NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO THE NATION. I'M LISA OWEN. NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. AND I'M PATRICK GOWER. THIS WEEK - THE MONEY MEN OPEN THE BOOKS. NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. MORE INVESTMENT, MORE JOBS, AND, OF COURSE, A MORE PRODUCTIVE ECONOMY THAT CAN PAY MORE FOR THE JOBS THAT PEOPLE HAVE. WE'VE ACTUALLY GOT AN ENORMOUS AGENDA OF TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE FOR THE ECONOMY AND TO IMPROVE THE COUNTRY. THE DEPUTY LEADERS OF THE TWO MAIN PARTIES GO TOE-TO-TOE. BILL ENGLISH AND DAVID PARKER JOIN ME TO DEBATE TAX, WAGES AND THOSE THORNY COALITION OPTIONS. WHAT COMPROMISES ARE THEY PREPARED TO MAKE FOR THE SAKE OF POWER? THEN - IS THE HONEYMOON OVER FOR LAILA HARRE AND HONE HARAWIRA? (SINGS SONOROUSLY) THEY'VE GOT THEIR GAME FACE ON, BUT ARE THEY SINGING FROM THE SAME SONG SHEET? BOTH LEADERS ARE WITH US LIVE. PLUS, CORBETI' AND EGO; BRENDAN HORAN'S PROSPECTS; AND THE UPS AND DOWNS OF THE WEEK WITH OUR PANEL, HELEN KELLY AND FRAN O'SULLIVAN. OOPYRIGHTABLEZOM GREAT TO HAVE YOU WITH US. JUST TWO MORE EPISODES, ACTUALLY, OF THE NATION TO GO BEFORE ELECTION DAY, SO TODAY THE DEPUTIES DEBATE, THE TWO MEN WING TO BE THE NEXT FINANCE MINISTER. WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO OFFER YOU, AND DO THEIR SUMS ADD UP? WE'RE GMNG OVERA SIGNIFICANT CHUNK OF THE PROGRAMME TODAY TO HEAR FROM NATIONAL'S BILL ENGLISH AND LABOUR'S DAVID PARKER. AND MODERATING THE DEBATE, LISA OWEN. THANKS, PADDY, AND THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING. WE WANT TO START TODAY BY TALKING ABOUT TAX. IF I CAN COME TO YOU FIRST, MR ENGLISH. YOU'VE ALLOWED $1.5 BILLION OF ADDITIONAL SPENDING. HOW MUCH OF THAT IS GOING TO GO ON TAX CUTS? WELL, WE'VE ALLOWED ROUGHLYA BILLION FOR SPENDING ON HEALTH AND EDUCATION, WELFARE, POLICE AND SO ON, AND AROUND 500 MILLION EACH OF THE NEXT THREE YEARS IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, HAVE TAX CUTS. SO, HOW MUCH OF THAT WILL BE FOR TAX CUTS? WELL, AROUND THE 500 MILLION PER YEAR, AND YOU CAN ACCUMULATE THAT, BECAUSE OF COURSE 500 MILLION ON ITS OWN WOULD DELIVER A VERY SMALL TAX CUT. WE'VE TALKED FOR SOME TIME NOW ABOUT MODERATE TAX REDUCTIONS AND THAT'S IN THE CONTEXT OF A GOVERNMENT THAT'S BEEN CAREFUL ABOUT ITS SPENDING. WE CAN MANAGE GOOD PUBLIC SERVICES WITH CURRENT TAXES OR SLIGHTLY LOWER, WITH MODERATE TAX REDUCTIONS. THIS IS CONTRAST TO THE OPPOSITION PARTIES WHO WANT TO RAISE MANY MORE TAXES AND SPEND MORE MONEY. OK, WELL, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 500 MILLION ACCRUING AND YOU CAN GIVE MODERATE TAX CUTS, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR THRESHOLDS, THEN? WELL, WE HAVEN'T MADE ANY SPECIFIC DECISIONS ABOUT THAT. WE'VE SIMPLY INDICATED A DIRECTION TO REWARD HARD WORK, SAVINGS, INVESTMENT, EXPORTING, AND IF WE'RE RE-ELECTED, WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO THE DETAIL. WELL, YOU TALK ABOUT A REWARD THERE. SO, WHO EXACTLY WOULD YOU BE REWARDING? YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY SAID WORKING LOW- AND MIDDLE-INCOME NZERS, HARDWORKING. THATS RIGHT. LOW- AND MIDDLE-INCOME NZERS. WE THINK THE TAX STRUCTURE FOR INCOME TAX IS ABOUT RIGHT AT THE TOP END. THERE'S LESS OPPORTUNITIES FOR AVOIDANCE. PEOPLE ARE PAYING WHAT THEY SHOULD BE PAYING. AND ANY MODERATE TAX REDUCTIONS FROM HERE SHOULD BE FOR LOW- AND MIDDLE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. BUT IF YOU DO THE SUMS, 500 MILLION DOESN'T REALLY GO THAT FAR. IT IS THE 'BLOCK OF CHEESE' TAX CUT, ISN'T IT? AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE ALWAYS DESCRIBED IT AS A MODERATE TAX REDUCTION. THIS IS AS MUCH ABOUT DIRECTION FOR THE GOVERNMENTAND FOR THE ECONOMY, AS IT IS ABOUT DOLLARS IN THE POCKET, AND WE BELIEVE WE'RE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OF REWARDING HARD WORK, SAVINGS AND INVESTMENTAND HOLDING GOVERNMENT SPENDING SO WE DON'T HAVE TO RAISE MORE TAXES. DIDN'T YOUR OWN LEADER IN 2008 MOCK THE 'BLOCK OF CHEESE' TAX CUT? WELL, IF YOU GET INTO SOME BIDDING WAR ABOUT DOLLARS PER WEEK, I SUPPOSE THAT'S WHAT WAS HAPPENING THEN. WE'RE NOT INDICATING THAT. WE'RE NOT PROMISING LARGE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, BUT WE ARE INDICATING A CLEAR DIRECTION - THE TYPE OF ECONOMY WE WANT TO BE, WHERE HARD WORK IS REWARDED AND WHERE GOVERNMENT CONSTRAINS ITS SPENDING, WHERE WE DON'T LIFT OUR SPENDING AND FUND IT WITH MORE TAXES. SO, THE PRIME MINISTER HAS BEEN THROWING AROUND VARIOUS FIGURES - $10, $20, $30. SO, WHICH IS IT? OH, NO, HE HASN'T. ITHINK COMMENTATORS HAVE BEEN THROWING AROUND- NO, NO. HE HAS. IT'S A QUOTE. HE SAID $1 O, $20, $30 A VVEEK. WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY SPECIFIC WORK ON DOLLARS PER WEEK AND WOULDN'T EXPECT TO BEFORE THE ELECTION. JUST PULLED THAT FIGURE FROM THE AIR, HAS HE? MAKING IT UP? WELL, LOOK- WELL, THERE'S BEEN A BIT OF A GAME ABOUT TRYING TO GET NATIONAL TO GIVE A DOLLAR AMOUNT PER WEEK. WE SIMPLY HAVEN'T DONE THAT WORK. WE'D HAVE TO MAKE SURE ALL OUR FISCAL CRITERIAARE MET TO ENABLE A TAX CUT, COS THE TOP PRIORITY IS REPAYING DEBT. ALL RIGHT, LET'S BRING MR PARKER IN. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT? I CALL IT THE COLLINS TAX CUT. THEY WEREN'T EVEN TALKING ABOUT IT UNTIL THEY WERE IN TROUBLE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ON JUDITH COLLINS. UNTIL THEN, THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER WAS SAYING THEY COULDN'T REALLY AFFORD ANYTHING. LET'S BE CLEAR. THEY'VE RUN SIX DEFICITS IN A ROW. THEY'VE WRACKED UP $60 BILLION WORTH OF DEBTAND NOW THEIRANSWER TO NZ'S DECLINING EXPORTS IS TO DANGLE THE PROSPECT OF VERY SMALL TAX CUTS IN FRONT OF THE ELECTORATES. SO, IT'S AN ELECTION BRIBE, YOU'RE SAYING, TO STAVE OFF THE DIRTY POLITICS BACKLASH? I THINK IT WAS PARTLY THAT. I ALSO THINK THE GOVERNMENT, HAVING TRIED TO ASSERT THAT WE WERE FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND WERE GOING TO RUN DEFICITS, OR OUR ALTERNATIVE BUDGET, WHICH SHOWS US RUNNING LARGER SURPLUSES, AND SO DECIDED TO GO BACK TO THEIR OLD MANTRA, WHICH IS TAX CUTS, IN ORDER TO AVOID TALKING ABOUT THE CHALLENGES WE FACE IN THE ECONOMY. HANG ON A MINUTE. THAT THEORY DOESN'T REALLY PLAY OUT, BECAUSE THE PRIME MINISTER STARTED HINTING AT TAX CUTS IN MAY, SO IT CAN'T JUST BE A DIRTY POLITICS COMEBACK. AND THEN THE MINISTER OF FINANCE, MR ENGLISH, POURED COLD WATER UPON IT. BUT IT'S COME BACK. AND HE HAS SAID THAT ONLY IF IT'S FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE, ONLY IF THEY'RE IN SURPLUS AND THERE'S THIS MONEY. BUT YOU'RE PROMISING TAX CUTS AS WELL, IN THE SECOND TERM. WE'VE SAID THAT THEY'RE OPEN. YES, OF COURSE. WE RUN LARGER SURPLUSES SO WE'LL REPAY DEBT, LOWER. BY THE END OF OUR SECOND TERM, THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX, EXCLUDING THE FAMILY HOME, REVENUE STARTS TO GROW, AND SO TAX CUTS WOULD BE POSSIBLE UNDER US. FAMILY HOME, REVENUE STARTS TO GROW, AND SO TAX CUTS WOULD BE POSSIBLE UNDER US. AT WHAT LEVEL? OH, WELL, WE'RE NOT PROMISING TAX CUTS, SO WE'RE NOT- ACTUALLY, AT A HIGHER LEVEL- $10, $20, $30 AWEEK? OR HAVEN'T YOU DONE YOUR SUMS EITHER? I'M NOT PROMISING THEM. LOOK, AT A HIGHER LEVEL THAN NATIONAL CAN AFFORD, COS WE'RE RUNNING LARGER SURPLUSES, COS WE GATHER A BIT MORE REVENUE THROUGH GROWING CAPITAL GAINS TAX, EXCLUDING THE FAMILY HOME. SO YOU ARE PROMISING BIGGER TAX CUTS THAN NATIONAL? NO, WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT PROMISING TAX CUTS. WE'VE SAID THAT WE'VE LEFT OPEN THE POSSIBILITY OF TAX CUTS. OUR PROMISES ARE TO RUN BUDGET SURPLUSES AND TO REDUCE NET GOVERNMENT DEBT TO 3% OF GDP BY THE END OF OUR SECOND TERM. SO YOU'RE LEAVING OPEN THE POSSIBILITY, AS YOU PUT IT, OF TAX CUTS THAT ARE AT A HIGHER RATE THAN NATIONAL? YES, WE ARE. OF TAX CUTS THAT ARE AT A HIGHER RATE THAN NATIONAL? YES, WE ARE. NATIONAL'S TAX CUTS THAT YOU'RE CRITICISING. WE ARE, BUT YOU'RE TALKING SO MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THE ECONOMY AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO STOP THOSE GAPS WIDENING; TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT HOME-OWNERSHIP RATES ARE THE LOWEST IN 6O YEARS AND ARE STILL DROPPING; AND THAT OUR EXPORTS ARE GOING BACKWARDS. HOW MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE? WHAT YEAR WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE TAX CUTS IF LABOUR WAS IN POWER? WE'VE SAID AT THE END OF OUR SECOND TERM. OK. SO, TREASURY HAS SAID THAT AROUND 2018. DO YOU THINK THAT'S A REALISTIC OPTION FORATIME FRAME FOR TAX CUTS? WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TIME FRAMES AND PRIORITIES THIS NEXT WEEK AROUND OUR FISCAL POLICY, SO YOU'LL GET MORE DETAIL ON IT THEN. GIVEN THAT THE DEFICITS GONE BACK BY 500 MILLION AN OUT-YEAR SINCE YOUR BUDGET TO THE PREFU, HOWARE YOU ADJUSTING YOUR SPENDING TO COMPENSATE FOR THAT, BILL? WELL, IN THE BUDGETAND IN THE PRE-ELECTION UPDATE, WE CONFIRMED MAKING 1.5 BILLION AVAILABLE FOR MORE SPENDING AND MODERATE TAX REDUCTIONS. THAT REMAINS IN PLACE. AND AGAIN- YOUR SURPLUSES WENT BACK BY 500 MILLION AYEAR, THOUGH, SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO TRIM YOUR CLOTH LIKE WE'VE TRIMMED OURS? WELL, AS I'VE SAID, THE ALLOWANCES HAVE BEEN MADE. THEY'RE ALL BUILT INTO THE FORECASTS, AND WE'LL TALK MORE ABOUT THE DETAIL ON MONDAY. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN VOTING FORA WEEK NOW, AND THEY STILL HAVEN'T GOT YOUR FISCAL PLAN. THEY'VE HAD OURS. PEOPLE HAVE PORED OVER IT. THEY CAN SEE WE'RE IN SURPLUS, AND YOU STILL HAVEN'T ANNOUNCED YOUR FISCAL PARAMETERS OR YOUR TAX CUTS. HOW DO PEOPLE WHO HAVE ALREADY VOTED TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT? WHEN THEY'LL COME, MR ENGLISH. WHEN THEY'LL COME. WE OUTLINED THE FRAMEWORK IN THE BUDGET. THAT WAS CONFIRMED IN THE PRE-ELECTION UPDATE. GIVE US A SEC. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO THE POLLS, AS MR PARKER POINTS OUT, IN TWO WEEKS. SOME PEOPLE ARE ALREADY VOTING. WHEN CAN THEY EXPECT TO SEE ATAX CUT FROM NATIONAL? WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT ON MONDAY, BUT I THINK PEOPLE GOING INTO THE POLLING BOOTH- THEY KNOW THIS. PEOPLE ARE VOTING NOW, MR ENGLISH. WHEN CAN THEY EXPECT TO SEE ATAX CUT? YOU'VE INTIMATED THERE'S ONE COMING. WHAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH SAYING WHEN? WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE CONTEXT TOMORROW, ON MONDAY, AND THEN PEOPLE WILL HAVE A BIT MORE DETAIL. SO, THIS TERM OR NEXT TERM, MR ENGLISH? THEY'LL HAVE A BIT MORE DETAIL THEN, AND WHAT IT'LL HIGHLIGHT- THIS TERM OR NEXT TERM? IT'S A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION. AND WE'LLANSWER THAT IN MORE DETAIL ON MONDAY. BUT WHAT IT WILL SHOW IS THE CONTRAST OF THE OPPOSITION PARTIES WANTING TO RAISE MORE REVENUE AND WASTE MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING. WE WANT TO STICK TO PRETTY CONTROLLED SPENDING AND LOW OR SLIGHTLY REDUCING TAXES. WELL, IN SAYING THAT, AS FINANCE MINISTER, CAN YOU HONESTLY SAY, HAND ON HEART, THAT YOU PERSONALLY THINK A TAX CUT IS THE BEST USE OF THAT MONEY, RATHER THAN, SAY, PAYING DOWN DEBT? WELL, WE'VE SAID DEBT REDUCTION IS A PRIORITY. WE D- WE RAN UP DEBT THROUGH TOUGH TIMES TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE, KEEP PUBLIC SERVICES RUNNING, REBUILD CHRISTCHURCH. NOW WE ARE IN BETTER TIMES, IT IS A TOP PRIORITY TO STABILISE AND START REPAYING DEBT. $500 MILLION. IS IT BETTER TO USE THAT TO PAY DEBT OR TO GIVE ITAWAY IN TAX CUTS? WELL, THE GOOD THING IS WE'VE GOT CHOICES, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE JUST COME OUT OF A RECESSION. I'M ASKING YOU TO MAKE A CHOICE, MR ENGLISH. WHICH IS BEST USE OF THAT MONEY? WELL, WE'LL OUTLINE ON MONDAY THE WAY WE'LL LOOK AT THOSE PRIORITIES. BUT REPAYING DEBT, STABILISING- WHY ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT TELLING VOTERS WHAT THEY'RE GETTING NOW? WELL, THEY'VE HAVE A ROUGH- A GOOD IDEA OF HOW THIS GOVERNMENT WILL CONDUCT GOVERNMENT- FISCAL POLICY IN THE NEXT TERM. IDEA OF HOW THIS GOVERNMENT WILL CONDUCT GOVERNMENT- FISCAL POLICY IN THE NEXT TERM. A ROUGH IDEA OR A GOOD IDEA, MR ENGLISH? IN THE NEXT TERM. A ROUGH IDEA OR A BY THE TIME THEY GO TO THE POLLS? THEY WILL HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA, BUT THEY KNOW THE STYLE OF THIS GOVERNMENT. IT IS TO MANAGE PRETTY CAREFULLY, KEEP CONTROL OF THE SPENDING. WE DON'T BELIEVE IN NEWAND MORE TAXES. WE THINK WE CAN MANAGE WITH THE TAX REVENUE WE HAVE, BECAUSE THE OPPOSITION PLANS IN THAT RESPECT WILL AFFECT GROWTH AND JOBS. LET'S GET ON TO GROWTH AND JOBS. MR PARKER, I JUST WANNAASK YOU WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT - PAYING DOWN DEBT OR GMNG PEOPLE A TAX CUT? AFTER SIX DEFICITS IN A ROW, WE HAVE TO PAY DOWN DEBT, OTHERWISE, AS THE MINISTER OF FINANCE USED TO SAY UNTILA FEW WEEKS AGO, IF ANOTHER HICCUP COMES ALONG IN THE WORLD ECONOMY OR IF THERE IS ANOTHER LARGE EARTHQUAKE, THE GOVERNMENTS FINANCES AREN'T IN AS GOOD A POSITION TO DEAL WITH IT. SO IT'S FRIVOLOUS WHAT NATIONAL IS PLANNING TO DO? I THINK IT'S DESIGNED TO TAKE THE FOCUS OFF THE ECONOMY, AND THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DEBATING HERE, NOT JUST THE FISCAL TRACK FOR THE GOVERNMENT. WE SHOULD BE DEBATING WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO IMPROVE THE ECONOMY SO IT GROWS FASTER AND CAN SUSTAIN HIGHER WAGES. SO, MR ENGLISH, I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR HERE. YOU ARE PROMISING TO PAY DOWN DEBT; YOU'RE GOING TO GET DEBT DOWN TO 20% OF GDP BY 2020; YOU'RE GOING TO CUT TAX; YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CUT SPENDING; AND YOU'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN A SURPLUS? REALLY? YOU'RE GONNA ACHIEVE ALL OF THAT? YES, WE ARE, AND THATS ALL LAID OUT IN THE BUDGET BACK IN MAY, AND THEN TREASURY HAVE VERIFIED THAT INDEPENDENTLY THROUGH THE PRE-ELECTION UPDATE JUSTA MONTH OR SO AGO. MR PARKER, CAN YOU MATCH THAT? WE- WE BETTER IT. WE DO GATHER A BIT OF EXTRA REVENUE. WE DO IT IN A WAY THAT ALSO IMPROVES THE ECONOMY. A CAPITAL GAINS TAX EXCLUDING THE FAMILY HOME PUSHES MONEYAWAY FROM OVER-INVESTMENT IN RENTAL PROPERTY INTO THE PRODUCTIVE ECONOMY IN ORDER TO GROW EXPORTS, AND THAT, ALLIED WITH MORE OF OUR OWN SAVINGS THROUGH UNIVERSAL KIWISAVER, AND THROUGH INCENTIVES FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PUSH US TOWARDS A HIGHER-VALUE ECONOMY THAT SUSTAINS HIGHER WAGES. RIGHT, WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR CAPITAL GAINS TAX. IF I HAVE SHARES, SAY, AND THEY'VE GROWN IN VALUE AND I DECIDE TO SELL THEM, AM I GOING TO PAY CAPITAL GAINS TAX ON THOSE SHARES? YOU WILL PAY 15% OF THE GAIN OVER AND ABOVE THE VALUE WHEN IT CAME INTO EFFECT. SO IF YOUR SHARES WERE WORTH- YOU WILL PAY 15% OF THE GAIN OVER AND ABOVE THE VALUE WHEN IT CAME INTO EFFECT. SO IF YOUR SHARES WERE WORTH $100,000 WHEN IT CAME INTO EFFECT, YOU MIGHT HAVE ONLY PAID $50,000, BUT THE STARTING VALUE FOR OUR CAPITAL GAINS TAX IS $100,000, AND IF YOU SELL THEM SOME YEARS INTO THE FUTURE, THEN YOU'LL PAYA 15% TAX. BUT THAT'S FAIR. YOU'VE JUST SAID TO ME THAT YOU WANNA TAKE SOME OF THE HEAT OUT OF THE HOUSING MARKET AND THE INVESTMENT IN THE HOUSING MARKET. DOESN'T THAT CAPITAL GAINS TAX ON SHARES FLY IN THE FACE OF ENCOURAGING PEOPLE NOT TO PUT THEIR MONEY INTO RENTAL PROPERTY AND TO PUT IT INTO THE PRODUCTIVE SECTOR, INTO SHARES? NO, IT DOESN'T. WHAT IT ACHIEVES IS NEUTRALITY. PEOPLE SHOULD BE INVESTING ON THE BASIS OF THE PROFITABILITY OF THE BUSINESS THAT THEY'RE INVESTING IN, NOT FOR AN UNTAXED CAPITAL GAIN. HOW IS IT FAIR FOR SOMEONE TO EARN HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS ON THE INCREASE IN THE VALUE OF A PROPERTY OR ON THE INCREASE IN VALUE OF SHARES AND PAY NO TAX ON THAT, AND FOR SOMEONE ELSE WORKING FOR A WAGE TO PAY TAX ON EVERY DOLLAR THEY EARN? WHATABOUT MY KIWISAVER? WILL I PAY TAX ON THAT? CAPITAL GAINS TAX? WE'VE SAID THAT CAPITAL GAINS TAX WILL NEITHER INCREASE NOR DECREASE TAX ON KIWISAVER. YES, BUT HOW'S THAT GOING TO WORK IF MY PROVIDER OR BROKER IS BUYING AND SELLING SHARES TO GROW MY RETIREMENT FUND? WELL, IT WILL WORK AS IT CURRENTLY DOES. OK. I'VE READ YOUR CAPITAL GAINS TAX POLICY, AND THERE IS A LOT OF DETAIL THAT'S NOT IN THERE. IT'S GOING TO BE REFERRED TO A SPECIALIST COMMITTEE, WHICH HASN'T YET BEEN NAMED, AND THE DETAIL HASN'T BEEN DECIDED. ARE YOU AT BEST BEING TRICKY WITH THAT INFORMATION, OR DO YOU JUST NOT KNOW? BECAUSE EITHER WAY, PEOPLE ARE HAVING TO GO TO THE POLLS WITH A BIG UNKNOWN, AREN'T THEY? THERE'S ACTUALLY MORE DETAIL IN RESPECT OF OUR CAPITAL GAINS TAX POLICY THAN THERE IS THE WHOLE OF THE NATIONAL PARTY POLICY. FOR FOUR YEARS, THERE'S BEEN MORE THAN 2O PAGES OF DETAIL OUT THERE. THESE THINGS ARE NOT ROCKET SCIENCE. EVERY OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD - AUSTRALIA, CANADA, UNITES STATES, GREAT BRITAIN. THEY ALL HAVE THEM. THE IDEA THAT SOMEHOW KIWIS AREN'T BRIGHT ENOUGH TO DO THIS IN THE WAY THAT STRENGTHENS ECONOMIES OVERSEAS - IT DEFIES LOGIC. SO I'M ABSOLUTELY CONFIDENT THAT THE SCAREMONGERING THAT WE'VE HAD IN RESPECT OF WHETHER FAMILY TRUST HOMES ARE COVERED OR WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE INHERITA HOME, ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN MISINFORMATION. ACTUALLY, IF PEOPLE LIKE YOU READ THAT DOCUMENT, YOU'LL SEE THAT NINE OUT OF 10 QUESTIONS ARE ALREADY ANSWERED. ALL RIGHT. HERE'S A QUESTION. HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO LIVE IN A HOME BEFORE IT'S A FAMILY HOME? IF I BUYA HOME FORA FAMILY HOME, IT'S THE DAY I MOVE IN. WHAT'S DIFFICULTABOUT THAT, BILL? WHAT IF I OWN A RENTALAND I MOVE OUT OF THE HOME I'M IN AND LIVE IN THE RENTAL FOR, SAY, TWO YEARS. DOES THAT MEAN THAT I COULD THEN AVOID CAPITAL GAINS TAX ON IT? IF YOU CHANGE YOUR FAMILY HOME, IT'S THE NEW FAMILY HOME THAT BECOMES YOUR FAMILY HOME. WHAT'S DIFFICULT ABOUT THAT, BILL? SO IRD WILL HAVE TO KNOW- YOU CAN INVENT ALL OF THESE SCAREMONGERING EXAMPLES, BILL, BUT THEY'VE ALL BEEN DEALT WITH IN ECONOMIES LIKE AUSTRALIA THAT ARE SO MUCH STRONGER THAN OURS, BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT A CAPITAL GAINS TAX EXCLUDING THE FAMILY HOME. BEFORE THEY HAD A CAPITAL GAINS TAX, AUSTRALIA USED TO HAVE LOWER RATES OF HOME OWNERSHIP THAN US. THEY'VE GOT ONE. THEY'VE NOW GOT HIGHER RATES OF HOME OWNERSHIP THAN OURS, AND THEY'VE GOTA STRONGER ECONOMY AND HIGHER WAGES. LET'S TAKE A BREAK THERE, GENTLEMEN, AND WE WILL BE BACK. BUT LATER IN THE HOUR, LAILA HARRE AND HONE HARAWIRA ARE WITH PADDY. WHERE'S HONE BEEN AND DOES HE SUPPORT HIS OWN PARTY'S DRUG POLICY? PLUS, WHAT SORT OF POLITICAL REVOLUTION IS BRENDAN HORAN PLANNING? BUT NEXT - WHO'LL DELIVER MORE TO YOUR PAY CHEQUE AND BOTTOM LINES. WHATARE THE BIG TWO PREPARED TO GIVE TO NZ FIRST, THE CONSERVATIVES AND THE GREENS? THAT'S NEXT. FROM NATIONALAND LABOUR - BILL ENGLISH AND DAVID PARKER. MR PARKER, WHAT IS THE ONE NEW THING YOU WOULD DO TO BOOST OUR ECONOMY? I WOULD BE PUSHING INVESTMENT AWAY FROM THE SPECULATIVE ECONOMY INTO THE PRODUCTIVE ECONOMY TO GROW PRODUCTMTYAND EXPORTS. WHY IS THAT NECESSARY? NATIONAL CAME TO POWER PROMISING TO INCREASE EXPORTS AS A SHARE OF THE ECONOMY FROM 33% OF GDP TO 40. THEY HAVE INSTEAD GONE BACKWARDS FROM 33 TO 29, AND THEY'RE GOING BACK NOW TO 26. IF WE'RE GOING TO GROW THE WEALTH OF OUR COUNTRY, HAVE SECURE WELL-PAID JOBS WHERE PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO SAVE A BITAND BUYA HOUSE, WE NEED TO DO A FEW THINGS DIFFERENTLY. SO OUR MIX OF POLICY IS WE NEED MORE OF OUR OWN CAPITAL SAVED THROUGH UNIVERSAL KIWISAVER, LIKE IN AUSTRALIA - IT'S WHY THEY OWN THEIR BANKS PLUS OURS - PUSH IT INTO THE PRODUCTIVE ECONOMY BY PUSHING AGAINST SPECULATION THROUGH A CAPITAL GAINS TAX, EXCLUDING THE FAMILY HOME - ONLY 15% OF THE GAIN -AND THEN ENCOURAGE MORE OF THAT PUSH FROM VOLUME TOWARDS VALUE THROUGH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TAX CREDITS AND INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT INTO NEW PLANT AND EQUIPMENT. INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT INTO NEW PLANT AND EQUIPMENT. MR ENGLISH, YOUR NEW IDEA? LABOUR IS PROPOSING A CGT AS IF IT'S AN ANSWER FOR EVERYTHING. NO, NO. YOUR NEW IDEA, MR ENGLISH, FOR BOOSTING THE ECONOMY? WE ACTUALLY THINK WE'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION... SO NO NEW IDEA? DAVID TALKED ABOUT THE EXPORTERS. EXPORTERS HAVE DONE VERY WELL AGAINST QUITE STRONG HEADWINDS. THERE'S A LOT OF RESOURCE GOING INTO CHRISTCHURCH WHICH IS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE EXPORT INDUSTRY, THE HIGH DOLLAR. THEY'RE IN REALLY GOOD SHAPE NOW. THATAS WE SEE THE DOLLAR DRIFT OFF, GOVERNMENT DO WHAT IT CAN TO INFLUENCE THE INTEREST RATE TRACK, BUILD ON INVESTMENT- MR ENGLISH, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU ONE LAST CHANCE, MR ENGLISH. HAVE YOU GOTA NEW IDEA TO BOOST OUR ECONOMY? WE WANT TO KEEP GOING IN THE DIRECTION WE'RE GOING COS IT'S THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WE DISAGREE WITH THE OPPOSITION WHO BELIEVE THAT NZERS HAVE GOT IT ALL WRONG IN THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. WE THINK THEY'VE GOT IT RIGHT. WE WILL CONTINUE, FOR INSTANCE- SO WE DON'T NEED A NEW IDEA? THEY'RE DOING WHAT NATIONAL TELLS THEM TO DO WHICH IS OVER-INVEST IN PROPERTY AND UNDER-INVEST IN EXPORTS. THEM TO DO WHICH IS OVER-INVEST NO, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. OUR EXPORTS ARE GOING BACKWARDS. WE'VE HAD THE BEST TERMS OF TRADE IN 41 YEARS AND WE DIDN'T ONCE COVER THE OF OUR IMPORTS AND INTEREST. ...AND CONTINUING TO UPSKILL OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. WHERE A LOT OF WHAT WE NEED TO ACHIEVE IN THIS ECONOMY, IS NOTABOUT SITTING AROUND WAITING TO WIN LOTTO WITH ONE BIG IDEA, IT'S ABOUT DOING DOZENS OF THINGS WELL JUST IN THE WAY THAT OUR HOUSEHOLDS AND BUSINESSES IN THE LAST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS HAVE ALL HAD TO ADJUST. THEY'VE BECOME MORE PRODUCTIVE, MORE FOCUSED, LESS DEPENDENT ON DEBT, AND THAT IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR NZ - SUSTAINABLE GROWTH BUILT ON CREDIBLE, STABLE GOVERNMENT AND SENSIBLE POLICY. MR PARKER, MR ENGLISH IS RIGHT, ISN'T HE? I MEAN, WE'VE GOT 3.5% GROWTH THIS YEAR, GOING DOWN TO A RESPECTABLE 2.7 - SOME OF THE BEST IN THE OECD; INFLATION IS DOWN; HOUSEHOLD DEBT IS DOWN. WHY WOULD YOU CHANGE HORSES WHEN THINGS ARE GOING SO WELL? WELL, THEY'VE RIDDEN THE BACK OF VERY HIGH DAIRY PRICES, AND THEY'VE RACKED UP $70 BILLION... BETWEEN $60 AND $70 BILLION OF GOVERNMENT DEBT. THE TRUTH IS OUR EXPORTS ARE DECLINING, THE GAPS ARE WIDENING IN SOCIETY AS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT THE LOWEST RATE OF HOME OWNERSHIP IN 6O YEARS, AND STILL GETTING WORSE. IF YOU HAVE EXPORTS GOING BACKWARDS, DESPITE THE BEST TERMS OF TRADE IN MY LIFE, WE HAVEN'T EARNED ENOUGH TO PAY FOR OUR IMPORTS AND INTEREST, YOU'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. THE TREND GOING OUT IS THOSE EXPORTS TO GO EVEN LOWER AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE ECONOMY, AND AS A CONSEQUENCE, WE HAVE TO PLUG THAT GAP BY BORROWING MORE MONEY FROM OVERSEAS AND SELLING MORE OF OUR LAND AND COMPANIES TO OVERSEAS OWNERS. MR ENGLISH, ECONOMISTS SAY THAT GROWTH HAS PEAKED, AND MR PARKER IS RIGHT - DAIRY PRICES ARE DOWN 50%. WOOD PRODUCTS ARE DOWN. EXPORTS ARE FALLING. WHATS YOUR PLAN B? WELL, THE PLAN IS TO CONTINUE WITH THE PLAN, SO EXPORTERS HAVE DONE VERY WELL DESPITE THE HIGH HEADWINDS. DAIRY PRICES DO GO UPAND DOWN. THEY FELL BY SIMILAR AMOUNTS A COUPLE OF TIMES IN THE LAST FIVE YEARS. WHAT WE ARE SEEING, THOUGH, IS GREATER INVESTOR CONFIDENCE. WE'RE SEEING A BURGEONING OF AREAS LIKE THE HIGH-TECH SECTOR. WE'RE SEEING EXPORTERS GEARING UP BECAUSE THEY CAN SEE THE CURRENCY COMING OFF, AND THEY'RE STARTING TO BELIEVE THAT THE ECONOMY IS BEING SUFFICIENTLY WELL MANAGED THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET A SHARP INTEREST-RATE CYCLE IN A HOUSING BOOM. WELL, YOU TOLD US EARLIER ON THE SHOW... EARLIER THIS YEAR ON THIS SHOW, YOU TOLD US THOSE GOOD TIMES WERE COMING AND THAT PEOPLE COULD EXPECT HIGHER WAGES. HOW MUCH HIGHER? WELL, THE AVERAGE WAGE WILL MOVE FROM 55,000 TO 62,000 OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. LET'S LOOK AT THAT FIGURE BECAUSE WE PUT THAT TO AN ECONOMIST, WHO LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS FOR US, AND FACTORING IN INFLATION, THAT GIVES US A 0.9% PAY RISE A YEAR, WORSE THAN THE 20-YEAR AVERAGE. IS THAT THE BEST WE CAN EXPECT UNDER NATIONAL? IT'S WHAT THIS ECONOMY CAN NOW PRODUCE, AND BY ANY DEVELOPED COUNTRY STANDARD, ITS- CONSISTENT INCREASES IN REAL WAGES ARE PRETTY UNUSUAL. AND THATS WHAT NZ HAS ACHIEVED IN THE LAST YEAR OR TWO AND CAN OVER THE NEXT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS. AND WHAT'S GOING TO BUILD THAT FURTHER- IT'S BELOW THE ZO-YEAR AVERAGE, MR ENGLISH. IS THAT THE BEST WE CAN EXPECT? OF COURSE WE HOPE WE COULD DO BETTER, BUT WHAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP DO BETTER IS AN ECONOMY THAT STALLS WHEN YOU GET THE HARAWIRA-KIM DOTCOM-CUNLIFFE-LED GOVERNMENT WITHAWHOLE BUNCH OF POLICIES, WHICH EVEN IF YOU AGREED WITH THEM, ARE COMPLEX AND WILL CREATE A GREAT DEAL OF UNCERTAINTY. SO WE'RE AN ECONOMY WHO HAS THE OPPORTUNITY THROUGH STEADY PROGRESS OVERA NUMBER OF YEARS TO ACTUALLY LIFT HOUSEHOLD INCOMES IN A WAY THAT IS RELATIVELY UNUSUAL IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD. MR PARKER, YOU'RE COMPLEX ACCORDING TO MR ENGLAND AND YOUR MATES ARE COMPLEX AS WELL. IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE THAT PEOPLE SHOULD INVEST ON THE BASIS OF PROFITABILITY RATHER THAN CHASE A TAX AVOIDANCE THAT PEOPLE WORKING FOR AWAGE CAN'T GET. THAT'S PRETTY SIMPLE. ALL OF OUR POLICIES ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY APPLIED IN AUSTRALIA. THEY DO BETTER THAN US. WE SHOULD TAKE SOME OF THEIR IDEAS LIKE HAVING MORE OF THEIR OWN SAVINGS, WHICH FLOWS THROUGH TO HIGHER WAGES COS YOU'VE GOT MORE MONEY TO INVEST IN IMPROVING THE PRODUCTMTY OF THE ECONOMY, THEREFORE MAKING IT GROW FASTER. YOU KNOW, WE CAN GET TO AVIRTUAL CIRCLE HERE WHERE WE INVEST LESS IN SPECULATION AND MORE IN PRODUCTMTY. YOU'VE ALSO GOT TO FIX- I WANT TO JUMP IN HERE, MR PARKER. LET'S TALK ABOUT YOUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER PARTIES. EVERYBODY NEEDS FRIENDS UNDER MMP. WINSTON PETERS' BOTTOM LINES. MR PARKER, ARE YOU PREPARED TO BLOCK THE SALE OF LOCHINVER STATION AND SET UPA FOREIGN BUYERS' REGISTER? WE'VE SAID THAT WHOEVER IS TAKING THAT DECISION IS BOUND BY THE LAW, AND THAT WOULD BE TRUE TO MR PETERS AS WELL. WE SAY THAT WE DO THINK THAT THERE'S NO ADVANTAGE IN SELLING OUR LAND TO OVERSEAS BUYERS. THEY ACTUALLY NORMALLY EMPLOY NZ FARMERS, AND WE LOSE THE ABILITY TO FARM OUR OWN LAND AND THE LONG-TERM PROFITS. SO WE'RE OPPOSED TO THAT SALE- FARM OUR OWN LAND AND THE LONG-TERM PROFITS. SO WE'RE OPPOSED TO THAT SALE- WILL YOU BLOCK IT? WHAT WE'VE SAID IS THAT WE'LL TRY AND BLOCK IT UNDER THE DISCRETIONS THAT THERE ARE AT LAW. IF WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T... SO YOU'RE ON THE FENCE NOW, BACKING AWAY FROM WHAT MR CUNLIFFE SAID EARLIER THAT HE WOULD BLOCK IT. NO, NO. HE SAID THAT WE WOULD DO OUR BEST TO BLOCK IT UNDER THE LAW, BUT THAT WE HAD TO APPLY THE LAW. WE WILL THEN CHANGE THE LAW SO THAT FUTURE SALES DO NOT OCCUR. ALL RIGHT. MR ENGLISH, WOULD YOU BLOCK IT TO GO INTO A RELATIONSHIP WITH MR PETERS IN THE COALITION? NO, WE WON'T BLOCK THAT SALE. THE LEGISLATION UNDER WHICH IT'S BEING PROCESSED WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN BY MR PETERS AND THE PREVIOUS LABOUR GOVERNMENT. IT'S BEEN STRENG- THE COURT INTERPRETATIONS HAVE STRENGTHENED IT SINCE. OK. SO YOU WOULDN'T BLOCK THAT SALE? INTERPRETATIONS HAVE STRENGTHENED IT SINCE. OK. SO YOU WOULDN'T BLOCK THAT SALE? YOU HAVEN'T BLOCKED ONE FARM SINCE, BILL. THAT'S A NONSENSE. THE DISCRETIONS ARE SO WIDE YOU CAN EITHER APPROVE OR TURN DOWN VIRTUALLY ANYTHING, AND YOU GUYS APPROVE EVERYTHING. NO. THE COURTS HAVE SET QUITE A HIGH THRESHOLD, AND THAT'S HOW THIS SALE WILL BE TREATED WITH TOUGHER TESTS THAN APPLIED WHEN WINSTON PETERS WAS LAST IN GOVERNMENT. YOU HAVEN'T TURNED ONE DOWN. MR JOYCE ON THIS PROGRAMME SAID ONLY A RIDICULOUSLY SMALL AMOUNT OF LAND HAD BEEN SOLD TO FOREIGNERS - 700,000HA INCLUDING JOINT VENTURES, ON YOUR WATCH. IS THATA RIDICULOUSLY SMALL AMOUNT? AND IT MAY WELL BE THAT THERE'S BEEN FOREIGNERS SELLING BACK TO NZERS. IS THATA RIDICULOUSLY SMALL AMOUNT? IS THAT THE RIGHT CHARACTERISATION? IF THE GENERAL CONCERN IS WIDESPREAD FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OF NZ LAND, THEN THE INFORMATION THAT'S AVAILABLE SUGGESTS THAT IT IS QUITE SMALL FOREIGN OWNERSHIP, AND WE DON'T THINK THAT'S A LARGE PROBLEM. ANOTHER BOTTOM LINE IS BUYING BACK ASSETS. HALF OF OUR FORESTS ARE NOW IN FOREIGN OWNERSHIP. WELL, YOU SIGNED THEM OVER, DAVID, WHEN YOU WERE THE MINISTER. WELL, ACTUALLY, SOME OF THEM I DID, AND WE ACTUALLY SAID WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT, WE'VE GOT THAT WRONG AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT AGAIN. WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT FOR THE FUTURE. OTHERWISE DEMOCRACY GETS MORIBUND AS IT IS UNDER YOUR GOVERNMENT. ALL RIGHT. BUYING BACK ASSETS. MR ENGLISH HAS ALREADY TOLD US THIS YEAR THAT YOU WON'T DO IT. IS THAT STILL RIGHT? YOU WON'T BUY BACK ASSETS? NO, CERTAINLY NOT. WE'VE SOLD THEM. WE GOT 4.7 BILLION IN THE BANK. WHAT ABOUT YOU, MR PARKER? WOULD YOU BUY BACK ASSETS IN ORDER TO BE IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH MR PETERS? WE'VE SHOWN THAT WE CAN'T AFFORD TO IN OUR FISCAL PLAN, AND SO UNLESS WE WERE GOING TO DROP SOMETHING ELSE OUT OF OUR PLAN, WE COULDN'T DO IT. YOU'VE GOT $100 MILLION PUTASIDE, HAVEN'T YOU? ISN'T THAT THE WINSTON FUND? $200 MILLION PER ANNUM IN OUT-YEARS. UNLESS THINGS CAN BE DONE WITHIN THAT ENVELOPE, WE OBVIOUSLY, IN ORDER TO MEET OUR PROMISES OF BUDGET SURPLUS AND PAYING DOWN DEBT, HAVE TO PRUNE OTHER EXPENDITURE THAT WE PROPOSE. SO YOU CAN'T HELP WINSTON IN THAT REGARD? WELL, NO. I JUST SAID THAT- AREN'T YOU PUSHING HIM OVER TO NATIONAL? NO. WHAT I'VE SAID IS THAT IF ASPIRATIONS GO ABOVE THAT $200 MILLION PER ANNUM BY THIRD PARTIES, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO CUT OUR OWN SPENDING. WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WHAT GOES IN OR OUT BEFORE THE ELECTION. ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT THEN ABOUT A ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE DIRTY POLITICS ALLEGATIONS? WOULD YOU HAVE ONE? ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT THEN ABOUT A ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE DIRTY POLITICS ALLEGATIONS? YOU KNOW, THE INQUIRY THAT WE'VE GOT INTO JUDITH COLLINS AT THE MOMENT IS FAR TOO NARROW. IT DOESN'T LOOK AT ANY CONDUCT WITHIN THE PRIME MINISTER'S DEPARTMENT NOR ANY OF HER OTHER MISTAKES IN RESPECT OF WHALE OIL OR THE ORAVIDA CONTROVERSIES. OK. ON THAT, MR ENGLISH, I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU, WOULD IT BE WRONG FOR A MEMBER OF YOUR STAFF TO GO INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S WEBSITE AND DOWNLOAD PERSONAL DETAILS, LIKE CREDIT CARD INFORMATION? WOULD THAT BE WRONG? LOOK, IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO THIS STUFF THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS- I ASKED YOU A REALLY SIMPLE, ETHICAL QUESTION. IF SOMEONE IN YOUR OFFICE GOES INTO A WEBSITE THATS NOT THEIRS - SOMEONE ELSE'S WEBSITE - STARTS DOWNLOADING CREDIT CARD DETAILS, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THAT IS WRONG? I WOULDN'T ASK A STAFF MEMBER TO GO AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. NOTASKING IF YOU ASKED. IF THEY DID IT OFF THEIR OWN BAT, IS IT WRONG? LOOK, THE QUESTION YOU'RE PUTTING IS COMPLETELY HYPOTHETICAL. IT'S AN ETHICAL QUESTION, MR ENGLISH. SIMPLE TO ANSWER. IS IT WRONG OR NOT? SADLY IT'S NOT HYPOTHETICAL. IT HAPPENED IN THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE. SOMEONE HAS GONE INTO CAMERON SLATER'S GMAILAND DOWNLOADED 10 YEARS OF EMAILS. IS THAT WRONG? ALL RIGHT, IF YOU'RE WORRIED THE HYPOTHETICAL NATURE OF IT, LET'S PUT IT THIS WAY. LET'S SAY JASON EADE WHO WORKS FOR THE NATIONAL PARTY GOES INTO A COMPUTER, A WEBSITE THAT'S NOT YOURS, HE DOWNLOADS PERSONAL INFORMATION, ALLEGEDLY, INCLUDING CREDIT CARD DETAILS. IS THAT RIGHT IN YOUR VIEW? LOOK, THESE ARE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN A BOOK. THEY'VE BEEN DISCUSSED ENDLESSLY FOR TWO OR THREE WEEKS. AND NO ONE'S INQUIRING INTO THEM. IN A BOOK. THEY'VE BEEN DISCUSSED ENDLESSLY FOR TWO OR THREE WEEKS. AND NO ONE'S INQUIRING INTO THEM. IN A BOOK. THEY'VE BEEN DISCUSSED WE'VE GOT AN ELECTION- IS IT OK? IT'S A REALLY SIMPLE QUESTION. WHY ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT ANSWERING IT? IS IT OK? I WOULDN'TASKA STAFF MEMBER TO DO IT, AND, ACTUALLY, I DON'T THINK IT'S THE BIGGEST ISSUE. WHAT IF A STAFF MEMBER DID IT OFF THEIR OWN BAT? I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN, AND I DON'T THINK I CAN SAY ANYTHING THAT WILL ADD TO THE EXTENSIVE COMMENTARY THERE'S ALREADY BEEN. YOU COULD INQUIRE INTO IT. YOU CAN TELL US WHAT YOUR STANCE IS ON THAT IN TERMS OF ETHICS. IF SOMEONE IN THE OFFICE- I'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU. IS ON THAT IN TERMS OF ETHICS. IF SOMEONE IN THE OFFICE- I'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU. NO, YOU SAID YOU WOULDN'T ASK THEM TO DO IT. I'M ASKING YOU, 'IS IT OK IF THEY'VE DONE IT OFF THEIR OWN BAT?' IS THAT OK IN YOUR BOOK? LOOK, IT'S A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION. YOU'RE MAKING UP A SITUATION THAT'S NOT REAL. THE ONE THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT- YOU'RE MAKING UP A SITUATION THAT'S NOT REAL. THE ONE THAT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT- HAVE YOU READ DIRTY POLITICS? IT'S VERY REAL. NO, I HAVEN'T READ DIRTY POLITICS. I HAVEN'T BOTHERED, AND LIKE MOST NZERS, BECAUSE ACTUALLY THEY THINK THERE'S SOME BIGGER ISSUES INVOLVED IN THIS ELECTION CAMPAIGN. WELL, THERE ARE BIGGER ONES THAN THAT ONE, LIKE WHETHER THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE OR THE FINANCIAL MARKET AUTHORITIES HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED TO A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. I AGREE THERE ARE BIGGER ISSUES, BUT THERE ARE ALSO SMALLER ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE INQUIRED INTO AS WELL. IN TERMS OF WINSTON PETERS, WOULD YOU GIVE HIM SOME KIND OF FINANCE PORTFOLIO IN ORDER TO SEALA RELATIONSHIP FOR COALITION? THOSE NEGOTIATIONS WON'T TAKE PLACE BEFORE AN ELECTION. SO NOT PREPARED TO SAY. MR ENGLISH? OBVIOUSLY, YOU WOULD HAVE THE MAIN ROLE, ONE ASSUMES? BUT WOULD YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN THE FINANCE PORTFOLIOS FOR MR PETERS? IT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE THE FINANCE PORTFOLIO, BUT IT IS AN OPEN QUESTION FOR ANY KIND OF OPPOSITION PARTIES COMING IN. BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT, POTENTIALLY, QUITE A STRONG GREENS VOTE. IF WINSTON IS THE KINGMAKER, THEN HE'S HAD AMBITIONS- HE WAS THE TREASURER ONCE BEFORE. I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT DEAL OF UNCERTAINTY OF EXACTLY HOW ALL THAT WOULD FALL OUT IN WHAT WOULD BE QUITE A COMPLEX SET OF ARRANGEMENTS- THE TRADITION HAS ALWAYS BEEN UNDER MMP THAT THE LARGEST PARTY PROVIDES THE MINISTER OF FINANCE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA CHANGE. EXCEPT IN 1996 IT WASN'T, AND THAT'S WHEN WINSTON DUG IN AND BECAME THE TREASURER. BILL- BILL- LET'S END ON A LIGHTER NOTE. YOU BOTH WANNA BE IN CONTROL OF THE PURSE STRINGS IN THE NEXT GOVERNMENT. SO LET'S TAKE BUDGETING DOWN TO A HOME. HOW MUCH IS IT FOR A BASIC BLOCK OF CHEESE, A KILO OF CHEESE? WELL, IT DEPENDS WHETHER IT'S ON SPECIAL. $9 OR $10. MR PARKER? DEPENDS WHETHER IT'S TASTY OR MILD. IT'S A BIT CHEAPER IF IT'S MILD OR COLBY. PRICE? UH, YOU'D GET IT FOR ABOUT $7 A KILO. WOW. $9.50 TO $11.50 WE SAW. HELEN KELLYAND FRAN O'SULLIVAN WILL JOIN PADDY AND ME LATER TO PICK THAT DEBATE APART. AND UP NEXT - LAILA HARRE AND HONE HARAWIRA TOGETHER FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE RUMOURS OF A RIFT EMERGED. BUT NOW IT'S TIME FOR YOUR WEEKLY DOLLOP OF POLITICS IN 6O SECONDS. TWO WEEKS OUT FROM THE ELECTION, HOW DO YOU SEE IT, PAUL? LET'S START WITH NATIONAL. YEAH, I'VE HEARD OF THEM, BUT THEY'VE HAD THAT BIG DISTRACTION OUT THERE, HAVEN'T THEY? YOU MEAN THEIR POLICIES? YEAH, TOTALLY. A LOT OF TIME AND SPACE BEING WASTED ON STUFF THATS NOTHING TO DO WITH JUDITH COLLINS. IT'S LIKE SHE'S THE ONLY ONE IN NATIONAL THATS TRYING. WHAT ABOUT THE LABOUR PARTY? NAH, THEY'VE HAD A BAD WEEK TOO, NOT ASINGLE LEAK. IN FACT, I DON'T THINK THERE'S BEEN A SINGLE EMAIL TO COME OUT OF LABOUR IN THE WHOLE CAMPAIGN. AND THIS IS BASIC ELECTIONEERING, ISN'T IT? ALTHOUGH IN THEIR DEFENCE, MOST OF LABOUR'S EMAILS ARE JUST DAVID CUNLIFFE SENDING HIMSELF MOTIVATIONAL QUOTES. THE GREEN PARTY? I'M NOT SURE THEY'D KNOW WHATAN EMAIL WAS, JEREMY. YEAH, IT'S TOO ADVANCED. THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING TO GET NOTICED, THOUGH. IT'S ALMOST LIKE RUSSEL NORMAN NEEDS TO GETA BIT WASTED ON SOME FEIJOA WINE AND GO AND DRY-HUMP AN OIL RIG OR SOMETHING. IT SEEMS SO OBVIOUS WHEN YOU SAY IT, PAUL. YEAH. WHEN YOU SAY IT, PAUL. YEAH. NZ FIRST? NO, I DON'T THINK ANY PARTY'S GOT THAT POLICY, HAVE THEY? CONSERVATIVES? GOT THAT POLICY, HAVE THEY? CONSERVATIVES? BOTH LAUGH SORRY. BOTH LAUGH SORRY. INTERN ET-MANA. WELL, KOKIRI HAD THE RIGHT IDEA, DIDN'T SHE? BUT MAYBE SHE SHOULD HAVE THROWN THE PUFFED UP Ll'l'I'LE SHIT, LIKE, ATA FAN OR SOMETHING. YEAH, AND I DON'T SUPPOSE A RICH FAT ALLEGED CRIMINAL IS GOING TO HELP THEIR CASE EITHER. YEAH, AND I DON'T SUPPOSE A RICH OH. JUDITH COLLINS? HELP THEIR CASE EITHER. YEAH, AND I DON'T SUPPOSE A RICH OH, JUDITH COLLINS? BOTH! YEAH. YEAH, AND I DON'T SUPPOSE A RICH NO, I THINK SHE'S KLINGON, ISN'T SHE? THE POLLS SUGGEST THATS A TOUGH ROAD RIGHT NOW, AND THE ALLIANCE ITSELF HAS BEEN HAVING SOME TOUGH TIMES WITH SOME INTERNAL DMSIONS. SO, GOOD MORNING TO YOU BOTH, HONE HARAWIRAAND LAILA HARRE. I'LL START WITH YOU, HONE HARAWIRA. WHERE'VE YOU BEEN? I'VE BEEN UP NORTH AND REALLY ENJOYING GETTING AROUND TO SEE AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. BEEN TO DARGAVILLE, BEEN TO WHANGAREI, BEEN TO WELLSFORD, TO TE HANA, TO RUAWAI, TO TE KAO, I'VE BEEN TO AHIPARA, I'VE BEEN TO KAITAIA. IT'S THE JOHN HORE SONG. AND YOU'VE BEEN ON LEAVE AS WELL. THAT'S RIGHT, ISN'T IT? I TOOK A BIT OF A BREAK BECAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT. JUST GOING HARD OUT, HARD OUT, HARD OUT. DECIDED TO TAKE A COUPLE OF DAYS, BUT STILL ALL IN THE NORTH. SO YOU HAD A HOLIDAY UP NORTH? YOU DON'T GETA HOLIDAY, EVEN IN THE NORTH, SO I STAYED HOME RATHER THAN GO AWAY TO ANYWHERE ELSE. BUT YOU MUST BE THE ONLY LEADER WHO HAS TAKEN LEAVE DURING THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN. OH, I THINK I NEEDED A BIT OF A BREAK. I'M REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT I HAVE A CO-LEADER LIKE LAILA. SHE'S REALLY GOOD AT WHAT SHE DOES. ANNETTE SYKES, JOHN MINTO - YOU KNOW, THEY'RE INCREDIBLY TALENTED PEOPLE. I'M NOT THE SORT OF LEADER THAT NEEDS TO BE OUT IN THE FACE OF THE PUBLIC ALL OF THE TIME WHEN I'VE GOT PEOPLE LIKE LAILAALONGSIDE. AND LET'S REMEMBER THAT HONE AND THE REST OF OUR CREW HAVE TRAVELLED FROM THE NORTH OF THE NORTH ISLAND TO THE SOUTH OF THE SOUTH ISLAND AND BACK AGAIN WELL BEFORE OTHER PARTIES EVEN BEGAN THEIR ELECTION CAMPAIGN. WE'VE FILLED HALLS. IN THE NORTH, UNBELIEVABLE SUPPORT FOR THE NOTION OF A NEW KIND OF POLITICS AND A NEW RELATIONSHIP. SURE. NOW, THERE'S BEEN TALK OF A RIFT. IS THERE A RIFT BETWEEN YOU GUYS? ABSOLUTELY NOT. NO. ACTUALLY- ABSOLUTELY NOT. NO. ACTUALLY- DO WE LOOK LIKE WE'RE RIFTING? ACTUALLY, I'M SITTING OVER HERE BECAUSE THE CAMERAMAN MADE ME SIT OVER HERE. BUT THERE ARE NO ISSUES HERE. WELL, LET'S LOOK AT THE POLICIES, THEN, AND LET'S START WITH DECRIMINALISING CANNABIS. LAILA HARRE, YOU WANT TO DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS. INTERNET WANTS TO DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS. INTERNET MANA HAVE TO- THE INTERNET PARTY AND THE MANA PARTY HAVE BOTH HAD- YES, BUT- JUST LET ME EXPLAIN THIS. HAVE BOTH DEVELOPED POLICIES AROUND DRUG LAW REFORM. WE HAVE ENORMOUS AREAS OF COMMON GROUND. FIRSTLY, WE ARE BOTH COMMITTED TO THE LEGALISATION OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA. YEAH, SURE. I KNOW THAT. BUT IF WE COME BACK TO DECRIMINALISING, INTERNET WANTS TO- I'M GETTING THERE. INTERNET WANTS TO DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS, YES OR NO? YES, AND- HONE HARAWIRA, DO YOU WANT TO DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS FOR PERSONAL USE? HANG ON, PADDY. JUST GETTING BACK TO WHAT LAILAWAS SAYING, MANA MOVEMENT HAS ITS OWN POLICY- WAY OF DOING THINGS; SO DOES THE INTERNET PARTY. YEAH, SO JUST FOR THE VIEWERS AND THE VOTERS, DO YOU WANNA DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS? I'M REALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY IN WHICH THE INTERNET PARTY HAS DEVELOPED THEIR POLICIES. I'M ALSO COMFORTABLE WITH THE WAY IN WHICH MANA HAS DEVELOPED ITS POLICIES, AND I'M PROUD TO REPRESENT INTERNET MANA'S POLICY, WHICH IS VERY SIMPLE, WHICH IS TO SUPPORT THE USE OF MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES AND ALSO TO CALL FOR A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF ALL DRUG LAWS, IN PARTICULAR WITH RESPECT TO CANNABIS, TO ALCOHOL AND TO CIGARETTES. OK. SO YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING YOU AGREE ON, AND- YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING YOU AGREE ON. THAT'S GREAT. OK. SO YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING YOU AND THERE ARE NO ISSUES THERE. YOU AGREE ON. THAT'S GREAT. OK. SO YOU'VE GOT SOMETHING YOU AND THERE ARE NO ISSUES THERE. WE ALSO- BUT WHATABOUT DECRI-? CAN I ASK YOU, HONE HARAWIRA, DO YOU WANT TO DECRIMINALISE PERSONAL USE OF CANNABIS, YES OR NO? IT'S REALLY SIMPLE. WELL, I'LL GIVE YOU A REAL SIMPLE ANSWER, SHALL I? YES OR NO? YOU WANNA DECRIMINALISE, YES OR NO? TAIHOA. TAIHOA, PADDY. YOU'RE ASKING ME AS THE LEADER OF THE INTERNET MANA MOVEMENT, AND I CAN TELL YOU QUITE OPENLY THAT OUR POSITION IS A SIMPLE ONE. WE SUPPORT THE USE OF MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES, AND WE'RE CALLING FOR A COMPLETE REVIEW OF ALL OF THE DRUG LAWS IN RESPECT OF CANNABIS, TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL, BECAUSE THEY ARE ENTIRELY IRRATIONALAND INCONSISTENT. WE HAVE ONE, TOBACCO, WHICH IS KILLING MORE THAN 5000 NZERS EVERY SINGLE YEAR. YOU CAN WALK OUT OF HERE AND BUY IT IN A SHOP. YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW- YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED THE QUESTION, HONE. ...WHICH WE DON'T KNOW THE HARM THAT IS BEING CAUSED, AND WE'RE SPENDING MORE THAN $100 MILLION EVERY SINGLE YEAR TRYING TO POLICE IT. WE COULD BE FEEDING ALL OF THE KIDS IN DECILE 1 TO DECILE 4 SCHOOLS FOR THAT MONEY. SO, CAN YOU JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION? DO YOU SUPPORT DECRIMINALISING CANNABIS FOR PERSONAL USE OR NOT? I DON'T, PERSONALLY, BUT- AND WHAT ABOUT MANA? AS LEADER OF MANA, DOES MANA-? MANA IS STILL WORKING THROUGH ALL OF THOSE ISSUES. AT THIS STAGE, OUR POSITION IS- BECAUSE HERE'S THE- TAIHOA. YOU'VE JUST ASKED A QUESTION. OUR POSITION AS MANA IS TO SUPPORT THE USE OF MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES. COS HERE'S THE INTERNET PARTY'S POLICY. THEY WANT TO IMMEDIATELY DECRIMINALISE PERSONALISED USE. THEY WANNA DEVELOPA MODEL FOR REGULATING THE LEGAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF CANNABIS FOR PERSONAL USE. THEY WANNA ENABLE THE TAXATION. THIS IS RIGHT, ISN'T IT, LAILA? YES. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT SELLING DAK ON THE MAIN STREET OF KAITAIA, HONE HARAWIRA. DO YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THAT? WELL, NO, WE'RE NOT, AND THAT'S A COMPLETE MISREPRESENTATION OF THE INTERNET PARTY'S POLICY. REGULATING THE LEGAL PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF CANNABIS. JUST LET ME EXPLAIN OUR POLICY. SO, THE COMMON- CAN I? I MEAN, THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN. THE POINT OF DEPARTURE FOR BOTH THE INTERNET PARTY AND THE MANA MOVEMENT, IN TERMS OF PERSONAL USE, IS THAT WE ALL WANT TO SEE A SHIFTING OF THE POLICING OF MARIJUANAAND CANNABIS USE FROM THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TO THE HEALTH SYSTEM. WE HAVE DEFINED THAT AS REQUIRING THE DECRIMINALISATION OF PERSONAL USE AS A FIRST STEP. IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT OF A MODEL FOR THE FUTURE REGULATION OF CANNABIS SALE OR PRODUCTION, TO TAKE IT RIGHT OUT OF THE BLACK MARKET, AWAY FROM THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT, WE HAVE SAID WE NEED TO DEVELOP A MODEL THAT IS NOT LIKE THE MODEL THAT WAS DEVELOPED FOR SYNTHETIC CANNABIS AND LEGAL HIGHS, WHERE YOU DID SEE QUEUES OUTSIDE DAIRIES IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES LIKE KAIKOHE TO PURCHASE SYNTHETIC CANNABIS. NOW, THAT'S THE LEGACY OF THE NATIONAL PARTY, OF PETER DUNNE, ON DRUG LAW REFORM. WE REJECT THAT AS A MODEL. BUT YOU WOULD STILL ALLOW RETAIL AS A REFORM? WHAT THE INTERNET PARTY WANTS TO DO IS TO DEVELOP A MODEL FOR THE PROPER REGULATION OF CANNABIS PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION WHICH WOULD ENABLE ITS TAXATION. THAT WILL NEED A LOT OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENTAND INCLUDING ENGAGEMENT WITH OUR PARTNERS IN MANA. OK, WE'VE RUN OUT OF TIME. OH, WAS THAT IT, PADDY? HONE HARAWIRAAND LAILA HARRE, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. WELL, IT'S A RARE PARLIAMENT THAT DOESN'T SEE AT LEAST ONE MP LEAVE THEIR PARTY. IN THIS PAST TERM, IT WAS BRENDAN HORAN, FORMERLY OF NZ FIRST. IT'S COMMON TOO FOR SUCH MPS TO STAND FOR RE-ELECTION JUSTAS HORAN IS WITH HIS OXYMORONIC INDEPENDENT COALITION. SO WHAT DOES HIS PARTY STAND FOR? WHO ELSE IS IN IT? AND DO THEY HAVE ANY KIND OF CHANCE? TORBEN AKEL REPORTS. GOOD MORNING, TAURANGA. MOANA TAURANGA TANGATA. A GORGEOUS DAY. THE METSERVICE HAVE COMPLETELY FLIP-FLOPPED, ALMOST AS IF THEY WERE A POLITICAL PARTY. TUESDAY MORNING IN TAURANGAAND LOCAL RADIO HOST PAT SPELLMAN IS TALKING POLITICS, INCLUDING HIS OWN POOR SHOWING IN A JUST-RELEASED POLL. WOMAN: NOT EXACTLYA GOOD WAKE UP FOR PAT THIS MORNING, THOUGH, EH, PAT? WHAT'S THAT? WAKING UP WITH YOU? NO, NO. WAKING UP WITH YOUR 2%. LAUGHTER YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC. THERE'S A 4.5%, 5.5% MARGIN OF ERROR, SO I COULD HAVE HAD 7. SPELLMAN IS STANDING IN THE WAIARIKI ELECTORATE FOR THE NZ INDEPENDENT COALITION, OR NZIC, THE PARTY FOUNDED BY BRENDAN HORAN. TILL RECENTLY A LABOUR PARTY ORGANISER, SPELLMAN ADMITS HE'S SOMEWHAT SPELLBOUND BY HORAN. HE'S A MAN OF MANA, HE'S LOYAL, HE'S LOVING, HE'S CARING, HE'S REAL. HE'S ALSO NUMBER ONE ON THE NZIC'S LIST OF 1O CANDIDATES, SIX OF WHOM ARE BASED IN THE BAY OF PLENTY. IN 2011, HORAN WAS NZ FIRSTS CANDIDATE IN TAURANGA, BUT GOT JUST 13% OF THE VOTE. THIS TIME, HE'S STANDING IN THE ADJACENT BAY OF PLENTY SEAT, HOPING TO CAPITALISE ON THE RETIREMENT OF ITS LONG-STANDING MP, TONY RYALL. THIS IS THE GAME PLAN: THAT I WIN THE BAY OF PLENTY SEAT. WE GET AT LEAST 2% OR 3% OF THE PARTY VOTE, SO I'LL TAKE IN THREE TO FIVE MPS. BUT SO FAR THE NZIC IS YET TO EVEN REGISTER IN ANY MAJOR POLLS, THOUGH HORAN THINKS HE KNOWS WHY. KNOW OF NO PERSON WHO'S BEEN TELEPHONED BYANY OF THESE POLLSTERS OR APPROACHED BY THE POLLSTERS AND HAVE BEEN ASKED WHAT ABOUT THE NZ INDEPENDENT COALITION. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU KNOW WHO'VE BEEN APPROACHED BY POLLSTERS? INDEPENDENT COALITION. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO YOU KNOW WHO'VE BEEN APPROACHED BY POLLSTERS? THREE OR FOUR. AND THEY'VE ALL SAID TO YOU THAT THE POLLSTERS DID NOT ASK THEM- THREE OR FOUR. AND THEY'VE ALL SAID TO YOU THAT THE POLLSTERS DID NOT ASK THEM- THAT'S RIGHT. ...ABOUT THE NZ INDEPENDENT COALITION? THAT'S RIGHT. ...ABOUT THE NZ INDEPENDENT COALITION? MM. OF COURSE, POLLSTERS DON'T ACTUALLY ASK RESPONDENTS ABOUT SPECIFIC PARTIES, JUST WHICH ONE THEY'D VOTE FOR. IRONICALLY, REGULAR OPINION POLLS ARE A KEY PART OF THE NZIC'S PITCH. IF ELECTED, ITS MPS WOULD POLL THEIR ELECTORATES BEFORE VOTING ON MAJOR BILLS; ABOUT HALF A DOZEN TIMES PER TERM. THE MOMENT MPS GET IN AND THEY THINK THEY'RE SPEAKING FOR ALL THE PEOPLE BUT THEY DON'T CONSULT WITH THEM, AND THINGS POP UPAND THE AVERAGE VOTER GOES, 'WELL, HOLD ON, I DIDN'T VOTE FOR THAT.' AN EXAMPLE HORAN GIVES IS THE GAY MARRIAGE ACT, WHICH HE VOTED AGAINST. A POSITION THAT SITS WELL WITH NZIC CANDIDATE BARJINDAR SINGH. ORIGINALLYA LAWYER FROM INDIA, HE MET HORAN WHILE DRMNG HIM IN HIS TAXI. HE TOLD ME HE GOING TO FORM A PARTY, AND I NOT ONLY JOINED THE PARTY, ALSO SO MANY OTHER MY FRIENDS AND PEOPLE I ENROLLED AS MEMBERS. SINGH THEN MADE NUMBER SIX ON THE NZIC'S LIST. NOTA BAD MOVE BY HORAN, CONSIDERING THE HIGH NUMBER OF SIKHS LMNG IN THE BAY OF PLENTY - 2700, AT LAST COUNT. HE'S ALSO TARGETING ITS SENIORS, BY PROMISING TO RAISE PENSIONS; AND STUDENTS, WITH A PLEDGE TO ABOLISH TERTIARY FEES. BUT WHAT IF ANYTHING DO LOCALS KNOW ABOUT BRENDAN HORAN AND HIS INDEPENDENT COALITION? TO FIND OUT WE SURVEYED VOTERS HERE IN CENTRAL TAURANGA. MA'AM, WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT BRENDAN HORAN? I KNOW THAT HE USED TO BE NZ FIRST, AND I KNEW HE HAD HIS OWN PARTY NOW. NOTA LOT, TO BE HONEST. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. HAVE YOU HEARD OF HIS INDEPENDENT COALITION? NO, I HAVEN'T. WOULD YOU BE LIKELY TO VOTE FOR THEM? PROBABLY NOT. NO! WHY NOT? WELL, I JUST DON'T THINK HE'S GONNA DO ANYTHING FOR THE BAY OF PLENTY, AND HE ALSO HAS HIS OWN PROBLEMS. INDEED, HORAN IS STILL THE SUBJECT OF A POLICE INVESTIGATION INTO THE SAME ALLEGATION WHICH TRIGGERED HIS EXPULSION FROM NZ FIRST NEARLY TWO YEARS AGO - THAT HE'D MISAPPROPRIATED MONEY FROM HIS MOTHER'S ESTATE BEFORE SHE DIED. AS WE KNOW, IT'S ALL POLITICALLY MOTIVATED BY THE LEADER OF NZ FIRST, SO I'M NOT REALLY CONCERNED AT ALL. TO BE FAIR, HORAN HAS BEENA STRONG ADVOCATE FOR THE BAY, OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS. AS THE ONLY LOCALLY-BASED OPPOSITION MP, HE'S BEEN THE GO-TO GUY FOR UNHAPPY LOCALS AND THE MEDIA. BUT WILL THAT BE ENOUGH FOR HIM TO WIN THE BAY OF PLENTY SEAT THIS TIME ROUND? I WOULDN'T BE DOING IT IF I DIDN'T THINK WE COULD WIN IT. I'D HAVE ANOTHER PLAN, WOULDN'T I? YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT FAITH IN THE PEOPLE OF BAY OF PLENTY. I'VE GOT FAITH IN NZERS. PROBLEM IS, POLLS SUGGEST THEY DON'T HAVE MUCH FAITH IN HIM, AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY PLAN B, POST-ELECTION HE MIGHT BE DOING A LOT MORE OF THIS. STILL TO COME - THE PANEL PICK UP ON THE STATE OF INTERNET MANA AND WHO'S THE MAN WITH THE PLAN TO GROW THE ECONOMY. STAY WITH US. AND NZ HERALD COLUMNIST FRAN O'SULLIVAN. NOW, LET ME COME TO YOU. THE DEBATE - WHO DID YOU THINK CAME OUT OF THAT THE BEST? MR PARKER OR MR ENGLISH? FRAN? UH, PROBABLY MR ENGLISH. HE'S IN AN AWKWARD POSITION, BECAUSE ON MONDAY THEY'RE GOING TO SET OUT WHAT THE FISCAL TRACK IS AND WHAT TAX CUTS THEY CAN OR CAN'T DO, SO HE WAS TRYING TO- HEDGING HIS BETS? WELL, TRY NOT TO GIVE YOU THE BREAK THAT WILL COME ON MONDAY, BASICALLY. BUT, YOU KNOW, HE'S GOT THAT POINT. I THOUGHT HE HEDGED ITA BIT IN THE SENSE THAT HE TALKED ABOUT THERE'S 500 MILLION THERE, BUT IT WASN'T NECESSARILY CLEAR THAT WOULD COME IN IN THE FIRST YEAR, SO HE WAS SORT OF KIND OF SUGGESTING THAT IT COULD BE ROLLED FORWARD. AND WHAT IS INTERESTING WHEN YOU LOOK AT DAVID PARKER, HE ALSO WAS TALKING TAX CUTS, BUT NOT TOWARD THE END OF THE SECOND TERM OF LABOUR BEING IN GOVERNMENT WHEN THEY WOULD HAVE CAPITAL GAINS TAXES COMING IN AND A BIT OF AN OFFSET. HE WAS SAYING HE COULD OUT-TAX-CUT NATIONAL. THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SAYING. HELEN KELLY, WHILE THAT WAS HAPPENING, YOU WERE RUNNING SOME NUMBERS YOURSELF, WEREN'T YOU? SO HE SAYS 500 MILLION GOING TO TAX CUTS. WHAT DOES THAT AMOUNT TO? YEAH, IF THAT WAS GIVEN TO PEOPLE ONLY ON LESS THAN $40,000 A YEAR, IT WOULD BE $4.60 A WEEK. NOW, LABOUR AND THE GREENS ARE OFFERING MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES TO THAT VERY SAME GROUP WHICH WOULD SEE THEM AN AWFUL LOT BETTER OFF TAKING THAT SORT OF OPTION. THE PROBLEM IS WAGES ARE TOO LOW FOR THOSE PEOPLE ON UNDER $40,000 A WEEK- A YEAR, AND YOU ASKED SOME VERY VERY GOOD QUESTIONS, REVEALING QUESTIONS, ABOUT WHAT BILL ENGLISH THINKS ABOUT WAGE INCREASES. HE HAS NO AMBITION TO LIFT WAGES IN THIS COUNTRY, NO PLANS. IN FACT, THEY PLAN TO PASS LAW TO REDUCE WAGES. THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IF THEY HADN'T LOST JOHN BANKS. AND, PADDY, HE APPARENTLY HAS NO NEW IDEAS EITHER? WHEN HE WAS ASKED FOR ONE NEW IDEA, HE COULDN'T COME UP WITH ANYTHING. THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING RIGHT, HE RECKONS. BUT IN SAYING THAT, THAT IS NATIONAL'S PLAN. THAT IS NATIONAL'S BRAND. STABILITY WITH THE ECONOMY. I MEAN, I WASN'T SURPRISED TO SEE THAT AS OTHER PEOPLE. THATS EXACTLY WHAT HE'S GOING FOR. HE STUMBLED, UNABLE TO ANSWER. 'THERE'S GOING TO BE NO ONE SINGLE IDEA TO WIN THE LOTTO.' IT'S NOT WINNING THE LOTTO. I MEAN, THEY'VE SET UPA FRAMEWORK. THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CHANGE. BUT SHOULDN'T YOU BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH-? YOU'RE THE FINANCE MINISTER, SHOULDN'T YOU BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH ONE FRESH IDEA? WELL, HE WON'T COME UP WITH ONE FRESH IDEA. HE'LL GIVE YOU A WHOLE PILE OF THINGS THAT THEY'RE DOING. AND IF YOU ACTUALLY GO OUT, YOU CAN LOOK AT WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH DATA- DATA FORUM WORK, ALL THAT. THERE'S SIGNIFICANT REVOLUTION HAPPENING IN PUBLIC SERVICES AND ACROSS THE ECONOMY. JUST PICKING UP ON THE POINT THAT HELEN MADE ABOUT THE MINIMUM WAGE, AND ITHINK THAT IS AN ISSUE. WHAT IS INTERESTING IS, IF I CAN GETA PLUG IN THE MOOT OF THE BOARDROOM, OVER THE LAST WEEK OR TWO, IT'S REALLY INTERESTING TO SEE SOME OF THE MORE PROGRESSIVE BUSINESSES ARE ACTUALLY DOING THIS. SOME HAVE ADOPTED LMNG WAGE ANYWAY AND ARE REALLY WORKING IN WITH THEIR UNIONS, AND THIS IS AT THE TOP TIER OF TOWN, TO, YOU KNOW, TRYAND MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THATS THE REAL WAY WAGE INCREASES WILL COME. lT'LL COME THROUGH MORE PRODUCTIVE BUSINESSES. BUTAT THE SAME TIME, I THINK THERE IS THIS ISSUE AT THE LOWER END OF TOWN, IF YOU LIKE, THE SMALLER BUSINESSES, WHERE MAYBE THAT WHOLE ISSUE OF THE MINIMUM WAGE DOES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. THE WHOLE OF AGED CARE IS PAYING MINIMUM WAGES TO THEIR STAFF. THESE ARE PRODUCTIVE WORKERS. THESE ARE WORKERS ABSOLUTELY WORKING EVERY MINUTE THAT'S MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM AND GETTING WAGES THAT THEY CAN BARELY LIVE ON. THERE IS A WAGE CRISIS IN THIS COUNTRY, AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM BILL ENGLISH IS ACTUALLY THE WAY WAGES ARE GOING IS ALL FINE. LABOUR HAS SAID THINGS LIKE THEY'LL INVEST IN WOOD MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING LOGS. THEY HAVE GOT IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING ECONOMIES OUTSIDE OF AUCKLAND AND CHRISTCHURCH. THEY'VE SAID THAT THEY WILL REBUILD INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE RAIL, BUT THEY'LL BUILD INTO PROCESSING OUR PRIMARY PRODUCE INTO HIGHER-VALUE PRODUCTS. BUT WHO IS RIGHT ABOUT WHERE THE ECONOMY IS HEADING, BECAUSE WE'VE STILL GOT GROWTH RATES THAT ARE GOOD COMPARED TO OTHER OECD COUNTRIES. AS BILL ENGLISH POINTED OUT, 0.9% OF A WAGE INCREASE, TAKING INFLATION OUT OF THE MIX, IS STILL PRETTY GOOD. WELL, I MEAN, THAT IS THE POINT. YOU TALK TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING OFFSHORE, COME BACK AT THE CORPORATE AREA THEY'VE BEEN IN IN THE UNITED STATES, THAT SORT OF THING, SINCE THE GFC, AND THEY SAY, 'HEY, COME ON. GUYS. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LUCKY YOU ARE.' AND THERE IS AN ELEMENT THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE CORPORATE SECTOR, EVERYBODY GOT WHACKED AND THE GOVERNMENT BLEW OUT THE DEBT BIG TIME TO SUSTAIN LMNG ACROSS THE BOARD IN NZ AND A LOT OF PROJECTS THAT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD CONSIDERABLY. BUT- BUT WE'VE MOVED ON FROM THAT, HAVEN'T WE? WHAT NOW? WELL, ACTUALLY, WHAT NOW IS THE BUSINESS SECTOR SHOULD BE DOING MORE OF THE WHAT NOW. IN THIS COUNTRY, THERE'S A HECK OF LOT OF SITTING ON THE BACK, SAYING, 'WHAT WILL THE GOVERNMENT DO NEXT?' I MEAN, PROGRESSIVE BUSINESSES ACTUALLY NEED TO GET OFF THE GOVERNMENT TEAT AND GET OUT THERE THEMSELVES AND DEVELOP THEIR BUSINESSES AND GET COMPETITIVE. AND I THINK WE ARE STARTING TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. AND THE MORE, THE BETTER. WE HAVE HAD, I WOULD ARGUE, A MANAGEMENT DEFICIT IN THIS COUNTRY FOR MANY YEARS. SORRY, HELEN, I JUST WANT TO TALK TO PADDY, START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT COALITION PARTNERSHIPS IN THERE, BECAUSE EVERYBODY WAS SEEMINGLY RULING OUT WINSTON AND NOBODY PREPARED TO BUDGE. YEAH, AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT LABOUR DOESN'T HAVE MUCH MONEY THERE FOR BUYING BACK ASSETS ALTHOUGH I THINK WE WILL SEE A POLICY THERE USING THAT 100, 200 MILLION TO START BUYING BACK- OH, THAT'LL GO FAR ON 4.6 BILLION. YEAH, IT WON'T MAKE MUCH OF A DENT, WILL IT? SO WINSTON'S OUT OF LUCK ON THE OLD 'ASSET BUYING BACK' THING. BUT CAN I JUST CHALLENGE YOU HERE. WHYARE WE SAYING IT'S GOING TO BE WINSTON THAT DECIDES THIS ELECTION? REGARDLESS, ON THE ECONOMIC, WHICH I THINK FRAN HAD A GOOD GO AT, THE FORECAST BY THE TREASURY IS THAT THE GROWTH WILL HALVE; THAT MUCH OF THE GROWTH IS BEING DRIVEN BYAVERY NARROW RANGE OF ECONOMIC ACTMTY - CHRISTCHURCH AND PRIMARY PRODUCTS. WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO RELY ON THAT. THE ECONOMY IS SHRINKING DOWN IN TERMS OF ITS DIVERSITY AND WHAT I THINK WE SAW THERE FROM THOSE TWO FINANCE MINISTERS IS THAT REGARDLESS OF WHO THEY'RE IN COALITION WITH, ONE HAS GOTA SET OF IDEAS TO BUILD AND BROADEN THE ECONOMY AND TO TRAIN WORKERS AND TO PAY THEM MORE; AND ONE HAS GOT THE IDEA THAT WHAT WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING IS OK. YEAH, IACCEPT, ACTUALLY, THAT DAVID PARKER HAS ACTUALLY DONE A LOT OF THOUGHT ON THE ECONOMY, AND THERE IS A PRESCRIPTION THERE. WE'LL HAVE TO LEAVE IT THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL TAKE A BREAK AND BE BACK WITH MORE IN A MOMENT. 'PROBABLY CAN'T BUY BACK LOCHINVER STATION BECAUSE OF THE LAWS.' HE SEEMED TO BE BACKING AWAY FROM WHAT CUNLIFFE HAD EARLIER BEEN SAYING TO US ON THIS SHOW. YEAH, DAVID CUNLIFFE WAS PRETTY STRONG, AND HE ACTUALLY SAID HE WOULD BLOCK THE LOCHINVER SALE; IF LABOUR GOT RE-ELECTED, THEY WOULD BLOCK THE LOCHINVER SALE, AND WE SAW DAVID PARKER THERE SAYING THAT THEY WOULD TRY AND BLOCK IT IF THEY COULD DO IT IN THE LAW. THE LAW IS ACTUALLY PRETTY OPEN. IT DOES ALLOW MINISTERIAL DISCRETION, AND WHEN DAVID CUNLIFFE MADE THAT STATEMENT, HE WAS VERY CLEAR, 'WE WILL BLOCK THAT SALE.' I THINK LABOURARE TRYING TO WRIGGLE OUT OF IT. DAVID CUNLIFFE WENT TOO FAR WHEN HE SAID THAT. YOU CAN SEE THE REAL POSITION WITH PARKER THERE. DAVID CUNLIFFE WAS ALL TALK. HE WAS TRYING TO GETA POLITICAL HIT. PREPARING VOTERS FOR DISAPPOINTMENT, FRAN, DO YOU THINK? WELL, I THINK REALLY, WHEN THEY WISED UP THE FACT THAT HE CAN'T DO THAT. HE CANNOT AS A MINISTER ACTUALLY TAKE A NO ON IT WHEN THEY HAVEN'T EVEN HAD THE RECOMMENDATION AND THE CASE PUT TO THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. AFTER THE RECOMMENDATION, THEY CAN TAKE A NO. NATIONAL HAS NOT TURNED DOWN A SINGLE FARM SALE FORA FOREIGN BUYER, AND THERE'S 980,000HA OF FARMLAND GONE INTO FOREIGN OWNERSHIP. YOU HEARD BILL ENGLISH SAYING HE'S GOT NO PROBLEM WITH IT. SO THERE IS A CLEAR DIFFERENCE. LABOUR DOES HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. NATIONAL DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I THINK THE POINT HERE, THOUGH, IS THE POLITICS. IT'S VERY EASY FOR DAVID CUNLIFFE TO STAND UP, GET A HEADLINE AND SAY, 'I'LL BLOCK THE LOCHINVER SALE,' AND THEN IN THE WEEKS AFTER IT, START TO WRIGGLE THEIR WAY OUT OF IT WHEN THEY'VE ACTUALLY DONE THE D TIME AND WORKED IT OUT. DAVID CUNLIFFE HAS BEEN EXPOSED ON DETAILALL OVER THE SHOW. AND LOCHINVER STATION WILL BE THE NEXT FOR HIM. BILL ENGLISH TODAY COULDN'T SAY- HE SAID IN HIS COMMENT TODAY THAT THE TAX CUTS WERE IN NATIONAL'S BUDGET. THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. HE FAILED ON THE DETAIL HIMSELF TODAY. HIS SPENDING QUOTIENT WAS THERE. LET'S GIVE THESE POLITICIANS SOME ROOM. WHAT I KNOW IS THAT LABOUR IS WORRIED, AS ARE NZERS, ABOUT FOREIGN LAND SALES. NATIONAL ARE NOT. I JUST WANT TO JUMP IN HERE. YOU TALKED ABOUT WIGGLING THERE. WHEN I ASKED BILL ENGLISH ABOUT AN ETHICS QUESTION, ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS OK TO BE WOMBLING THROUGH SOMEONE'S WEBSITE AND DOWNLOADING CREDIT CARD DETAILS, I COULDN'T GETA CLEAR ANSWER FROM HIM. YEAH, AND BILL ENGLISH IS ETHICAL, AND HE KNOWS IT'S WRONG. AND I DON'T KNOW WHY HE DIDN'T JUST- I DIDN'T KNOW WHY HE JUST DIDN'T SAY THAT TODAY, AND IT'S A WORRY. HE'S GOING OVER TO THE DIRTY POLITICS SIDE. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE NEWS TONIGHT SAYING BILL ENGLISH SAID THIS, THE PRIME MINISTER'S TEAM- HE WENT AS FAR AS TO SAY I WOULDN'T ASK SOMEONE TO DO THAT. BOTH! Ill-HM. HE WENT AS FAR AS TO SAY I WOULDN'T ASK SOMEONE TO DO THAT. BOTH: "ll-HM. HE WOULD SACK SOMEONE THAT DID IT, AND JOHN KEY SHOULD SACK JASON EADE. AND JOHN KEY HAS AVOIDED HIS RESPONSIBILITY IN THE DIRTY POLITICS FIASCO. AS HE POINTS OUT, THOUGH, THEY'RE ALLEGATIONS IN THE BOOK, SO- WELL, THEY'RE BEING PROVED TRUE, AREN'T THEY? ONE REVELATION ATA TIME, THEY'RE BEING PROVED TRUE. AND NOBODY'S DENYING THAT JASON EADE WENT INTO LABOUR'S COMPUTER. FRAN, IN THAT CONVERSATION, BY THE END OF IT, YOU WERE LEFT THINKING NOBODY'S GOT THE DEAL TO STACK UP WITH WINSTON PETERS, BECAUSE NEITHER OF THEM CAN OFFER ALL OF THESE BOTTOM LINES. BUT IS IT GOING TO BE WINSTON PETERS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH? WELL, ON BALANCE, THE POLLS WOULD SAY YES, BUT IT'S BEEN VERY INTERESTING TO WATCH THE PROGRESS OF THE CONSERVATIVES OVER THE LAST LITTLE WHILE. I MEAN, EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW- I HOPE HE DOESN'T SUE ME - REGARDED COLIN AS A BIT WHACKY, BUT ALONG THE WAY, HE'S ACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE QUITE SMART. HE GOT THE LOCHINVER THING OUT. AND ALONG THE WAY, WHERE HE MIGHT ACTUALLY PICK UP SOME- BUT WINSTON GRABBED THAT OFF HIM. HE'S GOT MORE CHANCE OF BECOMING THE CHAIR OF THE NEIL ARMSTRONG FAN CLUB, LET'S FACE IT. HE WON'T GET THERE IN THIS ELECTION. I THINK HE CAN PERHAPS PICK UP SOME DISAFFECT NATIONAL VOTERS WHO HAVEN'T LIKE THE DIRTY POLITICS ALLEGATIONS AND HAVEN'T LIKED TO SEE THE, YOU KNOW, THE AMERICANISATION OF NZ POLITICS. BUT IF HE DOESN'T GET THERE, FRAN, HOW FAR ARE THESE GUYS GONNA BE PREPARED TO BEND TO GET ON WINSTON'S GOOD SIDE? WELL, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL DO WHAT THEY CAN, WON'T THEY, AND IT'S VERY INTERESTING. IF IT'S VERY NEATLY POISED. GO BACK TO 1996, AS BILL ENGLISH REMINDED US. HELEN CLARK AND BOLGER WERE FAIRLY EVENLY MATCHED. HE WENT FOR BOLGER; HE BECAME TREASURER. AND WE WORKED WELL WITH HELEN CLARK. JUST ON THE CONSERVATIVES, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF THEY CONTINUE TO POLL AT OVER 4% IF YOU SEE JOHN KEY TALK THEM UP IN THE FINAL WEEK. DO NOT BE SURPRISED IF THE POLLS STAY LIKE THAT. JOHN KEY WILL GIVE THEM ATALK AND GIVE THEM A PUSH AND HELP THEM GET THERE. AND ALSO YOU'VE SEEN COLIN MODIFY HIS POSITIONS OVER THE COURSE OF THIS CAMPAIGN. HE'S BECOME MUCH MORE REASONABLE. THOSE STAREY-EYED BILLBOARDS HAVE ALL BEEN CHANGED TO A SMILING VISAGE. VERY HARD TO PUSH WHEN YOU'RE NOT ON THE SEAT. YEAH, BUT HE POINTS TO THE FACT THAT HE IS INTERESTED IN THINGS LIKE TAX CUTS FOR CORPORATES; HE'S PRO-BUSINESS; THERE'S A WHOLE PILE OF THINGS THATARGUABLY COULD BE MASSAGED INTO A FIT. LET'S MOVE ON TO LAILAAND HONE. HELEN, I'M JUST INTERESTED. LAILA IS DEAD SET ON GETTING RID OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, BUT IS SHE ACTUALLY DAMAGING THE LEFT IN ALL OF THIS? I THINK TIME WILL TELL THAT. I'M NOT SURE. I THINK WHAT YOU SAW TODAY WAS THEM AGAIN RESPONDING TO A BEAT-UP ABOUT THEM BEING SEPARATED, ANOTHER WHALE OIL BEAT-UP INTERESTINGLY. WE'RE STILL USING HIM AS A SOURCE. < WHATARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? WELL, TODAY, THEY'VE OBVIOUSLY GOT POLICY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEIR POLICIES ON MARIJUANA, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE NOT WORKING TOGETHER, THAT THEY'RE NOT- PADDY, YOU DID THE INTERVIEW. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF IT? YOU COULDN'T GET A STRAIGHT ANSWER. IT'SA SIMPLE QUESTION. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, HELEN KELLY. I WAS ASKING ONE OF THEM WHAT THEY THOUGHT ABOUT DECRIMINALISATION OR NOT. WHAT IS THERE NOT TO WORK OUT ABOUT THAT? IT'S AYES OR NO QUESTION. I THINK THEY SAID THEY'VE GOT DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW ON IT. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THE SUGGESTION THAT THERE'S A SPLIT IN THE PARTY BETWEEN THOSE TWO AT THE LEADERSHIP LEVEL, IN TERMS OF A CRACK IN THE PARTY, I THINK HAS OVERBLOWN THERE. HONE HARAWIRA WALKED OUT ON THE JOBS POLICY. WHAT MORE EVIDENCE OF A RIFT DO YOU NEED? I DON'T THINK HE DID WALK OUT ON THE JOBS POLICY. HE LEFT THE ROOM. ALL RIGHT, WE WILL LEAVE IT THERE. AND NOW LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT WHAT'S COMING UP NEXT WEEK. LABOUR REVEALS ITS ASSET BUY-BACK FUND TODAY; NATIONAL'S DELAYED TAX ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOW DUE TOMORROW; DAVID CUNLIFFE AND JOHN KEY WILL GO HEAD-TO-HEAD AGAIN ON THE TV3 LEADERS' DEBATE ON WEDNESDAY. AND THE RESERVE BANK IS EXPECTED TO LEAVE THE OCR UNCHANGED ON THURSDAY. IT'S GOING TO BE A HUGE WEEK, AND WE'LL CAP IT OFF HERE WITH A ONE AND A HALF HOUR PROGRAMME SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. WE'LL TALK TO ALL THE BIG PLAYERS, INCLUDING JOHN KEY, DAVID CUNLIFFE AND OTHERS. AND AS THE POLLIES LIKE TO SAY, GOING FORWARD, WE CAN'T BROADCAST ON ELECTION DAY, BUT WE'LL MAKE UP FOR THAT WITH A SPECIAL PROGRAMME DONE AT 8AM THE MORNING AFTER THE ELECTION. WE'LL TALK TO THE PARTY LEADERS AS COALITION NEGOTIATIONS BEGIN AND GIVE YOU THE BEST ANALYSIS OF WHAT THE NUMBERS MEAN. BUT THAT'S US FOR TODAY. AND FROM LISA, ME AND ALL THE TEAM, HAVE A GREAT WEEK. CAPTIONSBYHUGOSEL. WWWABLE.OO.NZ CAPTIONSWEREIMDEPOSSIBLE WITHFIMDINGFROIINZONAIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2014