not delivering the best possibly not delivering the best
value by structuring in this way. And that's where I
think we've actually get a difference. Because he is not political,
he has got a particular role and therefore he needs to.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
He's there to serve the government of the day, and
he will be saying this because the government of the
day are looking at it and we've already seen I mean,
I think he's far.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Too intelligent a man to disrespect him like that. I
think he's coming That's.
Speaker 4 (19:29):
The basis of our constitutional democracy is that public servants
serve the government of the day, not in a party
political way, but certainly.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
But do we have too many orders from.
Speaker 4 (19:37):
The government of the day and that's appropriate. It's clear
to me these orders are coming from the top, from
the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Public Service,
and that is completely appropriate.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
The public service is also going to pay free and
Frank advice. There's a clear important part of our constitution.
And I think it's a little bit I agree with Nick.
I think it's disrespectful Sir ch kind of say that
he's not doing his role of providing friend Frank advice
because it aligns with the tule like absolutely, as you
see many of the people you represent really open to
(20:07):
having those dicussions abou getting better outcomes through efficiencies. But
it's the way it's done, and I think that's what
he's talking about, and that's what's really value about it.
That he's not making a he doesn't need to win
any votes. He's got like a very well paid, very
good job set for a certain amount of time, so
he just needs to get on and do it. And
I think that's where I'd like to actually have a
proper conversation about it, rather than delving into the spin
(20:27):
and the politics of it.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Yeah, and I, for one, sitting there watching it, feel
very comfortable that he's the right guy for the right
job and he's going to make the right decisions based
on what we actually require and need.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
Well, what I'll tell you is if you approach the
kind of change that we see in the public service,
and we've already seen, if you keep approaching it on
the basis of only cutting costs, it will not deliver
well for New Zealanders. You will see the undermining of
public services, getting them ready for privatization, and you'll see
worse outcomes for New Zealanders. If it's a genuine discussion
and good faith about how we make better public services
(21:00):
and better departments, everyone's up for it, but I'm cynical
about it given this government's track record.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
I've got fluffits Simons and that she's calmed down a
little bit more. Always, No, you're not calm. You are
very upsetting. Bridget Morton in the studio, I want to
talk about Destiny Church. There's caused to remove Destiny's Churches
Charitable Trust after its protest of a rainbow story time
over the weekend left children and families barricading themselves into
(21:27):
a room and terrified. Bridget Morton, I mean this story,
I don't know, It's got some sort of ugliness to
it that I don't like. And should we be more
selective who we allowed to have charitable status.
Speaker 5 (21:41):
Actually, I think, you know, it doesn't have a little
bit of distastefulness to it.
Speaker 3 (21:44):
That is disgusting what they did.
Speaker 5 (21:46):
They're absolutely free to have their views and to do
peaceful protest, but the way they went about it was
just appalling and there's no justification for that when they
say that families are at the core of what they
believe in.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
So I do think in terms.
Speaker 5 (21:59):
Of Destiney Church, the charity's law and who gets charitable
status is very complex and I think also needs some reform.
In New Zealand, we've had a complex series of cases
over the last few years between Family First and Greenpeace
and where the U can be sort of a political
advocate as alongside your charitable purposes. There's some signals from
(22:19):
the government that they are looking at that, and maybe
something happening in the budget around it. I'm not sure,
but I do think that is something that we need
to look as a wider picture.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Yeah, I mean, how why should a church like Destiny
Church gets that charitable status. I just don't understand it.
Speaker 4 (22:36):
I don't think we should call them a church. I
think they're a hate group and that they're violent criminals,
and there's no place for them in New Zealand. I
don't think they should get any exemptions from playing tax.
They exploit members of their so called parish to get
money for their leaders. It is inappropriate. Is it a cult,
it's a hate group of cult. It's certainly not a
(22:56):
church in any sense of what I've seen churches be about.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
And what did you think when you saw that behavior?
I mean they look like a gang to me with
the insignias on the back of their T shirts and
that did they look to you?
Speaker 4 (23:07):
Yeah, that's thugs and it's outrageous, particularly when these children involved,
and it's attack on one of New Zealand's most marginalized communities.
I have no time for them. Yeah.
Speaker 5 (23:17):
I think one of the issues too, is that they
are disparaging what a church does. We know that the
churches for hundreds of years in New Zealand have provided
a very value of community service and many continue to
do so, and that should be supported. And I think
that does attract a charitable status because when they are
providing that community status, I community support. I do think
that that's valuable. The question is about where you draw
(23:39):
that line, and then where you draw that line with
the sort of advocacy side of it as well. So
as I go back to it, I think we need
to have a big reform and relook at this because
the charities are not operating in the same way.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
They used to.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
No, and I don't believe churches are operating the same
way that they. Yes, when I was a kid, then
you know your parish would come round and visit and
make sure you're all okay. I don't think they are either.
So I mean, I think that's another debate that we
had Friday Friday face off with Bridget Morton and flur
fitz Simon. So I'm going to lighten it up for
the last twenty minutes because it's Friday and let's get
ready to go to go out and have a good
(24:11):
time swearing. Now far, we've seen you upset this morning.
You didn't swear at me, though we've talked about swearing
this morning. Is swearing becoming more acceptable? Are you looking
very guilty as I asked you? Are you a swearer?
Speaker 4 (24:27):
I do cuss a little bit too much, yes, do you? Yeah? Terribly?
Speaker 2 (24:31):
You use if we.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
Are all the time? Yeah, I'm embarrassed to admit it,
but it's true.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
The seaword it's occurred before.
Speaker 4 (24:42):
Wow, it feels like I'm in confession.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Wow, I would not have picked that. Why Why do
we swear so much? Now?
Speaker 5 (24:50):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (24:50):
It's such a release. It feels so good.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Did you hear your mother and father swear?
Speaker 4 (24:54):
Yes, constantly, including to each other?
Speaker 2 (24:57):
Wow? You see my I can? I mean I saw
that my parents fighting enough, God damn I did. But
I never ever heard my either of my parents ever swear,
and in fact, never heard them use the Lord's name
in vain.
Speaker 4 (25:08):
Have you sworn in front of your children? Is it awkward? Pause?
Speaker 2 (25:14):
I have to say yes, yeah. But is that a
generational thing?
Speaker 4 (25:20):
Yeah? Probably? My mother is very loose with swear words.
In fact, some places, some households have said that she's
the first person that's ever sworn in their house. So
I you know, I'm following at her footsteps.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Bridget Morton, I know that you're going to say it around.
You're looking at me right that I know what you're
looking at it. You're a swearer too, aren't you.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Well?
Speaker 5 (25:39):
So I grew up on a house we're swearing was
absolutely a nogo and I remember only like a couple
of years ago I said the F word in front
of my father and I immediately crumbled inside. So no defense,
but you know, a great upbringing, it didn't really help.
Just before Christmas, I a certainly swore on writing New
(25:59):
Zealand Ontional radio.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
So i'ment is it a right for politicians to swear?
Speaker 5 (26:06):
I always think that I think it's fine to swear,
but you shouldn't swear act someone. So you know, saying
to someone that I'm if and angry about this is
very different to saying if off like. It's quite a
different tone to it. So I don't think that there's
that big a deal. I think we've moved on from
the sort of toyo to add you know, bugger, that
(26:27):
was a big sort of scandal.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
We have got bigger problems in the will to worry about.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Have either of you told someone the Air Force totally?
Speaker 3 (26:35):
I'm almost in I have, like I would hope I have.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I must have met I have, you know, but I
work in hospitality. If someone gets you too wide up
and you're trying to check me, I just say, yeah,
why don't yet off? You know? So it's okay. What
about your kids? Have you heard your kids ever swear?
Speaker 4 (26:55):
I've got teenagers and we are battling with the set present.
It's fair to say, and yes there is some swearing
and I'm not that happy about it, which.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Is your mind you, but it's not a it for
your kids.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
I know, I know, I am one of my friends.
She's got kids.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
I think they'll be five and seven, and so there's
a real kind of joy about swearing. So she has
this rule that about once a week, when they're in
the cart and nobody else can hear, they get five
minutes where they love to say any swear where they like,
and then shut it off.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
And you'll love sweat.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
Trouble with that. So it's trouble with that you once
you get it in your psyche.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
No, they don't. They don't.
Speaker 5 (27:29):
They know that it's like this little like fun little tristion.
Every week they can take their little rant and then
they're done.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
Oh gosh, just like taking your kids around the corner
to give them a beer before they have a beer,
or smoke before they have a smoke and it starts.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
It's definitely not doing that for it.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Okay, all right, let's let's go back to parliament. Winston
Peters and Shane Jones have attacked the Green MP Ricardo
Mensie March again, questioning why he refers to the country
as a rare when he arrived in two thousand and six.
And now I almost know, Flur, what you're going to
say with this something about Ricardo Mensie March and I've
(28:01):
seen him in a cafe, something about him that he yeah,
entitled is my word.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
No, that's not how I describe it all. I think he's
a very talented politician, and I think he's a very
passionate and committed person, and he's effective, and that's why
he's raising the shackles, raising the attention from Shane Jones
and Winston Peters. It's because he's doing his job.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Well.
Speaker 4 (28:25):
I have a lot of respect for him, and I'm
I really welcome.
Speaker 2 (28:29):
To say aet era.
Speaker 4 (28:30):
Of course, it is good on him. He's in New
Zealander and the same way that all of us in
this room.
Speaker 2 (28:34):
Are ooh gosh, Bridget come on, well.
Speaker 5 (28:38):
I mean, this is the best thing that happened to
his career in terms of you know, they're really just
giving him a platform and giving it all. Like, tell
me that most people had not heard of him until
Shane Jones just gave him this big celebrity moment. So
for him, particularly because he is a Green MP, the
best thing in the world for him is to be
seen as opposition to New Zealand first, to be seen
(28:59):
as a champion for an immigrant workforce like this is great,
great profile for him. So I don't think, you know,
he's I don't think he's got to be. It should
be too upset by what's happening. I do have to
say that I really enjoyed. I think it was a
spin off that found you know, that pointed out that
Andy Foster was an immigrant to this country as well,
and whether or not he was showing appropriate gratitude. I
thought it was quite just pointing out that within their
(29:21):
own part, of these people that weren't born in New Zealand,
and all of those people, you know, Shane, Winston, and
Ricardo and Andy, they all got voted into the same
place by the same rules. Therefore they all have the
same rights to advocate for people.
Speaker 4 (29:34):
I think I wouldn't say, though, that it doesn't have
an impact on him. I think what happens when people
like Winston Peteresn't Shane Jones call out somebody in this
way and quite as in a phobic way. It actually
emboldens a whole lot of racist, dangerous people and they
can tune on him. It's inappropriate behavior from MPs.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
Okay, I think he's a bit of a whiner everything,
but every he opens his mouth it sounds like he's whining,
sounds like the naughty teenage.
Speaker 4 (29:59):
It's not doubled down on him. He's already under a
tech Okay, all right.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
That you don't give him the profile boost as well.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
I'm just saying I'm big personal honest, there's anything I
could be at this job, can't it?
Speaker 3 (30:09):
Yeah, well that's what they employed you, right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
The Friday Facie hot?
Speaker 2 (30:15):
Why not? Okay, Bridget Morton, give me your hots and
knots for the week.
Speaker 5 (30:20):
My hot is the Chamber of Commerces Dive into twenty
five event they had last night.
Speaker 3 (30:24):
I think we're doing.
Speaker 5 (30:25):
A lot of negative to speak everyone what's happening in Wellington.
I think it was a sold out event. It had
a massive, great vibe, great people pasting about like actually
what we can do to drive the Wellington economy.
Speaker 3 (30:35):
It was a really good event.
Speaker 5 (30:37):
Maybe some feedback to Simon Arcis the Chambers year about
the atrocious tropical suit he wore.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
But I think all of the whole a great event.
Speaker 5 (30:45):
My not has to go to axe Simon Court and
his man's planning that woman on the benefit should use
menstrual cups. It was horrendous. It was so dumb, but
also the man's planning about you get one for fifteen
dollars from the chemic just it was awful and he
deserves all of the criticism he got this week for it.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
I can't even look up. I can't even look couple.
I cringing so much. I can't do you good. Oh
my god, that is so bad. It is so bad.
