NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO THE NATION. I'M LISA OWEN. AND I'M PATRICK GOWER. THIS WEEK, THE DIRT KEEPS FLYING, BUT IS THE MUD STICKING? I THINK WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A LEFT-WING SMEAR CAMPAIGN THAT'S QUITE SYSTEMATIC. NZERS DESERVE BETTER FROM THEIR PRIME MINISTER AND MINISTERS THAN THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOUR. MORE ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JUDITH COLLINS AND CAMERON SLATER LATER. BUT FIRST, HOW PURE DO WE WANT TO BE? OUR ENVIRONMENT IS PRECIOUS. BUT SO TOO ARE THE JOBS AND WEALTH THAT COME FROM WORKING THE LAND. CAN OUR WATERWAYS BE TOO CLEAN? AND IS THE RMA OUT OF CONTROL? NATIONAL'S AMY ADAMS AND THE GREENS' RUSSEL NORMAN ARE LIVE. THEN THE GREENS AND LABOURAVOWING BIG ECONOMIC REFORMS, BUTARE THEY ON THE SAME PAGE, AND CAN THEY LINE UP THEIR SPENDING PROMISES? GRANT ROBERTSON AND NORMAN JOIN ME. PLUS, MORE REVELATIONS ABOUT CAMERON SLATER'S OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUEST. AND LATER, CORBETT AND EGO'S SATIRE AND OUR PANEL, JOURNALISTS ANDREA VANCE AND DAVID FISHER. THANKS FOR JOINING US. WELL, IT'S BEEN A WEEK DOMINATED BY QUESTIONS ABOUT 'DIRTY POLITICS'. WE'VE GOT NEW DEVELOPMENTS ON THAT LATER, AND WE'RE KEEN TO HEAR YOUR VIEWS, SO TEXT US ON 3330 FOR 50C. YOU CAN EMAIL US AT THENATION@TV3.CO.NZ. OR WE'RE ON TWITTER AND FACEBOOK @THENATIONTV3. NOW, THIS WEEK'S CAMPAIGN DEBATE - AS A HANDFUL OF ISLANDS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE WORLD, NZ IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL TREASURE, AND AS KIWIS, WE'RE PROUD OF BEING CLEAN AND GREEN-ISH, BUT PUTTING THAT ENVIRONMENT TO WORK IS ALSO HOW WE EARN A LMNG - FARMING, DRILLING, HAVING PEOPLE OVER TO VISIT. SO CAN WE STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAND THE ECONOMY? OR DO WE HAVE SOME TOUGH CHOICES TO MAKE. THIS MORNING, I'M JOINED BY NATIONAL'S AMY ADAMS AND THE GREENS' RUSSEL NORMAN. GOOD MORNING TO YOU BOTH. BOTH! GOOD QORNING. AND THE GREENS' RUSSEL NORMAN. GOOD MORNING TO YOU BOTH. BOTH: GOOD MORNING. MINISTER, IF I CAN COME TO YOU FIRST. NATIONAL HAS ANNOUNCED NEW FRESHWATER STANDARDS, BUT THAT STILL WOULD MEAN THAT THERESA HUGE NUMBER OF OUR WATERWAYS THAT YOU COULDN'T SWIM IN. HOW DO YOU SELL THATAS PART OF THE KIWI WAY OF LIFE? WHAT IT ACTUALLY MEANS IS, FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER, WE'RE GONNA BE SETTING STANDARDS FROM CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO SAY THIS IS THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM EXPECTATION, AND BEYOND THAT, COMMUNITIES DECIDE HOWAND WHERE THEY MANAGE THEIR WATER BODIES - WHICH AREAS THEY USE FOR SWIMMING AND WHICH THEY DON'T. THAT'S ENTIRELY NEW. WE'VE NEVER HAD THERE BEFORE IN NZ, SO IT'S A CONSIDERABLE STEP FORWARD FOR WATER MANAGEMENT, AND IT'S GOING TO LEAD TO A CONSIDERABLE IMPROVEMENT IN THOSE RIVERS AND WATERWAYS THATARE CURRENTLY BELOW THOSE BOTTOM LINES. BUT DON'T YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO BE ABLE TO NIP DOWN TO THE LOCAL RIVER, DOWN TO THE SELWYN RIVER, AND JUMP IN WITHOUT ANY CONCERNS? I MEAN, THATS NOT UP TO SCRATCH IN PARTS. DON'T YOU WANT THAT FOR YOUR KIDS? I DO, AND ACTUALLY, ITRUST THAT OUR COMMUNITIES WILL WORK THROUGH AND MAKE SENSIBLE DECISIONS ABOUT WHICH WATER BODIES THEY USE FOR SWIMMING AND WHICH THEY DON'T. SO IF WAS- BUT YOU CAN'T GUARANTEE THAT WITH YOUR NEW STANDARDS. I MEAN, YOU'RE PREPARED TO TAKE MODERATE RISK OF INFECTION IN WADING AND BOATING? BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT WHERE WE ARE NOW, LISA, THERE'S NO RULE AT ALL, SO COUNCILS CAN SET ANYTHING THEY LIKE. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS PUT IN PLACE A BRAND-NEW STANDARD. THERE'S NEVER BEEN A NATIONAL BOTTOM LINE FROM CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. IT'S A BOTTOM LINE, AND THEN BEYOND THAT, COMMUNITIES WORK THROUGH WHERE THEY WANT TO SWIM. SO, IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THERE'S 425,000KM OF WATERWAYS IN NZ. A FEW OF THOSE ARE USED FOR SWIMMING, BUT MANY, MANY ARE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND STORMVVATER RUN-OFF CHANNELS, AND TO MANAGE ALL OF THOSE FOR SWIMMING, I THINK, WOULD BEA NONSENSE. WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS SAY TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES, 'ABSOLUTELY, WE EXPECT THAT YOU'LL WORK THROUGH, 'IDENTIFY WHICH RIVERS YOU WANT TO SWIM IN 'AND GO THROUGH AND ASSESS THE COST OF DOING THATAND COME UP WITHA SENSIBLE SOLUTION.' IF WE WERE TO MAKE A BLANKET RULE ACROSS NZ, THE COST COULD POTENTIALLY RUN INTO THE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. MR NORMAN, TOO EXPENSIVE TO MAKE ALL OUR RIVERS SWIMMABLE, AND THE MINISTER IS SAYING EVEN THOUGH THAT'S YOUR POLICY, IS THAT REALISTIC, YOUR POLICY? OR IS ITA PIPE DREAM? OH, WELL, I THINK IT'S VERY REALISTIC. SO IT'S A QUESTION OF TARGETS THAT WE SET. SO THE NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENT ON FRESHWATER MANAGEMENT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, IT CAME FROM DAVID SHEPPARD, FORMER PRINCIPAL COURT JUDGE OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT. SET SOME VERY CLEAR TARGETS, AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, 'THIS IS THE DEBATE. DO WE WANT TARGETS AROUND SWIMMABILITY 'OR THE TARGET THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS NOW SET, WHICH IS WADEABILITY?' IT'S GOTTA BE SAFE TO WADE IN, THOUGH EVEN THEN, THERE'S A ONE IN 2O CHANCE THAT YOU COULD GET SERIOUSLY ILL BY WADING. AND THAT IS REALLY, I THINK, AN ENVIRONMENTAL BUT AN ECONOMIC DECISION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR PRIMARY SECTOR. AND WHEN WE'VE ANALYSED, YOU KNOW, WHATS THE VALUE OF OUR 'CLEAN GREEN' BRAND, MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT DID DO SOME ANALYSIS ABOUT THIS SOME TIME AGO, AND WHAT IT SUGGESTED WAS THAT IF WE LOSE THAT BRAND, THE COST TO DAIRY ALONE IS ABOUT $500 MILLION AYEAR. THE COST OF TOURISM IS $900 MILLION A YEAR. SO IT'S INCREDIBLY EXPENSIVE TO GO DOWN THE POLLUTION ECONOMY PATH, AND OF COURSE, IT MEANS THAT OUR KIDS CAN'T SWIM IN OUR RIVERS. SO I THINK THERE'S ACTUALLY A GREAT SYNERGY BETWEEN A CLEANER ECONOMY AND A SMARTER ECONOMY AND ALSO PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT, BECAUSE THEY BOTH GO TOGETHER. THE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH IS WHAT NATIONAL'S PROPOSING, WILL IN THE LONG RUN UNDERMINE OUR 'CLEAN GREEN' BRAND, AND HENCE THE DAIRY SECTOR, THE TOURISM SECTOR AND MEAN THAT WE CAN'T SWIM IN OUR RIVERS. WHAT EXACTLY THE ISSUE IS IT'S NOT A TARGET. WHAT WE'VE SET IS NOTA TARGET. WHAT WE'VE SET IS A BOTTOM LINE. BEYOND THAT, COMMUNITIES WILL SET THE TARGETS. AND I FULLY EXPECT THAT MOST OF THEM WILL SET SWIMMABILITY IN THOSE CORE RIVERS- BUT YOUR BOTTOM LINE DOESN'T SET SWIMMABILITY. OUR BOTTOM LINE IS THE FIRST NZ HAS EVER HAD. CURRENTLY, BEFORE US, AND WHAT THE LABOUR-GREENS GOVERNMENT WERE QUITE HAPPY WITH WAS LEAVE IT ENTIRELY TO COMMUNITIES TO SET ANYTHING. WE'VE SAID, 'ACTUALLY, THERE IS A MINIMUM EXPECTATION AROUND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH AND HUMAN HEALTH.' AND THEN COMMUNITIES CAN DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHERE THEY CHOOSE TO SWIM AND MONITOR FOR THAT. AND THE GREENS HAVE NEVER EXPLAINED TO US WHAT THE COST OF THEIR PROPOSAL IS. THEY'VE SIMPLY COME OUT WITH A SOUND BITE. WE'VE COSTED OUR PROPOSALS, AND THEY HAVEN'T. SO I'LL GIVE RUSSEL NORMAN A RIGHT OF REPLY THERE. BUT I JUST WANT TO KNOW - WHAT PERCENTAGE OF OUR RIVERS AND LAKES WILL BE SWIMMABLE, THEN, DO YOU IMAGINE? WELL, LOOK, ACTUALLY, MOST OF OUR RIVERS AND LAKES ARE ALREADY MANAGED TO A VERY HIGH STANDARD AND CAN BE SWUM IN. AND I THINK COMMUNITIES WILL WANT TO- < 60%? 80%? WELL, ACTUALLY, THE INTERESTING THING AT THE MOMENT IS THEY ONLY MEASURE A COUPLE OF HUNDRED SITES ACROSS NZ. THERE'S 425,000KM, AND THEY ONLY MEASURED- AND AT MONITORED SITES, 60% ARE NOT SWIMMABLE. THE SITES THAT THEY KNOW THERE'S A PROBLEM IN- 60% ARE NOT SWIMMABLE. NO, WELL, THEY'RE NOT. THEY HAVEN'T SAID THEY'RE NOT SWIMMABLE. THEY SAID AFTER A HIGH LEVEL OF RAIN, THEY CAN BE A RISK. ACTUALLY, THAT'S 94 SPECIFIC SITES ACROSS 425,000, AND THE COUNCILS AND COMMUNITIES ARE WORKING VERY HARD TO ADDRESS THAT. BUT IF YOU SETA BLANKET RULE FROM WELLINGTON THAT DICTATES TO COMMUNITIES WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO, THE REALITY IS IT WILL IMPOSE POTENTIALLY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF COSTS. NOW, COMMUNITIES HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION AS TO WHERE THEY SWIM IN. NOW, RUSSEL NORMAN, THE MINISTER HAS SAID YOU HAVEN'T PUTA PRICE TAG ON WHAT IT'S GONNA COST. WHAT IS IT GOING TO COST? SO THINKABOUT THE TRANSITION WE MADE. IN THE PAST, THE DAIRY SECTOR WAS ALLOWED TO POUR THEIR EFFLUENT DIRECTLY INTO RIVERS, RIGHT, AND THEN WE SAID, 'NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT,' SO WE'VE PUT IN SOME TERRIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL RULES. SO THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH EFFLUENT PONDS. AND THEN THE DAIRY SECTOR FOUND THAT, ACTUALLY, THE EFFLUENT THEY COULD SPRAY BACK ON THE LAND AND SAVE MONEY FROM FERTILISER. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU PUT IN PLACE AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT LIKE YOU CAN'T JUST POUR THE EFFLUENT STRAIGHT INTO A RIVER, THEN YOU GET THIS INNOVATION, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE DAIRY SECTOR. BUT HOW MUCH IS IT GONNA COST? YOU SAYING IT IN SWINGS AND ROUNDABOUTS, BUT GIVE ME A BOTTOM LINE. HOW MUCH IS IT GONNA COST? SAYING IT IN SWINGS AND ROUNDABOUTS, BUT GIVE ME A BOTTOM LINE. HOW MUCH IS IT GONNA COST? SO, ACCORDING TO THE MINISTRY'S OWN ADVICE, IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE TO DO NOTHING THAN TO DO SOMETHING. THAT IS THE MINISTRY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT ADVICE ABOUT THIS EXACT ISSUE. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN ME... YOU STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN ME A DOLLAR FIGURE. WELL, YOU CAN'T NAME A DOLLAR FIGURE ON IT IN THE SENSE THAT NEITHER CAN... WE HAVE. WE'VE COSTED OURS. ON IT IN THE SENSE THAT NEITHER CAN... WE HAVE. WE'VE COSTED OURS. WELL, ACTUALLY, WE'VE LOOKED AT YOUR ANALYSIS, AND WHAT THE MINISTRY SAID IS THAT IF YOU DO NOTHING, IT'S MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IF YOU DO SOMETHING, BECAUSE THE VOLUME-LED STRATEGY THAT THE DAIRY CORPORATIONS, THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS PROMOTING, ALL RIGHT, MEANS THAT WE WILL DESTROY THE RIVERS AND, IN THE PROCESS, DESTROY THE BRAND THAT UNDERPINS THE NZ EXPORT SECTOR. TOURISM, AGRIFOOD IS ENTIRELY BUILT ON CLEAN, GREEN AND SAFE. NOW, LET'S DEAL WITH THE MONITORED SITES QUESTION- BOTH SPEAKAT 0&5 NOW, LET'S DEAL WITH THE MONITORED SITES QUESTION- BOTH SPEAKATOWE I WANT TO ASK THE MINISTER ABOUT THIS. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT INCREASING IN THE NUMBER OF DAIRY COWS THAT WE HAVE, AND WE KNOW THAT SINCE 2008, WE'VE ADDED HALF A MILLION MORE DAIRY COWS TO THE NATIONAL HERD. THAT PRODUCES THE SAME AMOUNT OF WASTE AS 7 MILLION PEOPLE. SO MR NORMAN'S RIGHT, ISN'T HE? IF WE CONTINUE ON THIS PATH, INEVITABLY, YOUR POLICY OF INCREASING DAIRY IS GOING TO DO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE? A COUPLE OF THINGS HERE. FIRST OF ALL, ACTUALLY, WATER POLLUTION IS NOT JUSTAN AGRICULTURE AND DAIRY ISSUE. ABSOLUTELY, THEY HAVE A PART OF IT, BUT WE CAN'T IGNORE THE FACT THAT OUR MOST POLLUTED WATERWAYS ARE IN URBAN AREAS. SO, YES, THE DAIRY AND AGRICULTURE SECTOR HAS A PART TO PLAY IN THIS. BUT, ACTUALLY, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATIONAL AND THE GREENS, FUNDAMENTALLY, IS THAT WE BELIEVE YOU CAN GROW THE PRODUCTIVE BASE AND THE JOBS AND THE ECONOMY IN NZ AND IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT. THE GREENS SEEM TO THINK THE ONLY WAY TO ADDRESS IT IS TO SHUT DOWN OUR ECONOMY. WE DON'T ACCEPT THAT. MINISTER, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU CAN HAVE THINGS HAND-IN-HAND? YOU CAN HAVE GROWTH, AND YOU CAN HAVE A GOOD ENVIRONMENT? WELL, ACTUALLY, THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIONER SAYS, NO, YOU CAN'T. THAT YOUR GOAL IS TO DOUBLE AGRICULTURE EXPORTS BY 2025, AND THE ENVIRONMENT COMMISSIONER HAS CALLED THAT A CLASSIC ECONOMIC VERSUS ENVIRONMENT DILEMMA AND WENT ON TO SAY THAT YOU NEED TO TAKE URGENT STEPS TO SLOW THE EXPANSION OF DAIRYING OR MORE RIVERS AND LAKES WOULD BE DEGRADED. YOU CANNOT HAVE BOTH, ACCORDING TO ONE OF OUR EXPERTS. YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH. I DON'T ACCEPT THAT, LISA. IN FACT, WE'RE SEEING FARMERS ACROSS NZ CONSIDERABLY CHANGE THEIR FARMING SYSTEMS AND MOVE TO MUCH BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT FOR THEIR PRODUCTION, AND WHAT WE'RE MOVING TO NOW WITH A REGULATED SYSTEM OF HOW WE CONTROL WHAT IS LOST FROM THE FARM INTO THE WATER BODIES IS SEEING ALREADY- SO JAN WRIGHTS GOT IT WRONG? THE FARM INTO THE WATER BODIES IS SEEING ALREADY- SO JAN WRIGHTS GOT IT WRONG? YEAH. SO YOU'RE SAYING EVERYONE'S GOT IT WRONG. WHATS HAPPENING AT THE MOMENT- DR NORMAN'S REPORT COVERED THE PERIOD UNDER THE LABOUR-GREENS GOVERNMENT AND THEN SAID IF NOTHING CHANGED, IT WOULD GET WORSE. GOVERNMENT AND THEN SAID IF NOTHING CHANGED, IT WOULD GET WORSE. RIGHT. MR NORMAN? SO LET'S JUST GETA FEW FACTS ON THE TABLE. SO OVER 60% OF MONITORED SITES NOW ARE UNSAFE FOR SWIMMING. IF YOU LOOK AT ACROSS ALL OUR LOWLAND RIVERS IN PASTORALAND URBAN ENVIRONMENTS, IT'S PROBABLY OVER 90%, ACCORDING TO DR MIKE JOY, ONE OF OUR LEADING FRESHWATER SCIENTISTS. NOW, OF COURSE, THE MINISTER DOESN'T LIKE SCIENTISTS, BUT THAT'S WHAT THE SCIENTISTS SAY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERARCHING PICTURE, THE PICTURE IS, 'ARE THERE ECOLOGICAL LIMITS WITHIN WHICH WE'RE WORKING?' HOW MANY COWS CAN WE HAVE, RIGHT? THERE'S REAL CONSTRAINTS COS WE LIVE IN A REAL WORLD. SO WHAT WE'VE GOT TO DO IN THE AGRIFOOD SECTOR IS GO. 'WE NEED TO ADD MORE VALUE RATHER THAN MORE VOLUME.' AND THE SECTOR SAYS THIS. I GO AND TALK TO THE SECTOR A LOT, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY SAY THEY WANT TO DO. ONE WAY TO ACTUALLY NUDGE THEM IN THAT DIRECTION IS SAY, 'WE'RE GONNA HAVE CLEAN-WATER RULES IN PLACE 'SO YOU CAN'T CONTINUE TO INCREASE POLLUTION INTO RIVERS.' AND THERE'LL BE CONSTRAINTS AROUND GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS, AND THAT WILL ACTUALLY PUSH THE SECTOR IN THE DIRECTION THAT WE ALL NEED IT TO GO. SO YOU DON'T THINK WE'LL HAVE TO SACRIFICE ANY JOBS OR ANY ECONOMIC GROWTH? IT'S ABSOLUTELY THE OPPOSITE BECAUSE AS THE RIDETT INSTITUTE, WHICH IS THE INSTITUTE OF AGRIFOOD BASED AT MASSEY UNIVERSITY, HAS ALL THE MAJOR PLAYERS IN IT, WHAT THEY'RE ALL SAYING IS, IN THE AGRIFOOD SECTOR, WE NEED TO PROTECT CLEAN, GREEN AND SAFE. THAT'S THE BRAND THAT UNDERPINS IT ALL. AND WE NEED TO MOVE UP THE VALUE CHAIN AND OWN MORE OF THE VALUE CHAIN FROM HERE TO CHINAAND EVERYWHERE ELSE AND INVEST MORE IN R&D. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE GREENS ARE DOING AND EXACTLY WHAT NATIONAL'S OPPOSED TO. ISN'T THE FLIPSIDE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION'S ARGUMENT THAT THERE WILL BE LESS JOBS AND LESS DAIRYING GROWTH? NO, BECAUSE WHAT JAN WAS SAYING WAS 'YOU CAN'T HAVE MORE VOLUME'. SEE, THE CURRENT STRATEGY OF THE DAIRY SECTOR AND THE NATIONAL PARTY IS MORE AND MORE VOLUME - MORE COWS, MORE MILK POWDER, THE LAST DROP OF MILK FROM THE LAST BLADE OF GRASS. ACTUALLY, THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIC STRATEGY, WHICH IS WHAT SMARTER COUNTRIES DO AND WHAT WE CAN DO, WHERE YOU GO, 'ACTUALLY, WE'RE GONNAADD MORE VALUE TO THE EXISTING VOLUME, 'RATHER THAN JUST INCREASE THE VOLUME, 'WHICH IS VERY LOW-ADD, SIMPLE COMMODITIES AND ISN'T A WAY TO GET RICH.' BUT THE MINISTER IS RIGHT WHEN SHE SAYS THATA LOT OF THE WATERWAYS THAT ARE POLLUTED ARE 2KM FROM A CITY AND A LARGE PERCENTAGE ARE 1OKM FROM A CITY. IT'S NOT JUST THE FARMERS, BUT IT'S- THATS RIGHT, SO URBAN WATERWAYS, WHICH IS A TINY PER CENT OF ALL THE WATERWAYS IN THE COUNTRY, RIGHT, COMPARED TO PASTORAL WATERWAYS, RIGHT? THEY ARE POLLUTED. IT'S A REAL ISSUE, AND OUR STANDARD APPLIES TO THOSE AS WELL. THEY NEED TO BE SWIMMABLE AS WELL. WE'RE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. BUT WE KNOW THE VAST MAJORITY OF CATCHMENTS IN NZ, NECESSARILY, OUTSIDE OF NATIONAL PARKS AND STUFF, THOSE CATCHMENTS ARE PASTORAL CATCHMENTS. AND IN THOSE CATCHMENTS IN THE LOW LAND AREAS, WATER IS VERY POLLUTED BECAUSE OF THIS BIG WAVE OF INTENSIFICATION THATS HAPPENING. IS YOUR POLICY AN ANTI-JOBS POLICY? AS NATIONAL WOULD HAVE US BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE TAKING US DOWN THE CUL-DE-SAC OF NO GROWTH. IT'S ACTUALLY THE EXACT OPPOSITE, AND IT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE RIDDET INSTITUTE SAYS WE SHOULD DO - WE SHOULD ADD VALUE RATHER THAN VOLUME. THE VOLUME STRATEGY WILL ABSOLUTELY CRASH INTO THE 'CLEAN, GREEN AND SAFE' BRAND AND DESTROY IT, BECAUSE THATS WHERE IT'S GOING. CRASH INTO THE 'CLEAN, GREEN AND SAFE' BRAND AND DESTROY IT, BECAUSE THATS WHERE IT'S GOING. ACTUALLY THAT'S A GREAT SOUND BITE, BUT YOU CAN SAY 'ADD VALUE', BUTACTUALLY WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY STRATEGY FROM THE GREENS AS TO HOW WE'RE GONNA DO IT. YES, A BILLION-DOLLAR R & D INVESTMENT. WHAT WE'VE SAID IS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO GROW THE SIZE OF OUR PRODUCTIVE BASE; WE CAN CONTINUE TO ADD JOBS AS LONG AS WE DO IT IN AWAY THAT REDUCES OUR ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT. WE KNOW THAT THAT'S POSSIBLE. IT'S HAPPENING NOW. THE GREENS WANT TO APPROACH THIS BY SHUTTING DOWN INDUSTRY, SHUTFING DOWN JOBS, LIMITING WHAT NZERS CAN DO. WE SAY, 'ABSOLUTELY, WE NEED TO GROW OPPORTUNITIES FOR NZERS, BUT WE MUST REDUCE THE ENVIRONMENTAL FOOTPRINT.' I KNOW THATS POSSIBLE BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT HAPPENING. MR NORMAN, BEFORE WE GO TO THE BREAK, I WANT TO ASK, IS IT THE GREENS' INTENTION TO STILL CHARGE PEOPLE FOR IRRIGATION WATER? THE BREAK, I WANT TO ASK, WE WOULD NEGOTIATE WITH THE INDUSTRY WHAT THAT PRICE SHOULD BE FOR IRRIGATION WATER. THEY HAVEN'T TOLD US. WHAT THAT PRICE SHOULD BE FOR IRRIGATION WATER. THEY HAVEN'T TOLD US. IF YOU'RE AN URBAN INDUSTRIAL USER, YOU PAYA PRICE PER UNIT FOR WATER. THEY HAVEN'T TOLD US. IF YOU'RE AN URBAN INDUSTRIAL USER, NO, IT IS RIGHT. NO, IT ISN'T. IF YOU'RE AN URBAN INDUSTRIAL USER, NO, IT IS RIGHT. NO, IT ISN'T. BUT IN THE RURAL AREAS, YOU DON'T PAYA PRICE PER UNIT, SO THE DAIRY CORPORATIONS THAT AMY REPRESENTS HERE DON'T WANNA PAY. FARMERS WHO ARE TAKING IRRIGATION WATER, YOU'RE GOING TO CHARGE THEM FOR THAT PRMLEGE. THEY'RE GONNA CHARGE FARMERS AND ONLY FARMERS. THEY WON'T CHARGE ANYONE ELSE. THEY'RE GONNA CHARGE FARMERS ARE YOU GOING TO CHARGE FARMERS? CHARGE ANYONE ELSE. THEY'RE GONNA CHARGE FARMERS ARE YOU GOING TO CHARGE FARMERS? YES, SO WHAT THE OECD SAID IS THAT- THEY'RE GONNA CHARGE FARMERS HOW MUCH, MR NORMAN, ARE YOU GOING TO CHARGE? YOU SAID 10C PER THOUSAND LITRES IN 2011. WOULD THAT BE THE SAME CHARGE? NO. SO WHAT WE SAID IN- WHAT WE'LL BE SAYING WHEN WE RELEASE OUR POLICY AROUND THIS IS THAT WE'LL NEGOTIATE WITH THE SECTOR AS TO THE RIGHT PRICE, BECAUSE EVERY ECONOMIST ON THIS ISSUE SAYS IF YOU WANT TO DRIVE EFFICIENCIES THROUGH THE SECTOR, YOU NEED A PRICE ON THE USE OF- IF THIS WAS ABOUT EFFICIENCIES, THEY WOULD BE CHARGING IT TO ALL WATER USERS, AND THEY'RE NOT, AND THE FACT THAT THE GREENS ARE PROMOTING A WATER TAX ON ONE SET OF WATER USERS- THAT'S NOT RIGHT; IT'S ON EVERYBODY. NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. THAT'S NOT RIGHT; IT'S ON EVERYBODY. NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. INDUSTRIAL USERS IN URBAN ENVIRONMENTS HAVE TO PAY. THE POLICY THAT THE GREENS AND LABOUR HAVE PUT OUT IS AWATER TAX. THEY WON'T TELL US HOW MUCH, AND IT ONLYAPPLIES TO FARMERS. THAT'S NOT TRUE. THEY WON'T TELL US HOW MUCH, AND IT ONLYAPPLIES TO FARMERS. THATS NOT TRUE. IF THIS WAS ABOUT WATER EFFICIENCY, IT WOULD APPLY TO ALL USERS. MR NORMAN, WHY NOT NAME THE PRICE BEFORE THE ELECTION SO THAT YOU KNOW YOU'VE GOT A MANDATE TO BRING A POLICY LIKE THAT IN? WHY NOT? SO TWO POINTS - INDUSTRIAL USERS IN URBAN ENVIRONMENTS CURRENTLY DO PAY FOR WATER. SO TWO POINTS - INDUSTRIAL THEY DON'T PAY FOR WATER. CURRENTLY DO PAY FOR WATER. SO TWO POINTS - INDUSTRIAL THEY DON'T PAY FOR WATER. YOU ASK ANYONE WITHIN AUCKLAND. SECONDLY, WE THINK THE BEST WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE IS TO WORK WITH THE INDUSTRY, BECAUSE WE NEED A PRICE SO THERE'S A PRICE SIGNAL. AS TO WHAT IT SHOULD BE, WE WANNA WORK- SO YOU WON'T TELL US THE PRICE, AND YOU WON'T TELL US BEFORE THE ELECTION. WE WANT TO TALK TO THE INDUSTRY TO SET IT. ALL RIGHT. LATER, WHO'S GOT THE BEST ELECTION ADS? AND WE DELVE INTO THE WEEK OF DIRTY POLITICS. BUT NEXT- MORE ON KEEPING IT CLEAN AND GREEN AND WHETHER THE RMA'S STOPPING YOU WHACKING UPA RETAINING WALL THIS WEEKEND. BACK SHORTLY. WITH NATIONAL'S AMY ADAMS AND RUSSEL NORMAN FROM THE GREEN PARTY. IF I CAN COME TO YOU, AMY ADAMS, NATIONAL WANTS TO REFORM THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT. TELL ME BRIEFLY, WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT? WELL, THE RMA HAS THE LOWEST SATISFACTION SCORE WITH THE NZ PUBLIC ACROSS ALL THE SERVICES THAT CENTRAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFER, AND LARGELY THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S INCREDIBLY COMPLEX; IT'S VERY VERY EXPENSIVE TO WORK YOUR WAY THROUGH; IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO WORK OUT WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO WITH YOUR LAND; AND IT'S SEEING, FRANKLY, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS GO TO CONSULTANTS, PLANNERS AND LAWYERS WHEN NZERS JUST WANT AN ANSWER ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN AND CAN'T DO ON THEIR PROPERTY. WE THINK WE CAN MAKE ITA LOT SIMPLER AND A LOT MORE COST-EFFECTIVE. SO IS THE MAIN ISSUE IS IT'S SLOWING DOWN THINGS LIKE CONSENTS FOR DECKS AND ABILITY TO BUILD HOUSING WHICH WE HAVE, ARGUABLY, A SUPPLY AND SHORTAGE PROBLEM? THATS EXACTLY RIGHT. WHEN THE RMA ISN'T WORKING RIGHT, IT LEADS TO INCREASE IN HOUSE PRICES; IT LEADS TO INCREASES IN COSTS OF THINGS LIKE FOOD AND ELECTRICITY; IT MEANS NZERS PAYING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR CONSENTS TO REMOVE A CHIMNEY OR EXTEND A DECK. AND OF COURSE WE NEED TO HAVEA SYSTEM OF RULES, BUT WE NEED ONE THAT BALANCES VERY CAREFULLY ALL OF WHAT WE NEED AS A SOCIETY, SO HOUSES, JOBS AND, OF COURSE, OUR CORE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS. BUT HANG ON A MINUTE. ISN'T THERE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? BECAUSE LABOUR DID OFFER TO SUPPORT YOU GETTING THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION THROUGH IN TERMS OF HOUSING, BUT ISN'T THE REALITY THAT YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO CREATE A BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ACT RATHER THAN AN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT? LOOK, THAT'S JUST NOT RIGHT. SO, THE PARTS THAT LABOUR OFFERED TO SUPPORT WERE WITHOUT THE CRITICAL CHANGES THAT WOULD'VE MADE HOUSING A PRINCIPLE OF THE RMA, SO THEY SAID THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT THE HOUSING BITS, BUT THEN IN TERMS OF THE REFORM PACKAGE, THEY WOULDN'T SUPPORT THE CORE ELEMENTS NECESSARY TO MAKE THAT WORK. IF WE DON'T MAKE, FOR EXAMPLE, HOUSING SUPPLY LAND ONE OF THE CRITICAL PRINCIPLES OF THE ACT, THEN THE OTHER CHANGES WON'T WORK, SO THEY TOOK THE LANGUAGE OF WANTING TO SUPPORT, BUT THE REALITY IS, THEY WOULDN'T SUPPORT THE PIECES THAT WOULD'VE MADE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY BETTER. RUSSEL NORMAN, IT'S TOO COMPLEX, OR IS THIS ATROJAN HORSE, THE HOUSING DEBATE? WELL, A FEW FACTS - 97% OF ALL CONSENT APPLICATIONS ARE NOT EVEN NOTIFIED; TH EY'RE JUST APPROVED NON-NOTIFIED. 0.3% OF ALL CONSENT- 0.7% OF ALL CONSENT APPLICATIONS ARE APPEALED TO THE ENVIRONMENT COURT, SO IT'S VERY SMALL. REMEMBER, WHAT NATIONAL'S TRYING TO TAKE OUT OF THE RMA, FOR EXAMPLE, ARE THE REFERENCES TO THE VALUE OF ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY. NOW, YOU'D HAVE TO ASK, IF THE ISSUE IS BUILDING A RETAINING WALL, WHY WOULD YOU GUT ONE OF THE KEY DIMENSIONS OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT - FOR EXAMPLE, THE REFERENCE TO ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY? AND I WOULD ARGUE - AND I THINK IT'S PLAINLY OBVIOUS - THAT THE REASON IS THAT VVHEN YOU'RE RUNNING A 'POLLUTION ECONOMY' KIND OF APPROACH, YOU RUN UP AGAINST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ALL THE TIME, SO WHEN THEY RUN UP AGAINST ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS, THEY'RE BOWLING THEM OVER. SO, YOU THINK ABOUT THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED COUNCILLOR IN CANTERBURY. THEY HAD TO BE GOT RID OF BECAUSE THEY WERE PROTECTING WATERWAYS. THEY WEREN'T PROTECTING WATERWAYS. THEY WERE PROTECTING WATERWAYS. THEY WEREN'T PROTECTING WATERWAYS. YOU THINK ABOUT THE RMA. IT HAS TO BE MODIFIED TO REMOVE THINGS LIKE THE VALUE OF ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY BECAUSE WHEN YOU RUN THIS KIND OF ECONOMY, WHICH IS JUST FOCUSED ON SIMPLE COMMODITIES AND POLLUTION, IT KEEPS HITTING THESE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS, SO THEY GET BOWLED OVER. A DIFFERENT APPROACH IS YOU SAY, 'ACTUALLY, LET'S PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITS 'AND RESPECT THEM AND BUILD A SMARTER ECONOMY, 'INVEST IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THOSE LIMITS.' MINISTER, ARE YOU SAYING- 'lNVEST IN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THOSE LIMITS.' MINISTER, ARE YOU SAYING- THE GREENS WANT TO PLAY ON THOSE FEARS, BUT IT'S JUST NOT TRUE. THE VAST BULK OF WHAT THE RMA DOES IS AROUND URBAN PLANNING - WHAT WE CAN DO WITH OUR HOUSE ON OUR SECTION, WHETHER YOU CAN TRIM A TREE IN YOUR BACK YARD, WHETHER YOU CAN EXTEND YOUR FENCE. AND THE NUMBERS RUSSEL TALKS ABOUT REALLY SUGGEST THAT THE VAST BULK OF WHAT WE CONSENT DOESN'T NEED A CONSENT. MINISTER, ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT THE CHANGES THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE WON'T WEAKEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS MINISTER, ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT THE ONE IOTA? WEAKEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS MINISTER, ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT THE ONE IOTA? ABSOLUTELY. IN FACT, I WOULD- OR IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT WEAKENING THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS IS WORTH IT? A LI'I'I'LE BIT OF WEAKENING IS OK IF WE CAN GO FORWARD ECONOMICALLY? WHAT WE'VE SAID, LISA, IS THAT THE RMA HAS TO PROVIDE FOR OUR SOCIAL, CULTURAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES. THAT'S WHAT THE ACT IS VERY CLEAR ABOUT. AND WE'VE SAID, AS WELL AS CONSIDERING THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES, MANY OF WHICH WE'RE STRENGTHENING, IN ACTUAL FACT, THAT IT'S EQUALLY IMPORTANT THAT COUNCILS PAY ATTENTION TO THINGS LIKE 'HAVE THEY PROVIDED ENOUGH LAND FOR HOUSING GROWTH? 'HAVE THEY PROVIDED FOR NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE IN THEIR DISTRICT? 'HAVE THEY PROVIDED FOR NATURAL HAZARDS IN THEIR DISTRICT?' RUSSEL NORMAN, YOU'RE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, AREN'T YOU? YOU'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO BEEF THIS UP A LITTLE BIT, THE RMA. YEAH, I MEAN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DRAMATIC LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY IN NZ OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS AND UNDER THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT AS WELL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT WATER QUALITY DECLINE, RAPID DECLINE IN WATER QUALITYACROSS THE COUNTRY, IT'S CLEAR THAT THE RMA ISN'T STRONG ENOUGH FOR PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT. SO, YEAH, WE DO WANT TO STRENGTHEN THE RMA BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITS ARE WHAT MAKES NZA GREAT PLACE TO LIVE, THE FACT THAT YOU CAN GO TO THESE WILD AND BEAUTIFUL PLACES. AND THE RMA IS ONE OF THE KEY TOOLS FOR PROTECTING THEM. WHY WOULD YOU WEAKEN IT? THE FACT THAT YOU CAN'T TRIM A TREE IN YOUR OWN BACKYARD WITHOUT GOING TO THE COUNCIL IS NOT WHAT MAKES NZA GREAT PLACE. IN YOUR OWN BACKYARD WITHOUT GOING TO THE COUNCIL IS NOT WHAT MAKES NZA GREAT PLACE. IN YOUR OWN BACKYARD WITHOUT GOING IT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE, RUSSEL. AND MOST NZERS WANTA SYSTEM THAT ALLOW THEM TO GET ON WITH THEIR DAY-TO-DAY LIVES- BRIEFLY, MINISTER, YOU DON'T HAVE THE MANDATE AT THE MOMENT TO GET THESE CHANGES THROUGH. YOUR SUPPORT PARTNERS DON'T WANTA BAR OF IT - THE MAORI PARTY, UNITED FUTURE. SO IF YOU GET BACK IN GOVERNMENT WITH THE SAME POLITICAL PARTNERS, ARE YOU GOING TO ACCEPT DEFEAT AND JUST FORGET ABOUT IT? WELL, LOOK, WHAT WE'VE SAID, LISA, IS THAT WE'RE GONNA TAKE THIS ISSUE TO THE ELECTION, BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT MOST NZERS ARE SICK OF A SYSTEM THAT IS CUMBERSOME, EXPENSIVE AND GETS INTO TELLING THEM THINGS LIKE HOW BIG THEIR FRONT WINDOWS CAN BE, WHETHER THE LMNG ROOM'S AT THE FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE- IT'S ABOUT DAIRY CORPORATIONS. THATS WHAT IT'S ABOUT. THAT SORT OF LEVEL OF RESTRICTION IS NOT HELPING. IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT. THAT SORT OF LEVEL OF RESTRICTION IS NOT HELPING. IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT. SO WE'RE STRENGTHENING WATER PROTECTIONS ON ONE SIDE. WE'VE NOW GOT THE CLEANEST AIR QUALITY ON RECORD DURING THE WORK WE'RE DOING. BUT THE URBAN PLANNING SIDE OF THE RMA IS NOT WORKING AS WELL AS IT COULD. WE WANNA SEE THAT ADDRESSED. BRIEF LAST WORD TO RUSSEL NORMAN. RMA IS NOT WORKING AS WELL AS IT COULD. WE WANNA SEE THAT ADDRESSED. BRIEF LAST WORD TO RUSSEL NORMAN. SO, WHEN DAIRY CORPORATIONS CONTROL THE GOVERNMENT, WHAT THEY DO IS THEYATTACK ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS. WE HAVE A MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THAT EVERY ACTION SHE'S TAKING IS ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION INSTEAD OF PROTECTION. THE GOVERNMENTS HEADING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION COS IT'S COMMITTED TO THE POLLUTION ECONOMY INSTEAD OF A SMARTER, CLEANER ECONOMY. WE'RE COMMITTED TO JOBS AND GROWTH. INSTEAD OF A SMARTER, CLEANER ECONOMY. WE'RE COMMITTED TO JOBS AND GROWTH. THANK YOU BOTH FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING. THAT'S RUSSEL NORMAN AND AMY ADAMS. THANK YOU. NOW, YOU KNOW THE ELECTION IS GETTING CLOSE WHEN THE POLITICAL PARTIES' CAMPAIGN ADS START PLAYING. BUT WITH LIMITED AIRTIME ALLOWED FOR SUCH ADS, IT'S IMPORTANT THE PARTIES GET THEIR MESSAGES RIGHT. SO IS THAT THE CASE WITH THIS YEAR'S CROP? OUR REPORTER TORBEN AKEL SOUGHT THE VIEWS OF THREE ADVERTISING EXPERTS. ARCHIVE: # GREAT THINGS HAPPEN COS IT'S YOUR TURN NOW. # THEY'VE BEEN A PART OF OUR ELECTION CAMPAIGNS FOR HALF A CENTURY NOW - ARCHIVE: THIS NOVEMBER, GIVE YOUR VOTE TO LABOUR. TVADS TRYING THEIR BEST TO PERSUADE... THAT'S MY PROMISE TO YOU. ...INSPIRE... WE HAVE SO MUCH TO BE PROUD OF. ...AND OFTEN SCARE THE VIEWERS... YOU DON'T WANT TO BE BETRAYED AGAIN. ...INTO VOTING FOR THE ADVERTISER. POOR LITTLE BUGGERS. HERE, THOUGH, AS IN MUCH OF EUROPE, TVAND RADIO ADVERTISING IS STRICTLY REGULATED. # THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HIGH TAXATION. # POLITICAL PARTIES ARE ALLOCATED TAX FUNDING, AND THAT'S ALL THEY CAN SPEND ON AIRTIME. THIS YEAR, NATIONAL GOT THE MOST WITH MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS AND LABOUR NEXT WITH 920,000. THE PARTIES THAT HAD ONLY ONE MP GOT ALMOST 77,000 AND THE CONSERVATIVES, JUST OVER 60,000. TO PUT THOSE AMOUNTS INTO CONTEXT, THE COST OF ADVERTISING DURING THE 6 O'CLOCK NEWS IS CURRENTLY AROUND $10,000 FOR A SINGLE 30-SECOND AD. IT'S VITAL, THEN, WITH SUCH LIMITED AIRTIME THAT THE PARTIES' ADS PUSH THE RIGHT BUTTONS WITH VOTERS. SO HOW DO THIS YEAR'S CROP STACK UP? TO FIND OUT, THE NATION ASKED THREE ADVERTISING EXPERTS. PAUL WHITE IS THE PROGRAMME LEADER OF ADVERTISING CREATMTY AT AUT, MIKE HUTCHESON IS AN INDUSTRY VETERAN WHO RAN LABOUR'S 2011 CAMPAIGN AND BRIDGET TAYLOR CO-OWNS AN AUCKLAND AGENCY AND IS A FORMER PANELLIST ON THE AUSSIE AD REVIEW SHOW THE GRUEN TRANSFER. FIRST UP WAS NATIONAL'S ROWING AD. BUT THROUGH YOUR HARD WORK AND THE NATIONAL PARTY'S ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT, NZ IS HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. YOU CAN'T BEATA SPORTS METAPHOR IN NZ. KIWIS LOVE IT. ADD A BIT OF COMEDY IN THERE, WHICH THEY ALSO LIKE, YOU'VE KIND OF GOTA WINNING FORMULA. IT KEEPS YOUR ATTENTION, IT TAKES YOU THROUGH AND IT ENDS WITH A NICE, SIMPLE MESSAGE - 'WE'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION; IS EVERYBODY ELSE?' PROBABLYA GOOD MOVE NOT TO PUT JOHN KEY THERE, BECAUSE ITHINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CRITICISM ABOUT HIM FRONTING ALL THE BILLBOARDS. SO I THINK THAT THATS SHOWING THAT THERE IS A BIGGER MACHINE THAN JUST A PRESIDENTIAL-STYLE PRIME MINISTER WAS A GOOD MOVE ON THE PART OF THE NATS. NEXT UP, LABOUR. WHO WANTS MORE AFFORDABLE HOMES ACROSS NZ? WE DO. WHO WANTS BETTER JOBS AND HIGHER WAGES FOR KIWIS? WE DO. I THINK IT'S A CLASSIC PARTY-POLITICAL AD OF ITS TYPE. IT HAS THE LEADER'S VOICE. IT ENGAGES THE PEOPLE, AND IT GOES THROUGH THE POLICIES, AND THEN IT GIVES YOU A SLOGAN AT THE END, SO FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, THAT'S FINE. < IT'S SAFE. SO FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, THAT'S FINE. < IT'S SAFE. IT'S SAFE. YEAH, IT'S SAFE, ABSOLUTELY. IT WASN'T TOO SLICK. IT WAS JUST PITCHED DEAD RIGHT. IT TOUCHED THE ISSUES OF HOUSING, FAMILY, JOBS. AND THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE PREOCCUPIED WITH. I THINK PEOPLE WILL GO, 'OH YEAH, LABOUR'S AD IS THE ONE WITH THE FAMILIES IN IT.' AND I THINK THAT'S THEIR INTENTION. THEN THERE'S THIS FROM THE GREENS, TO BE RELEASED ON MONDAY. CLASSICAL MUSIC I'M KIND OF LOST THE WILL TO LIVE AFTER WATCHING THE GREENS' AD. L- IT JUST SEEMED SO NEGATIVE. THE SOUNDTRACK MUSIC IN THE MINOR KEY. IT WAS DEPRESSING. IT'D MAKE YOU WANNA LEAVE THE COUNTRY, RATHER THAN VOTE GREEN AND STAY. THEY'VE GONE FOR THAT WHOLE SHOCK TACTIC ANGLE, WHICH IS USED OFTEN IN ROAD SAFETY ADS. THE PROBLEM NOWADAYS IS PEOPLE AREN'T SHOCKED ANY MORE. THEY JUST TURN OFF OR THEY TURN OVER. AS A PARTY, THEY'VE GOT MORE AND MORE INTERESTING OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, AND THEY'VE COME OUT WITH SOME REALLY INTERESTING POLICIES THAT CHALLENGED PEOPLE IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS. THAT JUST DOESN'T COME THROUGH. HERE'S FOUR SIMPLE THINGS - NUMBER ONE, REFERENDUM NEED TO COUNT. FINALLY, THERE'S THIS FROM THE CONSERVATIVES. NUMBER THREE, ONE LAW FOR ALL NZERS; AND NUMBER FOUR, TAX-FREE THRESHOLD FOR EVERYBODYAT THE BOTTOM END. IT'S QUITE OBVIOUSLY STRAIGHT AWAY A PARTY-POLITI CAL ADVERTISEMENT. SO IT'S NOT PRETENDING TO BE ANYTHING. AND I GUESS THAT IF YOU'VE NEVER HEARD THEIR POLICIES BEFORE, IT SPELLS OUT FOUR POLICIES. COLIN CRAIG ALREADY HAS BUILT A BIT OF A REPUTATION AS BEING A LITTLE BIT PREACHY, A BIT EVANGELICAL, AND I THINK HE EXEMPLIFIED THAT IN THAT AD. HE MADE SOME QUITE GOOD POINTS, BUT THE WHOLE DELIVERY WAS SO DEPRESSING AND DOWN YOU DON'T WANNA LISTEN. AND MORE TO THE POINT, IF THE PEOPLE IN YOUR AD CAN'T LOOK REMOTELY ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT WHAT'S BEING SAID, HOW ON EARTH DO YOU EXPECT THE AUDIENCE TO RESPOND POSITIVELY? AS FOR THE OTHER PARTIES, IT SEEMS TVAIRTIME IS TOO PRICEY FOR MOST. ACT, NZ FIRST AND INTERNET MANA ALL TOLD US THEY'LL HAVE FEW OR NO ADS ON TV. JUST ON RADIO. COLIN CRAIG, MEANWHILE, IS HEADING BACK TO COURT; THIS TIME, TO GET MORE MONEY OUT OF THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION SO YOU CAN SEE MORE OF THIS. WELL, LATER, JOURNALISTS DAVID FISHER AND ANDREA VANCE, PLUS GRANT ROBERTSON JOINS RUSSEL NORMAN. WHO'S THE BOSS IF THE PAIR GET INTO COALITION NEGOTIATIONS? PADDY ASKS THE QUESTIONS AFTER THE BREAK. HAS BEEN HEADLINE NEWS THIS WEEK, WITH CONFIRMATION COLLINS HAD EMAILED HER FRIEND NOT ONLY THE NAME AND JOB TITLE OF A PUBLIC SERVANT THEY SUSPECTED OF LEAKING BUT HIS PHONE NUMBER AS WELL. THIS MORNING, WE WANT TO SHOW YOU DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY THE NATION, NOT FROM NICKY HAGER OR WHALEDUMP. THEY SHOW TWO OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUESTS MADE BY SLATER TO COLLINS ON DAVID BAIN'S CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION AND THE REPORT BY RETIRED CANADIAN JUSTICE IAN BINNIE. YOU'LL REMEMBER COLLINS AND BINNIE FELL OUT VERY PUBLICLY OVER THAT REPORT, AND DAVID BAIN HAS SOUGHTA JUDICIAL REVIEW OF COLLINS' HANDLING OF THE CASE. THE DOCUMENTS SHOW SLATER'S OIA REQUESTS WERE HANDLED WITH UNUSUAL HASTE. LISA TAKES UP THE STORY. SO, LET'S LOOK AT A COUPLE OF OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT REQUESTS FROM CAMERON SLATER, AKA VVHALEOIL. DECEMBER 21 ST 2012, A FRIDAY. AT 1.27 IN HE AFTERNOON CAMERON SLATER FIRES OFF AN OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUEST DIRECT TO JUSTICE MINISTER JUDITH COLLINS'S EMAIL. HE'S AFTER INFORMATION RELATING TO THIS MAN, DAVID BAIN. JUDITH COLLINS' PRESS SECRETARY REPLIES THE SAME DAY AT 6.11 IN THE EVENING. THE RESPONSE SAYS SINCE SLATER'S EMAIL, ANOTHER MEDIA OUTLETS 'PLACED A SIMILAR OIA REQUEST' AND HAS ASKED FOR AN 'EXPEDITED RESPONSE', SO IN THE 'INTERESTS OF FAIRNESS', THEY'RE ABLE TO PARTIALLY FILL HIS REQUEST. THE REPLY ALSO SAYS THE JUSTICE MINISTER'S OFFICE RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM DAVID BAIN'S FORMER LAWYER, MICHAEL GUEST, THAT SAME DAY, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS RELEASED TO SLATER TOO. SO CAMERON SLATER GETS AT LEAST A CHUNK OF THE DOCUMENTS HE ASKED FOR IN FOUR HOURS AND 44 MINUTES, AFTER HOURS ON A FRIDAY NIGHT. AND THE BUNDLE INCLUDES A LETTER THE MINISTER HAD ONLY JUST RECEIVED HERSELF. FAST FORWARD TO FEBRUARY 11TH 2013, AND HERE'S ANOTHER SLATER OIA REQUEST TO THE JUSTICE MINISTER. AGAIN, HE WANTS CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO DAVID BAIN AND HIS BID FOR COMPENSATION. THE NEXT DAY, HE EMAILS THROUGH AN ALMOST IDENTICAL REQUEST TO COLLINS. ONLY ONE THING IS DIFFERENT -THE DATES OF THE DOCUMENTS HE IS AFTER. THAT EMAIL GOES TO THE JUSTICE MINISTER ON FEBRUARY 12TH AT 9.53AM. THE RESPONSE COMES BACK AT 10.30 AM THE SAME DAY, SO 37 MINUTES LATER. IT INCLUDES ALMOST ALL THE INFORMATION REQUESTED. THE REPLY ALSO SAYS SLATER IS 'FORTUNATE' THE MINISTER'S OFFICE HAS RECENTLY RECEIVED A SIMILAR REQUEST, SO 'THE INFORMATION IS TO HAND'. WE ASKED THE MINISTER A SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TIMING OF THESE RELEASES, INCLUDING WHETHER THIS AMOUNTED TO PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT FOR HER FRIEND SLATER. A SPOKESWOMAN SAID ALL OIA REQUESTS ARE DEALT WITH ACCORDING TO THE ACT AND SHE MAKES NO APOLOGY FOR PROVIDING INFORMATION IF IT'S AT-HAND, IS CORRECT AND RESOURCES ALLOW. NOW, WE'VE ASKED JUDITH COLLINS REPEATEDLY TO COME ON THE NATION THIS WEEK AND SENT THE DOCUMENTS IN FULL TO HER LATE YESTERDAY. SHE'S DECLINED OUR REQUEST FOR AN INTERVIEW, BUTALONG WITH HER REPLY HAS SENT US THIS EMAIL, DATED FEBRUARY THE 5TH 2013, SHOWING HER OFFICE PREPARED A REPLY ON CORRESPONDENCE ABOUT THE BINNIE AND FISHER REPORTS AWEEK BEFORE SHE RELEASED SIMILAR INFORMATION TO CAMERON SLATER. WE'VE SHOWN THE DOCUMENTS TO GREEN PARTY CO-LEADER RUSSEL NORMAN. WELCOME BACK. AND LABOUR MP GRAND ROBERTSON JOINS US FROM WELLINGTON. GOOD MORNING, GRANT ROBERTSON. WELL, HERE WE HAVE IT, GUYS, AN EMAIL RESPONSE -AN OIA RESPONSE IN 37 MINUTES. GRANT ROBERTSON, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT? WELL, THATS PRETTY MUCH UNHEARD OF, PATRICK. IT'S A GOOD TIME FOR A PIZZA DELIVERY - 37 MINUTES - BUT YOU'D NEVER EXPECT THAT FROM AN OIA. I'VE BEEN AT BOTH ENDS OF THIS PROCESS, BOTH LOOKING OIAS GOING OUT AND REQUESTING THEM. THIS LOOKS LIKE FAVOURABLE TREATMENT FOR SOMEONE, AND IT FITS INTO A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR THAT WE'VE SEEN FROM JUDITH COLLINS WITH RELATION TO CAMERON SLATER. FRIDAY NIGHT HAVING A REQUEST PROCESSED, IT JUST DOESN'T HAPPEN. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, HIS REQUEST DID COINCIDE WITH OTHER REQUESTS. I MEAN, SURELY, PERHAPS IT WAS JUSTA COINCIDENCE? I THINK THERE'S BEEN ONE TOO MANY COINCIDENCES HERE. WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE IS THAT CAMERON SLATER KNOWS WHAT TO ASK FOR, AND THAT'S THE SAME SITUATION WITH THE SIS, JASON EDE AND JOHN KEY'S OFFICE, THAT THERE ARE CLEARLY CONVERSATIONS GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND, AND THIS IS THE PROBLEM HERE. WE'VE GOT FROM JOHN KEY DOWN THROUGH JUDITH COLLINS AND NOW WE HEAR HUNDREDS OF COMMENTS FROM MINISTERIAL STAFF ON CAMERON SLATER'S BLOG. IT'S ALL PART OF THE MODUS OPERANDI OF THIS JOHN KEY GOVERNMENT TO BE ABLE TO FEED MATERIAL TO A BLOGGER WHO THEN INCITES HATE. THAT'S WHAT THIS GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME. RUSSEL NORMAN, I WANT TO BRING YOU IN HERE. I MEAN, WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THIS SUPER-FAST EMAIL SERVICE TO CAMERON SLATER? I MEAN, I AGREE WITH WHAT GRANT SAID, AND I THINK WHAT IT SHOWS IS A SYSTEM. SO, YOU KNOW, THE NATIONAL PARTY OVER THE COURSE OF ITS GOVERNMENT HAS ESTABLISHED A SYSTEM WHERE YOU HAVE THE KIND OF FRIENDLY FACE OF THE GOVERNMENT OVER HERE, AND THEN BEHIND THE SCENES THEY'RE WORKING DIRECTLY WITH SLATER. AND SO HE'S THE DARK OPERATIONS AND DOES ALL THE REALLY NASTY ATTACK STUFF, BUT HE'S DOING IT HAND IN GLOVE WITH JOHN KEY, JUDITH COLLINS AND ALL THE REST OF THEM. IT'S THE SYSTEM THAT THEY ESTABLISHED THAT KEEPS THEM LOOKING NICE AND CLEAN AND FRIENDLY WHILE AT THE SAME RUNNING THESE ATTACK CAMPAIGNS AGAINST ANYONE THAT GETS IN THEIR WAY. THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF THAT, THOUGH, BECAUSE HE'S DONE EVERYTHING WITHIN THE LAW. WE KNOW THAT THE OIA IS TIGHTLY GOVERNED. I MEAN, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT, THAT HE JUST HASN'T LOOKED AT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE MEDIA AND SAID, 'HEY, I'M GOING TO PUT IN SOMETHING ON THIS'? THIS IS A PART OF A BROADER PATTERN. I MEAN, THERE'S MASSES OF MATERIAL THATS COME OUT NOW THAT SHOWS THE CLOSE WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND SOME OF ITS LEADING FIGURES AND SOME OF ITS STAFF, LIKE EDE, BUT ALSO COLLINS AND KEY, THEY WERE WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH WHALEOIL THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PERIOD. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IT'S A LOGICAL THING TO DO, I GUESS, FOR THEM. IT MEANS THAT THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'VE GOT CLEAN HANDS OVER HERE, BUTAT THE SAME TIME THEY'RE WORKING WITH SLATER ON ALL THE DIRTY STUFF, AND EDE'S OBVIOUSLY ONE OF THE CONDUITS AS WELL. YOU KNOW, IT'S A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD APPROACH, IN THE SENSE THAT IT MAKES SENSE, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY HOW I THINK NZERS WANT THEIR GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE. SURE. GRANT ROBERTSON, LOOKING THIS WEEK AT THE REVELATIONS ABOUT THE SIS OIA TO CAMERON SLATER ABOUT PHIL GOFF, WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THE PRIME MINISTER'S EXPLANATION THAT WHEN HE HIMSELF, ACTUALLY, AS WE SAW IN THE YOUTUBE VIDEO THIS WEEK OF HIS POST-CABINET PRESS CONFERENCE, WHEN HE SAID 'ME', HE ACTUALLY MEANT 'MY OFFICE'? YEAH, IT'S VERY HARD TO BELIEVE. I MEAN, WE'VE NOW GOT HIM SAYING THAT; WE'VE GOT REFERENCE FROM WARREN TUCKER TO DISCUSSIONS WITH THE PRIME MINISTER. I THINK IT'S QUITE CLEAR THAT THE PRIME MINISTER DID KNOW ABOUT THIS. BUT, AGAIN, I COME BACK TO THE FACT THAT IN THIS SITUATION, CAMERON SLATER KNEW WHAT TO ASK FOR, AND THE REASON HE KNEW WAS BECAUSE A PERSON WITH THE JOB TITLE SENIOR ADVISER TO JOHN KEY WAS WORKING WITH HIM - THAT'S JASON EDE. THIS GOES RIGHT BACK TO JOHN KEY. AND IF HE'S CONDONING THIS KIND OF POLITICS, THEN THE REST OF THE MINISTERS AND THE STAFF IN THE GOVERNMENT WILL FOLLOW ON. AND IAGREE WITH RUSSEL ON THIS - THIS IS THE KIND OF POLITICS NZERS HATE, AND IT'S BEEN DRIVEN RIGHT FROM JOHN KEY'S OFFICE. NOW, I WANT TO TURN NOW TO ECONOMIC POLICY, AND LABOURAND THE GREENS OBVIOUSLY HOPING TO PUTA GOVERNMENT TOGETHER VERY SHORTLY. I WANT TO LOOK AT YOUR TAX POLICY. NOW, LISTEN, LABOUR, YOU WANT 36 CENTS IN THE DOLLAR OVER 150,000. THE GREENS, YOU WANT 4O CENTS IN THE DOLLAR ON OVER 140,000. THIS IS THE TAX RATE, THE TOP TAX RATE, AND YOU CAN'T AGREE. YOU'VE GOTA MONTH TO GO. WHO WINS? GRANT ROBERTSON, WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO PUT YOURS UP? (CHUCKLES) LOOK, WE'RE GOING OUT WITH WHAT WE THINK IS THE BEST PACKAGE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PAY DEBT, THAT WE GO INTO SURPLUS- WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PAY DEBT, THAT WE GO INTO SURPLUS- WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO-? WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PAY DEBT, THAT WE GO INTO SURPLUS- WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO-? ...AND THAT WE TAX PEOPLE AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GO OUT WITH WHAT IS OUR MESSAGE, AND THE VOTERS WILL JUDGE US ON WHETHER WE'VE GOT THE PACKAGE TO REDUCE CHILD POVERTY AND ALSO PAY DOWN DEBT AND BE IN SURPLUS. YEAH, I THINK EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT, BUT WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO RAISE THE TOP TAX RATE IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE GREENS? WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO DO THE NEGOTIATIONS ON THE NATION THIS MORNING. THE REALITY OF MMP IS THAT THERE ARE ALWAYS NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT PARTIES. THATS WHAT HAPPENS. ARE ALWAYS NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN DIFFERENT PARTIES. THATS WHAT HAPPENS. DON'T THE VOTERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO KNOW, GRANT ROBERTSON, IF YOUR TOP TAX RATE IS MOVEABLE TO EVEN HIGHER AS SOON AS YOU GET INTO THOSE NEGOTIATING ROOMS? BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST THING YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT. THIS IS HOW YOU PAY FOR EVERYTHING. SO DON'T THE VOTERS HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW? CAN YOU SHIFT IT UP, OR IS IT ROCK SOLID AT WHERE YOU'VE GOT IT? WE'VE PUT OUT WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE RIGHT POLICY, AND WE WILL SIT DOWN AFTER THE ELECTION AND WORK WITH WHOEVER THE VOTERS OF NZ PUT UP. AND WE WILL SIT DOWN AFTER THE GREAT, $0 YOU'RE SAYING-? THE VOTERS OF NZ PUT UP. AND WE WILL SIT DOWN AFTER THE GREAT, $0 YOU'RE SAYING-? WE THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT BALANCE. WE'LL TAKE THATAS YOU'RE PREPARED TO PUT THE TAX RATE UP. NOW, TURNING TO YOU, RUSSEL NORMAN- I DON'T THINK I SAID THAT. TO PUT THE TAX RATE UP. NOW, TURNING TO YOU, RUSSEL NORMAN- I DON'T THINK I SAID THAT. NOT TO PUT WORDS IN GRANTS MOUTH, BUT, YEAH, GO ON. YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF YOU, RUSSEL NORMAN, I MEAN, LABOUR WANTS TO STICK TO THE $1.5 BILLION SPENDING CAP. DAVID PARKER, THE FINANCE SPOKESPERSON, SAID THAT. ARE YOU PREPARED TO STICK INSIDE THAT $1.5 BILLION SPENDING CAP AS WELL IF YOU GO INTO A GOVERNMENT WITH LABOUR? AND YOU- WELL, I'D SAY- IF YOU GO INTO A GOVERNMENT WITH LABOUR? AND YOU- WELL, I'D SAY- < SO THINKING HARD, ARE YOU? IF YOU GO INTO A GOVERNMENT WITH LABOUR? AND YOU- AND WE GOT THEM INDEPENDENTLY AUDITED BY INFOMETRICS, AND SO WHAT THEY SHOW IS THAT THE GREENS ARE RUNNING LARGER SURPLUSES THAN THE NATIONAL PARTY, RIGHT - $2.2 BILLION. ARE YOU PREPARED TO STICK WITHIN THE $1.5 BILLION SPENDING CAP THAT DAVID PARKER HAS SET? BECAUSE HE HAS EFFECTIVELY SAID, 'YOU PLAY BY OUR RULES OR YOU DON'T PLAY AT ALL.' AND SO WHAT EACH PARTY NEEDS TO DO IS GO TO THE ELECTION ON THEIR PLATFORM, SO WE'VE PUT OUT OUR FISCALS VERY CLEAR - YOU CAN LOOK AT ALL OF THEM. WE'VE GOT THEM AUDITED BY INFOMETRICS. YOU CAN CHECK THEM OUT, RIGHT, AND LABOUR'S PUT OUT THEIRS. AND THEN DEPENDING ON- SO THE VOTERS THEN MAKE THE DECISION, DEPENDING ON LABOUR GETS SO MANY VOTES, GREEN GETS SO MANY VOTES, THEN WE HAVE TO NEGOTIATE POST-ELECTION. AND THE INFLUENCE OF EACH PARTY IN A DEMOCRACY SHOULD BE BASED ON HOW MANY VOTES THEY GET, AND SO THAT'S HOW IT'LL WORK. SO, YOU KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT THE TOP TAX RATE - THE REASON WE PUT THAT IN THERE FOR EACH DOLLAR OVER 140 K WAS TO PAY FORA BIG PACKAGE OF CHILD POVERTY REDUCTION. FOR EACH DOLLAR OVER 140 K AND SO WE THINK THAT THAT'S A CRITICAL INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE OF NZ, AND WE'LL BE GOING TO THE TABLE ARGUING THAT. LABOUR HAS A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT APPROACH, AND WE'LL OBVIOUSLY HAVE TO NEGOTIATE. AND HOW MUCH INFLUENCE EACH SIDE HAS DEPENDS ON THE VOTES. THAT'S HOWA DEMOCRACY WORKS. WELL, HERE'S A QUESTION FOR GRANT ROBERTSON. THIS WEEK WHEN THE GREENS LAUNCHED THAT POLICY, THEY SAID THAT THEY WANT TO DO AN AUDIT - AN AUDIT OF YOUR COSTINGS. HOW DO YOU FEELABOUT THAT? I MEAN, SHOULD YOU AUDIT THEIRS OR WHAT? (CHUCKLES) LOOK, OUR COSTINGS HAVE BEEN OUT THERE SINCE JUNE. YEAH, BUT DO YOU WANT TO AUDIT THE GREENS' COSTINGS? BECAUSE THIS IS THE STAGE WE'RE AT WHEN YOU GUYS ARE TRYING TO GETA GOVERNMENT TOGETHER AND YOU DON'T TRUST EACH OTHER'S FIGURES ENOUGH, YOU WANT TO BRING IN INDEPENDENT AUDITORS. NO, LOOK, OUR FIGURES WILL STAND ON THEIR OWN MERITS. THE GREENS' FIGURES WILL STAND ON THEIR MERITS. WE PUT OURS OUT IN JUNE. WE'VE GOTA FULLY COSTED POLICY THERE. EVERYONE CAN LOOK AT IT. IT'S BEEN THERE SINCE JUNE. NO ONE'S BLOWN ANY HOLES IN IT. WE'RE VERY CONFIDENT OF OUR COSTINGS. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S A MATTER OF DUE DILIGENCE, OF MAKING SURE THAT WE'VE GOT THE NUMBERS RIGHT, COS THE CHALLENGE FOR US IS TO PUT ITALL TOGETHER. I MEAN, GRANTS RIGHT. NOW, LISTEN, AHEAD ON THE NATION, WE'LL CUT THROUGH ALL THE DIRTY POLITICS AND SPIN. WHAT DO WE KNOW FOR SURE? INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS ANDREA VANCE AND DAVID FISHER WEIGH IN ON THE PANEL. BUT ON THE WAY TO THE BREAK, IT'S POLITICS IN 60 SECONDS. THE BIG QUESTION THIS WEEK - AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF AN EMAIL FALLS IN A FOREST AND NO ONE'S THERE TO HACK IT, CAN IT STILL BECOME A BOOK? WHAT'S-? WHATS THIS? OH, THAT'S A GIFT FROM MY SIS. THAT'S SCREAMING LEFT-WING SMEAR CHAMPAGNE. OH, THAT'S VERY SMEARY, ISN'T IT? LOVELY. AND THAT'S A LOVELY SUIT TOO, BY THE WAY. OH, THAT'S VERY SMEARY, ISN'T IT? LOVELY. AND THAT'S A LOVELY SUIT TOO, BY THE WAY. THANK YOU. I JUST GOT THIS ONE. LOVELY. AND THAT'S A LOVELY EXPENSIVE? THANK YOU. I JUST GOT THIS ONE. LOVELY. AND THAT'S A LOVELY EXPENSIVE? I DIDN'T PAY FOR IT. LOVELY. AND THATS A LOVELY NAH, THE DOOR TO THE SHOP WAS WIDE OPEN. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT JUST MEANS 'HELP YOURSELF'. DOESN'T IT? YEAH. THE BIG QUESTION THIS WEEK -AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHERE IS COMMUNICATIONS ADVISER JASON EDE? THIS WEEK -AT THE END OF THE DAY, COMMUNICATIONS ADVISER JASON EDE HAS JUST ENLISTED THE SERVICES OF A COMMUNICATIONS ADVISER. ANY ADVICE? HAS JUST ENLISTED THE SERVICES OF A COMMUNICATIONS ADVISER. ANY ADVICE? HAS JUST ENLISTED THE SERVICES OF (CHUCKLES) GUTLESS. YEAH. WELL, COMPARED TO A WHALE, DEFINITELY. BUT THEN THEY'VE GOT MASSIVE GUTS. HAVEN'T THEY? DOUBLE THE GUTS. BUT THE BIG QUESTION THIS WEEK - WHEN THIS DAY ENDS, WHYARE SO MANY WORDS MISSING FROM THE COLLINS DICTIONARY? I CAN'T FIND SORRY. I CAN'T FIND GUILTY. I CAN'T FIND RESIGN. WELL, THIS IS WHY SHE'S THE JUSTICE MINISTER. WHY? WELL, THIS IS WHY SHE'S THE JUSTICE MINISTER. WHY? COS WHEN YOU ASK HER SOMETHING, SHE GOES 'JUST IS'. WHY? COS WHEN YOU ASK HER SOMETHING, THANK YOU. IS THIS OUR LAST ONE OF THESE? COS WHEN YOU ASK HER SOMETHING, THANK YOU. IS THIS OUR LAST ONE OF THESE? NO, LAST WEEK WAS THE LAST ONE. THIS IS THE LAST, LAST ONE. IS THIS OUR LAST ONE OF THESE? NO, LAST WEEK WAS THE LAST ONE. NO. CHEERS. HAVE, FRANKLY, LEFT MANY CONFUSED, BUTAFTER 10 DAYS OF QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, THREE MAIN ISSUES HAVE DOMINATED ABOUTA WEBSITE, A PHONE NUMBER AND AN OFFICIAL INFORMATION REQUEST. WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THESE THREE STORIES? TORBEN AKEL BOILS IT DOWN. OVER THE PAST 1O DAYS, THERE HAVE BEEN CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF MISDEEDS AND IMMORALITY AT THE BEEHIVE FOLLOWING THE RELEASE OF NICKY HAGER'S BOOK. IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, THE PRIME MINISTER DESCRIBED THE BOOK'S CONTENTS AS... A WHOLE LOT OF DOTS THAT CAN'T BE CONNECTED. NOW, THOUGH, WITH MORE AND MORE DOTS APPEARING, HAGER'S CONNECTIONS ARE STARTING TO FIRM UP. SO WHAT, THEN, DO WE NOW KNOW? THE BOOK CLAIMED THAT THE PM AND HIS OFFICE COLLUDED WITH BLOGGER CAMERON SLATER OVER THE RELEASE OF SIS PAPERS IN ORDER TO EMBARRASS PHIL GOFF. HAGER SAYS... BUT KEY HAS CONSISTENTLY DENIED THAT. CATEGORICALLY CAN TELL YOU I WAS NOT INVOLVED WITH THAT PROCESS PRIOR TO IT BEING RELEASED. AND ON THURSDAY FORMER SIS DIRECTOR WARREN TUCKER AND THE CHIEF OMBUDSMAN BOTH SAID IT WAS JUST KEY'S OFFICE THAT WAS BRIEFED, NOT KEY HIMSELF. ON FRIDAY, THOUGH, THIS 2011 CLIP EMERGED OF KEY REFERRING TO TUCKER'S INFORMATION RELEASE TO SLATER. KEY NOW SAYS WHEN HE SAID 'ME' THERE, HE MEANT HIS OFFICE. SO THE FACTS REMAIN UNCLEAR. ALSO IN 2011 WAS THE WELL-PUBLICISED BREACH OF THE LABOUR WEBSITE AND DOWNLOADING OF SENSITIVE DATA ABOUT DONORS AND SUPPORTERS. HAGER CLAIMS... AND IN PARTICULAR, FORMER BEEHIVE AIDE JASON EDE. KEY HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT EDE ACCESSED THE WEBSITE BUT NOT THAT HE DOWNLOADED ANY DATA. IF THE WALLABIES LEFT THEIR STARTING LINE-UP UP ON THEIR WEBSITE, WOULD THE ALL BLACKS GO AND HAVE A LOOK? THE ANSWER IS YES. THE REASON I KNOW THAT IS IT'S HAPPENED. SERIOUS QUESTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN ASKED ABOUT JUDITH COLLINS' CLOSE TIES WITH SLATER AND, IN PARTICULAR, HER ROLE IN HIS NAMING OF A CML SERVANT SLATER THEN ACCUSED OF LEAKING INFORMATION ABOUT BILL ENGLISH. HAGER SAYS... KEY FIRST SAID HE WOULDN'T LOOK INTO THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST COLLINS. SHE'S UTTERLY REFUTED THEM. BUT THIS WEEK, FACED WITH THIS EMAIL SHOWING SHE GAVE PLEASANTS' PHONE NUMBERS TO SLATER, KEY USED HIS NEW WORD OF CHOICE - 'UNWISE'. THERE ARE SOME DETAILS THERE WHICH I THINK IT'S UNWISE OF A MINISTER TO PASS ON. YOUR PRIVATE INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF PHONE NUMBERS, ITHINK THAT'S UNWISE. TIME NOW TO WELCOME TODAY'S PANEL, AND SITTING ALONGSIDE PADDY WE HAVE FAIRFAX POLITICAL REPORTER ANDREA VANCE AND NZ HERALD SENIOR REPORTER AND AUTHOR DAVID FISHER. WELCOME TO YOU ALL. I'M WONDERING, THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TOOK TO GET THOSE OIA REQUESTS BACK TO CAMERON SLATER, WHEN'S THE FASTEST TIME YOU'VE HAD INFORMATION COME PINGING BACK TO YOU? 37 MINUTES? 37 MINUTES IS A BIT OF A RECORD, I THINK. I'M GONNA BE THE VOICE OF REASON HERE, THOUGH, AND SAY THAT I TOO HAVE HAD OIA REQUESTS BACK QUICKLY, IN THE SAME DAY, WITHIN A COUPLE OF HOURS, WHEN ANOTHER MEDIA ENTITY HAS MADE THE SAME REQUEST, SO THAT'S NOT UNUSUAL, AND IT'S NOT JUST BEEN FROM THE JUSTICE MINISTER'S OFFICE; IT'S BEEN FROM GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS, OTHER MINISTER'S OFFICES, SO IT'S NOT ENTIRELY ALTOGETHER UNUSUAL IF THE SAME REQUEST IS MADE, THEN, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE OIA, THEY HAVE TO GIVE THE INFORMATION OUT, AND THERE'S NO DIFFERENTIATING THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THIS CASE. DAVID FISHER, DO YOU SEE ANYTHING UNUSUAL IN IT? WELL, THATS WHAT'S HAPPENED IN ONE OF THESE CASES. IN THE OTHER CASE, THE ONE WHICH INVOLVED THE LETTER FROM MICHAEL GUEST, THAT LETTER HAD REALLY PERSONAL INFORMATION IN ITABOUT DAVID BANE. THAT LETTER HAD REALLY PERSONAL INFORMATION IN ITABOUT DAVID BANE. QUITE INFLAMMATORY INFORMATION. THAT LETTER HAD REALLY PERSONAL INFORMATION IN ITABOUT DAVID BANE. QUITE INFLAMMATORY INFORMATION. INCREDIBLY INFLAMMATORY INFORMATION, BINNIE WAS HAVING A ROW WITH MINISTER COLLINS AT THE TIME. UH, THAT IT ARRIVED IN HER OFFICE ON THAT DAY AND WENT STRAIGHT OUTAGAIN ON THAT DAY. I'VE NEVER HAD THAT. YEAH, I THINK WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS, 'YES, YOU CAN GET THINGS BACK IN 37 MINUTES', ALTHOUGH I HAVE TO SAY, IT DOES SOUND LIKE A BIT OF A MOVIE TITLE, DOESN'T IT? OFFICIAL INFORMATION IN 37 MINUTES STARRING JUDITH COLLINS AND WHALEOIL. BUT ONE OF THE ISSUES HERE, I THINK, IS THIS IS INFORMATION THAT SUITS JUDITH COLLINS' NARRATIVE THAT IS GETTING TO HER FRIEND WHALEOIL, WHO IS APPLYING FOR IT DIRECTLY TO THE MINISTER'S EMAIL, AND, I THINK, WHETHER THERE IS ANY SORT OF COLLUSION BEHIND THE SCENES, WHETHER THERE IS 'NOD AND A WINK'-TYPE STUFF PUT IN, SOMEONE'S ASKED- THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THAT. THERE'S NO SMOKING GUN. NO, BUT THE ISSUE HERE- THE OIA ITSELF, AWONDERFUL PIECE OF LEGISLATION BECAUSE IT SAYS GOVERNMENT IS FOR EVERYBODY; WE'RE ALL ENTITLED TO HAVE A ROLE IN THAT. AND WHEN SOME PEOPLE HAVE MORE A ROLE IN THAT ORA GREATER ENTITLEMENT THAN OTHERS, THEN IT EXCLUDES THE OTHER PARTIES. THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT HERE. HER NARRATIVE, HER LINE THAT SHE'S PUSHING, AS PADDY SAYS, UM, THE OIA OPERATES- IT SAYS IN THE LAW IT'S THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW THAT COUNTS. SPIRITS SUPPORTED BY FAITH. WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN NICKY HAGER'S BOOK DEGRADES THE FAITH. AND INTO THAT SPACE, QUESTIONS COME. WAS SHE DOING FAVOURS? DID WHALEOIL GETA NOD? WELL, GIVEN THAT THE SIS IS LOOKING INTO WHETHER WHALEOIL GOTA NOD, WHETHER CAMERON SLATER GOTA NOD, WHETHER THAT WAS APPROPRIATE DECLASSIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS, DO YOU THINK, ANDREA, THAT SOMEONE NEEDS TO BE AUDITING JUDITH COLLINS' OFFICE'S RESPONSE? I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A MORE ROBUST WATCHDOG OF THE WHOLE OIA PROCESS. I MEAN, GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS KNOW NOW THAT THE OMBUDSMAN IS SO UNDER-RESOURCED, SO STRETCHED, THE VOLUME OF COMPLAINTS CAN'T BE INVESTIGATED. WE HAVE AN... UM, OIA COMPLAINT THATA FORMER STAFF MEMBER FROM OUR OFFICE PUT IN TWO YEARS AGO, AND IT'S STILL BEING LOOKED AT. I MEAN, TWO YEARS TO WAIT FOR A RESPONSE IS JUST CRAZY, AND GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS AND MINISTERS ARE ABUSING THIS. THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN REFUSE OIAS, AND THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NOTHING JOURNALISTS CAN DO ABOUT IT BECAUSE TWO, THREE YEARS DOWN THE TRACK'S NO USE. THE STORY'S LONG GONE. EVEN THE REPORTER'S LONG GONE FROM THE OFFICE. EVERY DAY IS A VICTORY. PUSH IT BACK ONE MORE DAY. EVERY DAY IS A VICTORY. SO, IN TERMS OF THE BIGGER PICTURE, WE ALSO HAD THE PRIME MINISTER HERE OUT ON THE ROAD, AND EVERY DAY HE'S ASKED ABOUT 'DIRTY POLITICS'. HOW IS THIS STARTING TO LOOK FOR HIM? IS HE PHASED ATALL? ARE THE FEATHERS RUMPLED? I THINK THEY'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN RUMPLED, AND HE HAS HAD TO MOVE QUICKLY. WE SAW IN TORBEN'S TRACK THERE THE CHANGE OF LANGUAGE TO 'UNWISE' AND THEN BY THE END OF THE WEEK TO THE HACKER STEALING THE ELECTION, JOHN KEY HAVING TO CHANGE HIS FRAMING ALONG THE WAY, ALTHOUGH AT THE SAME TIME REMAINING IN THAT DEFENSIVE CROUCH. AND I THINK HE WILL LOOK BACK ON IT AND WONDER WHY HE DIDN'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT JASON EDE, WHY HE DIDN'T ACTAGAINST JASON EDE AND WHY HE IS SO SCARED OF DOING SOMETHING ABOUT JUDITH COLLINS, BECAUSE BOTH OF THEM ARE JUST BAGGAGE THAT JOHN KEY DOESN'T NEED. IT'S NOT TOO LATE FOR HIM TO DO ANYTHING. HE'LL LOOK LIKE HE'S DOING A U-TURN, BUT HE WILL BE WONDERING RIGHT NOW WHY HE DIDN'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT THOSE TWO. DAVID FISHER, SHOULD HE HAVE MOVED LAST THURSDAY? (SIGHS) HE WAS VERY- AT THAT POINT, I DON'T THINK HE REALISED THE RISK THAT WAS THERE, AND THAT RISK BECAME QUITE CLEAR ONCE THE HACKER POPPED UP ON WHALEDUMP ON THE MONDAY. AND NOW EVERY TIME HE DENIES SOMETHING, HE FACES THE RISK OF PROOF POPPING UP, OR WHAT APPEARS TO BE PROOF POPPING UP. AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE REASON HE'S SHIFTED HIS APPROACH, ACTUALLY. HE CAN'T DEAL WITH THE ALLEGATIONS HEAD-ON COS HE DOESN'T KNOW WHATS COMING. THE BIG QUESTION FOR ME IS WHY HE DIDN'T ACTAGAINST JASON EDE. I MEAN, I DO THINK THEY WERE AMBUSHED SOMEWHAT BY THE BOOK, OBVIOUSLY. THEY THOUGHT THAT THEY HAD IT UNDER CONTROL. THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE CONTROLLING THE MESSAGE. THEN IT COMPLETELY UNRAVELLED THIS WEEK. WHY THEY DIDN'T CAUTERIZE IT BY ACTING AGAINST JASON EDE IS A BIG QUESTION. YOU'VE GOTTAASK - WHAT'S JASON EDE GOT THAT THE PRIME MINISTER'S TOO FRIGHTENED TO ACT? I DON'T THINK THAT HE WOULD'VE SACKED JUDITH COLLINS, NOT SO CLOSE TO AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN. WHATABOUT AFTER THE ELECTION? LET'S SAY THEY'RE BACK IN GOVERNMENT. HE DOESN'T DO ANYTHING AT THE MOMENT. IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE ELECTION, AS PADDY SAYS. WHAT HAPPENS TO JUDITH COLLINS AFTER THE ELECTION? WELL, I'LL TELL YOU WHATS HAPPENED TO JUDITH COLLINS THIS WEEK. THE CRUSHER HAS BEEN CRUSHED. ANY HOPE THAT SHE HAS OF FUTURE POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AMBITIONS, WHICH AT THE START OF THE YEAR WERE ACTUALLY REALLY QUITE REAL, ARE GONE. JUDITH COLLINS I NOT GOING TO BE LEADER OF THE NATIONAL PARTY WITH A BACKSTORY THAT HAS A WHOPPING GREAT BOOK CALLED 'DIRTY POLITICS' IN IT WITH ANOTHER BIG CHAPTER CALLED 'ORAVIDA' IN IT AND A WHOLE LOT OF UNFLATTERING TELEVISION APPEARANCES IN BETWEEN. IT'S OVER FOR HER, AND I'LL TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT HAS HAPPENED - WHILE JUDITH COLLINS HAS BEEN CRASHING, PAULA BENNETT HAS BEEN RISING. IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE WHO IS GOING TO SUCCEED JOHN KEY, BE ITAT NEXT TERM OR THE TERM AFTER, PAULA BENNETT IS NOW FLAT IN THE PICTURE, COS THE OTHER GUY, STEVEN JOYCE, SAT WHERE YOU'RE SITTING, ANDREA, AND HE DID NOT LOOK LIKE A PRIME MINISTER THREE WEEKS AGO EITHER. SO, SHE'S STILL GONNA HAVE A MAJOR PORTFOLIO AFTER THE ELECTION IF THEY'RE IN GOVERNMENT. IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE. I WATCHED EVENTS UNFOLD THIS WEEK, AND CERTAINLY THE NARRATIVE AND THE GOSS- SPECULATION AROUND ABOUT IS 'OH, SHE'S GONE. SHE'S GONE POST-ELECTION.' BUT SHE IS A VERY SENIOR MINISTER, AND SHE IS- DESPITE THIS TERRIBLE YEAR, SHE IS A VERY CAPABLE MINISTER AS WELL, SO lT'D BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHETHER KEY ACTS AGAINST HER POST-ELECTION, BUT I THINK THAT THIS IS SHAPING UP TO VERY MUCH BE THE STORY OF- IF NATIONAL GETATHIRD TERM, THE BIG ISSUE EVERYONE'S GONNA BE LOOKING AT IS WHAT IS JOHN KEY'S SUCCESSION PLAN? WHO'S GONNA BE THE NEXT LEADER OF THE NATIONAL PARTY?' WELL, WATCH THIS SPACE. AND THERE IS MORE TO COME AFTER THE BREAK. WE'LL BE BACK IN A MOMENT. PADDY GOWER, ANDREA VANCE AND DAVID FISHER. WE WERE TALKING ABOUT 'DIRTY POLITICS' BEFORE. DOES THIS REALLY MATTER TO VOTERS BEYOND THESE FOUR WALLS? DO PEOPLE OUTSIDE, THE REAL PUBLIC, DO THEY CARE? I THINK IT SHOULD DO, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT DOES. < WHY SHOULD IT? I THINK IT SHOULD DO, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT DOES. < WHY SHOULD IT? UH, THEY'RE VERY KEY, FUNDAMENTAL I THINK IT SHOULD DO, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT DOES. AVERY PRECIOUS THING. UH, ITALLEGES ATTACKS ON SOME REALLY FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. BUT I WONDER WHETHER OR NOT IT'S JUST POLITICAL GEEKS THAT ARE GONNA GET OBSESSED ABOUT THOSE THINGS. ANDREA? YEAH, IAGREE. I MEAN, THEY ARE IMPORTANT ISSUES, AND IT IS ABOUT TRUTH AND INTEGRITY OF POLITICIANS, BUT I WONDER IF THE REAL LOSERS OUT OF THIS IN THE LONG RUN ARE GONNE BE THE MEDIA, BECAUSE, AND THIS IS A BIT NAVAL-GAZING, BUT I WONDER, ARE WE DOING VOTERS A DISSERVICE? IT'S NOT THAT WE SHOULDN'T ASK THESE QUESTIONS; WE ABSOLUTELY SHOULD HOLD THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE JUSTICE MINISTER AND EVERYONE ELSE INVOLVED IN THIS TO ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, IT SHOULD NOT BE AT THE EXPENSE OF IMPORTANT DEBATES ABOUT POLICY, AND THIS WEEK, EVERY SINGLE PRESS CONFERENCE WITH THE PRIME MINISTER HAS BEEN DOMINATED BY THIS ISSUE AT THE EXPENSE OF ISSUES THAT ARE ACTUALLY REALLY FUNDAMENTAL TO THIS CAMPAIGN - THE ECONOMY, THE ENVIRONMENT, HOUSING - THINGS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS MORNING. OK, WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, THEN. WE HAD RUSSEL NORMAN IN HERE WITH AMYADAMS. WHO CAME OFF BETTER OUT OF THAT, DO YOU THINK, PADDY? YEAH, I THINK IT WAS A BIT OF A TWO-WAY THING, WASN'T IT? THEY WERE AT JUST COMPLETE ODDS WITH EACH OTHER, AND WHAT I WAS ENJOYING WATCHING FROM OVER THERE IS JUST HOW OPPOSITE THE NATIONAL PARTYAND THE GREENS ARE ON THOSE SORTS OF ISSUES. I THOUGHT RUSSEL NORMAN LOOKED PERFECTLY FINE UP AGAINST THE MINISTER, BUT I ALSO THINK THE MINISTER DID PRETTY WELL TOO. YOU HAD RUSSEL NORMAN. IASKED HIM ABOUT WHETHER THEY'RE GONNA CHARGE FARMERS FOR WATER. AND WE KNOW THAT IN 2011 THEY HAD THAT POLICY. HE SAID THEY'LL PROBABLY KEEP IT. BUT HE WON'T SAY HOW MUCH. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT, ANDREA? WELL, ITHOUGHT IT WAS REALLY INTERESTING, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE CONTEXT THIS WEEK THAT GREENS HAVE SAID 'WE WANNA GO IN AND AUDIT LABOUR'S BOOKS, SO TO SPEAK. 'WE WANNA KNOW HOW MUCH THE POLICIES ARE GONNA COSTAND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING MARRIES. AND I THOUGHT, WELL, YOU CAN'T REALLY SAY THAT AND A FEW DAYS LATER REFUSE TO GIVE OUT DETAILED COSTINGS ABOUT YOUR OWN POLICY. IT'S A LITTLE OFF. BUT, YEAH, IT WAS INTERESTING. OBVIOUSLY IT'S SOMETHING THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT, COS IT WILL COST FARMERS A LOT OF MONEY. I LOVE THE THOUGHT OF RUSSEL NORMAN AND THE GREENS NEGOTIATING ATAX ON WATER WITH FARMERS. I MEAN, JUST... (LAUGHS) I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THOSE NEGOTIATIONS, COS IT'S GONNA BE SMOOTH (I) WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THAT, DAVID? BECAUSE DO YOU THINK THAT THEY SHOULD GO TO THE POLLS LAYING IT ALL OUT THERE SO THAT THEY HAVE THE MANDATE TO NEGOTIATE WITH FARMERS? IT'S AN INCREDIBLY PRECIOUS NATURAL RESOURCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BACK IN, UH... WHAT WAS IT? 10, 14, 15 YEARS AGO, WE HAD A ROYAL COMMISSION ON GE? UM, HAVING A PRECIOUS RESOURCE DICTATED TO BY POLITICAL IDEOLOGY JUST SEEMS A BIT ODD TO ME. IF IT'S THAT IMPORTANT, IT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT ON A DIFFERENT BASIS, RATHER THAN JUST AS AN ELECTION... WE ALSO HEARD ABOUT THE RMA. AND, I MEAN, IT'S HARD TO GET EXCITED ABOUT THAT, BUT IT IS WHETHER YOU CAN BUILD A DECK IN YOUR BACK YARD AND OTHER THINGS, BUT THERE YOU HAVE THE NATIONAL PARTY CLAIMING THAT THEIR WANT TO CHANGE THIS IS ALL ABOUT HOUSING SUPPLY, MAKING IT EASIER FOR THE AVERAGE GUY. SHE WAS ADAMANT, THE MINISTER WAS ADAMANT, IT IS NOT GOING TO WEAKEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS AT ALL IF WE MAKE THESE CHANGES. ADAMANT, IT IS NOT GOING TO WEAKEN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS AT ALL IF WE MAKE THESE CHANGES. BUT THEIR COALITION PARTNERS SAY THAT IT IS. I MEAN, MAORI PARTY AND UNITED FUTURE ARE REFUSING TO BACK THEM IN THIS LEGISLATION BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IT ATTACKS THE CONSERVATION VALUES OF THE ACT. THEY BELIEVES IT TAKES THEM AWAY FUNDAMENTALLY. SO IT'S JUST REALLY INTERESTING THAT THEY BANG ON ABOUT WANTING TO FIX THE HOUSING PROBLEM AND THIS IS THE SOLUTION TO THE HOUSING PROBLEM, WELL, THEN WHY NOT NEGOTIATE WITH UNITED FUTURE AND MAORI PARTY AND ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT CONSERVATION IF THEY DON'T... AS SHE SAYS, THEY DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH OF AN IMPACT, THEN SEPARATE THE TWO OUT AND FIX THE PROBLEM. YEAH, I MEAN, IALWAYS EXPLAIN IT TO PEOPLE LIKE THIS - IT'S VERY HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PASS WITH THE RMA. IT'S A VERY COMPLICATED PIECE OF LEGISLATION, BUT IT'S THE ONE PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT JOHN KEY HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET THROUGH, AND THAT SHOULD TELL YOU EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOWABOUT WHAT'S IN IT, BECAUSE THEY HAVE GOT THROUGH ASSET SALES, THE CASINO LAWAND EVERYTHING, BUT THIS IS THE ONE THAT CROSSED THE LINE, AND THAT GOES TO SHOW WHERE NATIONAL SITS ON IT. SO, THEN WE HAD A COUPLE OF OTHER POTENTIAL COALITION PARTNERS THERE WHEN WE SAW GRANT ROBERTSON AND RUSSEL NORMAN TOGETHER. DAVID, WHAT DID YOU THINK? WERE THEY WORKING TOGETHER IN THAT? DID THEY LOOK LIKE THEY CAN WORK TOGETHER? UH, YEAH. UM, WHEN THEY HAD THE CAMERAS ON THEM. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT SORT OF A GROWN-UP CONVERSATION THEY'RE GONNA HAVE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO WORK OUT HOW TO FORM A GOVERNMENT. THERE'S ONE INTERESTING THING I'VE NOTICED IS A HUGE SHIFT BETWEEN THE LABOUR-GREENS RELATIONSHIP, SAY, A YEAR AGO AND NOW. THEY ARE CLEARLY NOT TALKING TO EACH OTHER. LABOUR DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE GREENS WERE GOING TO SAY THIS WEEK IN TERMS OF THEIR COSTINGS. THE COMMUNICATION THAT WAS THERE BEFORE WHEN THEY WERE LAUNCHING POLICIES LIKE NZ POWER. UM, KIWI POWER? NZ POWER? THEY'RE JUST CLEARLY NOT HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION THAT THEY WERE PERHAPS UNDER DAVID SHEARER, AND I JUST THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING SHIFT. YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THE FACT THAT THEY CAN'T AGREE ON A TOP TAX RATE- IF THEY CAN'T ACTUALLY GO INTO THE SAME THING WITH THATAND ANNOUNCE AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY'RE GONNA STICK ON THE SAME THINGS, SO YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE THERE ARGUING, JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN COMMUNICATING. THEY SHOULD'VE HAD BASICS LIKE THAT NAILED DOWN SO THAT THEY COULD GO OUT TO THE VOTERS AND SAY 'WE AGREE ON THIS'. 'WE'RE AT ONE.' VOTERS AND SAY 'WE AGREE ON THIS'. 'WE'RE AT ONE.' YEAH, 'WE'RE AT ONE ON THIS.' THAT'S RIGHT. THEY WANT TO BE GMNG PEOPLE CONFIDENCE, AND I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD TAKE IT FROM THAT. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OUR PANELLISTS JOINING US THIS MORNING. NOW, LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT WHAT COULD BE IN THE NEWS NEXT WEEK. NATIONAL WILL LAUNCH ITS CAMPAIGN TODAY, AND SO WILL INTERNET MANA. LABOUR WILL MAKE A FISCAL ANNOUNCEMENT TOMORROW FOLLOWING THE OPENING OF THE GOVERNMENTS BOOKS LAST WEEK. AND JOHN KEY HEADS TO THE WEST COAST ON TUESDAY, WHERE HE'S LIKELY TO FACE SOME TOUGH QUESTIONS FROM THE PIKE RIVER FAMILIES. AND IN POLICY ANNOUNCEMENTS, EXPECT A JUSTICE SPEECH FROM ACT LEADER JAMIE WHYTE, A HOUSING ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE GREENS ON WEDNESDAY, WHILE WINSTON PETERS TALKS IMMIGRATION ON FRIDAY. AND HERE ON THE NATION NEXT WEEK - THE KIWI DREAM, OWNING YOUR OWN HOME. HOUSE PRICE RISES IN THE MAIN SECTIONS ARE ASTRONOMICAL, BUT IN THE REGIONS, THEYARE FLAT-LINING. WHATS TO BE DONE ABOUT OUR HOUSING CRISIS? NATIONAL'S NICK SMITH AND LABOUR'S PHIL TWYFORD DEBATE. THAT'S IT FOR OUR SHOW TODAY, LISA. NATIONAL'S NICK SMITH AND LABOUR'S PHIL TWYFORD DEBATE. THATS IT FOR OUR SHOW TODAY, LISA. IT WAS GREAT TO HAVE YOU WITH US. ENJOY THE REST OF YOUR WEEKEND. Clwmbym. Wwwablesom Capflomwmmadepocdble wlhmdhgfiomNZOnAk. COWIIIIAIJIO 2014