Labour and National appear to be aligned on the Paris Climate Agreement.  

Yesterday ACT called for New Zealand to leave unless the terms of the deal change, but the Prime Minister said no.  

Labour's Chris Hipkins echoed Christopher Luxon, telling John MacDonald leaving the deal would cause more harm than good.  

He says it would be a disaster for us – walking away from those commitments would mean people overseas would stop buying our products. 

Hipkins says our largest export industries rely on New Zealand’s clean, green reputation. 

LISTEN ABOVE  

Labour and National appear to be aligned on the Paris Climate Agreement. &nbsp;
Yesterday ACT called for New Zealand to leave unless the terms of the deal change, but the Prime Minister said no. &nbsp;
Labour's Chris Hipkins echoed Christopher Luxon, telling John MacDonald leaving the deal would cause more harm than good. &nbsp;
He says it would be a disaster for us – walking away from those commitments would mean people overseas would stop buying our products.&nbsp;
Hipkins says our largest export industries rely on New Zealand’s clean, green reputation.&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE &nbsp;

Every weekday join the new voice of local issues on Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald, 9am-12pm weekdays.

It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.

If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio.

With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector.

Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.

Every weekday join the new voice of local issues on Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald, 9am-12pm weekdays. It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking. If it’s news you’re after, backing John is the combined power of the Newstalk ZB and New Zealand Herald news teams. Meaning when it comes to covering breaking news – you will not beat local radio. With two decades experience in communications based in Christchurch, John also has a deep understanding of and connections to the Christchurch and Canterbury commercial sector. Newstalk ZB Canterbury Mornings 9am-12pm with John MacDonald on 100.1FM and iHeartRadio.

Every weekday join the new voice of local issues on Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald, 9am-12pm weekdays.

It’s all about the conversation with John, as he gets right into the things that get our community talking.

Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald

Chris Hipkins: Labour leader on ACT's call to leave the Paris Agreement, Foreign buyers, ditching open-plan classrooms

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/c982cc9f-7103-4862-8410-b34d00120afe/transcript

If you bump into Chris Hipkins today, can you tell him he’s dreaming?

Because, now that we know this year’s election is happening on 7 November, Chris Hipkins is saying that Labour can get more than 40 percent of the party vote and form the next government.

He also wants Labour to win back Auckland.

He’s dreaming. Because I don’t think voters, generally, are ready yet to give Labour another chance. And I don’t think voters in Auckland, especially, are ready to trust Labour again.

Hipkins is doing what leaders do - especially in election year. They rally the troops. But it’s going to be a big task keeping the troops rallied for 10 months.

And I know Labour will be disappointed that the election isn’t happening sooner. An earlier election would have meant less time for the economy to recover. Plus, Labour has nowhere near the same campaign resources that the likes of the National Party has.

So it’s going to be a tough winter for the party.

The thing is: what would we need to see from Labour or hear from Labour to buy into this talk from Chris Hipkins that it’s a different party from last time around? Rather than banging-on about changing and being different, we need to hear what it is the party has accepted about itself that has driven this so-called change. It’s very easy to say “oh, we’ve changed. we’re different now, you’re gonna love the new us”. That’s just telling people what you think people want to hear.

To even think about giving Labour another chance so soon, people need to see the difference.

Let me give you an example: you’re running a cafe but customers are leaving in droves because they don’t like the way you and your staff treat them when they come in for lunch or a coffee. You’re a bunch of grumps. Terrible vibe. So people give you the flick. You realise what’s happening and you go onto your Facebook page and you say “hey guys, I’m hearing that some of you haven’t been that impressed with our service. Hey, I’ve had a word to the team and we’re different now, we’ve changed our ways, so come on back.”

Would you buy into that? I’m picking voters will be exactly the same with Labour.

LISTEN ABOVE

If you bump into Chris Hipkins today, can you tell him he’s dreaming?
Because, now that we know this year’s election is happening on 7 November, Chris Hipkins is saying that Labour can get more than 40 percent of the party vote and form the next government.
He also wants Labour to win back Auckland.
He’s dreaming. Because I don’t think voters, generally, are ready yet to give Labour another chance. And I don’t think voters in Auckland, especially, are ready to trust Labour again.
Hipkins is doing what leaders do - especially in election year. They rally the troops. But it’s going to be a big task keeping the troops rallied for 10 months.
And I know Labour will be disappointed that the election isn’t happening sooner. An earlier election would have meant less time for the economy to recover. Plus, Labour has nowhere near the same campaign resources that the likes of the National Party has.
So it’s going to be a tough winter for the party.
The thing is: what would we need to see from Labour or hear from Labour to buy into this talk from Chris Hipkins that it’s a different party from last time around? Rather than banging-on about changing and being different, we need to hear what it is the party has accepted about itself that has driven this so-called change. It’s very easy to say “oh, we’ve changed. we’re different now, you’re gonna love the new us”. That’s just telling people what you think people want to hear.
To even think about giving Labour another chance so soon, people need to see the difference.
Let me give you an example: you’re running a cafe but customers are leaving in droves because they don’t like the way you and your staff treat them when they come in for lunch or a coffee. You’re a bunch of grumps. Terrible vibe. So people give you the flick. You realise what’s happening and you go onto your Facebook page and you say “hey guys, I’m hearing that some of you haven’t been that impressed with our service. Hey, I’ve had a word to the team and we’re different now, we’ve changed our ways, so come on back.”
Would you buy into that? I’m picking voters will be exactly the same with Labour.
LISTEN ABOVE

John MacDonald: Hey Labour, don't tell us you've changed - show us you've changed

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/7c8601d7-7ef3-491c-93b9-b3d90187e492/transcript

Phil Goff agrees with the Christchurch City Council's response to a Government proposal of capping rates to no more than 2 to 4 percent per year.

Goff says the Government is not performing in lowering the cost of living, but a rates cap is not the right answer.

The former Mayor of Auckland told John MacDonald the Government sees local councils as an "easy target".

Christchurch City Council has responded to the Government's proposal, saying that while they support a prudent approach to managing rates, the cap as currently designed is “unrealistic and unworkable”.

LISTEN ABOVE

Phil Goff agrees with the Christchurch City Council's response to a Government proposal of capping rates to no more than 2 to 4 percent per year.
Goff says the Government is not performing in lowering the cost of living, but a rates cap is not the right answer.
The former Mayor of Auckland told John MacDonald the Government sees local councils as an "easy target".
Christchurch City Council has responded to the Government's proposal, saying that while they support a prudent approach to managing rates, the cap as currently designed is “unrealistic and unworkable”.
LISTEN ABOVE

Phil Goff: former Mayor of Auckland dismisses rates caps as 'pure politics'

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/e5b7cc91-e79c-4c71-8abb-b3d9001086b2/transcript

Hats off to the Christchurch City Council.

Which is telling the Government today that its idea of forcing a cap on council rates increases is “unrealistic and unworkable”.

Which is a polite way of saying “rates caps are a daft idea, so just drop it right now”.

And that’s what I think too. I’ve always thought it’s a daft idea to force local councils around the country to increase rates by no more than 2 to 4 percent each year. It sounds brilliant, but it’s never going to work.

The Christchurch council says even at the upper range of a 4 percent cap, it would be forced to cut costs by up to $120 million a year.

Which confirms to me that the Government either has no idea or no interest in the financial realities local councils are dealing with.

Christchurch city council says rates caps would force cuts to essential services, lead to a decay in assets, delay investment in critical infrastructure, and reduce the council’s ability to repay debt.

Not only that. It says they would drive up fees and charges. Which the Government isn’t being totally upfront about.

Because, just before Christmas, a Cabinet paper was quietly published which shows we’re only being told part of the story.

In the paper, the local government minister says the rates caps are intended to “incentivise greater use of user charges, which have declined in recent years”.

Which is what the Christchurch city council is warning us about today.If councils are forced to limit annual rates increases to somewhere between 2 and 4 percent, we’ll just end up paying more in other ways. How do you feel about higher parking fees? Higher dump fees. Paying more to use your council pool. Higher consent charges. Life won’t be cheaper, it will be more expensive.

I’ve always known that this idea isn’t actually going to deliver us any benefits.

This cabinet paper and the people who actually know a thing or two about how councils work - Christchurch city council staff and councillors - are proof.

No matter how much you might think your local council needs to rein-in the spending, this idea of rates caps won’t make one bit of difference.

LISTEN ABOVE

Hats off to the Christchurch City Council.
Which is telling the Government today that its idea of forcing a cap on council rates increases is “unrealistic and unworkable”.
Which is a polite way of saying “rates caps are a daft idea, so just drop it right now”.
And that’s what I think too. I’ve always thought it’s a daft idea to force local councils around the country to increase rates by no more than 2 to 4 percent each year. It sounds brilliant, but it’s never going to work.
The Christchurch council says even at the upper range of a 4 percent cap, it would be forced to cut costs by up to $120 million a year.
Which confirms to me that the Government either has no idea or no interest in the financial realities local councils are dealing with.
Christchurch city council says rates caps would force cuts to essential services, lead to a decay in assets, delay investment in critical infrastructure, and reduce the council’s ability to repay debt.
Not only that. It says they would drive up fees and charges. Which the Government isn’t being totally upfront about.
Because, just before Christmas, a Cabinet paper was quietly published which shows we’re only being told part of the story.
In the paper, the local government minister says the rates caps are intended to “incentivise greater use of user charges, which have declined in recent years”.
Which is what the Christchurch city council is warning us about today.If councils are forced to limit annual rates increases to somewhere between 2 and 4 percent, we’ll just end up paying more in other ways. How do you feel about higher parking fees? Higher dump fees. Paying more to use your council pool. Higher consent charges. Life won’t be cheaper, it will be more expensive.
I’ve always known that this idea isn’t actually going to deliver us any benefits.
This cabinet paper and the people who actually know a thing or two about how councils work - Christchurch city council staff and councillors - are proof.
No matter how much you might think your local council needs to rein-in the spending, this idea of rates caps won’t make one bit of difference.
LISTEN ABOVE

John MacDonald: Rate caps won't make a difference

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/fc2e3137-6c4f-4bf8-bc01-b3d90005f11d/transcript

Chris Hipkins: Labour leader on ACT's call to leave the Paris Agreement, Foreign buyers, ditching open-plan classrooms

In 1 playlist(s)

Canterbury Mornings with John MacDonald

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips