Don Brash v Matthew Hooton defamation case: High Court hears Brash wants ‘unreserved apology'
But Dickey told Associate Judge Grant Brittain, KC, that the remarks were not as offensive as suggested and Hooton had already apologised.
The court heard any rewards in the case would be nominal, not substantial.
Dickey said at one point Brash seemed to suggest 'iwi' were paying Hooton, which was totally unfounded.
Brash's views on the Treaty of Waitangi and race relations were largely what Hooton's monologue was about.
Specialist defamation lawyers Peter McKnight and Ali Romanos appeared for Brash.
Romanos said the remarks were serious because Hooton was not 'some random person on Reddit' but an established figure with gravitas.
Romanos said Brash wanted an unreserved apology from Hooton.
He said some 3500 people might have heard the initial podcast monologue, which was later circulated to more people on social media.
McKnight said it was not right to strike out a case with 'very serious matters alleged'.
He argued the case should go to trial.
McKnight asked for today's strike-out application to be dismissed and costs awarded.
Associate Judge Brittain reserved his decision but indicated a judgment on the strike-out application would likely be made in about a fortnight.
Hooton was not in the courtroom today.
Brash was, but he declined to comment afterwards.
Brash, apart from also being a former Reserve Bank Governor, leads the Hobson's Pledge lobby group.
Hooton is a columnist for the Business Herald and has worked in political and corporate communications and strategy for clients including the National Party.
John Weekes is a business journalist covering aviation and court. He has previously covered consumer affairs, crime, politics and court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
20 hours ago
- NZ Herald
As the world fills up with surveys, how much do our reviews matter?
He both survived the ordeal and lived to review it, so: 'Five stars'. The surveys, they haunt us. Everywhere we dine, stay, shop, and travel, the inevitable 'rate your experience' awaits, ready to hound us for our thoughts as soon as the transaction concludes. SurveyPlanet, a customer-feedback platform for organisations, has identified both 'pre-survey fatigue' and 'post-survey fatigue' as emerging risks for businesses – consumers' annoyance at being asked to fill out a survey and annoyance at being asked to fill out a survey on the heels of another survey, respectively. Let me bear witness to the existence of said fatigues, which we might also call quantification sprawl, Letterboxd culture, five-star thirst. In the time since I started reporting this story, I was asked to leave a top rating for the seller of a phone case I bought on Etsy, a guy who sold me a lamp on Facebook Marketplace, and a mobile hibachi chef we hired for my friend's bachelorette party. Additional email and text prompts to review my experiences came from, among others, the scheduling department at my doctor's office (the scheduling department!) and a business that managed to turn four contracted days of painting my apartment into five weeks. How did we wind up spending this much of our precious lives sighing at our devices and futzing with cartoon stars? Reddit posts on the topic attract a chorus of beleaguered consumers ready to empathise: 'Sick and tired of being asked for reviews of everything I buy'. 'Sellers - stop doing this if you want good feedback.' 'I hate review culture.' Others let their resentments out in tweets: 'For the love of Pete stop asking me if I enjoyed my experience visiting your online store, going to the doctor or paying my bills!' For Ross Presser, a DevOps engineer based in south New Jersey, the exasperation spikes whenever he opens the app HelloFresh to make edits to his weekly order. ''Was your delivery okay? Did you like the meal? Do you have anything to say about the meal, can you post pictures of it on social media?'' Presser, 58, rattles off. 'Late-stage capitalism,' he says with a rueful laugh. Sometimes what's irksome is the sheer audacity. One X user described a delivery guy rooting around in her garage then asking for a five-star review; another was put off by a waiter who asked for one despite reeking of cigarette smoke. Many people have revealed their policies of giving negative reviews when asked specifically for positive ones or using surveys to complain about surveys; some describe feeling harassed or badgered, even bribed or quid pro quo'd into giving their experience the full pentad of approval. I, for one, remember that years ago a Wave Runner tour company in New Jersey withheld souvenir photos – me and each of my bridesmaids breezing past the Statue of Liberty, naturally – until I'd left a five-star review on Google that mentioned the staffer who'd asked for it by name. This is, somewhat newly, illegal in the United States: as of October 2024, businesses can offer consumers incentives for reviews, but not for specifically positive reviews, according to section 465.4 of the Federal Trade Commission's Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule. Obviously, there are worse fates than being asked, even repeatedly, to recall and rate a business transaction, especially when it can help customer satisfaction. Still, what can be unnerving is the surreal, dystopian feeling that you're just compacting all your delights and sorrows and random synapse-firings down into one flat digit (or one happy, angry or neutral smiley face). Anna Fitzpatrick, a 35-year-old writer in Toronto, laughs to herself every time she gets asked to rate purchases from her local cannabis shop: 'When I started smoking weed, it was just some guy at a party!' Absurdity became melancholy, though, when Fitzpatrick's first book came out and she found herself disturbed by the notion that its success could be influenced by something as reductive as Goodreads' star-rating system. Being asked to quantify her feelings about every book, every movie, every app, every tourist destination, she says, 'does, I think, change how I interact with the world, for the worse'. Lonas, too, wonders if review sprawl might be taking away opportunities to use human interaction for its noblest purpose: problem-solving. 'I think it's making people interact less with each other about when things are wrong, and especially when things are right,' Lonas says. 'You come to the review page and write 'One star, my chicken was undercooked,' but you didn't say anything to the server?' he adds. 'Maybe the restaurant could have done something to resolve this scenario if you had just spoken up.' Little academic research exists (yet) on survey fatigue. But Katie Mehr, a marketing professor at the University of Alberta who specialises in consumer evaluations, says that 'there's research to suggest that people often want to help small businesses by giving reviews that are quite positive', especially over faceless corporations that ostensibly need less help and make you feel like you're reviewing into a void. You are, of course, almost never actually reviewing into a void. And no one knows it better than the people whose services you're rating. Sarah and Chris Jarrach are 33 and 36, respectively, and their household income depends on how customers rate interactions with them. In their hometown of Boulder, Colorado, she owns a liquor store. He's a service-lane manager for a Mercedes-Benz service centre. Sarah wants more and higher ratings on her shop's Google page. 'If someone's Googling, like, 'liquor store near me,' those reviews are gonna come up, and you're not gonna go to the one that has 3.2 stars. You're gonna go the one that has 4.8 stars,' Sarah says. And with slim margins, every purchase counts. Chris' pay itself, meanwhile, is affected by the reviews he gets from customers. A few days after a transaction, his clients are invited to fill out a survey about their experience for internal use. On a past pay plan, Chris got US$50 for each survey a customer sent back as long as he stayed at or above the company's national average employee rating, US$25 if he fell below it. 'Surveys are people's personal report cards,' Chris says. 'People just need to remember to be kind to the person that helped them.' Tas Kabir, 43, who rents out the garden apartment of his Washington, DC, home, saw his Airbnb rating slip from 4.9 to 4.8 after a guest whose comments indicated he was perfectly satisfied with the stay gave him four stars. 'Not the end of the world, but, you know,' Kabir says. Even one more four-star review might endanger his Superhost status. And Phillip Arnheim, senior manager of market research for Amtrak, can attest that even an expansive corporation has humans looking over its surveys. In fact, the rail service recently used them to help overhaul its system for alerting passengers of delays. 'We've increased the amount of information we're sharing about what's taking place, when you can expect resolution, when you can expect to arrive,' Arnheim says. 'And before, that was only shared via email. Now we're serving it through the app and through text.' Some of Amtrak's long-distance routes serve steak in their dining car; thanks to the open-ended comments sections on their surveys, Amtrak knows it's a customer favourite and makes sure to keep it well-stocked. The signature Stephen Starr lobster mac and cheese introduced on first-class Acela dining cars a few years ago remains available for the same reason. 'There probably is some fatigue that takes place because there are so many companies asking for feedback,' Arnheim concedes. 'But we really do use those responses.' And on that note, valued customer, one more question for you. How would your rate your experience reading this article? Would you recommend it to a friend?
Newsroom
a day ago
- Newsroom
Sweeping reforms to laundering laws
The Government has unveiled sweeping reforms to the country's anti money laundering laws to crack down on dirty money. Set to be in place by the next election, the changes to New Zealand's Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism regime aim to shut down dodgy deals, tighten financial loopholes, and take on the criminal underworld, while cutting unnecessary red tape for law-abiding citizens. It's estimated that a staggering $1.35 billion is generated from money laundering in New Zealand every year. The Detail talks to Lloyd Kavanagh, a financial services lawyer and deal maker from Minter Ellison Rudd Watts, about the changes, which include giving police greater powers to freeze bank accounts more quickly, banning cryptocurrency ATMs, introducing a more risk-based system for selling property from family trusts, and making it easier for parents to open bank accounts for their children. Kavanagh also welcomes efforts to streamline and simplify the system by introducing one supervision layer to oversee the rules. 'Currently, we have three supervisors who supervise different segments of the market,' he tells The Detail. 'You have the Reserve Bank, who is the [anti money laundering] supervisor for banks, you have the FMA who oversees securities market participants broadly, and then you have the Department of Internal Affairs, who looks after casinos and everybody else … lenders, lawyers, accountants, real estate agents, and quite a wide range of smaller businesses. 'What the Government is proposing is … we should have a single supervisor so that they can be consistent in the guidance that they give to reporting entities, and have a total overview of what's going on in the sector. So that is one measure which I think will have a significant impact. 'Some of the other measures … are actually to relieve the administrative burden – one of them is, at the moment, you have to verify your customer's address, which proves to be really difficult for a lot of people … so, the change will mean you only have to do that if you have got reasons for thinking it's a high-risk customer. 'I am actually optimistic that by removing some of the mandatory bureaucracy, resources will get refocused in doing what I think, and I certainly hope all New Zealanders are keen to do, which is to use the pressure on what happens to the proceeds of crime to help us detect crime in the first place.' Kavanagh does have some concerns about giving greater powers to police. 'I'm a little reserved about simply giving additional powers to the police if you don't have the right checks and balances'. And questions the ban on cryptocurrency ATMs, which are kiosks that allow users to buy and sell cryptocurrency using cash. 'I'm somewhat puzzled by that inclusion because I haven't seen the evidence as to why that would be a particular priority.' But ultimately, he believes the law changes will make a difference. 'We all benefit if there is less crime in New Zealand. These people [money launderers] make business decisions as to which countries are easier to operate in and profitable to operate in. 'And we know from the reports that have come from the Government over the last year that New Zealand has an increasing level of drug abuse. We know that we are more and more connected in a world where there are all sorts of transactions going on. 'What we need to do is just make ourselves a little bit harder to do bad things in. So, I think these [law changes] are positive steps.' Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here. You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Unemployment tipped to hit nine-year high as labour market weakens
There was anecdotal evidence that firms holding on to labour were not experiencing the pick-up in demand they expected, which meant more jobs were at risk, he said. 'A degree of 'labour hoarding' appears to have suppressed unemployment in recent quarters,' he said. 'If a recovery in economic momentum doesn't do the heavy lifting when it comes to 'right-sizing' firms' labour input, a further reduction in headcount may be needed.' With the high-frequency data pointing to an economic slowdown, risks around employment growth over the next few quarters were skewed to the downside, he said. Workman expects unemployment will rise to 5.3%, worse than the Reserve Bank's forecast of 5.2%. He also forecasts the employment rate falling 0.1% (down 0.9% for the year). It is likely that the level of participation in the labour market – already low and flattering the unemployment rate – also fell. Westpac senior economist Michael Gordon was no more optimistic. 'Monthly data has pointed to further job losses over the quarter, particularly among younger people,' he said. 'We expect that many of these people will have exited the workforce altogether, dampening the extent of the rise in the unemployment rate.' The labour market typically lagged the broader economic cycle, so it was understandable we would still be seeing softness at this stage, he said. 'But it's possible that this lag will be more prolonged than usual.' ASB senior economist Mark Smith said he expected the Reserve Bank would likely take 'more signal from trends in labour costs than the unemployment rate'. 'Labour cost growth is expected to cool, with the balance of power firmly tilted towards employers,' he said. The Labour Cost Index should increase by 0.5% for the quarter, with annual labour cost growth cooling to 2.1%, he said. That would be the lowest in four years. More moderate April 2025 increases in the minimum wage would deliver a more modest than usual second-quarter increase. Annual public sector labour cost growth was expected to ease towards 3% given the Government's fiscal belt-tightening, he said. 'We expect wider measures to generally confirm that wage pressures are easing.' BNZ head of research Stephen Toplis noted none of this was 'supportive of household spending, which remains critical to a broader economic recovery'. 'Weak employment is a headwind on its own but comes with a kicker of raising concerns around job security,' he said. 'Combined with above-average inflation in some essential items like food and electricity, it is another factor threatening the timing and extent of the pick-up in household spending that many are forecasting.' This Wednesday's data would confirm the need for more rate cuts, Kiwibank economists wrote. 'Last week's inflation data was the first test for the RBNZ given its data-dependent approach,' they said. 'We believe it opened the door to a rate cut in August.' Headline inflation rose, but the drivers appeared to be temporary. Domestic inflation was heading in the right direction. 'Next week's labour market is the second test for an August rate cut. And should the data print the way we expect, the door to a rate cut remains firmly open.' Downside risks to medium-term inflation were growing, given the soft labour market and dimming global outlook, they said. 'We expect the RBNZ to cut the cash rate by 25 basis points at the August meeting. And they'll need to go to 2.5% eventually.' Liam Dann is business editor-at-large for the New Zealand Herald. He is a senior writer and columnist, and also presents and produces videos and podcasts. He joined the Herald in 2003.