Flur Fit Simons, don't repeat it. Please.
Speaker 4 (31:18):
My hot is actually christ Church. I've been down in
christ Church for work this week, and I haven't actually
spent that much time down there, but I walked around
the city and did a bit of shopping, went out
for dinner. It's a great city. And actually the mayor
film major described it at a conference I was at
a while ago, is if you haven't visited christ Church
since twenty fifteen, you haven't visited christ Church. And I
totally agree with them. So just a hard recommend on
(31:39):
christ Church. My not is the government's relentless attack on
working people. We saw it this week with them trying
to push through the partial strikes legislation. They're trying to
crack down on partial strikes. We already have a very
limited right to strike in New Zealand. This is on
top of them introducing ninety day trials and firing it well,
the removal of fair pay agreements and woefull increases to
(32:01):
the minimum wage. So I've had enough of their attacks
on working people.
Speaker 2 (32:04):
We have we got facts on how many people have
lost their jobs on the ninety days.
Speaker 5 (32:09):
No.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
Actually, that's the other shameful thing about it is there's
no records kept of it, so we don't even know
how employers are using it, or what it's meaning, or
what are the traumatic and mental health consequences on workers
from being dismissed without any reason.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
No, I'd like to tell you that I've never ever
used it once.
Speaker 4 (32:24):
I'm not surprised. You're a decent person.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
Well, I just wouldn't. I mean, you know, it's who
it's a person that employs the person that got it wrong,
not the person they employed. I think, by the way,
christ Church, are you just rattled Ethan's cage because he's
about as soon as the show is off, he's off
to the Chiro Club. He wants us to finish so
early so he can get to the Choral Club for
the first class of white How my producers a member
of the choral Club, I'm not wet. Union clear clearly
(32:50):
did the union, and he's off to what's that thing
down south in christ Church? What's it called Electric Avenue?
Seventy thousand sold out. It's amazing, Bridget Morton, thank you
very much for joining us. Flirfit Simon's thank you very
much for I don't think I'd want to be having
any meetings with you this afternoon, because I think it'd
be very hard to deal with this afternoon. Just quietly.
I'm not saying that as I'm not saying it as
(33:11):
a male female thing. I'm just saying it as a sweet,
big equal. I'm not trying to say.
Speaker 4 (33:15):
That, you know you're the minstrel Cup.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
I'm not saying anything about that. I'm not mentioning anything
like that. I just think that someone's going to have
some grumpy afternoon meetings this afternoon because we've fired you up.
I mean, I've never seen you so fired up. Have
you a great weekend both of you. Thank you for
coming on the show. Appreciate you both.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from news Talk said b Wellington's official week interview. It's
Friday fatime with property Management a better rental experience for all.
Visit Quovi dot cot In's head starts Friday, joining.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Us to Friday. Based off this week is lawyer and
political commentator Bridget Morning Morton.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Good morning, Bridget, good morning.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
How are you?
Speaker 3 (00:42):
I'm very good. It's beautiful on Sunday and it's Friday.
Speaker 4 (00:44):
So what could be Betther?
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Yeah? What could be better? Friday? Yeah? Lawyers Friday started
about now too, don't they? And and PSA Assistant Secretary
Flir fitz Simon's morning, Flir, Good morning. Union. People don't
finish at three at eleven or twelve o'clock on a Friday.
Do they work right through to seven o'clock at night?
Driving for us to get us a better deal?
Speaker 5 (01:06):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (01:07):
There's a lot of week to do, Nick, I.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
Know there's a lot of work to get. How many
people are getting pay rises at the moment?
Speaker 4 (01:12):
Not enough.
Speaker 2 (01:13):
Nobody's getting a pay rise. You had a pay rise lately, Bridget?
Speaker 3 (01:17):
I have, but so have our staff.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
That's what we do in small business is you've got
a reward everyone, Gosh.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
I've had a pay rise for a well, have you
had a.
Speaker 4 (01:25):
Pay rise for I've talked you about this before, Nack.
You need to join the union and we'll sort it
out for here.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
That's a big promise.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
I loan it.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Have you looked at me? Be reading the papers, ladies.
A lot of people are out our organization, losing their jobs.
I don't think I've a guard near the union right now.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
Exactly the wrong attitude. Time to join.
Speaker 2 (01:43):
Okay, is there a union for talk back hosts?
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Yeah? Absolutely too, would be the one.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Okay, Ethan says he's and it doesn't help him much anyway.
Let's talk about.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
The topics disagree.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
Let's talk about he's always moding about his wages, like
every person, everybody. You know what, I probably have more
conversations about money with everyone and works a life than
anything else. People always worry what they're getting paid, an't they?
Speaker 4 (02:07):
Well it's yeah, it's how you really has a direct
correlation with your quality of life. So that's pretty important.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
Yeah, of course it is. Right. Let's start with the
China warships. Judith Collins has come out and said she'd
wish that she'd known. I'll start with you on this one, Bridget,
she wished that she'd known. There's it's a major force.
I mean, it's not just one little tug boat like
the Americans sent in from Hawaii into Wellington. This is
pretty major. Why are they here? What should we do?
Speaker 5 (02:36):
Yeah, I mean it's a tricky one, right. I don't
have any direct connections to the Chinese government, so I
can't give any any state secrets about what's happening. But
it is quite just concerning to have them there and
to have that sort of forces sitting there on the
sort of almost on the horizon as such. So I think, yeah,
I'm going to live it to the experts on this
one to how to deal with this, because that is
a very tricky space for us to manage flur.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Can we do anything at all?
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Well offish?
Speaker 5 (03:01):
Right?
Speaker 4 (03:01):
I just want to say that I was quite impressed
by the comments I've seen reported from Judith Collins. It's
clear that she is sensitively and delicately dealing with this issue,
but she has rightly described it as a wake up call,
and I think it is a wake up call about
our influence in the Pacific and the importance of that
and just the involvement of China is something that we
need to take note of and think carefully about how
(03:22):
we continue to maintain those close relationships with our Pacific partners.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
And the problem isn't it rigid that they're our biggest
trading partner by a mile, So we can't annoy them,
can we?
Speaker 4 (03:36):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (03:36):
And I think we in some ways it's better to
work constructively in terms of that We're not going to
be able to outspend them in the Pacific. We have
to be realistic about that, and many of the Pacific
nations need a lot of support.
Speaker 3 (03:47):
So to sort of.
Speaker 5 (03:48):
Say to them that you shouldn't be taking resources or
anything from them is I think a little bit possibly
patronizing of us or a naive of us to sort
of just claim that.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
I think also, you're absolutely right.
Speaker 5 (03:59):
There's a huge part of our population that relies on
the money that comes in through exporting to China, and
their business is built on it, and we would struggle
with that was cut off.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Yes, we would as an economy really struggle that was
cut off. So we've got to be very very careful
how we play it, don't.
Speaker 4 (04:14):
We flu Well you have to be take some care.
But actually what our government has consistently done governments of
both stripes is raised difficult issues with China when the
opportunity presents, including issues around human rights. And I imagine
we will also be raising this difficult issue about them
coming close to our waters and to our borders, and
(04:35):
I think we should do that because actually you can't
just be cowered by economic interests. You have to have
an independent foreign policy and you have to make sure
that you raise difficult things with countries like China.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
Right, let's move on to the vision for Wellington's first event.
They brought in star Power. Couldn't have brought in bigger
star power? Did that? James Cameron spoke about how the
film industry could be the answer to Wellington's growth, but
he noted support from the government would also be needed.
Flu did you go to the event.
Speaker 4 (05:08):
I didn't. I was out of town, but I probably
wouldn't have gone anyway. But credit to them, they got
a sizeable crowd and I really respect people that want
to organize people around how we make Wellington better. I
would say that the reporting of it's been clear about
who that crowd was. A much older demographic and a
very white demographic, so I'm not surprised given those demographics
(05:28):
in the crowd that things like cycle ways and concerns
around parking were reportedly raised as as some of the
main issues at people, except.
Speaker 2 (05:37):
That they were mentioned in the forum, which which really
surprised me.
Speaker 4 (05:41):
I understand there were crowd reactions when aspects of those
things were raised, but I do think it was good
that they did lift it to talk about the film
industry and the potential that offers, and quite interesting looking
at the comments from James Cameron around been quite defensive
about government involvement in the film industry, and I think
we're right to be cynical about handouts to the film industry.
(06:03):
We should expect something in return for them, but we
do get.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I mean he set himself for every dollar we get
where he said we get seven or eight back.
Speaker 4 (06:11):
You could make that argument for most government subsidy into
different industries. What I think I want to see from
a film industry in Wellington as a commitment to New
Zealand content and a commitment to well paid, stable jobs,
and we don't have that at the moment. In Australia.
There are far higher requirements around Australian content and that's
why we're getting so many good Australian dramas coming out.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
And we are two tenor I mean in Wellington Wellington
based movie I think it was Wellington Base was it's
just been released and the release was in Wellington bridget
What are your thoughts on the whole movie thing. I mean,
the whole idea of him James Cameron speaking was he
was going to use it for his forum to speak.
It wasn't anything to do with Vision Wellington, was it? Really?
Speaker 3 (06:49):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (06:50):
And I think the problem you've got is James Cameron
as possibly the worst salesperson of industry subsidies.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
Could be a billionaire everitar.
Speaker 5 (06:58):
Film in like biggest grossing film of all time, like
two point nine billion or something, and he personally made
something like ninety five million out of it. So in
terms of supporting that film industry, I think you'd actually
have a much powerful voice for the industry from some
of those amazing gaming industry that we've got in Willington.
Some of those more independent set of filmmakers.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Well they were there as well, Yeah, but they.
Speaker 5 (07:20):
Obviously weren't put you know, they didn't have as much
that voice has not come through like James Cameron because
he is James Cameron. I think also I'm pretty skeptical
as well in terms of, you know, whether we're not
in the government subsidy because of those big profits that
can be made. I probably differ here with Flur though,
in terms of what you can actually do to support them,
and I think some deregulation and allowing some more flexibility
(07:42):
we know to make big movies that you need to
just you've got to have some more flexibility around your
employment laws. I think you can make it easier in
terms of some of the consenting and things to make
them more attractive to be here. So I think without
a doubt that has to be something that we can
look at to make actually a more attractive place to
come and make movies.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
Now you've put some really interesting slides to that, because
I'm concerned that Flur, if we get too tough on them,
we're going to lose more and more too. I mean,
now we know Melbourne's starting to go hard, Sydney's going hard,
Auckland's going hard. Surely we've got to work to keep
this industry. And you take the film industry out of
Wellington over the last twenty years. You know what have
(08:22):
we got?
Speaker 4 (08:23):
Well I totally disagree with deregulating employment relations in that
film industry further, they already have a special deal. But
also what we need to see is the workers of
the film industry looked after. I know many people have
worked in the film industry when they were younger, and
they would love to go back there now, but they
can't because of the ridiculous long hours and huge pressure
(08:45):
put on them as workers in that industry, and they
are all contracted out. It is a very difficult job
to do under intense pressure with long hours. Now, that's
not a good job, that's not a decent life. That's
not going to deliver for those people doing that work.
When they need to have a wake up call and
treat the people working on the film in film with
respect and give them a decent life as well as
(09:05):
doing this important interesting work.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Can I tell you a very interesting story that once
was told to me when I was young, when I
first got into hospitality. A guy was working in this
local circus that came around town right and his job
was he had a big shovel and he walked behind
the elephant and all he did was pick up the
poo from the from the elephant, and all day while
the circus was going on, this guy was there with
his shovel. And so guy walks up to him at
(09:29):
the end of the end of the show and end
of the circus and system gosh, you've got a horrible
hard job. Do you want me to come and work
for me? And the guy looked him and said, what
and give up showers? I mean, that's show bers, I mean,
it's a long story to tell you that. You know,
those long hours and hard work, that's we all do
it in showers.
Speaker 4 (09:47):
Well, that's right, and that's actually really important work. You know,
we needed that work done because that's a very important
aspect of hygiene and running of a circus. So I
respect him and the work that he's done.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
But what I'm saying is that that that you've got
to accept that that's just part of the gig.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Now. That's why he was rightly proud of his work
and got on him.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Yeah, But I.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
Think what you're sort of saying though, that there's a
bargain to be made in terms of that your wages
or your hours are not the only thing that you
get job satisfaction from and I worked in many, many
years in politics. I could earn much more outside of politics.
I could have worked considerably less hours, had considerably less stress.
But I loved working there and the beility to be
in that environment and make a difference made it all
(10:27):
worth it to me. And I think that's where we
really risk if we are going too far on employment
laws or putting too many of those restrictions in is
that the opportunities just won't be there for Kiwis and
you won't get that opportunity for those younger Kiwi kids
to easy the movies getting made in their backyard and
b for them to come in and do the shovel
job on the grassroots because that job will be in
(10:49):
Canada or will be in the UK.
Speaker 4 (10:50):
I just don't buy this line that that's needed. We
already have a long hours and low wage culture in
New Zealand, including in the film industry. We don't need
it to get worse. We need better conditions for workers
life we see overseas.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Can you agree with the fact that the film industry
has been absolutely unique and great.
Speaker 4 (11:05):
For willing It has been great.
Speaker 2 (11:08):
I when you think about to where when we're in
our heyday. We had the Hobbit movies and we had
the movies where you know, there's two thousand people living
in Wellington right now that are directly connected to working
at Wetter, you know, and they are some of the
brightest of best from all around the world. We've got
to celebrate that and got to try and bring it in,
don't we.
Speaker 4 (11:26):
Yeah. Absolutely, But if you talk to many of those people,
they will say that the conditions of work are too
difficult and the pay is too low, and they will
tell you that, and they will tell you that very honestly.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
Bridget Morton and Flurfitt Simon's joining us for Friday Faceoff.
The US President has labeled the Ukrainian president as a
dictator as he meets with Putin to try and put
an end to the war, likely by giving away Ukraine territory.
I know we don't normally do a lot of international
stuff on Friday Face Off because it's about Wellington things.
But I think this could play out very interestingly. Fleir,
(11:58):
What are your thoughts, How does this play out? Where
do you think this ends?
Speaker 4 (12:02):
Well, I'm really worried about where it ends, and I
think what we're seeing from Donald Trump is an attempt
to undermine democracy in Europe and give some voice to
those far right groups that are already having too much
influence in those countries. He is spouting absolute nonsense when
it comes to Zelenski and when it comes to him
(12:22):
being a dictator, which is not true as we haven't
had an election, but people don't have elections during wartime.
He has had elections. He's not a dictator. And Judith
Collins this morning on the radio was very clear about
that and took a very firm stance. And now I'm
agreeing with Judith Collins twice on one day.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
But I'm getting concerned by that. It's not what you'd
be brought in the show now.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
No, No, I'm getting concerned about it too. But I
would say that I think it's there is a lot
of destabilization happening in the world at the moment, and
it is hard to pin down where it is going
and what it means. But we are seeing the rise
of the far right in Europe and that is a
deep concern.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
You know what concerns me a little bit about this
whole thing, Bridget, is that we could see the situation
very easily that Trump and Putin actually do the deal
in the background and Ukraine loses some land.
Speaker 5 (13:10):
Yeah, and I don't think it's just them losing some land,
but they would actually, I think lose their security because
it's they made you take a portion of the actual
sort of territory off them. But actually that would mean
that Russia feels powerful, feels validated, and the actions feels
like they can do this again because the other very
powerful actor in this space, the US, has basically endorsed them.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
That's where we're getting to.
Speaker 5 (13:31):
And it seems to be that it's completely on the
basis of Trump's ego and some pettiness that he, you know,
wants to be the leader out there. Zelenski has got
you know, his self brands pretty good. He's out there,
there's a lot of supportive run You just got to
see how many other will Europe.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Be strong enough to actually do something on their own
without America though, That's what really concerns me, and I
don't think they would be. I think that they could
tail just as quickly as everyone else.
Speaker 5 (13:57):
Yeah, I mean, it is certainly worrying in terms of,
you know, we are relying on Europe to come together
in those leaders. There's a lot of rhetoric and there's
a lot of supportive narrative I think out there. But
the fact that we actually haven't seen anything really certifically
happened in terms of Ukraine since this conflict started indicates
that perhaps Europe is not as strong and united as
(14:18):
they're betraying themselves to be.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
Well, that's saying America is holding the whole thing together.
If they walk, they're in trouble. I mean. The other
thing is should we be sending peacekeepers? I mean there's
talk now that we're going to send peacekeepers to Ukraine.
I mean, Fleur, is that a smart move to do
right now? I mean that could really infuriate Donald, couldn't it.
Speaker 4 (14:34):
I think we should absolutely be open to it. And
I think what this whole dispute and conflict is doing
is testing international institutions. And the approach that Trump seems
to be taking is to completely ignore them, ignore all
the norms of international law, and instead do deals himself.
And it's dangerous. Those institutions have been set up in
many cases in the aftermath of terrible conflict across the world,
(14:58):
and they are durable for a reason, and they need
to be respected, and so I'm deeply concerned about where
this is going.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
Do you think, Bridget, that we should be sending some
peacekeeping people to Ukraine? Do you think that's a good
move right now?
Speaker 5 (15:10):
Well, I think we have to be a good international actor.
We are a small country at the bottom of the world,
and we do need to play our parts. So Whilist
we can say, you know, Europe is not doing enough
or not strong enough, we have to sort of do
that as well. It's a little bit like their bargain.
We're just talking about it the top of the hour
about China. You do have to balance your economic and
your international obligations. But I do think in this instance
(15:31):
that it is really important that we back in behind democracy,
that we are making sure that small countries like that
are not going to be abused in this way, because,
to be honest, we are as vulnerable.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
Bridget, I want to start with you on this one
because I know that exactly what flu is going to say.
The Public Service Commissioner has says the conversation is needed
whether we have too many government departments. Now I've just
taken my seventeen page file at Ethan I said to
Ethan the other day and we talked about I said,
can you give me a list of all the government departments?
And suddenly there was smoke coming out at the bottom
of mind where my printer is, because there's seventeen pages
(16:05):
of government departments. Seventeen pages of them.
Speaker 4 (16:07):
Here's one page in an act schedule, one ay of
the public service.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
There's seventeen pages that printed out.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
For he did one department per page.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
No, he did not. He did about fortyh Can.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
We just stop using Ethan on the show. I think
he's got a look slack.
Speaker 2 (16:22):
What are you thinking when you read that?
Speaker 3 (16:24):
For me, there's always a mix up between the two issues.
Speaker 5 (16:27):
One is a department and b is the outcome or
the policy outcome. So the ones that are always up for,
you know, being cut off of the Ministry for Women
and the Ministry for Ethnic a years. When I look
at for the Ministry Woman, there is absolutely work that
needs to be done in terms of pay gap. You know,
key we save a savings. What we're doing around maternity
leave and having the right ranges, all of that kind
of stuff is really important. What I worry about by
(16:48):
having a separate department is that they are not as
powerful as they could be. Because what happens, and I
know this from being in government, as the cabinet paper
goes out to consultation around all of the key kind
of departments, comes back and then there's this one paragraph
that gets what did the Ministry women think about the
impact could have on gender issues? If we she had
a system in which all departments actually had to think
about these issues rather than just doing the token is
(17:11):
stick go and have a chat to the department, we
actually get probably better outcomes a woman. I don't know
if we need a whole separate department.
Speaker 2 (17:18):
Don't start me on department for women, because my wife
absolutely hates it with a vengeance. She doesn't need anyone
to look after her. She looks after herself. Flu what
do you think about having cutting the departments down?
Speaker 4 (17:32):
Well, look, there is a lot of duplication and unfortunately
we've been concerned for many years around the competition between
government departments. But it's hard to take this government seriously
when it has imposed horrific cuts on government departments with
no plan. So it does just seem like another performative
act too, because it thinks I think that there is
value in attacking the public service or public servants in
(17:56):
the minds of the public, there's a populist element to it.
But look, there is.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
A populist attitude to trying to save money, isn't there.
I mean, I mean, I know this whole person. You're
trying to make it too personally.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
They do beat up on the public service and on
public servants in a way, and they did it all
through the election campaign and it played well for them.
But I think it's lazy politics, and I think if
they were serious about the performance of the public sector,
we'd be having a different conversation. Look, where the workers
within the public service are certainly open and up for
a discussion about how you get greater efficiency, better outcomes,
(18:28):
and how you drive for better decision making, but it
needs to be done in a considered way where those
voices are actually elevated and taken into account.
Speaker 2 (18:35):
We are trying here.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
It is the public service commissioner is a public servant.
He made this.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
He's made racist as an issue, So he is a
public servant making this comedy about publicIt. This is not
Nikola Willis or Luxon. No lu Luxeon headed comments is
like the public service commissioner has come in. He's pretty
new in the role, but his rare experience and has said, actually,
I'm looking across waters within most of there, and I
think we have to have a conversation about departments.
Speaker 3 (19:00):
So I don't think you can actually smash together.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
The things around budget cuts and what Ryan Rosch is saying,
actually from refision see an outcomes point of view, we're
actually not delivering the best possibly not delivering the best
value by structuring in this way. And that's where I
think we've actually get a difference. Because he is not political,
he has got a particular role and therefore he needs to.
Speaker 4 (19:18):
He's there to serve the government of the day, and
he will be saying this because the government of the
day are looking at it and we've already seen I mean,
I think he's far.
Speaker 2 (19:24):
Too intelligent a man to disrespect him like that. I
think he's coming That's.
Speaker 4 (19:29):
The basis of our constitutional democracy is that public servants
serve the government of the day, not in a party
political way, but certainly.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
But do we have too many orders from.
Speaker 4 (19:37):
The government of the day and that's appropriate. It's clear
to me these orders are coming from the top, from
the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Public Service,
and that is completely appropriate.
Speaker 5 (19:46):
The public service is also going to pay free and
Frank advice. There's a clear important part of our constitution.
And I think it's a little bit I agree with Nick.
I think it's disrespectful Sir ch kind of say that
he's not doing his role of providing friend Frank advice
because it aligns with the tule like absolutely, as you
see many of the people you represent really open to
(20:07):
having those dicussions abou getting better outcomes through efficiencies. But
it's the way it's done, and I think that's what
he's talking about, and that's what's really value about it.
That he's not making a he doesn't need to win
any votes. He's got like a very well paid, very
good job set for a certain amount of time, so
he just needs to get on and do it. And
I think that's where I'd like to actually have a
proper conversation about it, rather than delving into the spin
(20:27):
and the politics of it.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
Yeah, and I, for one, sitting there watching it, feel
very comfortable that he's the right guy for the right
job and he's going to make the right decisions based
on what we actually require and need.
Speaker 4 (20:38):
Well, what I'll tell you is if you approach the
kind of change that we see in the public service,
and we've already seen, if you keep approaching it on
the basis of only cutting costs, it will not deliver
well for New Zealanders. You will see the undermining of
public services, getting them ready for privatization, and you'll see
worse outcomes for New Zealanders. If it's a genuine discussion
and good faith about how we make better public services
(21:00):
and better departments, everyone's up for it, but I'm cynical
about it given this government's track record.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
I've got fluffits Simons and that she's calmed down a
little bit more. Always, No, you're not calm. You are
very upsetting. Bridget Morton in the studio, I want to
talk about Destiny Church. There's caused to remove Destiny's Churches
Charitable Trust after its protest of a rainbow story time
over the weekend left children and families barricading themselves into
(21:27):
a room and terrified. Bridget Morton, I mean this story,
I don't know, It's got some sort of ugliness to
it that I don't like. And should we be more
selective who we allowed to have charitable status.
Speaker 5 (21:41):
Actually, I think, you know, it doesn't have a little
bit of distastefulness to it.
Speaker 3 (21:44):
That is disgusting what they did.
Speaker 5 (21:46):
They're absolutely free to have their views and to do
peaceful protest, but the way they went about it was
just appalling and there's no justification for that when they
say that families are at the core of what they
believe in.
Speaker 3 (21:58):
So I do think in terms.
Speaker 5 (21:59):
Of Destiney Church, the charity's law and who gets charitable
status is very complex and I think also needs some reform.
In New Zealand, we've had a complex series of cases
over the last few years between Family First and Greenpeace
and where the U can be sort of a political
advocate as alongside your charitable purposes. There's some signals from
(22:19):
the government that they are looking at that, and maybe
something happening in the budget around it. I'm not sure,
but I do think that is something that we need
to look as a wider picture.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Yeah, I mean, how why should a church like Destiny
Church gets that charitable status. I just don't understand it.
Speaker 4 (22:36):
I don't think we should call them a church. I
think they're a hate group and that they're violent criminals,
and there's no place for them in New Zealand. I
don't think they should get any exemptions from playing tax.
They exploit members of their so called parish to get
money for their leaders. It is inappropriate. Is it a cult,
it's a hate group of cult. It's certainly not a
(22:56):
church in any sense of what I've seen churches be about.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
And what did you think when you saw that behavior?
I mean they look like a gang to me with
the insignias on the back of their T shirts and
that did they look to you?
Speaker 4 (23:07):
Yeah, that's thugs and it's outrageous, particularly when these children involved,
and it's attack on one of New Zealand's most marginalized communities.
I have no time for them. Yeah.
Speaker 5 (23:17):
I think one of the issues too, is that they
are disparaging what a church does. We know that the
churches for hundreds of years in New Zealand have provided
a very value of community service and many continue to
do so, and that should be supported. And I think
that does attract a charitable status because when they are
providing that community status, I community support. I do think
that that's valuable. The question is about where you draw
(23:39):
that line, and then where you draw that line with
the sort of advocacy side of it as well. So
as I go back to it, I think we need
to have a big reform and relook at this because
the charities are not operating in the same way.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
They used to.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
No, and I don't believe churches are operating the same
way that they. Yes, when I was a kid, then
you know your parish would come round and visit and
make sure you're all okay. I don't think they are either.
So I mean, I think that's another debate that we
had Friday Friday face off with Bridget Morton and flur
fitz Simon. So I'm going to lighten it up for
the last twenty minutes because it's Friday and let's get
ready to go to go out and have a good
(24:11):
time swearing. Now far, we've seen you upset this morning.
You didn't swear at me, though we've talked about swearing
this morning. Is swearing becoming more acceptable? Are you looking
very guilty as I asked you? Are you a swearer?
Speaker 4 (24:27):
I do cuss a little bit too much, yes, do you? Yeah? Terribly?
Speaker 2 (24:31):
You use if we.
Speaker 4 (24:33):
Are all the time? Yeah, I'm embarrassed to admit it,
but it's true.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
The seaword it's occurred before.
Speaker 4 (24:42):
Wow, it feels like I'm in confession.
Speaker 2 (24:46):
Wow, I would not have picked that. Why Why do
we swear so much? Now?
Speaker 5 (24:50):
Oh?
Speaker 4 (24:50):
It's such a release. It feels so good.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Did you hear your mother and father swear?
Speaker 4 (24:54):
Yes, constantly, including to each other?
Speaker 2 (24:57):
Wow? You see my I can? I mean I saw
that my parents fighting enough, God damn I did. But
I never ever heard my either of my parents ever swear,
and in fact, never heard them use the Lord's name
in vain.
Speaker 4 (25:08):
Have you sworn in front of your children? Is it awkward? Pause?
Speaker 2 (25:14):
I have to say yes, yeah. But is that a
generational thing?
Speaker 4 (25:20):
Yeah? Probably? My mother is very loose with swear words.
In fact, some places, some households have said that she's
the first person that's ever sworn in their house. So
I you know, I'm following at her footsteps.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Bridget Morton, I know that you're going to say it around.
You're looking at me right that I know what you're
looking at it. You're a swearer too, aren't you.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Well?
Speaker 5 (25:39):
So I grew up on a house we're swearing was
absolutely a nogo and I remember only like a couple
of years ago I said the F word in front
of my father and I immediately crumbled inside. So no defense,
but you know, a great upbringing, it didn't really help.
Just before Christmas, I a certainly swore on writing New
(25:59):
Zealand Ontional radio.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
So i'ment is it a right for politicians to swear?
Speaker 5 (26:06):
I always think that I think it's fine to swear,
but you shouldn't swear act someone. So you know, saying
to someone that I'm if and angry about this is
very different to saying if off like. It's quite a
different tone to it. So I don't think that there's
that big a deal. I think we've moved on from
the sort of toyo to add you know, bugger, that
(26:27):
was a big sort of scandal.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
We have got bigger problems in the will to worry about.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Have either of you told someone the Air Force totally?
Speaker 3 (26:35):
I'm almost in I have, like I would hope I have.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I must have met I have, you know, but I
work in hospitality. If someone gets you too wide up
and you're trying to check me, I just say, yeah,
why don't yet off? You know? So it's okay. What
about your kids? Have you heard your kids ever swear?
Speaker 4 (26:55):
I've got teenagers and we are battling with the set present.
It's fair to say, and yes there is some swearing
and I'm not that happy about it, which.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Is your mind you, but it's not a it for
your kids.
Speaker 3 (27:07):
I know, I know, I am one of my friends.
She's got kids.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
I think they'll be five and seven, and so there's
a real kind of joy about swearing. So she has
this rule that about once a week, when they're in
the cart and nobody else can hear, they get five
minutes where they love to say any swear where they like,
and then shut it off.
Speaker 3 (27:22):
And you'll love sweat.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
Trouble with that. So it's trouble with that you once
you get it in your psyche.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
No, they don't. They don't.
Speaker 5 (27:29):
They know that it's like this little like fun little tristion.
Every week they can take their little rant and then
they're done.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
Oh gosh, just like taking your kids around the corner
to give them a beer before they have a beer,
or smoke before they have a smoke and it starts.
Speaker 3 (27:40):
It's definitely not doing that for it.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Okay, all right, let's let's go back to parliament. Winston
Peters and Shane Jones have attacked the Green MP Ricardo
Mensie March again, questioning why he refers to the country
as a rare when he arrived in two thousand and six.
And now I almost know, Flur, what you're going to
say with this something about Ricardo Mensie March and I've
(28:01):
seen him in a cafe, something about him that he yeah,
entitled is my word.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
No, that's not how I describe it all. I think he's
a very talented politician, and I think he's a very
passionate and committed person, and he's effective, and that's why
he's raising the shackles, raising the attention from Shane Jones
and Winston Peters. It's because he's doing his job.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Well.
Speaker 4 (28:25):
I have a lot of respect for him, and I'm
I really welcome.
Speaker 2 (28:29):
To say aet era.
Speaker 4 (28:30):
Of course, it is good on him. He's in New
Zealander and the same way that all of us in
this room.
Speaker 2 (28:34):
Are ooh gosh, Bridget come on, well.
Speaker 5 (28:38):
I mean, this is the best thing that happened to
his career in terms of you know, they're really just
giving him a platform and giving it all. Like, tell
me that most people had not heard of him until
Shane Jones just gave him this big celebrity moment. So
for him, particularly because he is a Green MP, the
best thing in the world for him is to be
seen as opposition to New Zealand first, to be seen
(28:59):
as a champion for an immigrant workforce like this is great,
great profile for him. So I don't think, you know,
he's I don't think he's got to be. It should
be too upset by what's happening. I do have to
say that I really enjoyed. I think it was a
spin off that found you know, that pointed out that
Andy Foster was an immigrant to this country as well,
and whether or not he was showing appropriate gratitude. I
thought it was quite just pointing out that within their
(29:21):
own part, of these people that weren't born in New Zealand,
and all of those people, you know, Shane, Winston, and
Ricardo and Andy, they all got voted into the same
place by the same rules. Therefore they all have the
same rights to advocate for people.
Speaker 4 (29:34):
I think I wouldn't say, though, that it doesn't have
an impact on him. I think what happens when people
like Winston Peteresn't Shane Jones call out somebody in this
way and quite as in a phobic way. It actually
emboldens a whole lot of racist, dangerous people and they
can tune on him. It's inappropriate behavior from MPs.
Speaker 2 (29:50):
Okay, I think he's a bit of a whiner everything,
but every he opens his mouth it sounds like he's whining,
sounds like the naughty teenage.
Speaker 4 (29:59):
It's not doubled down on him. He's already under a
tech Okay, all right.
Speaker 3 (30:02):
That you don't give him the profile boost as well.
Speaker 2 (30:05):
I'm just saying I'm big personal honest, there's anything I
could be at this job, can't it?
Speaker 3 (30:09):
Yeah, well that's what they employed you, right.
Speaker 1 (30:12):
The Friday Facie hot?
Speaker 2 (30:15):
Why not? Okay, Bridget Morton, give me your hots and
knots for the week.
Speaker 5 (30:20):
My hot is the Chamber of Commerces Dive into twenty
five event they had last night.
Speaker 3 (30:24):
I think we're doing.
Speaker 5 (30:25):
A lot of negative to speak everyone what's happening in Wellington.
I think it was a sold out event. It had
a massive, great vibe, great people pasting about like actually
what we can do to drive the Wellington economy.
Speaker 3 (30:35):
It was a really good event.
Speaker 5 (30:37):
Maybe some feedback to Simon Arcis the Chambers year about
the atrocious tropical suit he wore.
Speaker 3 (30:42):
But I think all of the whole a great event.
Speaker 5 (30:45):
My not has to go to axe Simon Court and
his man's planning that woman on the benefit should use
menstrual cups. It was horrendous. It was so dumb, but
also the man's planning about you get one for fifteen
dollars from the chemic just it was awful and he
deserves all of the criticism he got this week for it.
Speaker 2 (31:04):
I can't even look up. I can't even look couple.
I cringing so much. I can't do you good. Oh
my god, that is so bad. It is so bad.
Flur Fit Simons, don't repeat it. Please.
Speaker 4 (31:18):
My hot is actually christ Church. I've been down in
christ Church for work this week, and I haven't actually
spent that much time down there, but I walked around
the city and did a bit of shopping, went out
for dinner. It's a great city. And actually the mayor
film major described it at a conference I was at
a while ago, is if you haven't visited christ Church
since twenty fifteen, you haven't visited christ Church. And I
totally agree with them. So just a hard recommend on
(31:39):
christ Church. My not is the government's relentless attack on
working people. We saw it this week with them trying
to push through the partial strikes legislation. They're trying to
crack down on partial strikes. We already have a very
limited right to strike in New Zealand. This is on
top of them introducing ninety day trials and firing it well,
the removal of fair pay agreements and woefull increases to
(32:01):
the minimum wage. So I've had enough of their attacks
on working people.
Speaker 2 (32:04):
We have we got facts on how many people have
lost their jobs on the ninety days.
Speaker 5 (32:09):
No.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
Actually, that's the other shameful thing about it is there's
no records kept of it, so we don't even know
how employers are using it, or what it's meaning, or
what are the traumatic and mental health consequences on workers
from being dismissed without any reason.
Speaker 2 (32:21):
No, I'd like to tell you that I've never ever
used it once.
Speaker 4 (32:24):
I'm not surprised. You're a decent person.
Speaker 2 (32:26):
Well, I just wouldn't. I mean, you know, it's who
it's a person that employs the person that got it wrong,
not the person they employed. I think, by the way,
christ Church, are you just rattled Ethan's cage because he's
about as soon as the show is off, he's off
to the Chiro Club. He wants us to finish so
early so he can get to the Choral Club for
the first class of white How my producers a member
of the choral Club, I'm not wet. Union clear clearly
(32:50):
did the union, and he's off to what's that thing
down south in christ Church? What's it called Electric Avenue?
Seventy thousand sold out. It's amazing, Bridget Morton, thank you
very much for joining us. Flirfit Simon's thank you very
much for I don't think I'd want to be having
any meetings with you this afternoon, because I think it'd
be very hard to deal with this afternoon. Just quietly.
I'm not saying that as I'm not saying it as
(33:11):
a male female thing. I'm just saying it as a sweet,
big equal. I'm not trying to say.
Speaker 4 (33:15):
That, you know you're the minstrel Cup.
Speaker 2 (33:17):
I'm not saying anything about that. I'm not mentioning anything
like that. I just think that someone's going to have
some grumpy afternoon meetings this afternoon because we've fired you up.
I mean, I've never seen you so fired up. Have
you a great weekend both of you. Thank you for
coming on the show. Appreciate you both.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.