Chris Hipkins On China Missile Test, Trump & NZ Politics — The Bradbury Group

[00:00:00] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:00:30] Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [00:01:30] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [00:01:36] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:01:36] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [00:01:40] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:01:40] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Wee. Coming up on this evening's show, the political panel all-stars tonight are Māori broadcaster and raconteur Matthew Tukaki and former New Zealand Herald columnist Dr. Matthew Hooten. Tonight's one-on-one intent is the leader of the Labour Party, Chris Hipkins, on the geopolitics of China, test firing a missile in the Pacific, New Zealand first purge of 700,000 voters, act empowering private security with nationals vigilante powers. And why hasn't Bishop Brian Tamaki been arrested? Our extra one-on-one intent tonight is environmental activist Mike Smith on the latest big polluter scandal details his new high court case and the political reality of El Nino peaking over New Zealand this year. Shout-out to Kiwiskirt and Kiwibird for moderating tonight's YouTube page. Good evening to all the Bradbury easters online watching right now. You make this show one of the most watched live podcasts in New Zealand and your comments will appear on screen as we go. Shout-out to our Watia, Facebook, Rover, Spotify, Apple Podcast and Sky TV whanau. Remember to like and subscribe because that's all that's holding the fourth estate together right now. And our Twitter panel this evening is Tim Selwyn. He'll be tweeting live online at Twitter #TheBradburyGroup. Before all that however is this week's War on News. Brothers and sisters, how on earth did Donald Trump manage to find the time from his illegal war in Iran and the most depressing 250th birthday party ever to get involved in the Soccer World World Cup? The hand of Trump, as it is now known, saw Trump boasting about interfering with a red card ruling on one of his own team players. Who else gets to boast about cheating other than Donald Trump? His speech at the 250th birthday of America swung from jingoistic neuroses to self-aggrandizing narcissism to feral intolerance the way your drunk uncle who subscribes to the platform does every Christmas. Trump's immaturity and his immorality however make him the perfect symbol of America. His bloated fake tan drenched in fast food sweat? There's America. His reckless use of the military industrial complex? His domestic agenda of extreme violence against protesters? His trampling of all things decent? There's America. His crass protection raggots and obscene corruption and grifting is America. His big beautiful bill gave the wealthiest a trillion dollar tax break while giving crumbs to the workers he pretends to stand with? That's so America. Trump is America and no one manages to sum up its 250 wretched years better than his foul mutation of every value America proclaims itself for. Trump's America is a United States of wounded masculinity. A plutocracy of the oligarchy, for the oligarchy and in the interests of the oligarchy. God defend America because Trump sure as Christ won't. Unless it's a crypto investment scam, then he'll be first in to save America. Moving on. Just when you thought the inane vigilante laws National are ramming through weren't bad enough, now ACT wants to paramilitarize private security forces in what vaguely looks like what one would call a proto militia. Think of ICE without the guns or the budget or the legal oversight. I can't believe an anti-police post-Marxist anarchist like me needs to spell this out to you all, but no one should be able to touch you other than a properly sworn in police officer. Allowing ZB vigilante dads to grab hold of anyone they suspect of shoplifting is a recipe for disaster. And the only way you could make that worse is by handing over to people, too thick to get into the cops in the first place, the legal power to physically detain someone. I'm not sure any of us would be safer allowing ACT to start the formation of private militia by giving security guards the power to detain you, physically overpower you, take down your details and conduct searches of your person. You can't be this collectively stupid to give the most right-wing party the DNA for private militia. Come on! It's a law to create brown shirts for Christ's sake. We don't need to paramilitarise security guards with proto-police powers. No one needs that. Put the militia down. Move slowly out of the room. And finally this week, you really have to question the double standards of political journalism in New Zealand. ACT have resurrected their Thanos small government doom plan where David Seymour snaps his fingers and makes half the functioning state disappear. Labour got attacked for their brilliant public transport fare cap costings. Yet the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand claims to amputate half of the entire state and there was zero media scrutiny. Want cheaper public transport costs for working people in the cities? And it's the Nuremberg trials. Brain fart out some ideological mutilation of the state with a libertarian revenge fantasy and it's suddenly crickets chirping. If we are just making up right-wing performance art, why not build a temple to Milton Friedman in Wellington where Jordan Williams sacrifices federated farmer lambs on the altar of free market capitalism as a public holiday only available for people worth over 5 million in assets? I mean if we're allowing make-believe ideas like cutting the state in half, why not go all in? When it's the left wanting to help people, it's wall-to-wall scathing analysis. When it's the right threatening to amputate half the state or disenfranchise 700,000 permanent resident voters. Not a whisper. The double standards at play are unbelievable. The political panel all-stars up shortly, Whānau, but first this week's 1 on 1 in 10 with Labour leader Chris Hipkins. Kia ora comrade. Kia ora comrade. Welcome to the show and thank you for being available to the fourth estate. Your democracy is grateful. [00:08:26] Speaker 3: Kia ora bomber. Always fun to talk to you. [00:08:29] Speaker 2: Thank you comrade. Chip, our Chinese economic overlords are angry that Australia and Fiji signed a treaty acknowledging they would protect each other's interests. Why should China get to react to two South Pacific nations deciding to protect each other's interests with such a militaristic display? And seeing as we are so beholden to China economically, can we afford to have a spine? [00:08:54] Speaker 3: Well I think the Australia-Fiji deal actually makes sense. It's about preserving peace in the Pacific Ocean. Yes. You know, we want the Pacific Ocean to be a zone of peace. And I think it's a pretty clear statement that Australia and Fiji will work together to defend that. I think that's something that New Zealand should sign up to as well. Totally. We don't want to see military escalation in the Pacific. Yeah. [00:09:18] Speaker 2: While China is flexing its muscles, America's new ambassador wants nuclear ships into New Zealand. Why would we want to be one inch closer to Donald Trump's America after what we've seen in Iran? [00:09:31] Speaker 3: Well, you know, New Zealand went nuclear-free when the rest of the world said that we couldn't. We did it anyway and it's actually been very, very good for New Zealand. There's no need to revisit that. Nuclear-free New Zealand is who we are. It's now in our DNA. We're proud of it. We're recognised and respected around the world for it. We should stay that way. And no emissary of Donald Trump can come in here and try and tell us what to do. [00:09:54] Speaker 2: Do you trust National to actually protect our nuclear-free status? Do you trust them? [00:10:01] Speaker 3: Look, National's track record on nuclear-free is all over the place. From Don Brash's Gone By Lunchtime. One of your guests on the show tonight might have a few views on that. I think he was around at the time. I think Matthew was, yeah. From Gone By Lunchtime through to the fact that they opposed nuclear-free when it was first introduced. You never know where the National Party will land on it. [00:10:22] Speaker 2: That sound I hear as David Lange turning in his grave isn't the reality that if we want Wellington to make decisions for New Zealand, not for Washington or Beijing, that we must invest more into our military if we want a truly independent foreign policy. There's a price that has to be paid for that, isn't there? [00:10:41] Speaker 3: Well look, we need a military, a defence force that's appropriate for New Zealand. So if we look at what we ask our defence force to do, obviously it's not just about defence. It's also about disaster recovery and response. Yes. It's about delivering aid in the Pacific and so on. And there's no question that some of the kit that they're working with does need upgrading, does need to be replaced. We saw during Cyclone Gabrielle that they were stretched to the point where they actually did need more resource and we ended up borrowing extra support from Australia. So there's a case to be made for that. But there isn't a case for us to spend more money on defence just for the sake of it or just because Donald Trump tells us to. [00:11:19] Speaker 2: New Zealand First unbelievably wants to purge, and we've done the numbers, 700,000 permanent residents of the right to vote. Permanent residents who have spent a life building lives here while paying tax. One of the sacred values of democracy is no taxation without representation. Can the New Zealand Labour Party tonight tell those 700,000 permanent residents that you will not allow their right to vote to be extinguished by Winston's latest anti-migrant bashing? [00:11:54] Speaker 3: I can categorically tell those 700,000 permanent residents in New Zealand that their right to vote will be protected by Labour, but I can also tell them that at this election their vote matters more than it ever has before. Because if this government's re-elected, it may be the last vote they get to cast in New Zealand. So if they don't want that to happen, then they cannot vote for any of the three parties that make up this government because their vote, we saw what happened last election when Christopher Luxon basically gave the small parties whatever they asked for. Winston Peter sits down after the election says to Christopher Luxon, right bottom line for New Zealand First is all those migrants aren't going to get the vote. But we just know what the National Party will do. They'll roll over and they'll say oh yeah, okay then. [00:12:36] Speaker 2: Talking of anti-migrant bashing, Bishop Brian Tamaki recently urged his angry followers to purge Muslim, Sikh and Hindu Kiwis from New Zealand and to burn down their mosques and temples. This isn't a free speech issue. He's inciting his followers to violence. Followers who already have a track record using violence against librarians for Drag Queen Storytime. Why hasn't he been arrested? If I told people watching this show to go out and firebomb National Party electoral officers, how quickly would the cops be on my doorstep? [00:13:15] Speaker 3: Well, Brian Tamaki is an absolute thug and I don't want to give him any more publicity than he's already getting at the moment. But I do want to acknowledge our Indian community who have been subject to a whole lot of outright racism over the last few months. Some of the debate around the India Free Trade Agreement stoked up by ministers in the current government has led to absolute overt racism towards Indian New Zealanders in a way that's just totally unacceptable. And I think it's an indictment on Christopher Lux's leadership that while his own ministers have been out there stoking that up, he's had nothing to say about that. [00:13:49] Speaker 2: Look, I'm an atheist Marxist. I don't believe in a magical invisible flying wizard. But this is a liberal progressive democracy. We believe in freedom of religion. You have every right as a member of our society to believe in whatever you want. But Brian Tamaki is calling on his followers to burn down temples and mosques as if Muslims, Hindus or Sikhs somehow weren't our brothers and sisters and neighbours. They are New Zealanders who have every right to practice their faith. Are you as a political leader concerned with the scapegoating of minorities this election? [00:14:29] Speaker 3: The government has built itself on scapegoating minorities, attacking Māori, attacking migrant New Zealanders, attacking members of the rainbow community. It's not just the same for minorities either. There's more women than men in New Zealand, and they still managed to find a way of attacking women with the reversal of pay equity. This is a government that's just interested in creating wedges everywhere they go, carving out vote shares rather than governing, as they should, in the interests of everybody. [00:14:58] Speaker 2: It's not the migrant workers' fault that governments haven't prepared the infrastructure for the extra numbers of people. They're just trying to eke out a living, and yet we have a government who won't look at their own policies in terms of why we're not getting the economic traction, and they're more prepared to blame the other. I mean, I've never seen anything as brutal and blunt in my 31 years of covering politics. Have you? [00:15:29] Speaker 3: Well, the absolute attacks on the migrant community are absolutely disgraceful. And I'll tell you what, Winston Peters used to talk about, he used to claim to represent older New Zealanders. Well, go and visit any rest home in New Zealand, and they'll tell you how important migrant workers are to the care of our elderly people. Now, of course, Winston Peters doesn't care about elderly people anymore. He's decided that the conspiracy theorists are a better voting stomping ground for him. But actually, if you care about elderly New Zealanders, you've got to recognise that there's large parts of our economy, including the aged care industry, that rely on migrant workers. They do amazing work, and they deserve to be valued and respected for what they contribute. [00:16:05] Speaker 2: Amen. Finally, Comrade, if top cross 5%, can you work with Kool-Aid? [00:16:10] Speaker 3: Well, look, I haven't really had much to do with top. They've got some interesting ideas. There's clearly some that would be sort of out of the question for us. Sure. But let's just see how things unfold over the next few months. [00:16:22] Speaker 2: Thank you, Chris, for your insight and oversight. We will talk with you again next month. You're always a joy. Thank you, Comrade. Thanks, Bomar. The political panel all-stars up shortly, Whāna, but now this week's extra one on one and ten with environmental activist Mike Smith on the latest big polluter scandal details his new High Court case and the political reality of El Nino peaking over New Zealand this year. Kia ora, Comrade. Welcome to the show and thank you for being available to the Fourth Estate. Your democracy is grateful. [00:16:55] Speaker 4: Kia ora, Bomars. Thanks for having us on your show again. Mike, thank you. So the latest is the government's introduced a bill, as you would have heard, to stop our case from being heard, even though the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that it should go to trial. So they've intervened under urgency, as you mentioned before. The bill is now before the Justice Committee and public submissions are open until 9am on the 13th of July, which is six days away. [00:17:27] Speaker 2: Since you were last... So on a matter of... Yep. Go ahead. Since you were last on, we've had the Ombudsman report back heavily criticising the Prime Minister's office for the use of private emails that have sidestepped any transparency and you have relaunched High Court action. On what grounds have you launched that legal challenge? [00:17:47] Speaker 4: So, yeah, we filed a judicial review, which just calls into question whether or not the processes the government have been using are within the scope of the law. So we're going to have that reviewed. And while we're waiting for the outcomes of several other inquiries around the government's handling of my case to date. So, but what I'd like to say to you listeners is that the issue is now shifted from the courtroom to Parliament and the real question is, what are we going to do to remove this current government, I believe? I've had meetings with the Labor shadow cabinet and got undertaking from them that they will amend and repeal any amendments to the Climate Response Act that this government pushes through under urgency. And so the question, so that gives us real hope and I'd like to thank the Labor Party, particularly Deborah Russell, who made an outstanding speech at the first reading in Parliament. And, yeah, so I think it's now in the Court of Public Opinion, which is great because courts are very rarefied places, only lawyers and judges really get to talk in the old witness. I think it's a very good opinion is a very democratic space in which we all can have an opinion. And I'm hoping that people that are equally concerned as we are about the attacks on the rule of law, the attacks on democracy, the complete one-eyed blindness when it comes to the impacts of climate change on the economy, on our social cohesion. And people who are concerned do voice their concerns all the way to the election hustings this year. [00:19:35] Speaker 2: Your activism has uncovered a web of entanglement between the big polluters and a government prepared to do anything to protect them from paying for the pollution they create. Why should voters care? [00:19:48] Speaker 4: Well, you know, we elect politicians to govern our country. We don't elect corporates to govern our country. And I guess that's the fundamental principle that's at stake here. It comes as no surprise that there are corporate lobbyists talking to a government. That's not a new thing. There's hardly any news there. What the problem with that is, is that when challenged and asked about that, the Prime Minister basically lied and said, well, you know, he had no knowledge of it. And, but we had the receipts, we had the evidence. [00:20:21] Speaker ?: Yes, you did. [00:20:21] Speaker 4: That ironically was supplied to us by the companies themselves. Yes, I know. [00:20:26] Speaker 2: Isn't it glorious? Yeah. [00:20:28] Speaker 4: And so we're able to say, well, come on, Prime Minister, you know, you can't be lying to the New Zealand public about this, you know, just be honest about it. Let's have a conversation about it. But the fact that he dug his heels in and he just continued to deny it, tried to push it off to one of his, one of his official underlings. That's right. Yeah, which is, you know, pretty standard operating procedure for politicians when they're in a tight spot. But I think it's, it's been scandalous. And that scandal just has grown legs, stood up on those legs, and it's run off down the road screaming. Yeah. And, and I think it's really damaged the credibility of this government. Oh, yeah. Because what it looks like. Yeah. Is crony capitalism versus cover up, which leads people to think, well, is there some kind of corruption going on behind the scenes? And so that's the impression that I think is being left with the public. [00:21:24] Speaker 2: As you pointed out, Labour have promised to repeal any law national put up so that you can continue your legal action. Does that help? And does it give you hope? [00:21:36] Speaker 4: Yeah, it really does help because it means that the case doesn't die a political death over the next couple of weeks. But, you know, we'll be resurrected again, maybe not in three days, but then certainly within, within six months, if we ever change the government. And so that means that it's game on again. We can then lift the issue out of the murky political waters, put it before the courts and using the expertise of the courts, the strong arguments on both sides of the argument that, that the lawyers will apply. And then let common sense be the determinant of what we need to do to reduce our emissions, because reducing our emissions, we must do. If we're going to have any hope of having a stable economy, social cohesion and a safe place for our grandchildren, we just have to do it. And the sooner everybody embraces that and leans into it, the better it's going to be. [00:22:32] Speaker 2: We have extreme flooding today in the South Island and the most extreme El Nino in 150 years is set to peak over New Zealand this summer. Is there a disconnect with the extreme climate change weather events we are seeing and a government enabling the biggest polluters? [00:22:50] Speaker 4: Absolutely, there is, you know, and that's the irony of it, Bomber, is that, you know, Fonterra, being one of our largest dairy processing companies, has got a lot on the line when it comes to the viability of pastoral farming. Right. And back in 2017, when we saw the last big drought race through the north, there wasn't a cow left in Northland as the pastures burnt off and they had to ship off all the stock to the freezing works. So ironically, what they're fighting against is not in their, even their short term interests, let alone their long term interests. So I'm just like, come on, guys, just put your hands up, face the facts. It is happening. It's not going away. It's going to accelerate. And what we need to be doing is developing resilience and management plans to deal with this instead of, you know, trying to, on a wing and a prayer, think that we can bluff our way through this. It's just no way to be managing a crisis of this magnitude. [00:23:49] Speaker 2: You have angered the most powerful polluters in the country. Do you fear any retribution? [00:23:55] Speaker 4: Well, no, I'm nearly 70. So I think, you know, my days on this earth are certainly numbered. But I want to, I want to make sure in the interests of all of our kids, not just my kids, but all of our, all of our children and our grandchildren to come, that we're doing the best that we can to try to minimize the damage that we're causing. And to just set them up for, for, for a good chance of survival in the days to come. And I think that's worth every ounce of my time and energy and resources I can put into it. [00:24:31] Speaker 2: You're such a legend, Comrade. And finally, finally, Mike, what do you say to those who still claim climate change is a hoax? [00:24:40] Speaker ?: Well, there's going to be victims, right? [00:24:41] Speaker 4: Well, there's going to be victims, right? And that's really unfortunate. I would hope that everybody kind of wakes up and takes the personal or collective responsibility for what's happening and to do the best that they can to safeguard themselves and to mitigate their own life situation against harm. But there will be people who just willfully and blindly walk off the cliff. And at the end of the day, there's not much that we can do about that individually, but collectively as a government, we have a responsibility to all of our citizens, the good, the bad, the ugly, the onto it, the not so onto it, to provide the guardrails for safety for going ahead into the future. And so that's why we employ the government to do the right thing. [00:25:22] Speaker 2: Preach. Thank you, Mike, for sharing your insight and oversight this evening. All power to your arm. Good luck in your battle, Comrade. [00:25:29] Speaker 4: Nice to see you again. Be well, my friend. [00:25:31] Speaker 2: OK, now to our political panel, all stars. Andrew Little, get out of the way, because there is a new cheerleader for the capital in town. Our first panelist is a libertarian Sven Gali and moral shepherd of the right. Former New Zealand Herald columnist and now editor of The Post. Born again Wellingtonian. It's absolutely, positively Dr. Matthew Huden. Good, Comrade. Welcome to the show. One word to describe the weekly, sir. [00:25:55] Speaker 5: Monumental. We saw Australia and Fiji sign this defence pact. It was an example, the first example, really, of the South Pacific taking responsibility for its own defence without being attached to a great power. I mean, we've had ANZUS in the past, Seattle and things like that. But this is Australia and Fiji, two important countries in the region, saying we're going to have a defence pact. And of course, the Prime Minister of New Zealand, Christopher Luxon, says it's something New Zealand could be interested in joining. It would be interesting to see Samoa or Tonga or both or other islands in the region decide that they want to be part of it. It would be interesting how it grows. It could be monumental in that sense. Obviously, what's most extraordinary is it led to what appears to be such a firm reaction from the People's Republic of China. [00:26:57] Speaker 2: Our next panellist is the Māori for All Seasons broadcaster, politikokh, commentator, recreational TAB flutterer and raconteur, the one and only working class anvil it is Matthew Tukaki. Kia ora, comrade. One word to describe the weekly, sir. [00:27:11] Speaker 6: Jurisputants, before I do, though, come and join me on Wednesday for the 130th last running of the Avondale races. Out there for a flutter? Out there for a flutter? Out there for a flutter? Let's stop that development. Let's get the horses back. No, no, in all seriousness, jurisprudence. I mean, I think the biggest challenge with what Mike Smith and the court case and the interference of the Parliament. Yeah, yeah. The courts make determinations that Parliament then begins to perfect. Yeah. All legislation, all legislation is imperfect. And so the role of the court is to call things out and then the Parliament is meant to perfect the legislation even further. That's not happened in this case and it's a dangerous precedent in terms of the jurisprudence around this case. And so I think we should all be concerned that the Parliament that is, you know, obviously biased based on who's in government of the day, is now doing things that should not be done. I really do think we need to watch this one very carefully. Preach. [00:28:14] Speaker 2: Brothers and sisters, let's get into tonight's show. Issue one. China testing a missile in the Pacific versus unhinged Trump. What is the true price of an independent foreign policy? Issue two. The political ramifications of the rise of New Zealand first and top. And issue three tonight. ASB economists predict green shoots of economic recovery. Really? Plus, we'll have a final word at the end of the show where each panelist gets to go to the mountain top to see who breaches broadcasting standards this week. My money is on John Tamahiri and he's not even on tonight's show. Let's kick things off with issue one. And that is the latest geopolitical tensions with China testing a missile in the Pacific versus unhinged Trump demands. What is the true price of an independent foreign policy? Matthew Houghton, you have been forever scornful of New Zealand's nuclear free stance as a meaningless boom of pretension. But with our Chinese economic overlords upset and our American political masters demanding nuclear ship visits, doesn't our nuclear free status inoculate us from China and America? And are you ready to admit you were wrong? [00:29:16] Speaker 5: Well, I don't think the anti-nuclear status is considered relevant really by the United States or China or indeed by India or Pakistan or France or the UK where there was fears when it first started that it would spread. That's why the Reagan administration responded so aggressively. But, you know, it's hardly affected any other country in the world. So there it is. [00:29:50] Speaker 2: Follow up question. China did this as a response to Australia and Fiji agreeing to defend each other on a new treaty. That is a decision between two South Pacific states deciding what is best for them. Why the incredibly severe response by China? [00:30:11] Speaker 5: Well, China has said we shouldn't read too much into it. But in that case, it's a remarkable coincidence because it's the first time the Chinese have tested a missile like this, certainly affecting the South Pacific. They are a signatory of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Area Treaty. And it just so happened that by a remarkable coincidence, it happened just a few hours after Fiji and Australia made this move. So I think that reasonable people could think that it is related to that deal. And this is China. Let's not be too moralistic about it. This is China doing what great powers do. They seek regional hegemony. They always have over thousands of years of human history. And they assert that hegemony as far as they can. And that's what we've seen over the last 24 hours or so. And it does, you mentioned it being so important to New Zealand economically, I think, as Chris Hipkins was alluding to, it makes a case for that free trade agreement with India. [00:31:27] Speaker 2: Oh, doesn't it? [00:31:28] Speaker 5: And it makes a case for the National Party policy, which they announced to look what they call it, looking for the next billion customers, including Nigeria. I mean, I'd never imagined a free trade agreement with Nigeria, but it's a booming part of Africa. And, you know, maybe, you know, you can see that spreading our economic risks does make a lot of sense. [00:31:51] Speaker 2: Matthew Tukaki, a former US diplomat last month, asked what has New Zealand done for America lately? Off the top of my head, we lost 92 New Zealand military personnel killed in the Korean, Vietnam and Afghanistan wars, plus another 40,000 killed in World War I and II. We've paid our price for an American relationship and blood. What has America done for New Zealand? [00:32:16] Speaker 6: Well, first of all, I think we're going to be really clear about Donald Trump's role in the world. He's an orange coloured clown that gives orangutans a bad name. And I love orangutans. The problem with orangutans, when they're up there in the jungles of Indonesia, they piss all over what's on below. Look, this bollocks that we somehow haven't made our contribution. We have. And I do not think it's a wise choice for an American directly appointed by Trump as ambassador to New Zealand to swan on in here with his basketball jib driving, like an airplane movie, and start telling us what to do. So he can go and get stuffed. [00:32:54] Speaker 2: The current American ambassador wants us to accept nuclear ships back into our harbour. How much of hell will freeze over before Kiwis accept American nuclear ships in our waters? Especially when Trump is president. Yeah. [00:33:08] Speaker 6: Yeah, look, I mean, you know, these diplomats, and look, I've been a UN representative once in life. Yeah. These diplomats that rock up to foreign countries telling people what to do. I mean, look at what America's tried to tell countries in their own region what to do. What to do in Haiti. What to do in Puerto Rico. What to do in Cuba and Panama. I mean, do we forget about all the crisis they themselves have caused? So, look, you know, we did a lot of work to get the French out of Muirah Atoll and all this other sort of thing. Look, others much wiser in this debate can discuss the nuances of the anti-nuclear legislation. But actually, I quite like it for no other reason. It's given us a bit of a brand. We are nuclear free. Anything that paints a picture of New Zealand as a place to come because we're all inclusive, then come maybe not the 700,000 people that Winston Peters wants to block off. [00:33:59] Speaker 2: Follow up question. If we want an independent foreign policy, don't we have to admit that we need to increase military spending? No, I don't think we do. [00:34:06] Speaker 6: I mean, I think it's wise to increase military spending for a whole range of reasons, including protection of our economic zones. Yes, yeah, yeah. Clearly not policing, but participating in the Pacific region more generally. I think with climate change upon us and all the rest of it, that increases natural disasters, more movement of infrastructure to be able to distribute good services and support. For all of those reasons, I think we need a stronger military, but I also think we need stronger civil defence. And those sorts of instruments and infrastructure. I just want to talk about China for a minute though. Because I think it's really important that we understand that China's been up to these tricks for a long time. You'll often hear in the news about planes returning back to places like Auckland on their way to Shanghai mid-flight because the paperwork hasn't been filed properly. I mean, no, that's actually sending a message. Or West Australian rock lobster or red wine laying on ports unopened and spoiling. Look, China is putting its mark on what it thinks is its role in the world. Just as America has, just as Belgium did when they were a colonial power. The French when they had some relevancy, not so much more because, let's face it, they're a pack of retards. But, you know, no, I'm full on tonight. I'm full on, Bomber. I feel you are. [00:35:26] Speaker 2: I feel you are. Quick round to both of you. Who has the most influence over Wellington? Washington or Beijing? Matthew Houghton. [00:35:33] Speaker 5: Right at the moment. If you had to choose, I think you'd say Beijing because the US administration is not won because of its political situation and the likelihood that it will lose control of the Senate and the House of Representatives is one that matters terribly much, at least until those mid-term elections are over. [00:35:57] Speaker ?: Fonterra. [00:35:58] Speaker 6: Fonterra. Fonterra. If there was that option, a new Fonterra. Oh. No, no, in fairness, I mean, look, coming back to the question, if it was a toss up between DC and Beijing, I would say both of them have equal measure of us as weak. Christopher Luxon, who's trying to play Grand Chief Executive Officer of whatever the hell he is, is making us look stupid. He's allowed Winston Peters as foreign minister to dictate foreign policy in many respects. And I'm not too sure that is the way to go. But I certainly think to Washington and Beijing, we are less of ourselves because of Christopher Luxon as prime minister, to be frank. [00:36:38] Speaker 2: Is it going to be a bigger issue to both of you if it turns out that this Chinese rocket actually fell inside, I think it's Talovu? Tuvalu's economic zone. [00:36:45] Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, yeah. [00:36:46] Speaker 2: Is that a bigger issue? [00:36:47] Speaker 6: Well, what's Tuvalu going to do, you know? Well, sure, but that's actually in, isn't it? It'll be a breach of international law. You know, you could play all sorts of things about laws of the sea and all the rest of it. Yeah. I'm not too sure it's going to worry the Chinese too much. Houdin? [00:37:02] Speaker 5: Well, economic zone would be one thing if it was in the 12-mile sovereign territory. Yeah, yeah. Right. That would be another thing. But shall we be a bit realistic? Um, Tuvalu doesn't have the, um, economical military might of the People's Republic of China. And that's how global politics plays out. [00:37:24] Speaker 2: Comrades, we need to move on to issue two tonight. And that is what are the political ramifications of the rise of New Zealand First? And top, Matthew Tukaki. Winston is promising to disenfranchise 700,000 permanent residents from voting if re-elected. How will those 700,000 permanent voters react? Are you surprised? I mean, it's Winston. [00:37:48] Speaker 6: But it's such a huge number of people. Yeah, it's a huge number, but so are people in rest homes. And he's abandoned them. He went for the conspiracy theorists at the last election. Look, Winston is doing what Winston does every election. He goes for 1% here, 2% there to get to the 5% threshold. Uh, and he's, he's a very populist politician, as we all know. Interesting on the social media feeds today is a comparison of the five countries, uh, that have, um, this, uh, I think Uruguay is one of them. The UK. The UK is one of them. Yeah, a couple of others. And then there's a long list of everything else. Yeah. Um, so, you know, this is populism politics. Now, interesting though, you mentioned Brian Tumaki before, because Brian Tumaki has tried his hand at populist politics as well. And clearly you're not snorking. So look, Winston's cornered the market of populism. [00:38:35] Speaker 2: Follow up question. Who will be the kingmaker, Kule or Winston? [00:38:39] Speaker 6: I think everyone's putting too much stock into Topp. I really do. Um, look, I quite like Topp for some of their policies, obviously not all of them. Um, but yeah, I think, I think it takes more than a couple of election cycles to get across that 5% threshold. Uh, they are going hell for leather though in the seat of Mount Albert against Helen White. Yeah. Uh, and, uh, maybe the, the LEC of the Labour Party there in that electorate might be, uh, ruining the day they, uh, they decided to put Helen White in there. Um, but no, I, I, I don't, I don't see Topp getting across 5%. [00:39:12] Speaker 2: Uh, Matthew Hurden, Andrea Vance destroyed New Zealand first in her weekend column, describing the new recruits as a cast of embittered political zombies. Shuffling back onto the scene. You have trashy Stewie Nashie, recreational Christo-fascist Elliot Aikili, former Conservative Party leader and love poet Colin Craig, anti-abortionist and handmaid's tale prequel Alfred Naro, walking case study in concussion Tain Randall, and now the platforms hate puppet Michael Laws. If National New Zealand First and Act do get back into power, these political circus clowns will be in power. How weak will Luxon be in a second national act in New Zealand First Government? [00:40:02] Speaker 5: I think the first thing about, um, Andrea Vance's column in, in the Sunday Star Times, um, uh, was that it was very, very popular and beautifully written. Oh, yeah. Um, which is not to, um, say that I necessarily agree with the, the Sunday Star Times and the Post, it's, there are many different views and, um, so some of those terms I, I wouldn't use myself, but I'm delighted to see such a brilliant columnist using them in the Sunday Star Times. I think that it does look as if, um, um, if the polls are to be believed that National would be weaker and New Zealand First, uh, would be stronger. [00:40:41] Speaker 2: So what does it look like? [00:40:42] Speaker 5: Um, well, I think what it looks like from your perspective, um, you began this show deeply concerned about some radical, radical lurch to the right, uh, in the second term, Luxon Government. Um, and, um, I just can't see how that would happen if National was weaker and New Zealand First was stronger and ACT was, you know, at 6% or something. I, I think that the next Luxon Government, if there is one second term of it, um, would be more conservative, small C conservative than this one. I, I, I can't see that it's going to launch off on a right wing neoliberal ideological crusade if that's what you were concerned about, Bomber. [00:41:22] Speaker 2: But you would agree that New Zealand First have some pretty wacky ideas and they've got some pretty wacky candidates who want to push those pretty crazy ideas forward. I mean, would we actually see New Zealand, for example, pulling out of the WHO? [00:41:39] Speaker 5: No, I don't think we would. Um, and you know, you use those words to describe the New Zealand First Party. I look at it differently and say that it's a house of representatives that we have in Wellington and the New Zealand First Party is one of those parties that brings a wider representation to the parliament than it might otherwise have. [00:42:04] Speaker 2: Sure. Yeah, it certainly does. It does do that. It does do that. Can I just back Matt up and Matthew on that? Please. Yeah, yeah. [00:42:09] Speaker 6: Look, I think we've got to be careful not to cast New Zealanders, um, into a channel of despair around who they might vote for, who they might follow. Look, Tane Randall, uh, you know, come on, he's a great all black captain. Sure, sure. 2007. Well, you know, history, you know, you know, all the classics, but I guess what I'm saying is that I think we shouldn't draw our battle lines based on what individual New Zealanders, who they might vote for. Look, New Zealand First might have some crazy policies, other parties have some crazy policies, but that's the true demarcation of a liberal democracy. [00:42:47] Speaker 2: Amen. A quick round. Will top get over 5%? Will New Zealand First be in double digits? Matthew Houghton? [00:42:54] Speaker 5: On top, I, um, rate the probability of top getting over 5% at 50%. [00:43:01] Speaker 2: Oh, wow. Okay, okay. And New Zealand First being in double digits? [00:43:05] Speaker 5: Uh, I think they'll be in double digits, but, um, you know, you began this segment by talking about, um, them being, you know, um, growing their vote. I think they might have peaked through this election cycle. [00:43:21] Speaker 2: Really? Really? So you think they'll go down from here? [00:43:25] Speaker 5: I think, well, they've been as high as I think 14 or so in some polls, and I think that they'll get between that and 10. [00:43:32] Speaker 6: Okay. Matthew? Yeah, look, I mean, I don't think top's gonna make 5% for a whole range of reasons. [00:43:38] Speaker ?: Okay. Yep. [00:43:38] Speaker 6: It might change if they win the seat of Mount Albert, which I'm looking at very closely. Uh, in terms of, um, Winston and New Zealand First, I, I think they have potentially peaked. Um, but again, there are a whole range of things going on. I'd like to see what happens in the seat of Tukituki and around the Hawke's Bay with Stuart Nash and Tony Randall from that area. Yep. Uh, Tukituki has changed, um, from, uh, Labour, uh, and I think, uh, Anna Lourke, um, to National. Yes, yes, yes. Um, so it's got a bit of turnabout. Hawke's Bay are becoming a bit disenfranchised with National, but they're conservative voters in the main. Um, and so, yeah, I, I, I, I do think that they've peaked. [00:44:17] Speaker 2: Uh, comrades, we need to move on to issue three tonight. And that is the latest ASB predictions claiming the green shoots of recovery are back because Trump's self-inflicted Iran fiasco is supposedly over. But we've been told by the free market cheerleaders we call journalists that the economy is about to bloom for about four years now. Matthew Tukaki, the ASB report doesn't mention, doesn't mention the fact that the most powerful El Nino in 150 years will peak over New Zealand this summer. With all the economic damage, drought, fire, and flood produced. Is this vacant optimism or are we really on track? [00:44:57] Speaker 6: Look, bomber, bomber, bomber, bomber. The banks and their reports are like the odds at the TAB. You know, the odds at the TAB seem pretty good. I mean, you know, was that poly market thing is probably better. Uh, look, I, I don't think these reports generally take into account a plethora of different things. So they say there are green shoots in the economy to me, to me, to me, to me, not a problem at all. I understand that. But for a lot of New Zealanders out there, they don't feel those green shoots. And so, you know, it's not as if they say, oh, they don't do a litmus test of the vibe out there in the New Zealand community. Instead, they tend to base their reports on some pretty old, rigid forms of data collection. So, yeah, mate, I'd burke a three-legged horse over an ASB report. [00:45:42] Speaker 2: Uh, Matthew Hooton, the last three El Nino events have cost us collectively $12 billion. Apparently, the worst one in 150 years won't cost us anything. Are these economic predictions as heroic as Treasury predictions? [00:46:02] Speaker 5: Oh, the Treasury predictions have been quite good in the last year or so. Um, you know, they've, they've, they've improved a bit. If anything, the, the deficit, the deficit is down. Um, the tax tag is up. It's, you know, the cost of welfare is down. Um, you know, that's cyclical. So, so I think there are green shoots in the economy. I know the Prime Minister has been saying that a lot. He cites South Island and Christchurch. Uh, I was in Christchurch for the weekend and it is, it is booming. Right. Um, obviously I am Wellington's biggest cheerleader. Of course. I've spent the best years in my life. 12, uh, 12 years in my twenties here. [00:46:43] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:46:43] Speaker 5: Yes. Also spend a lot of time in Auckland where I was born. But having said all that, I've got to say Christchurch is, is the part of the country that seems to be booming the most at the moment. But there does have to be a reversion to the mean eventually. People are deeply pessimistic and that just has to work its way out of the system at some point. Um, and you know, I, I think the economy is likely to be better. Yeah. The, the, it looks as if, you know, the Middle East situation, the price of oil is not as bad as we feared. Um, the, the money is at least gone from the dairy farms to Christchurch. It'll get to Auckland and then down to Wellington as well. And, and so I don't think that's an outlandish prediction to say that there are green shoots. [00:47:26] Speaker 6: Matt, it's just not getting into the regions. And this is what I'm sensing. We are seeing a boom in Christchurch that probably was architected as a result of all the investment and infrastructure going in after the Christchurch earthquakes. Right. Um, and you know, remember the outpouring of people out of Christchurch after that. And now we're seeing them pouring in, uh, and Takaha and all the, all the infrastructures we're going to take hold of the local economy. A big ups to Christchurch, but you go just a little further down the road there, not to Queenstown because apparently that's been booming since it was born. That's right. Um, you see a lot of provincial towns in rural New Zealand, regional New Zealand, provincial New Zealand who are still struggling. So they, they're not seeing what potentially Christchurch has. Uh, and then you go north, you go to the east coast of New Zealand, you go to the far north, um, you know, 10 minutes out of, out of the, uh, the, the, the Brent Irwins. And it's pretty sad, pretty bleak. So it is about, um, for me, it is about, we've got to understand that New Zealand's economy is more than just what's going on potentially in Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland. Upper Hutt, Matthew. What about Upper Hutt? Poor little Upper Hutt. Love it. [00:48:30] Speaker 2: Quick round. Love it. [00:48:32] Speaker 5: Lots of good readers there. Quick round to both of you. [00:48:34] Speaker 2: Good post readers in Upper Hutt. Will the peace in the Straits of Hormuz hold? Matthew Houghton. [00:48:44] Speaker 5: I think it probably will. I don't think we'll go back to a full shooting war, but I think that the, um, the flow of shipping through Strait of Hormuz will remain uncertain for, for a considerable amount of time, by which I mean probably years. But I don't think we're going to go back to a shooting war because I don't think either side has an appetite for that at present. [00:49:06] Speaker 2: Matthew Tukaki, so the Americans will allow the Iranians to set up a toll at the Straits. [00:49:13] Speaker 6: Well, I say this from a sense, a centre of expertise as a former delivery boy for both the Dominion in the morning and the evening post at night. Great, great masthead publications as I would my 10 speed bike around the streets of Upper Hutt. Uh, also maybe pilfering milk tokens along the way out of bottles. Uh, I don't, I don't have the same optimism about the peace holding because I think we're seeing a new definition of peace. Um, and also the fly in their ointment is still, um, Benjamin Netanyahu. Yeah. I mean, no one can predict what he may do. And of course, I think they're coming up towards, um, elections and we might just see a more radical, um, form of government elected in Israel. So, yeah, I don't have the same faith. [00:49:59] Speaker 2: Final, final quick round to both of you. Um, OCR decision tomorrow. What does the Reserve Bank do? Matthew Hooten? [00:50:06] Speaker 5: 0.25 point raise. [00:50:10] Speaker 2: Matthew Tukaki? Hold. Hold! Oh! Comrades, we need to wrap the show with the final word. Matthew Tukaki, your final word, please. Tomfoolery. [00:50:19] Speaker 6: Tomfoolery. Tomfoolery. And I come back to the word I used at the beginning, jurisprudence. I mean, this business of the parliament interfering to such an extent in the laws of our country, uh, where the Supreme Court has already made a determination, quite a big one, uh, is tomfoolery at its worst. And we should never be captured, uh, by the likes of big business. Yes, big business have a role in this country. Um, but not when it involves little emails to gmails and all this other nonsense. Uh, so tomfoolery is my last word. Matthew Hutton, your final word this week, please. [00:50:55] Speaker 5: Well, it links back to Christchurch where I went down for the rugby. And as I said, it's, it's finally worked, you know, that central city blueprint. I worked on that with, um, Sarah and the, um, Christchurch central development unit. And, you know, it was, it's, it's pretty amazing to see. It actually has worked after probably later than anyone wanted, but it is a great place. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. It's a great place to see. The park crowd were pretty much more lighthearted. In the last few decades, that's turned around. I'd love to see back at Eden Park, people really just enjoying the rugby and the family occasion rather than the menace that we sort of often feel at Eden Park these days. I don't know why. [00:52:13] Speaker 6: Can I just add? Matt's raised another great point. Great point tonight. You know, the Lancaster Park audience were angry. The Eden Park audience were drunks. And that's where you get the vernacular angry drunks. Right. [00:52:27] Speaker 2: Thank you comrades. And now to my final word. Brothers and sisters. Every single homelessness agency warned the government that if they implemented their deeply flawed emergency housing plans, there would be a tsunami of homelessness. As exposed by TVNZ, the entire system is geared towards finding reasons to disqualify these broken human beings from accessing any support. MSD trawl information to find a reason to disqualify those applying and a triage system that incentivizes those who cut the most. The government's response to this homelessness that their direct policy has caused? Why they will simply allow police to arrest the homeless. This is a spiteful hate cocktail driven by the right's need to punish the poor because their failure reflects badly on the rest of us when wealthy fat tourists visit on bloated swine palace cruise ships. The weeping wound of our inequality that we have created shames us in front of the guests. This policy will not be understood by the homeless, many of whom are mentally sick with severe addiction issues. They will of course resist arrest with an energy born from terror forcing the police to deploy levels of force that will predictably be lethal. I say that you Kiwi must see the realities of the policies the government you voted in have caused. I say that you Kiwi must see the wretched poverty that your government's policies have created. I say you Kiwi must see the human collateral damage of forever cutting social policies. We cut outreach. We cut food banks. We cut emergency housing. And the very predictable occurs and the solution arrest the wound that we all collectively created. This is what we is now. This is what we have become. And now here's Tom with the weather. In solidarity, the revolution continues. Ka pai a te ara. [00:54:26] Speaker 1: The Bradbury Group, New Zealand's best weekly political argument. The Bradbury Group is an independent podcast through the Rover Network, sponsored by Wātea News. Everything on the show is an opinion and shouldn't be taken seriously enough to attempt defamation action against us. We were joking. We are never serious about anything. And officially, a small wetter in Avondale is legally the owner. Good luck finding him. Don't forget to follow, like and comment. [00:55:15] Speaker ?: We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. We'll see you next time. Bye.