1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:02,320
Speaker 1: Right, let us get to you to this poll right now.

2
00:00:02,360 --> 00:00:04,280
Speaker 1: By the way, the time is eight past six, So

3
00:00:04,720 --> 00:00:08,559
Speaker 1: one News is claiming this as a shock result. National

4
00:00:08,640 --> 00:00:11,920
Speaker 1: is down two to thirty four percent, Labour is down

5
00:00:12,039 --> 00:00:14,600
Speaker 1: three to twenty nine percent, The Greens are up two

6
00:00:14,640 --> 00:00:17,440
Speaker 1: to twelve. ACT is down one to eight. New Zealand

7
00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:20,360
Speaker 1: First is up one to eight. Anti Patimari is up

8
00:00:20,400 --> 00:00:22,960
Speaker 1: one to four. I'm not entirely sure what the shock

9
00:00:23,000 --> 00:00:26,079
Speaker 1: there is under these numbers. The National, New Zealand First

10
00:00:26,120 --> 00:00:28,840
Speaker 1: and ACT parties have the numbers to govern together. Preferred

11
00:00:28,880 --> 00:00:32,000
Speaker 1: Prime Minister luxeun steady on twenty three. Hipkins is down

12
00:00:32,040 --> 00:00:34,639
Speaker 1: one to nineteen, Winston Peters is down one to six,

13
00:00:34,720 --> 00:00:37,159
Speaker 1: Chloe's up one to five, David Seymour's up one to four,

14
00:00:37,159 --> 00:00:39,680
Speaker 1: and Nichola Willis is one one and Nikola Willis, the

15
00:00:39,720 --> 00:00:41,920
Speaker 1: Finance Minister, is with us. Now, Hey, Nikola.

16
00:00:42,440 --> 00:00:46,519
Speaker 2: HIV, what's the shock? Well, I suppose if your Labor

17
00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:49,720
Speaker 2: and you've been yelling from the rooftops, fire and brimstone,

18
00:00:49,760 --> 00:00:51,760
Speaker 2: this budget's the end of all time and then you

19
00:00:52,159 --> 00:00:54,520
Speaker 2: lose three points at the pole in your preferred prime

20
00:00:54,520 --> 00:00:57,120
Speaker 2: minister rating takes a dive. Then It might be a

21
00:00:57,120 --> 00:00:59,320
Speaker 2: bit of a shock, mindn't it I suppose?

22
00:00:59,360 --> 00:01:01,440
Speaker 1: So I mean, are you Are you heartened by the

23
00:01:01,440 --> 00:01:02,960
Speaker 1: fact that you haven't got a budget bump?

24
00:01:03,040 --> 00:01:03,200
Speaker 2: Right?

25
00:01:03,280 --> 00:01:05,160
Speaker 1: So that must be disappointing for you because you would

26
00:01:05,160 --> 00:01:07,080
Speaker 1: expect that. But are you heartened by the fact that

27
00:01:07,120 --> 00:01:09,880
Speaker 1: the pay equity stuff hasn't done you guys that much damage?

28
00:01:10,440 --> 00:01:13,160
Speaker 2: Well, it gives me confidence that New Zealanders get where

29
00:01:13,160 --> 00:01:15,120
Speaker 2: we are as a country, which is that where a

30
00:01:15,160 --> 00:01:17,280
Speaker 2: government doing a big clean up job. The books have

31
00:01:17,319 --> 00:01:19,440
Speaker 2: been left in a mess. We have to do some

32
00:01:19,760 --> 00:01:24,240
Speaker 2: pleasant choices to unwind previous spending commitments that are now unaffordable.

33
00:01:24,720 --> 00:01:26,960
Speaker 2: And as I said going into the budget, I couldn't

34
00:01:26,959 --> 00:01:30,600
Speaker 2: deliver rainbows or unicorns in a responsible way. I felt

35
00:01:30,680 --> 00:01:32,600
Speaker 2: the job that we had as a government was to

36
00:01:32,640 --> 00:01:35,440
Speaker 2: set out a path back to balance books and debt

37
00:01:35,440 --> 00:01:38,479
Speaker 2: reduction while making critical investments for the here and now.

38
00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:41,479
Speaker 2: We did that and New Zealanders make clear in that

39
00:01:41,560 --> 00:01:43,720
Speaker 2: poll that they would still want us to be the

40
00:01:43,760 --> 00:01:45,679
Speaker 2: government of the day. So that is heartening.

41
00:01:46,280 --> 00:01:49,240
Speaker 1: Okay, tell me about the road cones. How long before

42
00:01:49,280 --> 00:01:51,960
Speaker 1: this tip line starts working and they go through and

43
00:01:52,000 --> 00:01:53,120
Speaker 1: get rid of the road cones.

44
00:01:54,600 --> 00:01:57,680
Speaker 2: Well, I think the tip lines has been launched today

45
00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:01,400
Speaker 2: and as soon as people ring with those good examples,

46
00:02:01,480 --> 00:02:04,280
Speaker 2: we now have a very quick way of making sure

47
00:02:04,320 --> 00:02:06,320
Speaker 2: that we follow up on them and find out what

48
00:02:06,360 --> 00:02:09,400
Speaker 2: the heck's going on. So I think you'll see some

49
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:12,680
Speaker 2: action pretty quickly. Minister van Velden is pretty hot on this,

50
00:02:12,800 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 2: the Prime Minister is very hot on it, the Minister

51
00:02:15,639 --> 00:02:18,440
Speaker 2: of Transports hot on it. So this is one where

52
00:02:18,480 --> 00:02:22,040
Speaker 2: the public, by using their voice, can get some action.

53
00:02:22,240 --> 00:02:24,720
Speaker 1: Okay, so how does it practically work? So I get home,

54
00:02:24,919 --> 00:02:27,560
Speaker 1: I remember where it all happened, I fill out my form.

55
00:02:27,639 --> 00:02:28,840
Speaker 1: It goes through to work Safe.

56
00:02:28,880 --> 00:02:32,880
Speaker 2: What happens then look, I imagine and I will acknowledge

57
00:02:32,880 --> 00:02:35,200
Speaker 2: I've not been briefed on the operational detail, but I

58
00:02:35,200 --> 00:02:38,080
Speaker 2: imagine work Safe would then look into, well, where was that,

59
00:02:38,240 --> 00:02:41,840
Speaker 2: which council's jurisdiction was it? In that inquire with the

60
00:02:41,880 --> 00:02:45,639
Speaker 2: council as to why that was occurring, guessing the Council

61
00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:48,280
Speaker 2: will then make a thousand excuses about why that is

62
00:02:48,320 --> 00:02:50,919
Speaker 2: the case and maybe blame a contractor on the way through.

63
00:02:51,320 --> 00:02:54,560
Speaker 2: We can learn a lesson from that example of what

64
00:02:54,639 --> 00:02:57,720
Speaker 2: went wrong and then ask for correction and ensure that

65
00:02:57,760 --> 00:02:59,799
Speaker 2: if there is a policy reason for it, we fix it.

66
00:03:00,080 --> 00:03:02,040
Speaker 1: I've been around long enough to know that this is

67
00:03:02,160 --> 00:03:04,400
Speaker 1: by the time they get round, by the time WorkSafe

68
00:03:04,440 --> 00:03:05,880
Speaker 1: gets to the council and the council gets to the

69
00:03:05,880 --> 00:03:08,280
Speaker 1: traffic management people, blah blah blah, the cones are gone, right,

70
00:03:08,560 --> 00:03:10,840
Speaker 1: So this is probably more about freaking them out and

71
00:03:10,840 --> 00:03:12,720
Speaker 1: getting them to not put out all those cones in

72
00:03:12,760 --> 00:03:13,400
Speaker 1: the first place.

73
00:03:14,400 --> 00:03:17,120
Speaker 2: You got it either, which is to say to those

74
00:03:17,160 --> 00:03:20,480
Speaker 2: councils who haven't gone and looked at their traffic management

75
00:03:20,520 --> 00:03:23,880
Speaker 2: policies and approaches to see whether they're wasting money on

76
00:03:24,040 --> 00:03:27,560
Speaker 2: road cones, here's the heads up. If you don't do it,

77
00:03:27,800 --> 00:03:30,240
Speaker 2: you'll be outed as one of the councils that is

78
00:03:30,280 --> 00:03:32,240
Speaker 2: having far too much of this going on. Because I'm

79
00:03:32,280 --> 00:03:34,519
Speaker 2: sure the Minister will be able to break down by

80
00:03:34,600 --> 00:03:37,200
Speaker 2: region and council where the most complaints are coming from.

81
00:03:37,240 --> 00:03:38,920
Speaker 2: And what'd that be interesting information?

82
00:03:39,160 --> 00:03:40,640
Speaker 1: It will I'm looking forward to it.

