An appeal of the High Court's decision to overturn the Waitangi Tribunal summons of the Children's Minister has been lodged. 

It ruled Karen Chhour could not be compelled to appear before the Tribunal over her plans to repeal part of the Oranga Tamariki Act.

Constitutional law expert Andrew Geddis told Andrew Dickens that the Waitangi Tribunal does have the power to summon a minister. 

He says the court said on this occasion, the reasons why the minister was being summoned and evidence she could provide wasn't enough to justify using that power.

LISTEN ABOVE

An appeal of the High Court's decision to overturn the Waitangi Tribunal summons of the Children's Minister has been lodged.  
It ruled Karen Chhour could not be compelled to appear before the Tribunal over her plans to repeal part of the Oranga Tamariki Act. 
Constitutional law expert Andrew Geddis told Andrew Dickens that the Waitangi Tribunal does have the power to summon a minister.  
He says the court said on this occasion, the reasons why the minister was being summoned and evidence she could provide wasn't enough to justify using that power. 
LISTEN ABOVE

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show.

Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda.

The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion, delivers the best talent, and always leaves you wanting more.

The Mike Hosking Breakfast always cuts through and delivers the best daily on Newstalk ZB.

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show. Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda. The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion, delivers the best talent, and always leaves you wanting more. The Mike Hosking Breakfast always cuts through and delivers the best daily on Newstalk ZB.

Open your mind to the world with New Zealand’s number one breakfast radio show.

Without question, as New Zealand’s number one talk host, Mike Hosking sets the day’s agenda.

The sharpest voice and mind in the business, Mike drives strong opinion,...

The Mike Hosking Breakfast

Andrew Geddis: Constitutional Law Expert on the appeal lodged against the High Court's decision to overturn the summoning of Karen Chhour

Call me superficial, but to watch the Reserve Bank heavyweights lined up, as I did Wednesday post their cash rate decision, I did not see dynamism. 

These people outwardly do not fill you with any sense of excitement. 

The Reserve Bank is in a spot and, as a result, so are we as a country. 

A couple of semi-interesting things happened and also one very interesting thing. 

They voted 5 to 1 to cut. They don’t vote that often. 

They also offered alternative scenarios, which they haven't done for five years. Alternative scenarios are not a good sign. If you have enough of them, you are literally making stuff up. 

Anyone can drum up alternative scenarios. What I want to hear more of from experts is what is actually going on. 

The important stuff is they have no bias on further cuts. 

A lot of people thought we would get a cut yesterday, followed by one, possibly two, more. 

The so-called "neutral rate", that's the cash rate settling at 2.75% or 2.5% – that now seems to be off the table. 

Why? 

They argue inflation, which is what drives them. That's their mandate. 

The trouble with that is inflation is only just in the band. It's heading more towards the top of the band and here is the really big part – growth, or large dollops of growth, are not driving this inflation. 

We are barely growing, if growing at all. Yet inflation is still a thing. That's not good for an economy and it's not good for the Government. 

The Government, namely Willis and Luxon, leap, and have leapt, on each announcement talking about the money coming back into the economy as the interest rates drop. If the bank isn't cutting, then rates aren't dropping, and we aren't spending or feeling remotely bullish. 

The Reserve Bank doesn’t care that much because they are fixated on inflation, whether it's driven by factors beyond our control —like insurance, shipping or councils— or growth. 

Yes, we had growth in Q1. It was quite good growth too. The live GDP tracker has Q2 up a bit, but not much. 

But it has annual numbers negative and inflation trending up. 

What we need is help. We are in a quagmire we need to extricate ourselves from. 

The Reserve Bank doesn’t look like they are that interested. 

