Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast Newstalk ZB

Have you ever heard of a placebo policy? That’s what this Three Strikes law is, and I don’t think bringing it back is going to make one bit of difference. 

You’ll know what a placebo is when it comes to things like clinical trials where they give someone a sugar pill but tell them it’s medicine, and the person says ‘oh I feel much better, thanks’.  

The person thinks they’re using a real pill, or a real drug and their mind tells them that, because they're doing something, it’s working. It’s making a difference. But it’s actually not doing anything. 

And placebo policies are exactly the same. They’re policies that people think will work —will make a difference— just because they exist.  

Or more to the point, they are policies that politicians latch onto because they think it makes them look like they’re doing something. Even though, at the end of the day, it doesn’t change a thing.   

And that’s exactly what the Government is doing with its plan to bring back the Three Strikes legislation. You commit crimes with punishments longer than two years and, the third time, the judge has to give out the maximum sentence. None of this discount business. 

That two-year bit is key, because the new version of Three Strikes Version isn’t going to apply to low-level offending. 

The idea behind that is to make sure there isn't a repeat of situations that even Labour thought were nutbar. Example: a mentally ill man serving nearly five years in prison for kissing a woman in the street.  

Nevertheless, some people love the idea of it. But there is no clear proof that it reduced the amount of serious crime the last time we had it. But the Government is bringing it back anyway because it can and because it will look like it’s doing something. 

Criminal defence lawyer John Munro said on Newstalk ZB today that, even though we’ve had this law here before, the Government is pretty much flying blind on this one because there hasn't been any long-term research on its effectiveness the last time we had it. 

And some people are saying that it’s likely some criminals, once they’ve been done twice already for serious crimes, will think even less about consequences because they have nothing to lose. 

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not in the least bit sympathetic to criminals. Not in the least bit.  

All criminals, but especially the lowlifes who commit the likes of the 41 different violent and sexual crimes we’re talking about with this Three Strikes law. You can imagine what they are, I don’t need to go through a list. Although, this time around, there’ll be a new strangulation and suffocation offence included.       

But, in your heart of hearts, do you really think bringing this law back is going to make any difference? I don’t think it is. If the aim is to reduce violent crime, then the Government is barking up the wrong tree with this one. 
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, the Reserve Bank has got what it wanted. Maybe not what it wanted, it's possibly the hard landing that they were hoping to avoid, but it got what it engineered.  

Back in 2022 the Reserve Bank told a Select Committee that, yes, it was deliberately engineering a recession to rein back inflation after being slow to raise interest rates. Governor Adrian Orr said as a result of raising interest rates to slow spending, there would likely be a rise in unemployment, but it may be a job-rich slow down because of the severe lack of labour in the economy.  

Remember, this was two years ago. Back in 2022, before the influx of migrants in 2023. He predicted that unemployment would peak at 5.7% in 2025 before things started to come right in terms of inflation, in terms of giving mortgage holders a bit of a breathing space.  

Figures released yesterday show that those on Jobseeker at the end of March have surpassed 5.7% of the working population already, we’re at 5.9 % in the middle of 2024. Still less than 6.4% of the working population we saw in March 2021, but it will make National’s aim of getting 50,000 people off Jobseeker benefits by 2030 that little bit harder in the short term. However, Social Development Minister Louise Upston isn't letting up on the message that those who can work should work. 

“These sanctions will really show up those that are not doing their bit. That's why in the short term it's good to see that there's been an increase. People need to know if they can work, they should. And actually, any job is better than no job. And when times are tough and you need to put food on the table for your family, you get out there and do whatever is available. And that's the message I want to send really clearly, if you can work, you should, and the sanctions will mean you need to do your bit.” 

Yep, the number of beneficiaries sanctioned in the March quarter is already 20% higher than a year ago. This is Ministry of Social Development, taking its cue from the Government. Louise Upson said the ministry seems to be taking the initiative on its own. While we'd rather see beneficiaries with work obligations comply to avoid being sanctioned, it's good to see the ministry utilising all the tools at its disposal to incentivise people into work. Those sanctions would have been well used back in 21/22/23, when we were screaming out for labour, and nobody could get workers for love nor money. When unemployment was at its highest, that's when we needed the workers the most.  

Right now, though, the job market has tightened and everybody is battening down their economic hatches until mid 2025, when hopefully the storm will have passed.  

Louise Upston says people shouldn't be sniffy about the type of work they do. Again, a sentiment I totally agree with, but who's hiring?  

I remember a number of people pivoting during Covid; airline pilots went farm labouring and opened cafes, executives went truck driving, but that was again different times. Our borders were closed, everybody was screaming out for workers in any and every field. They'd take all comers.  

Times have changed. All well and good to say people should take the jobs available, that they shouldn't be choosy and picky about what sort of work they do, and I'm stunned at the number of people who are. I'm stunned at the number of people who won't go to work because they're worth more. You know, the market kind of dictates.  

So, a sentiment I agree with, take the jobs that are available. Ok, what jobs are available? Are the same people who phoned me, the same employers who phoned me, begging for workers saying they'd help with relocation expenses, they would pay anything to anybody, you didn't have to be the perfect employee. Are you still in that same position? Or now can you pick and choose?  

Are you in the position of being able to say ordinarily I'd have picked you up, but I've got three people better right now, better qualifications, b

New Zealand police officers have overwhelmingly rejected the government's latest pay offer and have given the government one last chance to lift its game. The latest offer was put to the vote on April the 8th by the New Zealand Police Association. More than 75% voted against the offer. That is overwhelming. President Chris Cahill said the outcome sends a clear message to the government that the offer falls well short of addressing officers' concerns and very real needs. Police Minister Mark Mitchell was on with Mike Hosking this morning and says the rejection is an incredibly disappointing outcome. 

“In terms of where we are at the moment as a country, which is, we're basically broke in terms of the massive borrowing that was implemented by the previous government. The fact that we're paying $8.5 billion in interest. I mean I could increase our police service three times over with that money. And so, we've put together a package that is a quarter of a billion dollars better than the offer that went forward in August.” 

That was Mike Mitchell talking to Mike Hosking this morning.  

Look, I have every sympathy for the government inheriting the books they did, the debt they did. I have every sympathy for the government for inheriting pay negotiations that should have been settled under the previous administration, but the police should not have to bear the brunt of an economy that's been mishandled. With all due respect to Mark Mitchell, that is neither here nor there.  

The police shouldn't have to care about the economy. They're suffering the impact of a mishandled economy the same way we all are, but it's not their concern. They don't have to carry the can because the economy's down the toilet. The last pay rise police had was two years ago at 3.5%. Inflation that year was 7.2%. So, they've been sold a pup basically. They were let down by the previous administration, but there were many promises during the election campaign that they would be supported. Law and order was a huge issue in 2023 and was given even more prominence than it normally is during any old election campaign, and with good reason.  

Mark Mitchell and National, Christopher Luxon promised to crack down on crime, neuter the gangs and support the police. Along with the economy, that was one of their biggest platforms, law and order. The fact that the police had been let down and that they would restore faith for the police and restore the kind of mana the police once eroded under years of, I would say not ‘neglected’ so much, certainly more police were added to the ranks, but you had police ministers that didn't particularly want to be there other than Stuart Nash, and it seemed to be on a high rotate. It didn't seem to be. a portfolio that was given much prominence by the previous administration and national capitalised on that in the election campaign. When Christopher Luxon was in studio with me a couple of weeks ago, I put it to him that he owed the police a decent pay off offer after all the tub thumping. 

“We tried to put an enhanced offer in just after, you know, month or so ago, and then we put another new offer on the table just at the end of last week, which you know has been taken out there. I can't really go into the details of that because in fairness, the police are actually all going to digest that objectively themselves and make their own individual decisions as to whether that's something they do want to support or not. But I'm hopeful because the government has put in hundreds of millions of dollars more on the table in order to make sure that we can put our best foot forward in that negotiation. We back our police; we want them to do well.” 

Well, pay them more then. Give them the respect that they're due. When you are using the men and women in blue as a marketing tool, as a call to action for all New Zealanders, then I think police can quite rightly expect to see that support come about in a tangible way. With

Back in the day when I lived in Ponsonby and it was only just starting to evolve as a shopping and cafe destination, we didn't have beggars per say. More, they were people who were living in community houses who would walk up and down the street, and they were simply absorbed into the community.  

They were given cigarettes from the smokers who were sitting at the outside tables of the cafes that had established themselves. There was always a meal for them at many of the cafes and the restaurants that were popping up. There was a brush and comb set set aside at Servilles for one of the ladies, who would come in every morning at 10am, and asked to be made beautiful. And they would comb her hair and brush it, and somebody would spritz her with hairspray and off she'd go. They weren't part of the mainstream; they were living in community houses because they had various forms of mental illness, but they were part of the community, you knew their names, you could greet them. You sometimes got a response, sometimes didn't. But everybody knew who they were, and they belonged there. It's just simply not like that now.  

And I don't know whether it's a chicken and the egg, whether we've got more uncaring, or they've got more volatile. The square pegs who live amongst us appear to have got a whole lot more aggressive. There's a woman in Ponsonby now, who screams foul-mouth invective all day, every day, while dragging a heavy suitcase behind her, and either cannot or will not engage if you say hello to her. It just means she'll turn and scream the cuss words at you.  

There's a bloke who's been there forever, who just about gives me a cardiac infarction when I'm sitting at the lights musing about the day ahead, and all of a sudden there's a bang, bang, bang on the back window, or the side window, or the front window demanding money with menaces. Even if I had actual money in the car, which I very seldom do, I wouldn't give it to him, because he terrifies the living bejesus out of me for a moment while I'm sitting there.  

Some of those begging outside supermarkets seem genuine souls. As I say, don't carry cash very often, but when I say that and offer to buy the man or woman lunch instead, the offer is gratefully accepted and the food is eaten immediately, after a thank you. Clearly, there are some who are hungry and have run out of means to feed themselves. What do we do with those amongst us, who feel they have to take to the streets to beg for money or food to get by?   

Rotorua is seriously considering a bylaw banning begging after ten Aussie tourists were physically accosted at a cafe last week, and in one suburb in Christchurch, also this week, aggressive begging is making people fear for their safety. Residents are having to change their routines and stop visiting public spaces to avoid confrontation and they're looking to make rules around begging there too.   

What happened to being able to absorb those members of the community who are different? Did they change or did we? Is that there are so many people on the streets now? Is it that so many of them are on drugs, and boozed to the eyeballs, and volatile? You don't know what they're going to do, even if you offer something in kindness, you don't know how it's going to be received. Are beggars seen as dangerous now rather than just odd? Are they unnecessarily parading their poverty? Going out of their way to make us feel uncomfortable?  

‘There’s a welfare system there man, for the love of all its holy use it, get yourself out of my sight. Stop hassling me. I've already given through my taxes. If that's not enough, get a job.’ Is that the attitude now? Because a lot of the people that I've seen, don't look to me, I'm no expert, but they do not appear to me to be people who could hold down full-time jobs. They appear unable, not unwilling, but unable to hold down a full-time job, in that case, living in a big city you're probably going to have to depend

Inflation is continuing to ease, particularly for essentials. 

Latest Stats NZ figures show the Consumer Price Index increased 4% in the year to March, down from 4.7% in the year to December. 

Housing's been the biggest contributor to inflation and rents rose at the fastest rate since records began in 1999. 

But the Herald's Liam Dann says the cost of most other day-to-day essentials are going up more slowly. 

He says grocery prices are stabilising, and fruit and vegetables have actually got a lot cheaper. 

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

When I broke my arm just before the end of the year, I was very grateful to our health system for picking up the pieces, quite literally. They found a bit that was missing at the top of my arm that they weren't expecting, and put me back together again, and it's pretty much back to normal.  

I'm very, very grateful for the skill, the ability and the kindness of North Shore Hospital, and I was grateful too for the part funding of the first few physio and acupuncture appointments. Those appointments have made a huge difference in getting back mobility, even though the taxpayer-funded part is now over, I will keep up the appointments because I can see the difference they're making. I'm grateful, too, to the taxpayer for the partial funding of those first physio appointments.  

I never needed to use taxpayer funded taxes, though. While I couldn't drive, I found Uber’s far more convenient. I also had lots of friends in town who were lovely, and if I had to pay for Uber’s myself, well so be it - that is the price for convenience. Still, plenty of people are using taxis who are on ACC, or are they? Who would know?  

ACC spends $35 million a year on taxis for injured clients, but in a Herald story today, the ACC can see they haven't conducted any audit of the companies that provide the taxi services. Because of course, no one would be rorting the system, would they? Never in the history of ACC has anyone rorted the system? Remember back in 2009? I remember all the hoo-hah about that.  

The National government introduced a partial charge on physio visits that we're still paying today, because costs are blown out exponentially. The co-charging scheme was introduced in 2009 because Nick Smith, who was ACC minister at the time, said the free physiotherapy service introduced in 2004 had got out of control in just five years. Costs had gone from $58 million per year to $139 million in 2008. And since the service had become free, the number of clients in higher socioeconomic areas using physios had occurred disproportionately. Fix that golf swing, put it on ACC, go to the physio. Back giving you jip? Put it on ACC. Some of the physio costs were extraordinary, so Nick Smith said I smell a rort when I see one, visits will be limited, and you'll have to pay part charges after a certain time.  

In 2008/2009 physiotherapy cost ACC Levy payers $144 million. That was back then. So, we've seen that any system without checks and balances can and will be rorted. Uber has the ability, the boss was showing us, to let them know all the details of staff travel by the month - where they went, what time, how much it cost, what the company business was, all that sort of thing. Basically, an audit on the spot.  

I accept the taxi companies don't have that facility and not everyone needing transport through ACC has a smartphone or access to Uber, but surely the least we can expect is an audit of the taxi companies. You cannot tell me that all that money is spent, is being spent wisely and well and on people who need the service. I'd love to hear your experience of it. Numerous complaints have been made about the service. They don't turn up, they turn up late, if they turn up at all meaning some people are missing appointments because they're standing around waiting for their taxi. How many of you gave up on taxis as I did before I even started, and just used Ubers in the cities? It's easy enough.  

Can we just have a little bit of accountability and responsibility when it comes to taxpayers' money, please? That's all I ask.  
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.