Player FM - Internet Radio Done Right
Checked 3d ago
تمت الإضافة منذ قبل three أعوام
المحتوى المقدم من NZME and Newstalk ZB. يتم تحميل جميع محتويات البودكاست بما في ذلك الحلقات والرسومات وأوصاف البودكاست وتقديمها مباشرة بواسطة NZME and Newstalk ZB أو شريك منصة البودكاست الخاص بهم. إذا كنت تعتقد أن شخصًا ما يستخدم عملك المحمي بحقوق الطبع والنشر دون إذنك، فيمكنك اتباع العملية الموضحة هنا https://ar.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - تطبيق بودكاست
انتقل إلى وضع عدم الاتصال باستخدام تطبيق Player FM !
انتقل إلى وضع عدم الاتصال باستخدام تطبيق Player FM !
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
وسم كل الحلقات كغير/(كـ)مشغلة
Manage series 3032727
المحتوى المقدم من NZME and Newstalk ZB. يتم تحميل جميع محتويات البودكاست بما في ذلك الحلقات والرسومات وأوصاف البودكاست وتقديمها مباشرة بواسطة NZME and Newstalk ZB أو شريك منصة البودكاست الخاص بهم. إذا كنت تعتقد أن شخصًا ما يستخدم عملك المحمي بحقوق الطبع والنشر دون إذنك، فيمكنك اتباع العملية الموضحة هنا https://ar.player.fm/legal.
Every weekday join the new voice of local issues on Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald, 9am-12pm weekdays.
It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.
If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio.
With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector.
Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.
…
continue reading
It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.
If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio.
With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector.
Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.
919 حلقات
وسم كل الحلقات كغير/(كـ)مشغلة
Manage series 3032727
المحتوى المقدم من NZME and Newstalk ZB. يتم تحميل جميع محتويات البودكاست بما في ذلك الحلقات والرسومات وأوصاف البودكاست وتقديمها مباشرة بواسطة NZME and Newstalk ZB أو شريك منصة البودكاست الخاص بهم. إذا كنت تعتقد أن شخصًا ما يستخدم عملك المحمي بحقوق الطبع والنشر دون إذنك، فيمكنك اتباع العملية الموضحة هنا https://ar.player.fm/legal.
Every weekday join the new voice of local issues on Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald, 9am-12pm weekdays.
It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.
If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio.
With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector.
Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.
…
continue reading
It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.
If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio.
With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector.
Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.
919 حلقات
كل الحلقات
×C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: This is a terrible thing to say, but it's true 6:03
6:03
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب6:03data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Do you know why the Government has failed to meet all of its child poverty targets? The overarching reason I’m talking about here. Because this is really complex and there are all sorts of reasons why kids end-up living in poverty and why politicians, generally, fail to fix the problem. So the main reason why nothing seems to be achieved in this area. Why do you think that is? It’s because of us. Those of us who aren’t living in poverty and aren’t one of those invisible people who feature in these latest stats which show we’re going nowhere on this front. We’re the reason. Because, if we’re honest, we don’t really give a damn. Unless we're in that boat, we don’t really care as much as we might think we do. If we did, we’d be demanding to know at election time what politicians are going to actually do for the 156,000 Kiwi kids living in hardship. They’re the latest numbers. If we really cared, we’d be grilling politicians on how they’re going to get them out of hardship. But we don’t. Every piece of policy we look at it and want to know what’s in it for us. We listen to the Prime Minister’s state of the nation speech, and we don’t flinch when we realise that he hasn’t mentioned child poverty once. There was nothing in there about child poverty. There’s a lot of talk about fixing the economy —as there should be— but, as the Children's Commissioner is saying today, kids can’t wait while the Government tries to fix the economy and action is needed now. She’s right. But it won’t happen because we’re not demanding that it happens. Although, depending where people are on the political spectrum, some will be hearing this news today and some might be ripping into the government for not doing enough and others will be ripping into parents for not doing enough. One of the most depressing examples recently of how we don’t actually care about kids in poverty is the debate over the school lunches programme. Because, every time it comes up, there’s no shortage of people banging on about it being the responsibility of parents to make sure their kids are fed and why should us taxpayers pay for their kids to eat lunch? It’s depressing because what someone is saying when they say that, is it’s the kids fault that they’ve got no-hoper parents. In fact, that always seems to be the assumption, doesn’t it? A kid goes hungry because they've got hopeless parents. Just like a kid who goes to school without shoes has got hopeless parents. A kid who gets bronchitis every winter because they live in a freezing house. Bloody parents. And, as long as the majority of people think like that, nothing’s going to change. And, as long as the majority of people think like that, politicians know that