エピソード

  • Liam Dann: NZ Herald Business Editor on the OCR cut, inflation

    Liam Dann: NZ Herald Business Editor on the OCR cut, inflation
    2025/10/09

    The Reserve Bank's continuing to walk a fine line, with its move to cut the OCR 50-basis points to 2.5%.

    Economic data suggests inflation has now hit 3%.

    Finance Minister Nicola Willis is blaming rising rates, saying they’re having a disproportionate impact on overall inflation, whereas other sectors are stabilising.

    NZ Herald Business Editor Liam Dann told Kerre Woodham we almost seem to be in a self-fulfilling negative spiral.

    He says we should be feeling better, but we aren't, and then we start questioning ourselves and the economy.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    11 分
  • Kerre Woodham: OCR cuts have not restored the most important thing - confidence

    Kerre Woodham: OCR cuts have not restored the most important thing - confidence
    2025/10/09

    Hopes for an economic recovery have been given a significant boost by yesterday's decision from the Reserve Bank to frontload cuts to the official cash rate. The RBNZ delivered a 50 basis point cut to the OCR and indicated it was prepared to cut again in November if required. After that, they're kind of starting to run out of ammo.

    Dropping mortgage interest rates though is not the panacea to cure all economic ills. Mortgage holders account for around a third of households. So of all the households in New Zealand, one third are paying mortgages. Two thirds, those who rent and those who've paid off their homes, and who are watching in horror as interest rates on their savings accounts plummet, do not have mortgages.

    Is the country's economy really going to be invigorated because a third of householders will see their mortgage reduced by a few hundred to a $1,000 a month? It'll be a good start, I suppose. And the 50 point cut will cut the costs of those with business loans, most of those are on floating rates, but what businesses really want to see is not reduced costs, but increased spending, increased revenue, and that is only going to come with confidence in the economy.

    I know a number of people who are seeing their mortgages coming onto a lower rate before the end of the year, but they're not planning a big spend up, even with Christmas on the horizon. They've been burned by the higher interest rates, and yes, yes, yes, I know Boomers had 22% and they managed and we don't know we're living, but it's all relative. It's much bigger mortgages. For many people seeing them go to 7 - 8% was a shock after mortgage interest rates were around 2%.

    So they are coming onto a a lower rate, but they have been burned, and the increased cost of living has also scared them. They've run down their savings, and over the next few months they're going to pay a few bills, get ahead of the bills, and start stashing some money away in case there's another economic shock. Which is probably not what businesses want to hear.

    Nor would the government be all that thrilled to hear that anecdotal story. They need people, they need us to start feeling better and soon, given the parlous state of the National Party's fortunes in the latest poll. They really need people to feel better. It's not good enough to say look at law and order, look at the ram raids, look at the changes we've made to education which are going to be the most positive thing we can do with our young people. Look at what we're doing with housing, increased housing which will bring the cost of first homes down. They can point to a whole lot of things that they have done and are doing and we're like, “ Still tough out there. It's really hard. You said we'd feel better. We don't." And that's what the polls are reflecting, so we need to start feeling better soon.

    It's a tricky balancing act with the Reserve Bank trying to stimulate the moribund economy while at the same time keeping a weather eye out for inflation. And there are no absolute answers about what is right and what is wrong.

    What is the best way to restore confidence? Look at the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research. Their members know a bit about how economies work, and they have a monetary policy shadow board. They look at the same figures as the Reserve Bank monetary policy committee and they make their own decisions. They look at monetary policy and come up with their reckons based on that. Their Monetary Policy Shadow Board recommended a 25 point basis cut, reflecting the view that excess capacity in the New Zealand economy provided scope for a small cut to support recovery and activity without affecting inflation.

    Several of their members said that because of the much weaker than expected June quarter GDP, there should be a 50 basis point cut now. One said it should stay on hold, given the recent spike in inflation and the fact that the OCR cuts to date have yet to work through the economy.

    Cities always recover last. Out on the farm, when they've got good prices, it slowly starts to trickle through, but the cities recover last. So stimulate but not too much.

    Nicola Willis has directed her pointy finger in the direction of councils and says rates are having a disproportionate effect on inflation. Other sectors are stabilising but really, it's a confidence game, isn't it? We've got to feel confident and that we're not clawing our way through each and every pay cycle before we can start spending and businesses can start making profits. And voters have to feel confident and businesses have to start doing better before National can be confident about not being a one-term government.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分
  • Tanya Wilton and Mark Lawrence: Hutt Hospital ED Specialist and Psychiatrist on the impact and cause of New Zealanders' declining health

    Tanya Wilton and Mark Lawrence: Hutt Hospital ED Specialist and Psychiatrist on the impact and cause of New Zealanders' declining health
    2025/10/07

    A new report from the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists says the health of New Zealanders is declining.

    It showed working age people reporting excellent health almost halved between 2011 and 2024, while psychological distress had increased among all adults.

    The report called on the government to address and reverse the decline by investing in housing, poverty reduction, education, improved nutrition and physical activity, as well as a stronger commitment to addressing the impact of tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy food.

    Hutt Hospital ED Specialist Dr Tanya Wilton told Kerre Woodham she sees people who have struggled to obtain adequate income, housing, and security, and it’s harder to eat and stay healthy when you don’t have the money to do so.

    She says you can’t get away from those social determinants of health in terms of those key areas.

    Tauranga-based Psychologist Mark Lawrence told Woodham that when it comes to psychological distress, the biggest challenge is a lack of extensive long-term investment to addressing societal stressors.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    13 分
  • Kerre Woodham: Unhealthy habits are a matter of choice not a lack of education

    Kerre Woodham: Unhealthy habits are a matter of choice not a lack of education
    2025/10/07
    A new report says the health of New Zealanders is declining, and that it's costing us dearly- in the billions of dollars with more billions to come. The report, released by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists showed working-age people who reported they were in excellent health almost halved between 2011 and 2024, while psychological distress had increased amongst all adults. The report called on the government to address and reverse the decline by investing in housing and poverty reduction and education, improved nutrition, physical activity, as well as a stronger commitment to addressing the impact of tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy food. If the trend continues, the report estimates that only 6.6% of adults will be in excellent health, while almost 20% would be in fair or poor health. How can this be so? What is the point of spending more on education when you know, and everybody knows, what we need to do to live a healthy life? We have never been more aware of how to live a healthy life. We know how to do it. Whether we choose to do it is entirely another matter. Social media provides recipes for those who are on slim budgets. If you think, well, I don't know how to cook, there's Tik Tok and Instagram that will show you how to cook, or YouTube tutorials. If you say, "but I've only got this amount of money to spend on food", there are endless accounts that will show you what to do with meagre resources. You might not be able to afford the finest organic meats, most people can't. But there are ways of turning out nutritious food using the most basic ingredients. There are free exercise programmes for any exercise you care to think of. You can even walk barefoot around the block. You don't need special exercise gear or gym memberships or to belong to a swimming club or a Taekwondo club or a basketball club. There are so many ways that you can move if you want to. Why would we spend more on physical activity when people are choosing not to? There are accounts that you can follow for free to assist you in coping with the world. If you're suffering from anxiety, there's anti-addiction programmes. There has never been a time where people have been more open in discussing mental health issues, where there's been greater acceptance of people who are struggling with mental health issues, where mental health days are a matter of course. How can we be declining? How can you not know what is good for you and how you can improve your mental health and your physical health? Whether you want to or not is another matter. I'm not pointing the finger, I'm looking at myself in the mirror. I knew the amount I was drinking wasn't healthy for me, but I did it anyway, until I stopped. Until I thought, no this can't go on. This is silly. You're fat, you're unhealthy, you're falling over, broke a bone, enough. And so you stop. But you do it until you don't. I cannot believe that the kids that are going into the dairies before school that I used to see on my commute, who were buying the virulently coloured soft drink and the pie for breakfast, I cannot believe that they did not know that was an unhealthy breakfast. They know it's unhealthy, but they choose to do it. You could throw all the money in the world at education programmes. Until people decide they're worth more, they deserve more in their life. They are the ones, individuals are the ones who have to decide for themselves that they deserve better in life, that they deserve to look after their bodies. And I don't know how you do that. I would love to hear from you on this. Is there anybody in the world that doesn't know how to live a healthy life? It's all a matter of choice.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分
  • Kerre Woodham: A different view point does not permit you to invade someone's home

