Anger from transport operators who say something needs to change with the Interislander's Cook Strait ferry service.

The provider is only operating one ferry currently after the Aratere suffered damage hitting a linkspan when docking in Wellington yesterday.

The issue is under investigation by Interislander.

KAM Transport manager Bill Bamber told Kerre Woodham it's not good enough.

He says it's frustrating, and to describe it as a shambles would be an understatement.

LISTEN ABOVE

Anger from transport operators who say something needs to change with the Interislander's Cook Strait ferry service. 
The provider is only operating one ferry currently after the Aratere suffered damage hitting a linkspan when docking in Wellington yesterday. 
The issue is under investigation by Interislander. 
KAM Transport manager Bill Bamber told Kerre Woodham it's not good enough. 
He says it's frustrating, and to describe it as a shambles would be an understatement. 
LISTEN ABOVE

Join Kerre Woodham one of New Zealand’s best loved personalities as she dishes up a bold, sharp and energetic show Monday to Friday 9am-12md on Newstalk ZB. News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your morning listening covered.

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Bill Bamber: KAM Transport General Manager on the issues with the Interislander ferries, Aratere not operating

During the 2002 election campaign, New Zealand was having a major debate about the safety of genetically modified food. One memory you might have from this time is a televised interview between 3 News’s John Campbell, and Prime Minister Helen Clark. Campbell, fired up and informed by Nicky Hager's yet-to-be-published book Seeds of Distrust, alleged there had been a cover-up over the suspected release of GE corn seed in 2000. The tension was palpable. Clark was furious about being ambushed by Campbell, later labelling him a “sanctimonious little creep”. Remember that? It was an extraordinary interview, and it marked the beginning of Corngate, and it also made genetic engineering a politically untouchable subject.  

But that is all about to change.  

Yesterday the Government announced it is moving forward on its intentions to overhaul restrictions on the use of gene editing and other genetic technologies in New Zealand and establish a dedicated regulator. A regulator is being put in place to give the public confidence in this new approach.  

Legislation is expected to go to Parliament by the end of the year, removing regulatory hurdles on developing genetic technology beyond the lab that has been in place for the last 30 years. These new regulations will put us in line with the approach that Australia is taking.

Back in 2002, like a lot of people, I was interested in the Royal Commission of Inquiry and Corngate scandal and concerned about the potential impact of releasing GM crops into the environment.  

But like all technology – so much as changed over the last couple of decades, and if we don’t readdress these regulations then, as former chief scientist Professor Sir Peter Gluckman has warned NZ runs the risk of becoming a biotech backwater.

We can already buy products on our shelves that are genetically modified – they must be labelled, and we have a choice as to whether we buy them, but I can understand why some people are still concerned about the environmental releases of GE crops. Therefore, the government needs to make sure they get this piece of legislation right. It’s good to see robust risk assessments will be in place, which may also include public consultation before the regulator is satisfied with the risks can be managed.  

But there is so much more we can do with GE than just grow food. Over the last few decades, we have seen what GE can contribute to medicine, agriculture and the environment. As Science reporter Jamies Morton pointed out in the NZ Herald today.

Look at Wellington’s Malaghan Institute and its development of CAR T-cell cancer therapies that involves collecting a patient’s immune cells, genetically modifying the cells to recognise and kill their cancer and returning the cells to the patient as treatment. Current restrictions around research like this have proven challenging for scientists to work with.

Another company is developing gene-edited sterile Douglas fir trees as a way to help tackle the spread of wilding pines across our landscapes, but is having to conduct field trials in the US.

At AgResearch, scientists have been looking at whether gene editing might unlock a pathway in white clover leading to specific compounds that might also help cut methane and nitrogen pollution. The new laws would make it easier for the agency to run controlled field trials here in New Zealand

Implanting genetically modified sperm, eggs and embryos will remain prohibited.

So, is it something to still be afraid of?  

A survey on 1029 people run by Primary Purpose, a research firm specializing in primary industries discovered that attitudes on using genetic tech in food were approximately split into thirds: 34 percent support, 31 percent opposition and 34 percent were unsure. So how do you feel about it?  

This is new territory for New Zealand – it's a move away from a cautionary approach. But are we at the point now whereby the benefits for society outweigh the risks.  

During the 2002 election campaign, New Zealand was having a major debate about the safety of genetically modified food. One memory you might have from this time is a televised interview between 3 News’s John Campbell, and Prime Minister Helen Clark. Campbell, fired up and informed by Nicky Hager's yet-to-be-published book Seeds of Distrust, alleged there had been a cover-up over the suspected release of GE corn seed in 2000. The tension was palpable. Clark was furious about being ambushed by Campbell, later labelling him a “sanctimonious little creep”. Remember that? It was an extraordinary interview, and it marked the beginning of Corngate, and it also made genetic engineering a politically untouchable subject.   
But that is all about to change.   
Yesterday the Government announced it is moving forward on its intentions to overhaul restrictions on the use of gene editing and other genetic technologies in New Zealand and establish a dedicated regulator. A regulator is being put in place to give the public confidence in this new approach.   
Legislation is expected to go to Parliament by the end of the year, removing regulatory hurdles on developing genetic technology beyond the lab that has been in place for the last 30 years. These new regulations will put us in line with the approach that Australia is taking. 
Back in 2002, like a lot of people, I was interested in the Royal Commission of Inquiry and Corngate scandal and concerned about the potential impact of releasing GM crops into the environment.   
But like all technology – so much as changed over the last couple of decades, and if we don’t readdress these regulations then, as former chief scientist Professor Sir Peter Gluckman has warned NZ runs the risk of becoming a biotech backwater. 
We can already buy products on our shelves that are genetically modified – they must be labelled, and we have a choice as to whether we buy them, but I can understand why some people are still concerned about the environmental releases of GE crops. Therefore, the government needs to make sure they get this piece of legislation right. It’s good to see robust risk assessments will be in place, which may also include public consultation before the regulator is satisfied with the risks can be managed.   
But there is so much more we can do with GE than just grow food. Over the last few decades, we have seen what GE can contribute to medicine, agriculture and the environment. As Science reporter Jamies Morton pointed out in the NZ Herald today. 
Look at Wellington’s Malaghan Institute and its development of CAR T-cell cancer therapies that involves collecting a patient’s immune cells, genetically modifying the cells to recognise and kill their cancer and returning the cells to the patient as treatment. Current restrictions around research like this have proven challenging for scientists to work with. 
Another company is developing gene-edited sterile Douglas fir trees as a way to help tackle the spread of wilding pines across our landscapes, but is having to conduct field trials in the US. 
At AgResearch, scientists have been looking at whether gene editing might unlock a pathway in white clover leading to specific compounds that might also help cut methane and nitrogen pollution. The new laws would make it easier for the agency to run controlled field trials here in New Zealand 
Implanting genetically modified sperm, eggs and embryos will remain prohibited. 
So, is it something to still be afraid of?   
A survey on 1029 people run by Primary Purpose, a research firm specializing in primary industries discovered that attitudes on using genetic tech in food were approximately split into thirds: 34 percent support, 31 percent opposition and 34 percent were unsure. So how do you feel about it?   
This is new territory for New Zealand – it's a move away from a cautionary approach. But are we at the point now whereby the benefits for society outweigh the risks.

Francesca Rudkin: Should we still be afraid of gene editing?

Yesterday the Prime Minister said that the vast amount of people on Jobseeker Benefits were trying hard to find a job and meet their obligations, and before we have a conversation about changes to the Jobseeker Benefit, that is important to remember.  

But we do have a problem with the number of people on the Jobseeker Benefit, and how long they are on it.  

According to the current government, the number of people on Jobseeker Support increased by 70,000 under the previous government as the use of sanctions significantly decreased, and almost two-thirds of the people receiving this benefit have been for over a year. 

The Government’s plan clarifies what they see as the deal between the government and the Jobseeker beneficiary. They have basically said, there are some responsibilities you must meet to receive this benefit, and if you take those responsibilities seriously, then life goes on.  

The changes Cabinet have agreed to include:

Requiring Jobseeker Support recipients to reapply every six months, instead of annually – sensible.  

Requiring all beneficiaries with work obligations to have a jobseeker profile before receiving a benefit – I would have thought that was already in place!  

The introduction of a traffic light system that informs people what is required of them and alerts them if they are not keeping up with their requirements – which is a fair move as it gives people the chance to get back on track. 

Those who aren’t interested in fulfilling their obligations could face sanctions such as money management, where half of the benefit goes onto a payment card that can only be used for a limited range of essential products and services.  

Social Development and Employment Minister Louse Upston explained this to Heather du Pleiss-Allen last night:

“So the traffic light system: green, you're complying; orange, you've got a warning; red, there's a sanction. So, at the moment the sanctions are either a 50% reduction in the benefit or a cancellation completely. We want to introduce for parents, in particular, a maximum reduction of 50%, but instead of going to that straight away, we could then use a non-financial measure like money management, so they still get the same amount of money but less choice over how they use it.”

Surely this is a better alternative to outright cutting of the benefit? But it is one measure which comes with some risk – the last thing we want to see is the welfare of children or family affected by this sanction.  

There is also a new community work sanction requiring beneficiaries to "build skills and confidence", and they have extended the period a failure to meet obligations counts against a beneficiary from one year to two years, which seems a bit petty.  

All in all, these are the checks and balances we would expect for people on a benefit, and hopefully they will be delivered with respect.  

But will these measures get people back into work? Alongside these obligations, we still need to keep working on breaking down barriers that prevent people finding work – especially with our young people.  

Former welfare expert advisory group member and also former BusinessNZ CEO Phil O'Reilly spoke to the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning about the importance of this: 

“One thing that was happening very well under the last government was the idea of at least building some work capable skills. So the idea of getting people a driver's licence and a site safety certificate and so on, just so they could go get a job in construction, for example. All of that, I think, is a really important part of building the capacity for people to move off welfare. So most people do want to do that. I mean, there are some people who just want to sit around and do nothing, and they should be sanctioned, of course, but most people want a job, so we should have a bit of yin and yang in this about making sure we can do both.”

While the Government says it has seen enough evidence more sanctions will be effective in getting people into work, Greens and Labour have argued the opposite, echoing findings from the Welfare Expert Advisory Group who deemed sanctions to be “problematic” and ineffective at getting beneficiaries into work. 

But it’s a step forward, it’s worth a try and maybe a wakeup call for younger people who have found themselves on the Jobseeker Benefit and discovered they quite like it.  

Yesterday the Prime Minister said that the vast amount of people on Jobseeker Benefits were trying hard to find a job and meet their obligations, and before we have a conversation about changes to the Jobseeker Benefit, that is important to remember.   
But we do have a problem with the number of people on the Jobseeker Benefit, and how long they are on it.   
According to the current government, the number of people on Jobseeker Support increased by 70,000 under the previous government as the use of sanctions significantly decreased, and almost two-thirds of the people receiving this benefit have been for over a year.  
The Government’s plan clarifies what they see as the deal between the government and the Jobseeker beneficiary. They have basically said, there are some responsibilities you must meet to receive this benefit, and if you take those responsibilities seriously, then life goes on.   
The changes Cabinet have agreed to include: 
Requiring Jobseeker Support recipients to reapply every six months, instead of annually – sensible.   
Requiring all beneficiaries with work obligations to have a jobseeker profile before receiving a benefit – I would have thought that was already in place!   
The introduction of a traffic light system that informs people what is required of them and alerts them if they are not keeping up with their requirements – which is a fair move as it gives people the chance to get back on track.  
Those who aren’t interested in fulfilling their obligations could face sanctions such as money management, where half of the benefit goes onto a payment card that can only be used for a limited range of essential products and services.   
Social Development and Employment Minister Louse Upston explained this to Heather du Pleiss-Allen last night: 
“So the traffic light system: green, you're complying; orange, you've got a warning; red, there's a sanction. So, at the moment the sanctions are either a 50% reduction in the benefit or a cancellation completely. We want to introduce for parents, in particular, a maximum reduction of 50%, but instead of going to that straight away, we could then use a non-financial measure like money management, so they still get the same amount of money but less choice over how they use it.” 
Surely this is a better alternative to outright cutting of the benefit? But it is one measure which comes with some risk – the last thing we want to see is the welfare of children or family affected by this sanction.   
There is also a new community work sanction requiring beneficiaries to "build skills and confidence", and they have extended the period a failure to meet obligations counts against a beneficiary from one year to two years, which seems a bit petty.   
All in all, these are the checks and balances we would expect for people on a benefit, and hopefully they will be delivered with respect.   
But will these measures get people back into work? Alongside these obligations, we still need to keep working on breaking down barriers that prevent people finding work – especially with our young people.   
Former welfare expert advisory group member and also former BusinessNZ CEO Phil O'Reilly spoke to the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning about the importance of this:  
“One thing that was happening very well under the last government was the idea of at least building some work capable skills. So the idea of getting people a driver's licence and a site safety certificate and so on, just so they could go get a job in construction, for example. All of that, I think, is a really important part of building the capacity for people to move off welfare. So most people do want to do that. I mean, there are some people who just want to sit around and do nothing, and they should be sanctioned, of course, but most people want a job, so we should have a bit of yin and yang in this about making sure we can do both.” 
While the Government says it has seen enough evidence more sanctions will be effective in getting people into work, Greens and Labour have argued the opposite, echoing findings from the Welfare Expert Advisory Group who deemed sanctions to be “problematic” and ineffective at getting beneficiaries into work.  
But it’s a step forward, it’s worth a try and maybe a wakeup call for younger people who have found themselves on the Jobseeker Benefit and discovered they quite like it.

Francesca Rudkin: The new Jobseeker sanctions are worth a try

Some good news and some not-so-good news for retail crime.  

Let’s start with the good news – it’s Monday after all.  

Police data reveals that the figures are down for burglaries in Auckland.  

They are also down for abductions.  

Ram raids have continued to trend down to the lowest number of 15  percent in April this year compared to a high of 86 percent in 2022.  Maybe those bollards and interventions have worked their magic and made it less fun to video a car crashing into shop, or maybe boot camp doesn’t sound like a great way to spend 3 months.  

But the Dairy and Business Owners’ Group is still very concerned about the statistics because we have seen an increase in acts that are likely to cause injury – they are up 4 percent.  

On the rise, we have assaults, sexual assault, robbery, and theft.  

And the retail sector is paying the price for this.  

The owner of a South Auckland 24/7 diary is feeling helpless and scared after being robbed twice in the last week. Having fog cannons and panic alarms didn’t deter the robbers – who were targeting the till, cigarettes and vapes.  

Also, just recently a security guard was bashed in the head with a hammer by armed assailants during a robbery of a jewellery store, and the owner of another jewellery store in South Auckland suffered a skull fracture and cuts after teenage robbers used a hammer and knife to stab him.  

It’s clear to see why retail workers are still scared to go to work and do their jobs.  

In July, the Coalition Government announced they were establishing a Ministry Advisory Group for the victims of crime as part of its plan to restore law and order- they want this group of business owners, retail experts, and advocacy groups to provide the Government specific proposals to address urgent challenges in retail crime – over the next two years.  

