A late scratching ahead of this afternoon's Melbourne Cup, with New Zealand-bred hope Asterix ruled out of the great race.

The majority New Zealand-owned horse - who won the 2022 New Zealand Derby - is guided by Sydney-based Kiwi trainer Chris Waller.

Sportstalk host D'Arcy Waldegrave explained what to expect ahead of this evening's race.

LISTEN ABOVE

A late scratching ahead of this afternoon's Melbourne Cup, with New Zealand-bred hope Asterix ruled out of the great race.
The majority New Zealand-owned horse - who won the 2022 New Zealand Derby - is guided by Sydney-based Kiwi trainer Chris Waller.
Sportstalk host D'Arcy Waldegrave explained what to expect ahead of this evening's race.
LISTEN ABOVE

With a straight down the middle approach, Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive on Newstalk ZB delivers the very latest news and views to New Zealanders as they wrap up their day.

Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive

D'Arcy Waldegrave: Sportstalk host speaks ahead of the 2026 Melbourne Cup

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/56ce7243-f81c-4f25-a6f7-b4f70042c376/transcript

Tonight on The Huddle, Wellington Mornings host Nick Mills and former Labour chief of staff Mike Munro joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more!

What do we think of the whole Netball NZ v Ali Williams/Anna Mowbray saga? Could this have been handled better? 

The election campaign is due to wrap up soon - what do we make of it? Does Opportunity have a real future in Parliament? 

LISTEN ABOVE

Tonight on The Huddle, Wellington Mornings host Nick Mills and former Labour chief of staff Mike Munro joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the day - and more!
What do we think of the whole Netball NZ v Ali Williams/Anna Mowbray saga? Could this have been handled better?&nbsp;
The election campaign is due to wrap up soon - what do we make of it? Does Opportunity have a real future in Parliament?&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE

The Huddle: Could the Netball NZ saga have been handled better?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/abceaea1-7a58-4c64-932b-b4f70069d5ff/transcript

Revolut has become New Zealand's 27th bank, after the Reserve Bank granted the London-based platform a banking licence.

This will enable Revolut to hold deposits and participate in the Reserve Bank’s Depositor Compensation Scheme. 

Revolut CEO Ryan Brosnahan says this is an 'exciting' opportunity. 

"We find that customers actually want to interact with their phones, rather than walking into a branch - and so we've built the entire business around that." 

LISTEN ABOVE

Revolut has become New Zealand's 27th bank, after the Reserve Bank granted the London-based platform a banking licence.
This will enable Revolut to hold deposits and participate in the Reserve Bank’s Depositor Compensation Scheme.&nbsp;
Revolut CEO&nbsp;Ryan Brosnahan says this is an 'exciting' opportunity.&nbsp;
"We find that customers actually want to interact with their phones, rather than walking into a branch - and so we've built the entire business around that."&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE

Ryan Brosnahan: Revolut CEO on the company securing approval to become New Zealand's first digital bank

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/1fd86fed-0f28-4b42-b759-b4f7006302d7/transcript

Have you seen the data from the first nine days of police using move-on orders?

Guess how many of the 29 people police moved on were homeless. Four. Four of them.

Four out of the 29 were homeless, which means 25 of them, the vast, vast, vast majority, had homes, or at least addresses, they could go and spend their day at instead.

So all of that angst about where we were going to move people to, all of that "you can't just move them on if you've got nowhere to move them to", was for nothing. Because the answer is: we do have somewhere to move them to. Their own homes.

Turns out this law is not as cruel and disgusting as the hand-wringers in the Greens and Labour said it was. Turns out the people being moved on were not all the vulnerable innocents they were portrayed as being.

Turns out, at least according to the data, most of the move-on orders were issued to people who were drunk, intimidating, threatening, disorderly or breaching the peace. Twenty-eight out of the 29 people moved on fell into those categories.

I could have predicted that for you.

And of the four who didn't have a home to go to, police did not lock them up. They did not treat them unkindly. In at least one case, they gave the person food and took them somewhere they could eat it.

Now, here's my question for you: how many of these people would have been locked up if it weren't for move-on orders?

Because that was the go-to option for police beforehand, wasn't it? If you were causing a ruckus somewhere in town and the cops came up to you and told you to move on, and you were in a mind to be a pain in the butt and refused to leave, instead continuing to make a nuisance of yourself, it was off to jail for you.

Now, instead of jail, it's a piece of paper telling you to jog on and, hopefully, acting as a lesser punishment that diffuses the situation.

If the hand-wringers really cared about these people as much as they say they do, they would support move-on orders. Because surely a little piece of paper is better than the alternative, which is jail.

LISTEN ABOVE

Have you seen the data from the first nine days of police using move-on orders?
Guess how many of the 29 people police moved on were homeless. Four. Four of them.
Four out of the 29 were homeless, which means 25 of them, the vast, vast, vast majority, had homes, or at least addresses, they could go and spend their day at instead.
So all of that angst about where we were going to move people to, all of that "you can't just move them on if you've got nowhere to move them to", was for nothing. Because the answer is: we do have somewhere to move them to. Their own homes.
Turns out this law is not as cruel and disgusting as the hand-wringers in the Greens and Labour said it was. Turns out the people being moved on were not all the vulnerable innocents they were portrayed as being.
Turns out, at least according to the data, most of the move-on orders were issued to people who were drunk, intimidating, threatening, disorderly or breaching the peace. Twenty-eight out of the 29 people moved on fell into those categories.
I could have predicted that for you.
And of the four who didn't have a home to go to, police did not lock them up. They did not treat them unkindly. In at least one case, they gave the person food and took them somewhere they could eat it.
Now, here's my question for you: how many of these people would have been locked up if it weren't for move-on orders?
Because that was the go-to option for police beforehand, wasn't it? If you were causing a ruckus somewhere in town and the cops came up to you and told you to move on, and you were in a mind to be a pain in the butt and refused to leave, instead continuing to make a nuisance of yourself, it was off to jail for you.
Now, instead of jail, it's a piece of paper telling you to jog on and, hopefully, acting as a lesser punishment that diffuses the situation.
If the hand-wringers really cared about these people as much as they say they do, they would support move-on orders. Because surely a little piece of paper is better than the alternative, which is jail.
LISTEN ABOVE

Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: Here's what the data from police move-on orders tells us

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/2bf49d02-8d71-4503-bdbe-b4f7005d9b2f/transcript

D'Arcy Waldegrave: Sportstalk host speaks ahead of the 2026 Melbourne Cup

In 1 playlist(s)

Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips