Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast Newstalk ZB

Remember the Tau Henare-Trevor Mallard stauch back in 2007?  

Senior Cabinet Minister Trevor Mallard said the punch he threw at National MP Tau Henare is “one of the most stupid things I've ever done in my life” and in a life full of them, that's saying something. The scuffle broke out in the parliamentary lobbies. Allegedly, Henare had made some snide remarks about Trevor Mallard's personal life, which is pretty nasty, but Mallard lost the plot and then promptly lost his Sports Minister portfolio and was demoted by then PM Helen Clark.  

He was allowed to stay in cabinet, though, which some thought was very lenient on Helen Clarke's behalf, but she was always incredibly loyal to those who showed devotion to her, so I guess that's how he stayed and then went on to have a fabulous career and is now living on the pig's back in Ireland. Oh me, oh my. If only you'd been sacked then and there, it could have spared us a lot. But there we go.  

That was a particularly unsavoury moment in parliamentary history. More recently, Nationals Tim Van de Molen was judged to be in contempt of Parliament after he was found to have threatened and intimidated Labour MP Shanan Halbert in a Transport committee hearing. He accepts he stood over him, Van de Molan stood over Halbert and generally behaved like an oak. He was censured effectively, a public telling off in the House of Parliament, and stripped of his portfolios by Christopher Luxon.  

Now we have Green MP Julie Anne Genter committing a sin at least as egregious as Mallard’s, certainly, far more egregious than Van de Molen. By marching across the house and standing over National MP Matt Doocey, getting right up in his grills and behaving in a totally intimidating manner. She apologized and says she was trying to impart information.  

What, by shoving it down his throat? It was completely unacceptable and over the top and I cannot believe that there are texters who are defending the behaviour, why? How, how can you defend that? It doesn't matter if she's a Green or if she's a woman, God, imagine if it was a man had done that. We all, we all know how bad that would have looked, even if Matt Doocey had stood up. He was probably just gob smacked because she was behaving completely irrationally. And when you're confronted like that, it's really quite shocking and you turn into a flight and fight response and the adrenaline surges cause you're thinking, what is the mad tart going to do next.  

I cannot believe already there have been texts this morning saying, oh, come on, it’s fake news, you know. Bigger things to worry about. I don't think so. What is it about Transport Committee hearings that excites so much passion? Because that's what happened with Van de Molen and Halbert. And the last one, it was a transport committee. And here we had Simeon Brown answering questions from the floor.  

I don't know how much the Debbie Francis review into bullying in Parliament cost, but it doesn't seem to have improved matters much, does it? Julie Anne Genter deserves all the censure Parliament can throw at her, as would any MP of any hue who behaved in that fashion?  

And as an aside, she has taken the gloss of James Shaw's valedictory speech. He should be the ones getting the headlines. He should be the Green MP that everybody's talking about. He has shown dignity and professionalism throughout his career, and to have been upstaged by one of his own MPs, one of his own party members with her appalling lack of professionalism is extremely disappointing.   
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Happy International Workers Day to all the labourers and workers out there. All right, brother. All right, sister. Dedicated to recognizing the contributions and achievements of workers worldwide and taking the opportunity to promote workers rights and opportunities so. Go us, all of us paid grunts.  

MPs, would you consider them paid grunts? Not really public servants, sure, and reasonably well-paid public servants. Too much? Well, who decides that? The remuneration authority, that's who. A very good idea to leave the setting of certain public servants pay to an independent authority. And let's face it, it is never a right time for MPs to be accepting pay rises, they're on a hiding to nothing. Particularly tough, though, when the government has been calling for financial restraint when it's been calling for cost cutting in every government department. At a time when hundreds, if not thousands, of workers are being made redundant, you get the remuneration authority saying ‘look time for a pay rise for MPs.’ On a sliding scale, depending on what job you do. It doesn't matter that many of those who were sucking off the public tit shouldn't have been there anyway. That hiring spree in the last six months of ‘23 was an outrage. Redundancies are punishing and create uncertain times for those on the receiving end of a ‘don't come Monday’.  

The Remuneration Authority has announced pay rises backdated to October 2023 and coming in tranches through to 2026. It will be the first increase to MPs salaries since 2017 and the first major overview of the remuneration package since in about 20 years. The Prime Minister's salary will rise by almost $50,000 over six years, from $471k to $520k. Which you know, if you're the CEO of a big company, as he likes to see it, or if you're the Prime Minister, you probably wouldn't begrudge. 

I don't think people begrudge the big money for the big job. It's when you look at some of the backbenchers from numerous parties that you start to get a little sniffy and a little bit, what about me-ism starts to creep in. The Prime Minister has said he'll donate the extra to charity, as has become almost customary.  

So, what to do? What to do?  

Now we can all say they don't deserve it, but that's not true. Some of them do deserve the money they get, be they a backbencher from any party, be they a minister, be they a leader of an opposition party, some of them work hard for the money. They understand the concept of public servant. They are there to do their best for their constituents, for their party, for the country. Some of them are underpaid. Others would be overpaid if they were on the dole.   

So, what do you do? Would you do the job for the money? I heard the man from the Remunerations Authority saying, look, it's a matter of looking at what similar jobs pay in the private sector. It's a matter of attracting people to do the job and it's a matter of retention. Now, I know you've got to look for comparisons, but when it's attracting people to the job, you wouldn't do it for the money, would you? When you look at the hours they work, the scrutiny they're under, the pressure they're under, the meetings they have to sit through, the numpties they have to listen to. I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't be in a backbench MP. Not for the money. I might do it if I thought I could add something and help create a New Zealand that's fair and just in the way I want to see it, but I certainly wouldn't do it for the money.  

As for retention, quite frankly that's not up to a wage band, that's up to a voter. If you're doing a good job, you'll be retained. The voters will vote you back in. It's got nothing to do with the money. 

So, when it comes to the backbenches, some of them are overpaid, massively, given what they do, others are underpaid. If you look at the work of the ministers, I think it's too soon to tell from the current government as to whether they’re value for money.  

The last lo

A former Labour Minister says a proposed pay rise for politicians gives them a real dilemma. 

The Remuneration Authority's set to increase most MP salaries 10.5% over three years. 

If implemented, it would be the first pay rise for MPs since 2017 and the first rise of 2.8% will be backdated to the election.  

Stuart Nash told Kerre Woodham that the public tends to hear about poorly performing MPs, which can shift perceptions of MPs in general.  

He says about 90% of MPs work incredibly hard and put the hours in, but it's often unseen. 

LISTEN ABOVE   
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Unemployment has risen again but economists don't think it's peaked yet. 

Stats NZ figures out today show the rate reached 4.3% for the March quarter, up 0.3 percentage points from the December quarter's 4%. 

It reflects the impacts of higher interest rates as the Reserve Bank keeps trying to rein in inflation. 

Herald Business Editor at Large Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham that it's a slow and steady rise. 

He says 134 thousand people are now unemployed, up from 122 thousand at the end of 2023, meaning 12 thousand jobs have gone. 

LISTEN ABOVE   
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, the 1News Verian poll released last night shows that support for the coalition government, after seeing an operation for a few months, has dropped since election night. Hardly surprising. Well, to my mind. Anyway, clearly there were others who were simply gob smacked and amazed, but on to them in a moment.   

National, ACT, and New Zealand First have collectively dropped 5 percentage points. According to the numbers from that poll, and based on that poll, the left block would be able to form a government and New Zealand First would be out of Parliament. How many times have New Zealand first voters heard that? So many times, you'll be out of government dead and buried.   

The poll had National at 36%, down two points from the last poll in February, Labour jumped to 30%, up two. And the Green Party also increased by two to 14%. Te Pati Māori was on 4%, the same as the last poll. This is pretty much par for the political course. Labour showed a dip after it formed a coalition government in 2017 after three years of heading their coalition government. The first Colmar Brunton poll of 2020 saw National scraping into power and again New Zealand First out of Parliament in their polls. 

These snapshots are an indication of how people are feeling, both in themselves and around politics. Christopher Luxon was questioned about it this morning when he was on with Mike Hosking. He said, he didn't say it in so many words, but this is me. He said, it was hardly surprising that people were feeling grumpy. These are his words, he told Mike Hosking, we've got high inflation and high interest rates. People are sick of it. We're making some pretty tough decisions. We need to do that in order to fix the mess. We've been left New Zealand, as he said, would make a call into and a half years' time. And he went on with the usual spiel. Everyone in the coalition government is very focused on fixing the mess that they inherited, which is quite true. They've got a big job. They knew that going in. But people are going to need to see some results and they're going to need to see them soon.  

The shocking daylight robbery of a jewellery store over the weekend, all very 2020. The price of everything is still rising, uncertainty in the job market, there's a lot going on and not a lot of it is good for most people. It is not the government's fault, but it is their responsibility. And they are going to need to see some wins within the next three months and they are also going to have to watch their messaging. The accommodation entitlement, the snide tweets from ACT on Twitter over job losses in the public service, the weeks of fumbling and obfuscation from Melissa Lee handling the broadcasting portfolio, none of that has been helpful at all. Sacking Melissa Lee? Very helpful.  

I noticed that, I thought that was a really good move. I was up in Hokianga trying to avoid the news and I saw this and thought, damn it, what a great talk back day that would have been because I think that is really decisive, really good. She's clearly not up for the job. She can't handle it. Get. Go.  

Brutal, but a good sign to Ministers, perform, or you're out. A good sign to backbenchers that if you perform, you're in. I thought I thought that was a really good move, so the poll was taken over a week and ended on the day of Melissa Lee's sacking, so I'd be interested to know whether that will have an impact the next time around.  

But it's polls. You know, as every they're great to have a bit of a yarn about, great to give different media outlets their lead for the day or the night. People can have a yarn about them. Take the pulse, see where everybody's at, they count for nothing until Election Day. You can take some learnings out of them. You can think. OK, well, yes. No, we need to be careful here. We need to be more positive here.  

It will give Labour a bit of heart because they have been in the doldrums, and they need to reinvigorate themselves to

If you're a teenager addicted to your phone and the world that lies within and beyond your apps, it's the end of the world as you know it today.   

The Government's ban on phones in schools kicks in as kids return to school for Term two, meaning students won't be able to use their cell phones during the day - including at lunch time and during breaks. Some schools have gone early and introduced it in Term one. They saw the writing on the wall, thought they'd bedded in before they were required to by law. Others have gone even earlier. They decided it was the right thing for their school to ban cell phones, and they didn't need a government imperative to do so.  

In a shocking departure from the norm, there seemed to be wholesale support for the ban, despite it being an initiative of the wicked, evil National government. And it appears that the headlines are in the main, supportive that the media have found people who are supportive of the ban, like New Zealand Secondary Principals Council Chair Kate Gainsford. She says schools across the country already have measures in place, but the changes will make it easier to stop distractions. She says parents have appreciated the support because they're having the same sorts of conversations in their own homes about the harmful effects of too much time online, about limiting screen time.  

So, now you've got rules around cell phone use at home that are being replicated in the school grounds, so the adults are working together. It seems that parents, educators, even some of the kids agree that 24/7 access to cell phones is a bad idea, but for years nobody wanted to be the one with the stick - you wanted to be down with the kids on their level, you didn't want to impinge on their freedoms. And then along came Erica Stanford. When she entered government as part of the National team in the coalition government. She was big on banning cell phones and she says she has no problem waving a big stick if it means the kids will benefit. 

Erica Stanford - “I've had a lot of principals say to me, look, it was really hard, there was lots of pushback from kids, but now you've done it, you're the bad guy. I'm quite happy to be the bad guy, Mike. It means improved mental health and academic outcomes for our kids. I mean, there was a Norwegian study that's just come out saying that this has got incredibly good outcomes for especially low socioeconomic girls for their mental health, but also GPA grades and bullying is reduced as well, so look - I'm happy to be the bad guy.” 

That was bad guy, Erica Stanford, Education Minister, talking to Mike Hosking this morning. It's not just Norwegian studies. Studies by researchers at the University of Texas and Louisiana State University found that where students were banned from bringing their smartphones into the classroom, their grades quickly improved. Around an average of 6 percent. That's without the distractions. That's amazing. The results were most pronounced for high school students over 16. It's even better for at risk students, as Erica Stanford referred to. Students who live in poverty or attend special education classes benefited approximately twice as much as their peers, after ditching the technological distraction.  

By removing phones from the classroom, apparently it's the equivalent of adding an extra hour of class per week. Students lose almost a full week of school interacting with their phones rather than engaging in class time. The only counter study I can find, with arguments against is that children feel infantilised. Well, your children, it’s kind of a point. And if you can't stay off your phones then it shows that your childlike behaviour needs to be modified.  

I just cannot believe that teachers, principals feel so disempowered that they can't make the rules in their own schools. Some don't, some have, and some did - and good on them. But a lot of principals didn't want to have a battle with parents who said I n