Call me superficial, but to watch the Reserve Bank heavyweights lined up, as I did Wednesday post their cash rate decision, I did not see dynamism.&nbsp;
These people outwardly do not fill you with any sense of excitement.&nbsp;
The Reserve Bank is in a spot and, as a result, so are we as a country.&nbsp;
A couple of semi-interesting things happened and also one very interesting thing.&nbsp;
They voted 5 to 1 to cut. They don’t vote that often.&nbsp;
They also offered alternative scenarios, which they haven't done for five years. Alternative scenarios are not a good sign. If you have enough of them, you are literally making stuff up.&nbsp;
Anyone can drum up alternative scenarios. What I want to hear more of from experts is what is actually going on.&nbsp;
The important stuff is they have no bias on further cuts.&nbsp;
A lot of people thought we would get a cut yesterday, followed by one, possibly two, more.&nbsp;
The so-called "neutral rate", that's the cash rate settling at 2.75% or 2.5% – that now seems to be off the table.&nbsp;
Why?&nbsp;
They argue inflation, which is what drives them. That's their mandate.&nbsp;
The trouble with that is inflation is only just in the band. It's heading more towards the top of the band and here is the really big part – growth, or large dollops of growth, are not driving this inflation.&nbsp;
We are barely growing, if growing at all. Yet inflation is still a thing. That's not good for an economy and it's not good for the Government.&nbsp;
The Government, namely Willis and Luxon, leap, and have leapt, on each announcement talking about the money coming back into the economy as the interest rates drop. If the bank isn't cutting, then rates aren't dropping, and we aren't spending or feeling remotely bullish.&nbsp;
The Reserve Bank doesn’t care that much because they are fixated on inflation, whether it's driven by factors beyond our control —like insurance, shipping or councils— or growth.&nbsp;
Yes, we had growth in Q1. It was quite good growth too. The live GDP tracker has Q2 up a bit, but not much.&nbsp;
But it has annual numbers negative and inflation trending up.&nbsp;
What we need is help. We are in a quagmire we need to extricate ourselves from.&nbsp;
The Reserve Bank doesn’t look like they are that interested.&nbsp;

Mike's Minute: The Reserve Bank didn't inspire me

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/f830061b-2a3a-4799-a3b3-b2ed017c118a/transcript

Elon Musk’s time in the US Government has come to an end.   

He's posted on his platform, X, saying the mission of the Department of Government Efficiency —or DOGE— will only strengthen over time. 

A White House official has confirmed Musk's departure. 

US Correspondent Richard Arnold told Mike Hosking there’s been mixed reviews about his work. 

Musk was only able to find $9 billion in savings, despite his pledges to cut at least $2 trillion, which tech journalist Kara Swisher says means his efforts were a failure.  

She says he did a lot more showmanship than he did work. 

On the other hand, Trump aide Stephen Miller says what DOGE has done is “among the most valuable services ever rendered to Government”. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

Elon Musk’s time in the US Government has come to an end. &nbsp;&nbsp;
He's posted on his platform, X, saying the mission of the Department of Government Efficiency —or DOGE— will only strengthen over time.&nbsp;
A White House official has confirmed Musk's departure.&nbsp;
US Correspondent Richard Arnold told Mike Hosking there’s been mixed reviews about his work.&nbsp;
Musk was only able to find $9 billion in savings, despite his pledges to cut at least $2 trillion, which tech journalist Kara Swisher says means his efforts were a failure. &nbsp;
She says he did a lot more showmanship than he did work.&nbsp;
On the other hand, Trump aide Stephen Miller says what DOGE has done is “among the most valuable services ever rendered to Government”.&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE&nbsp;

Richard Arnold: US Correspondent on Trump's tariffs, Elon Musk leaving DOGE

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/1d1f4bf3-8205-409e-b966-b2ec017fa42c/transcript

I cannot recommend a piece of reading enough in the Listener, and reproduced elsewhere, on a longitudinal study that now spans 35 years and 12 elections. 

It's gripping. 

A couple thousand people each election are given dozens of questions. 

Its weakness is some of the questions are vague enough to throw up responses around things like health care and public services. We like them and we want more, no surprises there. But how much more? What if the money is wasted? 

We don’t get to know that stuff. 

The David Lange Government of 1984 blew it big time, went way too far and upset too many people. I remember it well. 

We love strong leaders. We are more socially conservative than you might think. 

The electoral system doesn't represent what we actually want, or like. We like the death penalty, yet we've never had it. 

There are two highlights for me: Labour's moves around Māori and introducing Treaty of Waitangi principles into some legislation. 

The majority of us, decades ago, didn’t want it. We don’t have the 2023 results yet, but I bet you nothing has changed. 

Which I would have thought would lead you to ask, why hasn’t it been fixed? 

It's a bad idea that's been allowed to fester and cause ongoing angst and upset for decades. 

Secondly, there are signs of increasing dissatisfaction, concern and unhappiness. The authors say it's not like the 90's. 

I remember the 90's. It was Ruth Richardson and Jenny Shipley. It was welfare reform, the mother of all Budgets, the burning of effigies on Parliament grounds. You can see the edginess these days with similar discourse and protest. 

But it's suggested political polarisation has declined over the past decade. 

Really? Do you believe that? 

I don’t. I don’t think we have ever been more divided and never been more stark in our views of the country and the world. 

Social media, distrust, fake news, polarising views and stands – I have no idea how they've concluded this. Read it and see if you disagree.  

But on most stuff, we haven't changed. The times change, the circumstances change but, broadly, we don’t. 

I'm not sure if that’s good or bad. 

I cannot recommend a piece of reading enough in the Listener, and reproduced elsewhere, on a longitudinal study that now spans 35 years and 12 elections.&nbsp;
It's gripping.&nbsp;
A couple thousand people each election are given dozens of questions.&nbsp;
Its weakness is some of the questions are vague enough to throw up responses around things like health care and public services. We like them and we want more, no surprises there. But how much more? What if the money is wasted?&nbsp;
We don’t get to know that stuff.&nbsp;
The David Lange Government of 1984 blew it big time, went way too far and upset too many people. I remember it well.&nbsp;
We love strong leaders. We are more socially conservative than you might think.&nbsp;
The electoral system doesn't represent what we actually want, or like. We like the death penalty, yet we've never had it.&nbsp;
There are two highlights for me: Labour's moves around Māori and introducing Treaty of Waitangi principles into some legislation.&nbsp;
The majority of us, decades ago, didn’t want it. We don’t have the 2023 results yet, but I bet you nothing has changed.&nbsp;
Which I would have thought would lead you to ask, why hasn’t it been fixed?&nbsp;
It's a bad idea that's been allowed to fester and cause ongoing angst and upset for decades.&nbsp;
Secondly, there are signs of increasing dissatisfaction, concern and unhappiness. The authors say it's not like the 90's.&nbsp;
I remember the 90's. It was Ruth Richardson and Jenny Shipley. It was welfare reform, the mother of all Budgets, the burning of effigies on Parliament grounds. You can see the edginess these days with similar discourse and protest.&nbsp;
But it's suggested political polarisation has declined over the past decade.&nbsp;
Really? Do you believe that?&nbsp;
I don’t. I don’t think we have ever been more divided and never been more stark in our views of the country and the world.&nbsp;
Social media, distrust, fake news, polarising views and stands – I have no idea how they've concluded this. Read it and see if you disagree. &nbsp;
But on most stuff, we haven't changed. The times change, the circumstances change but, broadly, we don’t.&nbsp;
I'm not sure if that’s good or bad.&nbsp;

Mike's Minute: Has the political divide gotten worse?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/2af43e78-e914-42d3-90ed-b2ec01721f32/transcript

Andrew Geddis: Constitutional Law Expert on the appeal lodged against the High Court's decision to overturn the summoning of Karen Chhour

In 1 playlist(s)

The Mike Hosking Breakfast

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips