Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Join Kerre Woodham one of New Zealand’s best loved personalities as she dishes up a bold, sharp and energetic show Monday to Friday 9am-12md on Newstalk ZB. News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your morning listening covered.

  1. 16h ago

    Kerre Woodham: I'm all for paying what you owe, but...

    Every bailiff in the country is going to be out in force today, scanning the number plates of parked cars to identify those amongst us who have overdue court fines and reparation. You can run but you cannot hide. And if you can't pay your fines or make arrangements to pay them, your car may well be clamped or towed away to be sold to recoup the parking fines you haven't paid. In July of last year, bailiffs began trialling handheld devices to scan number plates of parked cars and those stopped at some breath testing stations. So far, and this is just since July of last year, the new technology has returned a total of $4,241,867 —no word on the cents— in fines and reparations as of a few days ago. Paul Goldsmith says the message to those who owe money is simple: pay your court fines or you may be walking home. He was on with Mike Hosking this morning and said the swarming of the country with bailiffs is not just about revenue gathering, it's also about raising awareness of court fines.  “I also heard them saying, “Is this a PR exercise?" Well, yeah, it is an element of PR. We want to actually get the message out that you've got to pay your fines. And so it's pretty sort of simple so that we can spend that money, and it's a good $4 million we can spend that on helping victims out from suffering from the consequences of all this." Well, quite. Any dollar counts given the parlous state of the country, and getting $4,241,867 back as of just a few days ago is a very good start. So far, bailiffs have scanned well over a quarter of a million number plates and identified 7,148 people with overdue court fines or reparation. Of those, 1,320 people paid on the spot, a further 561 organised a payment arrangement, 404 people had their vehicle seized, 683 had their vehicle clamped. So they're getting on with it. They're not mucking around.   But while I'm all for people paying what they owe, and I had to come to an arrangement when I was a mad thing many years ago —before I became the sensible voice of reason on the wireless— with the courts to pay off my parking fines, and they were substantial by the time you put the penalties in there, and it took about a year to pay off. But I did pay them off. I'm all for people paying what they owe, but I do hope there'll be some willingness from the courts to work with those who have allowed fines to back up. If you have a bit of disposable income, fines are annoying. They're like, “Ugh, oh well, better pay it." You pay it, you resolve to be more careful next time. But if you are on the bones of your bum, if the couple of days before payday are tight, there is no extra money to go around – a fine can be absolutely disastrous if it comes with another unexpected expense.   I don't think people who are comfortable have any idea what financial anxiety is like, that gnawing in your stomach, that sick feeling of thinking, “I don't know how I'm going to pay this." And if you get a parking fine or if you haven't got your rego done because you're waiting till next month to get the rego done but then you're sprung, yeah, you know that you owe it, you know that you have to pay, but there's something that needs that money more urgently. It's not all cigarettes and Sky television, it's not all drugs and alcohol. For a lot of either working families or families on benefits trying to get by, they are doing the best with what they have. And I just hope the courts show a little bit of leniency if you enter into a payback arrangement, otherwise, it's just a spiral further and further downwards, which doesn't help anybody.   And if you need your car for work because you're barely getting by and your car's seized or clamped, you lose your job. Again, it's that debt spiral further and further and further down. Yes, pay what you owe. I've done it when it's been really difficult to do, and I've done it when it's been relatively easy to do. Maybe be proactive. If you've got that technology and you know that somebody owes a fine, get onto it before and get them onto an arrangement before it becomes so big it becomes a debt mountain they simply cannot scale. They'll never see the top of it, they'll never see the back of it.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  2. 1d ago

    Kerre Woodham: Auckland's harbour crossing - a discussion that goes round in circles

    I can imagine 50 years from now, the morning host on ZB 9am to Noon will be nearing retirement and they'll have talked about everything, as I have done over my time here. So, they'll be opening their show on the 18th of August 2076, and they'll say, “Harbour crossing, tunnel or bridge? Meola Reef crossing or a bridge alongside the existing one? 0800 80 10 80.” And 50 years from now, the discussion will begin again and again and again.   Can you imagine we'll have a second harbour crossing in 50 years? Which is the more likely scenario – the ZB morning host 50 years from now opening it up for discussion, bridge or tunnel, Meola Reef or alongside the existing one, or that you'll be driving over or through the tunnel-crossing, listening to the morning host on Newstalk ZB in 2076? Because it will have been built and there you will be in your driverless car, sipping your morning coffee, listening to the wireless on your car radio while you're going over the harbour crossing.   It seems like one of those where you just end up going round and round and round in circles, which would be fine if it wasn't costing us so much money. How many reports have there been into another crossing? There was one in 1996 —last century— Transit New Zealand's scoping study identifying the initial bridge and tunnel options. Oh, and then things stepped up again, in 1997 the Auckland Regional Council reviewed dozens of alignment variants. Bit of a lull, then between 2006 and 2009 there were more studies, alignment and corridor protection studies recommending twin tunnels – I remember that, remember the discussions around that 20 years ago. 2010 to 2011, new transport and economic evaluation that looked into add-ons like the Skypath. 2023, the Waitematā Harbour Connections detailed business case presented five shortlisted bridge and tunnel options. 2024 to ‘26, further geotechnical seabed testing and market sounding investment cases by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport.   And then this month, another reset ordering an independent Crown-led detailed business case alongside a separate $1 million study for a Meola Reef alignment, which is basically a sop to Wayne Brown's ego and will only happen if Auckland Council's willing to pay half a million towards it. You cannot imagine how thrilled I am to be an Auckland ratepayer contributing towards Wayne Brown's ego and a taxpayer paying towards a $1 million ego study. Chris Bishop says the latest independent Crown led detailed business case is necessary.  “The difference here would be that in the past we've made decisions based on desktop studies, right? So a bunch of people have sat around and looked at a map and gone, “Oh, that'd be quite good," and drawn a line and gone, Let's do that." This time we've actually had a barge in the harbour, we've got the route alignment for a new bridge, we've got the route alignment for the tunnel. There's a lot more work's been done and I appreciate people listening will say, “Oh yeah, yeah, well he would say that," but this, you know, is genuinely true. We're a lot further advanced, we've got a really detailed investment case for both a bridge and a tunnel.   “The question is always, and has always been with this project, and this is the reason why the ‘08 and 2014 and 2015 and 2016 versions fell over, no one's yet worked out a proper way to pay for it because it's, you know, like it potentially, you know, could bankrupt the transport system or even, you know, the country's fiscal position unless we get it right. So that's the work we're doing right now, and I don't want people to underappreciate the scale of the cost. It's huge.”  I don't think we underestimate that, but I also know that given the amount of time we've wasted and the money we've wasted on coming up with options and then re-presenting the same options, would have been a good down payment to a lovely firm of Chinese tunnel builders who could have come in, whapped the thing up and pushed off again. We'd be driving over it.   The only thing that makes me feel marginally better about this decades long time and money wasting exercise is that the first harbour bridge was beset by the same issues. I know we probably think, as I did until I looked into it, God, must have been 20 odd years ago, that our pragmatic, phlegmatic forebears just rolled up their shirt sleeves and threw up the Auckland Harbour Bridge and bloody be done with it because we needed it, but in fact no. It faced intense public, political and technical opposition for decades. North Shore residents and farmers had been agitating for a crossing since the 1860s. So nearly 100 years later the thing was shoved up after much debate.   So maybe, maybe, maybe we aren't completely and utterly as hopeless this generation as I think we are. These are the same kind of debates, discussions, you would think we would learn from history, wouldn't you? But no. And if ever there was a piece of infrastructure that needed to be looked at by independent consultants, the Infrastructure Commission has a look at it, it cannot be touched politically, we decide on the best option, we toll the thing and be done with it. But it just does not seem to be that simple. It wasn't that simple in 1860 and it's not that simple in 2026. I hope things will have improved by 2076.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  3. 5d ago

    Kerre Woodham: Is ACT's bed tax alternative a good option?

    There's a reason that people live in cities and towns that others love to visit. Beautiful beachside resorts down south, the gorgeous, gorgeous little villages nestled under incredible mountains and natural beauty, or vibrant hotspots where there's a million things to do and a melting pot of cultures and all the places of great historical relevance as well as great beauty. Of course people are going to flock to visit them. But it does cost to provide the amenities that serve the visitors and for small cities and towns, it's a heavy, heavy burden for the ratepayer.   For a long time now, there's been discussion about whether to impose a bed tax on tourists, approximately 2.5% to 3% on short stay lodgings, and that would fund major cultural and sporting events and build the infrastructure in places where the ratepayer simply can't afford to put in the changing rooms, the loos, the motorhome parks, that sort of thing that are required. It would relieve the financial pressure on the ratepayers. Local authorities like Auckland Council face multimillion dollar budget gaps for attracting and subsidising major events that drive regional economic activity.   Now, ACT has proposed a dollar a night from each guest night stay be given to the local council who is hosting that visitor, funded through levies and GST that tourists already pay. So not a new tax, but taking the money and taking a dollar out and giving it to the council. David Seymour estimates this dividend would give councils more than $40 million annually, but the strategic director of Hotel Council Aotearoa, James Doolan, told Mike Hosking that while it's a good start, it's nowhere near enough.  “How do we share the massive amount of tourism tax with the people who actually host the tourists? You've got to do it everywhere nationally with a formula that doesn't change and isn't at risk of being changed by politicians from time to time. And $40 million for the entire country, I mean, Wayne Brown and Hotel Council, we agree that the number for Auckland alone should be about $40 million.   “So there's some, again, good stuff from ACT, they've acknowledged the problem, but already we have $5 billion of GST, we have $230 million collected at the border, $230 million at IVL, and we need ACT to tell us whether that money is also going to deal with visitor pressure, which is what it was originally designed to do.”  And it was. Remember when the international visitor levy was $35? Half went to conservation and DOC, the other half went into directly into infrastructure. Then the Coalition Government came in and changed it to $100, and now it's being used to pay for all sorts of things loosely associated with tourism. James Doolan didn't believe it should be spent on upgrading the cycle trails, given that it's mostly Kiwis that use them, but I don't know. I mean, regional tourism is still tourism, isn't it? At least it's not going on something like defence. It's not being taken out of one budget portfolio and going into another portfolio entirely.   But if you live in a tourist town, a place that tourists flock to because it's beautiful, because it gives them an experience that they otherwise would not have, like Rotorua. Loved my time in Rotorua over Christmas, loved going back and seeing the city recovering and damn near fully recovered. Beautiful things to do there. But what do you need to spend the money on? I look at places like Whangamatā or Wānaka, and they're little, and for most of the time they chug along really nicely as a beautiful little community in a beautiful part of the world, and then woof, in comes the tourism, in comes the visitor influx. And it's not year-round, it's seasonal. How on earth do you deal with that with the huge fluctuations? If it was relatively steady, it would be so much easier to deal with.   But when you're living in places, Ōhakune is another example, how do you deal with a massive influx of tourists all at once? Because what you need to sustain the tourists during that time is not what you're going to need for the rest of the year. And what sort of money do you need to look after the tourists properly, so it doesn't fall on the ratepayers’ shoulders? What sort of money are you talking about in the regions? What would you spend it on? Say all of a sudden, the international visitor levy gives you a windfall for your particular town, your particular region, what would you spend the money on to either attract tourists or to look after the ones who are already dedicated to coming and visiting your town?  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  4. 6d ago

    Kerre Woodham: National's leadership debacle – what a waste of time

    So that's it then, at least until the next time. Christopher Luxon and his camp stared down the would-be challengers to his leadership, and he lives to fight another election. What happens after that is anybody's guess – win or lose. Chris Penk, the stalking horse, paid the price for calling a confidence motion, stripped of his ministerial portfolios, kicked down to the bottom of the backbenches to sit in purgatory, and he's announced he'll retire from politics at the election. There are all sorts of reckons about who he was acting for, who was really behind the coup, why it failed, and no doubt that will keep the political journos and the Wellington cabal in a lather for the next few weeks to come.  But the end result is, despite all the fevered speculation, another challenge to the Prime Minister's leadership was mounted and another challenge was bested. What a sorry, sorry state of affairs. Credit to the Prime Minister for having the cojones to stare down the perfidious ne'er do wells within his own caucus. He doesn't have to do the job, he doesn't need to do the job, yet he was determined to stick it out and finish the job in his own time and in his own way. Credit too to him for keeping excellent ministers where they are doing good work, when surely a dark deep recess of his heart must wish there was still the ability to hang, draw, and quarter traitors. Would have taken a big deep breath and then move on. The ministers are doing good work for New Zealanders while undermining their boss and their party, and to be able to set aside an entirely understandable desire for vengeance shows real maturity and leadership.  But where does it leave erstwhile National voters? Quite clearly the caucus is full of liars and traitors and grasping opportunists, no different I suppose to most other political parties, but it doesn't make me feel great voting for them. I know I should accept that this is politics, but why? You wouldn't put up with that in friendships, you wouldn't put up with that in your own workplace. Why do you have to accept undermining, duplicitous, two faced, pledging loyalty with one hand, hugging with one hand while the other hand holds the knife? I find it despicable. Is loyalty an old-fashioned virtue? I wouldn't have thought so. Anyway, why should people be able to get away with pledging their loyalty, telling the public, “Oh yes look, we're absolutely behind the leader," only to be found to be actively undermining both the leader and the party? And what sort of thinking are you getting if a significant cabal within National thinks it's a great idea to roll a leader who is leading a party that could form a government 90 days before the election?  It hardly shows the brains trust, does it? To have a group of people going, “Hey, I know, why don't we roll the leader of our party and the Prime Minister 90 days before an election? That'll really get people on side." What a waste of time, what a waste of money and what an absolute bloody gift to Labour.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

About

Join Kerre Woodham one of New Zealand’s best loved personalities as she dishes up a bold, sharp and energetic show Monday to Friday 9am-12md on Newstalk ZB. News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your morning listening covered.

More From Newstalk ZB