The Panel with Ali Jones and Simon Pound Part 1
To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following:
See terms of use.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
21 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Two Labour bills pass into law
Labour MP Camilla Belich gives evidence to the Education and Workforce Select Committee about her own member's bill. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith A generous 'member's day' in Parliament has seen two Labour Party bills pass with full or part-government support, including a bill that looks to stop employers enforcing gag orders on workers talking about their salaries. New Zealand First, which opposed the Labour bill, took a swipe at its coalition partner for supporting legislation it said "torches contract law". NZ First MP Mark Patterson asked a National MP if he'd been "napping" when it was considered by the party. Every other Wednesday, Parliament debates bills put forward by backbench MPs from any party that are drawn from the members bill ballot. Camilla Belich's Employment Relations (Employee Remuneration Disclosure) Amendment Bill would make pay gag clauses unenforceable , meaning employers could not take legal action if an employee does talk about pay. This legislation passed with support from opposition parties and National, while ACT and New Zealand First voted against it. Belich spoke first, indicating she had felt apprehensive because nothing was guaranteed in terms of support from other parties. But she said it was a "good day" when MPs could come together to support legislation even when they had different politics and a different vision for New Zealand. She referenced a study by the Human Rights Commission into the Pacific Pay Gap which she said had found pay secrecy was "really hampering the progress" of New Zealand workplaces, an idea she then became interested in leading to her members bill. "We cannot keep taking steps backward when it comes to equality and fairness. These are things that should be bipartisan." She said the bill implemented a small change, but said it was a small step forward for New Zealand, saying it would make workplaces fairer and more open. Speaking first on behalf of the National Party, Vanessa Weenink said she rose in "very strong support" of the bill, to a round of applause. She also acknowledged it was a small change, but called it a "fundamental change". "It will actually enable all employees to confidently discuss their pay and terms and conditions with anyone that they choose to, without fear that doing so may cause some encumbrance in their employment, that they might have some negative impact or repercussions as a result of doing that." She said that fear could lead to unease and mistrust, and could perpetuate inequality. Her National Party colleague Hamish Campbell emphasised the legislation did not force anyone to disclose anything. ACT MP Parmjeet Parmar. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith ACT opposed the bill, with MP Parmjeet Parmar saying the legislation fell short of what Belich and others hoped it would do. She claimed the supporters believed it would fix pay discrimination and the gender pay gap, but Parmar said it would not "do anything of that sort". "This bill has no substance in it to make meaningful progress in that regard, and that is why the ACT party is not supporting this bill." She said any discussions about the gender pay gap and pay discrimination were "undeniably" important, adding "if this bill was doing anything in that regard we would have thrown full support behind this bill". Parmar said it was going to create problems at workplaces, rather than solve them. New Zealand First MP MP Mark Patterson. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone New Zealand First strongly opposed the bill, with MP Mark Patterson calling it an "abomination". He said it "torches contract law" and the party "will not put our name next to it". Patterson also questioned National's support for the issue. "We are surprised that National had, but they've obviously gone along with that on this occasion - hopefully this is not a trend in terms of flouting contract law." He asked whether there were no lawyers left in the National Party, asking James Meager directly if he'd been "napping" when it went through caucus. Patterson pointed to "unintended consequences" of the bill and people sharing their pay "willy nilly". He suggested there may be warranted reasons pay differentiation between employees, such as "performance, merit, experience". "It's not gender, necessarily, hopefully it should never be gender." Tracey McLellan's Evidence (Giving Evidence of Family Violence) Amendment Bill , which would extend the range of possible protections for those giving evidence of sexual assaults or family harm in the Family Court, also passed but with support from all parties. It would allow for those giving evidence to do so in alternative ways, rather than being required to in the same room as the alleged abuser for example. Many MPs highlighted the moment of unity, saying it was the best of parliament when it came together to make change for the better. McLellan spoke first and said the bill was about "safety, it's about dignity, and it's about justice". "It is about recognising that victims fo family violence should not be retraumatised by the very institution charged with protecting them." She said too many people, "most often women", had walked into the family court and found it to be a place of fear rather than refuge. "This bill takes an important step to change that." Tom Rutherford. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Tom Rutherford spoke on behalf of National, echoing McLellan's sentiments. He also spoke about the debate representing the "collegiality of parliament". "Everybody in this place wants to make New Zealand a better place, sometimes we disagree about how we get there, but sometimes we actually come together for the good of New Zealand." He said this bill reflected that parties could put political differences aside, recognise an issue and fix it. McLellan later told RNZ MPs were there to improve the lives of people. She acknowledged there wasn't always agreement on how that should be done, but "when you can provide the other parties that you're working with a good, sensible bill, it makes it pretty hard for them not to see the light and not to support it". Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
'It raises the IQ of both countries': How Muldoon stole a joke that was already stolen
Context - Few political one-liners are as enduring in New Zealand folklore as Sir Robert Muldoon's crack about the brain drain. Asked about Kiwis moving to Australia in the late 1970s, Muldoon famously replied that the migrants "raised the IQ of both countries". Trans-Tasman migration was surging at the time, with 103,000 New Zealanders moving permanently to Australia between 1976 and 1982. The joke has been repeated in speeches, pub banter, and the occasional barbecue argument for decades. But here's the punchline: Muldoon didn't write it - he pinched it from political cartoonist and columnist Tom Scott. However, Scott says he wasn't bothered. "I'd already stolen it," he admitted. "I couldn't get too pious". Sir Robert Muldoon served as the 31st prime minister of New Zealand. Photo: Stuff Speaking to Corin Dann in RNZ's new podcast Context , which looks at the history behind today's headlines, Tom Scott said he took the gag from Irish writer Brendan Behan. In his play The Quare Fellow Behan wrote the same thing about Irish people migrating to America. "I modified it without attribution," Scott explained. "I didn't give Brendan the credit. I took it for myself. I said, 'When Kiwis go to Australia, it raises the IQ of both countries.' And I put it in The Listener column." It was the perfect joke for the moment. The Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement, introduced in 1973, had made it easy for Kiwis to live and work in Australia without visas. When Australia's economy surged while New Zealand's sputtered, thousands left for greener pastures. RNZ's new podcast Context looks at the history behind today's headlines. Photo: RNZ / Marika Khabazi (photo), Robert Whitaker (design) Ten days after Scott's column ran, Muldoon dropped the line as if it were his own. Scott said he was only too pleased to see Muldoon borrowing from his (and Brendan Behan's) work given that, at the time, he was banned from Muldoon's press conferences. "It was doubly rewarding," Scott said, "to be a banned person and a quoted person. It was quite nice." Follow and listen to Context on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. David Lange served as the 32nd prime minister of New Zealand. Photo: Merv Griffiths. Dominion Post (Newspaper): Photographic negatives and prints of the Evening Post and Dominion newspapers. Ref: EP/1986/3948/17-F. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. Muldoon wasn't the only prime minister to steal Tom Scott's lines. "[David] Lange stole a lot of mine as well," Scott recalled. "In his farewell valedictory to Parliament, he said, 'Winston Peters can't be here tonight, he's been unavoidably detained by a full-length mirror.' And that was my line too. So, you know, I've had Muldoon and Lange both stealing my lines. It's quite flattering, really." Over the years, the "IQ" remark has taken on a life of its own. Many quote it without knowing its real author, assuming it sprang fully formed from the PM's famously sharp tongue. For more on the fascinating historical story of the 'Brain Drain' - including fears of farm workers fleeing for the goldfields, and anxieties over scientific migration in the 1960s - check out RNZ's new podcast Context , hosted by Corin Dann and Guyon Espiner, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Newsroom
4 hours ago
- Newsroom
Online radicalisation and foreign interference among rising threats to NZ
Young New Zealanders are at growing risk of being radicalised online, according to a new report from one of the country's spy agencies that also highlights a rise in foreign interference activities against a background of global instability. In its latest security threat environment report, the NZ Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS) warns the country faces 'the most challenging national security environment of recent times', with increasingly unstable relationships between states as well as rising levels of polarisation and grievance. The report says there has been 'a noticeable increase' in foreign interference actors visiting the country in the last 18 months, highly likely to have asked to build relationships with specific parts of New Zealand society and conceal their links to foreign states. China is singled out as the most active nation undertaking foreign interference in New Zealand (although not the only one), with a section on the country's United Front Work Department and its efforts to build influence with individuals and organisations in countries like New Zealand. 'It is important to acknowledge that not all [United Front] activity is foreign interference and some engagements can have benefits for New Zealand organisations. However, its activities are regularly deceptive, coercive and corruptive and come with risks for New Zealand organisations.' The security report emphasises concerns about transnational repression, saying some New Zealanders are being targeted by foreign states in a bid to keep diaspora communities politically loyal even though they live in another country. The agency says it is aware of 'co-optees' monitoring social media, photographing individuals at events, or instructing other community members to collect information on behalf of foreign states, with the risk that such information could be used to coerce the person being monitored or their family back home. In one case, a foreign state asked a co-optee to collect information on a New Zealand-based person who had applied for refugee status – 'almost certainly' because they were a member of the rainbow community. The report also says it is aware of foreign intelligence officers who have travelled to New Zealand to likely support 'coercive repatriation' of people back to their country of origin. Though it does not name any states, Newsroom has previously reported on China's efforts to force alleged criminals to return from countries including New Zealand. Foreign agents have been taking control of community organisations by co-opting or replacing leaders, with the replacements sidelining those deemed to be a challenge to the foreign state's agenda and sometimes restricting government officials from speaking to the wider community. In one case, a New Zealand official who wanted to share 'important security advice' with a community was discouraged from doing so by a community leader (also a government employee) who had undertaken activity in support of a foreign state's objectives: 'Even though the intent of the security advice was to raise awareness of risks, the gatekeeper likely thought it was against the interests of a particular foreign state.' The report also raises concerns about increasingly polarised and violent rhetoric both in the real world and online, including 'a notable degree of misplaced agitation and blame for perceived societal ills' at the fringes. 'Much of this rhetoric exists solely online, and its spread is aided by algorithms that push controversial content because it generates the most engagement.' The NZ Security Intelligence Service says it has not seen any sophisticated state-backed information operations directly targeting New Zealand, but believes New Zealanders 'have almost certainly consumed foreign state-manipulated information when active online, even if they are not the target audience of that information'. Young and vulnerable Kiwis were particularly at risk of being radicalised online, with teenagers increasingly coming to the attention of security services as unfettered internet access shortened pathways to violence. 'What might have previously been considered societal risks associated with internet safety, now have the potential to pose an ongoing risk to New Zealand's national security.' In an interview with Newsroom, NZSIS director-general Andrew Hampton said the report was not intended to alarm people, but to raise public awareness about the growing threats. 'We certainly don't want to cause despair or anxiety. I actually believe that in a democracy like ours, the public are often those who are best placed to actually see concerning behaviours, report them and take steps to mitigate them.' Although much of the activity outlined in the report was not currently illegal, Hampton said the Government's foreign interference legislation – which is yet to pass its second reading in Parliament – would allow police to take action and give communities a clearer demonstration of what activities were unacceptable in New Zealand, acting as a deterrent to foreign states and the 'sympathetic individuals' they co-opted. Asked how the public should reconcile China's status as both New Zealand's largest trading partner and the most active state carrying out foreign interference here, he said the spy agency was well aware that our country's prosperity relied on its international and trade connections. 'We are not saying don't engage, and we're certainly not saying don't engage with China: what we are saying, though, is be cognisant of the risks that are associated with some of that engagement.' On the issue of young New Zealanders being radicalised, Hampton said questions around greater regulation of internet access – such as a social media ban for under-16s as suggested by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and others – was for politicians and Parliament, but the agency wanted to draw attention to increased online engagement with grievance-based narratives. 'If you look at our current subjects of investigations – we're not talking about large numbers of people here – they're almost all young, in their teens or early 20s, they aren't part of global terrorist networks, they are people who have been largely radicalised online.' The spy agency had been speaking to school principals and other educators about what online radicalisation looked like, and had received leads as a result of that work.