83
00:03:40,800 --> 00:03:40,960
Speaker 2: Now.

84
00:03:41,000 --> 00:03:43,119
Speaker 1: How committed are you to helping out these Aussie banks

85
00:03:43,200 --> 00:03:45,720
Speaker 1: or the changes to the Triple CFA or are you

86
00:03:45,800 --> 00:03:46,800
Speaker 1: prepared to rethink that?

87
00:03:47,960 --> 00:03:52,600
Speaker 2: Well, I'm never committed to helping out Ossie banks. That's

88
00:03:52,640 --> 00:03:54,400
Speaker 2: not where I come from. I'm on the side of

89
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:55,200
Speaker 2: customers end.

90
00:03:55,240 --> 00:03:56,960
Speaker 1: Yeah, but this is what you're practically doing.

91
00:03:58,240 --> 00:04:02,360
Speaker 2: Well, I disagree with that characterization. I've heard Scott Simpson's

92
00:04:02,400 --> 00:04:04,640
Speaker 2: interview with you the other day as he set out

93
00:04:04,680 --> 00:04:08,280
Speaker 2: what he's attempting to do with this proposed law change

94
00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:11,000
Speaker 2: is give the courts a bit more discretion and the

95
00:04:11,040 --> 00:04:15,080
Speaker 2: penalties they impose when where banks they have not made

96
00:04:15,080 --> 00:04:16,360
Speaker 2: full disclosure.

97
00:04:15,880 --> 00:04:18,440
Speaker 1: Always lesser though, because at the moment, as far as

98
00:04:18,440 --> 00:04:21,760
Speaker 1: I understand it, the courts are required to impose like

99
00:04:21,880 --> 00:04:26,479
Speaker 1: basically complete reimbursement of all fees. Any discretion they have

100
00:04:26,720 --> 00:04:28,960
Speaker 1: is to lower how much you're paid.

101
00:04:29,360 --> 00:04:31,640
Speaker 2: Well, my view is if harm has been done to

102
00:04:31,680 --> 00:04:35,160
Speaker 2: a customer, then it is appropriate that banks should have

103
00:04:35,200 --> 00:04:38,960
Speaker 2: to compensate, and the penalties should be significant enough to

104
00:04:39,080 --> 00:04:42,680
Speaker 2: make sure that the banks feel it. So the purpose

105
00:04:42,720 --> 00:04:45,960
Speaker 2: of a select committee process, as your wel aware, is

106
00:04:46,040 --> 00:04:49,040
Speaker 2: to look at well, is the law as it's drafted

107
00:04:49,160 --> 00:04:53,160
Speaker 2: going to have the intent of policy makers carried out

108
00:04:53,240 --> 00:04:56,480
Speaker 2: or are there other implications? So the select comitty process

109
00:04:56,520 --> 00:04:58,719
Speaker 2: is pretty important to me. Let's hear all the views

110
00:04:58,760 --> 00:05:01,919
Speaker 2: on is the changed to the law are going to

111
00:05:01,960 --> 00:05:04,640
Speaker 2: have the effects that you're suggesting, which is letting banks

112
00:05:04,640 --> 00:05:06,240
Speaker 2: off the hook. Because if that's the case, I don't

113
00:05:06,279 --> 00:05:08,680
Speaker 2: think Cabinet wants that or is it going to be

114
00:05:08,720 --> 00:05:11,440
Speaker 2: more workable for the courts and still be fair and just.

115
00:05:11,600 --> 00:05:13,680
Speaker 2: And if that's the case, then it stays. But if

116
00:05:13,720 --> 00:05:16,040
Speaker 2: we have to tweak it, we will. That's what Select

117
00:05:16,040 --> 00:05:17,400
Speaker 2: committee processes are all about.

118
00:05:17,480 --> 00:05:19,600
Speaker 1: Can't understand why you guys are doing it. I mean,

119
00:05:20,080 --> 00:05:22,920
Speaker 1: I just don't understand why. Because Scott, if we take

120
00:05:22,960 --> 00:05:25,160
Speaker 1: Scott at his word, which ps I do not on this,

121
00:05:25,640 --> 00:05:27,919
Speaker 1: he reckons there's been no lobbying from the bank, So

122
00:05:27,960 --> 00:05:29,240
Speaker 1: why are you guys doing it?

123
00:05:30,000 --> 00:05:33,159
Speaker 2: Look, I understand that it's the advice from officials is

124
00:05:33,200 --> 00:05:38,400
Speaker 2: that the last government made significant changes post twenty nineteen

125
00:05:38,920 --> 00:05:41,640
Speaker 2: and there's an anomaly whereby there's a small period of

126
00:05:41,680 --> 00:05:45,160
Speaker 2: a few years between twenty fifteen and twenty nineteen where

127
00:05:45,200 --> 00:05:49,359
Speaker 2: the law is operating differently and they have concerns about

128
00:05:49,400 --> 00:05:51,880
Speaker 2: that and they think that this amendment will give appropriate

129
00:05:51,880 --> 00:05:55,839
Speaker 2: discretion to the courts. Now, Select committee processes allow for

130
00:05:56,040 --> 00:05:59,120
Speaker 2: all views to be heard, and you can be assured

131
00:05:59,400 --> 00:06:02,000
Speaker 2: that this mine in particular, and I'm sure others around

132
00:06:02,000 --> 00:06:04,919
Speaker 2: the cabinet table will be watching this issue very closely

133
00:06:05,000 --> 00:06:07,320
Speaker 2: because I am not in the business of letting the

134
00:06:07,320 --> 00:06:08,599
Speaker 2: major Ossie banks off the hook.

135
00:06:08,720 --> 00:06:12,279
Speaker 1: Great, okay, well like it. I feel quite reassured by that. Now,

136
00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:14,080
Speaker 1: are you going to scale back the key we saver

137
00:06:14,240 --> 00:06:17,760
Speaker 1: contributions that MPs get like everybody else's have to cop.

138
00:06:18,839 --> 00:06:21,880
Speaker 2: Look, I've looked into this issue and this is actually

139
00:06:21,960 --> 00:06:24,680
Speaker 2: a determination for the remuneration.

140
00:06:24,279 --> 00:06:26,520
Speaker 1: Oh no, don't do Oh, don't you do that, Nikola,

141
00:06:26,640 --> 00:06:29,400
Speaker 1: because what you're about, what you're about to say to

142
00:06:29,480 --> 00:06:31,760
Speaker 1: me is MPs don't have a say over this and

143
00:06:31,760 --> 00:06:33,279
Speaker 1: we have to leave it to the rem Authority.

144
00:06:33,400 --> 00:06:37,800
Speaker 2: Yes. In two thousand and three, the Remuneration Authority made

145
00:06:37,839 --> 00:06:41,680
Speaker 2: a determination on superannuation, which is where it currently sits.

146
00:06:41,760 --> 00:06:45,240
Speaker 2: They went through some international comparisons and the like and

147
00:06:45,320 --> 00:06:48,839
Speaker 2: they have made their recommendations. So that's where it sits

148
00:06:48,920 --> 00:06:52,880
Speaker 2: currently and of course is part of the overall compensation

149
00:06:53,040 --> 00:06:57,240
Speaker 2: package for MPs. So it is a slightly separate issue

150
00:06:57,240 --> 00:07:02,440
Speaker 2: from Kiwi Saber. It is about the employer versus the employee.

151
00:07:02,480 --> 00:07:05,000
Speaker 2: We're here the Remuneration Authority acts and the role of

152
00:07:05,000 --> 00:07:10,000
Speaker 2: the employer and makes recommendations accordingly. So it's not something

153
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:12,320
Speaker 2: that we have discussed as a cabinet. You should sit it.

154
00:07:12,400 --> 00:07:15,920
Speaker 2: I haven't actually seen opposition in p suggest it either,

155
00:07:15,960 --> 00:07:16,520
Speaker 2: of course not.

156
00:07:16,680 --> 00:07:19,320
Speaker 1: It's like you guys like Turkey's asking for an early Christmas,

157
00:07:19,360 --> 00:07:21,320
Speaker 1: You're not going to be You should do it, Nikolay,

158
00:07:21,360 --> 00:07:22,960
Speaker 1: you should do it, and you have the power to

159
00:07:22,960 --> 00:07:24,720
Speaker 1: do it. And you know that as well, because you

160
00:07:24,720 --> 00:07:27,440
Speaker 1: can override the rem authority if you want to buy legislation.

161
00:07:27,840 --> 00:07:30,240
Speaker 1: Do you do you not agree that it's a terrible

162
00:07:30,280 --> 00:07:32,960
Speaker 1: look for you guys to be taking as much as

163
00:07:33,080 --> 00:07:35,720
Speaker 1: thirty four thousand dollars a year In Key we saver

164
00:07:35,880 --> 00:07:39,120
Speaker 1: contributions via the taxpayer. When everybody else and I know

165
00:07:39,160 --> 00:07:42,040
Speaker 1: it's not apples for apples, but when everybody else's contribution

166
00:07:42,280 --> 00:07:45,160
Speaker 1: via the taxpayer's two hundred and fifty dollars, it looked bad.

167
00:07:46,080 --> 00:07:49,520
Speaker 2: Well in this case, heither, I just say that the

168
00:07:49,600 --> 00:07:53,520
Speaker 2: employer is making the contribution, so it's not the government

169
00:07:53,560 --> 00:07:56,480
Speaker 2: as such. There's a separate issue. So some employers you've got,

170
00:07:56,800 --> 00:08:00,960
Speaker 2: of course, make contributions larger than is required by statute.

171
00:08:01,160 --> 00:08:04,239
Speaker 2: I think yessure you'relready raising the overall.

172
00:08:04,560 --> 00:08:06,680
Speaker 1: No, the whole thing, Nicola, the whole thing is just

173
00:08:06,760 --> 00:08:08,560
Speaker 1: a bad look, right because even if you just use

174
00:08:08,600 --> 00:08:10,240
Speaker 1: apples for apples, which is what you're talking about, the

175
00:08:10,280 --> 00:08:13,800
Speaker 1: employer contribution you guys are getting. You're getting every dollar

176
00:08:13,800 --> 00:08:16,560
Speaker 1: that you put in the taxpayer, the employer puts in

177
00:08:16,640 --> 00:08:19,440
Speaker 1: two and a half dollars, right, So up to that's

178
00:08:19,520 --> 00:08:22,760
Speaker 1: a huge amount of contribution. Nobody else in the workplace

179
00:08:22,760 --> 00:08:24,440
Speaker 1: in New Zealand is getting that. We're getting one dollar

180
00:08:24,480 --> 00:08:25,840
Speaker 1: for one dollar from our employers.

181
00:08:26,480 --> 00:08:28,880
Speaker 2: So here's what I do agree with you on, which

182
00:08:28,960 --> 00:08:33,080
Speaker 2: is when we're looking at MP's overall pay, I think

183
00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:36,600
Speaker 2: that superannuation is a very relevant factor as part of

184
00:08:36,600 --> 00:08:39,920
Speaker 2: that overall consideration, because I think the way it should

185
00:08:39,920 --> 00:08:42,120
Speaker 2: be thought about is not only what MP's are getting

186
00:08:42,160 --> 00:08:44,880
Speaker 2: paid in the here and now, but what benefits a

187
00:08:44,960 --> 00:08:47,280
Speaker 2: crue to them after they've served in Parliament, and that

188
00:08:47,320 --> 00:08:49,920
Speaker 2: should all be thought of as a package. I think

189
00:08:49,920 --> 00:08:53,240
Speaker 2: that that's fair enough. And I'm always been of the

190
00:08:53,240 --> 00:08:56,160
Speaker 2: school of thought that says this idea that you need

191
00:08:56,200 --> 00:08:58,840
Speaker 2: to be paid really well to be an MP is

192
00:08:58,920 --> 00:09:01,480
Speaker 2: wrong because if you're not there for public service, then

193
00:09:01,520 --> 00:09:04,199
Speaker 2: what are you doing there? And we actually want to

194
00:09:04,280 --> 00:09:06,160
Speaker 2: ensure that people aren't in it for the perks and

195
00:09:06,200 --> 00:09:09,079
Speaker 2: the cash. So I agree that it should be considered

196
00:09:09,160 --> 00:09:11,679
Speaker 2: as part of that. But I do think it's distinct

197
00:09:11,720 --> 00:09:15,640
Speaker 2: from the issue of the government subsidy per se, because

198
00:09:15,679 --> 00:09:18,960
Speaker 2: in this sense you've got the remuneration authority taking the

199
00:09:19,040 --> 00:09:21,480
Speaker 2: role of the employer. But should the employer consider it

200
00:09:21,520 --> 00:09:23,120
Speaker 2: as part of the overall rem package.

201
00:09:23,320 --> 00:09:27,720
Speaker 1: Sure, Okay, now I've done it. I've done something bad

202
00:09:27,960 --> 00:09:33,040
Speaker 1: by you, Nikola, not the first time, but unlike that.

203
00:09:33,120 --> 00:09:35,600
Speaker 1: I will apologize for it because I suggested that you.

204
00:09:35,720 --> 00:09:38,360
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. I suggested you were the MP who may

205
00:09:38,400 --> 00:09:40,840
Speaker 1: have been the one who gave her a bollocking at Parliament,

206
00:09:40,880 --> 00:09:43,199
Speaker 1: but I think it's probably more likely Amy Adams or

207
00:09:43,200 --> 00:09:43,840
Speaker 1: Maggie Barry.

208
00:09:43,880 --> 00:09:47,200
Speaker 2: Now I have not caught up with this. I didn't

209
00:09:47,280 --> 00:09:50,280
Speaker 2: know that there is a reference to someone giving a bollocking.

210
00:09:50,360 --> 00:09:52,800
Speaker 2: I presume you're talking about her book. It sounds like

211
00:09:52,840 --> 00:09:55,560
Speaker 2: this might be one of the actual juicy bits. Not

212
00:09:55,600 --> 00:09:57,760
Speaker 2: so far, everything I've heard makes me think that it

213
00:09:57,800 --> 00:09:58,760
Speaker 2: sounds pretty boring.

214
00:09:58,800 --> 00:10:01,120
Speaker 1: It's so boring. This is that okay, So this is

215
00:10:01,120 --> 00:10:03,839
Speaker 1: like that we're clutching at strawsy Nicholas. So anyway, the

216
00:10:03,960 --> 00:10:07,360
Speaker 1: National MP looked gleeful. She was an incredibly smart woman,

217
00:10:07,440 --> 00:10:09,920
Speaker 1: self assured and well respected by all sides. She wore

218
00:10:09,960 --> 00:10:13,160
Speaker 1: tailored suits and sounded as if she were private school educated.

219
00:10:13,280 --> 00:10:14,640
Speaker 1: This is why I was thinking it was you.

220
00:10:14,760 --> 00:10:16,840
Speaker 2: Well here that can I just say that would be

221
00:10:16,840 --> 00:10:19,640
Speaker 2: the first time I have ever been described as having

222
00:10:19,679 --> 00:10:20,400
Speaker 2: a posh accent.

223
00:10:20,480 --> 00:10:20,720
Speaker 1: Well, and.

224
00:10:22,480 --> 00:10:24,839
Speaker 2: I certainly get emails saying with that woman, learn how

225
00:10:24,840 --> 00:10:27,800
Speaker 2: to enunciate. She's got such a broad listen to them,

226
00:10:27,800 --> 00:10:29,959
Speaker 2: she needs to be sent to alocution. We know you

227
00:10:30,480 --> 00:10:31,000
Speaker 2: sound like me.

228
00:10:31,280 --> 00:10:33,520
Speaker 1: And here she was hair bobbing back and forth with

229
00:10:33,559 --> 00:10:35,960
Speaker 1: a flushed face, pointing her finger in my direction. But

230
00:10:36,040 --> 00:10:38,000
Speaker 1: I don't think that this doesn't sound like you. It

231
00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:39,880
Speaker 1: sounds more like Maggie or Amy, doesn't it.

232
00:10:40,920 --> 00:10:44,040
Speaker 2: Yeah, definitely, because I remember I was a pretty juniorine

233
00:10:44,120 --> 00:10:52,920
Speaker 2: p during Well, I don't think it was me. I'd

234
00:10:52,960 --> 00:10:55,360
Speaker 2: be prepared to be standing standing corrected. But what I

235
00:10:55,400 --> 00:10:58,480
Speaker 2: would say is if it was me, I think I

236
00:10:58,559 --> 00:11:00,800
Speaker 2: really failed in my duty to news to make a

237
00:11:00,840 --> 00:11:03,520
Speaker 2: real impression on Doom, to make her change some of

238
00:11:03,559 --> 00:11:09,040
Speaker 2: her Sillier policies. So that so that was a failing

239
00:11:09,040 --> 00:11:10,440
Speaker 2: if it was me. But no, I don't think so.

240
00:11:10,760 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 2: I don't have quite the excellent.

241
00:11:12,120 --> 00:11:14,559
Speaker 1: No, I do not feel that you like aricature doesn't

242
00:11:14,559 --> 00:11:17,240
Speaker 1: sound like you, Nicolas. Thank you so much, appreciate it.

243
00:11:17,320 --> 00:11:21,559
Speaker 1: Nicola Willis's Finance Minister. For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive,

244
00:11:21,760 --> 00:11:25,160
Speaker 1: listen live to news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays,

245
00:11:25,280 --> 00:11:27,479
Speaker 1: or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio