Review: Ryan Bridge's hectic new live morning show
Tara Ward watches the first episode of new digital news show Herald Now.
'The journalists are already sick of me,' Ryan Bridge announced in the opening moments of Herald Now, NZ Herald's new digital news show that premiered this morning. The broadcaster explained that he'd been standing in the middle of the NZME newsroom all week, rehearsing to launch the weekday show that promises ' the news you need to know now '. But this time, not only was Bridge standing in the newsroom, he was also streaming live on both YouTube and nzherald.co.nz, and at 7am he was ready to kickstart the morning's first news bulletin.
'You've probably heard Niva's voice before, but she's a looker too,' Bridge said of Niva Retimanu, who read the news from the Newstalk ZB studio. Back in the newsroom, Bridge began with 'Bridge does the business', while behind him, journalists darted around as they hustled the morning headlines. While Bridge rattled off the latest OCR figures, my frazzled early-morning brain did business of its own by wondering what was really hiding inside the NZME newsroom fridge.
An interview about benefit sanctions was quickly followed by an appearance from soon-to-be-deputy-prime-minister David Seymour, who seemed to have all day to lean on the desk and tell us how stink the country is right now. In contrast, Bridge, having already hosted Newstalk ZB's Early Edition at 5am this morning, was fast and full of hand-waving energy. He pressed Seymour about spending $20 million a year on the Regulatory Standards Bill, to which Seymour rambled about Nick Smith 'getting away scot free' about earthquake regulations, or something.
Bridge had lots of paper on his desk and lots of things to discuss, including Seymour's upcoming debate at the Oxford Union. Seymour explained he would speak against the argument that 'no one can be illegal on stolen land'. Bridge brought up David Lange's iconic 'I can smell the uranium' Oxford Union one-liner back in 1985 – would Seymour think of some jokes ahead of time? 'Sometimes the best jokes just happen,' Seymour said.
Speaking of jokes: on to the bleak state of our public health system. Journalist Michael Morrah stopped in to discuss his exclusive story about the pressures on Middlemore Hospital last winter, when more than 1,500 patients were treated in corridors during a 36-day period. Hospitals are overloaded and understaffed, Morrah confirmed, sharing heartbreaking comments from stressed medical professionals in the first of his three-part series about the desperate condition of the system.
It was an important issue, but Bridge didn't take it up with Nicola Willis, whose interview followed Morrah's. Willis stood in for prime minister Christopher Luxon, who was suffering from a winter virus, and Bridge questioned her about changes to KiwiSaver. 'We're worse off overall,' he argued, to which Willis suggested people should just look at the retirement website. Bridge concluded the interview by asking if Willis was wearing the same blue dress she wore on Budget Day. 'If you are, go for it girl,' he said.
'The 1950s called, and they want their line of questioning back,' Willis replied, while I wanted to put my head deep inside that NZME staff fridge.
After the 7.30am news, Bridge was also searching for answers. 'I enjoy a nice dress as much as your next gay man,' he began. 'Should I have asked about it? Probably not.' No matter, here's Heather with the weather, and a budget review with business entrepreneur Carmen Vicelich, who was forced to Zoom in from the Koru Lounge shower rooms due to the lack of privacy. 'We need some private rooms so we can do business,' she complained. It was Middlemore Hospital all over again, except with a 20% government tax break for new machinery purchases.
At 7.56am, after a frenetic hour of interviews, Bridge took what seemed to be his first breath of the morning during the sports round-up. Later, after more ads selling me the wet weather gear that All Black Scott Barrett wears when he milks the cows, Dame Julie Christie and Matt Heath popped by for a Monday morning panel and Christie dropped a Costco bombshell: you have to buy 48 rolls of toilet paper at once.
While I reeled from this astonishing revelation, Bridge discussed the supermarket duopoly with a supermarket duopoly expert and read out the morning's viewer feedback. Rob was glad there was now something 'substantial' to watch in the morning, while Philip asked 'how do I pause and rewind please?' Viewer Alan's attention was elsewhere: 'What is annoying for me is the background activity.'
'Perhaps you guys could just all go away?' Bridge turned and joked to his colleagues, who grinned and waved. They're busy, Bridge assured Alan, but maybe David Seymour was right. Between the Herald Now's toilet paper chitchat, shower room revelations and that mysterious newsroom fridge, sometimes the best jokes do just happen.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
14 hours ago
- NZ Herald
More mega than Metallica: Why Edinburgh Tattoo will be NZ's biggest show of the summer
Advertisement Advertise with NZME. When the Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo last marched into New Zealand, it attracted an audience of 82,000 over four nights at Wellington's Cake Tin. In 2016, the nearly 1300 performers came from seven countries. Just over half of them were from New Zealand, including the members of seven pipe bands,
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Stormy seas ahead for new skipper
Depending on your political alignment, the swearing in of David Seymour as deputy prime minister on Saturday was either a glorious achievement or the stuff of nightmares. For most though, it will be business as usual. Deputy prime minister is an important role, but not one of grave constitutional importance. It being shared is a novel situation born of this government being a three-way coalition, but it was an eminently practical solution to what might have been a problem if the role had been the sole province of one person for three years. Those who doubt whether Mr Seymour has what it takes to assume command when Christopher Luxon is not about are, presumably, unaware that Mr Seymour has been acting prime minister on several occasions when both Mr Luxon and former deputy prime minister Winston Peters were out of the country. The ship of state was safely kept off the rocks then, as it will no doubt be again when Mr Seymour temporarily assumes the helm: he is a more than capable man, with a firmly ingrained sense of personal responsibility. There are others who believe that the stability of the government will be weakened by a tyro deputy prime minister taking charge, especially one who is given to speaking his mind — and who unapologetically has said that he has no intention of changing that. Those people also forget that Mr Peters is hardly a shrinking violet, and that the coalition remained stable despite some choice outbursts in the past 18 months from the elder statesman of New Zealand politics. Having said all that, much of Mr Seymour's time in the next few months will be spent trying to shepherd through his Regulatory Standards Bill, the second highly controversial piece of legislation he has sought to enact this term. The first was, of course, the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill. Despite the inevitability of it being voted down it still attracted enormous opprobrium and inspired the largest protest march seen in Wellington in many years. Its fallout is still glowing bright, as Parliament considers what to do with the three Te Pati Maori MPs who disrupted the voting on the doomed Bill. Many of those opposed to the Regulatory Standards Bill are the same people, and for many of the same reasons. The Bill is intended to clarify and improve New Zealand's law-making process, and many of the checks and balances which it proposes are not unknown in other countries. However, in this country the Treaty of Waitangi exists as safeguard of the legal rights of Maori, and any attempt to circumvent the Treaty was always going to cause controversy. The Bill itself is largely silent on the Treaty, and its proponent did not mention it at all in his first reading speech. The Opposition surely mentioned it though and spared no punches: "an absolutely vile piece of legislation" was one of the milder condemnations, while Te Pati Maori called on people to mobilise to stop the Bill in its tracks. For Mr Seymour. the Bill is an exercise in cutting the red tape which he claims is holding New Zealand back. He is no doubt right that there are examples of overregulation, and that it can be obstructive to people's individual or corporate endeavours. But some regulations, such as environmental and health standards, exist for good reason and any effort to weaken those protections warrants intense scrutiny. Likewise, so does any attempt to diminish the guarantees afforded by the Treaty of Waitangi, which for all some may wish otherwise remains the foundation stone of New Zealand's existence. The Bill, unlike the Treaty Principles Bill, enjoys the support of both governing parties, albeit that New Zealand First has suggested that it needs improvements. That obviously enhances its chances of becoming law but equally amplifies the opposition to it. Parliament's computer system, which collapsed under the weight of submissions on the Treaty Principles Bill, has staggered again under the welter of opinion on this Bill — almost certainly negative opinion. A full and rigorous select committee process is going to be critical to public acceptance of this proposed law change: it is unfortunate that the committee chose not to extend the public submission period. Mr Seymour's leadership will now be under the spotlight. He will need to exercise Solomonic wisdom, given that battle lines are firmly drawn.
Otago Daily Times
16 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Four strikes and not out — the Regulatory Standards Bill
The Regulatory Standards Bill — Government Bill 155-1 under the name of the Minister for Regulation — was introduced to Parliament on May 19. It received its first reading on May 23 and has been referred to the finance and expenditure select committee. As alluded to previously in this publication (ODT 4.1.25), earlier attempts to introduce this legislation failed in 2006, 2009 and 2011. In 2021, with the support of the National Party, a Bill to this effect was introduced by the (now) minister, but did not get off the ground. It was condemned as a dangerous constitutional shift undermining public and collective rights and threatening parliamentary sovereignty. Nothing about this Bill has changed except that the National-Act New Zealand coalition agreement provides for support of the Act policy programme by National. In this regard, the situation is different from that of the failed Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill, which National and New Zealand First supported only to the select committee stage, then voted it down. Why is this Bill of such concern? The reasons are the same as they were two decades ago, being: — That the proposal represents a constitutional entrenchment of neo-political principles with an accumulation of power in the hands of the minister of regulation; — Tying principles of good regulation to property rights as a fundamental of good lawmaking overlooks entirely the ancillary fundamental of good lawmaking being strengthening communities, enhancement of environmental standards and protection of vulnerable groups. The proposed primacy of free market and individual rights is false as both are reliant on law and order and inherent obligations to protect the vulnerable (persons or environment) and maintain a reasonable balance where equity and justice is accorded the same value. Existing legislative guidelines from 2021 provide that "legislation should be consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi and should reflect the fundamental values and principles of a democratic society". This Bill does neither. Current guidelines identify the principle that "everyone is subject to the law". This Bill changes that to "every person is equal before the law" which reflects the Act party's policy to eradicate equity-based programmes which seek to redress systemic inequality. Equality in this sense is a procedural right, free of class or status. It is not, and never has been, the right to be treated the same. Equating property rights with personal liberty creates dangerous territory, the focus on which will obliterate the duty to preserve the environment and address substantive inequality issues. Going down this path will open the door to compensation claims in the event of any actions impacting adversely on property rights. There are already in place substantive regulatory controls. The advice to the minister in this instance is, in essence, that the proposed legislation is unnecessary. The extent of powers placed in the hands of the minister, the proponent of the Bill, is excessive. The objective of the Bill is to encapsulate more than 20 years of neo-liberal, libertarian dogma, designed to elevate and protect the interest of property above all else. Successive parliaments have soundly rejected this legislation in the past. The prime minister must ensure that the Bill is amended to recognise all of its defects or simply decline to support it on the basis that it is not good law. Act NZ leader David Seymour would be unlikely to surrender his upcoming deputy prime ministership given the patience shown to date in getting this hobby horse across the line. — Noel O'Malley is a Balclutha lawyer and past president of the Otago District Law Society.