    Kerre Woodham: A different view point does not permit you to invade someone's home
    2025/10/06
    When I heard the Green Party co-leaders were holding a press conference yesterday, I thought fleetingly, ever the optimist, "Oh, they might be holding a press conference calling for the cessation of protests outside the home of a fellow parliamentarian." Undoubtedly they'd couch it in greeny language – they would call out the Foreign Affairs Minister for his lack of courage at the UN, etc, etc, but ultimately they would make the point that protesting in a personal sphere is wrong, and they would call off the hounds and remind people that yes, we have a right to protest, but with that right comes responsibility and it is quite clearly irresponsible to make the attacks personal and bring the protest to the door of an MP's home. That's what I thought, fleetingly. But no, nothing of the sort. In fact, it was a PR stunt for the flotilla to Palestine. No mention was made of the protesters outside Winston Peters' home. In fact, one of them was alongside the Green co-party leaders. Chlöe Swarbrick lectured us again about our responsibility to ensure the safety of the three New Zealand citizens detained by the Israeli government after the flotilla was intercepted, and that was that. A bit of tearful beseeching of the government to do something. Love for the detainees, and that was about it. Can you imagine what would happen if Groundswell decided to protest Green policies, and they decided to take that protest to the door of Marama Davidson's home or Chlöe Swarbrick's home? I would be absolutely appalled, and I would demand they be arrested or leave immediately. There is absolutely no excuse for it. You might disagree vehemently with policies, you might think you have moral, intellectual, scientific right on your side, on the side of whatever argument you're putting forward, but there are standards and there are limits and there are boundaries. The lot outside Winston's house, you're perfectly entitled to hold a point of view. You may well feel that you're on the right side of history. That does not give you carte blanche to invade a man's home, and that's exactly what you're doing, and that of his neighbours. The noise invading somebody's home. You know, if you have had really ugly neighbours who have made your life hell because of the noise they're making, It's an invasion. So too is the bloody rock through the window. If anybody thinks that the new legislation around protests at people's homes is going to provide any protection at all for public figures, for anybody, think again. The bill is before the Justice Select Committee. Submissions on it closed yesterday, but critics say it's way too vague to do much good. Constitutional law expert Graeme Edgeler said as much to Mike Hosking this morning. “There are offences which deal with this already. And I, my suspicion is that the new offence, that the draft, at least at the moment, is so complex, perhaps so difficult to prove, you know, was that the reason they're doing that? Was it, you know, just all the difficulties in proving it, that police may just continue to use the criminal offences that already exist, which kind of have the similar penalties. “And when people aren't sure what's covered and it's a criminal offence, courts tend to err on the side of, well, if you wanted to make this clearly legal, you'd have done a better job of writing it. So if it's not clear, you tend to favour on the side of the criminal for criminal cases. And so, hopefully the government can sort of narrow this and fix it to cover exactly what it is they want. I mean, it's sort of protests near residential areas. I mean, Queen Street's got massive apartment buildings on it – are those residential areas and no protests down Queen Street? I mean, no one's going to apply the law that way. The police aren't going to apply that law that way. The courts aren't going to apply the law that way. And so it’s really going to do much of anything.” No, it's not. So we're going to have to rely on existing laws to give people a measure of protection in their own homes. That and inculcating a sense of decency and fair play. If anyone attempted to disturb or frighten or harass the Green Party co-leaders and members of their families in their own homes, it would be absolutely inexcusable. The Green Party co-leaders have pointed out how inexcusable the internet trolling and the abuses of their MPs, and indeed of other women MPs, but mainly theirs, but women MPs, non-gender specific MPs, they are absolutely ropeable about the level of vitriol and harassment and violent language being used against MPs on social media. What difference is it being outside somebody's home? Absolutely no difference whatsoever. They are the first to point the digeridoo at people who have a different point of view and express it vocally and violently, and rightly so. Nobody should be subject to that. They want the police protection, they demand the people have a right to be safe ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    7 分
  • Kerre Woodham: A tough but fair change to the benefit

    Kerre Woodham: A tough but fair change to the benefit
    2025/10/05
    On the face of it, it seems tough. Telling young people to get out there and get a job when the economy is tanked and unemployment is high, is you'd think, unrealistic. From November of next year, young people wanting to get job seeker support or the equivalent emergency benefit will have to take a parental income test to see whether their parents can support them instead of the taxpayer. About 4,300 18 and 19-year-olds were estimated to become ineligible for support, with 4,700 remaining eligible in the 27-28 financial year. As I said, this kicks in from November of next year, so from 2026. As of June, there were just over 15,000 18 and 19-year-olds on job seeker support. It's a lot of young kids. There is no doubt it is difficult right now for young people to find work, to be taken on as apprentices. When the economy contracts, young people tend to be the first laid off, having fewer skills and less work experience. Last on, first off kind of thing. As well, they can be in casual or part-time employment, jobs that are more easily dispensed with. But of course, look beyond the headlines. They're not being told to go out and find a job in a really tight labour market. They have to find a job, they have to be studying, or they have to be training. They have three options. What they can't be, according to this government and the Prime Minister, is reliant on the taxpayer. The bigger issue here is we're trying to reset expectations with young people that you just can't partially attend school and then just drift on into unemployment benefit. And it is a bit of a reset for under 25s to say, I'm sorry, you're expected to get connected with work or employment or training or education. $65,000, where do you why how do you land on that? It's basically the income cut-out point for the supported living payment. And so it basically says if you're coming from very low-income families, we're exempting you. But we know it's quite low, but the reality is it puts the pressure back on parents to say get those young people into work or education. That was Chrisopher Luxon, Prime Minister, talking to Mike Hosking this morning on the Mike Hosking Breakfast. A youth worker who was spoken to in relation to the story, to the announcement, said, and I quote, "I've never met a young person that doesn't want to find work." Really? You need to get out more. I think the vast majority of young people do want to work. They want to study, they want to train to be able to work so that they can become self-determining, to stand on their own two feet. Not all of them. We have had young people say as much on this show. Nature boy, anyone? And you'd have to wonder about Barbecue Man, whether his children are fine upstanding productive citizens, because generally welfare dependency leads to welfare dependency and further down the generations it goes. There are fantastic stories of young people who were struggling, who got the kick up the bum they needed and managed to achieve beyond their wildest expectations. One of the owners of a New World supermarket started life as a trolley boy in Whakatāne when his mum said, "If you're not going to go to school, you are getting a job. You are not staying under my roof and not contributing." "Oh, I can't find an apprenticeship." Well, get any job, she said. And he started life as a trolley boy. And one thing led to another. He discovered not only did he actually like work, he was actually productive and respected by his peers, he was really good at it, to the extent that he ended up owning his own supermarket. And I could not agree more with Rod Bell, Chief Operating Officer for Blue Light, who spoke to Mike too this morning. The big danger is if a young person starts down the track where a benefit becomes part of their life, as the stat shows, that they end up probably at least a minimum of 18 years of their life on the benefit. That's amazing. Yeah, we want to break that. You break that once and you've actually paid then probably for 20 people. So financially it makes a huge sense, but for anybody, they want to have worth and worth is doing something positive and proactive, whether it's work or training or education is what will make people feel better about themselves and make a difference to the young people. Absolutely. And it's that stat that's really really hard to read that if you are a kid that goes straight onto a benefit out of school that you might have been attending haphazardly, you've got no habit of getting up and being somewhere presentable, ready to go, because you haven't been attending school. It's been a very haphazard, spotty, patchy attendance record. The number of people I've spoken to in the Far North who want to give young people jobs to the extent that they kit them out in the clothing they'll need for the job, they'll drive to their house, they will get them out of bed, get them into the shower them, get them into the van, take them ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    8 分
  • Kerre Woodham: You need to know how to play the system to enact change

    Kerre Woodham: You need to know how to play the system to enact change
    2025/10/03
    I've always thought that if you want to change the system, if you feel that the system, whatever it might be, doesn't work for you, the best way is to change it from within. When you live in a democracy, that is one of the beauties of a democracy. You don't have to riot in the streets, you don't have to depose tyrannical dictators, you can use the ballot box to effect change. You can also enter the system and change it from within. But only if you take the time to learn how the system works, and only if you're prepared to settle for incremental change rather than spectacular seismic show-stopping change. Plenty of people think they can go into Parliament and make a real difference and retire hurt, basically, realising that the system is too big for them to grapple with, that they're not best suited for Parliament. That's across all parties. I remember my own former colleague, Pam Corkery, entered Parliament with the Alliance Party, thinking instead of talking about making change, she'd enter Parliament and try and make the change from within. But she was frustrated – the system stymied her. You’ve seen it with New Zealand First, you've seen it with National, you've seen it with Labour. And as Eru Kapa-Kingi has pointed out, activism and politics are completely different beasts. Kapa-Kingi is the driving force behind the protest movement Toitū Te Tiriti, largely responsible for last year's nationwide hikoi to Parliament that drew tens of thousands of protesters. Yesterday, the movement announced it was distancing itself from Te Pāti Māori. Eru Kapa-Kingi, he's the son of Te Pāti Māori MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi and a former party vice president, said yesterday that Toitū Te Tiriti was not a lobby group for the Māori Party. He went further, claiming Te Pāti Māori had a problematic leadership style, which amounted to effectively, he said, a dictatorship model, as reported by Te Ao Māori News. I thought Te Ururoa Flavell spoke really well this morning on the Mike Hosking Breakfast, outlining the problem with activists entering Parliament to advance their goals. “I mean, the statement that he's made is politicians need to stop being activists and activists need to stop being politicians, which I think is a fair call. So and in that regard, trying to separate out the movement that he set up, Toitū Te Tiriti, he said that's their focus around the obligations to the Treaty of Waitangi and keeping those at the forefront of the New Zealand society. And then the second part of course is what is the point of a political movement in Parliament and how can they best achieve goals for the best interests of the nation.” Right now, Te Pāti Māori are incompetent and impotent politically. They have their core base of voters, much the same as the Greens. The Greens, it's hard to see how effective they could be in Parliament as part of a government. Dame Tariana Turia's Te Pāti Māori was not an impotent political force. Dame Turia understood how politics worked. She entered Parliament on the Labour ticket but resigned in 2004 over the Foreshore and Seabed Bill to set up the Māori Party, Te Pāti Māori. She understood politics, she understood the importance of compromise. As the Spinoff said in her obituary, an architect of Whanau Ora and Smoke-free Aotearoa, Turia's legacy is one that belies a waning art in politics, knowing when to compromise and how to make it count. In no way was she a sell-out. She stayed true to her own beliefs, she stayed true to acting as a voice for her people, but she knew how to work the system from within. She knew how to make the system work for her and the people she represented. Labour would need the Greens and Te Pāti Māori to form a government based on current polling. Yesterday Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Te Pāti Māori looked like they're quite a long way away from being ready to play a constructive role in any future government. And again, I'd say the Greens would struggle too. Since the former co-leader James Shaw left Parliament, and again, that was a man who understood how Parliament worked, how politics worked, the gentle and powerful art of compromise. But since he's left, there's been the sacking and/or resignation of four MPs —Elizabeth Kerekere, Darleen Tana, Golriz Ghahraman, and Benjamin Doyle— and the party's been distracted with issues advanced by activist MPs, like their anti-police stance. That takes a lot of time to deal with when they could be furthering what the party says it stands for, when they could be advancing the causes of their voters. Again, like Te Pāti Māori, they have a core group of voters, people who can't imagine voting for anybody else, who would swallow a dead rat rather than vote for National or New Zealand First, who might reluctantly vote for Labour, but who are Greens through and through. But it's knowing how to use that power, knowing how to use the system, knowing how to ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    7 分
  • Bosses Unfiltered: Every Thursday on Kerre Woodham Mornings and iHeartRadio

    Bosses Unfiltered: Every Thursday on Kerre Woodham Mornings and iHeartRadio
    2025/10/02

    Kiwi businesses have been navigating the biggest economic turmoil in decades. Wherever you look, business leaders are making tough calls: staff cuts, putting payroll on the credit card, or worst case… closing the business altogether.

    They thought they had it all: a great idea, solid marketing, and a healthy amount of capital. So where did it all go wrong? And can they ever turn things around?

    In Bosses Unfiltered, Kerre Woodham, interviews prominent Kiwi businesspeople who’ve experienced failure and adversity and lets them tell their story.

    When did they realise their dreams weren’t coming true? How big was their fall from grace? How did they pick themselves up and where are they now?

    Bosses Unfiltered tells the real story behind the headlines. About what it’s really like being in business, in a raw and vulnerable way, while showing that there is light at the end of the tunnel, and that success can quite often come from failure.

    Listen to Bosses Unfiltered every Thursday morning from 11:30am during Kerre Woodham Mornings, and follow the podcast on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    1 分