/on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/rss 九一星空无限 Wed, 15 Oct 2025 23:26:04 Z en /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/andrew-dickens-why-we-got-the-auckland-harbour-bridge-wrong/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/andrew-dickens-why-we-got-the-auckland-harbour-bridge-wrong/ There was a letter to the editor over the weekend about the Auckland Harbour Bridge which made a very good point. The writer remarked that the Harbour Bridge is the coat hanger shape it is because it needed to let freighters in to get to the Chelsea sugar works. The works are under Birkenhead, and they’ve been there long enough that they’ve become historically significant. But that is the only reason the bridge goes up so much and down so much. What a pity we didn’t move the industry in the 50s when we built the bridge.   What a pity we compromised the bridge for just one industry. We’re going to pay for that dearly. It’s one of those things we all forget about when talking about a second Harbour crossing. At the moment you’ll see barges doing Geotech in the middle of the Harbour. It's for two new, three-lane road tunnels. A single light rail tunnel is also part of the plan.  Meanwhile the existing bridge gets lanes for buses and cycling. What we get wrong is that we should really be talking about replacing the first crossing because it’s at the end of its life.  Move the sugar works and we could replace the bridge with a flatter wider version that will be wider and stronger than what we’ve got, giving it a longer life. I keep reminding people that the real problem with the Auckland motorway system is the limits on spaghetti junction and the pinch points at Northcote and Greenlane Penrose.  Not the bridge. Which still has more capacity. But no structural strength. And for all of you not in Auckland wondering why I’m talking about this, it’s simple. This will be the biggest and most complex and most disruptive infrastructure project this country will see and we’re all going to have to pay for it no matter which city we live in. Sun, 13 Apr 2025 18:06:31 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/roman-travers-wellingtonians-suffering-at-the-hand-of-inept-council/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/roman-travers-wellingtonians-suffering-at-the-hand-of-inept-council/ After another sweltering weekend with many of us seeking the shade of a big old tree, or taking a trip to our favourite rivers, lakes and beaches; it’s so sad to see Wellington suffering with poor leadership. Poor old Wellington. My favourite city in New Zealand. Usually, the leaks in Wellington come in the form of proposed ministerial policy of one party or another, but not Wellington. When the capital city does something - she does it with full fireworks and fanfare. Not only are Wellingtonians suffering at the hands of an inept council, but the ongoing unfathomable cost to replace their network of sewerage and water pipes - those problems now exacerbated by the biggest leaks of all. Fresh water leaks. Wellington's water use and their need for enforced water restrictions isn't because of Dorris and Derrick out there in the dead of night watering their petunias, well over 40 percent of Wellington's water use is down to the city councils own pipes leaking. So now the government's involved. The Minister of Local Government Simeon Brown has written to Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau and Upper Hutt Mayor Wayne Guppy to formally request further information on how these councils are addressing water leakage and water shortage issues. It's taken a while to get to this point, but I guess it's better late than never right? You may well be thinking - great! Now we're getting somewhere. What mayor anywhere would have the arrogance to ignore the Minster of Local Government? Well Wellington and Hutt have two of them. The Minister of Local Government, wrote to the Chair of the Wellington Water Committee to ask what actions shareholder councils are taking to reduce the possible water shortage. Both mayors failed to respond to the Chair of the Wellington Water Committee’s request for this information by the 17 January deadline. Why? On holiday? Didn't get the email? Don't have the answers? Don't really care? Who knows. Minister Brown has now used the powers under the Local Government Act to formally request information that those councils are 'taking their obligations to residents and ratepayers seriously, and are implementing all mitigations necessary to avoid cuts or limits on water supplies'. Rate payers need to demand more from their mayors. Perhaps the three waters policy that so many misunderstood, wasn't such a bad idea after all right? It would appear that in light of the complete lack of action and accountability demonstrated by some in power within the Wellington regions councils; the government will inevitably step in to save the day anyway. It's obvious to me that you can call it what you want to: Three Waters, Handles Water Music, Six Months in a Leaky Boat, Watership Down… whatever. Ultimately, your councils are letting you down in Wellington and Upper Hutt. Good luck at keeping your garden and lawns green this Summer. Once again, in light of the complete inadequacy shown here by Councils who should be expected to do better, New Zealanders will foot the bill for another poorly maintained chunk of infrastructure Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:24:02 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-im-as-impatient-as-the-next-guy/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-im-as-impatient-as-the-next-guy/ I’m as impatient as the next guy but can we cut Luxon some slack here? He’s dealing with Winston. He’s dealing with two parties, both deeply ambitious, principled and headstrong, and one of them has Winston at the helm.  That makes this entire negotiation of talks that he’s enduring.. all the more harder I reckon. I also don’t buy into the media’s timeline. This is not one of the longest negotiations on earth. Not by a long shot. And I don’t believe it started the day we counted votes either. That’s unfair to start the clock from there.   They had to wait for special votes, they needed a final number, they didn’t start in earnest until they knew they truly needed Winston. It’s been two weeks. Yes, having said that, I feel like it needs wrapping up this week too, but that’s just because we’re all bored and over it and the media is bereft of stories. They’re sick of being stationed outside hotels and chasing cars. If you think about any other corporate merger or negotiation, we would not have a clue how long those last because we’re not invested in them, we’re not breathlessly waiting outside the room every day watching the minutes tick by, it takes what it takes.   In this case it’s a government they’re forming, and they’ve been clear they want it to be one that lasts. I accept that’s got to take a bit of time. Also we want a good deal don’t we? What if they wrapped this up too fast and the deal was crap? I mean we know from previous history and inside reports on Ardern’s negotiations with Winston that she was ‘so desperate she was prepared to sell her grandmother’ – it was reported. So nobody wants to see a deal like that. A fast deal’s not always a good one. But that’s the true test of this whole thing I reckon.   Not how many days it takes or how much they spent on conference rooms, but whether it’s a good deal. That’s when we can really get critical of Luxon. Once we see the deal. If he’s given away too much to NZ First or acquiesced on stuff he shouldn’t have, then that’s going to get prickly. That’s going to rark people up, the major winning party shouldn’t have to be held to ransom to a disproportionate degree by bit players. That’s when we can really start getting into the nitty gritty of whether Luxon is a good negotiator or not. But for now I’m happy to cut him some slack.. unless, and here’s the rider.. unless the tail is wagging the dog, and he is allowing Winston to get away with his usual shenanigans.   I just don’t trust Winston Peters when he says he’s working really hard and it’s constructive.. and he tries to look urgent about it. It feels like he’s just saying all that to put us off the scent .. to make us think it’s not him being the stick in the mud. It’s part of his chameleon character.. say one thing, do another, who knows.   I just know that when it comes to politics, David Seymour and Winston Peters are seasoned pros .. Seymour I believe would play with a straight bat, Peters not so much. But together they could really be forcing National to jump through some hoops. If that’s the case and the deal is shoddy then we can fairly criticize Luxon at that point, but this pasting he’s getting from the media now, just seems a bit premature.  Sun, 19 Nov 2023 19:25:23 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-hard-working-david-seymour-is-hitting-all-the-right-notes/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-hard-working-david-seymour-is-hitting-all-the-right-notes/ The big winner out of last night’s One 九一星空无限 Kantar poll is David Seymour. While the two main parties both went down two points, Act went up by four. And the good thing for them about that is, that while the Nats dropped two, they're still on 37 which means add in Act's 11 percent support, and the right block on those numbers, would have enough to govern.  And that's the bit that'll have Labour starting to feel the heat. The message here - if you take into consideration their number last night is the lowest they've polled at since 2017, is that the country is sick of them. This is a government officially on notice. People are sick of their failures, and sick of the leadership. If you look at the preferred PM stakes, Jacinda’s dropped to 30, which is her lowest rating yet as PM. And I'm not surprised, their schtick is getting tired and arrogant and people are over it. It's all too predictable. The PM rejects the premise of all questions; she outright refuses to answer ones that look too hard. When she does speak, it's largely in riddles. The Finance Minister just stoops to nasty nitpicky comments, the Health Minister makes it up as he goes along, and most other Ministers just give a ‘nothing to see here’ generic dismissal to most issues. In fact funnily enough, just before I had Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni on the show yesterday, I got a text saying, 'why have you got her on, she always says the same thing, she'll say 'it's complex'. And sure enough, "it's complex" were the first words out of her mouth. While Jacinda dropped in preferred PM rankings though, so did Luxon, by two points. Which leads me back to Seymour. He was up to 5 as preferred PM, and here's where I think he's gaining ground. He says what he thinks. It's pithy and to the point, He seizes on the issues New Zealanders care about and he knows what they care about, because he's out on the street, and in town halls, and in communities, and on the road. He hasn't been travelling overseas for chunks of time, he appears omnipresent. He shows up for the 5am shows in a way no other politician does - he's not arrogant enough to assume he doesn't need to be everywhere. You can't say he doesn't work hard, no matter what you make of his politics, he's a trooper. He also has a way of not getting himself entangled with the press gallery in a way that makes him look like he's on the back foot. He's got good zingers and pithy one liners, he stays on message, he knows his stuff, and he seems to have come up with great sound bites by the time a camera gets to him, every time. His comments get used a lot on the news because they're funny, or clever, or delivered with a droll sense of irony or sarcasm, he talks like a real person. He doesn't talk down to us or at us or across us, he just talks.  His social media team is slick too - memes go up within minutes of news breaking, they're onto it. So I feel like he deserves to be top of the pops this poll, he's well and truly earning his place at the table if and when 2023 rolls around and a right block government's voted in. Mon, 08 Aug 2022 19:20:35 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-my-heroes-this-week-are-the-locals-that-fought-back-against-thugs/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-my-heroes-this-week-are-the-locals-that-fought-back-against-thugs/ My heroes of the week this week are the locals who fought back at thugs with axes and hammers, attempting a smash and grab at an Auckland jewellery store. It was the second time in a month this store had been hit – the owners suspect by the same offenders. The last time they tried to break in they were armed with rocks, crowbars and hammers. That seems to be the case these days – repeat raids. I know this store well, it’s in my ‘hood, I know the surrounding shops too, and I love the proprietors of them for what they did. A broad daylight smash and grab in a suburban area in a busy shopping precinct is ballsy, but then that’s burglars these days. They seem to be brazen and emboldened by the fact they usually get away with it. Which is why it makes what these local heroes at the Remuera shops did so cool. They basically chased the offenders off, the man from the kebab shop – famously awesome kebabs FYI – was cutting up carrots at the time, and took to the street running after these men with his machete-type knife. Another shop owner from nearby ran and picked up a sign and chased the offenders, then started ramming the side of their car with the sign. The sushi shop lady next door - also awesome sushi by the way – was busy yelling on the street, while also calling Police. Now that’s community spirit for you. I know what the cops will say. They’ll say you shouldn’t take matters into your own hands, they’ll say civilians should not run after axe wielding burglars with knives, but what do you expect at this point? There is no hard line from the top, from the Minister, from the Commissioner, from the Police themselves who’re hamstrung, so where did they think this was going to go? It is being left to the community to sort this stuff themselves, it’s a tragedy they have to, it should be Police doing this stuff, but no one’s waiting around for Police anymore. We’ve been promised for long enough that something will happen by way of law enforcement or crackdowns, it doesn’t appear to be happening, so street justice is where we’ve landed. And if that was one your kids working in that shop, or if your child was walking home from school past that scene, then would you want the local community to sit back and let hooded thugs with axes and hammers wreak havoc? Or would you like to see some grownups step in and shoo them away? Yes it could have ended badly, but what’s increasingly being discovered, is these punks are opportunists. They’re not exactly the world’s brightest, and these thieves took off as soon as they were challenged, probably in shock that anyone was bothering to even stand up to them. The locals who fought them off said that they’ve, “got the right to protect their community.” They said “if people can get together and not put up with this sort of thing, we're going to be a better society for it." Well it’s worth a shot isn’t it? Because no matter what you think about what they did, look at the alternative. No one caring and no one doing anything is feeding a society of lawlessness and mayhem. So if shop owners want to defend and protect their patches, then I’m all for it.  Thu, 28 Jul 2022 19:12:00 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-it-seems-we-are-going-to-stay-in-orange-for-any-winter-flu-from-now-on/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-it-seems-we-are-going-to-stay-in-orange-for-any-winter-flu-from-now-on/ Hands up if you had no idea yesterday was a traffic light announcement day. My hand is up. I was so oblivious, it was like stepping back in time, I thought the Herald had the wrong headline up when it ran front page news that Chris Hipkins had announced we were staying in an Orange light. Really? No kidding.  Didn’t even know the prospect of coming out of that was on the cards. That’s how brow-beaten we all are by now. We don’t even expect our full freedoms back do we? But it seems we're staying in Orange not just due to Covid - but the flu too. There seems to be a very nasty flu hitting Australia, we’ve had some of it here in Dunedin already, I know there're many families back to isolating and staying home with sickness. Auckland's seeing resurgence in Covid cases – up 75 percent. In fact both the shops I visited yesterday had signs up saying, ‘please be patient, we have many staff away due to Covid.’ So it appears we’re not out of the woods yet, and is worse yet to come in the form of flu? And is it that this year's flu is expected to be really bad, hence we're staying in masks, or is that the norm now, that every winter we'll go to an Orange light and stay in masks? Has Covid and the pandemic powers exerted by governments brought with it a change to life as we know it forever? Will there be a time that we once again go maskless in winter? Or will they just be the bad old days? Once the border fully opens in July and more Kiwis are travelling for school holidays and winter escapes, we will be back to circulating the usual bugs and viruses. And our immune systems will be unprepared having been locked down as a country for two years, and staying in our little bubbles. But in terms of ever getting back to Green light life? I don’t see the return to freedom happening before Christmas. But who amongst us would be brazen enough to predict anything these days? God forbid we start thinking we know what might happen or how it might unfold. Largely we just plan for the worst these days don’t we? Do we have collective PTSD from Covid? I mean Monkeypox reared its head with a handful of cases and the global panic looked to be back on immediately. We are so scarred aren’t we?  I was in a lift yesterday and a woman came to hop in behind me and then she paused, neither of us were wearing masks, and she said, ‘do you mind me hopping in with you without a mask?’ It’s a fair question I guess, it’s the new normal, we are paranoid about tight spaces with each other, well not all of us, but many of us. She went on to tell me she’s not had Covid, we didn’t know how we’d both dodged it so far but no one wants to be smug about that anymore given it may still come for us. The other thing I find people volunteering is their vaccination status. I was in close proximity with a stranger in a queue the other day and they turned to me and randomly volunteered, “Oh I’m double jabbed and boosted don’t worry.” Assuming that everyone is worried! It’s a wacky old world we’re living in these days, when chit chat with strangers turns into volunteering vaccination status. I guess come winter we'll just be adding in the new one .. 'don't worry I've had the flu jab.' Tue, 24 May 2022 19:17:47 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-turns-out-i-gave-the-government-too-much-credit/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-turns-out-i-gave-the-government-too-much-credit/ So just when I was giving them the benefit of the doubt, the Government showed its true colours again yesterday and went back to its head in the sand approach.  They’re not soft on crime after all, according to them. I thought all this money being thrown at crime was admission crime is a problem, and their dealing with it hasn’t been flash, but alas, wrong. The PM came out and said yesterday nope, they’re not soft on crime. She also denied this funding announcement was a rushed reaction to bad polls and bad headlines. As for Poto Williams, yesterday she was bluffing her way around what they’re doing about ram raids, she didn’t sound any clearer than she did when she first announced it. Essentially, they’re not sure how they’re going to help businesses deal with ram raiders, but they’ll consult. Of course they will. As for whether they’re soft on crime, she was singing from the same song sheet as the Prime Minster.  When it was put to her that a 九一星空无限hub poll showed 70% of New Zealanders think they're soft on crime, she denied it. “Not true,” she said. So 70 percent of Kiwis are wrong. This is, of course, the one and only Labour defence move, just deny everything, it’s not happening, not true, I reject the premise of the question. I’m surprised they’re still taking this path; actually, I’d have thought the polls and focus groups would be telling them by now that this blanket denial routine is not working for them. You can’t deny stuff that people know is true, that people are experiencing for themselves, that people are seeing unfold in front of their very eyes.  You can’t deny it when even the Police themselves are saying it’s true. That their hands are tied, that they can’t pursue people, that they can’t arrest people and that they can barely get past all their paperwork and bureaucracy these days to even get out on the street and actually be a cop. Anyway, Poto thinks this announcement of money is proof they’re not soft on crime. She’s delusional. All that this announcement is, is a long overdue shot in the arm for law enforcement which has been sadly lacking for too long. And even then, this new funding is going to take four years to trickle through. In regards to our largest city, Poto believes the ‘dynamic in Auckland has changed’ she says due to the loss of international students. In what can only be described as laughable, she didn’t recognize that’s because in place of the students, the Government popped the 501s in there. So she put criminals in town, then says the ‘dynamic has changed’.  No kidding, as a direct result of government decision making. Not that they’ll ever see it that way. And that’s part of the problem too, they don’t accept responsibility for anything, everything seems to be somebody else’s fault. It's hard to have faith there will be meaningful change, when the powers that be can’t even acknowledge the reality of the problem. Mon, 09 May 2022 19:19:17 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-auckland-cbd-isnt-bouncing-back-the-way-it-should/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-auckland-cbd-isnt-bouncing-back-the-way-it-should/ I was out in Auckland city last night - which if you know me, you know is extremely rare on a weeknight for me to be out anywhere, far less the CBD. But I was driving through downtown Auckland with my kids in the car and I couldn't believe how heaving town was for a Thursday night. Bars and restaurants full, people sitting cheek by jowl at tables both inside and out on the street, it was buzzing. I said to my kids, "look at this! Town's on fire!" and my very wise 22 year old son said, "Mum, you just wait, past 8 o'clock you do not want to be in here, it gets as rough as guts." Luckily I didn't plan on being in town past 8pm, but I knew he was right. Once the post work drinks and dinner crowd go home, Auckland's CBD transforms into a pretty unsavoury place. And I note even during the day it's getting untenable for some retailers. Clothing store Huffer said this week that Auckland’s just not safe anymore, which anyone who lives in Auckland knows. From guns going off, to ram raids, to violent crime, to the CBD full of homeless, to retail theft.. the list is endless. And it’s depressing. Especially if you’re a born and bred Aucklander like me, who’s grown up in this city, loved this city, owns property in it, raised kids in it. I was asking a real estate agent the other day how people live in town, right in the city centre, which should be prime real estate, proximity to great shopping, parks, ferries, buses, great eateries.. but how do they 1) navigate their way round it in a car, and 2) feel safe walking at night?  I mean you can’t take a car anywhere because there’s no parking and you’d be congested in traffic forever anyway, so you may as well walk, but if you’re walking, are you taking your life into your hands? It’s noble that Mayoral hopefuls keep saying they’ll fix congestion, and they’ll clean up the city, they’ll crack down on crime, but how are they doing any of that? The problem is the Mayor is just another councillor, and if the Auckland Council hasn’t done any of that yet, what makes you think they’ll start now? A new Mayor is still just as powerless. This is especially true when you’ve got the idealogues at Auckland Transport wanting to turn the city into one giant cycle lane. So it makes me sad what’s happened to Auckland. We’ve got family living in other cities who love where they live. Christchurch, Dunedin, Northland, they love it. They relish their environment and are enjoying the spring back to life post Covid. But Auckland has just not managed that same bounce back. Many shops have closed permanently, the aforementioned Huffer's had two ram raids, another clothing store in town I know of has had to electronically tag every single piece of clothing due to the surge in shoplifting. Not that it changes anything given Police are not that interested. So I’m not sure how we fix Auckland, or what we can do to restore her back to her old glory. Is that even possible now?  And if it’s not possible, how many of us stay and just put up with a city in decline, versus actually bailing on it? Thu, 05 May 2022 19:11:58 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-poto-williams-is-acting-immaturely-and-naively/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-poto-williams-is-acting-immaturely-and-naively/ This Government has an image problem and that may be partially reflected in their poll result. It's the bury the head in the sand approach - 'I reject the premise of the question', nothing to see here. But worse than that now I think, is this push back we're seeing where the Government is gas lighting its critics. If you dare to question co-governance, you are racist. If you criticise a female minister you are sexist. And now, Poto Williams has taken it next level - she's claiming that saying the Government is 'soft on crime' is a gendered issue and an attack on her, because she's female. Are you serious? That one is a such a stretch it's hard to believe she even said it out loud, but then she did also call the Police's handling of the Parliamentary protest "fabulous". That was her word - "fabulous". I can think of a lot of other words to describe how Police handled the Parliamentary protest but 'fabulous' isn’t one of them. But to think that soft on crime is a personal attack on her for being a woman? That's madness. I mean, if she was paying attention, and thinking rationally, she'd know the person most in the spotlight as being soft on crime is the Police Commissioner Andy Coster, widely known as ‘Cuddles Coster' because he is so soft on crime. So how can she claim it's a gendered or sexist issue against her, because she's a woman, if the person in for that criticism the most - is in fact a man? It makes literally no sense. And this is the new low of worryingly low bars inside this Government. To question or criticise anything they suggest or do, is to be 'attacking them'. In a position of public office you need to be accountable, you need to be up for robust debate, you need to be able to defend your policies and your decisions, without descending into name calling of anyone who questions it. This gas lighting shows an immaturity and naivety, but also an unwillingness to accept that they're paid by us, to work for us, and to be accountable to us. It's public service. They are not there to arrogantly stand at pulpits and declare that anyone who disagrees with them must be crazy or sexist or racist or fascist. It's just not how it works. Simon Bridges made a very good point in his valedictory last night when he said politicians have to watch that debates don't become too narrow, too watered down, just because people get scared to have them. We have got to be able to be honest as a democracy and have robust exchange of ideas, without feeling like we're going to be sidelined or ostracised or labelled, just because what we said doesn't match their ideology.  We are allowed to question, we are allowed to hold them to account, we are allowed to have opinions and views on their policies and ideas because I'm sorry Poto, but that's how democracy works. Not every criticism is 'gendered' just because you're a woman. Wed, 04 May 2022 19:10:18 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-its-a-rare-day-but-i-agree-with-winston-peters/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-its-a-rare-day-but-i-agree-with-winston-peters/ It’s a rare day I find myself agreeing with Winston Peters, in fact I’d go so far as to say it’s never happened. But given the circumstances of yesterday, I’d have to agree with Winnie; Trevor Mallard has lost the plot.  I mean I have actually used those exact words about Trevor Mallard before. When he spent half a million taxpayer dollars on a playground slide at Parliament, when he played the protestors the Macarena and set sprinklers in them, when he made false rape allegations and then used taxpayer money to fund his legal defence. Also when he kept leaping to Ardern’s defence when she was a newly appointed PM and he seemingly thought it was the 1800’s as he constantly spoke on her behalf, all the times he’s thrown people out of the House for no reason other than a pet peeve with them. I mean the list is endless.  This guy is well past his use by date and I have no idea how he still gets to be there at all, let alone in charge of anything. If anyone should be banned it should be him. So if you’re not up with Mallard’s latest losing of the plot, he’s banned Winston Peters from parliament. Just like he’s banned Matt King, and every other person who turned up to the protest. Banned them for two years. Winston Peters has labelled this move ‘dictatorial’ and in line with ‘a banana republic’. It’s hard to argue. Peters also says New Zealanders should not put up with such "totalitarian behaviour". I find myself still agreeing with him. He also points out the PM shouldn’t put up with it either, but as we know, she tends to put up with everything, sack no one, hold no one accountable and when it comes to Mallard in particular, manages to turn a blind eye. What's the deal with her and Mallard? Does he have something on her? She seems so powerless around him. So Winston’s taking legal advice, and knowing how litigious he is, this may cause pause for thought on Mallard’s part. Has he been too hasty here? Is it going to cost him a fortune in a legal drama?  Whose money will he use to fight that drama if and when it does unfold? How much of a headache does that give the Government? How many bad headlines do they want? Crucially, I think Mallard has to ask himself, why does he behave this way? Why is he so driven by anger? Is he spending too  much time on Twitter? Because I can tell you from out here in the real world, his antics are going down like a cup of cold sick. And the one thing Winston is good at – and remember I’m no Winston fan – but the one thing he is good at, is zeroing in on stuff the public hates. He’s got a good sense of this stuff. David Seymour’s called Mallard ‘petulant’ and says it’ll wind up in court, it’s petty and gets us nowhere (again). Luxon has been more diplomatic and said it’s a matter for the Speaker, in fact he echoed the PM who said the same thing. Which brings me to my next question, why is Luxon being so soft? Opposition is where you land the big hits and be bold. “A matter for the Speaker” sounds like a pass on a really simple question. But then again the Nats don’t have a lot of love for Winston so they probably don’t care. But power hungry, plot-losing Mallard is a worry.. and what’s also a worry, is that I’m now agreeing with Winston Peters. Tue, 03 May 2022 19:18:24 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-wealth-tax-chat-is-a-fishing-expedition-for-govt/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-wealth-tax-chat-is-a-fishing-expedition-for-govt/ So do we have a big backflip from the PM coming? The Heralds Political Editor Claire Trevett reminded us all yesterday of Ardern’s words regarding a wealth tax during the 2020 election campaign, remember that? It seems not even the PM recalled what she'd said, given she’s now saying something different.   So back in 2020, as Claire reminds us, Ardern not only ruled out a wealth tax - but said she would not allow it to happen while she was PM. Not on her watch, not happening. She was definitive.   Fast forward to yesterday morning when she was asked again - is a wealth tax coming? Well now, now she’s not so sure.   But by yesterday afternoon when asked again, she was back to, "not this term." So does that mean we can expect a wealth tax as part of the 2023 campaign? She certainly didn’t rule it out. She said Labour was “yet to form its tax policy for 2023” which sounds a lot like fudging the answer. But at the moment, on top of David Parker snooping into the IRD info on what taxes the country’s wealthiest are paying, he's also proposed a new Tax Principles Act. In other words, he is looking at how tax policies are assessed and whether that could be changed. The Government says it wants to know if it’s “fair.” They’re talking up the fairness aspect of it a lot.  And here’s what I find ironic about that, how fair is it to be definitive on something during an election campaign when it suits you, and then backflip when it doesn’t? And it’s not even that there’s an obvious backflip and something tangible we can hang our hat on. This is just a dodging of a question that suddenly doesn't suit them anymore. It’s potentially a fishing expedition on two fronts. One, suss what the wealthy are indeed paying in tax, that’s the obvious up front part of this sham, but two, suss the reaction. What is the public making of this conversation? How’s it playing out? What are the focus groups saying? They’ll be gauging it, just as they'll be courting the Greens, who they'll have figured out by now they're going to need next year if they want to be in government again.  All of this though takes us back to the same place, which is the disingenuousness of all this. Rule something out, and then don't rule it out. Strong leadership is actually about clear decisive communication and goal posts that don't shift. When you start shifting the goalposts, but at the same time pretending you’re not shifting them at all, you’re just creating mistrust. And you’re deluding yourself that people will be so bamboozled by your smoke and mirrors that they won't question it.  That’s not living up to your promised mantra, which was to be the most open honest and transparent government ever. I would have thought by now, especially given what’s happening in the polls, that the Labour party would be a tad more savvy with people, and a tad less waffly. Mon, 02 May 2022 19:14:26 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-shocker-of-a-week-for-the-government/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-shocker-of-a-week-for-the-government/ Not a great week for the government this week. The vaccination rollout’s been called a shambles, with potentially worse to come. Minister Chris Hipkins is saying he's nervous about how it’s going to go, supply is an issue, lots of excuses of course, but the upshot is, even what they’re currently rolling out is a mess. Just ask the 81 year old who was turned away, having booked an appointment and waited half an hour only to be told, no jab today sorry love. She was one of many in the same boat. Nurses, already feeling undervalued and over worked, have been kicked in the teeth this week by the government; they’re now looking at striking. Unions are at odds over whether the government’s public sector pay freeze is indeed a freeze or not. The CTU has swallowed the government’s line that it’s not a freeze, but the Utu Union hasn’t. Matt McCarten told me yesterday if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, so he’s calling it for the spin he thinks it is. Either way you slice it, the messaging has been a mess and the government’s attempts to hose it down even messier. Then, there’s Ashley Bloomfield having to apologise to Health Minister Andrew Little over ‘misleading’ him by providing incorrect information in the heavily redacted Mental Health report. The Ministry of Health removed key information from the report, claiming it was trying to ‘modernise’ how the data was presented. Turns out, seven relevant pieces of information were missing, oops. Mental Health Foundation’s Shaun Robinson said at the time that the missing information was either “a cock up or a conspiracy, but either way it didn’t look good.” So, Bloomfield had to apologise to Little who then had to apologise to the public, saying, ironically, that transparency is very important to him. And that’s all before we get to the He Puapua report. For the most open honest transparent government, things haven’t been looking too transparent of late. The pulpit of ‘truth’ is proving a stretch, are they being ‘too definitive?’ The big question is, will any of this, buried mid election cycle, resonate and register with voters? Do they care? Or will a nice wedding in Gisborne over summer, splashed no doubt all over media, push voters further in love with the PM and her government? Will all be forgiven? Are we that shallow? I wouldn’t be surprised. The polls will tell the story but so far, the failure to deliver, the lack of transparency, the back tracking on promises, and the blow to the public sector, may all be swept under the carpet. The captive and devoted audience may still be, A) asleep at the wheel, or B) don’t care. National, if they’re smart, will spend less time releasing personal memoirs and debating the leadership, and more time making the party look fit to govern. Two and half years to go, clock’s ticking. Wed, 12 May 2021 23:16:43 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-when-did-we-get-so-grumpy-at-the-supermarket/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-when-did-we-get-so-grumpy-at-the-supermarket/ I took my life into my hands yesterday, and went to the supermarket. And as I looked around at the supermarket workers slaving away in there probably on minimum wage, I thought, who’d take on this job these days? Undervalued, probably over worked, and now, allegedly risking their lives. I mean who expects that when you sign up for a supermarket job? And it’s not the supermarkets fault, the supermarkets seem well oiled machines, there are good people working in them doing their best to look after their staff, but the nature of the beast appears to be that supermarket workers are just targets for abuse from the public. Verbally, physically, and now even stabbing victims. So, they’re looking at body cameras for Countdown workers now. I mean what is the world coming to? According to one report, General Manager of safety at Countdown Kiri Hannifan, said “the abuse Countdown staff across the country receive on a daily basis keeps her up at night.” She said they have assaults against their team members every day and “it's got significantly worse since the level 4 lockdown last year,” where she said they “saw a 600 percent increase in violence towards staff.” And these aren’t just a few grumpy customers having a go about where to find the peanut butter, this is serious abuse. “Threats to kill, threats of abuse,” she says, it’s "absolutely gut-wrenching and very painful.” Can you imagine how worrying that is for staff and their families and their managers? Countdown has been working with police for the last two years on how to improve safety, and now body cameras are being looked at. They’re already being trialled in Australia to good success, given they record verbal abuse and catch some of the incidents on camera, it’s deterring assaults and de-escalating conflict. But can you believe we are actually talking about this here in New Zealand? Body cameras on Countdown staff? They don’t get paid danger money, they didn’t sign up to work in a prison or be on some kind of dangerous front line, they’re just processing groceries and stacking shelves. So, how are they the targets of so much abuse? Countdown’s Kiri Hannifan wants to remind the public that these people have families, that they’re valued members of society and don’t deserve this level of abuse. But it beggars belief she even has to say that, to remind us that they’re real people? What’s wrong with us if we think supermarket staff are just punching bags? Let’s hope this awful Dunedin incident was indeed just a random one-off attack and that supermarket staff don’t have to be paranoid about crime unfolding during their shift. Because we seriously have to question what on earth is wrong with us, if we think supermarket workers are somehow less valuable people than anyone else. Wed, 12 May 2021 00:44:30 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-is-it-really-a-bad-thing-that-more-teens-are-online/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-is-it-really-a-bad-thing-that-more-teens-are-online/ I found a report from the OECD's Programme for International Student Assessment interesting. It showed 15 year olds in this country “spend more time on the net than their peers in all countries except Denmark, Sweden and Chile.” That’s quite something. In terms of timeframe, it’s about 42 hours a week online. That’s “well above the OECD average of 35 hours a week and one of the biggest increases of the 79 nations in the study”. That may come as a shock to many – but probably not if you’re currently parenting teenagers. This is the digital generation, they have no concept of life without Google or Instagram. They're handed phones and iPads at younger and younger ages, they're skilled users of the net, more so than their parents and grandparents who didn’t get to grow up with it. But when we hear stats like this, do we immediately associate it with being bad? All that time online, terrible, they’re not living in the real world, what are they doing, what a waste of time. We blame a lot of stuff on devices. But, as the experts will tell you, it’s less about time spent online, and more about what they’re actually doing there. If they’re watching YouTube tutorials on the periodic table, is that really all that bad? What if they’re online reading and learning? But we tend to associate teens time spent online with all the bad stuff, sitting on social media or watching mindless vloggers. But what I’m discovering as our kids get older is that they’re actually more discerning about what they watch online. They find the learning aspects more helpful than the entertainment or social media bits. In fact, there’s a trend towards less social media these days – kids are sick of the anxiety-producing nature of it, the falseness of it, they find it too time consuming, too negative, often too toxic. And they’re vetting that stuff for themselves.  They’re deleting their social media, there’s even been a movement back to flip phones – ones where you just get to call or text and that’s it. They don’t have the time or inclination for emojis and mindless scrolling anymore, they’re sick of it. Maybe that’s why Facebook is the domain of older people these days So the big question with stats like this is, are these large numbers of hours online productive or not? Well the report also showed, “NZ was one of just five countries where use of digital devices at school was associated with better performance in reading.”  So are devices in fact proving more of a help than a hindrance? If this is the case, maybe we should we get off kids backs about time spent online, and instead look at the benefits they may be getting from it. Tue, 11 May 2021 00:04:33 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-australia-pipped-us-to-the-post-on-seasonal-workers/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-australia-pipped-us-to-the-post-on-seasonal-workers/ It’s extremely sad to see the demise of strawberry growing at Perry’s Berrys in Auckland. It’s not like we didn’t see this coming. It’s not like the horticulture industry hasn’t been crying out for pickers for months and asking the government to help out. But with so many months of their pleas falling on deaf ears, and so little help offered, what choice do some growers have but to shut up shop? Australia pipped us at the post here of course – they let in seasonal workers from the Pacific, put special plans in place to make it happen, they made sure their horticulture industry didn’t get hung out to dry. All while we seemed happy to let fruit rot on the ground. I remember interviewing growers late last year on this; they were forecasting the inevitable doom ahead, and begging the government to step in. I asked what they’d heard back from the government in terms of any relief coming their way. They’d heard nothing. The government hadn’t even gotten back to them, so you can imagine how that felt for them. I notice Horticulture NZ, who’ve been agitating for months on this, is again asking the government to allow quarantine-free travel for workers from Covid-free Pacific Island countries. They’re saying, according to one report, that ‘business will die otherwise’. The government let in 2,000 workers at the end of last year, but that was a drop in the ocean, the industry says it needs more like 10,000 seasonal workers. The stress these businesses must be under, trying to keep themselves afloat, all the while doing it with zero assistance and a limited workforce, must be super frustrating when the solutions are obvious and right in front of you. When the problem can easily be solved. And when you’ve been extremely vocal about that problem – and its solutions – for months on end. It must be how a lot of tourism businesses are feeling currently. Cast adrift without much hope of a life raft. Hopefully that’s all changing soon – hopefully we’ll be getting a trans-Tasman bubble opening shortly.  Fingers crossed there’ll be an announcement today, if not at some stage this week. And once that happens, I get the feeling cooped up Kiwis will head across the ditch in their drove, but I just hope Australians come here in their droves too. God knows we need them. We need business as usual, we need foot traffic, full hotels and motels, we need seasonal workers, we need international students. We need all the things that make an economy tick, and we need them desperately. Let’s hope today’s the day we get the green light on getting that trans-Tasman love flowing. Sun, 21 Mar 2021 22:15:53 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-study-shows-cannabis-legalisation-leads-to-increase-youth-use/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-study-shows-cannabis-legalisation-leads-to-increase-youth-use/ Imagine my surprise when (a) a new study published by the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs found cannabis legalisation leads to increased youth use, and (b) that the media didn’t report it. It’s justification that NZ made the right decision in voting No. It also flies in the face of what the Yes camp were saying – which was that legalising cannabis would not lead to any increase in use. This new study looked at more than 3 million High Schoolers aged between 12 to 16.. and ‘found significant increases in lifetime and past-month marijuana use among almost all demographics’. “Of concern was relatively greater increases in the prevalence of cannabis use among younger adolescents...” the study said. So the age old theory of you are what you are surrounded by, rings true here doesn’t it? Isn’t environment everything? Don’t kids born into the normalisation of drugs and alcohol usually grow up going the same way? So why then would pro- cannabis legalisation advocates think that by normalising marijuana use, we do anything other than make it more available, attractive and normal? Researchers in this study warned that… ‘the greater increases in these normally low-risk groups may be attributed to marijuana use becoming more normative due to legalisation.’ Not only that, mental health stats worsened. Which is exactly what the vote No proponents said would happen. US data from a National Survey on Drug Use and Health, found ‘significant increases in youth cannabis use in recently legalised marijuana states’.. and that at the same time, ‘mental illness indicators worsened across the country, while alcohol, cocaine, and tobacco use dropped.’ Staunch advocates of the no-vote to the legalisation referendum here say this data.. ‘should put to rest the wild claims by drug advocates in New Zealand that somehow – and miraculously - youth use of drugs is going to decline if we legalise cannabis. It is evident to everyone with both eyes open that New Zealand dodged a bullet by voting no in the recent referendum,’ that’s according to Family First’s Bob McCoskrie. Will we see this reported here in NZ? No of course not, it doesn’t fit the pro-cannabis agenda so prevalent here in mainstream media. Which is a shame, because when facts are presented as data, they deserve to be reported, not ignored. The good news – and there is good news for us given we haven’t gone down the legalisation track... is that here in New Zealand, ‘teen use (of cannabis) is dropping. In 2019, only 23 per cent of high school students reported having ever used marijuana in their lifetime, dropping from 38 per cent in 2001.’ That’s according to the Youth19 Rangatahi Smart Survey Substances report. So we did the right thing by our young people, even if the media choose to ignore the facts on that. Wed, 17 Feb 2021 19:02:07 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-lets-hope-a-three-day-lockdown-is-all-it-is/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-lets-hope-a-three-day-lockdown-is-all-it-is/ As I drove into work this morning, there it was flashing up in lights on the motorway, the familiar sign. 'Wash your hands', it said, and 'be kind'. Here we go again. Didn't we have a sense of foreboding as we saw in the New Year that 2021 may just not be as lockdown and trouble free as we may have liked? But to be honest, I didn't see this one coming. It was very short notice for everyone. Schools, not sure how many of those are set up to get online learning up and running so fast. Businesses who have to roster staff at home or off, and potentially get online quick sticks, and those who have to shut up shop entirely: hairdressers, dentists, nail salons. Ironically over the next 3 days I had all three of those booked. Always the way isn't it? The one week you have the dentist and the hairdresser: boom, lockdown. But it's all very sudden. I had a bet with my husband last night - when we heard the PM was giving an emergency press conference at 7pm off the back of a cabinet meeting - I said nope, she won’t do it. She wouldn’t dream of locking us down again, there’s no appetite for it, she won’t get buy in, it’s too much, she’ll just want to front up and say some reassuring things and assure us all we will all be fine if we just be kind, and that we'll keep an eye on it, and we should just keep washing our hands. My husband said I was dreaming. He said I had not read the room and I was out to lunch. He said if I hadn’t worked out by now how trigger happy the PM is on lockdowns then I’ve been living under a rock. But I was optimistic. I was hopeful. I thought maybe a casual level 2 upgrade and some friendly mask and hand washing chat. But I was wrong. I lost $50. I hate it when he’s right. He was smug. As soon as the TV cameras showed her walking into the room he said “I win”. He reckons he could see it on her face. I did actually text my parents prior to the 7PM announcement and ask if they had groceries in, and if not to go get some just in case. I also frantically texted my hairdresser to rebook me - look, priorities. So we are back to the 1 PM updates, back to counting cases and genomic sequencing, back to queues at the supermarket and everyone walking the dog round the block 10 times. Look at least it’s short. Three days is manageable - my great hope is it doesn’t drag on longer than that. that the contact tracing and the tracking works at lightning speed. We know what to do, we've been here before, let’s hope it is just the 3 days, let’s hope it’s not spread any further, let’s hope it is indeed a short and sharp lockdown and we will be back to normal by Thursday. Sun, 14 Feb 2021 22:47:16 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-we-need-purpose-built-quarantine-facilities/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-we-need-purpose-built-quarantine-facilities/ If we're thinking about opening up a trans-Tasman travel bubble and the signs are we're getting close, do we also need to be re-thinking the way we handle quarantine? One of our top public health academics thinks we do. University of Otago's Nick Wilson thinks we need purpose-built facilities, if we want to be sure not to have another large outbreak. He says the Government should stop using hotels to quarantine those who test positive. Instead, we should be thinking about purpose-built quarantine facilities in places like the Ōhakea Airbase. What he's saying makes even more sense in light of the fright we've had, with all those new cases from one plane yesterday. And the security lapses and escapes we've seen in hotels...which were never built to be used in the way they are now. Hotel quarantine and isolation is at best a short-term stop gap. Ask yourself this, back at the beginning of the year when this whole thing blew up...how long did you think it would last? A couple of months...six maybe, at the outside? So in a year, or maybe two years from now...is it feasible, let alone affordable, to be using hotels, with all their imperfections and of course the high cost...as our front line of defence? Of course it isn't. As Professor Wilson says...to keep the virus out long-term, we need to be thinking differently. Health authorities, he says, should be doing serious work to lower the risks...negative tests before people fly. This should apply especially to countries where COVID is not under control...specifically...the US, the UK, and India. The current government doesn't seem to like this much, but National has said it would impose a negative requirement on inbound passengers. I think the guts of this is...we're in a new reality now. We've been lucky and successful in our emergency response, but we need to stop treating this as just a blip, and hoping things will be normal soon. The world has changed...our defences need to change too. Thu, 01 Oct 2020 21:47:24 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-this-mt-roskill-mini-cluster-is-so-frustrating/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-this-mt-roskill-mini-cluster-is-so-frustrating/ The big story this week, for Aucklanders especially, has been the Mt Roskill mini cluster. It’s annoying because we’ve worked so hard and sacrificed so much and followed so many rules, that to think Level 2 could now be prolonged due to people taking the law into their own hands, is infuriating. Someone emailed me yesterday saying they’d lost their mother 4 days ago and they had 2 sisters with families who’re all still in quarantine with 8 days to go, so they never got to see her before she passed away. It’s a familiar story, we’ve been hearing from families in situations like this for months. It is heartbreaking for people like this, who’ve religiously followed the rules.. even ones which have dramatic impacts on their lives, to hear stories of others who’ve been more cavalier or careless. There is no point traversing the faith over science argument, or the God will protect us argument, because we don’t really know the full extent of what’s actually happened here, and if that was the intent or belief. Regardless though, the Church has come in for a lot of flak. But what about the Police? If they were called back in August to shut down these secret prayer meetings during Level 3 restrictions, why didn't they get tougher than just a few warnings? Why didn't they go hard and go early when they had the chance? Why risk letting it spiral even further?   There are those who’re defending the Churchgoers, saying they’re good hard working people who didn’t deliberately set out to do the wrong thing. That they’re not anarchists who were actively working against the law. But at the end of the day, whether they’re nice people or not, doesn’t really matter. What matters is that everybody follows the rules. The point of a strategic response to managing Covid is that we’re all on the same page, and by and large Kiwis are an extremely compliant bunch. We’ve seen that with the lockdowns and the support of the lockdowns, New Zealanders don’t appear to mind being told what to do and when to do it. They seem to accept this is bigger than just the individual, and if we all need to do something, then we all need to do it. Which is why this has been so irritating for so many people. Nobody wants to be let down, nobody wants to have their sacrifice and hard work made a mockery of. And most of all, no one wants this Level 2 extended a second longer than it needs to be. After Monday’s cabinet meeting we’ll hear our fate – whether we’re going to move down alert levels or not. If we do, we’ll be in Level 1 by midnight Wednesday of next week, fingers crossed. If we don’t, I think there’re going to be some very grumpy members of our already splintered team of 5 million.   Thu, 10 Sept 2020 21:58:19 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-whats-driving-push-for-diverse-entertainment-industry/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-whats-driving-push-for-diverse-entertainment-industry/ A lot of things have come to a grinding halt in 2020. Air travel, overseas holidays, many weddings and funerals, and yesterday the shocking news that The Kardashians will be no more. Well, they’ll still exist, just not on their TV show Keeping up with the Kardashians which has been airing the ins and outs of their daily lives for almost 14 years. I have to admit I don’t watch it, so I can’t profess to being someone who’ll miss it, but it did make me ponder what’s happened to the cult of celebrity and pop culture this year. Remember E 九一星空无限 got canned this year too. It seems as the world gave us all a giant slap in the face and got serious in the form of a global pandemic, the appetite for shallow trivia dissipated. We even looked down the barrel of the queen of the light entertainment, Ellen, getting ‘cancelled’ as her show lurched from crisis to crisis with never-ending stories about poor treatment of her staff. People seemed to be waking up all of a sudden and saying enough is enough. Even the Oscars is not immune. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences now says ‘in order to be eligible to win Best Picture 2024, a movie will have to pass a strict set of diversity rules.’ So all the goalposts are shifting. People are demanding more and better. The benchmarks are getting higher. Representation and inclusion is moving to the forefront, ‘pop culture vultures’ as the Kardashians have been described, are less enticing and palatable. The Academy, for example, wants films eligible for Best Picture to meet two of four new standards, one of which is to ‘include people from under-represented racial and ethnic groups, genders, ethnicities, sexual orientations or disability groups’ If you thought the Oscars was liberal already, it just went next level.  It'll be hoping to avoid any future controversies like the hashtag in 2015 of #OscarsSoWhite. But it makes you wonder, what’s the driver behind all of this? What’s the motivation? Is this shift to inclusion and diversity for the right reasons? Is it because it’s the right thing to do, and it’s time? Or is it because certain industries have been ‘got to’ by the active and very vocal woke,  and they’re running scared or trying to avoid any potential backlash? In the Academy’s case, they claim it’s about making long lasting and essential change. So does that have a trickle-down effect?  Who’s reflecting who?  Are industry moves like this merely reflecting society?  Or is the entertainment industry trying to be the beacon for how society should follow? Is it woke? Or is it just the gradual evolution of humanity? Wed, 09 Sept 2020 22:31:58 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-why-are-women-targeted-more-than-men-on-social-media/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-why-are-women-targeted-more-than-men-on-social-media/ COMMENT Toxicity online is not new – sadly, and yesterday's interview with a creative technologist on the level of abuse female politicians cop online - as opposed to men - proved that. It's so bad a tech company has set up a Twitter bot that uses artificial intelligence to seek out hateful tweets and post positive ones in response. It's an attempt to try to balance out the toxicity online. Disturbingly, toxic Twitter is not unique to New Zealand and is a global trend but the bot found New Zealand Twitter really is next level nasty. So why is that? Is Twitter too politicised? Has it become the weapon of choice for the bored and negative who are desperate for an outlet? Online abuse is so pervasive these days. I see the line judge hit in the throat by Novak Djokovic's stray tennis ball is getting abused online after she was named by Serbian media. It was reported that the "worst of the abuse included mocking her for the death of her son". Now if that's not the lowest of the low I don't know what is. So what makes people so sure of themselves online, so arrogant to assume that such nastiness on a keyboard is acceptable? People seem to say far worse things anonymously or online than they ever would to your face. National MP Nicola Willis pointed out yesterday that the people sending hateful tweets have their own issues. She said it's unfortunate there's a market for hate, just as there's a market for lovely affirmations. "It's up to us to put our big girl pants on and keep marching on", she said. That's easier said than done for many, you have to pretty thick-skinned. But are women targeted more than men? One could argue that no one is the focus of more online hate than US President Donald Trump. So maybe it's a politicians' thing? To put your head above the parapet and take a political stance is potentially "asking for it" maybe? There are those who will come at you because they hate what you're saying; those who will come at you because they hate the way you said it; and then, inevitably, those who just want you cancelled no matter what you say. None of this can really be taken personally, it's the haters projecting their own issues. But I know on 九一星空无限talk ZB there are many strong opinions expressed, and often times it's the women expressing them who're more personally targeted than the men. So who's doing the trolling? Is it women looking to take down other women? Is it men aggrieved that a woman has a job that enables her to express an opinion? Is it just bored people with too much time on their hands? Either way, it's a sad indictment on our modern digital world that so much of what was established online to be about community, has instead become about hate. Tue, 08 Sept 2020 21:57:37 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-in-an-economic-crisis-labour-announces-a-public-holiday/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-in-an-economic-crisis-labour-announces-a-public-holiday/ It was a great, if not welcome and blessed relief, to finally see some policy released by Labour yesterday. Not before time. But what a contrast. While National was releasing policy on a plan to tackle the country's methamphetamine problem, Labour was offering up another holiday. Labour says a Matariki public holiday is long overdue. Tell you what, so is a Covid recovery plan. The idea is basically a sop to win Maori votes, Labour's worried about the Maori vote and Maori seats, hence the politicisation of Matariki. But though TV reporters travelling with the PM got carried away and excitedly announced this to be a vote winner, it's landed with a thud in business circles. Guess who pays for this? Employers. The same employers already paying for the extra leave entitlements already introduced by this government. Deputy PM Winston Peters isn't  fan, he says this country needs more work and sacrifice, not more holidays. The Employer and Manufacturers Union warns it’s another costs for businesses.. already struggling to recover from lockdowns and level changes. It says the Government’s priority should be fixing the Holidays Act. Act’s David Seymour says if Labour wants Matariki to be a public holiday, it should abolish Labour Day so businesses aren’t taking on more costs. Seymour actually accused the PM of being “in la-la land”, and asked whether she even knew there was an economic crisis going on or not. He said New Zealanders.. “don’t need another day off, what they need is for Jacinda Ardern to take 3 years off. He points out there are 70,000 people on welfare, we're facing down mountains of debt for future generations, businesses are struggling to survive, and Labour’s answer is a new public holiday.” National says it's tone deaf. The country is facing an economic crisis like never before, and Labour's first policy announcement is another holiday. The upshot of this is, other businesses are fundamentally being asked to prop up the tourism sector. They're the ones who'll benefit from this holiday. But we need more than just a sugar rush for one sector, in reality what we need is a booming economy again, people working and being productive and creating jobs. That'll essentially benefit everyone.   Tourism Minister Kelvin Davis reckons this extra public holiday will carry an estimated cost to the economy of 280 million dollars. This from a government whose also signalling an interest in handing out more sick leave. The message here from Labour so far, is.. more lollies, more time off, more holidays away from work, and the tab for all of that.. as usual.. will be picked up by employers. Is that really a vote winner? Mon, 07 Sept 2020 21:25:12 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-misinformation-around-cannabis-referendum-concerning/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-misinformation-around-cannabis-referendum-concerning/ COMMENT: Amidst the current blitz of pro-cannabis legalisation media (both social and mainstream) a few things are getting lost. One is balance. Where are the no-vote stories? Two, is the facts; no we are not voting on legalising medicinal cannabis . That’s already legal. The Drug foundation – pro the yes vote, has made claims that legalising recreational cannabis will make access to medicinal cannabis easier. That’s their claim, But it's not what we're voting on - yet it hasn’t stopped a lot of the messaging and advertising around the referendum being focussed on medicinal. Three, even the pro legalisation campaigners accept there are risks in normalising cannabis use. One 'yes-vote' columnist pointed out that “not all the facts support a rosy picture of life after a ‘yes’ vote..”  She pointed out that normalisation of cannabis use ‘won’t be good for everyone’ and that ‘..legalisation probably won’t wipe out the criminal market completely either’. Despite that, her premise was that no social and health issues are ‘tied up in tidy bows’.. in other words, it’s not perfect but let’s vote it in anyway. That's a worrying low bar approach to a potentially major public health issue for this country. The other dodgy part of the pro-lobby argument, is that it comes largely from adults advocating on the basis of their own experiences, arguing the case for people like them. An open letter by cannabis users claiming the 'stoner stigma' was unfair, was largely about their own experiences with cannabis and what legalisation would mean for them. A Southland Hospital anaesthetist, musician Tiki Taane, The Opportunities Party leader, Wellington Pride Festival Chair, and a drag performer, all said they enjoy cannabis and wanted to encourage “the thousands of adult New Zealanders who enjoy cannabis responsibly, to feel it’s normal and acceptable..” I’m not sure how many laws need to be passed for adult Kiwis to feel validated in their recreational pursuits. Do they really need a ‘yes’ vote just to make them feel better about their cannabis use? And finally the argument that decriminalisation will stop users being ‘locked up’ for using cannabis. Cannabis offences have only declined as time’s gone by. I doubt we often ‘lock people up’ just for cannabis use alone. The justice argument, the ‘it’s not fair’ argument, doesn’t cut it, especially when you balance what’s fair, with what the practical out workings and cost of legalisation to our already stressed public health system would be. It’s hard when much of the information in advance of this vote is skewed from one angle only - and muddied with a spurious medicinal message. But I hope the least we can do is think beyond ourselves.. and whether legalisation helps us feel ‘normal’ or not. The vote is actually far more serious than that. Mon, 07 Sept 2020 04:29:23 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-weve-put-the-issue-of-live-exports-on-hold-for-too-long/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-weve-put-the-issue-of-live-exports-on-hold-for-too-long/ Things aren't looking good for the remaining crew of the Gulf Livestock 1. Two New Zealanders in a crew of 43. And not good at all for nearly 6000 cattle...which, let's face it, wouldn't have stood a chance. The ship was off Japan and almost at its destination after nearly three weeks at sea. Three weeks...in a cage...on a ship rolling about in the Pacific. The reality is that transporting live animals by sea in cages stacked high up on each other...is pretty close to barbaric. We tolerate putting cows onto trucks because the journeys are by regulation short, and the rules around conditions on the truck, and the people who can be in this business are strict. There's a 50 page guide, covering everything from what they should and shouldn't eat before they travel, to the design of the space they're in, how they're loaded and a lot more. That same guide also applies to preparing animals for travel by sea, and managing them. But there's a hell of a difference between a few hours on a stock truck, and three weeks on the ocean. Many don't make it...stress and fatigue claims them on the way. For the cows on the Gulf Livestock 1...drowned in their cages with no hope of getting out...bloody awful. But it's not just the journey we need to think about. It's the conditions we're sending these animals to at the other end. Can they expect to live out their days in fresh green pasture...as they would here...or some grotty concrete pen in an unfamiliar climate and god knows what kind of handling. MPI has been looking at live exports on and off for a long time now...this disaster has brought a temporary halt...perhaps it'll be enough to end them, once and for all. Thu, 03 Sept 2020 22:07:13 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-should-people-on-the-benefit-be-made-to-do-voluntary-work/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-should-people-on-the-benefit-be-made-to-do-voluntary-work/ You've perhaps heard this idea doing the rounds for people on a benefit to be doing some kind of voluntary work. Putting something in at the time you're taking something out. And as a taxpayer and fortunate enough to be able to get by on my own, I'll admit that every now and again I get a bit irritated by the size of the welfare bill. But what you have to bear in mind is that there are two types of people on benefits. Those who can't get by without support from the system, they use it because they need it and most can't wait to get off. And there are those who've developed a lifestyle, those who've settled for sucking on society's tit, and doing bugger all for it. Now my instinct is that work-for-the-dole schemes and heck, why not volunteer for the dole could be a good thing, at least we'd be getting something for our money. Because at first sight you'd probably think, why not, surely people who are taking out of the system could, and arguably, should be putting something back in. Until you start thinking about the practicalities. Who runs these schemes, who decides how much work someone should do, what sanction is there when people don't show up, how do we stop work-for-the-dole undercutting what should be paid work? Fact is...if you've ever done anything voluntarily you've probably come across people who are on a benefit, and are already motivated to make use of their time. And guess what, they'd be in that first group I mentioned at the start, they'd be taking care of themselves if they could. As to the rest...well...we could waste a lot of energy trying to persuade them how good life is when you get out of bed in the morning. Or we could say stuff em. There's plenty of help out there for people who want to help themselves...I'd rather we focus on them. For the rest...at the end of the day...it's their loss. Wed, 02 Sept 2020 22:45:59 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-greens-will-be-hoping-supporters-have-short-memories/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-greens-will-be-hoping-supporters-have-short-memories/ COMMENT I guess the important thing we need to know now, or by October anyway, is how forgiving Green Party supporters are. Co-leader James Shaw - a politician I rate, by the way - seems to have lost his way and made a bizarre decision that he's now paying for. But will he still be paying for it by the time we head to the polls? He'll be hoping voters have short memories, but this mistake is huge, and it's not just the mistake, it's the lack of judgment attached to it, and crucially, the hypocrisy of it. How did they get something so big, so wrong? An amount of $11.7 million is not to be sniffed at. Throwing this money in the complete opposite direction to where traditionally a Green Party would throw it, has burned people and he knows it. He's finally fronted up and apologised. He's apologised for the error of judgment, he's apologised to Green party members, principals, teachers, unions -pretty much everyone. I think he's even apologetic for the backlash to the school itself, which has faced a battering of bad press since this story broke. The backlash has been particularly fierce from other schools in the region. An open letter to Education Minister Chris Hipkins from the Taranaki Principals' Association, asked for a full retraction of any fund or loan offer. The association said principals were united in their opposition to the funding, they didn't like how taxpayer funding had been "directed to individuals who will privately own the expanded asset and profit from the venture". Fair enough. Shaw said he'd canvassed his colleagues about withdrawing the funding, but the agreement had been made in good faith and so the decision had to be honoured. Anyone who wasn't voting Green anyway won't be concerned about any of this of course, but it's their own base and those swing voters the Greens will be worried about. Because based on current polling, the Greens don't have much wriggle room. They are just on the cusp of the 5 per cent threshold, they can't afford to lose any votes, they can't afford to turn off swing voters. And if you take into account the fact that history shows the party tends to over-poll and under deliver on election day, then they have every right to be genuinely concerned. And Shaw has acknowledged the risk that this error of judgment may well cost them. Which leads us back to Labour. If they get enough votes come election day to govern alone, that's all well and good, but they'll still want the Greens to perform, because either way they'll want to sew up a deal and have them on board. More crucially, if Labour don't get enough votes to govern alone, their only mechanism for survival is the Greens (given we can, probably at this point, write off NZ First). So a lot rides on the Greens doing well on election night, which is why Shaw will be praying their supporters have short memories. Tue, 01 Sept 2020 20:27:10 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-wheres-the-plan-for-the-next-covid-outbreak/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/tim-dower-wheres-the-plan-for-the-next-covid-outbreak/ COMMENT So here's a tricky question: what are we going to do if there's another Covid-19 flare-up? Listening to what people have been saying about the latest Auckland lockdown - and seeing how swiftly things are getting moving again - I suspect there's not much appetite for another one. Problem is, and we know this from the ongoing frailty of the border controls, it'll only be a matter of time before we have another Covid flare-up. The virus wasn't lurking out of sight for all that time, it's just not possible. Community transmission would have been rampant during the first "go hard, go early" phase. But it wasn't. Yet the virus still snuck through. And if that can happen once, it can happen again, even if we have plugged all the leaks in the system. The Government needs to be thinking about this now. Before it happens. Not just because we can't afford to go backwards again but because people are getting restless and grumpy. And there's a real danger the public will resist, if not outright defy, another lockdown call. Especially people outside the affected areas. Why should the South Island be suffering? There's no virus there. Why should Northland be effectively cut off from the rest of the country? No virus there, either. The Government isn't stupid. I suspect it senses it's looking fragile and vulnerable on this. It's political now, it knows that, and that's probably why it didn't dare push the restrictions out a few more days, although I'll bet it wanted to. What we need now is something less than the blunt instrument which has whacked every one of us around the head. People have had enough. We need to be more targeted. What's needed is a plan. Mon, 31 Aug 2020 21:49:29 Z /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-goodwill-fading-with-each-new-covid-19-blunder/ /on-air/early-edition-with-ryan-bridge/opinion/kate-hawkesby-goodwill-fading-with-each-new-covid-19-blunder/ Our excitement in Auckland to get down to level 2 may have been slightly thwarted at the weekend by the unnecessary panic caused by incorrect messaging around testing. The Government's official Unite Against Covid social media channels posted a message at 5pm on Saturday night, saying everyone in South and West Auckland had to get a Covid test – even if they were asymptomatic. Cue confusion and panic. Queues of people waiting for tests snaked round the block. And God only knows where the legitimately Covid symptomatic people ended up in those unnecessary queues. Because it turns out, there was no need to do that, the messaging about testing - affecting about 700 thousand people - was wrong. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said at 1pm Sunday afternoon that she was "incredibly angry" about it. But she didn't front foot it, she only reacted when asked about it. That's despite her knowing it was wrong since Sunday morning. So she might be angry, but we could well be too. How does such a huge mistake happen? And why did the Government not front up about it until Sunday afternoon? Why did the wrong message stay up all that time? Even after Ardern said it was wrong and shouldn't be there. The Government simply cannot afford to keep burning trust in their competence and their messaging. Is it any surprise conspiracy theories and fake news abound, when people don't believe what they're being told by the official channels, because those official channels keep getting it wrong? Who's running this show? How can you keep banging on about your team of 5 million following the rules, when the rules keep changing? You can't keep relying on people's goodwill, after you've locked them down, given them conflicting advice, and changed your mind on masks. And that's before we get to all the experts saying they're not sure moving to level 2 is the right idea anyway. The all important "buy-in" from people, is waning – people are rightfully confused about level rules, masks, and as of this past weekend, testing too. It's time the Government stopped reacting to problems, and started driving workable solutions. We're all doing our bit, let's hope the Government and its officials, start doing theirs. Sun, 30 Aug 2020 21:47:42 Z