The intention is that this group will help ensure there are 20,000 fewer victims of violent crime by 2029 and reduce serious youth offending by 15 percent. 

Sounds great. A good step forward. But what about today? What about the worker who has to go to work in the 24/7 dairy tonight?  

Auckland’s CBD has been crying out for more police on the streets to make the inner city safe again and crack down on violence and antisocial behaviour – and the police have responded. It’s great to see cops walking the streets – being part of the community. Their presence is reassuring.  

But what about other areas of Auckland – do we have enough police to make all neighbourhoods feel that same sense of security?

So what do we do about retail crime? We have a group that will kick into gear at some point with some new suggestions. We have put physical deterrents into shops and shopping areas. We have more cops out on the street in certain areas. We have a government that is keen on real consequences to crime – stronger sentences for convicted criminals.  

But is this enough? What is it going to take to stop there being around 11 assaults every day? Life isn’t getting any easier out there for some people - times are still tough. Hopefully, some of these solutions will have an impact long term – but is there anything left that we could do short term to solve this issue? Because you should be able to go to work in the morning, and not worry about someone coming at you with a hammer.  

Some good news and some not-so-good news for retail crime.  
Let’s start with the good news – it’s Monday after all.  
Police data reveals that the figures are down for burglaries in Auckland.  
They are also down for abductions.  
Ram raids have continued to trend down to the lowest number of 15  percent in April this year compared to a high of 86 percent in 2022.  Maybe those bollards and interventions have worked their magic and made it less fun to video a car crashing into shop, or maybe boot camp doesn’t sound like a great way to spend 3 months.  
But the Dairy and Business Owners’ Group is still very concerned about the statistics because we have seen an increase in acts that are likely to cause injury – they are up 4 percent.  
On the rise, we have assaults, sexual assault, robbery, and theft.  
And the retail sector is paying the price for this.  
The owner of a South Auckland 24/7 diary is feeling helpless and scared after being robbed twice in the last week. Having fog cannons and panic alarms didn’t deter the robbers – who were targeting the till, cigarettes and vapes.  
Also, just recently a security guard was bashed in the head with a hammer by armed assailants during a robbery of a jewellery store, and the owner of another jewellery store in South Auckland suffered a skull fracture and cuts after teenage robbers used a hammer and knife to stab him.  
It’s clear to see why retail workers are still scared to go to work and do their jobs.  
In July, the Coalition Government announced they were establishing a Ministry Advisory Group for the victims of crime as part of its plan to restore law and order- they want this group of business owners, retail experts, and advocacy groups to provide the Government specific proposals to address urgent challenges in retail crime – over the next two years.  
The intention is that this group will help ensure there are 20,000 fewer victims of violent crime by 2029 and reduce serious youth offending by 15 percent. 
Sounds great. A good step forward. But what about today? What about the worker who has to go to work in the 24/7 dairy tonight?  
Auckland’s CBD has been crying out for more police on the streets to make the inner city safe again and crack down on violence and antisocial behaviour – and the police have responded. It’s great to see cops walking the streets – being part of the community. Their presence is reassuring.  
But what about other areas of Auckland – do we have enough police to make all neighbourhoods feel that same sense of security?
So what do we do about retail crime? We have a group that will kick into gear at some point with some new suggestions. We have put physical deterrents into shops and shopping areas. We have more cops out on the street in certain areas. We have a government that is keen on real consequences to crime – stronger sentences for convicted criminals.  
But is this enough? What is it going to take to stop there being around 11 assaults every day? Life isn’t getting any easier out there for some people - times are still tough. Hopefully, some of these solutions will have an impact long term – but is there anything left that we could do short term to solve this issue? Because you should be able to go to work in the morning, and not worry about someone coming at you with a hammer.

Bill Bamber: KAM Transport General Manager on the issues with the Interislander ferries, Aratere not operating

In 1 playlist(s)

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips