Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

• Dave Cade: On the draining of Lake Rotomanu in the fight against the invasive gold clams

  A New Plymouth lake is being drained in an effort to stop invasive clams. Lake Rotomanu's been closed to motorised watercraft since the gold clams were found there last month, marking the first discovery of the species outside of the Waikato River. The lake's outlet was opened yesterday, and it will take about four days to drain completely. Dave Cade told Kerre Woodham it’s the worst biosecurity threat to New Zealand’s freshwater that the country’s ever faced. He says the clams reproduce asexually, and they’ll smother the bottom of lakes, smothering native organisms and clogging hydro stations. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  --------  

  9:14

  --------

  9:14
• David Farrar: Kiwiblog author and co-founder of the Taxpayers' Union on the debate between Nicola Willis and Ruth Richardson

  Nicola Willis is defending her economic track record in the face of a lobby-group's satirical campaign. The Taxpayers' Union has sent MPs Nicola Willis-branded fudge, claiming she favours treats today and taxes tomorrow. It suggests Willis should cut spending more. Willis says the Government has reduced taxes and delivered significant cost savings while keeping frontline services. Kiwiblog author and co-founder of the Taxpayers' Union, David Farrar told Kerre Woodham that putting aside personalities, it’s not a bad thing for people to realise we still have a real fiscal challenge in New Zealand. He says that while the Government has cut spending in a number of areas, we’re still spending more than we’re bringing in in taxes. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  --------  

  9:57

  --------

  9:57
• Kerre Woodham: Willis and Richardson debating would be a pointless waste of time

  Do you see any advantage or benefit to the country in having a former Finance Minister and the current one debating fiscal policy? The current Finance Minister, Nicola Willis, has challenged the former Finance Minister, Ruth Richardson, to a debate. Now, that is misguided in my view, but to be fair, she was grievously provoked. Ruth Richardson is the chair of the Taxpayers' Union. The Taxpayers' Union is a pressure group, a ginger group, founded in 2013 to scrutinise government spending, publicise government waste, and promote an efficient tax system. Its basis is its membership is mainly conservative, centre-right, right-wing figures, and it's regarded as a right-wing pressure group. Normally you would think they'd be scrutinising Labour and Labour's spending. Last week, the Taxpayers' Union sent out a provocative pamphlet and an accompanying box of fudge, accusing Nicola Willis of not delivering on her election promises to rein in reckless spending, unsustainable borrowing, and the hiring of endless bureaucrats. The Union accused Willis of failing to deliver the goods and fudging it, hence the fudge that arrived with the press release. Provoked and incensed beyond reason, Nicola Willis swiped back. She said, "My message for Ruth Richardson is a very clear one: come and debate me face-to-face, come out of the shadows. I will argue toe-to-toe on the prescription that our government is following. I reject your approach, and instead of lurking in the shadows with secretly funded ads in the paper, come and debate me right here in Parliament. 'm ready anytime, anywhere, I will debate her." So you can see she was a little bit brassed off. Willis said she stood by her decisions in government and wanted Richardson to defend her legacy, having introduced the infamous Mother of All Budgets in 1991, when her government under Bolger came in and were left with, I would argue, an even worse fiscal mess than this government inherited. It's all got very personal. I don't think there's anything wrong in critiquing decisions made by government ministers, looking at how they're going, giving updates, having a reckon, especially when the ministers came in on a campaign of fixing the economy and reining in irresponsible spending, it's fair enough to say, "Okay, have you?" The Coalition Government possibly hasn't done enough, been innovative enough to suit the Taxpayers' Union agenda. They wanted more. They wanted cuts in spending, they wanted slashing of and wholesale firing of bureaucrats. That's what they wanted, but the Government's in the tricky position of having to be responsible stewards of the public purse and get re-elected. And that's a tricky one. The Taxpayers' Union doesn't have to worry about getting elected. It's a stand-alone lobby group. The Taxpayers' Union has criticised Nicola Willis for a measly 1% reduction in public servants, but as David Farrar from Kiwiblog points out, this may well be the first government in history to actually reduce the number of public servants. They're the first ones to have done it. It was never going to be easy inheriting the situation left by the previous government, and it never is. The Labour governments spend, that's what they do. But there's also nothing wrong with critiquing the performance of the government. The Taxpayers' Union shouldn't have made it so personal. Nicola Willis should have showed superhuman restraint and not lashed back. The debate is a pointless waste of time in my view. I know that we're all political tragics here and we take far more interest than the average person does and if I thought there was any merit whatsoever, and if lessons could be learned or if as a country we would benefit from having these two Finance Ministers thrashing out points of economic order, fine. I just don't see it. I think it's egos have been wounded and it is the equivalent of challenging somebody to 50 press-ups – a pointless exercise. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  --------  

  5:04

  --------

  5:04
• Kerre Woodham: Beyond the headlines of the cancer report

  Whenever I hear or read news headlines these days, I know that the headlines will be just that for so many people. Headlines. People won't hear or they won't read beyond the headline, and then they'll form their own opinions based on nothing more than 20 words or fewer. I've got numerous examples of that. Even people that I would have thought would understand the media, like journalists, they'll look at a headline and think, "Oh, you know, subscriber only, I'm not going to pay. I'm just going to draw my own conclusions from the headline," which they know is flawed and ridiculous. You have to read the body of the story. If you just go on the headline, then you are going to be misinformed. It's a bit like the cancer diagnosis headline that's in the news today. "Cancer diagnosis numbers set to skyrocket by 50% over the next two decades". As soon as I read that, I could write the text to this show myself. Example: Yeah, have a look at how many of them were vaxed. Join the dots, and variations on that theme. Or I could imagine people thinking, "Oh my god, cancer diagnoses are up. I'm going to die." Or putting my young activist cap on, Māori are around 1.6 times more likely to die from cancer than Pākehā or other ethnicities. So the young activists are like, "Yeah, that's right, man, institutional racism inherent in the system. Yeah. It's colonialism. That's what's causing that." In fact, when you look beyond the headlines, when you read beyond the headlines, there's actually a lot of good news in the story, if you are willing to take the time to read it or listen to the interviews. Since the first state of cancer report five years ago, there has been encouraging progress in key areas of prevention, early detection, and treatment. Cancer diagnoses might be skyrocketing, but that's because they've got better diagnostic tools. We can find it before it does the damage. The chance of surviving cancer has improved over the last 20 years. The five-year net survival for all cancers has improved by 15% in the last 20 years, probably due to the screening and the advances in treatment. And even better is the news that many, many of the cancers that afflict us can be prevented by us. We have the power to reduce our risk of some cancers, as Dr. Chris Jackson, Professor of Oncology at University of Otago and practising medical oncologist, explained to Heather du Plessis-Allan this morning. CJ: 20% of all cancers are related to smoking, 20%. So if you get rid of smoking, you would cut the number of cancers by 20%. So that is undisputed. HDPA: Even though the numbers are so small nowadays? CJ: Yeah, well, it's probably going to, certainly it is going down, but those people who've been smoking are still going to be going through the system for that amount of time. The number the number two cause is obesity. So New Zealand's what, the third most obese country in the world now, I think? And we're seeing a rise in some obesity-related cancers now also, and I think if we could fix that, that would be the other big thing in terms of prevention. The other key thing, which is a very New Zealand thing, is our love affair with the sun. And as we come into summer months, I think we have to reflect on the old slip, slop, slap thing. Australia has done the sun prevention thing better than we have, and our skin cancer rates are now higher than theirs. Absolutely. There are still many, many mysteries around cancers. There are cancer clusters within families, there are rising rates of healthy young people being diagnosed with bowel cancer. There is much work for cancer researchers to do. But they've also done a lot of work in the field of many cancers and have found the cause and effect. Smoking increases your risk of cancer, obesity increases your risk of cancer, ignoring sun warnings increases your risk of cancer. So we need to pay heed, if we want to. Make the changes you need to your lifestyle, you improve your chances of a healthy active life. Don't, get sick. Take advantage of the free buses that will take you to the free screening because early detection is the best prevention, or don't. And you'll pay the ultimate price. I mean, the headline, if you just simply looked at it, you could form your own conclusion. You could absolutely go off onto an interpretive dance of your own misinformation, your own prejudice, your own beliefs. Cancer diagnosis numbers set to skyrocket by 50% over the next two decades. In fact, beyond the headlines, there is so much good news in there. And one of the key messages I think that we need to take from it is the fact that we have a little bit of control and agency over our own lives, that it is not inevitable that we get cancer, we get sick and we die. There is much we can do to prevent it. Early detection is the best prevention. The treatments are good, provided you go along and you get the screenings, and you keep up to date with your health, you pay attention to your body, and you think that you're worth it. When we look at the numbers who are disproportionately affected by cancer, you have to ask how many are helping themselves. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  --------  

  6:10

  --------

  6:10
• Phil Lester: Victoria University Ecology and Entomology Professor on the efforts to stamp out yellow-legged hornets

  Efforts to stamp out yellow-legged hornets in New Zealand are widening. Biodiversity New Zealand is expanding the 5-kilometre surveillance zone in Glenfield and Birkdale on Auckland's North Shore further out to 11-kilometres, to ensure only one population is at large. Victoria University Ecology and Entomology Professor Phil Lester told Kerre Woodham hornets target worker bees one by one and will hurt more than our honey sector. He says bees support our dairy, kiwifruit, and avocado industries, and if they get established it will be a real problem. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

  --------  

  8:57

  --------

  8:57

More News podcasts

Trending News podcasts

About Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast: Podcasts in Family