Politics Central

The death toll from the Wuhan coronavirus in China continues rising as authorities and health care workers struggle to contain the outbreak.
Fifty-six people have been killed by the novel coronavirus in China, health officials said on Saturday. Over 1,900 confirmed cases have been reported across the country.
China's state-run Xinhua news agency reported that 237 patients are in critical condition.
Healthcare workers in the Chinese city of Wuhan say hospitals are running low on supplies as they treat an increasing number of patients.
The Chinese central government announced it would send more than 1,200 health workers — as well as 135 People's Liberation Army medical personnel -- to the city in an unprecedented effort to contain the spread of the virus.
Lunar New Year celebrations -- the country's most important holiday -- have been greatly impacted in Beijing, Hong Kong and other major cities due to the virus. Nearly 60 million people are under partial lockdown in the province of Hubei.
While most confirmed cases of the virus are in China, more countries around the world, including France, Australia and the United States are reporting their first cases. They are among 13 places outside mainland China where the virus has been confirmed.
In Wuhan, ground zero for the virus, four healthcare workers -- including doctors -- have told CNN of the difficulties facing medical crews on the ground. They have asked to remain anonymous to avoid repercussions.
Through telephone conversations with CNN and posts on Chinese social media, they told of low hospital resources. In private groups online, those identified as hospital staff are coordinating with members of the public to import protective equipment as they treat an increasing number of infected patients.
"In terms of resources, the whole of Wuhan is lacking," one Wuhan-based healthcare worker told CNN by phone. This person said they were looking for more protective clothing, protective goggles and masks.
"It's really like we're going into battle stripped to the waist," one healthcare worker added, using a Chinese idiom that equates to "going into battle without armour".
One hospital staff member claims healthcare workers have resorted to wearing diapers to work so as to avoid having to remove their HAZMAT suits, which they say are in short supply. A doctor on her Chinese social media Weibo page described similar accounts at another Wuhan hospital.
"My family members are definitely worried about me, but I still have to work," another doctor told. But she said that she is hopeful they will ultimately get the gear they need. "Our bosses, our hospital suppliers will definitely find a way to get these stocks to us," she added.
It's not clear if these accounts are anecdotal or whether there are widespread shortages across Wuhan.
Chinese state media has also shared posts from multiple Wuhan hospitals in which they ask for public donations of medical supplies. They report that one hospital staff member said the current supplies "are only able to sustain three or four days".
The Wuhan Health Commission has requisitioned over 10,000 beds from 24 hospitals to be used in the treatment of confirmed and suspected cases.
On Friday, Wuhan officials acknowledged that local hospitals were struggling to accommodate people seeking medical attention and said measures were being put into place to alleviate the situation.
State media also reported that the city aims to build a 25,000 square meter new facility within a week, increasing hospital capacity by 1,000 beds, and that several medical centres in Hubei province are asking for medical gear donations.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The political year kicked off in full force this week. 
As politicians return from their summer break, they already appeared to be in election mode, with both parties touting their achievements and potential ahead of the vote later this year.
The first big event was Rātana, which had both Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and National Party leader Simon Bridges in attendance. 
The event had not even begun before the first cross-party spats of the year occurred, with the Government criticised for not sending a representative to a holocaust remembrance service in Israel, and National faced pressure to sign up for Facebook's transparency toolkit after Labour announced it would do the same. 
TVNZ political reporter Katie Bradford joined Tim Roxborogh to discuss the first big week on the political calendar and what the events say about the coming election battle.
LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have announced they will no longer receive taxpayer handouts once they ditch royal life - but there is speculation that Prince Charles will still fund their privileged lifestyle. 
They are expected to continue to receive money from the Duchy of Cornwall via Prince Charles, which is currently thought to amount to £2.3 million a year.
As part of today's bombshell announcement this evening that they are giving up their royal roles, Buckingham Palace revealed Harry and Meghan would give up their Sovereign Grant money - which equates to some £100,000 a year.
The have also promised to repay the £2.4 million Sovereign Grant cash that was used for their Frogmore Cottage revamp.
Despite making no mention of being bankrolled by Prince Charles, it is understood he will continue to subsidise their expenses.
The Daily Mail's Royal Correspondent Rebecca English said Harry and Meghan will not receive any further public funding, "but will continue to receive funds from the Prince of Wales privately".
