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. THIS MORNING JOHN KEY'S THIRD-TERM PROMISE TO NZERS. NOTE: CAPTIONS COMPUTER GENERATED USING OCR FROM DVB-SUBPICTURES. CA. TO GET OUT THERE AND SAY, OK, THE CORE ISSUES THAT MATTER - ECONOMIC PROSPERITY, EDUCATION OF THEIR KIDS, HOUSING OF YOUNG NZERS, OUR OUTWARD PLACE IN THE WORLD, THE ENVIRONMENT. CAN THE PRIME MINISTER DELIVER? HAVING SAID BEFORE THE ELECTION HE WAS PROUD OF HIS RECORD ON CHILD POVERTY, JOHN KEY NOW SAYS MUCH MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO IS HE WILLING TO MAKE THE TOUGH POLITICAL CHOICES? SHOULD THE SON OF ASTATE HOUSE BE SELLING OFF $5 BILLION WORTH OF SOCIAL HOUSING? AND IS HE SOFTENING US UP FOR ANOTHER WAR? THEN - NZ WANTS A SEAT AT THE BIGGEST TABLE OF ALL, THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL. WE CROSS TO NEW YORK FOR UN INSIDER JEFFREY LAURENTI'S TAKE ON WHETHER WE CAN BEAT SPAIN OR TURKEY. AND THE LABOUR LEADERSHIP RACE IS HOTTING UP. MPS ANDREW LITTLE AND DAVID SHEARER ARE LIVE. LATER - A NATION EXCLUSIVE AS THE NEW LABELLING SYSTEM FOR HEALTHY FOOD HITS THE SHELVES. WHO'S GOT THE FIRST FIVE-STAR RATING? AND THIS WEEK'S PANEL - SUE BRADFORD, SIMON WILSON AND MATTHEW HOOTON. GREAT TO HAVE YOU WITH US. TO JOIN IN THE DEBATE THIS MORNING, JUST TEXT 3330 FOR 50C; EMAIL US AT THENATION@TV3.CO.NZ; OR WE'RE ON TWITTER AND FACEBOOK @THENATIONTV3. WELL, REFRESH AND RENEW WAS THE REFRAIN AS JOHN KEY'S THIRD-TERM CABINET WAS SWORN IN THIS WEEK. THE PRIME MINISTER MOVED QUICKLY TO PUT NEW FACES ON HIS FRONT BENCH AND IS KEEN TO STRESS NATIONAL WON'T BE RESTING ON ITS LAURELS. BUT WITH ALL THE TALK OF CHILD POVERTY, IS HE WILLING TO HEED THE EXPERT ADVICE? AND WHAT'S HE REALLY GOT PLANNED FOR STATE HOUSES AND THE SAS? THE PRIME MINISTER JOINS ME NOW. GOOD MORNING. I MORNING, LISA. I LAST TIME YOU WERE ON THIS SHOW, YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE PROUD OF YOUR GOVERNMENTS RECORD ON CHILD POVERTY, ON POVERTY. BUT YOU'VE NOW IDENTIFIED THIS AS A CORE AREA THAT NEEDS WORK IN THIS TERM. I so, WHAT CHANGED? I YEAH, SO, FROM MEMORY, ITHINK YOU WERE QUOTING ME FROM AN AUSTRALIAN ARTICLE. AND IT WAS REALLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT- THE THING I WAS PROUD OF WAS THAT WE SUPPORTED THE MOST VULNERABLE IN THE MOST DIFFICULT OF TIMES. SO I THINKAS I SAID ON THE SHOW LAST TIME, WHEN ALL THE CRIES WERE TO CUT WORKING FOR FAMILIES OR PENSION ENTITLEMENTS, WE DIDN'T DO THAT- AND WELFARE SUPPORT. WE MAINTAINED ALL THOSE. THE CHALLENGE, I THINK, FOR NZ IS THAT THERE IS A GROUP OF YOUNG NZERS THAT ARE LMNG IN VERY POOR CONDITIONS. THERE HAS BEEN FOR A VERY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT CAN WE DO TO ADDRESS THAT. NOW, WE KNOW WORK IS BY FAR THE FASTEST WAY OF LIFTING THOSE FAMILIES OUT OF POVERTY AND INTO A HIGHER LEVEL OF INCOME. SO THE CHALLENGE IS OF GROWING AN ECONOMY, AND THATS THE MAIN FOCUS OF THE TENSION. BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS A GROUP WE CAN IDENTIFY WHERE MORE WILL HAVE TO BE DONE BOTH IN TERMS OF ASSISTING THOSE FAMILIES INTO WORK AND SUPPORT IN THE CRITICAL AREAS LIKE HOUSING FOR THEM. SO YOU'VE ASKED PEOPLE WITHIN YOUR OFFICE TO LOOK AT MEASURES, GET SOME NEW IDEAS. WHAT AREAS ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY WANTING THEM TO BURROW DOWN INTO? IF YOU SIT BACK AND SAY- COS THERE ARE LOTS OF MEASURES OF POVERTY, AND WE COULD SPEND HEAPS OF TIME, I THINK, AS A COUNTRY TRYING TO DEFINE WHAT WE REALLY MEAN BY THAT. THERE'S ANYTHING FROM 260,000 KIDS ON A HOUSING SORT OF, YOU KNOW- WHEN YOU LOOK AT ITAFTER HOUSING COSTS, BEFORE HOUSING COSTS, RIGHT THROUGH TO A SMALLER GROUP. BUT I THINK THE FIRST THING IS TO SAY WHATS THE GROUP THAT WE'RE PARTICULARLY GOING TO TARGET? WE'LL GO AWAY AND LOOK AT THAT. THE SECOND THING IS TO SAY WHAT DRIVES THE POVERTY, INSOMUCH AS THEYARE IN POVERTY, WHAT DRIVES POVERTY FOR THOSE FAMILIES. AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME REALLY BIG ISSUES. THEY ARE HOUSING, THE DEBT OFTEN THAT THOSE HOUSEHOLDS HAVE. THERE'S CHILDCARE COSTS TO A CERTAIN DEGREE, TRANSPORT COSTS AS THEY MOVE INTO EMPLOYMENT. SO I THINK YOU CAN SIT VVITH ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMMES AND AND YOU CAN CERTAINLY MAKE AGENCIES WORK BETTER TOGETHER, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE CORE ISSUES, THEY'RE THE THINGS THAT ARE LIKELY TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO THEM NOW. CAN WE LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE SPECIFICS, PRIME MINISTER, COS YOU RAISE CHILDCARE THERE. I JUST WANT TO PUTA FEW THINGS TO YOU. SO WHATABOUT-'P WOULD BE PREPARED TO PROVIDE FREE AFTER CARE AND HOLIDAY PROGRAMMES FOR STUDENTS IN LOW-INCOME AREAS, SAY? I CAN'T GENUINELY TELL YOU TODAY, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. I CAN TELL YOU THE PROCESS I'M GOING THROUGH, WHICH IS - I'VE GONE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PRIME MINISTER AND CABINET, AND WE'VE CHAIRED ONE MEETING ALREADY WITH TREASURY AND WITH OFFICIALS FROM MSD AND THE LIKES AND SAID LET'S GO AWAY AND LOOK AT THOSE CORE ISSUES. LET'S TRY AND IDENTIFY THE GROUP THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. LET'S TRY AND IDENTIFY WHAT IT WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE TO DO THAT. HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE IN THE WAY OF RESOURCES? AND MAYBE WHAT RESOURCES COULD WE MOVE AROUND TO FUND SOME OF THIS STUFF? SO THAT'S THE SORT OF PROCESS WE'RE GOING THROUGH. DOING THAT, THEN, ARE YOU OPEN TO-? BECAUSE THE CHILDREN'S COMMISSIONER HAS SAID THAT BENEFITS ARE WOEFULLY INADEQUATE, ARE YOU OPEN TO RAISING BENEFIT LEVELS? THE MAIN ARGUMENT AS I SEE IT HAS REALLY BEEN ABOUT WHETHER WE'RE PREPARED TO PAY THAT IN-WORK TAX CREDIT TO PEOPLE ON A BENEFIT. SO THOSE WHO HAVE CHILDREN, ON A BENEFIT. AND THE ANSWER TO THAT HAS GENERALLY BEEN NO. WE HAVEN'T WANTED TO SUPPORT THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T WANTED TO NARROW THE GAP BETWEEN WELFARE AND WORK. AND I THINK IT'S WORTH REMEMBERING THAT WORKING FOR FAMILIES WAS ESSENTIALLY ESTABLISHED IN ITS NEW FORM UNDER A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. LABOUR THEMSELVES CAME UP WITH THAT POLICY, AND IT WAS LABOUR THAT FOUGHT VERY STRONGLY NOT TO HAVE THAT IN-WORK TAX CREDIT PAID TO THOSE PEOPLE. SO THE QUESTION IS, CAN WE DO OTHER THINGS FOR THOSE FAMILIES. BECAUSE IF IT'S JUSTA MATTER OF A BIT MORE MONEY ON THE BENEFIT, THE ONE POINT I'D MAKE THERE IS THAT WELFARE BROADLY COSTS ABOUT $8 BILLION A YEAR. SO IF IT WAS JUSTAS SIMPLE AS A BIT MORE CASH AND THAT WAS AT THE HEART OF THE PROBLEM, I WOULD STRONGLY SUGGEST GOVERNMENTS WOULD HAVE FIXED IT IN THE PAST. IT'S A MUCH MORE COMPLEX ISSUE WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE FAMILIES AND THOSE PARTICULAR CHILDREN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT WHEN YOU SORT OF SAY TALKING ABOUT COUNTERING THAT IN-WORK TAX CREDIT, WHAT WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO DO, THEN? A UNIVERSAL CHILD PAYMENT OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES? THERE MIGHT BE A RANGE OF THINGS. IF YOU LOOK AT YOUNG PEOPLE, WHAT WE DID WITH THE 16-, 17-, 18-YEAR-OLD, TYPICALLY YOUNG MUMS, WE'VE NOW EXTENDED THAT TO 19-YEAR-OLDS THAT WERE GOING PREVIOUSLY ON THE EQUIVALENT OF THE DPB, WE DID LOTS OF THINGS. WE PUTAWRAPAROUND SUPPORT PERSON, BECAUSE THERE'S TREMENDOUS FRUSTRATION FOR SOME OF THESE FAMILIES WHEN DEALING WITH LOTS OF AGENCIES. WE ALSO GAVE THEM INCENTIVE PAYMENTS AS THEY UNDERTOOK DIFFERENT ACTMTIES. SO WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS THERE'S CLEARLY A NEED TO GIVE THOSE FAMILIES MORE SUPPORT. I CAN'T AS I SIT HERE TODAY TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW YOU CAN DO THAT. I CAN SAYATA PRINCIPLED LEVEL, I WANT TO MAINTAIN THE INCENTIVES FOR FAMILIES TO MOVE INTO WORK. BUT THERE MIGHT BE WAYS WE COULD PUT MORE MONEY DIRECTLY INTO THOSE YOUNGSTERS AND MAKE SURE IT ACTUALLY REACHES THOSE YOUNGSTERS AND ISN'T JUST PART OF AN OVERALL POT WHICH DELIVERS A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SUPPORT. SO TARGETED SPENDING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? I POTENTIALLY. I WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU NEED TO KEEP BENEFITS AT A LEVEL THAT THERE'S STILL AN INCENTIVE TO GETA JOB AND EARN A SALARY OR A WAGE, POVERTY EXPERT JONATHAN BOSTON HAS SAID, AND I'M QUOTING HIM HERE, 'PEOPLE WHOLLY DEPENDENT ON THE BENEFITARE 25% WORSE OFF RELATIVE TO CITIZENS IN WORK I 'THAN THEY WERE A GENERATION AGO.' I HIS POINT BEING THAT THE GAP IS THERE AND IT'S TOO WIDE ALREADY, IN HIS VIEW. YEAH, SO, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE MACRO LEVEL, WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING IS BENEFITS HAVE BEEN GOING UP, AND WE PUT INTO LAW THAT THEY SHOULD BE ADJUSTED BY THE INFLATION RATE, BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, YOU'RE RIGHT, THE AVERAGE WAGE IS RISING. BUT WHAT'S ALSO ABSOLUTELY TRUE IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING OVER A GENERATION, IS THAT HOUSING AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE COSTS FOR THOSE FAMILIES AND ACTUALLY FOR NZERS IN GENERAL IS RISING. IT USED TO BE ABOUTATHIRD OF DISPOSABLE INCOME. NOW IT'S ABOUT HALF FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE. AND THATS JUST AS TRUE FOR A YOUNG COUPLE THAT MIGHT GO AND BUY THEIR FIRST HOME. SO, IN AWAY, IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE COMMENTS THAT BILL ENGLISH MADE THIS WEEK, YOU CAN DEBATE THE MERITS OR WHATEVER, BUT THE REAL POINT HE WAS MAKING IS THAT IF WE WANT TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF DISPOSABLE INCOME FOR THOSE FAMILIES, WE HAVE TO REDUCE THE PERCENTAGE OF HOUSING AS AN OVERALL PART OF THEIR EXPENDITURE. SO THAT'S ONE ELEMENT THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS, AND THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO THERE, ITHINK. GIVEN THAT HOUSING IS ONE OF YOUR TOP PRIORITIES- LET'S HAVE ATALK ABOUT THAT TOO. YOU TRIALLED A WARRANT OF FITNESS ACROSS ABOUT 500 STATE HOUSES. SO, WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO ROLL THAT OUT ACROSS ALL YOUR HOUSING STOCK, BECAUSE NICK SMITH SEEMED TO BE INDICATING THAT WOULD HAPPEN THIS YEAR. PAULA BENEFIT- BENNETT SAID IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. SO ARE YOU GOING TO ROLL IT OUT THIS YEAR? I CAN'T GIVE YOU THE ANSWER TO THAT TODAY BECAUSE NICK HASN'T COME BACK TO ME TO SAY HE'LL DEFINITELY DO THAT OR HE WON'T, AND, ACTUALLY, THE DEMARCATION MAY CHANGE, OR THE RESPONSIBILITY MAY CHANGE, BECAUSE BILL IS NOW RESPONSIBLE FOR HOUSING NZ. BUT IS ITA SERIOUS OPTION THAT YOU THINK IS A GOOD IDEA TO ROLL OUT? YES, AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IN RELATION TO THOSE HOUSING NZ HOMES - WE'VE BEEN INSULATING EVERY ONE OF THOSE THAT WE PRACTICALLY CAN. THERE ARE SOME THAT WE CAN'T, AND YOU RAISE ABSOLUTELY THE RIGHT POINT, WHICH IS UNDER THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT, THEIR FOCUS OF ATTENTION WAS LIFTING THE NUMBER OF STATE HOUSES. UNDER THE LAST SIX YEARS OF OUR GOVERNMENT, THE FOCUS HAS BEEN IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF THAT STOCK. AND SO WE DO WANT TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THAT QUALITY, BUT I THINK ALSO OUR BIG FOCUS OF ATTENTION WOULD BE TO SAY, CLEARLY THERESA NEED FOR MORE HOUSING, BUT WHO'S THE RIGHT PROVIDER OF THOSE HOUSES? AND IF YOU COME TO WARRANT OF FITNESSES. ONE OF THE REASONS WE WERE A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT ROLLING THAT OUT IN A MANDATORY BASIS FOR ALL PRIVATE SECTOR RENTALS IS BECAUSE THERE'S PLENTY OF LESS WELL OFF PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIVE IN A PRIVATELY RENTED HOME. WE ARE CONCERNED THAT WILL REALLY DRIVE RENTS UP, SO THERE'S THE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE ARGUMENT THERE. BUT IT IS AN INCREDIBLY BASIC WARRANT OF FITNESS LIST. I MEAN, ANYONE WATCHING THIS SHOW WOULDN'T WANT TO LIVE ANYWHERE THAT DIDN'T MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S STUFF LIKE HAVING TWO POWER POINTS IN A WALL, HAVING RUNNING WATER IN YOUR BATHROOM. DO WE NOT HAVE BETTER EXPECTATIONS FOR RENTERS IN THIS COUNTRY? WE SHOULD DO. BUT, I MEAN, WITHOUT BEING SILLY ABOUT THESE THINGS, YOU COULD PROBABLY GO TO A FEW FLATS IN CASTLE ST IN DUNEDIN THAT 14 STUDENTS ARE OCCUPYING AT THE MOMENT, WAYABOVE WHAT THEY REALLY SHOULD HAVE IN THERE, AND THEY WOULDN'T MEET ANYWHERE NEAR THE WARRANT OF FITNESS CONDITIONS. SO MY ONLY SIMPLE POINT TO YOU IS THAT, YES, I THINK THERE'S A LEVEL OF EXPECTATION. YES, I THINK IN A VOLUNTARY BASIS WE SHOULD EMBED THAT, AND OVER TIME WE HAVE TO MOVE IN THAT AREA. I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M JUST SIMPLY SAYING IF YOU PUTA LOT OF COSTS ON THEM, A BIT LIKE THE TREASURY ADVICE ON CAPITALS GAINS TAX, WHEN IT COMES TO RENTING, THE IMPOST THAT ULTIMATELY FALLS TO THE RENTER. WELL, NATIONAL IS PREPARING TO SELL OFF UP TO FIVE BILLION DOLLARS' WORTH OF STATE HOUSING. WHEREABOUTS IN YOUR POLICY DID YOU SPELL THAT OUT TO VOTERS BEFORE THE ELECTION? BECAUSE WHEN YOU SOLD OFF ASSETS BEFORE, THE POWER COMPANIES, YOU MADE IT VERY CLEAR; YOU SOUGHT A MANDATE TO DO THAT. I'VE LOOKED AT YOUR POLICY- WELL, I'VE NEVER SEEN A NUMBER FOR FIVE BILLION, SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU- WELL, I'VE NEVER SEEN A NUMBER UP TO. UP TO FIVE BILLION. WHERE YOU- WELL, I'VE NEVER SEEN A NUMBER UP TO. UP TO FIVE BILLION. WELL, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT NUMBER. BILL ENGLISH HAS SAID IT COULD BE UP TO A THIRD OF YOUR STOCK. SO THAT WOULD BE A VALUE OF AROUND FIVE BILLION. YEAH. SO LET'S WAIT AND SEE BEFORE WE ALL GETA LITTLE BIT EXCITED ABOUT THE THING. BUT THE FUNDAMENTAL POINT, THOUGH, THAT WE ARE MAKING, IS THAT WE DO WANT THE SOCIAL HOUSING STOCK TO GROW. SO THE POINT THERE IS - OK, HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT HAPPEN? SO THE FIRST THING WE DID LAST YEAR- BUT, EXCUSE ME, PRIME MINISTER, MY QUESTION WAS - WHERE IN YOUR POLICY DID YOU OUTLINE SPECIFICALLY THAT YOU INTENDED TO SELL OFF STATE HOUSING STOCK IN QUITE HIGH LEVELS? WHERE DID YOU INDICATE THAT PRIOR TO THE ELECTION? WELL, IT WAS QUITE CLEAR, I THINK, IN OUR POLICY THAT WE WANT TO MOVE TO GREATER SOCIAL HOUSING. SO IN THE END, MY POINT IS - I THINK YOU'RE TAKING A PARTICULAR COMMENT THAT HE'S MADE, AND IN THE END I CAN'T TELL YOU IF HE'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT OR WRONG BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS YET, BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS WHERE BILL IS WANTING TO MOVE IS HE'S WANTING TO INCREASE THE OVERALL LEVEL OF HOUSES AVAILABLE. SAY THAT THE SOCIAL HOUSING SECTOR BUT WHAT HE'S WANTING TO DO us 1 SHOULD BE A MUCH BIGGER PROVIDER. NOW, THE QUESTION WE HAVEN'T ANSWERED OURSELVES YET IS - HOW DO YOU DO THAT? ONE WAY WE'VE DONE IT- BUT HOW MUCH OF THE SELL-OFF OF THOSE HOUSES WILLACTUALLY GO BACK INTO CREATING MORE HOMES? HOW MUCH OF THAT MONEY WILL YOU GUARANTEE WILL BE SPENT ON THAT? WELL, IT DEPENDS, I THINK, A LOT ON HOW YOU STRUCTURE- AND WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT WORK, BUTAS AN EXAMPLE, YOU COULD, OBVIOUSLY, TRANSFER SOME HOUSING NZ TO SOCIAL HOUSING PROVIDERS ATA CERTAIN RATE. NOW, THAT COULD BE AT A DISCOUNTED RATE- BUT CAN YOU GUARANTEE THAT MOST OF THAT MONEY WILL BE SPENT ON CREATING MORE HOUSES, I IF INDEED YOU'RE SELLING SOME OFF? I WELL, THAT WILL BE THE KEY TEST OF THE POLICY, IS TO INCREASE THE OVERALL LEVEL OF HOUSING. WE ARE LESS CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER A SOCIAL HOUSING PROVIDER owns THAT [EH3 LIKE PRESBYTERIAN SUPPORT OR SALVATION ARMY OR OTHERS, OR WHETHER HOUSING NZ OWNS IT. IN FACT, WE'D PROBABLY ARGUE WITH YOU THAT WHILE THERE'S A PLACE FOR HOUSING NZ, OVER SUCCESSIVE GOVERNMENTS, IT'S HARDLY BEEN A RINGING SUCCESS. I THINK THERE'S MORE THAT WE CAN DO THERE. NOW, THE CHALLENGE, AS I SAID, IS WE GAVE INCOME-RELATED RENTS AS A NEW POLICY TO SOCIAL HOUSING PROVIDERS. THAT PROVIDES THE CASH FLOW FOR THEM. SO THE CHALLENGE HERE NOW IS - HOW DO THEY BUILD UP THAT CAPITAL STOCK? WHAT WE DO KNOW IS IN PLACES LIKE AUSTRALIA, THEY'VE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN GROWING THE OVERALL LEVEL OF STOCK AVAILABLE. OK. I WANT TO MOVE ON IN THE TIME WE'VE GOT LEFT ON TO GLOBAL ISSUES. YOU HAVE SAID THAT WE'D BE SURPRISED AT THE NUMBER OF NZERS WHO WOULD WANT TO LEAVE THIS COUNTRY AND FIGHT IN FOREIGN WARS. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? WELL, A BIGGER NUMBER THAN I THINK THE AVERAGE NZER WOULD THINK. MANY PEOPLE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? I CAN'T AND WON'T TODAY, BUT I MIGHT WHEN I GIVE THE SPEECH THAT I WANT TO OUTLINE. THAT'S A PROCESS I'M WORKING THROUGH WITH MY, KIND OF, SECURITY OFFICIALS. EXPERTS HAVE KIND OF SAID TO US ABOUTA DOZEN, MAYBE. IS IT MORE THAN THAT? UM, I JUST DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU A NUMBER TODAY, BUT WHAT I GENUINELY WOULD SAY TO NZERS IS THAT THE THREAT- BUT DON'T NZERS-? IF YOU ARE PLANNING LEGISLATION, DON'T NZERS NEED TO HAVE AN IDEA? I so CAN YOU TELL us? I MY SENSE IS - YES, ACTUALLY, THEY DO NEED TO HAVE AN IDEA, AND THERE WILLALWAYS BE THOSE THAT WILL CHALLENGE THE VERACITY OF THOSE STATEMENTS. I so MORE THAN A DOZEN? I WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THAT NUMBER TODAY, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING TO YOU IS IT'S HIGHLY PROBABLE, IF I'M ALLOWED TO, I WILL SPELL OUT, WITHIN A RANGE, WHAT THOSE NUMBERS LOOK LIKE. THERE ARE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES IN THAT GROUP OF FOREIGN FIGHTERS. SO THEY'RE PEOPLE WHO ARE EITHER IN A COUNTRY OVERSEAS FIGHTING. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING TO LEAVE. AND THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING TO BE PART OF THE OVERALL ENGAGEMENT, I SO THEY MIGHT FUND THOSE ACTMTIES. I I THINK IF YOU PUT ALL THOSE NUMBERS TOGETHER, NZERS WOULD BE QUITE SURPRISED. SO WHY WOULD WE INVOLVE OURSELVES? YOU'RE CONSIDERING, AT THE MOMENT, WHETHER THE SAS WILL BE INVOLVED. WHY WOULD WE INVOLVE OURSELVES IN THIS WAR? WHY WOULD WE MAKE IT OUR WAR? SO AGAIN WE'RE SORT OF JUMPING A BIT TO CONCLUSIONS THERE IN TERMS OF THE SAS. WHAT I WOULD SAY- IF WE GET INVOLVED AT ALL, WHY WOULD WE? SAS. WHAT I WOULD SAY- IF WE GET INVOLVED AT ALL, WHY WOULD WE? WHY WOULD WE GET INVOLVED? YEAH. I WHY WOULD WE MAKE IT OUR WAR? I SO THERE ARE THREE THINGS HAPPENING AT THE MOMENT IN TERMS OF THREATS, AS I SEE IT. SO NUMBER ONE IS A DOMESTIC THREAT, AND THEY ARE FOREIGN FIGHTERS EITHER RETURNING TO NZ OR PEOPLE THAT MIGHT TAKE ACTIONS - SORT OF, DOMESTIC BEHEADING AS WE SORT OF POTENTIALLY SAW IN AUSTRALIA. NUMBER TWO IS THOSE WHO ARE IN-COUNTRY - SO THEY'RE YOUNG NZERS- WELL, THEY MIGHT NOT BE YOUNG, NECESSARILY. THEY'RE AID WORKERS OR THEY'RE EVEN OUR MILITARY PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRIES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH E AGAIN, BOTH THOSE GROUPS ARE QUITE SMALL. BUT OF THE NUMBER OF FOREIGN FIGHTERS CURRENTLY IN IRAQ AND SYRIA, WE THINK THAT TOTAL NUMBER IS ABOUT 3000. AND MANY OF THOSE COME FROM MUSLIM-BASED COUNTRIES IN OUR REGION. SO IT'S REGIONAL ACTMTY. IF YOU TAKE A STEP BACK TO, SAY, THE BALI BOMBINGS, THAT WAS A TERRORIST GROUP, DOMESTIC IN NATURE. I ll= YOU LOOK AT WHAT ls POSSIBLE, I IT IS THAT YOU COULD SEE FOREIGN FIGHTERS GOING BACK TO THOSE COUNTRIES, AND THEY ARE COUNTRIES WHERE NZERS ARE LIKELY TO HOLIDAY OR TO TRAVEL, AND SO THEY PRESENTATHREAT. SO I GUESS ALL I'M SORT OF SAYING TO NZERS IS WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHAT WE MIGHT DO. AND OF COURSE DOING NOTHING IS AN OPTION, BUT IT WOULD BE VERY ODD FOR NZ TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE THE UKAND THE UNITED STATES AND AUSTRALIAAND CANADA AND FRANCE AND GERMANY AND BELGIUM AND LOTS OF OTHER LIKE-MINDED COUNTRIES, THE NETHERLANDS, ARE ALL INVOLVED IN SOME FORM IN FIGHTING A VERY SERIOUS TERRORIST GROUP, AND FOR NZ TO DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. THE QUESTION IS WHAT WE DO, I THINK, RATHER THAN WHETHER WE DO SOMETHING. OK. SO VERY QUICKLY, PRIME MINISTER, IF WE DO INVOLVE OURSELVES, WHOSE SIDE WOULD WE BE ON? WELL, WE'D BE ON THE SIDE OF STANDING UPAGAINST ISIL BECAUSE THEY ARE A TERRORIST GROUP THAT IN THE LAST TWO YEARS HAVE GROWN IN FRIGHTENING PROPORTIONS. THEY'RE EXTREMELY WELL-FUNDED. THEY HAVE CONTROL OF ABOUT FIVE, WE THINK, IRAQI OIL WELLS, SO THEY HAVE LOTS OF CASH. FORM OF FINANCING-AND RANSOMS, AS A THEY'VE BEEN usme KIDNAPPINGS AS A: FORM OF FINANCING THEIR ACTMTIES. SO IT'S ABOUT WHO WE'RE AGAINST, NOT WHO WE'RE FOR? WELL, THE ONE DIFFERENTIATION I'D MAKE IS - IN THE IRAQ WAR THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE EARLY 20008, THAT WAS A VIEW TAKEN BY THE UNITED STATES AND THE COALITION OF THE WILLING AGAINST THE THEN-SADDAM HUSSEIN REGIME. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT IS ASKING INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT AGAINST THIS TERRORIST GROUP. AND ONE QUITE INTERESTING THING ABOUT ISIL IS THAT THEY'VE MANAGED TO MAKE THEMSELVES THE ENEMY OF PEOPLE WHO NORMALLY DON'T LIKE EACH OTHER VERY MUCH. YOU'VE GOT IRAN AND IRAQ, AND SAUDI ARABIAAND JORDAN, YOU KNOW, TURKEY, EGYPT. YOU'VE GOT LOTS OF COUNTRIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST, - ISRAEL - PEOPLE THAT DON'T NECESSARILYALWAYS- WHO ARE INVOLVING THEMSELVES. MIDDLE EAST, - ISRAEL - PEOPLE THAT DON'T NECESSARILYALWAYS- WHO ARE INVOLVING THEMSELVES. ...HAVE WARM RELATIONS WITH EACH OTHER ALL OF A SUDDEN ALL OPPOSED. AND ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS THE BUILD-UP IN THE ACTMTIES OF ISIL IN THE LAST TWO YEARS IS HAPPENING ATA FRIGHTENING PROPORTION. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING ME THIS MORNING. THAT'S PRIME MINISTER JOHN KEY. LATER IN THE HOUR, MATTHEW HOOTON, SUE BRADFORD AND SIMON WILSON ANALYSE JOHN KEY'S THIRD-TERM AGENDA. BUT NEXT - NZ'S UP AGAINST TURKEY AND SPAIN FOR A SEAT ON THE SECURITY COUNCIL SO WHO'S A SHOO-IN AND WHO'S SLIPPING OFF THE PACE? UN EXPERT JEFFREY LAURENTI AND DAVID SHEARER ARE NEXT. THIS MORNING JOHN KEY'S THIRD-TERM PROMISE TO NZERS. IT'S GOT HIGH-STAKES DIPLOMACY, PROMISES MADE AND BROKEN AND INTENSE LOBBYING FOR POWER. NZ IS PART OF THIS YEAR'S CONTEST FOR TWO NON-PERMANENT SEATS; UP AGAINST TURKEY AND SPAIN AND THE WESTERN EUROPE AND OTHERS BLOC. THE VOTE TAKES PLACE ON FRIDAY. NOW, TO TALK ABOUT OUR CHANCES, I SPOKE EARLIER TO JEFFREY LAURENTI, WHO HAS SERVED IN NUMEROUS SENIOR UNITED NATIONS ROLES AND MORE RECENTLY AS A SENIOR FELLOW AT THE NON-PARTISAN CENTURY FOUNDATION. I BEGAN BY ASKING WHETHER COUNTRIES JUST VOTE FOR THEIR MATES. I WELL, IN GENERALASSEMBLY ELECTIONS, I THE SPANIARDS ALWAYS HAVE AN ADVANTAGE OVER THE REST OF THE EUROPEAN GROUP BECAUSE THEY HAVE A NATURAL CONSTITUENCY IN THE BLOCK OF 20-SOME LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES. AND THE EUROPEAN UNION HOLDS TOGETHER PRETTY TIGHTLY FOR ANY CANDIDATES FROM WITHIN ITS MEMBERSHIP. SO BETWEEN THOSE TWO, THE SPANIARDS ARE ALREADY UP TO SOMETHING LIKE 50 VOTES. THE REAL INTERESTING PART OF THE RACE THIS YEAR IS TURKEY. AND WHERE TURKEY IS ABLE TO BROADEN ITS BASE OR WHERE IT IS FINDING ITSELF NOW... ON THE POINT OF BEING PUNISHED FOR TURKISH GOVERNMENT POLICIES. NOW, FOUR YEARS AGO, THE LAST MAJOR CONTESTED RACE FOR THE WESTERN SEATS ON THE SECURITY COUNCIL, THE CANDIDATE WAS SUBJECTED TO AN UNPRECEDENTED DEFEAT IN ITS UN HISTORY. VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE MUSLIM WORLD VOTED FOR PORTUGAL AGAINST CANADA BECAUSE THE CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT OF STEPHEN HARPER HAD BECOME MILITANTLY PRO-LIKUD, MILITANTLY PRO-ISRAELI, AND THAT TOUCHED OFF VERY SERIOUS RESERVATIONS. IF WE LOOK AT TURKEY IN A BIT MORE DETAIL, AS YOU SAY, IT'S A LARGE MUSLIM COUNTRY, BUT IT IS A BIT OF A SUCCESS STORY IN ITS PART OF THE WORLD. HOWEVER, IT DOES WAR AT ITS DOORSTEP. DOES THAT PLAY IN ITS FAVOUR OR AGAINST IT? IT IS NOT THE WAR AT ITS DOORSTEP IN ITSELF THAT IS THE ISSUE FOR THE TURKS, IT IS THE TURKS OWN INVOLVEMENT IN FOMENTING THAT WAR OR THE PERCEPTIONS THEY HAVE, AND JUST OVER THE PAST WEEK OR TWO, PRESIDENT ERDOGAN'S DECISION TO STONEWALL AND TRY AND FORCE PRESIDENT OBAMA IN THE UNITED STATES TO CHANGE THE FOCUS OF ATTACKS IN SYRIA FROM THE ISLAMIC STATE TO THE ASSAD GOVERNMENT. AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A GOOD SENSE AMONG EUROPEANS THAT THIS IS NOT THE KIND OF REPRESENTATIVE THAT THEY WANT FOR THE WEST EUROPEAN AND OTHERS GROUP. SO THIS PROVIDES AN OPENING. THE OTHER PROBLEM FOR THE TURKS IS THAT THEY WERE JUST ON THE SECURITY COUNCIL SIX YEARS AGO, SO THE KIWIS, AS IT WERE, THE NZ CANDIDACY, WHICH WOULD NORMALLY APPEAR TO BE A LONG SHOT FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD FOR THE WESTERN GROUP, LOOKS AS IF IT HAS SOME TRACTION ONLY BECAUSE OF THE ENERGY... NEGATIVE ENERGY SURROUNDING TURKEY. I VIEW SPAIN ASA SHOO-IN. I WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT NZ, WHAT THE STUMBLING BLOCKS FOR US? THE STUMBLING BLOCKS ARE THAT NZ DOES NOT HAVE AUTOMATIC BLOCS THAT WILL FLOW TO IT WITH DOZENS AND DOZENS OF VOTES. SO IT STARTS WITH A BASE OF TWO, PERHAPS. PERHAPS THE STATES IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC. YOU CAN ADD THEM UP AND GET TO A DOZEN. BUT IT DOESN'T START WITH A LARGE BASE OF ITS OWN. BUT IT DOES HAVE, I SUSPECT, A GOOD DEAL MORE TRACTION WITH THE LATIN AMERICANS AS WELLAS WITH THE ACTUAL MEMBERS OF THE WESTERN GROUP THAN TODAY THE TURKS WOULD. I THE GAME ls REALLY m AFRICA. I AH. WHERE WE ARE EXPECTING SWING VOTERS, IF YOU LIKE. THE SWING VOTERS WOULD PRESUMABLY BE IN MUCH OF ASIA, WHICH I THINK FOR EAST ASIA WOULD SEE NZ, IF YOU HAVE TO HAVE A WESTERNER, AS MORE SIMPATICO, LET'S SAY, THAN TURKEY, AND IN AFRICA, WHERE THE TURKS REALLY HAVEN'T DONE MUCH SOUTH OF THE SAHARA, AND THE NZERS HAVE SOMETHING OF... AT LEASTA POSITIVE REPUTATION, BOTH IN TERMS OF AID AND IN TERMS OF THEIR POSITIONS ON ISSUES. REMEMBER, THE LAST TIME THAT NZ HAD A SEAT SOME 2O YEARS AGO, ITS THEN PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE IN NEW YORK, COLIN KEATING, HAD BEEN PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL TRYING TO GET ACTION ON RWANDA WHEN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION IN WASHINGTON WAS PRETENDING THERE WAS NOTHING REALLY WRONG. YOU MENTIONED THE FACT THAT CANADA FOUND ITSELF IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS FIGHT BECAUSE OF SOME OF ITS ASSOCIATIONS. NZ HERE IS OBVIOUSLY QUITE CLOSE TO AMERICA. WE'RE VERY GOOD FRIENDS, AS THEY PUT IT. SO COULD THAT DAMAGE US WHEN WE'VE GOTA PRIME MINISTER HERE CONSIDERING WHETHER WE SHOULD INVOLVE TROOPS IN THE SYRIA-IRAQ CONFLICT? WELL, IF YOU HAVE A PRIME MINISTER CONSIDERING SENDING SOME MILITARY FORCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CONFLICT, WHERE ON THE GLOBAL STAGE DO YOU HAVE COUNTRIES THAT ARE ON lSIL'S SIDE? ON THIS THOUGHT, BEING VIEWED AS ALLIED WITH AMERICANS- WELL, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT YOU EXPECT FROM A WESTERN, EUROPEAN OR OTHER CANDIDATE, AND IT'S THE TURKS WHO HAVE BECOME OUTLIERS IN THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS AS PRESIDENT ERDOGAN HAS TAKEN TURKEY IN A SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT DIRECTION. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S SLAM DUNK FOR NZ. BY NO MEANS. SLAM DUNK FOR SPAIN, NOT FOR NZ, BUT THE TURKS HAVE PROBLEMS AS WELL AS ASSETS, AND IN THAT YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR AUCKLAND TO SCORE A MODEST UPSET. CAN YOU TELL ME, THEN, WHAT DO YOU THINK WILL BE THE BIG ISSUES FOR WHOEVER DOES GET ELECTED TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL? WHAT ARE THE ISSUES THEY WILL FACE OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS? WELL, THE BIG ISSUES CLEARLY ARE GOING TO BE THE MIDDLE EASTAND THE SPREAD OF THIS JIHADIST STATE, SO-CALLED, THE ISLAMIC STATE, AND HOW TO CONTAIN IT. AND RELATED TO THAT, OF COURSE, IS THE RESOLUTION OF THE SYRIAN CML WAR. I EXPECT IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A RENEWED EFFORT TO LOCK DOWN THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT AND GET A SOLUTION. AND WE HOPE A RESOLUTION ON THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAMME, BUT IF NOT, THAT TOO IS GOING TO EMERGE AS A HIGHER PRIORITY FOR THE SECURITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME THIS MORNING. AND I'M GLAD THAT NZERS WANT TO BE PART OF IT! (LAUGHS) FANTASTIC. WELL, HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THE OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME THIS MORNING. THAT'S JEFFREY LAURENTI FROM NEW YORK. THANK YOU. WELL, THAT'S JUST ONE INTERESTING CONTEST TO WATCH OVER THE NEXT FEW DAYS. THE OTHER IS LABOUR'S LEADERSHIP RACE, WHICH ANDREW LITTLE ENTERED THIS PAST WEEK. WE'LL TALK TO HIM SHORTLY, BUT ANOTHER MP WIDELY TIPPED TO THROW HIS HAT IN THE RING BEFORE NOMINATIONS CLOSE ON TUESDAY IS DAVID SHEARER, WHO IS WITH ME IN THE STUDIO THIS MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MR SHEARER. ON TUESDAY IS DAVID SHEARER, JUST VERY QUICKLY, JEFFREY LAURENTI THERE IS SAYING THAT SPAIN'S A SLAM DUNK FOR THE SECURITY COUNCIL AND THEN IT WILL COME DOWN TO A RACE BETWEEN TURKEYAND NZ. YOU'VE BEEN OVER TO THE UN RECENTLY. WHAT'S YOUR TAKE? WHAT ARE OUR CHANCES? I WENT OVER AS PART OF A BIPARTISAN APPROACH TO THE UN. I DON'T THINK IT'S QUITE AS HE PORTRAYS, BUT WHAT I DO THINK IS NZ HAS DONE A REALLY GOOD JOB. WE'VE DONE AS BEST AS WE POSSIBLY COULD HAVE IN TERMS OF GETTING OUR NAME OUT THERE <i>I</i> AND HAVING A GOOD CHANCE. <i>I</i> <i>I</i> ARE we m OR OUT, DO YOU THINK? <i>I</i> I BET WE'RE IN. I'M NOT SURE WHO IT IS. I SUSPECT IT MIGHT BE TURKEY RATHER THAN SPAIN THAT'LL BE IN WITH US. I DON'T WANT TO CALL IT TOO MUCH, BECAUSE YOU KIND OF GET THOSE WOBBLES THAT WE MIGHT NOT DO IT, BUT I'M HAPPY. YOU'RE BETTING WE ARE, SO SPEAKING OF RACES, THE LEADERSHIP RACE -ARE YOU IN, OR ARE YOU OUT? WELL, I'LL MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT IN MY OWN TIME, AND IT WON'T BE TODAY, BUT CERTAINLY I WILL MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I WHAT'S DELAYING YOUR DECISION? I OH, I JUST WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT. I WANT TO CONSULT. LOOK, THE MOST WELL-KNOWN SAYING IN POLITICS IS 'WHY NOT ME?' THREE WORDS, AND FOR ME IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT 'WHY NOT ME'; IT'S ABOUT 'WHAT CAN I DO IF I DID ACTUALLY STAND?' AND YOU THINK ABOUT WINNING, BUT THE SECOND THING, AND THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, IS WHAT CAN I DO IN ORDER TO CHANGE LABOUR AND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT GOES IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION?' AND IF I CAN'T DO THAT, THEN I DON'T BELIEVE I SHOULD BE IN THE RACE. DO THE FAMILY THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA? OVERALL, NO, BECAUSE THEY SAW ME IN THE TWO YEARS, OR LESS THAN TWO YEARS, THAT I WAS THE LEADER BEFORE. IT'S INCREDIBLY STRESSFUL. IT TAKES AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TIME. ASK ANY OPPOSITION LEADER WHAT IT'S LIKE. IT IS THE WORST JOB IN POLITICS, POSSIBLY THE WORST JOB I'VE HAD IN MY LIFE. IT'S SATISFYING ON THE ONE SIDE, BUT IT'S ALSO INCREDIBLY, INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT. YOU SAID, THEN, THAT IF YOU CAN'T CHANGE LABOUR, THEN DON'T BOTHER TAKING ON THE LEADERSHIP, AS SUCH, SO CAN YOU? AND HOW? WELL, THERE'S TWO QUESTIONS THAT WE NEED TO BE ASKING OURSELVES - WHO DIDN'T VOTE FOR US, AND WHY DIDN'T THEY? AND IF WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT, OR REFUSE TO ANSWER THAT, THEN WE ACTUALLY SHOULDN'T BE GOING DOWN THIS TRACK. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THATAND YOU LOOK AT THE PROGRESSION OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED OVER TIME, OVER THE LAST THREE OR FOUR ELECTIONS - WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE RESULTS OF THIS ONE, BUTALMOST FOR SURE AS WELL - IT'S THAT THE MIDDLE OF NZ HAS LEFT US. AND IF YOU LOOK AT, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE GROUP, WHITE BLOKES, THEY HAVE NOT STAYED WITH LABOUR. THEY HAVE GONE SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND IT'S GREAT THAT WE'VE GOT THE LOYALTY OF PASIFIKAAND MAORI AND MANY OF THOSE OTHERS, BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT BIG GROUP... ANDREW LITTLE SAID YOU SCARED PEOPLE OFF WITH CAPITAL GAINS TAX, WITH THE SUPER AGE AND ELECTRICITY REFORMS. I DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT, THEN? I I THINK SOME OF THOSE POLICIES WERE NOT UNDERSTOOD PROPERLY, BUT THE REAL PROBLEM WAS THAT PEOPLE WEREN'T LISTENING, AND IF PEOPLE ARE NOT LISTENING, YOU CAN HAVE AS MANY POLICIES AS YOU LIKE; IT'S SIMPLY NOT GOING TO WORK. SO THERE'S AN ISSUE AROUND POLICIES AND HOW WE PACKAGE IT, BUT THERE'S ALSO AN ISSUE AROUND THE WAY THAT BRAND LABOUR IS BEING PORTRAYED, AND IT'S NOT BEING PORTRAYED AS THE FAIR, ASPIRATIONAL PARTY THAT IT HAS BEEN IN THE PAST. IT'S SEEN NEGATIVELY BY PEOPLE. IF PEOPLE WEREN'T LISTENING TO LABOUR, WAS THAT BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T LISTENING TO DAVID CUNLIFFE? IN PART, IT'S THE LEADERSHIP, FOR SURE. WHEN I STOOD DOWN, WE WERE POLLING AT 34, AND WE ENDED UP ON 25 IN THE ELECTION. THAT WAS IN THE SPACE OF 12 MONTHS. THAT IS A CATASTROPHIC DROP, AND DAVID'S GOT TO ASK HIMSELF WHETHER BY STANDING HE CAN TURN THATAROUND AND TAKE US BACK UP TO 40%. THAT'S WHAT HE'S GOTFAASK HIMSELF. HE IS IN THE RUNNING, AND HE WANTS IT, SO WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE CAUCUS IF HE DOES GET IT, THE LEADERSHIP, AGAIN? WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GONNA HAPPEN? I THINK IT WILL BE INCREDIBLY DMSIVE. CERTAINLY FOR MYSELF, YOU WORK FOR A PARTY AND YOU STAND FOR A PARTYAND THE VALUES THAT UNDERPIN IT, AND THEN YOU HAVE A LEADER THAT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE CONFIDENCE [III AND FOR ME, IT WAS AN ENORMOUS TEAR INSIDE MYSELF - 'HOW DO I MARCH THROUGH THE DAY?' AND I THINK THAT WAS THE SAME FOR MANY OTHER PEOPLE. SO WOULD IT LEAD TO A REVOLT WITHIN CAUCUS? I THINK IF THAT COMES UP, WE'VE GOT A REAL PROBLEM. WE'VE SET UP THE RULES TO GIVE THE PARTYA REAL SAYAND OBVIOUSLY THE AFFILIATED UNIONS A REAL SAY IN WHO BECOMES THE LEADER, BUTAT THE SAME TIME, THAT LEADER HAS TO HAVE THE CONFIDENCE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WORK IMMEDIATELY TO THEM, WHICH ARE THE OTHER MPS, AND IF THOSE MPS, AND PARTICULARLY SOME OF THE SENIOR ONES LIKE GRANT ROBERTSON AND DAVID PARKER, DON'T HAVE CONFIDENCE IN, SAY, DAVID CUNLIFFE, THEN YOU'VE GOT A SERIOUS ISSUE ON YOUR HANDS. THANK YOU FOR JOINING ME THIS MORNING. THANKS, LISA. ME THIS MORNING. THANKS, LISA. THAT'S DAVID SHEARER. AFTER THE BREAK -ANDREW LITTLE ON HIS PLAN TO RESCUE LABOUR. AND WILLA NEW FOOD-RATING SYSTEM CHANGE THE WAY WE EAT? WILL IT HELP YOU GET HEALTHIER? I LUCY WARHURST FINDS OUT. I THIS MORNING JOHN KEY'S THIRD-TERM PROMISE TO NZERS. LAWYER AND FORMER UNION BOSS ANDREW Ll'l'I'LE RECKONS HE HAS THE CREDS TO UNIFY THE FRACTURED CAUCUS AND SAYS HE'D DUMP SOME OF THE PARTY'S FLAGSHIP POLICIES TO WOO BACK VOTERS, SO COULD THE TWICE-BEATEN NEW PLYMOUTH CANDIDATE BE THE DARK HORSE IN THE LEADERSHIP RACE? I WELL, MR LITTLE ls wm-a ME NOW. I <i>I</i> GOOD MORNING. <i>I</i> YOU WOULD'VE HEARD DAVID SHEARER SAYING THERE THAT IF DAVID CUNLIFFE WERE TO BE RE-ELECTED AS THE LEADER OF THE PARTY, IT WOULD BE DMSIVE, HIGHLY DMSIVE, FOR THE CAUCUS. DO YOU AGREE WITH HIM? WELL, I THINK IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT, BUT THIS IS A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS INVOLVING THE PARTY, THE CAUCUS, THE AFFILIATES, AND IN THE END, THE PRINCIPLE WE LIVE BY IS WE LIVE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC OUTCOME, AND I THINK PEOPLE WOULD FIND A WAY TO WORK. WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE TASK IS AHEAD OF US, WHICH IS ABOUT REBUILDING LABOUR, RECONNECTING, AND WE WOULD ALL JUST HAVE TO MUCK IN AND FIND A WAY TO DO THAT IN THE MOST CONSTRUCTIVE WAY POSSIBLE. I DO YOU THINK EVERYONE COULD DO THAT? I WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. WE'VE LOST THREE ELECTIONS IN A ROW. OUR VOTE HAS BEEN GOING DOWN. WE'RE DOWN TO 32 MPS. WE ARE SCRAPING THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL. SO I THINK WE'VE JUST GOTTA KEEP FOCUSED ON THE TASK AHEAD. WE HAVE TO BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES ABOUT WHAT LIES BEHIND THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN, AND WE'VE GOTTA MUCK IN AND MAKE IT BETTER. SO, YOU'VE THROWN YOUR HAT INTO THE RING. WHATS WRONG WITH THE OTHER TWO CANDIDATES THAT MAKES YOU THINK LABOUR NEEDS YOU INSTEAD? I'M STANDING BECAUSE I THINK I HAVE SOMETHING TO CONTRIBUTE. I'VE GOTA PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF LEADING AN ORGANISATION, OF CHANGE, OF ENGAGING WITH PEOPLE AND TURNING ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE AROUND. LISTEN, THE FEEDBACK I'VE HAD THIS WEEK HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY PHENOMENAL, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T VOTE LABOUR OR WHO HAVE PREVIOUSLY VOTED LABOUR AND HAVEN'T THIS TIME, THE MESSAGE IS PRETTY CLEAR - IT IS A COMBINATION OF THE POLICIES THAT WE HAD; THEY JUST DIDN'T LIKE SOME OF THE THINGS, AND THE SUPERANNUATION AGE IS ONE OF THE KEY THINGS. AND THEY WANTED A CLEARER UNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT LABOUR STOOD FOR, STANDS FOR, AND GREATER CLARITY, FOR EXAMPLE, ABOUT WHO OUR COALITION PARTNERS MIGHT HAVE BEEN. OK, WE'RE GOING TO COME TO THAT, BUT I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU, YOU'RE PITCHING YOURSELF AS STABLE AND STEADY. DOES A PRIME MINISTER, THOUGH, NEED TO HAVE PIZAZZ AS WELL? DO YOU NEED PIZAZZ TO BE A PRIME MINISTER? YOU NEED TO HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF JUDGEMENT, AND YOU NEED TO HAVE A SENSE ABOUT WHAT SORT OF NZ THAT WE WANT. WE DON'T HAVE AT THE MOMENT. ARE YOU THE ANTI-PERSONALITY CANDIDATE, IF YOU LIKE, IN THE SENSE, SAY, THAT SHANE JONES WAS ALLABOUT THE PERSONALITY WHEN HE RAN FOR THE LEADERSHIP? I ARE YOU THE COUNTER TO THAT? I PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FORA STYLE OF LEADERSHIP THAT IS ABOUT SETTING OUT AVERY CLEAR DIRECTION FOR THE COUNTRY. LISTEN, THERE ARE REAL CONCERNS THATA LOT OF NZ HAVE ABOUT THINGS LIKE GROWING INEQUALITY, THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WHO WORK REALLY HARD CAN'T GET AHEAD, YOUNG COUPLES WHO SAVE AND SAVE YEAR AFTER YEAR AND STILL CANNOT GET INTO THEIR FIRST HOME - THOSE ARE REAL ISSUES. AND PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR ABOUT WHAT THE NZ THAT WE ALL WANT TO LIVE IN AND TO HAVE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE, NOT JUST NEXT YEAR, NOT JUST FOCUS GROUP BY FOCUS GROUP, I BUTACTUALLY m 1s, 20 YEARS TIME. I PEOPLE ARE THINKING ABOUT THE SUCCESS OF THEIR KIDS AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND WHATA SUCCESSFUL NZ WOULD LOOK LIKE. YOU MENTIONED CLARITY AROUND COALITION PARTNERS. THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE WORKED FOR YOU IN THE ELECTION. SO UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP, WOULD YOU GET CLOSER TO THE GREENS OR FURTHER AWAY FROM THEM, I AS SHANE JONES WAS PUSHING? I THE CRITICAL LESSON I THINK WE NEED TO LEARN FROM THIS ELECTION IS THAT VOTERS WANT TO HAVE AT LEAST SOME CERTAINTY, SOME CLEARER DIRECTION ABOUT WHO OUR COALITION PARTNERS MIGHT BE, AND I THINK WE WERE TOO UNCLEAR ABOUT IT. HOW THAT MIGHT WORK AND WHO THEY MIGHT BE, THAT'S A DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE OVER THE NEXT TWO OR THREE- BUT YOUR PERSONAL VIEW, SHOULD YOU HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE GREENS WERE, AS THEY OFFERED A DEAL BEFORE THE ELECTION, TO CAMPAIGN TOGETHER? WE SHARE A LOT OF THINGS WITH THE GREENS, STUFF ON SOCIAL POLICY WE SHARE, SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY WE SHARE. WE SHARE A LOT OF STUFF WITH NZ FIRST IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC POLICY. MANUFACTURING WAS A CLASSIC ONE. WE SHARE SOMETHING WITH EACH OF THOSE PARTIES. THERE ARE OTHER PARTIES THERE TOO THAT WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT I THINK WE PROBABLY HAVE LESS IN COMMON WITH. WE SHOULDN'T HAVE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH INTERNET MANA. WE DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR, AND I THINK PEOPLE WERE THEN A Ll'l'I'LE BIT SUSPICIOUS OF US, AND THAT, I THINK, BOUNCED BACK ON US. SO WERE THEY, AS DOTCOM SAID, 'POISON', INTERNET? I WELL, HE SAID THAT. I I YES. FOR YOUR BRAND Too. I NZERS LOOKED AT THAT WHOLE THING. THEY DIDN'T LIKE THE IDEA OF A VERY WEALTHY INDMDUAL WRITING OUT A MASSIVE CHEQUE, FUNDING A CAMPAIGN THAT WAS REALLY ABOUT HIS SELF-INTEREST ANDA BUNCH OF OTHER PEOPLE SIGNING UP TO IT. PEOPLE WERE REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THAT. AND I THINK OUR FAILURE TO BE A LITTLE BIT CLEARER ABOUT THAT - WE ACTUALLY REJECTED THAT TOO - DIDN'T HELP US. ALL RIGHT, THANKS FOR JOINING THIS MORNING, ANDREW Ll'l'I'LE. NOW, WITH ONE OF THE WORST OBESITY RATES IN THE WORLD, NZERS NEED TO EAT BETTER, BUT HOW DO WE KNOW WHATS GOOD FOR US? AFTER YEARS OF DEBATE OVER FOOD LABELLING, WE CAN REVEAL THIS MORNING THAT THE FIRST PRODUCT WITH THE NEW STAR RATING GOES ON SALE THIS WEEK. BUT WILL IT CHANGE THE WAY WE SHOP? HERE'S LUCY WARHURST. I MAKING HEALTHY CHOICES CAN BE TOUGH. I BOMBARDED BY NUTRITION INFORMATION PANELS, INGREDIENTS LISTS AND HEALTH CLAIMS. BUT THIS WEEK, FOR THE FIRST TIME, NZERS WILL FIND IT EASIER TO PICKA FIVE-STAR DIET. NOT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS NUTRITION PANELS, THEY WANTA QUICK, EASY SOLUTION. THAT SOLUTION? A STAR RATING SYSTEM LIKE THE ONE ON HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCES. THE FIRST TO DISPLAY IT, A KIWI CLASSIC, AND IT GETS ALL FIVE STARS. PIERRE VAN HEERDEN, GENERAL MANAGER AT SANITARIUM SAYS THEY'LL BE ROLLING IT OUT ON ALL OF THEIR PRODUCTS. THIS SYSTEM INCORPORATES IT INTO AN EASY TO UNDERSTAND DEVICE, RIGHT ON THE FRONT OF PACK. FOUR STARS AND ABOVE IS REALLY SOMETHING FOR EVERY DAY USE. WHEN IT'S LOWER THAN THAT, YOU NEED TO EVALUATE, DO I WANT TO USE THIS EVERY DAY OR IS THIS A TREAT? WITH EXPANDING WAISTLINES AND RISING HEALTH COSTS, THE GOVERNMENT SET UP AN ADVISORY GROUP MADE UP OF ACADEMICS, PUBLIC HEALTH GROUPS AND THE FOOD INDUSTRY TO DEVELOP A NEW FRONT-OF-PACK LABELLING SYSTEM. AMONG THEM WAS PROFESSOR CLIONA NI MHURCHU. THE ACTUAL SCIENCE UNDERPINNING IT IS COMPLEX, BUT THE RATING SYSTEM AT THE END IS SIMPLE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE WANTED. BUT WILL IT CHANGE THE WAY WE SHOP AND MOREOVER HELP IMPROVE THE HEALTH OF OUR NATION? CABINET APPROVED THE VOLUNTARY HEALTH STAR RATING IN JUNE, FOR FOODS ALREADY REQUIRED TO DISPLAYAN INFORMATION PANEL. COMPANIES HAVE UP TO FIVE YEARS TO IMPLEMENT IT. SO HOW DOES IT WORK? WELL, MANUFACTURERS EFFECTIVELY ENTER THEIR RECIPES INTO A COMPLEX CALCULATOR AND AN ALGORITHM DETERMINES THE RATING. THE MORE STARS, THE HEALTHIER THE FOOD. SCORING HIGHER FOR FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONTENT, FIBRE AND PROTEIN, BUT DROPPING BACK FOR SATURATED FAT, SALT AND SUGAR. BUT CRITICS SAY IT'S NOT THE BEST OPTION. A 2011 REVIEW RECOMMENDED THE TRAFFIC LIGHT SYSTEM USED IN THE UK. IT WAS SUPPORTED BY HEALTH ORGANISATIONS AND THE GREENS, BUT NOT THE FOOD INDUSTRY. IF YOUR FOCUS IS PUBLIC HEALTH AND GETTING THE MOST EFFECTIVE INFORMATION TO THE CONSUMER ABOUT THE NUTRITIONAL VALUE OF THE FOOD, THEN THE TRAFFIC-LIGHT SYSTEM HAS BEEN SHOWN BY MANY STUDIES TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY OF PRESENTING THAT INFORMATION. AND PIERRE VAN HEERDEN, ADMITS IT DOES HAVE ITS WEAKNESSES AND SOME FOODS COULD UNFAIRLY GETA BAD RAP. IF I TAKE MARMITE AS AN EXAMPLE, MARMITE HAS A LOW-STAR RATING ON IT, BUT HOW MUCH DO YOU ACTUALLY PUT ON YOUR TOAST IN THE MORNING? YOU DON'T PUT THAT MUCH ON. THE MAIN THRUST OF THIS IS COMPARISON WITHIN A CATEGORY. CLIONA NI MHURCHU SAYS IT'S A COMPROMISE. WE DEFINITELY WANTED A SYSTEM, AND BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY EVER GOING TO BE VOLUNTARY WE ABSOLUTELY HAD TO HAVE INDUSTRY ON BOARD. IT'S BETTER TO HAVE THE PROPOSED SYSTEM, THE STAR RATING SYSTEM, THAN NOTHING AT ALL ON THE FRONT OF THE PACK WE STILL NEED TO WORK OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE STAR-RATING SYSTEM IS JUST AS BENEFICIAL I OR POTENTIALLY EVEN BETTER. I BUT IF THIS IS TO HAVE EVEN A CHANCE OF WORKING, EVERYBODY HAS TO BE ON BOARD. NEW FOOD SAFETY MINISTER JO eooonew SAYS THE UPTAKE so FAR'S LOOKING EKEI BOTH OF THE MAJOR SUPERMARKETS HAVE INDICATED THEIR HOME BRANDS WILL USE THE STAR RATING SYSTEM, AND WE'RE ALSO SEEING SOME VERY BIG COMPANIES COMING THROUGH LIKE SANITARIUM, LIKE WATTIES, UNILEVER AND ALSO NESTLE. FOODSTUFFS' ANTOINETTE SHALLUE SAYS IT'LL START ROLLING OUT THE NEW PACKAGING IN A FEW MONTHS. ON PAMS AND BUDGET, YOU'LL START SEEING THAT FROM EARLY 2015, SO THERE'S APPROX 1400 PAMS AND 315 BUDGET PRODUCTS AND THOSE ARE ANY PRODUCTS THAT ARE MADE FROM A RECIPE, SO A GOOD EXAMPLE WOULD BE CEREAL OR BREAD. THAT SAID, THERE'S NOTHING TO STOP MANUFACTURERS IGNORING IT ALTOGETHER. IF UPTAKE IS LOW, AUSTRALIA HAS SAID lT'LL CONSIDER MAKING THE LABELLING MANDATORY, AND NZ COULD DO THE SAME. WE'LL CERTAINLY EVALUATE THIS, AND I THINK IN AYEAR'S TIME WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO LOOK BACK, WALK DOWN THE SUPERMARKET AISLE, SEE IF THERE'S BEEN A BIG CHANGE. MOJO MATHERS IS CONCERNED THAT UNDER A VOLUNTARY SCHEME, THE FOOD INDUSTRY WILL ONLY PUT IT ON FOOD WITH TOP MARKS. ACTUALLY WHEN WE'RE HAVING AN OBESITY EPIDEMIC, IT'S ABOUT IDENTIFYING FOODS THAT ARE UNHEALTHY. I MANDATORY OR NOT, wll.l. IT WORK? I WELL, THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS ARE TWO-FOLD - GUIDING CUSTOMERS TO MAKE HEALTHIER CHOICES AND INCENTMSING MANUFACTURERS I TO DEVELOP HEALTHIER PRODUCTS. I THE MINISTRY FOR PRIMARY INDUSTRIES SAYS EXISTING EVIDENCE DOESN'T SHOW A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, BUT THIS IS AN UNTRIED SYSTEM, AND THOSE BEHIND ITARE OPTIMISTIC. IT CERTAINLY WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO HELP MAKE HEALTHIER CHOICES BECAUSE THEY'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE TOTAL PRODUCT NUTRITIONAL VALUE IE IT WILL BE ONE OF TOOLS THAT WILL ASSIST. IN AND OF ITSELF IT'S NOT LIKELY TO REVERSE OBESITY OR DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT, I BUT IT ls PART ol= THE PACKAGE. I AND MANUFACTURERS ARE ALREADY LOOKING AT HEALTHIER RECIPES. WE'RE EVALUATING ALL OF OUR PRODUCTS AND TAKING A LOOK WHERE THEY SIT WITH THE HEALTH-STAR RATING, AND THERE WILL BE SOME PRODUCTS THAT GET CHANGED SLIGHTLY AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN ORDER TO GET A BETTER HEALTH-STAR RATING ON THEM. BUT WILL IT REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO CONSUMERS? DEFINITELY. I MEAN, IF THE FIRST IMPRESSION OF THE PACKAGING- IS TO HOW BENEFICIAL IT'S GONNA BE FOR MY FAMILY. I THINK I WOULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT THE BACK. I WOULDN'T RELY ON THE FRONT. AS LONG AS PEOPLE ARE EDUCATED ABOUT HOW TO USE IT. IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER. IF I LIKE SOMETHING, I LIKE IT. THAT'S IT FOR ME. I'M SURE IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE, YEAH, ESPECIALLY FOR ME, COS I HAVE MY GLASSES STRUNG AROUND MY NECK I AND I CAN READ IT WITHOUT THEM. I RESEARCH STARTS NEXT WEEK FOLLOWED BYA PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGN, AND THE PROOF WILL BE IN THE PUDDING. I # YOU GOT TO KNOW TO UNDERSTAND. # I WELL, TIME FOR A LI'I'I'LE LIGHT RELIEF NOW WITH SOME OF THE BEST POLITICAL TWEETS OF THE WEEK. ANDREW LI'I'I'LE PUT HIMSELF FORWARD FOR THE LABOUR LEADERSHIP THIS WEEK, AND 'TWITTER FOUND HIM A SOUNDTRACK. L# OOH, AHH, JUSTA LI'I'I'LE an. I WHILE OTHERS WERE ADMIRING HIS ABILITIES IN CLEARING DEADWOOD. A GREY LYNN HOVEL SOLD FOR MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS THIS WEEK, BUT IT'S NOT THE WORST DEAL IN THE AUCKLAND HOUSING MARKET. AND DAVID SEYMOUR DIDN'T EXACTLY COME INTO PARLIAMENT LIKE A WRECKING BALL, BUT HE DID SEEM TO MAKE AN IMPRESSION ON THESE EPSOM MILEY CYRUS FANS. AND AHEAD ON THE