Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, November 7th, 2025 - 62 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
3 free doctor visits they say. Yet, the numbers don't add up.
This isn't looking good for Labour in respect to being able to deliver and securing voter's trust.
An assessment of pilots in Hawke’s Bay and Whanganui emergency departments showed the AI scribe reduced the amount of after-hours admin work by 81%.
It also found that doctors who used the tool were able to see an average of one extra patient per shift.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/whanganui-chronicle/news/ai-scribe-cuts-after-hours-admin-in-hospital-eds-trial-finds/6XT353QJ5ZEWRKXUZDJBGQ3WAY/
Labour’s Health Spokesperson Ayesha Verall said that after consulting with the industry, she believed they could free up 4.5 million appointments.
Dr Luke Bradford, President of the Royal New Zealand College of GPs, said the number was ambitious.
https://b2bnews.co.nz/news/group-supports-capital-gains-tax-warns-of-strain-on-clinics/
There are over 4 million people eligible for 3 funded appointments. This equates to over 12 million appointments.
Therefore, it seems Labour's touted 4.5 million appointments falls far short.
Some people will not take up any or all of their 3 visits.
For many the real issue is being enrolled or having an alternative access to a PHO (not cost/just cost).
One presumes Labour will also have a free dentist visit for those with a CSC?
If Labour can take up the Greens policy and show the workings of how free/highly subsidised dental care for all could happen, and run on the platform, they might find they do remarkably well. Dental care is a bigger issue for most than 3 free GP appointments.
https://www.greens.org.nz/dental_for_all
Yes, dead right Kay.
Further, the Greens are offering free GP care while Labour are only offering 3 free visits
https://www.greens.org.nz/green_budget_free_gps_for_all
Never too early to think 'Party Vote Green'.
Indeed, SPC. Some people will not take up any or all of their 3 visits.
I'm guessing Labour are hoping many don't
Imho, you'd have to be sick not to hope that many Kiwis won't need to "take up any or all of their 3 visits."
Unfortunately, some people suffer from OCD (Obsessive Criticising Disorder aka perpetual whiners & complainers).
Hahaha………… yes, so true. Quite a few of them seem to comment on here.
Yes, if your reasoning is you're hoping less become ill but not if your reasoning is merely to make the policy workable.
After all, the goal is to increase the ability (thus the numbers) visiting GPs
We can trust the self-serving Coalition of Charlatans to continue to deliver to the sorted – that is, after all, their reason for being.
Chair, is your fear that Labour’s policy when enacted will not achieve this? More GP visits will, of course, require that there are GPs to visit.
Or maybe their policy team have at least done some basic modelling and have a rough idea of the likely effects. It’s hardly rocket science, after all.
One would expect they've at least done some basic modelling.
Nevertheless, Bradford (President of the Royal New Zealand College of GPs) said while doctors are currently using Scribe, an AI program that assists with note-taking and saves approximately two minutes per consultation, that would barely free up sufficient time for the additional appointments.
Going on to say, “if you want this policy, you’re going to have to resource the staff; to resource the staff, you’re going to have to get to the point where GPs aren’t burning out and they want to train as GPs, so that’s going to take some work.”
https://b2bnews.co.nz/news/group-supports-capital-gains-tax-warns-of-strain-on-clinics/
We don’t build every road as a six-lane, grade-separated highway just to handle the one or two days a year it gets congested.
Likewise, Labour doesn’t need to create enough additional capacity to deliver 12 million extra GP appointments. Not everyone eligible will use all three (or even any) of their visits. And many would have gone to the doctor anyway, but now won’t have to pay out of pocket.
There will, of course, be some degree of induced demand. But likely nowhere near the scale you’re suggesting.
The RNZCGP can’t have it both ways. If GPs are independent businesses, then delivery failures are theirs. And it's also their responsibility if they haven’t supplied enough doctors.
If they’re extensions of the government, then they’re part of the system they’re criticising.
Pick one.
When it comes to building new roads, they do need to be future-proofed to some extent.
And with a growing population, so do other policy considerations such as free doctor visits.
The operative phrase in that sentence is to some extent. It has to strike a balance between allowing for plausible growth without prematurely gold-plating.
Designing policy is hard work. Demand isn’t static. Human behaviour is unpredictable.
Moreover, it’s not always easy to identify or address the root causes of problems. In the regulatory design world, we call this a “wicked problem.”
A wicked problem isn’t bad. It’s just complex. Every solution changes the problem itself, causes and effects are intertwined, and there’s rarely a clear endpoint or perfect fix. These issues don’t stay solved; they evolve as society, technology, and expectations shift.
Public healthcare is a textbook example. Costs, access, workforce supply, public expectations, and health outcomes all feed into each other. Push on one part of the system (say, expand free GP visits) and pressure appears elsewhere, such as workforce shortages or increased demand for specialist care.
That’s why focusing too heavily on scale: whether it’s 4.5 million or 12 million appointments, misses the point. The challenge isn’t to calculate the exact number, but to design a system that can adapt as those numbers shift.
Scale matters, but it's only one facet of the problem. Not the problem itself.
It’s a balancing act, not a one-time solution.
That's a really interesting fusion of the PolSci literature and the actual experience of software engineering.
More application/implementation systems?
Over my career I’ve acquired a very particular set of skills.Mostly involving software, data, and regulatory theory.
Skills that make me absolutely useless in a hostage situation, but pretty handy when grappling with complex policy problems.
TL;DR: I was a politics and policy nerd who accidentally fell into a career of IT nerdery.
That would be a good headline for the NZH but as the first line of the first comment on OM it sucks badly. You lead with your conclusion yet you fail to convince.
You finish with your conclusion too, with some exaggeration for negative effect, without providing a compelling argument. Labour may or may not achieve or come near that number (but see below), but only dogmatic sworn enemies of Labour would wish them to fail.
There are over 4 million people eligible for 3 funded appointments. This equates to over 12 million appointments.
Sure, and Labour says it can free up “around 4.58 million doctor’s appointments every year.” It is disingenuous to expect every Kiwi to visit a doctor at least three times every year (also see further down).
If you select snippets and remove background explanation & context it looks like you’re manufacturing doubt & fear (aka concern trolling). Here’s more info, in addition to the Policy that you undoubtedly have studied well, with the pertinent parts in my italics:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/577060/labour-will-oust-anyone-found-to-have-leaked-capital-gains-tax-policy-chris-hipkins-says
The Integrity Institute, a journalist looks over the Free Speech Union.https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/11/06/who-benefits-the-rise-and-rise-of-the-free-speech-union/
hat-tip
The Integrity Institute news briefing email.
Well…..minds alike, or something, but I had just been reading that earlier this morning. Article chips beneath the exterior of it. (of course who is fundy/funding it…is maybe impenetrable) But….questioning and seeking those difficult answers are always very important.
I like Newsroom, some very good Investigative Journalists/Reporters.
'Liberal left stop surrendering the entire field of freedom of speech/freedom of expression to the right' challenge failed once again, this time by Newsroom.
Seriously, the more that people on the left try to portray freedom of speech as a right-wing concern, the more attractive they make the right look. Lots of people aren't keen on authoritarianism.
AI says
You are the one making this claim
Is Newsroom on the left? Are they trying to do this? Are they succeeding or failing?
If Newsroom is not liberal left, how is this comment relevant.
How is journalism "surrendering the entire field of freedom of speech/freedom of expression to the right" by covering right wing activism under the banner of freedom of speech?
Is that not of a narrative to pose resistance to their agenda, as censorship of their free speech?
It would be pretty dumb for those on the left to buy in to that, would it not?
Luxury Luxon, NACT1 and those problem Homeless. To me it sure seems that they, if not blaming the Homeless, are by means, seeking to disappear them….Anyway. Resultant.
And ah…this poem. Just words. But so deep.
I really don't know why people express shock/surprise about the homeless situation, and the government's response. This is just a normal part of the RW playbook- strip away public services/housing that benefit the non-rich in society, let the inevitable happen, then turn around a blame any negative plights on the victims of said policies. And play them off against the 'middle classes' who will then feel superior to those suffering, and chose not to empathise or vote accordingly. All part of the 'all about me, fuck everyone else' society (if there's such a thing anymore) we have to somehow exist in.
Not new, not surprising, and not batting an eyelid reading these stories.
Ok Kay. I didnt expect you to eyelid bat ? This is Open Mike. Others might actually be interested in what is going on? And possibly bat an eyelid or even two ?
Just out of Interest…do you get actually activated ? I have previously linked to many positive people/organisations whereby people can do much more, than batting eyelids….
I never suggested to imply the story is no big deal, if it came across that way, I apologise. And of course it should be spread far and wide. 'Not batting an eyelid' isn't code for I don't really give a damn, it means, I'm not surprised in the least.
You may not agree with my answer to getting activated- I learned a very long time ago that it's safer to stay under the radar and not come to the system's attention in times of RW governments, so I do, to the point of being very selective about petition signing. And I hate being in that position. Under LW governments I do more.
That poem is heart wrenching. Homelessness is is a wicked problem. In 2018 Jacinda Ardern said “There is no reason why there should be homelessness in a country like NZ”
Marama Davidson was given special responsibility to address the problem along with Phil Twyford.
Coralling them into motels proved unsuccessful.
My wife and I volunteered for a US Christian charity in San Francisco that fed and clothed and housed the homeless. There was good support for anyone who wanted to change their lives. Drug and alcohol residential programmes, mentoring. Psychiatrists and other professionals volunteered their time and there were some great redemption stories – but only from those who chose to change.
The problem was that the majority of those we served had no desire to change .They got enough money from the govt to pay for their drug and the tragedy was watching so many descend into a physical and mental health hell.
A misrepresentation.
There were few homeless on the streets during the COVID period. This was a temporary measure because there was no tourism and the places were available.
The house building 2017-2013 was the highest since the 1970's.
Having affordable housing available is still a choice.
Addicts often prioritise paying to continue their addiction over paying for housing. So free housing- not low cost- is the only viable solution if they choose to continue in their addiction.If the govt or council choose to provide to allow addicts to continue in their addiction and provide them with free housing large queues will form.
Most emergency housing in the US requires the homeless to not bring drugs- including alcohol- into the accomodation provided. So many choose to sleep rough.
If you permit drugs men and women must be housed in separate facilities. And there is a need for supervision to deal with access and violence. Nobody wants these jobs.
meanwhile…
//
A Pioneer Wet House Facility
Seattle, Washington is home to one of the first wet house facilities, 1811 Eastlake. The original residents, predominantly men, were selected from a list of 200 of the most frequent users of the public hospital, jail, and sobering center in Seattle. They also had to be unsuccessful in conventional recovery programs no less than six times.
1811 Eastlake allows residents to drink on-site. The facility houses 75 people and has seen several positive outcomes since opening in 2005:
https://rehabs.com/blog/are-wet-house-facilities-really-helping-alcoholics/
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/525859/te-pa-maru-signs-of-miraculous-results-at-wet-house-supporting-alcohol-dependent-residents
Thanks Joe. I read the links . The Eastlake facility is for alcohol addicts. Alcohol is the most abused drug by far because it is accepted and legal. I guess providing accommodation prolongs their lives and does provide some dignity. But the statistic of 3 to 5% quitting alcohol is probably why Eastlake have chosen not to scale the programme despite the long waiting list.
I am no expert but quickly learned to watch out for the unexpected manic violence that Fentanyl can induce. I'm not sure if our Meth is in the same category but to provide free long term housing for addicts would require substantial trained supervision. And be expensive.
It feels like the old Townes van Zandt song Waiting around to Die
your idea that addiction is a choice is profoundly ignorant of the realities of being physically addicted to a drug n a social context.
Which makes me doubt your telling of the story in the US and we of course have no way to check.
Meanwhile in NZ, addiction services are underfunded and people with addictions often don't get the support they need, especially in complex situations like people damaged from their childhoods who are often economically coerced to live in poverty and without good mental health support. People making decisions under those circumstances can sometimes make poor decisions (just like everyone else under prolonged stress), but I'm highly confident this isn't the life they would choose for themselves if they had real alternatives.
I didn't say that addiction was a choice.
But I do believe that the primary cause of addiction is the decision to take the drug.
Dear Michael Scott,
I would like to thank you for your sympathy regarding the very deep poem "Here I am", and also for the Jacinda and Marama Red Fish/ Whatabout. I would also like to acknowledge your anecdotal christian ministering to those poor hopeless
homelessaddicts…But I cant !
Your opening concern (IMO fake) is very soon revealed as a specie of judgmental "action has consequence" (aka victim blaming) that I find revolting.
Addicts do not need sympathy…they need EMPATHY, which, IMO from your comments, I suspect you have little..if any.
I feel bad for any addict ..and/or homeless, suffering personal trauma, who were in desperate need….to have had you "helping" them.
Jeebus save us from your brand of charitable help, IMO it mainly serves to bolster a false sense of moral superiority…
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2025/11/07/wait-what-the-new-curriculum-was-written-by-an-australian-company/
Well worth a read.
Link doesn't work for me.
It works for me.
It links onto this.
https://bevanholloway.com/2025/11/03/an-australian-company-is-at-the-centre-of-our-curriculum/
And this.
https://www.engaginglearningvoices.com/post/how-the-ministry-collapsed-trust-in-our-curriculum-process
Thanks for the links. The TDB link still doesn't work for me. I tried on 3 different browsers and don't get any posts on TDB since 5 November.
So it's not only an Aussie company played a key role in NZ curriculum development, but also from the first link you provided,
same for me re TDB.
Try clearing the browser cache.
I'd rather not. What's the most recent post you can see?
What’s the harm in clearing your internet browser cache??
I can see a whole lot of posts dated 7 Nov on TDB but I don’t know which one is most recent.
I cleared it on two browsers (looks like cookie deletion to me) and nothing has changed/
Baffling
I've tried browsers I don't normally use, 1 I downloaded and never used – same result for all of them….
… Until now. I just clicked on the link above to open in a new tab and it opened.
And now I'm getting TDB main page with posts up til today's ones.
I have no idea what’s going on.
Thanks SPC
The politics of the price of power and the value of an asset and who owns it.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/business/360877843/political-risk-prompts-broker-cut-big-four-power-valuations-13b
The big four power companies know full well that solar is the cheapest form of power on the planet now and they have missed the bus because, like Luxon, Jones and co, they have had their heads in the sand. Private companies are moving in with grid-scale and rooftop solar, usually with batteries attached.
In Australia some states are now offering 3 FREE HOURS of power during the day because of the excess of power due to solar. Even Starmer has got this right in the UK where renewables are being heavily supported by the government.
(EV's/PHEV's represented 26% of the car market last month in the UK)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/04/australia-free-solar-power-scheme-how-when-houshold-bills
New builds should have solar.
This government will do nothing to foster renewables, though it will pretend they are doing things. It is an easy policy win for Labour at the next election. Ed Miliband, secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change in the UK (26 percent of cars sold last month EV's or PHEV's) keeps saying that "Solar is now the cheapest energy in the world". Hipkins just has to keep repeating this.
Instead of renewables our wonderful government are proposing spending a billion on infrastructure so that very expensive LNG can be imported FFS. Not only is it very expensive, LNG imported in this manner emits more carbon than using coal.
Zero questions from the media poodles as to the coalitions various positions on electricity which are all over the place and none of it good for NZ.
Spray n walk away seymours suggestion of nuclear is just so on brand.
An expensive adjustment to allow more access to government support
(and one done to keep the rates below that of competitors so as to keep off the Trump radar)
https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/11/07/incentive-scheme-boosted-to-attract-international-films-tv-to-nz/
There's an informative backgrounder on the NYC mayor here: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/mamdanis-progressive-vision-new-york-shaped-by-childhood-uganda-mentors-say-2025-11-06/
My take is that his surprising success is due to authenticity. Now he will be tested for his capacity of operational competence, and the constraints around playing both sides against the middle. If he has encompassed that psychodynamic, he'll absorb the pressure.
Wow, if we had sun here in AO/NZ we could do the same.
/
https://electrek.co/2025/11/04/australia-has-so-much-solar-that-its-offering-everyone-free-electricity-3h-day/
The coalition of dumb leaving a trail of their incompetence.
They laid off people, paid them out and expected them to live off the money before re-applying for new (fewer) positions – all to save money (by having reduced research capability in the future).
Most just left, offshore.
Why?
National had signalled that it was no longer bi-partisan we would remain a first world nation state economy.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/business/360879218/waste-money-psa-blasts-107m-spend-callaghan-innovation-layoffs
National-led governments have a spectacularly shitty record when it comes to publicly funded research and development. Not that they do anything to encourage private-sector funding of R&D either, mind. The never-ending short-sightedness and rank incompetence is infuriating.
I am sure glad Sir Paul is no longer around to see that disgrace.