Previously, a former aide told the Daily Mail: "Prince Charles's attitude is always just pay what needs to be paid and move on.
"It's usually the path of least resistance when it's to do with the boys."
However, the Daily Mail's Richard Kay reported that those familiar with some of the eye-watering numbers which have crossed the royal desk at Clarence House say
One figure went so far as to say that the money he spends, not just on Harry and Meghan but also on financing William and Kate, was "draining him".
However, UK correspondent Enda Brady told the Weekend Collective he doesn't think Prince Charles will continue to fund them either.
"I think the Queen would have spoken to Charles at length in private, and I think Harry and Meghan made their decision." 
Officially, the brothers and their households are funded out of Charles's Duchy of Cornwall estate, but, in fact, the Prince has at times had to dip into his own private reserves.
At one stage he was paying the Sussexes more than William and his family.
That figure is now understood to be around the same, with Harry and William each receiving approximately £2.5 million.
However, the Prince has let it be known that his funds are not inexhaustible and that there is a limit to how far and how much he can pay.
Insiders speak of the "hundreds of thousands of pounds" the Prince made available to furnish the couple's Windsor home after their decision to abandon Kensington Palace.
According to a source, the figures involved in providing for both boys have in recent times been flagged up to the Prince by his accounting staff on more than one occasion.
"There's usually a raised eyebrow, but the Prince always just signs them off," says the source.
All the same, he has made it clear that while he will continue to fund his sons, there can be, as one courtier put it, "no blank cheque".
The couple will now be free to do any commercial deals they like and appear to be continuing their 'Sussex Royal' brand, even though they are no long Royal Highnesses.
If Meghan were to go back to acting she could be in for a princely sum of money, as she made £3million from appearing on American TV show Suits.
A source said the couple will spend the majority of their time in North America, and had not signed any commercial agreements as yet.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government spent almost half a million dollars on foreign advertising in a bid to woo overseas teachers to come work in New Zealand as the country grapples with a teacher "supply crisis".
Teachers' Unions say the Government needs to be doing more to train additional Kiwi teachers.
But the Government says it inherited major issues with teachers supply when it won power in 2017 and has blamed the previous National Government for not training enough teachers.
National's Education spokeswoman Nikki Kaye disagrees and said the Government has had two years to sort this issue out and blaming National was not good enough.
Information, released under the Official Information Act (OIA), reveals that since June 2016, the Government has spent almost half a million dollars on advertising in a bid to attract overseas teachers to work in New Zealand.
In the year to June, 2019 the Government spent a whisker under $200,000 on an advertising campaign to attract foreign teachers to the country.
And it appears the campaign was a success.
According to the Ministry of Education, more than 500 formally overseas teachers have been placed into roles since September 2018.
As well as this, more than 860 overseas-based teachers have received relocation grants to take up teaching positions in New Zealand.
"Following the campaign, there have been more than 17,000 applications from overseas teachers to work in New Zealand," the Ministry ofEducation's Deputy Secretary of Early Learning and Student Achievement Ellen MacGregor-Reid said.
She added that there are currently close to 800 overseas teachers who have been screened and are ready for schools to interview.
But NZEI President Liam Rutherford said the Government's focus should be on training teachers in New Zealand, not looking to bring in more from overseas.
Although he welcomed overseas teachers coming to New Zealand, he said that should only be a short-term solution.
Post Primary Teachers' Association (PPTA) President Jack Boyle said although the advertising campaign was "well worth the money" it is disappointing that it has got to the point where the Government had to look offshore for teachers.
"Due to a range of factors, including people leaving the workforce and an increase in the student population, we found ourselves with some pretty desperate shortages, particularly in secondary schools in Auckland."
He said the Government needed to do something to get sufficient teachers as quickly as possible to cover the shortfall.
On behalf of the Minister of Education, Duty Minister Jenny Salesa said the Government inherited a "teacher supply crisis" when it came into office in 2017.
Teacher enrolments were down by 40 per cent, she said.
However, she said the Government has been working to turn that trend around and Education NZ's overseas requirement drive is part of that plan.
She said that scheme was a "short-term measure to fill current gaps".
"We also have a comprehensive set of teacher supply initiatives to grow the number of New Zealand trained teachers in the medium to long-term."
Kaye said there has been "serious issues for some time" about how the Government attracts and retains quality teachers.
She said if National wins this year's election, it will put in place financial incentives which would help address both of those issues.
She added that there was a case to be made about having overseas teachers, but it is important that the balance is right.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Donald Trump's legal team filed its formal response Saturday evening to the Senate summons of the President, offering the first glimpse into what will ultimately be the White House's impeachment defense.
The response -- which calls the articles "constitutionally invalid" and says they are an attack on Americans -- argued both substantively, against the charges in the articles, and procedurally, against the House's impeachment inquiry.
"President Trump categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation in both articles of impeachment," the document reads.
The legal team argues that the first article of impeachment, abuse of power, "alleges no crime at all, let alone 'high crimes and Misdemeanors,' as required by the Constitution." The team cited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's repeated denials that he felt any pressure from Trump as evidence that Trump did not abuse his power during the July 25 phone call.
The team pointed to the fact that the President released transcripts of both the July 25 phone call and an earlier one on April 21 to argue the conversations were "perfectly legal, completely appropriate and taken in furtherance of our national interest."
Defending Trump against the second article of impeachment, obstruction of Congress, the legal team claimed the administration "replied appropriately to these subpoenas and identified their constitutional defects."
The legal team highlighted the fact that House Democrats did not seek to enforce their subpoenas in court. Democrats have said they chose not to do so because they did not want the investigation to get bogged down in a months-long court battle when they felt they had collected sufficient evidence already.
The legal team cast the White House's refusal to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry as an effort to exercise its executive branch authority, and accused the House of attempting to "bypass our Constitution's system of checks and balances."
House Democrats argue Trump threatens 'national security'
Meanwhile, House Democrats on Saturday released their argument for why President Donald Trump should be removed from office by the Senate in the upcoming impeachment trial, calling on the Senate to "eliminate the threat that the President poses to America's national security."
The House impeachment managers filed to the Senate their trial brief, a summary explaining why the House passed two articles of impeachment last month charging Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress ahead of the trial arguments kicking off next week.
"President Trump's conduct is the Framers' worst nightmare," the managers wrote in the brief.
The House managers made their case directly to the senators who will act as jurors in the impeachment trial.
"History will judge each Senator's willingness to rise above partisan differences, view the facts honestly, and defend the Constitution," the managers wrote. "The outcome of these proceedings will determine whether generations to come will enjoy a safe and secure democracy in which the President is not a king, and in which no one, particularly the President, is above the law."
Trump's legal team
A source close to the White House who speaks to Donald Trump regularly said the President has appeared "distracted" by the impeachment trial that begins on Tuesday, telling people around him Friday night at Mar-a-Lago in Florida that he "can't understand why he is impeached."
"Why are they doing this to me," the source quoted Trump as saying repeatedly.
Trump has been telling associates and allies around him that he wanted a "high profile" legal team that can perform on television, the source said. It's simply who Trump is, the source continued, adding Trump loves having people who are on television working for him.
This in part may explain why Kenneth Starr and Alan Dershowitz were added to the legal team representing the...

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Political commentator Shane Te Pou joins The Weekend Collective to look back on the year in politics for 2019.
LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Michael Lueck, AUT Professor of Tourism, joins the Weekend Collective to discuss the future of tourism on White Island and the inherent risks of adventure tourism.
LISTEN TO AUDIO ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Nicole McKee, secretary for the Council of Licenced Firearms Owners, joins the Weekend Collective to discuss the gun buyback scheme. 
LISTEN TO THE AUDIO ABOVE
 
 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

UK correspondent Enda Brady joins the Weekend Collective to discuss the recent UK election and what Labour needs to do to rebuild. 
LISTEN TO THE AUDIO ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A ban on all advertising of cannabis products, no online sales - and a minimum purchase age of 20.
Those are key restrictions in a draft cannabis law released this week ahead of next year's referendum.
Justice Minister Andrew Little says it's important voters are well informed before the 2020 General Election - and can participate in the referendum process.
The ballot will ask a simple Yes/No question.
National's Drug Reform spokesperson Paula Bennett says it's well-intentioned, but not delivering what it needs to, and there are too many questions for voters.
Is this just the beginning of the mudslinging and debate ahead of the contentious vote?
One News political reporter Katie Bradford joined The Weekend Collective to discuss what this week's announcement means and what will come next.
LISTEN ABOVE 
 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.