The Prime Minister says he will bring the Opposition leader on board to hammer out a plan for infrastructure.

The Government is promoting a message of bipartisanship as it sets its sights on designing a 30-year pipeline for delivering major projects.

Christopher Luxon and his Transport, Infrastructure, and Housing Ministers visited New South Wales last month to learn from Australia's productivity. 

Newstalk ZB's Kerre Woodham pushed Luxon on why he didn't take Labour leader Chris Hipkins if he's trying to build consensus. 

He says they have already reached out to other parties to make it clear the coalition wants to work in a bipartisan way.

When it comes to the coalition itself, Luxon insists he's leading a stable coalition, and works well with both partners. 

That's despite the controversial Treaty Principles Bill coming up in this week's Cabinet meeting, and a paper unveiling Act's David Seymour's proposed principles. 

Luxon's adamant he won't support the Bill past first reading and has admitted this was the issue that stalled coalition negotiations. 

Luxon told Kerre the three parties are very different.

But he says he's very proud of the way he works with both Seymour and Winston Peters.

LISTEN ABOVE

The Prime Minister says he will bring the Opposition leader on board to hammer out a plan for infrastructure. 
The Government is promoting a message of bipartisanship as it sets its sights on designing a 30-year pipeline for delivering major projects. 
Christopher Luxon and his Transport, Infrastructure, and Housing Ministers visited New South Wales last month to learn from Australia's productivity.  
Newstalk ZB's Kerre Woodham pushed Luxon on why he didn't take Labour leader Chris Hipkins if he's trying to build consensus.  
He says they have already reached out to other parties to make it clear the coalition wants to work in a bipartisan way. 

When it comes to the coalition itself, Luxon insists he's leading a stable coalition, and works well with both partners.  
That's despite the controversial Treaty Principles Bill coming up in this week's Cabinet meeting, and a paper unveiling Act's David Seymour's proposed principles.  
Luxon's adamant he won't support the Bill past first reading and has admitted this was the issue that stalled coalition negotiations.  
Luxon told Kerre the three parties are very different. 
But he says he's very proud of the way he works with both Seymour and Winston Peters. 
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

Christopher Luxon: Prime Minister takes calls, discusses infrastructure, energy crisis, Treaty Principles Bill

One of the emails that did come in for the Prime Minister caught my eye, and I thought, you know, this is not a silly idea. It might be. I think there's some merit and discussing it and I'd love to run it by you. 

It was from the Elephant Beetle Think Tank and a quick Google found that no such thing exists, probably a couple of people enjoying a glass of wine and having chats, but none the less... it questions why we still have intermediate schools. There are 116 intermediate schools that remain within the education system, and according to the Elephant Beetle Intermediate School plan, there would be huge cost savings without the fixed costs of operating intermediates, which can be diverted into the remaining school system. 

The operating budget for running the network of intermediates is big and there are massive savings to be had, potentially. The savings could be diverted into providing better outcomes in education, perhaps paying teachers more. Then take the land that the intermediate schools are on, which is generally in prime position in the middle of communities, in the middle of cities, in the middle of towns, and convert them into housing developments with 30% or so of the residences reserved for service workers like police, teachers, and nurses at subsidised prices and with better mortgage interest rates. As intermediate schools typically sit in the middle of established residential areas, there is little issue or a big strain on creating the infrastructure to do this. Create a mix of high and low rise housing, utilising the existing school halls etcetera as community centres and thereby creating a new utopia. 

Now obviously it's going to be more difficult than that, more expensive than that, but it's not a bad idea because what purpose do intermediate schools have? My daughter went to Ponsonby Intermediate and it was a very, very good school, but if the same teachers had been either at extended primary schools or at extended colleges... it was the people who made the education, it wasn't the fact that it was an intermediate school. 

You look back at the history of intermediate schools and they've been neither fish nor fowl. They were set up in 1922, initially to act as a kind of sorting gate to steer kids either into the trades or into academic courses. That's why you did the cooking and the metal work at intermediate. A study done on intermediates, ‘The New Zealand Intermediate School Experiment - Caught Between Two Schools’ was done by the Waikato Journal of Education and they said directors and Ministers of Education were unable to provide guidance for intermediate schools, thus, they found neither a clear nor consistent philosophy to justify their existence. Consequently, intermediate schools were left to develop in their own ways, in the hope that a role could somehow be found for them. 

When there was a review of the development and progress of New Zealand Intermediate schools in 1938, the author of the report said the cause for surprise is not that the schools should have lagged along the road, but that they should have gone so far since no one has ever known quite what they were doing. And the authors of the Waikato Journal Report say nearly 60 years later, the intermediates are still no closer to discovering and developing a clear educational philosophy and identity. 

And you would have to wonder, what is the point of them? You could easily, I would have thought, even with the pressure on school buildings, amalgamate them into either primary or secondary schools. And a lot of campuses are year 7 through to 13, and then you have all of that space freed up to do with as you wish, and all of that money freed up to do with as you wish. Now, presumably there are ideas against this, and I'd like to hear them because so far I've just heard the idea for and it doesn't sound like a bad one. But if the reason to keep them is just because they've always been there since 1922, I don't think that's a good enough reason. 

One of the emails that did come in for the Prime Minister caught my eye, and I thought, you know, this is not a silly idea. It might be. I think there's some merit and discussing it and I'd love to run it by you.  
It was from the Elephant Beetle Think Tank and a quick Google found that no such thing exists, probably a couple of people enjoying a glass of wine and having chats, but none the less... it questions why we still have intermediate schools. There are 116 intermediate schools that remain within the education system, and according to the Elephant Beetle Intermediate School plan, there would be huge cost savings without the fixed costs of operating intermediates, which can be diverted into the remaining school system.  
The operating budget for running the network of intermediates is big and there are massive savings to be had, potentially. The savings could be diverted into providing better outcomes in education, perhaps paying teachers more. Then take the land that the intermediate schools are on, which is generally in prime position in the middle of communities, in the middle of cities, in the middle of towns, and convert them into housing developments with 30% or so of the residences reserved for service workers like police, teachers, and nurses at subsidised prices and with better mortgage interest rates. As intermediate schools typically sit in the middle of established residential areas, there is little issue or a big strain on creating the infrastructure to do this. Create a mix of high and low rise housing, utilising the existing school halls etcetera as community centres and thereby creating a new utopia.  
Now obviously it's going to be more difficult than that, more expensive than that, but it's not a bad idea because what purpose do intermediate schools have? My daughter went to Ponsonby Intermediate and it was a very, very good school, but if the same teachers had been either at extended primary schools or at extended colleges... it was the people who made the education, it wasn't the fact that it was an intermediate school.  
You look back at the history of intermediate schools and they've been neither fish nor fowl. They were set up in 1922, initially to act as a kind of sorting gate to steer kids either into the trades or into academic courses. That's why you did the cooking and the metal work at intermediate. A study done on intermediates, ‘The New Zealand Intermediate School Experiment - Caught Between Two Schools’ was done by the Waikato Journal of Education and they said directors and Ministers of Education were unable to provide guidance for intermediate schools, thus, they found neither a clear nor consistent philosophy to justify their existence. Consequently, intermediate schools were left to develop in their own ways, in the hope that a role could somehow be found for them.  
When there was a review of the development and progress of New Zealand Intermediate schools in 1938, the author of the report said the cause for surprise is not that the schools should have lagged along the road, but that they should have gone so far since no one has ever known quite what they were doing. And the authors of the Waikato Journal Report say nearly 60 years later, the intermediates are still no closer to discovering and developing a clear educational philosophy and identity.  
And you would have to wonder, what is the point of them? You could easily, I would have thought, even with the pressure on school buildings, amalgamate them into either primary or secondary schools. And a lot of campuses are year 7 through to 13, and then you have all of that space freed up to do with as you wish, and all of that money freed up to do with as you wish. Now, presumably there are ideas against this, and I'd like to hear them because so far I've just heard the idea for and it doesn't sound like a bad one. But if the reason to keep them is just because they've always been there since 1922, I don't think that's a good enough reason.

Kerre Woodham: What's the point in keeping intermediate schools?

I could not have put it better than ACC Minister Matt Doocey did yesterday. He wants ACC to lift its own game before it starts raising levies. 

The Accident Compensation Corporation has just begun a one-month consultation on suggested rises of more than 7% on levies for motorists, and more than 4% for employers and earners. I mean everybody else is raising their rates, aren't they? So here goes ACC. They have motorcyclists, professional sports people and ballerinas, specifically in their sights. Ballerinas?! Dainty, little, tiny, wee things like them, I imagine it's a strenuous job, and if something goes wrong, if you're a ballerina, it would go wrong badly, but I wouldn't have thought there would be that many to make a drain on the Accident Compensation Corporation’s finances. But none the less, be warned ballerinas – you are in the ACC’s sights. 

To be fair, ACC has said it is just a consultation at this stage, and the proposal is part of a legislative requirement every three years, with cabinet making the final decision on whether levies are raised before December. Can you imagine any minister going ‘hmm, probably a bit unfair, let's see ACC improve its game before we lift the levies’. I cannot see any government organisation or minister going, ‘you know what? let's keep things the way they are’.Doocey says ACC has to make its own efforts to lift its poor financial performance, it has to increase its rehab rates, and it has to do a lot more around injury prevention before they can make a case for raising levies. And that is a fair call given ACC has just done a U-turn and reintroduced one-on-one case managers. They took them away as part of a $74 million restructure, despite the fact the agency had been warned that the new restructure was a dud. A complete dud that wouldn't work. 

And in fact, we had a caller a couple of weeks ago who said that they had been trying to talk to ACC about their particular rehabilitation, they said they were passed from pillar to post, from one person to the next. They had to explain everything from beginning to end every single time they phoned, and it was just a waste of everybody's time and incredibly frustrating. So one-on-one case managers have been reinstated. 

It's just another colossal waste of time and money. The rollout began in 2020 with some zingy person leading the restructure going ‘hey, we're going to increase productivity. Yes, we are. We're going to save costs and you case managers, you're going to see a direct lift in your performance. We're going to improve your workloads’.  By 2022, running costs had doubled, there were no discernible benefits to clients, and there was little improvement to case backlogs with exhausted and overworked case managers dropping at their desks. So the agency's gone back after $74 million down the gurgler to one-on-one case management. 

Back to the proposed living increases, they are up for discussion, so let's discuss. Motorcyclists - the levy covers only around 28% of your costs to the ACC scheme. When things go wrong if you're a motorcyclist, things go wrong badly, so you're going to need a lot of rehab. So Matt Doocey asked do we lower the levy for lower powered bikes while increasing the cost for more powerful bikes? And I would really love to know what ballerinas are doing to stuff themselves up so much. 

Professional sportspeople - I thought you would have been well and truly covered with the medical system that surrounds you as part of your job and the fact that you would go private.  I mean when have you ever heard of any All Black going on the waiting list for a knee operation? They don't. They're in surgery the next day, so I would have that would have been part of your contract that your medical costs are covered. Interesting though, at the Kerre Woodham Morning Show, two out of two of us have been on ACC in the past year. Helen with her never ending shoulder fracture and then me with the smashed arm. But again, the ACC ended after I think it was about 6 physio visits. I've been paying for them ever since. I paid for my own acupuncture, I didn't need any taxis. But we have used it. 

It is a good system when it works. You know you take responsibility for your own recovery as well. You don't just lie there, lumpingly, and expect the taxpayer and the government to fix you. You do your own rehab and try and get yourself better. Everybody says, oh, it's the envy of the world, your ACC, it's just wonderful. Is it still? There's a $1 billion shortfall and you know a lot of that is the damaged babies that actually survive the brutal beatings, but they are left needing lifelong care, so a fund has been set aside for their lifelong needs, which sickens me. 

You cannot get blood out of a stone. I don't know how much more they expect us to pay for everything, for all of the everything. For the rates, for the insurance, for the ACC, for the food, for the doctor's visits, for the everything. You know, there comes a point where you just cannot pay any more. But is ACC serving you well? I can put up my hand and I can do that now and say it has, it has worked well, provided you do your bit too. It's got to be a 50/50 partnership, I think. But can they really justify asking for more in levies when they have just wasted $74 million on a failed restructure? I’m with Matt Doocey: lift your own game before you take money out of our pockets.

I could not have put it better than ACC Minister Matt Doocey did yesterday. He wants ACC to lift its own game before it starts raising levies.  
The Accident Compensation Corporation has just begun a one-month consultation on suggested rises of more than 7% on levies for motorists, and more than 4% for employers and earners. I mean everybody else is raising their rates, aren't they? So here goes ACC. They have motorcyclists, professional sports people and ballerinas, specifically in their sights. Ballerinas?! Dainty, little, tiny, wee things like them, I imagine it's a strenuous job, and if something goes wrong, if you're a ballerina, it would go wrong badly, but I wouldn't have thought there would be that many to make a drain on the Accident Compensation Corporation’s finances. But none the less, be warned ballerinas – you are in the ACC’s sights.  
To be fair, ACC has said it is just a consultation at this stage, and the proposal is part of a legislative requirement every three years, with cabinet making the final decision on whether levies are raised before December. Can you imagine any minister going ‘hmm, probably a bit unfair, let's see ACC improve its game before we lift the levies’. I cannot see any government organisation or minister going, ‘you know what? let's keep things the way they are’. Doocey says ACC has to make its own efforts to lift its poor financial performance, it has to increase its rehab rates, and it has to do a lot more around injury prevention before they can make a case for raising levies. And that is a fair call given ACC has just done a U-turn and reintroduced one-on-one case managers. They took them away as part of a $74 million restructure, despite the fact the agency had been warned that the new restructure was a dud. A complete dud that wouldn't work.  
And in fact, we had a caller a couple of weeks ago who said that they had been trying to talk to ACC about their particular rehabilitation, they said they were passed from pillar to post, from one person to the next. They had to explain everything from beginning to end every single time they phoned, and it was just a waste of everybody's time and incredibly frustrating. So one-on-one case managers have been reinstated.  
It's just another colossal waste of time and money. The rollout began in 2020 with some zingy person leading the restructure going ‘hey, we're going to increase productivity. Yes, we are. We're going to save costs and you case managers, you're going to see a direct lift in your performance. We're going to improve your workloads’.  By 2022, running costs had doubled, there were no discernible benefits to clients, and there was little improvement to case backlogs with exhausted and overworked case managers dropping at their desks. So the agency's gone back after $74 million down the gurgler to one-on-one case management.  
Back to the proposed living increases, they are up for discussion, so let's discuss. Motorcyclists - the levy covers only around 28% of your costs to the ACC scheme. When things go wrong if you're a motorcyclist, things go wrong badly, so you're going to need a lot of rehab. So Matt Doocey asked do we lower the levy for lower powered bikes while increasing the cost for more powerful bikes? And I would really love to know what ballerinas are doing to stuff themselves up so much.  
Professional sportspeople - I thought you would have been well and truly covered with the medical system that surrounds you as part of your job and the fact that you would go private.  I mean when have you ever heard of any All Black going on the waiting list for a knee operation? They don't. They're in surgery the next day, so I would have that would have been part of your contract that your medical costs are covered. Interesting though, at the Kerre Woodham Morning Show, two out of two of us have been on ACC in the past year. Helen with her never ending shoulder fracture and then me with the smashed arm. But again, the ACC ended after I think it was about 6 physio visits. I've been paying for them ever since. I paid for my own acupuncture, I didn't need any taxis. But we have used it.  
It is a good system when it works. You know you take responsibility for your own recovery as well. You don't just lie there, lumpingly, and expect the taxpayer and the government to fix you. You do your own rehab and try and get yourself better. Everybody says, oh, it's the envy of the world, your ACC, it's just wonderful. Is it still? There's a $1 billion shortfall and you know a lot of that is the damaged babies that actually survive the brutal beatings, but they are left needing lifelong care, so a fund has been set aside for their lifelong needs, which sickens me.  
You cannot get blood out of a stone. I don't know how much more they expect us to pay for everything, for all of the everything. For the rates, for the insurance, for the ACC, for the food, for the doctor's visits, for the everything. You know, there comes a point where you just cannot pay any more. But is ACC serving you well? I can put up my hand and I can do that now and say it has, it has worked well, provided you do your bit too. It's got to be a 50/50 partnership, I think. But can they really justify asking for more in levies when they have just wasted $74 million on a failed restructure? I’m with Matt Doocey: lift your own game before you take money out of our pockets.

Kerre Woodham: ACC needs to lift its game before lifting levies

The number of New Zealanders with dementia is expected to double in the next 20 years, with social disadvantages playing a big role.

Public Health Communication Centre's briefing reveals the risk of developing dementia is 60% higher for people living in the most deprived areas in New Zealand.

Director of the Centre for Brain Research, Sir Richard Faull told Kerre Woodham that there are about 14 factors which, when addressed, reduce the risk of developing dementia.

These factors, which include education quality, social isolation, smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, uncorrected vision loss, and air quality, are often associated with poverty and deprivation.

LISTEN ABOVE

The number of New Zealanders with dementia is expected to double in the next 20 years, with social disadvantages playing a big role. 
Public Health Communication Centre's briefing reveals the risk of developing dementia is 60% higher for people living in the most deprived areas in New Zealand. 
Director of the Centre for Brain Research, Sir Richard Faull told Kerre Woodham that there are about 14 factors which, when addressed, reduce the risk of developing dementia. 
These factors, which include education quality, social isolation, smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, uncorrected vision loss, and air quality, are often associated with poverty and deprivation. 
LISTEN ABOVE

Christopher Luxon: Prime Minister takes calls, discusses infrastructure, energy crisis, Treaty Principles Bill

In 1 playlist(s)

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips