Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Scams are becoming increasingly more detailed, catching increasingly more people.  After a close call of her own, Kerre Woodham brought Netsafe’s Chief Technology Officer, Sean Lyons, on the show to give listeners tips and tricks to stay safe from scams.  He also gave some advice on what to do if your Facebook is hacked and how to get it sorted.  For more information, visit Netsafe's website.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

As Mike Hosking and I exchanged morning pleasantries today, I said to him “Wasn't Dr Shane Reti a breath of fresh air?”   “Breath of fresh air?” said Mike, “He was a howling Nor Westerly of fresh air!”  And by crikey, he was. Even those who didn't vote National must surely appreciate that here is a knowledgeable, passionate man in charge of his portfolio. He is under no illusions that New Zealand's health system is in dire straits. But he also understands that the system is absolutely underpinned by he tangata, he tangata, he tangata - the people, the people, the people.  Compare that with one of the former health ministers, Andrew Little, who just flatly refused to concede that the health system was in crisis.   The most he could manage to choke out was that we had a health system that was under major pressure and had major challenges. Initially, he didn't put nurses or midwives on the fast-track residency pathway list, kept saying we've got hordes of nurses lined up to be with us.   Hordes of them.   That's just simply not true. The New Zealand Nurse Organisation said it was flabbergasted nurses weren't included on that list, and he took a swipe at the Nurses Organisation. You know, the very people he's supposed to be working for and with.   Of course, as previous health ministers have found, words are easy, it is actions that count. And while it's fantastic that Doctor Reti has the safety of ED staff top of mind, how he will ensure that safety is another matter, security guards have limited powers. To really protect staff we'd need a police officer or two in every ED.   Still, when you see the number who were babysitting the gangsters on their way to Bird's funeral in Foxton, we clearly have officers available. It's just where their bosses choose to deploy them.   But to get back to the positives, it's the messaging I'm loving. You know, Dr Reti said it's broken. We've got a health system that's broken. He doesn't want any more seismic upheavals, he said the staff are exhausted, they've gone through Covid massive changes, a government that was on the back foot when it came to recruiting from overseas. Any more massive changes and I imagine that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back.   You also get the fabulous message that you will not treat people who want to help you with disrespect and violence. It is not acceptable to do so. The honesty and the authenticity in Dr Reti’s interview was a signal to us all that henceforth, basic decency is expected of members of the community. And there will be consequences if you cannot dredge up that decency from deep within you.   Amen. Doctor Reti. Amen. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Now the new Government has officially signed in this morning, and as Christopher Luxon said on Friday, he and his coalition Government cannot wait to get stuck in. The RMA reforms will be rolled back before Christmas, Three Waters gone, the ute tax is expected to be gone as well, and in a controversial move, the Government will not proceed with Labour's planned legislation that would restrict the number of retailers allowed to sell cigarettes. That would cut the amount of nicotine allowed in tobacco and ban those born after 2008 from buying fags. Remember that one? It was quite a thing at the time. As you can imagine, there's been an outcry. Former Health Minister Ayesha Verrall says the Government aims to fund its tax cuts through enabling more children to start smoking. It is, she said, disgusting. Incoming Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says while they were against some of the legislation Labour had planned, it was ACT and NZ First, who were vehemently against the proposed legislation. They wanted it gone and it was part of the coalition agreement. And he’s right, smoking has been decreasing over the years under successive Governments using different tools without the need for the sinking lid policy and restricting the number of retailers allowed to sell cigarettes. Between 2010 and 2018, the amount of tobacco smoked per person decreased by 39 percent. Across just about every metric smoking has come down and it's come down dramatically since the 1980s. He's also right that banning cigarettes outright or making them so restricted would just give the gangs another income stream. It would also make it more desirable for young people to take up the habit - forbidden fruit being the most tempting. Also, people don't have to smoke. Nobody does. You know, if you want to start smoking, that is a choice. You've got all the facts in front of you, you've got all the health risks that are proved beyond a doubt in front of you. If you choose to buy an overpriced packet of cigarettes then that's on you. For addicts, it's a bit different I do grant you. But if you decide as a young person, you know what I'm going to take a significant sum of money out of my wallet and buy myself a pack of cigarettes to basically smoke down to ash and have nothing left for it, that's on you. And I guess that's where ACT was coming from. If you want to go to hell in your own way, fill your boots like that fag. And the Government will tax the heck out of you to pay for that privilege, to pay for your health costs. So, Oh my God, he's killing children, that seems to be the narrative. Oh, this Government's only been in well, it isn’t even formally signed in and children will die as a result. Underprivileged people will die as a result. Well no. Smoking has been decreasing since the 1980s. It has been declining dramatically across all metrics. It is still a personal choice. People don't have to smoke if they don't want to. There's some weird ads on the radio about it being a post-colonial construct and you know it's not our fault that we're smoking, cause the colonials arrived and made us, but we don't have to. Yeah, the key point in that is you don't have to. It's not like you need water. You have to pay for water because you need it. You don't have to take up smoking. And successive Governments have used successive tools to bring the rate of smoking down. As Christopher Luxon said to Mike this morning, there have been numerous different ways- this doesn't have to be the only way. Perhaps people are still wedded to the idea that the past Labour Government’s way, was the way the truth and the light. There is no other Government other than Labour. It is the one true source of fact and truth and legislation.  Uncouple that idea from your brain. There are other ways of doing things, different ways to get a good result. Theirs is not the way the truth and the light. And the sooner we remember that, the better. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Te Whatu Ora is standing by its $100 million consultant spend.  This is despite it dropping from $139 million the year prior.  Chief People Officer Andrew Slater told the Mike Hosking Breakfast they've tightened where they're using contractors and consultants and are focusing on making sure they have the appropriate expertise.  He says it doesn't make sense to have some of these skills in house all the time.  Former Chair of Te Whatu Ora, Rob Campbell, says the consultant spend is still excessive. He joined Kerre Woodham to discuss the situation.  LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The talk is over, the ink is dry on the contracts, let the governance begin.   Prime Minister-in-waiting, Christopher Luxon, is due to speak this morning, giving us the broad shape of what the 54th New Zealand government will look like. And let's hope that once they start the governing proper, we see the last of these sorts of headlines: “Te Whatu Ora’s more than $100m consultant bill”.   A $100 million on consultants. $70 million went to the big four firms. Deloittes, they were paid $43.6 million by Te Whatu Ora in the past year alone. Previous to that, they’d got $34 million a year, before that $19 million.   PricewaterhouseCoopers were paid $9.4 million in the past year. Ernst and Young $7.9, KPMG $8.7 million. The Te Whatu Ora CFO, so the head of the of the money, he said the organisation couldn't disclose specific details about the contracted work. And this is where you go now into the gobbledygook that is professional bureaucratic speak. You might speak it. I mean, you might have had to learn to speak it so that you could advance in your career. I've never had to learn to speak it. I can still speak plainly and clearly, as can talk back callers.   The last time we had this sort of gobbledygook was when the Police Commissioner was on. He speaks it so he might know. Perhaps I should ring him. Perhaps I should ring him and ask him what on earth this means.   So we'd ask where the money had gone. Te Whatu Ora could not disclose specific details about the contract of work. I don't know why not. Public money. Public organisation. I don't know. I don't know how you wouldn't be able to disclose it. But some of the spending according to the CFO would have gone towards supporting change and transformation work resulting from the health reforms.   For example, Te Whatu Ora has engaged consultants to assist with the development of new national operating models to establish the Pae Ora delivery unit within the organisation which provides support, governance, and oversight of our key strategic change initiatives and to assist with the implementation of new structures.   What does that mean? It says nothing. It says absolutely nothing. I am still none the clearer as to where the money's gone. What? What are the initiatives? What are the key strategic change initiatives? Support governance? By the time you reach the end of the sentence, you’ve forgotten what the start of it was because there was nothing to hang on to.   Unless you can interpret it for me, and I'd be very grateful if you do speak bureaucratic gobbledygook, I'd love to know what exactly that means. Where that money has gone. The bloke from Te Whatu Ora told Mike Hosking this morning that hey, $100 mil, sure, but at least they've got that down from the $139 million they spent last year.   So this is not a one-off figure that you can say, okay, we're going to set up a system, establish the Pae Ora delivery unit within the organisation. So we've set it up, done it once, done it right, Bob's your uncle. Take my $100 mil and bugger off. No, we do it every year, it seems. $139 million last year, $100 million this year. If I was working in the health system, or waiting on an operation, and I woke up this morning and I heard that news story, I would be pretty dark heading off to work. What could you do with $100 million within the health system in a year. Andrew Slater, who was the bloke from Te Whatu Ora, their Chief People officer, explained what they'd spent some of it on.    “Where we've really used those consultants over the last year has been doing some things where we just can't and doesn't make sense to have those skills in house all of the time. So for example, we've set up our national Security Operations Centre that is looking at all of our systems and making sure we keep New Zealand’s data safe and private and well protected. And that would be an example of where we used one of those firms to kind of shoulder and bring that expertise to it.“  And that's great. I get that. If you need to bring in people short-term to deliver something, but why do you need to do it every single year? Like if you're bringing some data security experts in, don't you do it once, do it right and you've done it. How is it that you have to spend that sort of money every year?   And why can't they tell us exactly? See that was good, Andrew. Some of that would have been spent on data security and protecting access to patients' records. There have been data breaches at health boards around the country, so great, good. But seriously.   I know that too that there may well be restrictions around hiring. You might not be able to bring people in full time because that involves holiday pay and that involves all the other leave requirement, health and safety, and you know the whole holistic, nurturing and protection and care of an employee. So you think excellent, I'll get around that. I'll just hire a few contractors. They send me an invoice. I can pay. It doesn't have to go through the absolute ache of the hiring process, that's fine.    What could you do with 100 million? You could fly in a whole bunch of specialist doctors on working holidays to clear the backlog, couldn't you? To clear the most immediate cases. I can understand spending $139 million on consultants to set up a new organisation, to set up a management unit. But every year? How do you justify that?   And I ask that as a genuine question, how do you justify that? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Long coalition negotiations from the new about-to-be Government have seen a major economics consultancy downgrade its perception of New Zealand's political stability to its lowest rating in more than a decade.   BMI, not the body mass index, but a consultancy group owned by the Fitch Group and one of the three big ratings agencies, docked New Zealand a couple of points in its Short-Term Political Risk Index (STPRI), which measures the country's political stability. Because there's been far too much shagging around in their perception (my words, not theirs), when it comes to forming a new government.   The report said New Zealand’s score had decreased to 78.5 out of 100, down from 79.4, the lowest score the country has received since 2010.  A lower score implies greater political risk.   Seriously, Fitch Group, I presume you're not based in New Zealand.   I presume you haven't been living here for a number of years because I don't know about you, and I would really, really like to find out, but even without a government I feel the country is more stable and positive than when we had one that had been elected in a landslide.   Talks are continuing, we should have a government by close of play tomorrow who can then get cracking and hopefully have a plan of attack by Christmas. And I don't feel unstable at all. I'd love to get a gauge on when you're at do you feel more positive about the future? And it certainly helps that we're out of the doldrums of winter and into warmer, sunnier days, there is no doubt that that improves the mood.   Because nothing has really changed tangibly since we had a Labour government. The hospitals are still stretched to capacity.  It’s still so expensive to stock the pantry. Our roads are still in an appalling condition. The war in Ukraine goes on and the situation in Gaza is beyond unspeakable. Covid is ripping through the country. So really nothing much has changed, all of the problems that we had still exist both locally and internationally.  And the new government hasn't even been established, far less been tested on its management of these different issues.   But far from feeling shaky or feeling that the country feels unstable and jittery and on edge, I just don't get that sense at all. I feel more positive than I have for many years. And I don't know if that's just because we don't have to hear of yet more tales of ineptitude, that we don't have to see money being squandered. The new government may well end up being inept and squander our money, as I say, they are as yet untested, but at least we don't have to report on it on a daily basis, because that was grinding my gears.   Maybe it's because we're not talking about stuff ups and wanton wastefulness, having a break from talking politics, perhaps.   Maybe it is simply as banal as it changing from winter to spring and summer, but I certainly feel far more positive with no government than I did with one elected in a landslide.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So it appears the policy has been hammered out, and it's just a matter of dealing with the positions within the new government. But when you're dealing with politicians and egos, it's no simple process.   Some of the posts surely are obvious. Minister for Agriculture must be Andrew Hoggard, former Federated Farmer's head. Mark Mitchell for police, he's been in training for that job his whole working life. Erica Stanford for education. Even the most vainglorious of party leaders must acknowledge the right people should get the right job for the good of the country.   But the baubles of office are glittery and shiny and tempting and if you've had them once, you'd want them. So, who will be Deputy Prime Minister? According to Christopher Luxon, that's a job that's largely a job in name only.  “Well, look, I mean, it's largely a ceremonial role. There's a lot of talk about it, but it's a ceremonial role to actually fill in for when I'm incapacitated, away or, or not in the House. And so, you know, that's the that's how it's set up under our New Zealand system, largely ceremonial and for when I'm not there.”  If that doesn't sound like a man who's trying to prepare the country for Deputy Winston, I don't know what does. Initially, I took umbrage at his stance that being a Deputy Prime Minister is a largely ceremonial role. I have known deputy prime ministers in the past and they have worked jolly hard. But as one of the hardest working former deputy prime ministers said on Heather's show last night, times have changed.  “We are in a different era now. I was a deputy when there was one party. Under MMP, of course, deputies are liable to be from other parties, which in fact means their role will be different. But otherwise, in a single party system, you're there to do the things that your leader, your Prime Minister, just doesn't do. Meet the people he doesn't want to meet, go to the places he hasn't got time to go to. “  That, of course was Sir Don McKinnon, who would have been one of the best deputy prime ministers we've seen.   So, your thoughts, if you're a political beast. Does the role of Deputy Prime Minister matter in this MMP era or matter as much as it used to matter? Who should get it? And surely, as with any team, you pick the best person for the position. It should not be a matter of placating egos, but I know up to a point it will have to be, given the nature of those who enter into politics.   You've got to have a certain amount of ego to put yourself out there and say pick me, I’m the best person for the job. The country is in too much of a state not to take government and governance seriously. We need the best people in the right positions working for us all. They are public servants. They are in their jobs at the whim of the voters, and they are here to work for us.   Some of them might need to be reminded of that. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My mouth began to open in gobsmacked incredulity and then just as quickly snapped shut again.  Yes, the Herald investigation that found Auckland Transport is spending on average $470,000 a pedestrian crossing is shocking. But those of us with memories, and indeed arses, like elephants, remember how much the Wellington City Council spent on their pedestrian crossing on Cobham Drive out towards the airport.   Let's Get Wellington Moving. Was there ever a more poorly named organisation? Let's Get Wellington Moving spent $2.4 million on that one pedestrian crossing. I think it was slightly more in the end. Of that $1.86 million was for construction costs, $535K was for consultants. It is absolutely and utterly ludicrous.   AT is defending the cost of their, when you look at it, quite cheap pedestrian crossings. When you compare $470K with $1.86 million and well $2.4 by the time you take ... anyway, they're defending the cost of their $470K pedestrian crossing, saying they need 27 crossings. Having signals makes them more expensive as well, but they need them because it's part of the Vision Zero strategy and the crossings are necessary to save lives in areas where there is a high safety risk, for example near schools. Auckland Councillor Maurice Williamson is absolutely horrified at the cost and the attitude of saving lives, no matter how much money you have to spend.  Honestly. The thing is the Vision Zero strategy is not saving lives. It's not even working. For that money AT set a target of reducing deaths and serious injuries to no more than 537. I don't know where that figure came from, but nonetheless, 537 lives in 2022.   So that was the target. Let's keep deaths and serious injuries to no more than 537 and in 2022 there were 649. Good one. The other thing that absolutely gets my goat is that they don't spend. And when I say they, I mean just about every council I can think of, don't spend this enormous amount of money and get the job done once and right. Time and again they have to come back and redo the bloody job.   AT spent $346K on a raised light controlled pedestrian crossing in the inner city. Faulty work was picked up during construction. It was seven months before the problems were fixed, causing more disruption. Hello orange cones, how I've missed you said no one in Auckland, ever!   With the staggering amounts of money chucked at them, with the millions of dollars spent on consultants, stuff ups happen time and time and time again. Would this happen if it was their own money? Do we do this? We're doing renos on the home, we get the architects in and you know the builders in and oh, there's a stuff-up.  I've noticed that you've put a door there instead of a window. What the hell? Let's just start again and do it all over again. It doesn't matter about the money. Don't be silly. We'll just get more of it.   This is what incenses me. You could possibly make a justification that you could spend this sort of money. If you did it once, you did it right and it saved lives. It's not ticking any of those boxes. Justify yourselves. Justify the expense on these consultants. How very dare you come to me and say I want you to pay more rates, when your incompetent fools waste money with the cavalier disregard of a Labour Government. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Now, a little bit of background. I'm no manager. I have only ever managed a couple of restaurants briefly and I wasn't a terribly good manager. I ended up about 3 months into my managerial position being sued for constructive dismissal after trying to say somebody was a bit rubbish at training the other waitresses, but he was still very good at what he did and he could stay on the same money. Apparently that's constructive dismissal. There we go. Expensive learning curve for the restaurant and for me - I'm a rubbish manager, far better employee. But reading this letter that was sent from senior emergency department doctors at North Shore and Waitakere Hospitals pleading for dedicated security guards to be allocated to their wards, is an absolute no brainer management decision, even from a numpty like me. These senior doctors wrote to Te Whatu Ora, and not for the first time, and said- please, more security is needed to keep us and to keep the patients safe. So as a management decision, surely, and please put me right, but surely this is not as complicated as juggling stuff rosters, trying to get staff out of nowhere. You haven't got enough staff already and then they've been slammed by nasty flus and Covid and just life, that would be complicated. I would find that a difficult thing to do trying to find enough people with the different skills required to keep the hospital running. It would also be difficult trying to keep up the merry-go-round of hospital beds required. We have too many people clogging up the exit pipe because there isn't the at home care to allow them to recover safely at home, so they stay in wards in beds that are needed. That would be complicated. That would take time. That stuff would be tricky. But when my senior doctors tell me that they, or one of their colleagues, or one of the patients in their care could be killed or seriously injured if security is not improved, when I know for a fact that they're not making this up, they're not over exaggerating, they're not over dramatizing, there have been incidents where doctors have been assaulted, where patients have been assaulted, where the panic button has been hit 1000 times in a matter of months. They're not being silly. They’re not being hysterical. They're responding to a real threat to their well-being and safety. So when they tell me that - and I know this because the reports have to come across my desk- as a manager, I would suspect that there's been under reporting of all the incidents, only the most serious come across my desk. So this comes across my desk. They say somebody is going to die unless you listen to us. Surely, as the manager I think, hmm, well, I've left it a year. No, they're pretty serious. And I have seen a lot of incidents come across my desk.  What do you do as a manager? I would jump onto the computer, Google security companies, check that they're with the Security Guards Association, check their reviews, and phone their referees. Even with those checks and balances in place, I should have extra security that very night, being trained up to ensure the safety of my staff and my patients. Even going back to the security guard whom you use right now. Have you got enough guards to add to the roster? If you don't, can you recommend another security company with the same kind of dedication to service that you've shown us? It wouldn't be that hard, would it? Surely that is a very easy one to fix in the middle of a highly dysfunctional public health system. At the moment, though, the hospitals are covered by a team of up to five guards. The doctors say they value them highly. However, there's simply not enough of them. And of course, they're not often able to immediately respond to incidents of violence and aggression in the EDs. I've seen the security guards at work in the ED at North Shore Hospital. He was really good, as were the medical staff and the police officers involved. They were kind, they were respectful, they were firm, they were brilliant examples of being human. But if, as the doctors say, there are only 5 guards, have you seen the size of those hospitals? They'd have to cover all the wards a and when required, all the access points into the hospital, as well as areas outside. That's a pretty tough ask for five security guards. As I say, this request has not come out of the blue, doctors and nurses have been asking for full-time security at the hospitals since last year, after a growing number of assaults and aggression directed at staff and patients. This is simply unacceptable behaviour on behalf of the aggressors. Who the hell do you think you are, coming to a place where you are only going to get the utmost respect and kindness and care and turning on the very people who are helping you? Appalling behaviour. But it's also unacceptable behaviour for management. A year on and nothing's happened. A year on, and if the worst happens, as the doctors predict, then the blood of any staff or patients will be on the hands of Te Whatu Ora management. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A survey of our 200 largest and fastest growing tech exporters shows the sector is booming   Revenue for the so-called tin 200 increased 11.8 percent to 17 billion dollars in the past year...  The Former Managing Director at TIN, Greg Shanahan, told Heather Du Plessis-Allan that “the sector is reaching maturity, and the number of large companies is growing dramatically”.     LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.