This week on Politics Friday John MacDonald was joined by National MP for Banks Peninsula Vanessa Weenick, and Labour List MP Tracey McLellan.

They covered the latest national and local issues, including NZ First's announcement to campaign on a Māori electorate referendum, whether all events at One NZ Stadium should have a levy, electric e-trail bikes that are speeding around the city, and more.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Christchurch City Councillor Yani Johanson thinks we should all pay a special levy when we buy tickets for all events at Christchurch’s new One New Zealand Stadium.

And he won’t be getting any argument from me.

Yani can’t believe the news today that a levy is only going to be charged on tickets for concerts by international artists.

He says it is “inconceivable” the levy won’t be charged for all events, including rugby matches and everything else that happens there, because he reckons it’s only fair that all people who use the stadium help pay for its upkeep.

No international acts have been announced yet but, apparently, there are going to be some announcements in the next few weeks.

And when the tickets go on sale, the council’s events company - Venues Ōtautahi - which is going to be running the stadium, is going to add a $5 levy to the ticket price.

The money from the levy is going to be used to pay for the extra toilets and extra food and drink facilities that are going to be needed when they have these big concerts.

So it sounds as if we might be queuing up for portaloos even though it’s a new flash harry facility.

The point Councillor Yani Johanson is making, is that anyone who wants to go to any event at the stadium should make the same contribution towards the running of the place.

He says: “A lot of these people buy expensive tickets to these events and are subsidised by the ratepayers in Linwood, Bromley and Aranui. I don’t think that is fair.”

But the head of Venues Ōtautahi, Caroline Harvie-Teare, says it wouldn’t be fair or right to charge a levy for all events.

Her thinking is that if you or I are buying tickets to see the likes of Bruce Springsteen or Pink or the Rolling Stones, we’re not going to give two-hoots about a $5 levy on top of the ticket price.

But she says it would be a different story for some of the smaller-scale, community-type events that are also going to be held at the stadium.

She says a levy on those types of events could put some people off and so they would be less viable. But what I would say to that, is that the stadium is not a charity and if events can’t pay their way, then maybe they need to be held somewhere else.

What’s more, do you really think a $5 levy would put people off buying tickets to see the All Blacks or the Crusaders? Of course not. Do you think a $5 levy would put people off buying tickets to see the rugby league world cup double-header in October? Or the Black Ferns when they play here?

So, of course, this levy should be added to the ticket prices for every event. Yani Johanson is spot on.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Do you think there is anyone in New Zealand who believes the Government’s line that it’s a coincidence the findings of its inquiry into the Reserve Bank’s COVID-19 response will be released a few weeks before the election?

As the NZ Herald’s political editor, Thomas Coughlan, puts it: the inquiry will ask the right questions at the wrong time.

Because this has election campaigning written all over it.

The official line is that the review is being done to “identify any lessons New Zealand could learn to improve the response to future major events”.

But how credible is that, given the findings of the inquiry will be released just weeks before this year’s election?

Not very, according to Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who’s saying today: “If this is a genuinely independent review that provides some lessons learned, it could be useful. But doing it right in the middle of an election campaign suggests that’s not Nicola Willis’ primary motivation here.”

And he’s spot on. Because it’s not.

The Government’s primary motivation is to spend half a million dollars of taxpayer money on a report that is going to come out at the pointy end of the election campaign, which will do one of two things.

It will either rip into the Reserve Bank in the way the Government hopes it will. So it can then say to voters, “do you really want the last lot who let the Reserve Bank get away with this trainwreck back in charge of the economy?”

Or, the report will be a bit soft - not quite what the Government wants - but will still give it bragging rights about looking to learn from past mistakes. Unlike Labour, who it will accuse of not having the guts to front up to the COVID-19 Royal Commission of Inquiry.

So it’s going to be a win-win - especially for National.

I think this would have way more credibility if the Government had come out yesterday and said it was launching the inquiry but the findings wouldn’t be released until after the election.

For the benefit of whoever the government of the day is after the election.

If it had done that, I would have had no problem with the timing.

Instead, this inquiry - which, in itself, is fully justified - is at risk of looking like nothing more than taxpayers coughing-up for the National Party’s election campaign.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.