There is only one story in town. 

I realised this when I entered the newsroom and everyone was still itching to talk about it. 

Firstly, I am so glad the assassin was unsuccessful. 

The repercussions from this attempt are already dramatic enough. If Trump had been slaughtered, then the reaction could have been disastrous for the United States. 

Imagine January 6 and the insurrection and then multiply that horror by a thousand. Every Trumpist and their dog would be reaching for their guns right now and the chances of an uprising or a civil war would have increased dramatically. 

Obviously, there was a failure in the security detail, the assassination was only averted by a chance movement of the president's head, even though he was already in the sights of a Secret Service sniper. 

This is disturbing - but also unfortunate in that the rumour mill online now suggests that the Biden camp had deliberately scaled down security for Trump despite obvious signs the whole election race was getting tetchy. 

I don't believe this because the sniper had the shooter in his sights. The attempt was preventable, but the Secret Service has lost its edge. This is also understandable, considering this was the first attempt on a President in 40 years.

Meanwhile, the escalating tension has been covered by the MSM for some time now, complete with warnings that it could all get too real. This means that many supporters at the rally believed it was the media's fault. "You wanted political violence well you got it". Or- "the liberal media is responsible", one person said. Warning it's rising is not wishing it would happen. 

This shows that many have fallen for the 'look over there' trick played by many politicians and media commentators. Shooting the messenger and not listening to the message is a weakness. When a truth is not liked by a politician they attack the media. They've been doing this for decades.

And then tension in the States is spreading. In my whole life, I have never heard more commentary on the left and the right. There is no left and right in America. Their left is right of our National Party. 

But there is a real battle between liberals and conservatives. And it centres on touch paper issues like immigration and abortion and governmental overreach in civic life. And the language used is extreme and exaggerated to drive home the points, and that creates anger and dispute. And we end up with the disunited states of America.

And the real question is whether there can be a return to civil public discourse. 

Biden has already expressed this and a desire to bring unity back to the United States in an address from the Oval Office.

And I will ask the question - can the US discover unity, or have we gone too far down a track of division?

There is only one story in town. I realised this when I entered the newsroom and everyone was still itching to talk about it. Firstly, I am so glad the assassin was unsuccessful. The repercussions from this attempt are already dramatic enough. If Trump had been slaughtered, then the reaction could have been disastrous for the United States. Imagine January 6 and the insurrection and then multiply that horror by a thousand. Every Trumpist and their dog would be reaching for their guns right now and the chances of an uprising or a civil war would have increased dramatically. Obviously, there was a failure in the security detail, the assassination was only averted by a chance movement of the president's head, even though he was already in the sights of a Secret Service sniper. This is disturbing - but also unfortunate in that the rumour mill online now suggests that the Biden camp had deliberately scaled down security for Trump despite obvious signs the whole election race was getting tetchy. I don't believe this because the sniper had the shooter in his sights. The attempt was preventable, but the Secret Service has lost its edge. This is also understandable, considering this was the first attempt on a President in 40 years. Meanwhile, the escalating tension has been covered by the MSM for some time now, complete with warnings that it could all get too real. This means that many supporters at the rally believed it was the media's fault. "You wanted political violence well you got it". Or- "the liberal media is responsible", one person said. Warning it's rising is not wishing it would happen. This shows that many have fallen for the 'look over there' trick played by many politicians and media commentators. Shooting the messenger and not listening to the message is a weakness. When a truth is not liked by a politician they attack the media. They've been doing this for decades. And then tension in the States is spreading. In my whole life, I have never heard more commentary on the left and the right. There is no left and right in America. Their left is right of our National Party. But there is a real battle between liberals and conservatives. And it centres on touch paper issues like immigration and abortion and governmental overreach in civic life. And the language used is extreme and exaggerated to drive home the points, and that creates anger and dispute. And we end up with the disunited states of America. And the real question is whether there can be a return to civil public discourse. Biden has already expressed this and a desire to bring unity back to the United States in an address from the Oval Office. And I will ask the question - can the US discover unity, or have we gone too far down a track of division?

With decades of broadcasting experience behind him, Andrew Dickens has worked around the world across multiple radio genres. His bold, sharp and energetic show on Newstalk ZB is always informative and entertaining.

Andrew Dickens Afternoons

Andrew Dickens: Can we ever return to civil public discourse?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/582d1b54-b336-41a6-aedb-b1ae002de357/transcript

So, the Herald, in the weekend, came out and called the anti-cycle lane movement a culture war in its editorial.

They pointed out the bleeding obvious - that cycleways aren't the reason there is not enough money to improve our roads.

They pointed out that cycleways make up 1 percent of our transport spending. It's far less than footpaths - but you never get talkback calls moaning about footpaths, do you now?

This comes after the owners of the Westmere Butchery complained about a proposed cycleway outside their door affecting business.

There's no parking outside their door. Look at Google Maps. There's 25 cars parked down Garnet Road and there's room for more. They're talking bull. They've turned out to be useful soldiers in a culture war.

So was the Wellington owner of Pandoro Bakery, whose main shop on Allens Street is 100 metres from a free supermarket carpark and there's not a cycleway nearby or even proposed.

I have no idea what their motivation is. Other than a desire to prevent us from having good things. Other than a desire to have a mediocre country.

It's the common line from politicians these days - we can only have the 'need to haves' but not the 'nice to haves'. But it's a nonsensical slogan when you can't figure out the difference between the two.

It's the 'need to have' thinking that gave us the flawed Harbour Bridge. Someone somehow figured out that 8 lanes and a railway line were a 'nice to have' and 'not a need' to have for a future growing city.

The Prime Minister claimed that the Wellington Convention Centre was a 'nice to have' and that's we don't have money to fix the burst pipes. The pipes are broken because they weren't replaced 50 years ago and now they're 100 years old. That's because someone 50 years ago decided that water pipe maintenance was a 'nice to have' and that someone in the future can pay for it when it becomes a 'need to have'.

On an overseas trip before the election, the Prime Minister gave New Zealand a serve for being wet and having no mojo.

Well, look in the mirror, Christopher and Simeon.

Businesses will look at you and all your false economy and see a so-called CEO who doesn't believe in capex or investment in plants and machinery.

And we'll look at other countries and wonder why our 'nice to haves' are their 'need to haves'.

LISTEN ABOVE

So, the Herald, in the weekend, came out and called the anti-cycle lane movement a culture war in its editorial.
They pointed out the bleeding obvious - that cycleways aren't the reason there is not enough money to improve our roads.
They pointed out that cycleways make up 1 percent of our transport spending. It's far less than footpaths - but you never get talkback calls moaning about footpaths, do you now?
This comes after the owners of the Westmere Butchery complained about a proposed cycleway outside their door affecting business.
There's no parking outside their door. Look at Google Maps. There's 25 cars parked down Garnet Road and there's room for more. They're talking bull. They've turned out to be useful soldiers in a culture war.
So was the Wellington owner of Pandoro Bakery, whose main shop on Allens Street is 100 metres from a free supermarket carpark and there's not a cycleway nearby or even proposed.
I have no idea what their motivation is. Other than a desire to prevent us from having good things. Other than a desire to have a mediocre country.
It's the common line from politicians these days - we can only have the 'need to haves' but not the 'nice to haves'. But it's a nonsensical slogan when you can't figure out the difference between the two.
It's the 'need to have' thinking that gave us the flawed Harbour Bridge. Someone somehow figured out that 8 lanes and a railway line were a 'nice to have' and 'not a need' to have for a future growing city.
The Prime Minister claimed that the Wellington Convention Centre was a 'nice to have' and that's we don't have money to fix the burst pipes. The pipes are broken because they weren't replaced 50 years ago and now they're 100 years old. That's because someone 50 years ago decided that water pipe maintenance was a 'nice to have' and that someone in the future can pay for it when it becomes a 'need to have'.
On an overseas trip before the election, the Prime Minister gave New Zealand a serve for being wet and having no mojo.
Well, look in the mirror, Christopher and Simeon.
Businesses will look at you and all your false economy and see a so-called CEO who doesn't believe in capex or investment in plants and machinery.
And we'll look at other countries and wonder why our 'nice to haves' are their 'need to haves'.
LISTEN ABOVE

Andrew Dickens: We need to learn the difference between needs and 'nice to haves'

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/17f8a8b8-f27e-4047-9d0d-b1ed0031a8af/transcript

So the latest twist in the Treaty Principles debate is that the churches have come out against it.

More than 400 church leaders are urging MPs to vote against David Seymour's bill.

It's the latest chapter in a debate that has been described as 'divisive'.

If you don't think it's been divisive you weren't listening to Māori at the King's funeral. They're not hearing the One People argument, because they don't believe the bill promotes that. In fact, they believe the opposite. They believe the Treaty is how we achieve One People Together in agreement.

Personally, I don't care. I don't care if you support Māori and I don't care if you support Mr Seymour.

The fact of the matter is this is a virtue-signalling sideshow and it is divisive. Just like vaccinations and mandates and the Middle East.

The Treaty Principles Bill is divisive. And the reason why it's a virtue-signalling sideshow is because both National and New Zealand First have already said it won't get past the first reading. So it's a dead policy walking.

Why not kill it now and stop wasting our time, money and emotion?

Or the other parties could change their minds and help their coalition partner. But then you'll be branded as flippy-floppy.

Either way, I can't see how this helps National. You have a divided angry nation at each other's throat or you look weak.

Who's in charge of this coalition?

And speaking of which:

Former gun lobbyist Nicole McKee has used her power as a Government minister to reduce regulation for gun clubs - without any public consultation. It's not a major thing, but it is an abandonment of the true democratic process.

Perhaps National needs a reminder that when the legislation was first introduced after the mosque atrocity that every single member of National voted for it. So were you wrong then or are you wrong now?

Both these stories feel like the tail wagging the dog and makes National look weak. And I don't like that.

LISTEN ABOVE

So the latest twist in the Treaty Principles debate is that the churches have come out against it.
More than 400 church leaders are urging MPs to vote against David Seymour's bill.
It's the latest chapter in a debate that has been described as 'divisive'.
If you don't think it's been divisive you weren't listening to Māori at the King's funeral. They're not hearing the One People argument, because they don't believe the bill promotes that. In fact, they believe the opposite. They believe the Treaty is how we achieve One People Together in agreement.
Personally, I don't care. I don't care if you support Māori and I don't care if you support Mr Seymour.
The fact of the matter is this is a virtue-signalling sideshow and it is divisive. Just like vaccinations and mandates and the Middle East.
The Treaty Principles Bill is divisive. And the reason why it's a virtue-signalling sideshow is because both National and New Zealand First have already said it won't get past the first reading. So it's a dead policy walking.
Why not kill it now and stop wasting our time, money and emotion?
Or the other parties could change their minds and help their coalition partner. But then you'll be branded as flippy-floppy.
Either way, I can't see how this helps National. You have a divided angry nation at each other's throat or you look weak.
Who's in charge of this coalition?
And speaking of which:
Former gun lobbyist Nicole McKee has used her power as a Government minister to reduce regulation for gun clubs - without any public consultation. It's not a major thing, but it is an abandonment of the true democratic process.
Perhaps National needs a reminder that when the legislation was first introduced after the mosque atrocity that every single member of National voted for it. So were you wrong then or are you wrong now?
Both these stories feel like the tail wagging the dog and makes National look weak. And I don't like that.
LISTEN ABOVE

Andrew Dickens: Why not kill the Treaty Principles Bill now?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/57c45e9f-5990-4bea-bfc8-b1e60032a1c0/transcript

I was going to start my programme today with some thoughts about the energy crisis, but something else has popped up.

But I will share with you some fun facts:

Did you know that New Zealand uses the same amount of electricity in 2024 as we did in 2004?

Even though our economic activity and population have grown immensely in the past 20 years. What happened is that we, as consumers, became more efficient with our electricity use. We started using LEDs, we started saving, we started being more careful with our use.

So the energy crunch is because we're not making as much electricity as we used to - even though we've been saving electricity ourselves 

Meanwhile, did you also know that there are currently 22 renewable electricity projects fully consented but not started by the gentailers?

So sure, blame the oil and gas exploration ban and that will result in an energy crunch in 10 years.

But today's energy crisis is because the generators, who are also the retailers, have not ensured supply despite having it all available to them for years now.

I've got more on that - but right now, I have to mention outgoing Treasury head Caralee McLiesh who's leaving for a job as Australia's auditor-general.

In her exit interview she said the New Zealand Government needs to make more revenue. And the only way a Government makes more money is more taxes. She'd like to see a capital gains tax

She's like to see a capital gains tax - and she says the Government needs to save more in the big expensive items. She mentions super. She'd like to see the age limit raised.

Now, Caralee is not some crazy ideological lefty who wants to see the old and rich punished.

She's pointing out the bleeding obvious. We are structurally bad. Economists have been saying this for generations. We don't tax enough. When we tax, we tax the wrong people. We don't spend enough and when we do, we do it cheap and too late and then complain when it all starts to fall apart.

Faced with all this economic reality, the current Government decided to reduce its revenue to help some taxpayers and landlords. That's the exact opposite of what the problem needs.

And then to make things worse, they've stopped spending. And we end up with a country where pregnant Mums can't have toast, Nelson can't get a new hospital building, we run ferries that should be in museums, we run out of power and water, and then we moan we're becoming a third world country and it's all Labour's fault.

Someone has to point out the bleeding obvious now and then. I'm pretty sure nothing will happen on Caralee McLeish's advice because to change our structure would be too expensive politically. No turkey votes for Christmas.

So before you moan again about how useless this country is, remember it's the country you voted for.

LISTEN ABOVE

I was going to start my programme today with some thoughts about the energy crisis, but something else has popped up.
But I will share with you some fun facts:
Did you know that New Zealand uses the same amount of electricity in 2024 as we did in 2004?
Even though our economic activity and population have grown immensely in the past 20 years. What happened is that we, as consumers, became more efficient with our electricity use. We started using LEDs, we started saving, we started being more careful with our use.
So the energy crunch is because we're not making as much electricity as we used to - even though we've been saving electricity ourselves 
Meanwhile, did you also know that there are currently 22 renewable electricity projects fully consented but not started by the gentailers?
So sure, blame the oil and gas exploration ban and that will result in an energy crunch in 10 years.
But today's energy crisis is because the generators, who are also the retailers, have not ensured supply despite having it all available to them for years now.
I've got more on that - but right now, I have to mention outgoing Treasury head Caralee McLiesh who's leaving for a job as Australia's auditor-general.
In her exit interview she said the New Zealand Government needs to make more revenue. And the only way a Government makes more money is more taxes. She'd like to see a capital gains tax
She's like to see a capital gains tax - and she says the Government needs to save more in the big expensive items. She mentions super. She'd like to see the age limit raised.
Now, Caralee is not some crazy ideological lefty who wants to see the old and rich punished.
She's pointing out the bleeding obvious. We are structurally bad. Economists have been saying this for generations. We don't tax enough. When we tax, we tax the wrong people. We don't spend enough and when we do, we do it cheap and too late and then complain when it all starts to fall apart.
Faced with all this economic reality, the current Government decided to reduce its revenue to help some taxpayers and landlords. That's the exact opposite of what the problem needs.
And then to make things worse, they've stopped spending. And we end up with a country where pregnant Mums can't have toast, Nelson can't get a new hospital building, we run ferries that should be in museums, we run out of power and water, and then we moan we're becoming a third world country and it's all Labour's fault.
Someone has to point out the bleeding obvious now and then. I'm pretty sure nothing will happen on Caralee McLeish's advice because to change our structure would be too expensive politically. No turkey votes for Christmas.
So before you moan again about how useless this country is, remember it's the country you voted for.
LISTEN ABOVE

Andrew Dickens: Someone has to point out the obvious now and then

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/8b7c6263-1380-4065-97e7-b1df003a5aa2/transcript

Andrew Dickens: Can we ever return to civil public discourse?

Andrew Dickens Afternoons

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips