On the Mike Hosking Breakfast Full Show Podcast for Monday the 3rd of July, policy announcements up the wazoo and a chat with Dame Noeline Taurua after a redemption gold medal at the Commonwealth Games.

The Prime Minister defends his business comments in Rotorua, responds to NZ First's plan to increase the birth rate and talks fast-track projects causing angst.

Jason Pine and Andrew Saville talk the value of the Commonwealth Games, the Warriors win and whether the NPC was a success over the weekend.

Get the Mike Hosking Breakfast Full Show Podcast every weekday morning on iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.

LISTEN ABOVE

On the Mike Hosking Breakfast Full Show Podcast for Monday the 3rd of July, policy announcements up the wazoo and a chat with Dame Noeline Taurua after a redemption gold medal at the Commonwealth Games.
The Prime Minister defends his business comments in Rotorua, responds to NZ First's plan to increase the birth rate and talks fast-track projects causing angst.
Jason Pine and Andrew Saville talk the value of the Commonwealth Games, the Warriors win and whether the NPC was a success over the weekend.
Get the Mike Hosking Breakfast Full Show Podcast every weekday morning on iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.
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

Full Show Podcast: 03 August 2026 

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/c6414eda-812d-4582-ad1f-b49a015d7441/transcript

The Opportunity Party turns out to be a sham of sorts. 

We have bottom lines, but not real bottom lines. 

1) More power to the Commerce Commission. Big deal... 

2) A 10-year health plan. That means nothing. 

3) Reforming lobbying. That's hardly a thing. It means a lot, or little, or nothing, but it's hard to be against it. 

4) Bottom trawling. It's an odd one because it's not one of life's great issues in a world of war, terror, and white bread prices. 

5) Keeping the Climate Change Commission. Once again, big deal. 

I'd agree to all of that to shut them up and get on with running the country. 

The Government is littered with do-gooder, go nowhere departments. The Climate Commission makes literally no difference to anything. They have no teeth, they just recommend stuff, like a coroner or Privacy Commissioner. 

So what are we left with? 

The land tax is not a bottom line. The universal income is nowhere to be seen. 

In very general terms this would appear to make them much more appealing to a wider selection of voters. 

Is anyone actually against any of their actual bottom lines? 

Can National revisit their potential accommodation with them? They were ruled out because they sounded barking mad, turning everyone into a beneficiary. Now they aren't. 

If National needs six votes, are they the end of the world? Are they for example any more extreme than New Zealand First's opposition to the India FTA or ACT's stand on not breaking up supermarkets? 

If you accept them at their word they are a classic middle-of-the-road type operation. Ironically, they're so middle-of-the-road there appears no real need for them. 

Was their extreme tax position simply an attention grab? Will turning out to be bland on the bottom lines mean their support now fades, given they stand for stuff pretty much everyone stands for? 

How do you disagree with a 10-year health plan, whatever that is? 

They are either suckers, or manipulators, or Machiavellian, but for those who flocked to them to see major reform, it ain't happening. 

Their "get in the tent first" approach is way smarter, but in being now overtly nondescript, have they blown their chances of getting into the tent at all? 

The Opportunity Party turns out to be a sham of sorts.&nbsp;
We have bottom lines, but not real bottom lines.&nbsp;
1) More power to the Commerce Commission. Big deal...&nbsp;
2) A 10-year health plan. That means nothing.&nbsp;
3) Reforming lobbying. That's hardly a thing. It means a lot, or little, or nothing, but it's hard to be against it.&nbsp;
4) Bottom trawling. It's an odd one because it's not one of life's great issues in a world of war, terror, and white bread prices.&nbsp;
5) Keeping the Climate Change Commission. Once again, big deal.&nbsp;
I'd agree to all of that to shut them up and get on with running the country.&nbsp;
The Government is littered with do-gooder, go nowhere departments. The Climate Commission makes literally no difference to anything. They have no teeth, they just recommend stuff, like a coroner or Privacy Commissioner.&nbsp;
So what are we left with?&nbsp;
The land tax is not a bottom line. The universal income is nowhere to be seen.&nbsp;
In very general terms this would appear to make them much more appealing to a wider selection of voters.&nbsp;
Is anyone actually against any of their actual bottom lines?&nbsp;
Can National revisit their potential accommodation with them? They were ruled out because they sounded barking mad, turning everyone into a beneficiary. Now they aren't.&nbsp;
If National needs six votes, are they the end of the world? Are they for example any more extreme than New Zealand First's opposition to the India FTA or ACT's stand on not breaking up supermarkets?&nbsp;
If you accept them at their word they are a classic middle-of-the-road type operation. Ironically, they're so middle-of-the-road there appears no real need for them.&nbsp;
Was their extreme tax position simply an attention grab? Will turning out to be bland on the bottom lines mean their support now fades, given they stand for stuff pretty much everyone stands for?&nbsp;
How do you disagree with a 10-year health plan, whatever that is?&nbsp;
They are either suckers, or manipulators, or Machiavellian, but for those who flocked to them to see major reform, it ain't happening.&nbsp;
Their "get in the tent first" approach is way smarter, but in being now overtly nondescript, have they blown their chances of getting into the tent at all?&nbsp;

Mike's Minute: Has the Opportunity Party blown it?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/285bc90e-bc52-4702-885d-b4d701473186/transcript

At the end of each week, Mike Hosking takes you through the big-ticket items and lets you know what he makes of it all. 

 

The campaign: 4/10 

Is it just me or has the mental stuff with ice cream and dumb questions started so early that we will be suicidal by November? 

 

PREFU: 7/10 

Confirmed widely held suspicions that our economy is on the way back in a material way. 

 

Labour: 4/10 

Bad first week. Got busted on equity and the CGT promise appears problematic now that housing isn't growing. 

 

The EU FTA climate mess: 1/10 

It's one thing for a bunch of Dutch losers to whine, but to be backed by Kiwis, even if they are radicals, is treasonous. 

 

The Opportunity Party: 2/10 

Shot themselves in the foot with bottom lines. They may as well have named their favourite colours. 

 

LISTEN ABOVE FOR MIKE HOSKING'S FULL WEEK IN REVIEW 

At the end of each week, Mike Hosking takes you through the big-ticket items and lets you know what he makes of it all.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
The campaign: 4/10&nbsp;
Is it just me or has the mental stuff with ice cream and dumb questions started so early that we will be suicidal by November?&nbsp;
&nbsp;
PREFU: 7/10&nbsp;
Confirmed widely held suspicions that our economy is on the way back in a material way.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
Labour: 4/10&nbsp;
Bad first week. Got busted on equity and the CGT promise appears problematic now that housing isn't growing.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
The EU FTA climate mess: 1/10&nbsp;
It's one thing for a bunch of Dutch losers to whine, but to be backed by Kiwis, even if they are radicals, is treasonous.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
The Opportunity Party: 2/10&nbsp;
Shot themselves in the foot with bottom lines. They may as well have named their favourite colours.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE FOR MIKE HOSKING'S FULL WEEK IN REVIEW&nbsp;

Mark the Week: The Opportunity Party shot themselves in the foot

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/c64ec536-09da-4ee8-bd64-b4d60163a7d6/transcript

Given Westpac played what I would loosely call a dumb game this week with numbers, let me return serve. 

Their numbers involved a bunch of what they call "necessities" and their prices over the past ten years. 

White bread is up 120% and butter up 157%. Chicken though is only up 2%. So, if you ate a lot of chicken, not only would you be protein rich, you would have saved a fortune. 

The CPI is up in that period 38%. 

Their argument is that this is why we are miserable; everything appears so expensive. 

Not everything is, but if you eat a lot of white bread and butter, obviously without the chicken, you are arguing it’s a cost-of-living crisis. 

By the way, here are my numbers: while the CPI is 38%, hourly wages are up 53%. 

Now that dovetails into what we saw just last week with the food price inflation for the year at 1.9%. Our wages have in fact gone up more than that, so in other words, food is getting more affordable. 

It's a statistical fact – food is more affordable this year than last year. 

If you spread it out over 10 years at 53% versus 38%, things are way more affordable. We are actually getting ahead. 

See what you can do with numbers? 

Which has been my argument throughout this cluster of numbers, and misery, and point scoring, and finger pointing. 

If you want to be miserable and find something that is wrong, or broken, or too expensive, you can. 

But equally —glass half-full— if you want to find gain, or benefit, or advancement, you can as well. That choice is yours. 

For dairy and meat, we can explain the price gains: they are international. For olive oil, it’s a Spanish drought, for coffee it’s a disease, for your council rates its half-wits with no clue. 

But if you aren't prepared to avoid things that appear too much, then that’s on you. 

After all, what really is a necessity at the supermarket? What is a "must have" versus a "nice to have"? 

Is white bread really so good that it's worth getting exercised over? 

Given Westpac played what I would loosely call a dumb game this week with numbers, let me return serve.&nbsp;
Their numbers involved a bunch of what they call "necessities" and their prices over the past ten years.&nbsp;
White bread is up 120% and butter up 157%. Chicken though is only up 2%. So, if you ate a lot of chicken, not only would you be protein rich, you would have saved a fortune.&nbsp;
The CPI is up in that period 38%.&nbsp;
Their argument is that this is why we are miserable; everything appears so expensive.&nbsp;
Not everything is, but if you eat a lot of white bread and butter, obviously without the chicken, you are arguing it’s a cost-of-living crisis.&nbsp;
By the way, here are my numbers: while the CPI is 38%, hourly wages are up 53%.&nbsp;
Now that dovetails into what we saw just last week with the food price inflation for the year at 1.9%. Our wages have in fact gone up more than that, so in other words, food is getting more affordable.&nbsp;
It's a statistical fact – food is more affordable this year than last year.&nbsp;
If you spread it out over 10 years at 53% versus 38%, things are way more affordable. We are actually getting ahead.&nbsp;
See what you can do with numbers?&nbsp;
Which has been my argument throughout this cluster of numbers, and misery, and point scoring, and finger pointing.&nbsp;
If you want to be miserable and find something that is wrong, or broken, or too expensive, you can.&nbsp;
But equally —glass half-full— if you want to find gain, or benefit, or advancement, you can as well. That choice is yours.&nbsp;
For dairy and meat, we can explain the price gains: they are international. For olive oil, it’s a Spanish drought, for coffee it’s a disease, for your council rates its half-wits with no clue.&nbsp;
But if you aren't prepared to avoid things that appear too much, then that’s on you.&nbsp;
After all, what really is a necessity at the supermarket? What is a "must have" versus a "nice to have"?&nbsp;
Is white bread really so good that it's worth getting exercised over?&nbsp;

Mike's Minute: The power of statistics

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/d28b90ab-79fa-419f-bd0b-b4d6015e6f60/transcript

Full Show Podcast: 03 August 2026

In 1 playlist(s)

The Mike Hosking Breakfast

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips