Even though the air temperature was down around the minus-4 mark in Canterbury this morning, there would have been no shortage of muppets driving as if it’s the middle of summer.

You know, the speed limit’s 50kph or 80kph or 100kph and that’s the speed I’m going to go.

Don’t worry about the fact that there’ll be some other clowns driving around with their windscreens still frosted over. Or people driving east into that low winter sun, struggling to see what’s coming towards them.

Only problem is —and this isn’t limited to days like today— is how confident we can be that we know what the speed limit actually is whenever we’re driving somewhere.

Once upon a time, you’d be driving around town and you’d pretty much know it was 50 kph. And then, once you got onto the open road, it was 100.

I know there were things like Limited Speed Zones, but I think we can agree that it was much clearer what speeds we were expected to be travelling at.

These days, it can be a guessing game. I know the NZTA people would probably poo-poo that and say ‘it’s very clear what the speed expectations are’.

But tell that to the person I know who was pinged for speeding just outside Motueka a couple of summers ago.

It looked like a 100 kph zone. Felt like a 100 kph zone. But wrong! It was an 80 kph zone. Nevertheless, I’m not in favour of this one-size-fits-all approach the Government wants to take.

I get that the Government wants to deal-to the confusion that there can be about what speed limits apply where, by reversing some of the changes brought-in under the previous administration. Essentially, back to what they were four years ago.

This would include having “variable speed limits” around schools. So, instead of it being 30 kph outside schools all the time, the Government wants to make it 30 kph during school drop-off and pick-up times, and 50 kph the rest of the time.

And, not surprisingly, there is push-back coming from local councils, who say they know best when it comes to setting speed limits in their areas.

Auckland Council has already put it to a vote. 18 councillors don’t want the Government poking its nose-in and raising speed limits. And only three Auckland councillors do. A pretty overwhelming rejection.

Meantime, here in Canterbury, the Christchurch City Council is starting to flex its muscles too, saying that bringing-in variable speed limits around schools would require it to spend about $7 million of ratepayer money on new signs that could show different speed limits at different times.

Councillor Sara Templeton is in the news today saying that local communities have asked the council time-and-time-again to make streets safer and, if the Government thinks it can just go holus-bolus and put in a 50 kph speed limit everywhere, then it’s ignoring what the local people want.

She says people who support lower speed limits are always accused of being “ideologically driven”, which she rejects.

According to Councillor Templeton, it’s the people who want to increase speed limits who are the ones driven by ideology. Because —by her definition— ideology is “opinions with no evidence”.

The question to consider in all of this, though, is who knows best when it comes to setting speed limits. Is it the Government in Wellington? Or is it the people on-the-ground locally? Your local councils.

The people who get their ears chewed all the time about unsafe roads outside schools. Hoons causing trouble on Saturday nights. That sort of thing.

So it’s a no-brainer, isn’t it? Well, for me, it is.

What makes Wellington think it can set a blanket speed limit that will be appropriate everywhere? As Christchurch councillor Sara Templeton is saying today, “for a Government that talked about localism and councils taking responsibility for their communities at the last election, it seems to be mandating a lot of stuff from Wellington.” And I couldn’t agree with her more.

I also couldn’t agree more with those 18 Auckland councillors who voted in favour of telling the Government to butt-out when it comes to setting speed limits.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today on Politics Friday John MacDonald was joined by Labour’s Megan Woods and National’s Hamish Campbell to dig into the biggest topics from the week.

With Newshub airing its final broadcast tonight, they reflected on the media landscape and discussed the new Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill.

Who is responsible for speed limits, local councils or the central government? And Megan offers a new name for the stadium.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are going to be some noses out of joint today, with this announcement from the Government about what it’s going to do to try and sort out the shortage of houses in this country.

In Housing Minister Chris Bishop’s own words, the Government is going to “flood” cities with more land so that more houses can be built, so that supply can go up, and so that more people can afford a roof over their heads.

But that’s not all. It’s also going to stop local councils from mandating balconies or minimum floor areas for places like apartments. Instead, property developers and the market are going to decide that.

Which sounds like good old fashioned ‘supply and demand’ at work, doesn’t it?

So how is it going to do this “flooding of the market” with more land so that more places can be built?

Well again, this is going to be another thing that gets local councils brassed off. It’s going to tell councils that they can no longer set fixed urban-rural boundaries.

Which will have some people upset about productive farmland being sacrificed for housing. But what is a government to do?

Which is why I think we need to, at least, give the Government’s ideas a chance. To give it a go.

But don’t expect councils to be so open-minded. Because you can bet your bottom dollar that they’ll be banging-on about the Government over-reaching. Poking its nose in local business when it shouldn’t be.

They’ll be telling the Government to butt out. Which Chris Bishop fully expects, of course.

I can think already of one council, in particular, that will be pushing back.

The same council that —as one of its members said at the time— “flipped the bird” at the last government over its housing intensification plans.

Christchurch city is the one I’m referring to. And I’m picking that it will be lining-up to butt heads with the Government over this latest attempt to sort out the housing situation in New Zealand.

But we know what will happen. It will just turn out to be bluster and noise. And the Government will get its way. Which, in my opinion, it should.

Because any opposition —from local councils, anyway— is just about patch protection. That’s all it is. They don’t really give a damn about amenities and solving problems.

What’s more, I think we have to move on from this idea that you’re not living unless you have a standalone house on a quarter-acre section. That you haven’t made it in life if you can’t walk out the back door and feel grass under your feet - grass that you own. Or the bank owns, anyway.

It’s a fallacy. It’s a dead-end street. And when you see your local councillors —and I’m not just talking about Christchurch here, either— when you see your local councillors jumping up-and-down saying the Government is pouring cold water on the quarter acre dream, cover your ears.

Because they’re not worried about your dreams. They’re not worried about realistic, sustainable solutions to the housing shortage. They’re not worried about your backyard. They’re just worried about their own.

And the Government is doing way more than any council will to fix the housing crisis.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There’s a thing in politics called “optics”.

Which is exactly what it sounds like. It’s all about being seen to do something. It’s also about how people see whatever it is you’re doing.

You know: “Mmmm, how will this look, do you reckon? What will people think when they see us doing this, do you think?"

And that is exactly what’s behind the Government’s Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill. Which is politico or legalise-speak for making the big social media companies pay a fee if they want to make money off the news and current affairs content made by our local media companies.

On the face of it, it’s a perfectly reasonable thing to do. To expect people who make money oft of a product other outfits spend money making or producing, to pay something for the privilege.

That’s on the face of it. But, in reality, this is going to go nowhere.

They're already doing this in Australia with the likes of Facebook and Google but, at the end of this year, Facebook is pulling out. So, if Mark Zuckerberg reckons he can live without news from Australia, will he feel the same about news from New Zealand? Of course he will. And this will end up going nowhere.

Funnily enough, that’s what National thought last year too when Labour came up with pretty much this very same piece of legislation.

Last year, National said it was a “shakedown”. Which is slang for extortion or blackmail. By yesterday, though, it had changed its tune and was saying it was “something worth doing”.

That’s what Media Minister Paul Goldsmith was saying.

I thought Labour was dreaming when it started flogging this idea last year too. But I’m not going to pile on National and accuse it of doing a U-turn or giving in because, as I’ve said before, what good is a mind if you can’t change it?

What’s more, I don’t think National —in its heart of hearts— has done a U-Turn at all. Because I actually don’t think it has changed its mind. All it’s doing here is dealing with the optics.

Because, think about it, come Friday, the ratings for the news on TV3 are probably going to go through the roof. Because, on Friday night, Newshub is going to put-out its last-ever TV news bulletin.

The same thing happened when TV3 pulled the plug on Campbell Live. In its last weeks, that show had some of its best ratings ever. It’s classic rubbernecking. People love to watch something going down in flames. And this Friday will be no different.

So you can you imagine the heat coming the Government’s way, the closer we get to Friday and the closer we get to Newshub’s demise. Can you imagine the heat it would be getting if it hadn’t come up with something that made it at least look like it was doing something to help-out the media sector?

To make it look like it was doing the complete opposite of what the former Media Minister Melissa Lee did —or didn't do— and who got kicked out of that role for being completely hopeless at the optics. That’s what it came down to.

Which, by the way, if you’re Paul Goldsmith and you’re told you’re the new Media Minister and you have to do a better job than Melissa Lee - well, probably not too difficult.

So, what he did yesterday - 72 hours before Newshub turns off the studio lights for the very last time, is he dragged out something Labour tried to sell previously just so he can say "da-da, we care, we’re doing something, we love the media just as much as you do, and we ate Facebook just as much as you do blah blah blah blah blah.”

One problem, though. National’s coalition partner ACT can see through the optics —just like I can— and is pulling out the old “agree to disagree” clause in its coalition agreement. Just like New Zealand First did the other week.

Which means National now has to go cap-in-hand to Labour, to get it to support the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill. Which Labour will do. Only because it’ll give it the opportunity to crow about its great idea and how the Government has done what the social media nasties are doing - stealing other people's ideas and content.

When what Labour should really do, is be gracious. Accept that it’s an idea that was never going to work when it was pushing for it and accept that it’s still an idea that’s never going to fly.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When I heard on Friday morning that the cops had been out in force the night before cracking down on boy racers, I thought two things.

My first thought was ‘that’s great, I hope they do it again right through the weekend’. And the reason I thought that - and it was purely selfish - was because, with the kids home from uni, I knew a couple of them were planning to drive out to a party with mates on Saturday night.

At that point, I had it in my head that the party was up Kaiapoi-way, so I had visions of them shooting up the motorway on Saturday night.

Turns out I didn’t quite have my finger on the pulse and the party was in town. Either way, that was one of the things that went through my head when I heard the police had interrupted eight “skid Meets” - as they’re known - on Thursday night, involving more than 100 cars. Six in Christchurch. Two in Rolleston.

Three cars were impounded on Thursday night for sustained loss of traction. I think we can assume that’s official ‘police-speak’ for burn-outs.

Eighteen infringement notices were issued to drivers; two cars had green stickers stuck on them, which means there are compliance issues; and another car got a pink sticker - which meant it just shouldn't have been on the road, full stop. You get a pink sticker and your car’s going nowhere.

And it was all part of a nationwide blitz on the boy racers.

So, like I say, when I first heard about two things went through my head. I hope they keep doing it right through the long weekend. Which, it turns out, they did.

And the other thought I had, was that they - as in the Police - and “we”, are dreaming if we think a one-off sting on a long weekend is going to make any long-term difference. Because it’s not.

That didn’t stop acting Canterbury district commander police superintendent Lane Todd from doing a bit of the old chest thumping on the TV news last night.

In another report I’ve seen, the superintendent says: “Our staff did an excellent job identifying potential hotspots and consistently targeting participants in unsafe vehicles.”

No argument from me there. They didn't just do an excellent job - they did a brilliant job. And I reckon, because of it, the roads in Canterbury were much safer than usual over the weekend.

But, whether we like it or not, boy racers are here to stay. And, unless the police are going to do what they did at the weekend every weekend, or maybe even every night - then the success thry had at the weekend will just be a one-off.

I’ve had a gutsful of boy racers. We had that tragedy last September when an 18-year-old woman died after the car she was in crashed into the side of a house in Rangiora.

They’d been at an illegal street racing event and, when the police turned-up just before 5:45am, the driver took off and ended-up crashing.

The cops started following but gave up after a while because of the way the car was being driven and because they got into a built-up area. Not long after that, the driver lost control and crashed.

And, just weeks before that happened, there was all the fuss about boy racers causing mayhem for some of the animals at Orana Park. Because that stretch of road at McLeans Island is your boy racer’s idea of heaven.

And all the revving and screeching of tyres had some of the animals so freaked-out that they panicked and they ran around their enclosures and got injured.

But just because we’ve had a gutsful of boy racers. And just because the cops decide to do a surprise crackdown over one long weekend. It’s not going to make any long-term difference.

The only way the police could make any real difference, would be to do what they did at the weekend 24-hours-a-day, seven days a week. But that is never going to happen.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Christchurch Mayor Phil Mauger joined John MacDonald for their regular catchup.

The Mayor is currently in the midst of long term plan discussions, and gave his thoughts on the rates residents can expect, funding for the Arts Centre, and Orana Park.

And, the Government is looking to make it so Māori wards are up for a vote, what are Mauger’s thoughts? Does he think the bill is needed?

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Moses Mackay of Sol3 Mio fame is in Christchurch, performing Le Comte Ory with the New Zealand Opera.

He joined John MacDonald to discuss the show and his life in Italy.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This might be because I’m still recovering from the Bird Flu/Man Flu combo that had me stuck in bed last week. Or maybe, on this occasion, Winston Peters is actually making sense.

Either way, I agree with him that it’s Mickey Mouse that we have an epidemiologist who was involved in our COVID response, leading the inquiry into it. The Royal Commission.

Which, by the way, I think is critical. I know it would be very easy to decide that we are all over this COVID thing and what good is a royal commission going to do? And who says that when another pandemic happens we’re going to even bother using what we’ve learned this time around?

They are all risks. But, as far as I’m concerned, they are not reasons not to have an official inquiry.

But back to Tony Blakeley. He was one of those people along with the likes of Michael Baker etc who were on TV night-and-day talking about all the modelling and how sick we were going to get blah blah blah blah blah.

And being humans, we all had our favourites, didn’t we? And there were others, of course, that some of us couldn’t stand. And when it comes to my personal favourites, Tony Blakely was one of mine.

He’s a kiwi but he’s based in Melbourne and he always seemed to do his TV interviews in front of one of those glass block walls that were the in-thing back in the 80s. And I could never work out whether he was in some 80s-throwback hospital or whether he had some funky 80s-inspired apartment.

And I’ll admit that I probably got so distracted by the glass block wall thing that I probably missed a lot of what he actually had to say. Either way, I liked him. I thought he was a good guy who seemed to know what he was on about.

But, as well as being one of the media’s COVID rent-a-mouths, he also had the ear of the Labour-led government - which asked him for his advice on how New Zealand should be responding to the COVID pandemic.

And, when you think about it, it does seem crazy that he’s now the guy in charge of running a fine tooth comb through New Zealand’s COVID response so that we can learn some lessons and do a better job next time around. Because, if there’s one thing we can all agree on, there will be a “next time around”.

So Winston has never been happy that one of Labour’s COVID mates has had the job of leading the COVID-19 Inquiry. And he’s not happy that Tony Blakely is going to stay in charge, either.

Which is why he’s pulling out the “agree-to-disagree” clause in his party’s coalition agreement with National.

Which is somewhat academic. Because what the Government has done is split the inquiry into two phases. So Phase 1 is what we’ve had up until now and which will continue until November - with Tony Blakely in charge.

And then, in November, Phase 2 will begin. Which will look into things such as the vaccines and vaccine safety; the extended lockdowns in Auckland and Northland; and the extent of disruption to people’s lives and businesses.

And it’s not going to be an overnight thing. Phase 2 of the Inquiry will begin in November and final recommendations are expected to be delivered in February 2026. About 20 months from now. Just shy of two years.

And I’m happy with that. Because I think it is critical that this work is done. It would be a wasted opportunity if we didn’t put a spotlight on how New Zealand handled the COVID pandemic and commit ourselves to learning from the cock-ups.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.