David Seymour: Associate Health Minister on expanding drug funding

What would you do? I've been thinking about this ever since Paul's phone call yesterday. You might have been listening when he rang in. We were talking about the cost of living and how you can make economies and you can get an extra job and you can do all this and all that and try and get through, unless life throws you a curveball. And that's exactly what happened to Paul. He and Sandra have been together for 34 years. They have two sons, 18 and 20 They've lived good lives. They've worked hard, they've paid off the house, they've got all their insurances including medical insurance. They've never asked for anything. They've never needed to ask for anything. They've just lived their lives and been your typical Kiwi family. Then out of the blue, Sandra gets diagnosed with lung cancer. She's never smoked. It's a rare genetic condition and this particular lung cancer is a killer. This particular type doesn't respond to the treatments that are available and funded under our public health system, but there is a drug that's available that will slow the progress of the disease. So the bad news, you get the diagnosis. The good news, there's a treatment. The bad news, it's not funded by Pharmac. You can buy it on the open market, but you have to come up with $11,000 a month —nearly $4,000 a week— to pay for the drug that will give Sandra more time with her family. They don't have a lot, but they've never needed a lot. They've got their own home, and they've looked after themselves and they've never been on benefits, but where the hell do you come up with nearly $4,000 a week? It's not a story that's unique to this couple. If you have a look on the Givealittle pages, there are so many that are dedicated to families desperate to find the money for unfunded drugs that will keep their mum or their dad alive just that little bit longer. For some, there's hope of a cure, for many it's buying time. And it seems so cruel. The diagnosis is bad enough, terminal cancer. Then you're given a lifeline, oh but there is a drug that will keep you well for a lot, lot longer than you can expect or imagine. And then that lifeline evaporates because you find out that it's not funded by Pharmac and if you want it, you're going to have to lose everything. It's a real Sophie's choice. You might have to sell the house if you own the house, you might have to sell everything you own, you might have to sacrifice your pride and put yourself out there asking for help from strangers to just buy you that little bit of extra time. If you sell the house, you're going to leave the family without security if the treatment doesn't work. I mean, what an awful, awful situation to be in and an awful, awful conundrum. What would you do? And perhaps what are the discussions that you've had within your family? Remember when Herceptin wasn't funded and that seemed to hit younger women particularly. That was a dreadful decision to have to make. And yet Herceptin had very good survival rates, so what do you do? I suppose it depends on your circumstances, your age and stage. If you're a parent with young children, I imagine you would fight and you'd fight tooth and nail to get a bit of extra time. Whereas I think, and you never know until you're in that situation, but I think I would let fate take its course. My daughter is an adult now, she's happy, she's settled, she has her own family and that makes a big difference when you're a parent. I've had more than my share of good times, more than my fair share of life, I think I'd probably go rather than use all my KiwiSaver and everything else just to buy me a bit of extra time. But I'm at a different stage. There are so many applications before Pharmac at the moment to fund unfunded medicines that have a proven track record. There are so many pharmaceutical companies that want approval to be funded by Pharmac that offer people a lifeline. It just seems so, so cruel that you're given the diagnosis, you're reeling from th

There's a story in the New Zealand Herald this morning about a young couple in Hawke's Bay who are earning good coin, above the average between them, but they're barely able to make ends meet. This is the cost of living election – at least that's what the media outlets are telling us. But I don't know if you heard Enda Brady on with Mike this morning. Have a listen to what he had to say around the British budget. "People are worried about energy bills, cost of living, food. I went to the petrol station earlier on to get petrol, so I looked at the prices specifically for you, Mike. We are looking at $4.02 a litre for diesel, and I pay $3.52 for unleaded." The British Government releasing the budget said they just want to be able to give ordinary working families breathing room. This is a budget for, in the UK, for the immediate future. It's not setting the country up to recover, it's just trying to give your ordinary working family breathing room. Things are tight there and they have been for a while. People are finding out what they can do without and what are necessities. They're doing that here, but they're also doing it around the world. Post-Covid and the money printing, nations who went for that strategy are paying the piper and it's grindy. The prices paid for everyday items such as food, energy, transport, and household bills have risen by between 59% and 78% since the year 2000 in France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. Between 2021 and 2023 prices increased by 12 to 15% in the four countries. Wages didn't keep up and because prices don't fall back once inflation eases, many households are still feeling the squeeze today. It would be the same in the UK as well. In Australia, one in three households are going hungry as the cost of living crisis bites, according to a charity. Many people are reducing meal portions to make ends meet and they're being forced to cut the use of shampoo, toothpaste, and soap. Really cutting it right back down. In Australia, inflation data to be released this week is expected to confirm ongoing price pressures for household essentials, prompting a further interest rate hike from the Reserve Bank when it meets at the start of next month. The biggest increase in prices over the past year has been in petrol, up by almost 14%, but steep lifts in other essentials that Aussies consider their own, like beef 9.4%, lamb 10.1%, milk 8%. Sound familiar? Is there anywhere in the world that is doing just fine? I know we have a number of listeners who listen from various points of the globe. Is this the same story where you are? Are governments really finding it tough to meet their obligations, to meet their commitments, to look after those citizens who are not doing well, trying to find jobs for young ones? Again, Enda Brady referred to that in the UK – they've got more than a million young people who aren't in education, training, or jobs. People are really struggling to pay the basic household bills. Same in Europe, same in Australia. Doesn't make you feel any better, I suppose, if you're wondering how the hell you're going to pay the household rates, but this is not particular or peculiar to New Zealand. Economies are correcting and contractions, as at least half the population knows, are painful. There are signs that things are getting better globally. A lot of it will be dependent on the situation in the US, Iran, Israel, and that calming down. But even above and beyond that, there are signs things are getting better. Xero reported more business confidence, more sales, more employment, more jobs advertised and people employed. And this has been, this wasn't a blip in the data, this has been ongoing. So things are slowly, slowly improving. But in the meantime, in your house, what are you doing without? What have you found is a non-essential just to get by until things improve? Insurances, have you kept all the insurances? A young family I know who should be doing just fine, they concede that

When I look at Labour's campaign and I look at National's campaign, it's like, look, I'll do it for you next time. Seriously, when something is being done so badly, you think, you know what? I can do that so much better. They've had shocking campaigns, both of the main parties. Just negative, silly stuff. And yesterday, Labour had an absolute clanger. Of all the issues and all the policies that Labour could have come up with to attract voters, to point out deficiencies in the Coalition Government, why on earth did they have to decide on housing as one of their last big pushes before the election? You'll have heard Kieran McAnulty yesterday announcing a new rent to buy scheme that would allow public housing tenants to save for a house deposit. $100 a week from their taxpayer subsidised rent would be credited towards a house deposit with the funds held in a trust account. The scheme would help people save $5,200 a year, Labour says, and allow tenants to accumulate enough to put down a deposit on a home. Public housing tenants would have the option to buy the home they're living in. Labour said that for each house sold, three more would be built in its place. Really? What's your track record like on building houses, Labour? Pretty damn poor. Three more would be built in its place? Labour would have been turfed out after one term were it not for Covid last time round because of their failures of execution when it came to policy. One of their biggest embarrassments was KiwiBuild, the building of houses. 100,000 houses were promised. Remember that? And everybody went, oh, I don't think so. No, no, I think you've got that wrong. And it wasn't just people like me having a rick and going, I don't think you'll be able to do 100,000, it was people in the industry going, no, that's not going to happen. No, they knew best, Labour did. They went ahead, they promised it. 100,000 houses would be built for hardworking Kiwis. Total amount of houses built: 2,003. Quite a big differential. 100,000 promised, 2,003 delivered. So forgive me if I call BS on Labour's ability to build three houses for every one sold, unless they go down the Kāinga Ora route where they damn near bankrupted the country building houses at any cost. We've only just got Kāinga Ora under control after the build at any cost order was given by the last Labour government. There are two policy areas Labour should be staying well away from: law and order and housing. They are proven failures in both areas, unless they're willing to spend anything at all and lock other young people out of the housing market by buying up, spending money we don't have, and paying it down on the never never. This latest announcement, if you are living, say, in GI in Auckland in a state house, which is being gentrified, a little suburb that's being gentrified, how long would you have to live there before you'd saved even for a 5% deposit? If you're living in Greymouth in a Kāinga Ora house, you might in seven and a half years have enough to put down a 5% deposit loan on your home. But it's sticking two fingers to hardworking young people who are working and who are renting and who are saving for their first home. And it is nothing like the capitalisation of family benefit that McAnulty referred to when he was talking to Heather du Plessis Allan last night. "There'd be many people listening to your show who bought their home or their parents bought their home by capitalising the child benefit. And that set them up for life. Now, we haven't had a scheme like that for a very long time. And the announcement today to expand the 5% deposit and also have a scheme to actually get Kāinga Ora tenants out of state housing, out of a poverty trap and into home ownership, I think is something that will benefit the whole country. And I reckon it'll actually get broad support across the political spectrum." Will it? I'll be fascinated to find out. If we look at capitalisation of the family benefit, that cam

The Transport Agency says it needs a long-term plan sooner rather than later for Awakino Gorge, as the vital Taranaki to Waikato link faces more closures. The stretch of State Highway 3 is closing every night until Thursday next week as transport crews work to restore the road following a slip earlier this year. It's been closed several times over the last year, causing long detours for drivers NZTA Project Manager Caleb Perry told Kerre Woodham they'll be looking to finish planning over the next three years. He says that'll be the driver for them to decide if they invest more money into the route, or if they need to explore more options. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Awakino Gorge on State Highway 3 that connects Waikato to Taranaki will be closed for nine nights as of tonight. Every time there's a major storm it seems Karangahake Gorge between Paeroa and Waihi is closed. It was closed for five days this month. The Waiwera Gorge is open, then closed, then open, then closed. The Brynderwyns are a constant worry. Is it time to revisit our national highways and accept that what might have worked in 1923 —widening a dray track into a road— is not really fit for purpose in 2026? Sticks of gelignite blasting away through the Karangahake Gorge worked fine in 1875, but if you've driven through the gorge recently, looking like a goldfish with one eye out the side looking at the rock face, praying it stays up, the other goldfish eye looking out at the river and the road and hoping there's no landslip, you wonder how long these gorges are going to be drivable and whether it's worth patching them up, opening them, patching them up, opening them, patching them up, opening them. Round and round and round we go. We don't seem to be advancing. It's just spending hundreds of millions to stay in place. Transporting New Zealand says we have to start thinking about plan B when it comes to the transport network. They say when the Awakino Gorge is closed, it costs the sector up to a million dollars per day in additional travel time, fuel consumption, and vehicle operating costs. Transporting New Zealand, in the case of the Awakino Gorge, has suggested developing a 20km windy metal road, and suggested a one way route north for a couple of hours, then opening it for a couple of hours to the south. Which sounds like it would have been a brilliant thing to do in 1952, but in 2026, is that really the way to go when we're trying to connect two major provinces, two major exporting provinces, Taranaki and Waikato? I wouldn't have thought so. The New Plymouth mayor says he would sue NZTA if he could for their successive failures over the years, which have cost the people of his region millions and millions of dollars. Are our road networks still fit for purpose? Does it make sense to keep going over the same roads that were initially, in many cases, horse tracks, then dray roads, then roads for the old Model Ts? It worked back then. They made it work. And back then it was rip, shit and bust, hoots wahay, let's just blast our way through, and the quickest way to get anywhere is in a straight line between two points. Given the precarious state of the climate, given that the extremes are becoming the norm when it comes to the storms, the landslips, the torrential rain, do we need to redraw the map rather than keep retracing over existing lines? See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.