they won’t be grilled by voters wanting to know how they’re going to get kids out of poverty and governments will know that they won’t be taken to task for not meeting child poverty reduction targets. Sure, the coalition is feeling a bit of heat about it today with headlines and the usual talking heads out there saying they can do and should so better. But, after today, the government —in fact, every politician— knows that most people will be back to focusing on themselves, getting on with their weekend and not giving a damn about those 156,000 kids that, apparently, are growing up in the best country in the world. And I’ll include myself as one of the guilty parties in all of this too. Well semi-guilty. You won't hear me saying that a cruddy school lunch programme is okay because it should be those no-hoper parents feeding those kids, not us taxpayers. You won't hear me saying that. Ever. But where I am guilty is that I’ve never asked a politician what they’re going to do for child poverty. I’m just as capable as the next person of turning a blind eye to all this. Because, you know, gotta get on with life. Can’t take on all the world’s problems. And maybe it’ll sort itself out. Thing is, though, child poverty won’t sort itself out. Criticising parents or punishing parents won’t sort it out. And politicians certainly won’t sort it out - because they know that, deep down, we don’t actually care whether they do or not. It’s a terrible thing to say. But that’s where I think the problem lies. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 Politics Friday with Matt Doocey and Duncan Webb: Christchurch Earthquake, Rangiora's after-hours clinic, child poverty, Chinese warships 21:21
21:21
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب21:21data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Today on Politics Friday, John MacDonald was joined by Matt Doocey and Duncan Webb to delve into some of the topics listeners are most interested in. They mark the anniversary of the Christchurch Earthquake, which occurred 14 years ago tomorrow. Rangiora’s after-hours clinic is still not underway, but some certainty has been gained after the Waimakariri District Council has offered to bankroll the project. Child poverty statistics have not shifted – is this a problem governments can’t solve? And what do they make about the Chinese Navy sightings in the Pacific? LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: When are the banks going to lift their game? 5:47
5:47
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:47data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Adrian Orr. Champion of the people. Well, that might be going a bit too far. But the Reserve Bank Governor was speaking my language when he says that dropping the Official Cash Rate, like he did yesterday, is just the start and that the banks have to do their bit too. And I couldn’t agree more. He was having a dig at their profit margins. But for me generally, I don't give two hoots how much profits the banks make. Because profitable business are a good thing. Even profitable foreign-owned business. But where bank profits do seem obscene is when you consider the way they treat their customers. In particular, existing customers. They fall over themselves trying to get new customers, but if you're an existing bank customer - nah, you don't deserve any special treatment. Which is crazy, because everyone knows that generally it's easier to hold onto your current customers than get new ones through the door. Tell that to the banks, though. And, if you’ve got a mortgage with them —if you're an existing customer, like I am— it’s people like us who get ripped-off while the banks try desperately to get new people signed-up. Case in point: I don’t know how many times I’ve seen my bank of nearly 25 years running ads for loan rates for new customers way better than what I've been paying. And I go into a branch and say, “I've been with them for ages, can I get that same rate please?” And every time, it’s been, “oh nah, that’s for new customers only”. It’s like they think they've got you over a barrel. Which they have, because most of us don't do anything about it, do we? I know we make threats that we’re going to move to another bank, but I think the banks have done a very good job over the years of making us think that it costs too much to change banks. And that’s what most of us end up doing. In my case, I walk out of the branch thinking all sort of things in my head, writing all sorts of letters in my head telling the bank where to go… but then, you know, suck it up and watch the new customers get the welcome mat at my expense. And it shouldn't be that way. If the banks were as really interested in being our partner in life and all that warm fuzzy nonsense they trot out, they wouldn't treat existing customers with such indifference. Which is why I think the Reserve Bank Governor is spot-on with his comments. To their credit, all the major banks did cut their interest rates after the announcement yesterday that the Official Cash Rate was going down. But again, not all customers benefit from that. If you’re on a floating mortgage - yep you’ll benefit. But if you’re on a fixed rate - no change until it’s up for renewal. So I’ll give them some credit, but I think the banks still have a long way to go. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: How would you rate your trust in the public service? 5:51
5:51
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:51data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
I reckon most of us, when we fill out the census papers, assume that the information we’re providing won’t end up in the wrong hands. I know there are some people who don't feel like that. People who just don't want to give personal information to anyone - especially the government. Or the state. The Wizard of Christchurch was known over the years for refusing to take part in the census. And, in more recent years, we’ve had people who just can’t be bothered. They’re the ones who ended up getting things like Warriors tickets and pressie cards to do what the rest of us just do anyway. But I reckon after these revelations that have come out over the last 24 hours, it’s going to take more than tickets to sports matches and shopping vouchers to get people involved next time the census comes around. What’s more, I think the public service has got a major job on its hands to restore public trust. In fact, that may turn out to be the biggest job the recently new head of the public service —Sir Brian Roche— has on is plate. Because once you lose trust, it’s very hard to restore it. I haven’t lost trust (not yet anyway), but I’m certainly losing confidence in the public service when it comes to keeping my information secure. And this latest example could actually be the tipping point for me. But essentially, an inquiry has found multiple flaws in the way public service agencies protected personal information provided to third party contractors hired to help with the 2023 Census and a Covid vaccination drive. We don't know whether any of this personal information was “misused”, but what we do know is that, as Sir Brian puts it, “the gate was left open” for it to be misused. And what Sir Brian calls “very sobering reading” could be about to get worse. That’s because there are other investigations into how other government agencies including the police, the Serious Fraud Office and the privacy commissioner use our personal information. So what impact is going to have an impact on your trust in the public service and is it going to have an impact on your willingness to share personal information with the state? Let me quote Sir Brian directly, because there are two words that I think are the focus for us. He says: "The report makes for very sobering reading. It raises a number of issues that go to the core of the confidence and trust required to maintain the integrity and sanctity of information entrusted to government agencies.” The two key words there are trust and confidence. Here’s where I’m at with that. Sir Brian says the public service has pretty much failed to keep up with technological changes. And what he's getting at is that it is so much easier these days to share information. For example, if someone working in the public service can access someone’s information, what is there to stop them sending that around a few people? Not much. And when I heard Sir Brian talking about that, that is when I decided that the public service still has my trust. If I said to you that I didn’t trust them, that would be because I believed that there were public sector workers helping themselves to my personal information en masse and doing what they want with it. Intentionally. But I don’t think that, even after the revelations of the past 24 hours. But what I do think is that it has become so much easier for information to be passed on at the click of a mouse at lightning speed and that’s where I think the public service has been found to be pretty hopeless. So for me, I still trust the public sector, but my confidence in it is another story. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 Chris Hipkins: Labour Leader on Destiny Church, public service, Christchurch Hospital 9:39
9:39
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب9:39data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Labour Leader Chris Hipkins joined John MacDonald this morning to give his thoughts on some of the biggest stories of the week. The integrity of the public service is being called into question after Census data was allegedly misused – how will this impact trust in the future? Hipkins believes the GP shortage is the biggest factor impacting demand at Christchurch Hospital ED, so what would he do differently if he was Health Minister now? And he expands on his statement condemning the actions of Destiny Church protestors over the weekend. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: We're great at peacekeeping. But not in Ukraine 5:32
5:32
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:32data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Already, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is looking ahead to whenever a ceasefire might happen in Ukraine and has said that, if or when it does, he’d be happy to send troops in to keep the peace. It was too early for PM Christopher Luxon to confirm the Government's interest in sending troops to Ukraine once there’s a ceasefire during his regular appearance on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning. Christopher Luxon says he'd be open to it. But, despite the New Zealand military’s record of peacekeeping around the world, I hope we don’t get involved in Ukraine. I know that with Britain talking about peacekeeping already, they’ll be on the blower to Wellington at some point wanting us to join in. Just like they were last year about sending military personnel to help protect freight shipping in the Red Sea. You’ll remember how we said, “yep no problem” and six of our soldiers went off to try and put the Houthi militia in its place. And, as I said at the time, I got what the Prime Minister, the Foreign Affairs Minister, and the Defence Minister meant when they said it was about New Zealand doing its bit. I still didn’t agree with it, though. Which was based on previous experience. Essentially, when you get involved in a major military undertaking, you have no idea when it’s going to end. The patrols in the Red Sea. Who knows when they’re going to end? And who knows when any peacekeeping commitment in Ukraine would end? What’s more, Europe is flooded with military capacity. There is no shortage. And there will be no shortage of countries willing to join Britain in Ukraine when the war ends and when peacekeeping support is needed. Since 1948, New Zealand troops and personnel have been involved in more than 40 peacekeeping missions in places like the Middle East, the former Yugoslavia, Somalia and Iraq. But our brilliant peacekeeping record doesn’t mean we have to go running into Ukraine when the time comes. We need to be more picky about what peacekeeping work we get involved in because our military resources have become so depleted that we have to be realistic about what we can and can’t do. I also think —and I’m not being alarmist or anything here— but I think we should narrow our focus and look at pretty much limiting our military’s offshore activities to the Pacific region. I can’t imagine the government —which likes to talk about New Zealand doing its bit globally— being too fussed with that idea. But I think we need to refine our approach and stop saying ‘yes’ to requests from other countries every time the phone rings. Which is why if British prime minister Keir Starmer or US president Donald Trump or whoever is running Australia by the time a ceasefire in Ukraine happens, phones Wellington, I hope we have the fortitude to say we’d like to, but we can’t. We can’t because we don't have the military capacity. We can’t because we’ve learned from past experience that, once you’re involved in these things, it can be very hard to get out. And we can’t, because our military needs to focus on stuff closer to home. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: Is that all the PM has to say about Destiny Church? 7:02
7:02
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب7:02data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
When I saw Brian Tamaki on the news last night, he looked more pompous than ever. Pompous - not pious. Because he was the one who instructed his so-called followers to disrupt that drag artist’s kids show and protest at the Auckland Rainbow Parade at the weekend. From the pictures I’ve seen, both of those events looked pretty ugly. His idea. Under his instructions. And I’ve had a gutsful of this guy. And we need to be condemning him in the strongest way possible. Because, it seems that’s all we can do. Sadly. They were doing a particularly vigourous haka at the end of the parade. That wasn’t free speech. That was hate. I saw one person saying on the news that Tamaki’s Man Up crew is nothing more than a gang and should be treated that way. This person made particular mention of the gang patch legislation - saying that these guys ride around on motorbikes wearing patches, So why aren’t they included in the gang patch ban? The organiser of the rainbow parade says there is a difference between freedom of speech and hate speech - and what we saw at the weekend was hate. And I completely agree. The parade organiser says it was clear that they had set-out to intimidate, to bully, and get their message of misinformation across. I agree they wanted to intimidate. And I agree they were a bunch of bullies. But I don't know about the misinformation bit, because you never get any information from these clowns (misinformation or otherwise). And, as per usual, we had weasel words from the Prime Minister when he was asked about it yesterday. He said he respects peoples right to free speech and he respects people's right to protest, but he said Tamaki’s puppets “went too far”. You're damn right they went too far. Even by turning up, they went too far. What the PM should have done yesterday was condemn Brian Tamaki and his deluded followers in the strongest way possible. He should have done what Auckland mayor Wayne Brown did. He said it was nothing short of “thuggery”. Which is a great way to describe it. I thought Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick was a bit light on it when she said that the rainbow community needs love and support, not hateful rhetoric. I know what she’s saying, but I want her to condemn these people too. Because, for me, this wasn’t free speech - it was hate speech. And remember that this kind of thing isn’t new for this Destiny lot. You’ll remember they got all excited about an event at the library in christchurch that time when there was an event with people in drag reading stories to kids. And there’s no stopping them. Last night Tamaki was saying that he doesn’t think they’ve gone far enough yet. And he challenged the Prime Minister to get show some fortitude and to do a Donald Trump, and declare that only two genders will be recognised in New Zealand. Male and female. So these guys are dangerous. Not because of their mickey mouse beliefs, but because of the way they express them. If someone doesn’t like the idea of same sex people being in relationships - they’re allowed to feel that way. If someone thinks we should go back to the way it used to be, with just boys and girls and men and women, they can think that too. Good luck to them. But when people take it to the next level - like we saw at the weekend - that’s not ok by me. I tell you what else isn’t ok. The fact that this outfit is out there bullying people - dishing out their hatred - and because they call themselves a church, they enjoy all the tax benefits that come with that. A few years back, some Destiny Church charities were removed from the charities register for not filing their annual tax returns. Before that happened, more than 70,000 people signed a petition calling for Charities Services to strip the church of its tax-exempt status. I’ve had a look at the register today and the Destiny Church New Zealand Trust is still there. There are still some regional branches registered as a charity too. Which is a rort. And, until the government delivers on its promise to crackdown on so-called “charities” not paying tax, we just have to accept that it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean we have to sit back and let these people do what they want. We can’t make them pay tax. We can’t tell them to take their patches off - because they’re not a gang. But we can stand up and tell them to pull their heads in. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: Here's why we're so bad at road repairs 5:17
5:17
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:17data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
I’m starting to wonder whether it was just a fluke that we managed to build things like the big hydro dams back in the day without them falling over. Without them falling apart. Cracking under the pressure. Because, when you consider achievements like that, it makes it laughable that we don’t seem to be capable anymore of really simple stuff like fixing roads. An example is Halswell Junction Road, in Christchurch. Three repairs in the past 12 months and now it needs to be done a fourth time. The local councillor has had a gutsful, and I don’t blame him. What are some other examples that show just how average we’ve become? What about that time they flooded Cromwell and created the new lake? Was it just a fluke that we pulled that off without it leaking all over the place? The Lyttelton tunnel. How on earth did we do that without it caving in? We used to be able to do all those things. These days, we can’t even fix a road properly. We can build rockets and send them into space. We can build boats that win the America’s Cup. In fact, we’re better at those things than we are at fixing roads. Which is crazy, isn’t it? City councillor Andrei Moore is saying today that the repair work on Halswell Junction Road has been sub-standard and parts of it still aren’t level. What’s more, people are telling him that their houses are being shaken by traffic more than ever. So why’s that, do you reckon? I’ll tell you what I think but, first, here’s the council’s explanation. Its head of transport has told our newsroom that the problem with Halswell Junction Road is that it isn’t strong enough for them to use asphalt, and so they have to use chip seal. And, obviously, chip seal is hopeless on that particular road - which is a major route. The thing is, it’s not just Halswell Junction Road, is it? It seems to be everywhere. All over the place - so-called repairs are being done, over-and-over again. Maybe calling them “repairs” is generous, because something is only repaired once it doesn’t need fixing again. And do you know why this is happening? It’s easy. She’ll be right. This “she’ll be right” attitude is rife everywhere. It’s rife in councils, where the processes they use to hire contractors has become so complex, that once a roading outfit is in the system, they’re pretty much there for life. Even if they do cruddy work - they’re in the system, they’ve got a purchase order number, invoicing is all set-up and it's way too much work for the council to find someone who might do the job better. And hey, we can still tick things off the to-do list - even if we have to get them back to do it all over again in three months time. She’ll be right. The companies that do the actual work. If it doesn’t work first time, we’ll come back and sort it out. Don’t bother telling the council that chip seal is hopeless and we should be using asphalt. Don’t upset the apple cart. She’ll be right. Job for life. And you and I, we’re part of the problem too. Because, generally, we just shrug our shoulders and put up with this lame she’ll be right attitude when, what we should be doing, is making more of a noise about it. And when I say noise, I mean actually putting people into these councils who are prepared to push back when they hear nonsense such as Halswell Junction Road not being strong enough to take the weight of asphalt. I’m talking about putting people into councils who will push back at that and say, do something about that. Don’t just keep pouring chipseal. Make the road stronger. People who will challenge the way their council monitors performance and quality. People who will do there everything to get rid of “she’ll be right”. Because, until that happens —until everyone ups their game— nothing is going to change. And the same repairs are going to continue to be done over and over again. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 Politics Friday: Matt Doocey and Tracey McLellan talk supermarkets, mental health funding, helicopters, school lunches 22:28
22:28
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب22:28data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Today on Politics Friday John MacDonald was joined in studio by National’s Matt Doocey and Labour’s Tracey McLellan. They discussed yesterday’s supermarket announcement: does the Government really believe another player will enter the scene, or is it all just talk? Why has some mental health funding been redistributed when New Zealand continues to suffer through a mental health crisis? A bit closer to home, the price for our police to hire helicopters is blowing out each year, will Christchurch ever get its chopper? And is a pie really a healthy option for a school lunch? LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 Phil Mauger: Christchurch Mayor on the rates decrease, user-pays water system, and the Port Hills blaze 8:29
8:29
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب8:29data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
John MacDonald was joined by Christchurch Mayor Phil Mauger for a chat about the biggest issues concerning residents. Christchurch City Councillors have adopted their Draft Annual Plan. It now proposes a 7.58% overall rates increase, down from the originally-drafted 8.93%. They achieved this not by cost cutting, as well as paying off less debt, resulting in next year’s rates increasing significantly. Is the Mayor doing the right thing, or is he just thinking of the next election? Does he support the proposed ‘user-pays’ water system being introduced for ratepayers? And Mauger reflects on the response to the second big Port Hills fire now twelve months on from blaze. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: Here's how you can tell council elections are looming 8:29
8:29
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب8:29data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Let me give a shout out to Christchurch City Councillor Melanie Coker, who has told her council colleagues that what they are doing by not paying-off debt to keep the rates rise this year lower and then stinging us with an even bigger increase next year, is misleading. That’s how she’s describing this smoke and mirrors way councillors are trimming-back this year’s rates increase with one thing in mind - getting votes. She says the council is showing “poor leadership, poor financial management and is misleading the public”. And she’s bang on. They’re being short-sighted. Reckless. And if any of the ones who voted for this try to tell you over the next few months that you should vote for them because they’ve done everything they can to keep rates and down and they’ll do everything they can to keep them down again if you vote for them, call them out on these shenanigans. Because that’s what it is. Which is being generous. Councillor Coker puts it better, when she says it’s misleading. In fact, that’s being generous too, because what it really is, is a sham. I’m not going to get bogged down in numbers because that’s not what this is primarily about. When it comes down to it, this is about councillors trying to protect their backsides and get re-elected when the local body elections happen later in the year. But we need a few numbers for context. So the council was proposing a 9.93% increase. It was going to put that out for public consultation yesterday. But, at the last minute, councillor Sam Macdonald cooked up this idea that they could pay-off less debt and get the increase down to 7.5%. And what do you think happened? Enough of them around that council table thought “ooh, that’s a good idea. That’s a much easier sell when I’m out trying to get re-elected later in the year.” So when it went to the vote, that’s what they decided. It was close, though. Nine voted in favour of it —including mayor Phil Mauger— and eight were against it. Which is going to mean several things. The increase this year will be lower but, at this point it looks like next year’s increase will be over 10 percent%. What’s more, it’s going to contribute to the council’s books being in worse shape than they were going to be by $12 million. Before yesterday, the budget was going to be unbalanced by $48 million. This smoke and mirrors stuff is part of the reason why the council’s books will be unbalanced by $60 million. Going by the report I’ve read, councillor Kelly Barber takes the cake - saying this yesterday: "At the moment, our ratepayers are suffering. Next year is another year. Let’s deal with the problem of next year, next year.” In that one statement, councillor Barber demonstrated perfectly the problem with politicians in this country. Central government. Local government. They’re all the same. All they care about is the next election. And by saying “let’s deal with the problem of next year, next year”, Kelly Barber has shown us that all he cares about is getting another three years around the council table. And when it comes to dealing with “next year, next year” and that rates increase is looking like being more than 10 percent, and the council’s books are even more out of whack, it won’t matter, because the election will be history. Deputy Mayor Pauline Cotter’s another one. She says reducing rates artificially instead of paying off debt makes her uncomfortable, but "this is a good year to be easing financial pressure on people”. And she’s hopeful the economy will improve next year. But is that really the approach to take when you’re overseeing a $1.5 billion annual budget? Hoping things will get better. Of course it’s not. It seems that in an election year, it’s perfectly fine to not cut costs. It's perfectly fine to pay-off less debt. It's perfectly fine to kick high rates increases for touch and worry about them next year. It’s also perfectly fine to put the books $12 million more in the red than they would have been. It’s perfectly fine - if you’re trying to win votes. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: User pays for water doesn't sit well with me 5:49
5:49
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:49data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
If you thought Three Waters was a dog, how are you feeling now, with the news out today that the Christchurch City Council is looking at going all user pays on it when it comes to water? And this isn’t strictly a conversation about Christchurch. It’s a conversation about your philosophical position when it comes to water – something essential to all of us. And I’d be dead against charging people on the basis of how many litres of water they use. So the council is considering changing the way it charges those of us who live in Christchurch for water from being part of our rates bill to it being completely user pays. The more water you use, the more you pay. And I’m not a fan because, when it comes to something as basic as water, I think it’s unfair to go completely user pays. Just because you might use a lot of water, it doesn’t mean you can afford to pay more for it. And you might be thinking ‘well, what about electricity? What you pay for power is based on how much you use?’ And I’d say fair point, but the horse has already bolted when it comes to electricity. It doesn't mean we should do the same with water. So the council's thinking about making this change as a result of the Government’s water reforms – which it calls “Local Water Done Well”. And is its alternative to Labour’s ill-fated three waters reforms, which were all about taking responsibility for water off the councils. It wanted to take the water assets off council hands too. So the Government’s told councils that it’s not taking over but it’s still going to tell them what to do. Which means Christchurch is grappling with how it’s going to deliver what the government wants. Which is essentially deciding whether it’s going to keep running water services in-house, or whether it's going to set up a whole new entity to run water. The other question facing the council is how it charges for water. And it’s a simple decision the council has to make. Does it keep doing it the way its always done it? Where water is part of your rates bill. Or does it go all user-pays on it and charge people for water depending on how much they use. Now before we go any further, let’s forget about the fact that not every property in Christchurch has its own water meter. Because what we’re talking about here is the philosophical debate as to whether water should be an outright transaction, where we pay for what we use, or whether we should all be sharing the load a bit more. Sure, if you live on your own in an expensive part of town, then you’re going to effectively pay more for your water than someone in another part of town who’s property might not be worth as much as yours. But that seems fair to me. Because why should someone who doesn’t live in an expensive part of town but has, say, three or four kids and, because of that, uses a truckload more water than the person living on their own in Fendalton, be forced to pay more? The answer is, they shouldn’t. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 Mark Lizotte: Diesel on his career, releasing new music, family connections 12:56
12:56
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب12:56data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
A man of many stage names, Mark Lizotte, better known as Diesel, joined John MacDonald live from Australia for a chat. He’ll be taking to the stage in a couple of week’s time as a part of the line up for Selwyn Sounds. He and John talked about his career and it continuing to flourish with the release of new music and his pre-show habit of weather forecasting. Plus, John learned about his famous musical family connection! LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: Seymour is the fly in Luxon's ointment 5:40
5:40
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:40data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
Whenever people used to bang on about Christopher Luxon being the next John Key —which, I think we all agree now, he isn’t— but whenever I used to hear that talk, I pooed-pooed it. All because of what the two of them did before they got into politics. And the fact that Luxon isn’t another John Key is why we’ve got two new political polls telling us that, if an election was held now, the left-wing parties would have enough votes and enough seats to form a government. Because his political leadership is invisible. Particularly, in relation to his handling of ACT leader David Seymour. Seymour is running rings around the Prime Minister and voters are seeing it a mile off. Which is why last night’s 1News-Verian poll had National down 3% to a 34% share of the vote and Labour up 4% to 33%. Overall, the National/ACT/NZ First coalition would have 60 seats (not enough to form a government) and Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori would have 61 seats (enough to form a government). And Seymour is the reason. Or more to the point, Luxon’s reluctance to thump the table publicly is the reason. Before Sir John Key got into politics, he’d been a financial trader. Christopher Luxon, before he got into politics, was a chief executive. So, what’s the significance of that? Traders thrive on chaos and chief executives avoid chaos at all cost. Chief executives are like ducks on the water. They like it to look as if everything’s going smoothly, nothing to see here, but underneath the water their legs are going flat out. And being a former chief executive, that’s how Christopher Luxon is handling David Seymour —“nothing to see hear, nothing to see here”— and that’s why we have two poll results telling us that, if an election was held now, the National/ACT/NZ First coalition would be out the door. And he was treading water again on Newstalk ZB this morning when Mike Hosking asked him what he could do about Seymour – whether he could actually sack him from Cabinet. For trying to drive the land rover up the steps at parliament yesterday but, more significantly, doing that stupid thing where he wrote a letter to the police on behalf of Philip Polkinghorne before he was accused of killing his wife and, subsequently, found not guilty. The PM was saying he didn’t have time to think about David Seymour and it’s natural for minor coalition partners to seek media attention, despite the fact that Seymour has got into a public spat with the Prime Minister over the letter he wrote to the police. When the PM was asked yesterday about Seymour writing to the police, he said it was “ill advised”. Straight away, Seymour fired back in a media interview saying, “before criticising a local MP for doing their job, you should know all the facts”. I reckon more and more people are looking at Luxon and thinking “when are you going to tell him to pull his head in?” Especially when you consider that, in a few months time, Seymour will be Deputy Prime Minister. Luxon’s approach might be appropriate for the corporate world, but, as the numbers are showing, it’s not the way to handle things in the political world. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
C
Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6dfd/b6dfd8b04dc36f7f564a73adcbcec8224caa0563" alt="Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald podcast artwork"
1 John MacDonald: The foreign buyer ban has run its course 5:40
5:40
التشغيل لاحقا
التشغيل لاحقا
قوائم
إعجاب
احب5:40data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e2ee8/e2ee8cc9432b46cd4630facd70372204c0b5535d" alt="icon"
So the Government's doing all sorts of things to try and get rich migrants into the country - except one thing. Which it should be doing. Former immigration minister Stuart Nash was on Newstalk ZB this morning saying it's time to lift the ban on foreigners buying houses. And I agree with him. The so-called 'golden visa' the Government announced yesterday is going to mean an end to the English language test for rich migrants. It will also give people residency if they invest $5 million over three years in a growth-type project or $10 million over five years in a more conservative operation. We’re largely talking here about investing into a business, managed fund, commercial property or new property development. But if they want to live here - they have to rent. They’re not allowed to buy. Which is a rule Winston Peters likes. But according to Stuart Nash earlier, it's a rule he might be prepared to see go. So too would the immigration lawyer saying today that, if these wealthy types can’t buy a place here, then they’re just not going to bother. Nick Mason’s his name. And he’s saying that if the Government’s really serious about getting these people over here, then the ban on foreigners buying houses needs to be ditched. It came-in back in 2018. Remember that was around the time that Phil Twyford went through the phone book, noted down all the foreign-sounding names and claimed the place was being overrun by aliens. Which it wasn’t. So eight or nine years down the track, this immigration lawyer is saying that it’s a real sticking point and it will continue to be a sticking point if the Government doesn’t get rid of it. He’s saying: "Let’s say we all have $15 million and I choose to invest that in New Zealand and I can get permanent residency. That’s great, I can stay in New Zealand as long as I like but I can’t own my own house until I’ve spent at least six months of a 12-month period here.” Now we might be thinking, what’s wrong with waiting six months?. But that’s the tricky bit. Nick Mason says people with this kind of money don't necessarily spend six months anywhere and he thinks if they can’t buy a house on day one, then it will continue to be “a considerable barrier for many investors”. And let’s get real. If a millionaire or a billionaire is coming here, they're not going to be buying the weatherboard and tile place or the brick and tile place from the 50s. They're not going to be denying first-home buyers their chance to own a place. So this thing about foreigners pricing New Zealanders out of the market - I don’t actually believe that it’s a thing. I reckon this ban is like something from the dark ages. It’s based on paranoia and not much else. And it’s not just Stuart Nash who thinks Winston Peters might not be as paranoid as he used to be about foreigners buying up all our houses and spoiling the quarter-acre dream. Nicola Willis was dropping similar hints on Newstalk ZB today as well. You can imagine what’s going on behind the scenes though, can’t you? Because this is something National and NZ First haven’t agreed on in the past. NZ First has wanted it to stay and National has wanted it to go. I think it should go too. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.…
مرحبًا بك في مشغل أف ام!
يقوم برنامج مشغل أف أم بمسح الويب للحصول على بودكاست عالية الجودة لتستمتع بها الآن. إنه أفضل تطبيق بودكاست ويعمل على أجهزة اندرويد والأيفون والويب. قم بالتسجيل لمزامنة الاشتراكات عبر الأجهزة.