Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Is there any such thing as a completely fair tax system?   Surely the most you can hope for is a least unfair tax system. I ask this because a UN report is calling for countries to check taxes are being applied proportionally to the wealthiest individuals, and questioning the fairness of GST. The UN Committee for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights said a tax policy that maintains a low personal and corporate income taxes without adequately addressing high income inequalities is an example of a regressive and ineffective policy, and consumption taxes —of which GST is one— can have adverse impacts on disadvantaged groups, such as low-income families and single parent households, because they typically spend a higher percentage of their income on everyday goods and services. They don't have the option of withholding spending; they have to buy the basics.   In New Zealand, personal income tax rates went to a high of 69 cents in the dollar in the late 70s/early 80s until the Fourth Labour government came crashing in with a hiss and a roar and made changes that are reverberating to this very day. One of them being the major changes to our tax system. They standardised indirect tax and introduced an across-the-board tax on goods and services that is GST. It started at 10% and went up to 12% and is now 15%.   Tax incentives were removed, personal income tax rates were simplified. At the time, there were just two personal income tax rates, 24 percent on income, up to $30,000, 33% above that. The introduction of GST was sold as a tax that would get those who didn't pay it. It would collect those in the black economy, those who took part in cashier's drug sales, that sort of thing. You know, they might not pay tax, they might not declare income, but they had to buy stuff. And once they bought food and once they bought cars, that sort of thing, then they had to pay GST on it.   But even then, when it was introduced, it was slammed as a regressive tax, hitting those who had to buy the basics the hardest. It was interesting that David Lange, towards the end of his life, had a great deal of regret about how New Zealand had changed with the introduction of his government. It wasn't him leading the charge so much —he was the public face of the changes— it was Roger Douglas and Rogernomics that caused the greatest change. He said for those who wanted little personal involvement with government, those who did not want government in their lives, it was a fantastic thing. But for the uneducated, disabled, the disadvantaged, it was an absolute tragedy. And there was, I think, much regret towards the end of his life as to the changes that he had been a part of.   New Zealand's tax system is widely regarded as a sensible one, in as much as you have to have taxes —that's how governments raise revenue and that's how they pay for the roads and the schools and the hospitals and the police and the like— it's straightforward, there's little room and little need for tax avoidance. The international tax competitive index rates 38 OECD countries on the best tax environment for investment, as well as for workers and for businesses and New Zealand ranks third in that because it is so straightforward.   But again, it comes down to the least unfair tax system. I think there are always going to be people who feel that they are hard done by when it comes to the taxes they pay. They feel that they pay too much. They pay a disproportionate amount of their income towards tax, while others aren't pulling their weight. And then you also look at the way governments use your money. That was one thing that really ripped my nightie during the Labour Government’s last six years. We're getting up early, we're going to work, we're doing our bit, and they were squandering tax money, just burning it at a rate of knots with very little to show for it. You're always going to get people who say no, the government is spending money on projects I don't agree with it, I don't want my tax going to that. But I think the last government, the last Labour government, really took it to the nth degree and that's when you start resenting paying taxes. You don't want that in a society.   Can you tax your way to a fairer society? I really don't think you can. You can certainly create an environment where those who cannot work, who need assistance get it. You can create an environment where it's easier for people to do business, to get work, for businesses to do well. I think the more you make it complicated and try and right inequities, the more room there is to evade tax to avoid paying it altogether. GST, most countries have it because it is a way of addressing the black economy – is that enough justification to maintain it?   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-23

06:44

A tax expert says achieving a fair tax system is hard, but not impossible.  A UN committee is calling on governments to check their tax policies are being applied proportionally to wealthier individuals.  It says regressive and ineffective policies could disproportionately affect low-income households, women, and disadvantaged groups.  Denton Tax Partner Bruce Bernacchi told Kerre Woodham tax can become disproportional when measuring how much tax is paid overall against incomes.  He says New Zealand sticks out because higher income-earners are earning capital gains but not paying tax on it.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-23

10:00

After 96 years, Western Spring's Speedway's final race will take place tomorrow night.  The Legends Night will be headlined by Midgets, Sprintcars, and other open-wheel categories.  In October last year, Auckland councillors voted 11-8 to move all speedway events to Waikaraka Park, which will undergo an $11 million upgrade.  Western Springs Speedway Manager John McCullum told Kerre Woodham their focus is on having a good season and sending it out on the right note.  He says that under different conditions they could’ve have still operated out of Western Springs, but the stadium belongs to the city, and the city has made it abundantly clear they see a better use for the stadium.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-20

10:44

A big bounce back for our economy, despite many sectors still doing it tough. New Zealand's officially out of technical recession, with new GDP figures showing our economy grew 0.7% between October and December. Economists had predicted a growth rate of just 0.3-to-0.5%. NZ Herald Business Editor Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham while some areas still look gloomy, the bounce back from tourism and agriculture has been strong.  He says it looks like farmers will go a long way to saving us in this current cycle as well.  “Strong export prices combined with a good production season – that really makes a big difference.”  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-19

11:22

Chris Small from ABC Business Sales summed up the business loan scheme beautifully on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning: it was a balls up that was going to, has indeed, and will continue to cost the country hundreds of millions of dollars.   Let me take you back to March 2020. Business loans were made available in May – the announcement was made in March for small businesses affected by Covid-19. Businesses were offered up to $20,000, plus $1800 per full time employee. More than 129,000 businesses took out loans worth $2.4 billion. Borrowers had five years to repay the loan, and many would reach that limit from June.   It was never going to work. And the worst thing was everybody could see that it was not going to be a boon for the businesses that they thought it was, that it was not going to be a temporary stopgap, that the audits that Grant Robertson said would be put in place to protect the scheme were not going to work. Everybody could see that, everybody that is, but the previous government.   “In hindsight if the previous regime could look back, I'm sure they would wind it back and put a few more bells and braces in there because what they're now finding is people basically took the money thinking it was unlikely they were going to pay it back. And sure enough, they haven't paid it back, with little consequences. No security was taken in the way of PG's (personal guarantees) or any GSAs over their businesses, so it was a real free hit for the business owner at the time.   “Because there was no security taken, so the houses aren't at risk, no personal guarantee, so they can't get personally bankrupted, all the IRD, from what I've seen or read, can do is put in this default interest rate. Yes, that will keep mounting up and capitalising, and certainly a sole traders position, may just walk away and set up new entity or just ignore it. But I don't think it's realistic for the IRD to go around and just from an administration perspective, there's 120-odd thousand people to chase. It's just not going to happen. So it's just it was a balls up that’s going to cost us hundreds of millions of dollars, unfortunately.”  Yep, another one. That was Chris Small from ABC Business Sales on the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning. Utter madness. And at the risk of triggering those of us who did not have a good time under the previous administration, we do have to discuss it as the mistakes made then must never be made again. They have to be acknowledged – that it was a balls up. He put it beautifully. There were many of them and we mustn't do them again.   I think we can take it as read that high trust models don't work, we tried that experiment, didn’t work. Didn't work for the business loans, didn’t work for MIQ stays. BusinessDesk wrote back in 2023 that hotels that provided rooms for the government's controversial quarantine system received more than $1 billion. Just $187 million has been recovered by the government from people who had to pay for their MIQ stay, another $26 million is outstanding. So it didn't work there. High trust didn't work when it came to policing. It didn't work when it came to allowing troublesome tenants to stay on in Kainga Ora accommodation. I can't think of a single sector where it actually worked.   I remember my accountant saying to me, she had businesses who were taking the loan and saying, oh, we're not going to pay it back. Why should we? There is absolutely no need to – if they're stupid enough to give us the money, we're not going to pay it back. Surely there is a moral authority that if you can, you should. And if you can and you won't, then you must never, ever talk about beneficiaries bludging off the system ever again. Same with student loan defaulters, you have no moral high ground at all.   We can't move on. It'd be wonderful to be able to move on, but we can't move on when we are paying and paying and paying for stupid, ill-considered poorly advised decisions. And we're all going to be paying for a very, very long time to come. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-17

05:07

A Kawerau paper mill has found a new power source as New Zealand struggles with a looming winter power crunch.  A newly released briefing to the Minister shows electricity supply is tight, and gas supply needs to be maintained until suitable alternatives are found.  Essity’s Kawerau Paper Mill has become the first in the world to create a machine that runs entirely on geothermal steam.  Essity General Manager Mark Stevens told Kerre Woodham that the main area of benefit is sustainability – with the mill producing the same amount of paper with 66% less carbon output.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-17

08:34

Finance Minister Nicola Willis is looking at upping the amount employees and employers contribute to their KiwiSaver accounts.  She's seeking advice and taking advice on where we take KiwiSaver in the future. Commentator Shane Te Pou is saying we should be paying the same as they do in Australia where employer contributions are around 11%. Employers and Manufacturers Association Head of Advocacy Alan McDonald talks to Kerre Woodham about the proposal.  LISTEN ABOVE. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-16

07:17

Next week will see three sporting codes play Eden Park in the span of four days.  A T20 international double header on Friday, a clash between the Blues and the Crusaders on Saturday, and then on Monday the stadium is hosting the FIFA Oceania Qualifier.  It’s a massive undertaking for the grounds staff, involving months of planning.  Eden Park Turf Manager Blair Christiansen told Kerre Woodham that 40 years ago, there was no chance of this tight of a turnaround being possible.  He says it’s an evolution from people, but also the technology grounds staff now utilise.   LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-13

12:29

Speaking of the Investment Summit that's been convened by the government – or really the Prime Minister, because this Infrastructure Investment Summit is the PM's baby. What I really love is the positivity around it. It must be killing some media organisations, having to reluctantly spit out some good news. But there's optimism and there's hard bitten trillion-dollar asset fund managers saying yes, this all looks really promising. It's not just hearing about the very real possibility of getting essential works done, but it's the encouraging words from those fund managers with their trillions of dollars worth of assets.   And even more so, I love the talk of bipartisanship. That really warms the cockles of my hard, old heart. Investors are not going to commit their clients' funds if works are going to come to a grinding halt in 18 months or so and then three years later, we attempt to lurch them back into life. As Chris Bishop explained to Ryan Bridge last night, the investors needed to be reassured that there was bipartisan agreement when it comes to committing to big ticket projects.   “That's been a constant theme of today, hearing from the delegates, they like the fact that you've got National and Labour in the room being mature, grown-up adults, agreeing on, working on a pipeline, and also the funding model. Barbara Edmonds wrote a forward to the PPP document that we released as a government. That is really important and I'm working with her on the 30-year plan for infrastructure in New Zealand and I actively want to involve the opposition in that.   “And I think, the reality is, we need as a country to do that, right? Because these guys want long term certainty, they want to invest in New Zealand, they need to understand that their investments are safe and secure, and that there's also a pipeline so they can invest in human capital, and they can invest in the kit and the machinery. That is really important. Frankly, if we're honest about it, we haven't been very good at that as a country. Governments come and go, and the project’s come and go. Let's get mature about, let's be adults in the room and build for New Zealand.”  Amen to that. I don't know if you heard Chris Bishop with Ryan last night, but it was really positive, forward-looking – there was no negativity, no sniping. It was fantastic. It was wonderful to hear. Before the election, Christopher Luxon was talking about drawing up a bipartisan agreement with Labour on what infrastructure works were essential, works that whatever government came to power would support. And there'd be a bit of wriggle room for pet projects to appease ideologues within the various parties, who might not understand the importance of pragmatism. So Labour could come in and yes, they would still have to keep going with the expressway or the planned motorway or motorway extension, and the ideologues within their party would be unhappy about that, but there was a little bit of money in the kitty for a few cycleways that would appease them, or funded public transport fees, that sort of thing.   At the time I thought it was a bit pie in the sky, but seeing Labour's finance spokesperson there, having Barbara Edmonds actually being part of the process —a competent, capable woman who's untarnished by being part of the previous administration— fills me with real hope and optimism. And it's been a while since I've felt that. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-13

04:08

When the Prime Minister is doing all the shake and howdy at the investment summit in Auckland, I bet he’ll be feeling like a harassed parent who —despite all the chaos behind the scenes— somehow manages to arrive at a family wedding with the kids in tow looking cool, calm and very happy to be there.   Even though one of the kids had been refusing to leave the house and you all had a big bust-up in the car on the way to the church.   “But we’re here now guys - smile everyone”. I bet you that’s how Christopher Luxon is feeling.   And what will be making it worse is the fresh criticism coming from Briscoes Group managing director Rod Duke who’s telling Luxon and his government to “get their A into gear” and “actually do something” to help the economy. And I agree with him.    Because are you really doing any better than you were a year or 18 months ago?   This isn’t the first time Rod Duke has made these kinds of comments. I remember him saying a while back that he was prepared to give the Government until this month to deliver some results and, if he didn't see results, he’d be putting a rocket under them.   And that’s what he’s doing now.    He’s obviously had a gutsful of the Government blaming everything on the last government and he wants more action.   He says: “I think they’re of the view that up until now they’ve been able to blame the prior government, which is typical of a lot of governments I guess. But you know, the time has just about come where you’re going to have to make your own mark.   “You’ve had enough time to study, to tighten, to understand what the books look like, and now you’ve got to put some policies into place.”   He says everyone’s aware of the situation Luxon and Co. inherited from the previous government, but they’ve had enough time and should be able to show more for their efforts of the past 15 or so months.  Duke doesn’t seem to be doing what Luxon would probably ask him to do. You know, the line CEOs like to use about not going to them with problems but going to them with solutions.   But I think Rod Duke is right. The Government hasn’t delivered when it comes to the economy and it does need to get its “A into G”.    The problem is though, the Government has fallen into the trap that pretty much every government falls into – especially first-term governments. The trap of trying to do too much.   When you're in opposition, it’s very easy to sit there and have all these big ideas. Because when you’re in opposition, that’s all you have to do.   Different story when you get into government, though. For starters, you realise that the things you promised to do aren’t quite so easy to do in reality. So it takes way longer to achieve something.   And when you get into government, you have to deal with all the stuff that blows up in your face on a daily basis. You can lurch from one crisis to another and see your quarterly plan targets disappearing in front of your eyes.   So if Christopher Luxon said to me: “Don't come to me with problems, come to me with solutions” - here’s what I’d tell him.   I’d tell him to decide what his government is actually going to focus on and to stick with it. If it’s the economy, then make that your priority between now and the election.   And be honest about it, this laser-like focus that the Prime Minister talks about can't go in all directions.    I’d tell the PM to be upfront with us and say that if we want better health services and better education facilities and everything else that governments get lost in —as this government has— I’d tell the PM to be courageous and tell us that we’re going to have to wait for all those other things.   Because for now, it’s the economy and only the economy we’re going to worry about.   That might sound simplistic, but unless the Government ditches this idea that it’s going to fix everything ASAP, then it’s going to fail in all of them.   And people like Rod Duke won’t just be telling the Government to get its A into gear, he'll be telling it to get its A out of here. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-13

05:11

Patriotism or profit.   Essentially, that’s what these changes the Government is making to the way it hires companies to do work for it come down to.   It’s like “Buy NZ-Made”. The Government wants to make it easier for local companies to get on its books. But what’s more important? Getting the cheapest price from (potentially) an overseas company or paying a bit more to hire a local company?   Patriotism versus profit. For me, when it comes to things like government contracts, patriotism wins hands-down every day.  It’s like that argument people sometimes make about Kiwibank and why the Government doesn’t use it as its official bank. The answer to that is simple - the government can’t shop locally when it comes to its bank, because Kiwibank doesn’t provide the full-scale banking services that it needs.   But it wants to buy locally more, and that is a good thing – even if it means paying a bit more for it.     It is kind of weird though that —on the one hand— we’ve got the Government bringing all these foreign outfits to the big investment summit tomorrow and Friday. But today, it’s saying that it wants to give local businesses a leg-up or make it easier for local companies to get government contracts, by making changes to the hoops businesses have to jump through to get them.   Nicola Willis kind of explained-away the weirdness on Newstalk ZB this morning, saying that she wants overseas companies coming here to invest, hire locals, and grow the local economy.   So, what that would look like is we’d have a big foreign outfit coming over to build a motorway or some other piece of big infrastructure, and they’d have a whole lot of sub-contracts with local companies like Fulton Hogan and all the other usual suspects.   But what I’m hoping these changes will mean is that we’ll see less of the usual suspects getting government contracts and the others —that probably feel on the outer a bit— getting their share of the work too.    If you’ve ever put a bid in for work with the government —like I have, in a previous life— you’ll know that some of the hoops you need to jump through are ridiculous.   In fact, my impression has been that if you’re already in the system, you’re sweet – if not, then the hoops can be enough to make you pull the plug.  Which is why the Government plans to ditch 24 of those hoops.   Big picture, it wants to prioritise hiring local outfits. It also wants to ditch some of the requirements that companies have to agree to, to get government contracts. Which are worth more than $50 billion a year.   One of the proposed changes is doing away with the requirement that companies providing catering, cleaning, and security staff pay their workers the living wage.   That’s one of the changes that I’m a bit torn on – because governments bang-on all the time about wanting to create a high-wage economy. And while the living wage isn’t a high wage (it’s currently $27.80 an hour), it’s better than the minimum wage.   But a company that gets work with the Government probably does work for other people too and has staff working on other things other than the government work. So, the requirement to pay a living wage probably has quite a significant impact across the whole business and is probably enough to put some smaller businesses off going for government contracts.   You can tell that Nicola Willis is taking to her new-ish job as Minister for Economic Growth, because one factor she wants the government to consider when awarding contracts is what’s called “the economic benefit test”.   So government agencies will look at contract bids and base their decision on who to go with based on the economic benefit to New Zealand.   So it would sign a potentially more expensive contract with a local company because it would deliver more economic benefit to the country. More local workers getting work, more work for local subbies and the profits staying in New Zealand.   As opposed to a cheaper contract with a foreign outfit that might bring its own workers into the country and take its profits overseas.   I'd choose patriotism over profit, any day. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-12

05:30

There's an old saying in advertising - to be successful you don't sell the sausage, you sell the sizzle. Christopher Luxon may have a great sausage, but he's not selling its sizzle. The Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll released yesterday afternoon had National up 1.7 points to 33.6%, but Labour had moved past it, jumping nearly three points to 34.1%. The Greens fell to 10%, down 3.2 points. ACT went down 2.3 points and Te Pati Māori rose 2.1 points to 6.5%. NZ First went down 1.3 points to 5.1%. So when we translate this number soup into seats in the house, both Labour and National are up three each to 42. The Greens are down four to 12, ACT is down two to 10, NZ First down to to six, Te Pati Māori up two to eight. That would mean the centre left block of Labour, the Greens and Te Pati Māori would have 62 seats to the centre-right's 58 and thus could form a centre-left government.    Now, before anyone starts booking a one-way flight to Australia, the only poll that counts is the one on Election Day. And these opinion polls, midway through a government's term, generally show a disgruntlement with the current lot that's in, rather than an overwhelming desire to see the other lot take over. But this is the third poll, in a row, that puts the opposition ahead.   And you might know, and I might know that the government's doing a good job of trying to re-establish some semblance of fiscal propriety, that they're redrawing boundaries about what is and what isn't acceptable behaviour within a decent society, and they've taken the first steps towards restoring a world class education system. But you and I also know that we live in a democracy and every vote counts. The lady who called in and wanted taxpayers to buy everyone a house and a car because that would give them a sense of belonging  —she wasn't quite sure how to pay for it, but she thought it would be cheaper in the long run than jail terms— her vote counts the same as yours.   There is no denying that the three-headed coalition beast makes it difficult to govern. The Treaty Principles Bill has been a divisive distraction, the bloody school lunches are yet another Labour well-intentioned, misguided initiative that has become this government's problem. People still aren't feeling better off, and they're still waiting a long time for a hip replacement. Dissatisfaction, disgruntlement, disengagement, that's all part of the midterm blues. Speaking to the Herald, Christopher Luxon said New Zealanders are going to have an opportunity in 2026, which is not that far away, to make a decision around Chris Hipkins or myself, he said, and our respective governments. My job is to make sure New Zealanders see that they're better off under my Government, we've come through a very tough time, there are some green shoots that we're really encouraged about on the economy ultimately, he said, New Zealanders are going to judge me at the election in 2026 as to whether we've delivered for them on rebuilding the economy, restoring law and order, delivering better health and education.    So do you agree that this is the government not being able to sell its sizzle. The sausage is there, but without the sizzle there will be no successful selling story. I could understand why some within National could feel brassed off. We've got the policies, the building bricks, the foundations, to get New Zealand cracking again and that will better everybody. But if people don't believe that, if they don't believe the message, then they go to vote Labour and we're going to get a centre-left government.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-10

04:43

The Government's not here to shag spiders, is it? It's planning to turbocharge its fast-track regime, speeding up the process to acquire private land for major infrastructure projects, and they intend to do that in part by offering cold, hard cash. Sweeteners or “premium payments” will be offered to private landowners, whose land is acquired under this new accelerated process. Changes to the Public Works Act, announced yesterday, would see owners paid a bonus 5 percent of the land's value —up to $92,000— for acquisitions. Those who chose to sell before a Notice of Intention would also get an extra 15 percent - up to $150,000 - on top of that, for a total of up to $242,000, as Chris Bishop told Mike Hosking this morning:   “Paying a bit more upfront will massively lower costs in the long term, so we're offering a 15% incentive payment. If the Government comes along and basically says, look, we're going to build a Road of Natural Significance here or another piece of infrastructure listed on the Fast-track Act, we're going to give you a 15% incentive payment and then a 5% recognition payment as well. That will massively lower the cost of doing that infrastructure because it means we've got the certainty that you can plan the construction out, you can sequence it properly.   “At the moment there are a number of examples around the country, it just causes huge delays because of the length of time it takes to acquire the land. And so it's just another step we're taking to fast-track infrastructure projects. Much of the projects we're talking about here are New Zealand Transport Agency projects, so this is central government coming along and saying, look, we're building a road of national significance here, here's the route, we need your land.  “And look, no one likes taking land, we don't do it with a great degree of passion, but the reality is if we want to build stuff in this country and get those roads going that we need, and public transport projects that we that we need, it will require taking land, that’s just the simple reality of it.”  So most of those who object to land acquisition for critical infrastructure projects won't be able to go to the Environment Court. Instead, they'll submit their objections directly to the relevant decision maker for faster resolution. Under the changes announced, the Crown will be able to acquire private land much faster for some public projects listed in the fast-track legislation, as well as Chris Bishop said. the government's Roads of National Significance. So the overhaul of the Public Works Act is already underway and expected to be completed by early next year.   Infrastructure New Zealand is welcoming the government's land acquisition incentive payments and a faster process for objection. It says it's going to really get things cracking. The government says this kind of turbocharging is needed to rebuild the economy. Do you support this? Would it make a difference? Does everybody have their price? Would an extra quarter of a million, there or thereabouts, make you realise that your house is not necessarily a castle, but a valuable asset? I mean, isn't that fabulous Australian film, ‘The Castle’, built around the whole concept that infrastructure has its place, but not when it's a man's home, it’s his castle? And there are stories of landowners who have held up major works for years and years and years because they don't want to leave their home. It's their home and no amount of money would make them change their minds.   But Governments weren't talking about extra payments of nearly a quarter of a million dollars, were they? Does everybody have their price? If you have land or property that's either been acquired or in the firing line, does this make a difference? If you're a developer, is this exactly the sort of change and turbocharging you wanted to see? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-10

04:14

Crikey, I barely stepped away from the microphone yesterday and we had a double whammy news-wise. Phil Goff sacked as High Commissioner to London for an intemperate comment and question, Greg Foran resigning as Air New Zealand CEO. I heard someone on The Huddle with Ryan Bridge last night saying Greg Foran can now become the High Commissioner, Adrian Orr would become Air New Zealand CEO, and Phil Goff will take over as Reserve Bank Governor - all change.   Boy, will Phil Goff be kicking himself all the way back to New Zealand, all the way back to the farm at Clevedon. You are on the pig's back when you get a gig like that – it is a sweet deal. And one intemperate comment ...  I think he was just trying to be a bit too clever, showing he's done his homework, showing that he was well read, making appointed remark about somebody the world regards as a graceless buffoon (well, members of Phil Goff's world regard as a graceless buffoon), and he loses his gig, and rightly so.    He was asking a question of the Finnish Foreign Affairs Minister at a Chatham House event in London. Goff said he'd been rereading a speech by former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill after the Munich Agreement. “He turned to Chamberlain, he said ‘You had the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, yet you will have a war’,” Goff then said “President Trump has restored the bust of Churchill to the Oval Office. But do you think he really understands history?” So Phil Goff was making it well researched, clever-dick, pointed remark about the American president. What on Earth did he think was going to happen? He was stripped of his position immediately by Winston Peters. The Foreign Affairs Minister said Phil Goff’s comments were deeply disappointing. They did not represent the views of the New Zealand Government and made his position as High Commissioner to London untenable.    So a number of comments around that. Phil Goff was sacked by Winston Peters immediately. Winston Peters did not have to consult the Prime Minister before doing so – there was no need for him to consult. He was presented with a problem in his own department, and he dealt with it in the appropriate fashion. That's why you have managers, that’s why you have ministers. Everything doesn't filter up to the CEO. Imagine in your own organisation if every single decision in your department had to go to the CEO. Why have a dog and bark yourself? So there was no need to consult.    Was he sacked because the Government's sucking up, particularly to Donald Trump in the US? No. As Winston Peters pointed out yesterday, and as numerous foreign affairs experts have concurred, Phil Goff would have been sacked if he had made the comment of any foreign leader. When you're in a diplomatic role, you have to be diplomatic, and that wasn't.    And what about the Chatham House rules? Chatham House is an actual place where people congregate to debate, discuss ideas primarily around foreign policy, but also about other things. It's a meeting place for pointy heads where they can float and toss ideas around, and they don't have to worry about it being attributable back to them. The rules say when a meeting or part thereof is held under the Chatham House rules, participants are free to use the information received but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speakers, nor that of any other participant, may be revealed. So Chatham House rules guarantee people can speak freely within the walls.   But in this case, the Chatham House rules had not been invoked because it was being live streamed, so you're not going to be able to shield the identity of the speakers because it's being live streamed. So that's why the comments became public, despite the fact they were in Chatham House – oh irony of ironies. The rules have to be invoked. They weren’t, and apparently, according to Chatham House, it's not terribly often that they are. So there we go. That's what happened.   He stuffed up royally and he’s paid the price. And nobody will be more disappointed, I imagine, than Phil Goff except Mrs Goff because that would have been a lovely reward for a long period of time being an uxorious, fabulous support. Being a politician's partner or spouse would not be an easy gig. So you get the cushy number in London, feet up, gorgeous little holidays popping off around Europe. Now back to the farm in Clevedon, tail between the legs. Back on the ride on mower, no gardener for you anymore. He's had his punishment. He's heading home and Winston Peters did exactly the right thing. Ten out of ten for the Foreign Affairs Minister. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

03-07

05:59

A former Foreign Minister says Winston Peters was right to fire Phil Goff.  Goff made comments at a public event questioning US President Donald Trump's understanding of history.  The remarks have cost him his job as High Commissioner to the UK.  Foreign Affairs was one of a number of portfolios held by Sir Don McKinnon under National.  He told Kerre Woodham it's unacceptable for a diplomat to say such things.  McKinnon says there's a line that ambassadors and High Commissioners should not cross.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.