The future of Christchurch’s beleaguered cathedral is on the radar again – is there a chance it could be turned into a public use venue, or will it be lost to the city entirely?
Will a free trade deal with India really be as quick and straight forward as the Prime Minister believes? And does party politics have a place in local body government?
This and more are discussed by Labour’s Duncan Webb and Hamish Campbell on Politics Friday.
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 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Z'B Labour's Duncan Webers with us Morning, Duncan.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Oh, good to be here, another beautiful day.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
And nationals Sir Hames Camp Morning.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
Homish Morning, John, How are you very well?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Right? I've had I've had a mix of love and
non love for this idea that occurred to me at
five point thirty this morning that the cathedral needs to
be turned into a public facilities sooner rather than later,
when we ditched the idea of restoring it back to
what it used to be Hamish. What's your response to that?
Speaker 5 (00:36):
Well, I think I've been on record saying there I'd
love to see the cathedral restored, but I appreciate there's
lots of challenges. It is actually privately owned, well, it's
a church owned by the Anglican Church. I appreciate there's
a lot of nuances around it, but I think there
has been a sentier part of chrash Itch for for
ever since it's been built.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Right, I'm just told I'm going to say now that
I want answers to questions this week. That wasn't that
wasn't an answer, what do you think of the of
the idea of turning it into something rather than restore
ring it?
Speaker 5 (01:07):
Well, well, my answer was I'd like to see it restored, but.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
That's that's a don't you don't like it?
Speaker 5 (01:13):
Well, if it's not going to be restored, then if
we can explore some other options, I think that's.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Great, all right, right, don't think it'd be slightly more forthcoming.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Look, when I think about the Cathedra, actually feel quite
sad about what's happened to it. You know, something one
hundred million dollars has gone into it already for naught.
Should we be using that facility as soon as we
possibly can? Even though it's your idea, it's not a
bad one, so you know, I do think we should now.
I don't think they're too mutually exclusive though, you know,
(01:42):
Harry Sho and I are going to be at an
art exhibition there tonight. The idea that we can put
the restoration on pause and yet use what's there as
some kind of community facility, which is what every church
should be, right, I think that's a good idea.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
But that's what would get tricky, was it was it consecrated,
Was that the word that Don told me before before,
is that.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
The word consecration, so holy ground and all that.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, But what what I'm saying is that
you would actually have to take that the special nature
of the building away and turn it into what would
effectively be just another building.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Has been, has been. Yeah, you know, they came down
and deconsecrated it so that they could consecrate the new cathedral. Yes,
transitional cathedral. Right, So it's not holy in there anymore.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So the door is open.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
The door is open. Come down to the art exhibition.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Would you. Well, it's sold out. This is one of
the miniature buildings.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Yeah, yeah, I might be able to sneak you on
as a plus one if you like. You'd have to
scrub up.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Says he says, says with the says him with a
recently recently arrived beard. What's the story there? Is that
the new UNI?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Oh yeah, it's absolutely the slightly more relaxed, you know,
less formal, you know.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Yes, you're the George Clotney of the Labor Party.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
I'm not being pro espresso ads. If that's what you're asking.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Again, I want answers to the questions. Does this make
you the George Clooney of the Labor.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
Well I was at the Rainbow Parade the other day
with down there with a big rainbow banner and put
that on Facebook. I've got some very flattering comments, but
I'm not sure if it is right.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
So it's here to today. We'll move on from that one.
Let's talk about GDP. I suggested before ten that the
zero point seven percent increase in GDP would see you
Hamish war your party hit on and you Duncan poop
pooing it. So you're not wearing a party hat Hamish.
But I do know you've got a very nice what.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
Do you call the pocket chief, pocket hanking chief.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
I've never seen you with a pocket handkerchief.
Speaker 5 (03:46):
Before adding a bit of color.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
So you're Duncan with his beard. We've got you with
your pocket handkerchief. Does this show that you're very excited
about the zero point seven.
Speaker 5 (03:56):
I think it is. It is really good news. It's
been the first time we've had an increase for a
number of years, and of course everyone's kind of saying
it's only onlyo point seven percent. Yes, it is a
modest one. A lot of people are still doing tough.
But when we add this up. If this keeps, this
trend keeps on going, of course has a cumulative effect,
and so over a year, that's a couple of percent increase,
and that's what we need. That's what we need to
(04:17):
kind of grow our economy so people can have more jobs,
better paying jobs, and the opportunities that we want all
our kids to have.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Duncan. You'd have to be pretty miserable to draw a
negative out of this, wouldn't you.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
Yeah, you would. It's good. It's good news. It is
really good because we desperately need a strong economy and
the program so far under this government has been zero growth.
We've now got some growth. It's it's driven. It appears
to be driven by largely tourism and dairy and that's
you know, that's a concern because you know, sixty percent
(04:48):
of us are employed in services and that hasn't grown. So, look,
it is good news. I'm not going to I'm not
I'm actually not going to poopo it. I think it's
probably growth despite the government rather than because of it.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
But if we can sure, what's to approve of that?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
Well, the fact that the services sector is terrible, the
fact that we've got thirty thousand more unemployed, and the
fact that we've got thirteen thousand people in construction.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Twenty two thousand, No, no, thirty thousand.
Speaker 3 (05:14):
I'll go back in fact check that.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
But we've got twenty two thousand more compared to twelve
months ago on the job seeker.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
Yeah, but we're talking about under this government. But I mean,
if we're arguing about whether it's twenty two thousand more
unemployed or thirty thousand unemployed, we're arguing about how should
it is.
Speaker 5 (05:31):
But look, that's why it's great that the actually economy
is growing so we can actually get have jobs. Is
exactly what the point that we've been making for a
long time. We need to grow the economy, and that
is why we have been out to the world that
we've got a free trade agreement with the UAE, We've
signed an agreement with the Golf States to actually kind
(05:51):
of make sure that we can grow economy. So it's
more than just tourism that we can we can actually
have every part of the economy growing.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
All right, we'll get on to that. I saw a
story on the news last night about you mentioned Fonterra
about the price of butter and then you know. At
the same time, I heard Crosscepkins saying, you know, the
zero point seven is great, but people are still hurting
that increase. And I'm not going to argue with either
either of you. It was great to see it moving
in the right direction, but when you're going out and
(06:21):
paying ten dollars for a pound of butter, it's going
to take a bit more for people to appreciate how
positive that growth is.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Yeah, And I mean that's what open trade does, right.
I don't like the idea that you're paying up to
ten bucks for what you call a bound I'd called
five hundred grams a butter, But if you're selling it
on the open market, that is what happens. And I'm
not suggesting we go back to mold and subsidies and
tariffs and so on. That's a world of pain that's
(06:48):
coming towards us, and if we are caught up in
this tariff storm, that's going to be some difficulties ahead.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Yeah, hoy much. I saw the head of Fonterra last
night saying, oh, we're well prepared for that, but really
is that just talk?
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Oh?
Speaker 5 (07:01):
Look, and I think what we've seen with the Trade
minister Todd McKay going to Actually, so many countries around
the world. We are a small trading nation. We do
need to trade with the world, and we need to
have make sure we can diversify the countries we trade with.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
So you're saying, you're saying what Nicola was was saying
the other week or so that actually, we don't get
too spooked by the States. We've got other options.
Speaker 5 (07:22):
Yes, yeah, and I think we've we've we see the
Prime Minister who's on his way back from India now
is another prime example.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
We'll talk about that shortly. But in relation to that,
don't you think there is some danger because and I'm
heidant to use the word danger because I don't know
this idea of countries around the world running scared of
Donald Trump. But do you think what you've said and
what Nicola Willis said the other week could be interpreted
in the Oval offices New Zealand flipping the bird at America.
Speaker 5 (07:49):
Oh No. I think I think we've been very clear
and we've been very very cautious about the wording we've
used around around Taris, and I think that's I think
we've done a very good job. And I think Whinston
Peters has done a very good job as Foreign Minister
to make sure that we navigate through through this and
the best way possible.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Were you nodding, Duncan?
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Well, Look, I think the talk of us but we
are a small nation and we do trade. But I
think we've got to be careful about saying we are
a small trading nation as if that defines us, because
at the moment we trade butter, right and bit of
timber and some fish. We need to have local industries
that are you know, science based, advanced manufacturing and all
(08:30):
kinds of other things. We absolutely need need to diversify domestically.
And whilst we've got some great small emerging industries, they're
not there yet and so we've really got to be
careful about putting all of our eggs into the trading basket.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Okay, but the thing there's things like the gaming industry,
which is actually worth more than our wine industry. These
are billion billion dollar industries that that that are exporting.
So I think we have a really good, a good
story to tell. It's more than just butter and was
it forestry the other one?
Speaker 2 (09:04):
What's the story? Because when I hear that wod story.
I almost it triggers me. I hear people saying we've
got a story to tell. What's the story?
Speaker 5 (09:11):
That we are a small trading nation and innovative trading.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Will beyond that. Anyone can say that, what do you mean?
Speaker 5 (09:18):
Well, just gave an example of the gaming. There's a
number of gaming studios here in christ Church that are
competing on the International Stadia, which.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
I think will be one of the uses for the
new stadium. But that's a conversation for another day. India
is a conversation for today. When it seems that the
Prime Minister might have made some progress in India towards
a free trade agreement, is that just well, maybe I
master the wrong person. Hemost from the National Party.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Is that just talk?
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Is that just talk?
Speaker 1 (09:47):
No?
Speaker 5 (09:47):
Look, I think there has been really important steps towards
free trade agreement. Of course we're not right there, but
of course we need to start somewhere. There has been.
Speaker 2 (09:55):
One of the steps.
Speaker 5 (09:56):
Well, of course you've got to first kind of reach out,
make sure we get the rough kind of framework, make
sure that both both countries are talking from the same hemsheet.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Right and duncan you've got to admit a lot more
progress made than your government made in relationship to India.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Progress is progress, right, and these trade agreements are something
that often crosses governments. I mean, we picked up the
Comprehensive Trade Partnership Agreement and finished that off and improved it.
And look, when these guys get thrown out, we'll pick
up this and improve that as well. But it is good.
But I do think that we need to be.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Cautious about Are you saying, and I'm assuming that you
were operating under the assumption that you will win their
next election, are you acknowledging that there will be a
free trade agreement, that the current government will secure a
free trade agreement with India within this current term.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
No, no, no, absolutely not. I think it will take longer,
and I think it should take longer because free trade
agreements are actually really really complicated. There's a whole you know,
We've got things like what are the labor requirements, what
are the environmental requirements of the trade and goods? How
do we deal with treaty of white hangy issues across borders.
(11:09):
These are all things that crop up in free trade
agreements that need to be negotiated.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
So somehow, somehow, I suspect some of the some of
the things and on the current government's list when it
comes to negotiations home, it's trading White is that up
for consideration with Traider Group.
Speaker 5 (11:24):
Any legislation that's passing news Our needs to take into
consideration of the Treaty of White Ungy. So there's going
to be a whole range range of issues and that's
why it's really important to get the first steps or
the first run on board so to speak. Excuse of
pun with India. India has one point four billion people.
It's one of the fastest growing economies in the world,
and so it's this is great news for New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Well, it's a start of potentially great news, isn't it. Well,
I'm just conscious of you coming in here and being
cheerleading were an actual fact this is all about getting
beyond the cheerleading.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
Well, the thing is, as I've said, is first steps.
There is multiple steps that need to go through, but
you need to take that first step to actually start
the journey.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
All right, duncan, What's what was the nuclear thing that
Chris Sepkins was jumping up and down about in relation
to trading with India.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Yeah, India wants to belong to the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
It's a nuclear nation, it's got the bomb if you like,
and there's a group of nations that have rules around
how you trade in nuclear materials and the prerequisite for
belonging to that club is that you have signed up
for the Nuclear non Proliferation Treaty. India hasn't. Now the
(12:32):
Prime Minister is making noises about supporting them becoming part
of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, but an absolute bottom line
has got to be nuclear weapon non proliferation first, and
India has not signed up to no more bombs.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
I'm a share do you feel about that?
Speaker 5 (12:51):
Look, I'm not going to take part in what negotiations And.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
What's the thing is, what's your response to what Duncan
just said.
Speaker 5 (12:59):
Look, there's a whole range of issues that need to
be need to be worked through. I'm not going to Look,
I'm not going to not going on local radio and
sabotaging any negotiations, which may or may not be.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Asking you to do that. I'm asking you to respond
to what Duncan just said.
Speaker 5 (13:14):
Well, Look, as I've said, there needs to be a
whole range of things. There's going to be a lot
of things that need to be negotiated. Something we're not
in the position to be able to be able to
able to take part in those negotiations is not is
not my role.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
It's pretty simple. We're a nuclear free nation and our
bottom line should be that nuclear proliferation is a bad thing.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
It will not be what's wrong with that.
Speaker 5 (13:42):
There's nothing wrong with Duncan. Duncan Can say that all
he likes and do you agree or I don't think
we should have nuclear weapons pliferation? No, I don't, but
I'm not going to be not going to be jumping
in and sabotaging anything.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
I answer, how does the government saying that it's it's
part of the coalition of the Willing and it's going
to invest more in defense, But at the same time
we've got defense getting rid of three hundred and seventy
non officer roles or what's the word for civilian civilion
roles in the Defense force? How do those two marry up?
Speaker 5 (14:21):
Yeah, Look, there is some restructuring going on in the
New Zealand Defense Force. I think there's some jobs going
but there's also jobs being taken up, So it is
kind of a restructure I think in a couple of
weeks we will be releasing our Defense Capability Plan and
that will outline the speeding for the next fifteen years.
But we've got to make sure that we are getting
(14:41):
the best bang for our buck, and it's really an
operational matter for the New Zealand Defense Force.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
The question was, so, how does it marry up with
the commitment to investment. How does this marry out? You
would have thought, wouldn't you. Well, I would have thought
that the defense would won't define out how much it's
getting and what it's getting money for before doing this.
Speaker 5 (14:59):
Oh look, I think we're in a stage where these
geopolitical things are changing, and I assume the defense forces
making sure they're have the right structure and the right
roles to meet ongoing requirements.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
What does it mean, Well, it.
Speaker 5 (15:15):
Means that they probably might be changing their focus once again,
this is an operational matter, but they're making sure that they've.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Got well in a way home is she telling me
what I could say? You're part of the government. I've
asked you, how does it stack up when you see
cuts versus being told there's going to be more? It
doesn't stack up?
Speaker 5 (15:34):
Well, I think that's a very simplistic look of things.
Not everybody, not every role is going to be may
be needed going forward. So they're going to restructure to
make sure that they can meet the ongoing requirements to
be ready.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
Duncan, Well, they're cutting three hundred and seventy staff. That's
ten percent of the civilian workforce that are going. That's
not a restructure. That's jobs gone. There's six hundred roles going,
a few more created, but net three hundred and seventy gone.
And those are people who do important tasks within defense. Oh, well,
(16:08):
they would be providing policy work, would be one the
kind of document that was credling last year, the National
Security Strategy that said we're in the most challenging security
environment ever. That's the kind of work they do. The
document that's being prepared about the capacity needed, that's the
kind of work they do. These are really important roles,
quite apart from the kind of support roles, the administrative roles,
(16:31):
organizing the property portfolio, purchasing property and arranging maintenance. All
of that is done, you know, largely by civilian staff.
These are roles which have to be done and if
they're not, but done by civilians they'll be done by soldiers,
and the soldiers have a different job to do, so
it is really important. And we've got a situation where
we've got the Chinese patrolling the Tasman Sea, US promising
(16:53):
that we're front up with soldiers for a peacekeeping force
in Ukraine and other security issues around the Pacific. The
Chinese looking very interested in the Pacific sphere, and we
need to do more and we've lost vessel Off some more.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
So Duncan is the way Duncan describes it home is
kind of weird.
Speaker 5 (17:11):
You look, no, we we do have obligations to meet
and that is why we're going to be investing more
into into our defense force. Are the are the I
leave this up the operations manager management up to the
Defense Force. I'm sure they are more than capable to
be able to manage their resources in the best way possible.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
It's just it's just not true to say it's operational
when the Minister of Finance has gone to Defense and
said I want six percent savings.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
That's not operational, right, We'll go on homershif Look, it
is important, although hold on, Duncan, you know as well
as as I do that politicians decide on a whim
what's operational and what's not.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
If they want to poke their nose and it's not operational.
If they don't want to be tarnished or have to
say anything, it's suddenly operational.
Speaker 5 (17:57):
Well, it's important there to get the best bang for
our buck at the end of the day.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
Yeah, but the bucks have got smaller.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
I'm tired of that line. Best bank for a buck.
You could say that about anything, Homers, you can't.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
It is really important that when we take a dollar
off you, which we do, we spend that dollar ambish.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
That's nothing new, right. One final thing, how do you
feel about National Party getting involved in local government politics?
Speaker 5 (18:21):
On this one, we're not getting involved in local body politics.
We never have and so I appreciate your leading into
the act party once to get evolved. That's them. I
appreciate people perceive People's Choice here in christ Church is
a de facto labor party. I think it's probably we
want to move away from party block voting in local government.
(18:44):
We saw disaster's outcomes around three Waters when it was
voted along part people's Choice voted long.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
That's a falsehood, people here, Hold on, hold on a
sit you would not be so excited. You would not
react in that way if People's Choice wasn't a defective
part of the Labor people.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
But look political parties and local government. We've got independent
citizens which has an overlap with the National Party. The
party wants to get involved. Well, you know, they get
about eight percent of the vote. I don't think they'll
have a huge amount of success.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
But so are you in favorite or not?
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Look, I'm agnostic. It's like, go for it whatever. Sure,
the Labor Party does have candidates at local body and
people and People's Choice are sometimes aligned with the Labor Party.
I think it's fine. You know what they stand for,
they know what their values are, their labor values, and
I'm right behind there.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
How can you explain that? On the People's Choice website
at the bottom of the homepage, it says approved by
Ruben Davidson.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
Well, he was the chair of the People's Choice movement
for some time before being before being elected to parliament.
He probably needs to tidy that up, So thanks for that.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Right, you go on add that to the list today.
Thank you both. All right, all good, let's see it
and us for the beard. Are you going to do
a pole or something?
Speaker 3 (20:09):
Well you've got you've got one of those machines and pray.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Would you mind taking the glasses off?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Yeah? All right, we're looking at.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Sea. See that's George Clooney, there.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
Is all right?
Speaker 2 (20:26):
But who is Hamish? If you were George Cloney, who's Hamish? Oh,
Kevin Kevin Bacon, the Kevin Bacon of christ Church. That's
your mate. Thank you and I see you both.
Speaker 1 (20:38):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks It'd Be christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from News Talk.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Z'B Labour's Duncan Webers with us Morning, Duncan.
Speaker 3 (00:14):
Oh, good to be here, another beautiful day.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
And nationals Sir Hames Camp Morning.
Speaker 4 (00:18):
Homish Morning, John, How are you very well?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Right? I've had I've had a mix of love and
non love for this idea that occurred to me at
five point thirty this morning that the cathedral needs to
be turned into a public facilities sooner rather than later,
when we ditched the idea of restoring it back to
what it used to be Hamish. What's your response to that?
Speaker 5 (00:36):
Well, I think I've been on record saying there I'd
love to see the cathedral restored, but I appreciate there's
lots of challenges. It is actually privately owned, well, it's
a church owned by the Anglican Church. I appreciate there's
a lot of nuances around it, but I think there
has been a sentier part of chrash Itch for for
ever since it's been built.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Right, I'm just told I'm going to say now that
I want answers to questions this week. That wasn't that
wasn't an answer, what do you think of the of
the idea of turning it into something rather than restore
ring it?
Speaker 5 (01:07):
Well, well, my answer was I'd like to see it restored, but.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
That's that's a don't you don't like it?
Speaker 5 (01:13):
Well, if it's not going to be restored, then if
we can explore some other options, I think that's.
Speaker 2 (01:17):
Great, all right, right, don't think it'd be slightly more forthcoming.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Look, when I think about the Cathedra, actually feel quite
sad about what's happened to it. You know, something one
hundred million dollars has gone into it already for naught.
Should we be using that facility as soon as we
possibly can? Even though it's your idea, it's not a
bad one, so you know, I do think we should now.
I don't think they're too mutually exclusive though, you know,
(01:42):
Harry Sho and I are going to be at an
art exhibition there tonight. The idea that we can put
the restoration on pause and yet use what's there as
some kind of community facility, which is what every church
should be, right, I think that's a good idea.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
But that's what would get tricky, was it was it consecrated,
Was that the word that Don told me before before,
is that.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
The word consecration, so holy ground and all that.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, But what what I'm saying is that
you would actually have to take that the special nature
of the building away and turn it into what would
effectively be just another building.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Has been, has been. Yeah, you know, they came down
and deconsecrated it so that they could consecrate the new cathedral. Yes,
transitional cathedral. Right, So it's not holy in there anymore.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
So the door is open.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
The door is open. Come down to the art exhibition.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Would you. Well, it's sold out. This is one of
the miniature buildings.
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Yeah, yeah, I might be able to sneak you on
as a plus one if you like. You'd have to
scrub up.
Speaker 2 (02:43):
Says he says, says with the says him with a
recently recently arrived beard. What's the story there? Is that
the new UNI?
Speaker 3 (02:52):
Oh yeah, it's absolutely the slightly more relaxed, you know,
less formal, you know.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Yes, you're the George Clotney of the Labor Party.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
I'm not being pro espresso ads. If that's what you're asking.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
Again, I want answers to the questions. Does this make
you the George Clooney of the Labor.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
Well I was at the Rainbow Parade the other day
with down there with a big rainbow banner and put
that on Facebook. I've got some very flattering comments, but
I'm not sure if it is right.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
So it's here to today. We'll move on from that one.
Let's talk about GDP. I suggested before ten that the
zero point seven percent increase in GDP would see you
Hamish war your party hit on and you Duncan poop
pooing it. So you're not wearing a party hat Hamish.
But I do know you've got a very nice what.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
Do you call the pocket chief, pocket hanking chief.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
I've never seen you with a pocket handkerchief.
Speaker 5 (03:46):
Before adding a bit of color.
Speaker 2 (03:49):
So you're Duncan with his beard. We've got you with
your pocket handkerchief. Does this show that you're very excited
about the zero point seven.
Speaker 5 (03:56):
I think it is. It is really good news. It's
been the first time we've had an increase for a
number of years, and of course everyone's kind of saying
it's only onlyo point seven percent. Yes, it is a
modest one. A lot of people are still doing tough.
But when we add this up. If this keeps, this
trend keeps on going, of course has a cumulative effect,
and so over a year, that's a couple of percent increase,
and that's what we need. That's what we need to
(04:17):
kind of grow our economy so people can have more jobs,
better paying jobs, and the opportunities that we want all
our kids to have.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Duncan. You'd have to be pretty miserable to draw a
negative out of this, wouldn't you.
Speaker 3 (04:27):
Yeah, you would. It's good. It's good news. It is
really good because we desperately need a strong economy and
the program so far under this government has been zero growth.
We've now got some growth. It's it's driven. It appears
to be driven by largely tourism and dairy and that's
you know, that's a concern because you know, sixty percent
(04:48):
of us are employed in services and that hasn't grown. So, look,
it is good news. I'm not going to I'm not
I'm actually not going to poopo it. I think it's
probably growth despite the government rather than because of it.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
But if we can sure, what's to approve of that?
Speaker 3 (05:02):
Well, the fact that the services sector is terrible, the
fact that we've got thirty thousand more unemployed, and the
fact that we've got thirteen thousand people in construction.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Twenty two thousand, No, no, thirty thousand.
Speaker 3 (05:14):
I'll go back in fact check that.
Speaker 2 (05:16):
But we've got twenty two thousand more compared to twelve
months ago on the job seeker.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
Yeah, but we're talking about under this government. But I mean,
if we're arguing about whether it's twenty two thousand more
unemployed or thirty thousand unemployed, we're arguing about how should
it is.
Speaker 5 (05:31):
But look, that's why it's great that the actually economy
is growing so we can actually get have jobs. Is
exactly what the point that we've been making for a
long time. We need to grow the economy, and that
is why we have been out to the world that
we've got a free trade agreement with the UAE, We've
signed an agreement with the Golf States to actually kind
(05:51):
of make sure that we can grow economy. So it's
more than just tourism that we can we can actually
have every part of the economy growing.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
All right, we'll get on to that. I saw a
story on the news last night about you mentioned Fonterra
about the price of butter and then you know. At
the same time, I heard Crosscepkins saying, you know, the
zero point seven is great, but people are still hurting
that increase. And I'm not going to argue with either
either of you. It was great to see it moving
in the right direction, but when you're going out and
(06:21):
paying ten dollars for a pound of butter, it's going
to take a bit more for people to appreciate how
positive that growth is.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
Yeah, And I mean that's what open trade does, right.
I don't like the idea that you're paying up to
ten bucks for what you call a bound I'd called
five hundred grams a butter, But if you're selling it
on the open market, that is what happens. And I'm
not suggesting we go back to mold and subsidies and
tariffs and so on. That's a world of pain that's
(06:48):
coming towards us, and if we are caught up in
this tariff storm, that's going to be some difficulties ahead.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Yeah, hoy much. I saw the head of Fonterra last
night saying, oh, we're well prepared for that, but really
is that just talk?
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Oh?
Speaker 5 (07:01):
Look, and I think what we've seen with the Trade
minister Todd McKay going to Actually, so many countries around
the world. We are a small trading nation. We do
need to trade with the world, and we need to
have make sure we can diversify the countries we trade with.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
So you're saying, you're saying what Nicola was was saying
the other week or so that actually, we don't get
too spooked by the States. We've got other options.
Speaker 5 (07:22):
Yes, yeah, and I think we've we've we see the
Prime Minister who's on his way back from India now
is another prime example.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
We'll talk about that shortly. But in relation to that,
don't you think there is some danger because and I'm
heidant to use the word danger because I don't know
this idea of countries around the world running scared of
Donald Trump. But do you think what you've said and
what Nicola Willis said the other week could be interpreted
in the Oval offices New Zealand flipping the bird at America.
Speaker 5 (07:49):
Oh No. I think I think we've been very clear
and we've been very very cautious about the wording we've
used around around Taris, and I think that's I think
we've done a very good job. And I think Whinston
Peters has done a very good job as Foreign Minister
to make sure that we navigate through through this and
the best way possible.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
Were you nodding, Duncan?
Speaker 3 (08:08):
Well, Look, I think the talk of us but we
are a small nation and we do trade. But I
think we've got to be careful about saying we are
a small trading nation as if that defines us, because
at the moment we trade butter, right and bit of
timber and some fish. We need to have local industries
that are you know, science based, advanced manufacturing and all
(08:30):
kinds of other things. We absolutely need need to diversify domestically.
And whilst we've got some great small emerging industries, they're
not there yet and so we've really got to be
careful about putting all of our eggs into the trading basket.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Okay, but the thing there's things like the gaming industry,
which is actually worth more than our wine industry. These
are billion billion dollar industries that that that are exporting.
So I think we have a really good, a good
story to tell. It's more than just butter and was
it forestry the other one?
Speaker 2 (09:04):
What's the story? Because when I hear that wod story.
I almost it triggers me. I hear people saying we've
got a story to tell. What's the story?
Speaker 5 (09:11):
That we are a small trading nation and innovative trading.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Will beyond that. Anyone can say that, what do you mean?
Speaker 5 (09:18):
Well, just gave an example of the gaming. There's a
number of gaming studios here in christ Church that are
competing on the International Stadia, which.
Speaker 2 (09:26):
I think will be one of the uses for the
new stadium. But that's a conversation for another day. India
is a conversation for today. When it seems that the
Prime Minister might have made some progress in India towards
a free trade agreement, is that just well, maybe I
master the wrong person. Hemost from the National Party.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Is that just talk?
Speaker 2 (09:46):
Is that just talk?
Speaker 1 (09:47):
No?
Speaker 5 (09:47):
Look, I think there has been really important steps towards
free trade agreement. Of course we're not right there, but
of course we need to start somewhere. There has been.
Speaker 2 (09:55):
One of the steps.
Speaker 5 (09:56):
Well, of course you've got to first kind of reach out,
make sure we get the rough kind of framework, make
sure that both both countries are talking from the same hemsheet.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Right and duncan you've got to admit a lot more
progress made than your government made in relationship to India.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Progress is progress, right, and these trade agreements are something
that often crosses governments. I mean, we picked up the
Comprehensive Trade Partnership Agreement and finished that off and improved it.
And look, when these guys get thrown out, we'll pick
up this and improve that as well. But it is good.
But I do think that we need to be.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Cautious about Are you saying, and I'm assuming that you
were operating under the assumption that you will win their
next election, are you acknowledging that there will be a
free trade agreement, that the current government will secure a
free trade agreement with India within this current term.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
No, no, no, absolutely not. I think it will take longer,
and I think it should take longer because free trade
agreements are actually really really complicated. There's a whole you know,
We've got things like what are the labor requirements, what
are the environmental requirements of the trade and goods? How
do we deal with treaty of white hangy issues across borders.
(11:09):
These are all things that crop up in free trade
agreements that need to be negotiated.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
So somehow, somehow, I suspect some of the some of
the things and on the current government's list when it
comes to negotiations home, it's trading White is that up
for consideration with Traider Group.
Speaker 5 (11:24):
Any legislation that's passing news Our needs to take into
consideration of the Treaty of White Ungy. So there's going
to be a whole range range of issues and that's
why it's really important to get the first steps or
the first run on board so to speak. Excuse of
pun with India. India has one point four billion people.
It's one of the fastest growing economies in the world,
and so it's this is great news for New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Well, it's a start of potentially great news, isn't it. Well,
I'm just conscious of you coming in here and being
cheerleading were an actual fact this is all about getting
beyond the cheerleading.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
Well, the thing is, as I've said, is first steps.
There is multiple steps that need to go through, but
you need to take that first step to actually start
the journey.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
All right, duncan, What's what was the nuclear thing that
Chris Sepkins was jumping up and down about in relation
to trading with India.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
Yeah, India wants to belong to the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
It's a nuclear nation, it's got the bomb if you like,
and there's a group of nations that have rules around
how you trade in nuclear materials and the prerequisite for
belonging to that club is that you have signed up
for the Nuclear non Proliferation Treaty. India hasn't. Now the
(12:32):
Prime Minister is making noises about supporting them becoming part
of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, but an absolute bottom line
has got to be nuclear weapon non proliferation first, and
India has not signed up to no more bombs.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
I'm a share do you feel about that?
Speaker 5 (12:51):
Look, I'm not going to take part in what negotiations And.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
What's the thing is, what's your response to what Duncan
just said.
Speaker 5 (12:59):
Look, there's a whole range of issues that need to
be need to be worked through. I'm not going to Look,
I'm not going to not going on local radio and
sabotaging any negotiations, which may or may not be.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Asking you to do that. I'm asking you to respond
to what Duncan just said.
Speaker 5 (13:14):
Well, Look, as I've said, there needs to be a
whole range of things. There's going to be a lot
of things that need to be negotiated. Something we're not
in the position to be able to be able to
able to take part in those negotiations is not is
not my role.
Speaker 3 (13:30):
It's pretty simple. We're a nuclear free nation and our
bottom line should be that nuclear proliferation is a bad thing.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
It will not be what's wrong with that.
Speaker 5 (13:42):
There's nothing wrong with Duncan. Duncan Can say that all
he likes and do you agree or I don't think
we should have nuclear weapons pliferation? No, I don't, but
I'm not going to be not going to be jumping
in and sabotaging anything.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
I answer, how does the government saying that it's it's
part of the coalition of the Willing and it's going
to invest more in defense, But at the same time
we've got defense getting rid of three hundred and seventy
non officer roles or what's the word for civilian civilion
roles in the Defense force? How do those two marry up?
Speaker 5 (14:21):
Yeah, Look, there is some restructuring going on in the
New Zealand Defense Force. I think there's some jobs going
but there's also jobs being taken up, So it is
kind of a restructure I think in a couple of
weeks we will be releasing our Defense Capability Plan and
that will outline the speeding for the next fifteen years.
But we've got to make sure that we are getting
(14:41):
the best bang for our buck, and it's really an
operational matter for the New Zealand Defense Force.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
The question was, so, how does it marry up with
the commitment to investment. How does this marry out? You
would have thought, wouldn't you. Well, I would have thought
that the defense would won't define out how much it's
getting and what it's getting money for before doing this.
Speaker 5 (14:59):
Oh look, I think we're in a stage where these
geopolitical things are changing, and I assume the defense forces
making sure they're have the right structure and the right
roles to meet ongoing requirements.
Speaker 2 (15:13):
What does it mean, Well, it.
Speaker 5 (15:15):
Means that they probably might be changing their focus once again,
this is an operational matter, but they're making sure that they've.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Got well in a way home is she telling me
what I could say? You're part of the government. I've
asked you, how does it stack up when you see
cuts versus being told there's going to be more? It
doesn't stack up?
Speaker 5 (15:34):
Well, I think that's a very simplistic look of things.
Not everybody, not every role is going to be may
be needed going forward. So they're going to restructure to
make sure that they can meet the ongoing requirements to
be ready.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
Duncan, Well, they're cutting three hundred and seventy staff. That's
ten percent of the civilian workforce that are going. That's
not a restructure. That's jobs gone. There's six hundred roles going,
a few more created, but net three hundred and seventy gone.
And those are people who do important tasks within defense. Oh, well,
(16:08):
they would be providing policy work, would be one the
kind of document that was credling last year, the National
Security Strategy that said we're in the most challenging security
environment ever. That's the kind of work they do. The
document that's being prepared about the capacity needed, that's the
kind of work they do. These are really important roles,
quite apart from the kind of support roles, the administrative roles,
(16:31):
organizing the property portfolio, purchasing property and arranging maintenance. All
of that is done, you know, largely by civilian staff.
These are roles which have to be done and if
they're not, but done by civilians they'll be done by soldiers,
and the soldiers have a different job to do, so
it is really important. And we've got a situation where
we've got the Chinese patrolling the Tasman Sea, US promising
(16:53):
that we're front up with soldiers for a peacekeeping force
in Ukraine and other security issues around the Pacific. The
Chinese looking very interested in the Pacific sphere, and we
need to do more and we've lost vessel Off some more.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
So Duncan is the way Duncan describes it home is
kind of weird.
Speaker 5 (17:11):
You look, no, we we do have obligations to meet
and that is why we're going to be investing more
into into our defense force. Are the are the I
leave this up the operations manager management up to the
Defense Force. I'm sure they are more than capable to
be able to manage their resources in the best way possible.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
It's just it's just not true to say it's operational
when the Minister of Finance has gone to Defense and
said I want six percent savings.
Speaker 4 (17:39):
That's not operational, right, We'll go on homershif Look, it
is important, although hold on, Duncan, you know as well
as as I do that politicians decide on a whim
what's operational and what's not.
Speaker 2 (17:51):
If they want to poke their nose and it's not operational.
If they don't want to be tarnished or have to
say anything, it's suddenly operational.
Speaker 5 (17:57):
Well, it's important there to get the best bang for
our buck at the end of the day.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
Yeah, but the bucks have got smaller.
Speaker 2 (18:03):
I'm tired of that line. Best bank for a buck.
You could say that about anything, Homers, you can't.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
It is really important that when we take a dollar
off you, which we do, we spend that dollar ambish.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
That's nothing new, right. One final thing, how do you
feel about National Party getting involved in local government politics?
Speaker 5 (18:21):
On this one, we're not getting involved in local body politics.
We never have and so I appreciate your leading into
the act party once to get evolved. That's them. I
appreciate people perceive People's Choice here in christ Church is
a de facto labor party. I think it's probably we
want to move away from party block voting in local government.
(18:44):
We saw disaster's outcomes around three Waters when it was
voted along part people's Choice voted long.
Speaker 2 (18:51):
That's a falsehood, people here, Hold on, hold on a
sit you would not be so excited. You would not
react in that way if People's Choice wasn't a defective
part of the Labor people.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
But look political parties and local government. We've got independent
citizens which has an overlap with the National Party. The
party wants to get involved. Well, you know, they get
about eight percent of the vote. I don't think they'll
have a huge amount of success.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
But so are you in favorite or not?
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Look, I'm agnostic. It's like, go for it whatever. Sure,
the Labor Party does have candidates at local body and
people and People's Choice are sometimes aligned with the Labor Party.
I think it's fine. You know what they stand for,
they know what their values are, their labor values, and
I'm right behind there.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
How can you explain that? On the People's Choice website
at the bottom of the homepage, it says approved by
Ruben Davidson.
Speaker 3 (19:50):
Well, he was the chair of the People's Choice movement
for some time before being before being elected to parliament.
He probably needs to tidy that up, So thanks for that.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Right, you go on add that to the list today.
Thank you both. All right, all good, let's see it
and us for the beard. Are you going to do
a pole or something?
Speaker 3 (20:09):
Well you've got you've got one of those machines and pray.
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Would you mind taking the glasses off?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Yeah? All right, we're looking at.
Speaker 2 (20:19):
Sea. See that's George Clooney, there.
Speaker 4 (20:21):
Is all right?
Speaker 2 (20:26):
But who is Hamish? If you were George Cloney, who's Hamish? Oh,
Kevin Kevin Bacon, the Kevin Bacon of christ Church. That's
your mate. Thank you and I see you both.
Speaker 1 (20:38):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks It'd Be christ Church 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.