エピソード

  • Alf Filipaina: Auckland Councillor on the review into the Navigation Bylaw
    2026/05/05

    Auckland Council is aiming to reduce drownings and improve safety by upgrading its Navigation Bylaw.

    The most significant change would make life jackets mandatory for everyone on vessels under six meters long whilst it’s in motion.

    Current rules only require for them to be carried, with the person in charge of the vessel making the decision on whether it’s necessary.

    Auckland Councillor and Bylaw Review Panel member Alf Filipaina told Kerre Woodham this is the first review since the bylaw’s approval, and five years on, they want the community to have their say.

    He says they’re hopeful the majority will come in and say wearing life jackets while a vessel is on the water and in motion is common sense.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    9 分
  • Kerre Woodham: Is it necessary to make wearing a life jacket a legal requirement?
    2026/05/05

    Auckland Council wants to hear from you. It's consulting on proposed changes to the Auckland Navigational Bylaw. Right now, Clause 20 of the bylaw requires personal flotation devices, also known as life jackets, on vessels six metres and under. Unless, and here comes the thorny bit, unless the person in charge gives permission not to wear one. So that makes it all pretty cloudy, doesn't it? The proposed changes aim to clarify expectations and support safer decisions on the water. The proposed change to Clause 20 makes the rule clear, according to the council, and protects everyone on board.

    What they want to change to is personal flotation devices must be worn on recreational vessels six metres or less in length. So no faffing around with, oh, the person in charge says I don't have to – if you're on the boat, you wear them. Submissions opened yesterday and are open until the 7th of June 2026, so you've got a bit over a month to have your say.

    Is this sort of explicit rendering of the law necessary? Well, if you look at the stats, yes, it is. On average, between 15 to 20 people die every year in recreational boating accidents. And the majority of the accidents don't happen in rough seas miles from shore, they occur in the northern part of the North Island and in coastal waters within two kilometres of shore, and when you drill down, within 400 metres of shore. Vessel types: kayaks, canoes, small powerboats under six metres are the ones most frequently involved. Capsizing and falling overboard are the primary causes of accidents, often happening suddenly, and over half of those who died in the boating accidents were, guess what, not wearing a life jacket.

    So you can understand the frustration from Coastguard New Zealand, from the first responders turning up seeing the devastation that occurs when a loved one dies from what was supposed to be a fantastic day out. And it's all so unnecessary. With the right flotation device, you get wet and you go home, and a family's not torn apart. I understand that for a lot of people, going out on the boat is the last freedom. You know, the wind through your hair, if you've got any, the salt water and sound of the seabirds, the light glinting off the water, and you're catching food for dinner. It's a fantastic experience, but it can all go wrong so quickly. And being sorry is all very well and good. “Oh my god, I should have insisted they wear a life jacket.” Yeah, you should have and it's too late now.

    Do we leave it to God's little pruning fork? Like if you choose not to wear a life jacket and you know the stats, for heaven's sake, if you're a boatie, you know the stats. But is it a case of other people? Oh, it'll happen to other people. I'm very cautious, I'm very careful, I know what I'm doing. I can swim well. I was a lifesaver 42 years ago, I can look after the grandkids if anything happens. It's always other people until it isn't. But do you still want to be able to make your own choices and if the worst happens, oh well, there we go, it's just one of those things? Or should people be saved from their own stupidity and poor decisions? Every single boatie I know has really strict rules around their boat. When the kids go on board, they understand that the captain's in charge, you follow the rules, what he or she says goes, and life jackets are compulsory for everybody. It's not just for the kids and the adults don't wear them. Everybody wears them.

    I understand people want to go to hell in their own way, but I can also really understand the frustration of first responders and Coastguard who have to deliver the news to people back on shore that because the person they loved was wilful and obstinate and refused to believe that they were mortal, they're not going to be with them ever again. To me, it seems a no brainer. And I'm sure if you're that sort of boatie, you'd be like, how can you not? How can you not insist that people stay safe? It's not an onerous burden these days. So do you just leave people to, like I say, go to hell in their own way?

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分
  • Dr Ezekiel Emanuel: US Health Policy expert chats ahead of NZ summit
    2026/05/03

    The Health Innovators' Summit takes place in Auckland tomorrow with this year's discussion centring around ideas to create a world-class, high performing health system for New Zealand.

    The keynote speaker is one of the world’s foremost health policy experts and author of Which Country Has The World’s Best Health Care?, Dr Ezekiel Emanuel.

    He joined Kerre Woodham to chat about the state of New Zealand healthcare and how other countries operate differently.

    "New Zealand is exactly where there's a line how rich a country is versus how much it spends on healthcare, and New Zealand's exactly on that line for the per capita GDP," Emanuel said.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    13 分
  • Kerre Woodham: ACT's immigration plan is not exactly 'ground-breaking'
    2026/05/03
    It's good to see some parties releasing policies, looking at you Labour, whether you agree with them or not, given it's less than six months to the election. ACT released its immigration policy over the weekend, a six point plan that ACT says will welcome people with shared values and who play by the rules. ACT leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said New Zealand was a settler society that had been built by people willing to make a journey to try and build something better, which is true, wave after wave of immigration has made New Zealand the New Zealand it is. But the six point plan, is it really designed to build a better New Zealand or is it designed to get voters to ACT? As in the party, not as in to galvanise voters. Deport serious offenders, number one on the list. ACT will ensure that resident visa holders convicted of offences carrying sentences of 10 years or more will be deported, no matter how long they've been here. Well, we already do deport a lot of people back from whence they came if they commit serious crime, and the government has a proposal to extend liability to 20 years, so that if you've been here for 20 years, you'll still get sent back. So, really? Hardly ground-breaking. Two, skilled visas for skilled jobs. Too often ACT says the gaps close and categories remain wide open. ACT will have each skill category automatically expire every year to remain open, so you can say, look, I need a worker, you have to prove that there is a need, you have to show up to date evidence of demand, which sounds like a lot of unnecessary paperwork and not at all like ACT. ACT will introduce a five year welfare stand down for all residence class visa holders, no jobseeker support, accommodation supplement or income tested benefit for a migrant's first five years here. Fair. ACT will introduce a $6 per day infrastructure surcharge on temporary work visas on top of the existing charges. The fee is expected to raise around 80 million a year while remaining more affordable than comparable visas in Australia and the UK. Stronger English language requirements. Lower standards will still be permitted for seasonal workers. Well, you can lead a horse to water, you can't make it drink, you can lead a horticulture but you can't make it think. You know, it's like you can demand it, and it would be nice if everybody did speak a lingua franca, but at the same time, it's the same in any migrant countries like the US, there are pockets of the US where they still speak Polish and they still speak Yiddish and they still speak Italian because that's the comfort of home. And, there are 21,000 non overstayers in New Zealand right now, there'll be a dedicated overstayer enforcement unit within Immigration New Zealand. Right. Fair to say the policies have been met with eye rolling from the business and the rural community. Immigration lawyer Queen City Law Marcus Beveridge was very dismissive when he spoke to Ryan Bridge this morning: I just see it as it's not really worth getting out of bed for this because most of it's already here, it's superfluous, it's posturing. Minister Stanford's actually tidied most of this up already and I thought Mr Seymour could have done much better helping to refine the business categories rather than sort of dorking around with something that's already been fixed. Well, quite, really. And somehow you expect more from ACT. No, you might not agree with it, but you expect it to be better reasoned. Federated Farmers employment spokesperson Karl Dean talked to the Mike Hosking Breakfast this morning and he says, well, it's not going to help us compete on the international stage: I think the six bucks a day is one thing, you know, how would that look on the international stage? We struggle to get skilled migrants now, they look at Australia, they look at Canada, they choose those over New Zealand. This is another barrier. But it's also the fact of renewing or looking at the accredited work visas every year. You know, if I was a migrant looking to come into a country, I would not choose New Zealand if we had a yearly sort of allocation system. So from the people who deal with migrants every single day, it seems to be a ho hum from them. The biggest criticism seems to be, well, the work's already done and that we're not really in a position to dictate demands and make it difficult for migrants to come here. There are other places they can go. We talked before about the declining birth rates in the Western world, everybody wants skilled migrants, everybody wants them, and we're not really in a position to make it more difficult for migrants to be here than it already is. I'd love to hear from those who have applied for visas, who have applied to move to New Zealand for a better life. Is it what you thought it was? Does it need to be made tougher? Do we need stronger English language requirements? Does it make it easier to assimilate, to feel like a Kiwi if you can speak the language...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分
  • Kerre Woodham: The road toll still needs reducing
    2026/05/01

    You'll have heard it in our news, since Monday the 20th of April, 18 people have been killed in 14 separate crashes on our roads. As of this morning, 12 more lives have been lost on New Zealand roads so far this year compared to the same point last year. To give some context though, our road tolls today are nothing like the bad old days. Back in 1973, long before many of you were born, when we had a much smaller population and fewer cars on the road, the road toll was around 850 deaths. And you can only imagine the injuries involved in those as well. In 1975 seatbelts in cars became compulsory and the road toll began to decline. It was around about 625 in 1975 – that was considered cause for celebration. And over time, it's come down to fewer than 300 deaths on the road thanks to seatbelts, thanks to better engineering of cars, thanks to improved medical outcomes and rigorous enforcement of traffic rules.

    But the fact that things are better than they used to be will be cold comfort to the families of those killed, to the first responders and to the poor bloody truckies who are travelling along the highway, minding their own business, doing the speed limit, big heavy load on the back, and then watching as inevitable disaster unfolds right in front of them as a car veers across the centre line and heads towards them at 100km/h. There is nowhere for them to go. They cannot stop in time. They just have to wait for the inevitable, which would be horrific. Preliminary findings found 16 of the 18 deaths over these past 10 days occurred on open roads with 100km/h speed limits and no traffic safety barriers. Of those 18 deaths, six of them weren't wearing seatbelts. So there's an obvious fix – buckle up.

    The other must be looking at wire median barriers. There's a barrier stretching around three and a half kilometres on the Kapiti Coast along Centennial Highway. That used to be a dreadful section of road – there was nowhere to go. There was a sheer rock face on one side and the sea on the other. A very narrow stretch of road around the coast. In the decade before the first part of the wire median barrier went up in 2005, 16 people were killed, 14 seriously injured in 15 major crashes. So the $15 million barrier was extended in 2007, and between 2007 and 2015, there were no deaths or serious injuries on that part of the highway. The barrier had been struck 122 times since it was installed, but no deaths or serious injuries. Goodness knows what that number would be today in 2026, 11 years later.

    I know motorcyclists are wary of the cheese cutters. There are all sorts of dreadful stories about decapitations from the wire barriers, but the numbers don't lie. They save far more lives than they take. Even so, you cannot put a barrier down the length of New Zealand. I mean, even if we had the money, would it be advisable to do so? You just have to look at the numbers I suppose and see where the most fatals occur, and put the wire barriers there. And in the meantime, as a road user, you just have to rely on people doing the right thing. You have to rely on them driving roadworthy cars, not driving while they're tired, not driving under the influence of drugs and or alcohol, and paying attention to the conditions. That doesn't seem too much to ask.

    But in the meantime, what are your fixes? You know, the police are tearing their hair out and I just feel for the truckies. You more than anyone must see the near misses, must know how bad those figures could really be, were it not for divine providence. What would you like to see as the people most on the road, most at risk of being an unwilling and faultless participant in fatal crashes? I mean, buckling your seatbelt, I thought as a generation we all did. We all grew up where you buckled your seatbelt and you told your parents because they hadn't grown up with that. Everybody knew. The boss was reminding me of the olden, olden days, and I can vaguely remember where there were no retractable seatbelts. That must have been a wow invention when that happened. Used to have to hang the seatbelts up by their hook in the old Holden Kingswood. But they saved lives almost immediately. From the time they were introduced, the road toll came down by 200, and in the last 10 days, six lives could easily have been saved had they buckled up.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分
  • Kerre Woodham: Funding cancer prevention is a no-brainer
    2026/04/30

    You know it's an election year, don't you? You know it's an election year when Winston's fermenting merry mischief, when the leader of the opposition is happy to put himself up for an hour of questions on talkback, and when lobby groups are releasing their election wish lists.

    The Cancer Society has released its election manifesto and is calling on the next Government, however it looks, to spend dollars to save them. For example, if you invest $5.5 million a year to deliver a national skin cancer prevention and early detection programme, more than 90% of cases will be prevented – nearly all cases are treatable when detected early. Every dollar invested, according to the Cancer Society, returns $11.90 in savings.

    And when you think of friends and family who have been through cancer treatment, you can understand how that would stack up. If you don't have to go through the torturous and expensive and generally lifesaving treatments, you are saving so much. So much of your own energy, so much time, so much money as a result of not getting cancer in the first place or early detection. As Cancer Society Chief Executive Nicola Coom told Mike Hosking this morning, given that cancer's New Zealand's biggest killer, it makes sense to invest in early detection and treatments.

    “One in three of us in New Zealand will receive a cancer diagnosis in our lifetime, but what's startling is one in three can also be prevented. So 81 people today around New Zealand are going to hear that they've got cancer. What this manifesto is about is we want those people to either A, not have that news in the first place, or B, be told it's okay, we've detected it early, your prognosis is good.”

    So the Cancer Society also wants to see cervical screening fully funded at a cost of $21 million per year and deliver on the 90% HPV immunisation target by 2030. You get that immunisation rate up and that eliminates cervical cancer. Invest the $5.5 million a year to deliver the skin cancer prevention and early detection programme, fund a lung cancer screening programme and begin rolling it out over the next three years, lower the bowel screening starting age to 50 and protect children and families from the commercial drivers of cancer. It all makes sense. If you can spend a dollar to save 11, why would you not? And you can say well the money's not there, but it is. It is there within the health budget. Imagine. Imagine if you didn't have to go through that whole gruelling process of trying to treat a cancer which could have been detected early, which could have been prevented in the first place when you look at the HPV immunisation.

    Cancer does not have to be a death sentence anymore. Breast cancer used to be, once you got the news about that, it was basically “set your affairs in order”. But as a result of new treatments, as a result of detection programmes, you no longer see it as a death sentence. 86% of people who are diagnosed with breast cancer survive 10 years or longer now. With skin cancers, if they're detected early, bowel cancer if you have the screening programme and can pick up the polyps that can turn into something life threatening, there is no reason for us to go through the agony of seeing somebody sicken and die.

    There will still be some that are just the anomalies of cancer cells being in your body and it's just your DNA and your bad luck and hopefully next life round you have a better run of it. But for many people it's detectable and if you have the early screening, you find it, the treatments are less severe, less harsh, less gruelling, less expensive. No brainer. I'd absolutely back the Cancer Society's election manifesto on that and I'll ask Chris Hipkins about that, but I'd love to hear from those of you who know exactly what this is all about, who've been there, who've done that, who've either had early detection or because of gaps in the system did not have the early detection and had a poorer outcome, tell me your story.

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    5 分
  • Chris Hipkins: Labour Leader discusses election policy, Superannuation, India FTA
    2026/04/30

    Labour Leader Chris Hipkins is standing by the decision to wait until after the Budget to announce the party's election policies.

    The party has come under fire from the Coalition for its lack of policies so far.

    Labour's has revealed plans for a Capital Gains Tax, a Future Fund, and a plan to boost the video game sector rebate from 20% to 25%.

    It's promised three free doctors visits a year, a change to GP funding, as well as a Family Doctor Loan Scheme.

    Hipkins told Kerre Woodham he doesn't want to make promises that can't be kept, and waiting till the Government sets out the finances is the responsible thing to do.

    He’s also signalled he’s open to discussions around potentially means-testing Superannuation.

    The party is calling for the Super age to remain at 65, but at the same time, government briefings suggest keeping it the same would result in more spending.

    Hipkins told Woodham he doesn't back full means-testing, but there are questions about whether someone working full-time on a six-figure salary should get the pension.

    He says a conversation would have to be held in a constructive, bipartisan way.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    34 分
  • Larry Fallowfield: Motor Trade Association Dealer Expert on whether you have to service your car at a dealer to maintain your warranty
    2026/04/29

    Do you have to get your car serviced by the dealer to avoid voiding the warranty?

    While you don't necessarily have to, manufacturers require specific equipment and supplies to be used during the servicing process, and using alternatives can impact the warranty.

    The independent mechanic also has to adhere to the servicing schedule and keep complete documentation.

    Motor Trade Association Dealer Expert Larry Fellowfield told Kerre Woodham that while dealerships often cost more than independent mechanics, it comes down to the specific training and equipment they’re required to have.

    LISTEN ABOVE

    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

    続きを読む 一部表示
    6 分