Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald Newstalk ZB

It feels to me like big brother is being put in his place. And I think it’s brilliant.

Well, maybe not completely in his place. But we’re getting there, with this announcement by the Government that it’s going to make it easier for us to get loans and mortgages by giving banks and finance companies more flexibility to decide how they assess whether someone can afford a loan or not.

And it’s going to do that by getting rid of 11 pages of stupid regulations that were introduced in December 2021. You know the ones I’m talking about. The ones that made it quite alright for banks to check how often you use Uber Eats and Netflix when you want a loan..all that nonsense.

The last government brought them in to crack down on loan sharks. Eventually, realised it was a bit of a cluster. Eventually, started to ease things a bit. But the current government is stepping in and getting rid of all that nonsense completely.

I saw a guy on the news last night involved in the lending game and he said when those rules came in two-and-a-half years ago, the time it took to process a loan application went from about two hours to eight hours.

But that’s just the mechanics. The more important thing in all this for me isn’t about how long it takes to process a loan application, the important bit for me is how the Government is basically saying ‘if you think you can do it, then go for it’.

I mean, it’s the banks and other lenders that will have the final say, of course. But with all these checklists put in place by the last government getting the heave-ho, hopefully, we’re heading back towards times a little bit like when we bought our first place.

We weren’t all that long back from living overseas. The money we’d made over there was spent doing stuff - so we didn’t come back with any big nest egg to spend on a house. Maybe we should’ve. But let’s not get into woulda coulda, shoulda.

So we had a chat to the bank. Found a house. Went to the auction. Ended-up buying the thing and managing to pay what, compared to the deposits that have been required in recent times, a pretty small deposit. And there we were, in our first home.

And we did it because we backed ourselves. Yes, the bank backed us too. But we knew that, if we needed to cut back on spending to pay the mortgage, that’s what we would do. We didn’t have the bank saying ‘how many flat whites did you buy last week?’

Bear in mind that this was about a million years ago and things like Uber and Netflix hadn’t even been invented. But you get the gist. We backed ourselves. The bank backed us. And sometimes the way things were done in the past aren’t always bad. 

I don’t know if the Government has thought about it this way, but these changes in the lending rules actually deliver on all the rhetoric we heard from National, especially, before the election - about New Zealand needing to back itself more.

And when you back yourself, you don’t overthink things. Because when it comes to buying something like a house, you actually don’t have to go overboard on the over-thinking.

Yes, the local schools can be an important factor. Transport routes. All that stuff. But, when it comes down to it, keep it simple.

Do you like the house or the apartment? Yes. Do you want to buy it? Yes. Are you confident you can pay the mortgage? Yes. Do you know what will happen if you can’t pay the mortgage? Yes, the bank will take it off me. Great. You’re good to go.

But with these 11 pages of regulations that the Government is getting rid of…with these, it’s over-thinking central. And good on the Government.

Labour doesn’t think so, of course. It's saying today that these changes are going to put people at greater risk of being ripped off by loan sharks.

My response to that: is that if decent lending operators are more free to lend money, then people won’t need the loan sharks. Which is exactly what Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly

You know how you hear people talk about “the million dollar question”? Today, it’s a $13 million dollar question that needs answering.

It’s all to do with the streets around the new stadium in the centre of Christchurch: Te Kaha. You might remember, a while back, how the council came up with this idea of spending $34 million getting the streets ready for the stadium opening in 2026.

And how it wanted to do daft things like widen the footpaths, take away car parks and slow-down speed limits in the area —even more— to as low as 10 kilometres per hour. There was some underground infrastructure stuff, which is the boring stuff that usually makes the most sense.

But $34 million, and we said to the council, ‘what the hell are you thinking?’ They said, “good point guys” and pulled the pin on it. But then, a few weeks later, they had a re-think and it was all-on again.

They did listen to some of the big property developers around town who weren’t happy with the original idea of making Lichfield Street one-way, between Manchester and Madras. But, apart from that change, it was all-go.

And, at the time, what made it so attractive to the council was that $13 million of the $34 million was going to be coming from the Government.

But the city council has just found out that that money from central government is at-risk, because NZTA says it has no idea whether the work will be a priority spend for the new government.

And the council is going to have to wait until October to find out whether the $13 million it was expecting to come from Wellington for the project, is still going to be coming.

But here’s the tricky bit. And this is where the $13 million dollar question comes into it.

If this work on the streets around the stadium is going to be finished in time for when the stadium is due to open in 2026, the work has to start in July. Three months before the council will know whether the government money is still coming - or not.

And the decision facing the council now, is whether to press-on with the work in July —and risk NZTA and the Government saying in October that the $13 million isn’t happening anymore— leaving ratepayers to pay the extra.

Or pause the work until it knows what the central government funding situation is. Or come up with a cheaper option.

I’m in no doubt what the council should do. I think it needs to find a cheaper way of doing it.

Because do you really think the Government’s going to see this as a priority, when it’s already pulling funding from all sorts of things? And when it has said time-and-time again that taxpayers have put enough money into Christchurch’s recovery?

So of course it’s not going to be a priority. And, in fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if NZTA tells the council —at some point— to do exactly what I’m saying today. Go away and sharpen your pencil.

And if it was me who was given the job of sharpening the pencil - here’s what I’d do.

I would forget about all the beautification and footpath-widening stuff. Because you might remember Annabelle Turley from the Central City Business Association saying when this all first surfaced, that the council planners seemed to have forgotten our old friend the easterly wind.

They want to widen the footpaths around the stadium to six metres so people can do things like go to restaurants and sit outside and have dinner. As Annabelle said back then, they seem to have forgotten about the wind blasting from the east.

Although, maybe the stadium is going to act as some sort of windbreak. Either way, I’d ditch all that stuff.

Another way I’d cut costs, is to do away with this idea of permanently reducing the speed limit around the stadium to 10 kilometres per hour. Because the process of doing that will cost money.

I know previously the council’s transport manager has said the speed limit should be permanently reduced to 10 kilometres per hour so the council doesn't have to spend money on ex

Today on Politics Friday National’s Matt Doocey and Labour’s Tracey McLellan joined John MacDonald to dive into this week’s biggest political stories. 

Christchurch City Council will soon be making decisions surrounding the funding of the new stadium: should the $13 million price tag be paid by ratepayers? Or should the project be put on hold until NZTA can come up with the funding? 

The Reserve Bank is looking into digital currency, is New Zealand ready to let go of cash? And what’s their thoughts on the huge number of job cuts sweeping through the public sector? 

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

Savage and rushed. That’s how the Public Service Association is describing the Government’s crackdown on public sector spending, after another 1,000 job cuts were announced yesterday alone. Taking the total so far to more than 3,000. 

I’m going to add “flying blind” to that description. Because I think these cuts are starting to look like cuts for the sake of cuts.  

And I think everyone involved —the Government, the bosses of all the government departments, the unions— I think they’re all flying blind. More on that shortly. 

But first, I’m going to do my Nicola Willis thing. Although, she’s not the only politician who does this. 

What I’m talking about is the way the Finance Minister and other politicians sometimes describe running the country as if it’s the same as making decisions in our own personal lives. 

Example: Remember when the Government pulled the pin on the contract for the new inter-island ferries, and Nicola Willis was talking about buying Toyota Corollas instead of buying Ferraris? That’s the sort of thing I’m talking about. 

So, I’m going to do the same thing and tell you how the Government’s obsession with not wasting money is similar to the way I run my life. 

I’ve got an iPhone, right? Couldn’t even tell you what model of iPhone it is. I got it in December 2019 - so it’s not far away from being four-and-a-half years old. And the kids have been telling me for ages that it’s way past its use-by date and I should be getting a new one. 

But I’m like the Government and I don’t want to blow money on a new iPhone, so, I’ve stuck with it. I don’t want to waste money.  

Only thing is, it’s reached the point now that whenever I make a call on it, I either sound like I’m underwater or people can’t hear me at all. Or I keep cutting in and out.   

So, I’m at the point now, that —whether I like it or not— I’m going to have to go and buy a new phone. I’m at the point now where my stinginess is backfiring on me. 

The point I’m making is that there are some things we just have to keep spending money on. And whether we like it or not, we have to spend money on the public service. And, whether we like it or not, the public service is expensive.  

And I think the Government needs to look very carefully at what it’s doing with all these public sector job cuts. Because I think it’s starting to look just like me with my phone.  

Not wasting money. That’s been the reason I haven’t replaced my phone. But now I have to go and buy a new one which might have been cheaper if I’d done it ages ago. And I have to do it now because it’s packed a sad.    

And, just like me, not wasting money is the sole driver behind the Government putting the screws on the public sector. 

If you want proof of that, consider what Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said yesterday in Thailand when reporters brought up the job cuts announced by Oranga Tamariki and the Ministry of Education. 

He was asked what he thought about claims by a children's advocate that the cuts at Oranga Tamariki would, ultimately, impact on the kids who depend on our child welfare agency. 

He said he didn’t think the cuts were excessive and that “New Zealanders expect us to cut the waste”. Which seems to have become the excuse for anything. 

Yes, he’s right. None of us like money being wasted, especially our money. But, with respect, I reckon you personally have no idea what is waste and what isn’t waste when it comes to spending on public services. Just like I don’t. 

I also don’t think some of the people jumping up and down about the cuts know, either.  

Yesterday one of the union people was describing the 1,000 cuts announced yesterday as “savage” and “rushed”, and that it was a black day for the public service. 

But, again, do they know what waste is and waste isn’t? Probably not. They just want to save jobs. 

So, if the only way w

Funding issues have struck Christchurch, with the Cathedral, the Arts Centre, the A&P Show, and Orana Park all facing financial strife. 

Mayor Phil Mauger joined John MacDonald to dig into the issues, touching as well on the issue of begging on the streets of Christchurch and the timeline of the Council’s new CEO. 

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

Every time something terrible or tragic happens you hear people trot out a line which, I think, is totally meaningless. 

Maybe I’ve just become too cynical in my old age. But it was trotted out again on TV last night by a reporter talking about the appalling knife attacks at the mall in Sydney at the weekend. 

He was talking about an investigation that’s being launched to look into what happened in the lead-up to the attacks, the guy’s mental health history, all of that. 

And there he was, this reporter, and he just couldn’t help himself. Right at the end of his live report, he came out with it. He said the investigation was being done so that “this sort of thing never happens again”. 

I mean, think about it. Never happens again? Tragically, it will happen again. Because that’s just how society is these days. It is impossible to stop this sort of thing happening again. 

Not that Westfield —the crowd that runs the mall in Bondi— thinks so. 

Because it’s announced that at its malls in Australia and New Zealand, it’s going to be beefing-up security. So, in Christchurch, there’s going to be more security at Riccarton Mall after what happened in Bondi.  

My question is: why? If the answer is to ensure that this sort of thing never happens again, then forget about it. 

The other question I’ve got is: how? Because, as far as I’m concerned, whatever they do will just be a band aid that won’t make us any safer than we have been up until now. 

Unless, they really go full bore, and start x-raying our bags before we’re allowed in. And start checking our ID.  

More security guards aren't going to make any difference. Because, as you and I know, all security guards can do these days is walk around pretending to look tough. 

Some of them wear all sorts of vests and things —just like the cops— but, at the end of the day, they can’t do anything. They can just walk around looking tough. 

Which is why I think that this talk from Westfield about beefing-up security is just PR. It’s just marketing. Because if a mall company thinks it can stop this thing happening again, then it’s dreaming.  

And you’re dreaming if you expect outfits like Westfield to keep you safe. 

I reckon the only realistic thing Westfield and other mall operators could do would be to stick a sign up at the door saying: “Enter at your own risk”. 

And that’s not only because I don’t think beefing up security can stop tragic events like the one at Bondi at the weekend from happening, but also because I think we have to accept that we go into places like malls at our own risk. 

I think what Westfield is doing is it’s giving-in to this expectation that seems to be out there that we need to be protected from every possible bad thing that could happen to us. That we deserve to be protected from every possible bad thing that could happen. 

Because it's an impossible task. Just like it’s an impossible task to prevent things like the knife attacks at the Westfield mall in Bondi from “ever happening again”. 
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.