NATION, THE WEEK'S POLITICS IN REVIEW WITH OUR PANEL - SUE BRADFORD, SIMON WILSON AND MATTHEW HOOTON. BACK SOON. RIGHT-WING COMMENTATOR AND P METRO EDITOR SIMON VVILSON AND I R CONSULTANT MATTHEW HOOTON. <i>L</i> GOOD MORNING TO YOU ALL. <i>I</i> WE'VE HEARD THERE AGAIN THE PRIME MINISTER REITERATING THE FACT THAT POVERTY IS A KEY THING ON HIS AGENDA. SIMON, WHAT DO YOU THINK HAS MOTIVATED THAT TURNAROUND, BECAUSE BEFORE THE ELECTION, HE WAS SAYING 'NO PROBLEM TO SEE HERE', REALLY. I THINK THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO READ JOHN KEY ON THIS, AND IT'S HARD TO KNOW WHICH IS THE RIGHT ONE. ONE OF THEM IS THAT HE'S VERY GOOD AT TALKING THE TALK BUT NOT SO GOOD AT WALKING THE WALK; THAT HE KNOWS THIS IS THE LANGUAGE YOU HAVE TO TALK IN NZ NOW, SO HE'S ADOPTED IT BUT ISN'T PLANNING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. THE OTHER ONE IS THAT ACTUALLY WHAT HE'S SHOWN HE CAN DOA LOT IN HIS POLITICAL CAREER IS THAT HE TALKS VERY QUIETLYABOUT THE THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN IN A WAY THAT IS GUARANTEED OR CALCULATED NOT TO STARTLE HIS CORE SUPPORTERS. SO BENEFICIARY BASHING HAS ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING THAT SOME PARTS OF THE RIGHT HAVE DONE. AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT 'WE NEED TO HAVE A REAL CHANGE IN THIS AREA NOW, WHAT HE'S REALLY SAYING IS THAT HIS MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE LAST GOVERNMENT, PAULA BENNETT, HASN'T DONE THE JOB THAT SHE SHOULD HAVE DONE. I MEAN, THATS EFFECTIVELY WHAT YOU COULD READ INTO THAT, BUT HE DOESN'T WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY. OR THE HOUSING MINISTER, BECAUSE HE WAS PUTTING A LOT OF EMPHASIS ON HOUSING. HE DOESN'T WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY. HE PUTS IT INA MUCH MORE GENERAL WAY, BUTACTUALLY HE IS SIGNALLING THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO HAPPEN HERE HE DOESN'T WANT TO. MATFHEW, WHAT DO YOU RECKON WE COULD EXPECT OUT OF THIS? BECAUSE HE DID REPEATEDLY SAY THAT WE'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR HOUSING, ABOUT 30% OF INCOME SHOULD BE ON HOUSING; HE SAID PEOPLE ARE PAYING 50%, MORE. IS HE KIND OF SIGNALLING THAT THERE'S GONNA BE- THAT'S GONNA BE THE AREA HE'S GOING TO WORK ON, WHERE WE COULD EXPECT AN ANNOUNCEMENT? WELL, HE'S ALWAYS SAID IT HAS TO BE A SUPPLY SIDE ISSUE. EVERY SO OFTEN, BOTH THIS GOVERNMENT AND THE OPPOSITION PARTIES HAVE TALKED ABOUT PROVIDING ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE TO BUY THEIR FIRST HOMES. BUT I THINK THERE'S A RECOGNITION THAT THAT WOULD SIMPLY BE INFLATIONARY, AND THE TREASURY'S BEEN CRITICAL OF THE GOVERNMENTS POLICIES IN THAT AREA. SO HE'S TALKING ABOUT STIMULATING THE SUPPLY SIDE THROUGH THESE 3. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT REFORM WHICH IS SIMILAR TO WHAT LABOUR SAID. SO HE IS ASKING HIS PEOPLE TO FIND SOME NEW IDEAS, THE PEOPLE IN THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE TO FIND SOME NEW IDEAS. WHY DO WE NEED THAT? WE'VE GOT RESEARCH UP THE WAZOO, DON'T WE? YES, WE DO, AND THERE'S BEEN REPORT AFTER REPORT FOR DECADES ABOUT THE SITUATION WITH POVERTY, WITH CHILD POVERTY. MANY MANY IDEAS ABOUT SOLUTIONS FROM GROUPS LIKE OURS, CHILD POVERTY ACTION, AND MANY OTHER GROUPS AND UNIVERSITIES. HE DOESN'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PRIME MINISTER AND CABINET OR TO MSD. ALL THE ANSWERS ARE THERE, AND THEY'RE QUITE SIMPLE, BUT HE HAS NO INTEREST IN LISTENING. I DISAGREE WITH SIMON. I MEAN, I WISH SIMON WAS RIGHT, AND THAT WHAT MR KEY WAS SAYING THIS MORNING WAS ACTUALLY INDICATING SOME SHIFT IN WELFARE POLICY. I DON'T SEE ANY SIGN OF IT, I BECAUSE HIS FOCUS ls STILL ON WORK. I IS IT ABOUT FINDING SOMETHING THAT FITS THE IDEOLOGY THAT ALSO GOES TOWARDS SOLVING THE PROBLEM? HE DOESN'T SEE- I DON'T THINK HE SEES POVERTY POLICYAS THE SAME AS WELFARE POLICY. I THINK HE WAS VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. HE BELIEVES THAT IT WOULDN'T MATTER IF YOU INCREASED BENEFITS BY 20%; PEOPLE ON BENEFITS ARE STILL POOR AND STRUGGLING. SO HE'S ALWAYS MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE BELIEVES IT'S ULTIMATELY ABOUT ATRANSITION TO WORK. AND THAT'S WHERE HE WILL FOCUS ON. I DON'T THINK- YEAH. FINDING THE THINGS THAT FIT THE IDEOLOGY. AS IF LIFTING INCOMES, LIFTING BENEFITS AND WAGES ARE BOTH CRITICAL TO LIFTING POVERTY CHILD POVERTY DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE CHILDREN ARE ONLY IN POVERTY BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO LIVE ON, WHICH IS THE CASE FOR MANY EMPLOYED WORKERS AND UNEMPLOYED WORKERS AND BENEFICIARIES. UNLESS THIS GOVERNMENT, A LABOUR-LED GOVERNMENT, A GREEN-LED GOVERNMENT - UNLESS THEY ACTUALLY TOOK THIS SERIOUSLY, WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE DEEPENING POVERTY AND INEQUALITY. AND YOU WERE QUITE RIGHT TO MENTION HOUSING BEFORE, COS HOUSING ISA QUARTER. IF YOU LIVE IN A WARM, DRY HOME, THEN YOU CAN GO TO SCHOOL; YOU'RE NOT GETTING SICK I AND ON AND ON IT GOES. I THE PRIME MINISTER HAS SIGNALLED THAT HE WOULD LIKE HIS REFORMS FOR THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT TO BE PASSED SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE IT EASIER TO BUILD HOUSES. THE MINISTER OF FINANCE HAS TALKED ABOUT HAVING TO GETA BIT UGLY ON THIS. THOSE THINGS ARE ACTUALLY NOT TRUE. THERE ARE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS UNDERWAY IN THIS CITY, IN AUCKLAND, AND HOBSONVILLE POINT IS THE SHINING EXAMPLE, WHERE THERE HAS BEEN SOCIAL HOUSING INCORPORATED INTO THEM, WHERE THERE IS RELATIVELY LOW COST HOUSING BEING BUILT, AND THEY'RE BEING DONE WITHIN THE EXISTING FRAMEWORK. IT DOESN'T NEED THE REFORM OF THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT. DOES HE HAVE THE MANDATE TO SELL OFF STATE HOUSES, UP TO $5 BILLION WORTH? I MEAN, I READ THE POLICY. I COULDN'T SEE IT SPELLED OUT THERE. DOES HE HAVE THE MANDATE, MATTHEW? HE, UH, DIDN'T SAY HE WASN'T GOING TO DO THAT. AND I DON'T THINK THE- HIS OWN MINISTER SAID POTENTIALLYA THIRD. I DON'T THINK THAT THE CONCEPT OF MANAGING THE CROWN'S BALANCE SHEET- IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT. I MEAN, WE SEEM TO HAVE THIS IDEA THAT WHATEVER STATE HOUSE OR SOCIAL HOUSE THE STATE OWNS AT A PARTICULAR TIME, IT MUST ALWAYS OWN. AND WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT IS MANAGING THAT. AND IT SHOULDN'T SURPRISE ANYBODY THAT A NATIONAL-LED GOVERNMENT, A CENTRE-RIGHT GOVERNMENT, AS MUCH AS THIS IS A CENTRE-RIGHT GOVERNMENT, WOULD BELIEVE IN USING WELFARE AGENCIES PRIVATE ORGANISATIONS LIKE THE CHURCH, WELFARE GROUPS, AS PART OF A SOCIAL STRATEGY. THAT'S WHAT DMDES NATIONALAND LABOUR. LABOUR BELIEVES THE STATE SHOULD DO EVERYTHING. NATIONAL BELIEVES THERE'S ROOM FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR. BUT IT IS A FALLACY TO THINK THAT THERE ARE LARGE PRIVATE ORGANISATIONS OUT THERE LIKE THE SALVATION ARMY AND PRESBYTERIAN SUPPORT SERVICES, THE TWO HE MENTIONED, THAT ARE ALL READY TO RUN SOCIAL HOUSING. THERE IS A VAST AMOUNT OF WORK THEY WILL NEED TO DO TO TOOL UP TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. IT ISN'T JUSTA CASE OF GOING, 'OK, THERE ARE BETTER PRIVATE AGENCIES.' I ll"s NOT LIKE THAT. I SUE, BRIEFLY, HE WOULDN'T GIVE US A GUARANTEE THAT THE MONEY BEING MADE FROM SELLING THESE HOUSES IS ALL GOING TO GO BACK INTO SOCIAL HOUSING. DO YOU HAVE CONCERNS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE SIPHONED OFF I To SOMETHING ELSE? I THIS POLICY IS SELLING UP TO ATHIRD OF STATE HOUSES IS JUST INSANE AT THIS TIME. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE LACK OF CAPACITY IN THE COMMUNITYAND PRIVATE SECTOR TO DEAL WITH THAT. BUT WHERE'S THE MONEY? WHERE'S THE CAPITAL FOR LOW GROUPS THAT ARE ALREADY STRUGGLING ON THE GROUND TO BUY ALL THESE STATE HOUSES? AND MR KEY, OR MR ENGLISH, ARE NOT TALKING AT ALL ABOUT WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO HAVE HAPPEN, WHICH IS A MASSIVELY ACCELERATED BUILD OF STATE HOUSES. OF COURSE, LET'S SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY HOUSING SECTOR AS WELL. THATS REALLY IMPORTANT. BUT IT'S AVOIDING THE KEY ISSUE, WHICH IS THAT WE NEED, LIKE, 10,000 HOUSES A YEAR NOW JUST TO BEGIN TO DEAL WITH THE URGENCY, WITH ASSERTIVENESS THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY. THERE CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE MANDATE FOR THAT. NO POLITICAL PARTY- NO MAIN POLITICAL PARTY PUT FORWARD BUILDING LOTS OF STATE HOUSES. THE LABOUR PARTY, WHICH HAS JUST GONE TO A HISTORIC DEFEAT, PUT UPA POLICY OF THE STATE BUILDING HOUSES THAT WOULD THEN BE SOLD. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO MANDATE FOR AN EXPANSION OF THE STATE HOUSING STOCK. WE HAD A MILLION PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T VOTE IN THIS ELECTION, AND THATS BECAUSE THESE PARTIES ARE NOT DEALING WITH WHAT REALLY MATTERS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE RIGHT NOW. THANKS, GUYS. WE'LL BE BACK IN A MOMENT WITH SOME MORE. SO DO STAY WITH US. MATTHEW, YOU DON'T THINK IT'S SUCH A GREAT IDEA IF WE WERE TO GETA SPOT ON THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL, DO YOU? IWHY?I NZ IS IN A UNIQUE SITUATION THAT THROUGH BOLGER, CLARK AND KEY OR EVEN EARLIER, ACTUALLY, THERE'S BEEN THIS POLICY TO BE CHINA'S BEST FRIEND IN THE WESTERN WORLD. WE'RE THE FIRST TO LET THEM INTO THE “FPO, FIRST TO DO THE FREE TRADE AND ALL THIS SORT OF THING, AND WE ARE UNIQUELY PLACED TO BE FRIENDS WITH BOTH THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA. AND WE DON'T HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THEM EVER. IF THERE'S AN INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE WHERE THEY DISAGREE, WE CAN JUST SAY, 'OH, LEAVE THAT TO THE SECURITY COUNCIL, 'AND WE'LL DO WHAT THE SECURITY COUNCIL SAYS.' IF WE'RE ON IT, WE'RE GONNA BE IN THIS SITUATION EVERY WEEK OF HAVING TO CHOOSE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA ON A VOTE ON INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, AND I DON'T SEE HOW ON EARTH THAT'S IN OUR INTERESTS. THAT IS THE PERFECT SEGWAY TO TALK ABOUTANOTHER POTENTIALLY DMSIVE VOTE, WHICH IS FOR THE LABOUR PARTY LEADERSHIP. SIMON, WE HEARD THERE EXTRAORDINARY STUFF FROM DAVID SHEARER, SAYING THAT CUNLIFFE WOULD BE A DMSIVE LEADER IF HE GOT BACK IN AND THAT POTENTIALLY YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CAUCUS THAT CAN'T WORK TOGETHER. I THINK THAT'S A VERY MILD WAY TO PUT IT, FRANKLY. HAS THERE EVER BEEN A CASE OF SOMEONE WHO IS MORE POLITICALLY TONE DEAF THAN DAVID CUNLIFFE? I HE'S BEEN PROFOUNDLY REJECTED. I IT MUST BE- OF COURSE IT'S HARD FOR HIM, BUT HE FAILED, AND HE FAILED BECAUSE FUNDAMENTALLY PEOPLE DIDN'T TRUST HIM AS THE POTENTIAL PRIME MINISTER. AND HE HAS TO GO, BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THAT IF THE CAUCUS DO MANAGE TO SUPPORT HIM, THEN THE CAUCUS ITSELF WILL EXPLODE. lT'LL BE SO DMSIVE THAT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THAT CAUCUS EVEN BEING ABLE TO FUNCTION AT ALL. THATS GOING TO PUT THE LABOUR PARTY RIGHT OUT IN THE... YOU KNOW. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THAT, SUE, COS HE WAS EVEN TALKING ABOUT HOW DURING THE CAMPAIGN HE HAD TO ASK HIMSELF WHETHER HE WANTED TO GET UP AND CAMPAIGN FOR THIS GUY, LEADER DAVID CUNLIFFE AND BE ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL WITH HIM. WELL, I WAS REALLY STRUCK, ACTUALLY, BY ANDREW Ll'l'I'LE'S COMMENT RIGHT UP FRONT 'WE'RE SCRAPING THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL.' I THOSE WERE r-us WORDS. I YES, AND TO ADMIT THAT IN A WAY, AND DAVID SHEARER SAID, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN CATASTROPHIC. AND I THINK THIS INDICATES THE DISASTER AREA THAT IS LABOUR AND HAS BEEN FOR SOME TIME NOW. AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE SO FOCUSED ON INTERNAL SCRAPS AND THIS LEADERSHIP STRUGGLE NOW AT THE EXPENSE ON AND ON OF ANY RELEVANCE TO WHAT'S GOING ON FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE, THE SORT OF PEOPLE THAT THEY PURPORT TO REPRESENT - LOW-WAGE WORKERS, MAYBE BENEFICIARIES, UNEMPLOYED, THOUGH THEY NEVER TALK ABOUT THAT. THEY'VE BECOME IRRELEVANT. AND THEY'RE ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION IF THEY DON'T WATCH OUT, THE LABOUR PARTY. UNLESS THEY RE-FIND IN THEMSELVES SOME PURPOSE, SOME SOULAND SOME DETAILED POLICIES AND WAYS FORWARD THAT WILL ACTUALLY INSPIRE PEOPLE. YES, BUT WHO DOES THAT? WHO IS THE SAVIOUR OF THE LABOUR PARTY IN TERMS OF THE LEADERSHIP? THEY DON'T HAVE AN OBVIOUS SAVIOUR, BUT IT'S NOT CUNLIFFE. IT CAN'T BE CUNLIFFE. I AND THAT'S REALLY SIMPLE. I WHETHER IT'S ROBERTSON OR ANDREW LITTLE OR POSSIBLY SOMEONE ELSE, THAT-A NEW LEADER, A NEW STEP FORWARD WILL MEAN THAT THE CAUCUS AND THE PARTY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO UNITE, AND I THINK YOU COULD SEE THAT THAT COULD HAPPEN QUITE QUICKLY. BUT ANDREW LITTLE VS JOHN KEY? MATTHEW HOOTON'? WELL, I DIDN'T SEE THAT ANDREW LITTLE COMMUNICATES MUCH BETTER, FRANKLY, THAN DAVID SHEARER. WE SAW THEM BOTH THIS MORNING, AND THEY HAVE SIMILAR PROBLEMS WITH VERBAL COMMUNICATION. I I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE. I BUT, ANYWAY, I THINK THE CASE FOR ANDREW LITTLE IS THAT LABOUR IS THE PARTY OF LABOUR IN AWAY THAT NATIONAL IS THE PARTY OF CAPITAL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE GOOD OLD MARXIST PERSPECTIVES. AND DON BRASH STRONGLY REPRESENTED CAPITALAFTER NATIONAL'S DISASTER IN BEE AND TRANSFORMED NATIONAL, GOT IT BACK ON TRACK. AND SO MAYBE THERE'S A SORT OF SYMMETRY HERE THAT A STRONG REPRESENTATIVE OF LABOUR COULD DO A SIMILAR THING FOR THAT PARTYAS BRASH DID FOR NATIONAL. THE KEY IS THAT PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE A SENSE OF WHO THAT LEADER IS. THEY NEED TO BELIEVE THAT THEYARE SOMETHING AND WHETHER THEY'RE RIGHT OR WRONG- IF YOU LOOK AT JOHN KEY, NZERS BELIEVE WE KNOW JOHN KEYAND KNOW WHAT HE IS, I AND WE TRUST HIM BECAUSE OF THAT. I IF YOU DRILL INTO THAT, WHAT DOES HE REALLY WANT TO DO IN POLITICS, IT'S STILL NOTA LOT CLEARER THAN IT WAS WHEN HE WENT INTO POLITICS. BUT WE TRUST HIM ANYWAY. HE'S MANAGED TO PROJECT IT, AND WE BELIEVE IT AS A NATION. IF- LITTLE HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. I THINK ROBERTSON HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT CUNLIFFE DIDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO ITAND HAS NO MORE ABIL- IN FACT, HAS VASTLY LESS ABILITY NOW I THAN HE on: BEFORE ELECTION. I I WAS INTERESTED, SUE, THERE. ANDREW LITTLE SAYING, 'BOY, WE DIDN'T STEP FAR ENOUGH AWAY 'FROM KIM DOTCOM AND THE INTERNET PARTY.' UH, WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THAT? COS YOU DID STEP AWAY. OH, WELL, I ACTUALLY SAW LABOUR STEPPED A LONG WAY AWAY, ESPECIALLY IN TE TAI TOKERAU WHERE KELVIN DAVIS WAS STRONGLY SUPPORTED AND HE WON, SADLY FOR HONE, AND IAM REALLY SAD ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENED FOR THE MANA PARTY, THE MANA MOVEMENT NOW. UM, EVEN THOUGH I THINK WHAT I WAS SAYING AGES AGO, WAY BACK WHEN THEY WENT INTO THE ALLIANCE WITH DOTCOM THAT WAS TRUE, AND I OF COURSE DESPERATELY WISH THAT THE MOVEMENT HAD LISTENED TO WHATA LOT OF US I WERE SAYING AT THE TIME. I I BUT YOU WERE RIGHT. I THEY MADE THAT CHOICE, AND I NOW FEEL REALLY SAD THAT HONE AND ANNETTE AREN'T IN PARLIAMENT I BECAUSE THOSE VOICES ARE LOST. I WHETHER MANA CAN REBUILD INTO SOMETHING THAT'S GOT THAT SAME STAUNCH KAUPAPAAGAIN, I DON'T KNOW. BUT BEST WISHES TO ALL OF THOSE INVOLVED IN THAT JOURNEY. I THINK THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN BACK HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE DEAL. I VERY QUICKLY BECAUSE WE'VE GOTTA GO. I THE THING IS, I THINK KIM DOTCOM BECAME SO TOXIC THAT EVEN THOUGH LABOUR HAD MADE IT VERY CLEAR THEY WERE NOT GOING TO HAVE THEM IN PARLIAMENT, IN A GOVERNMENT, DOTCOM WAS SO TOXIC THATA LOT OF PEOPLE JUST DIDN'T WANT HIM ANYWHERE NEAR, ANYWHERE NEAR AT ALL. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL LEAVE IT THERE. NOW LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT WHATS COMING UP NEXT WEEK. TOMORROW JOHN KEY'S NEW CABINET MEETS FOR THE FIRST TIME; NOMINATIONS CLOSE TUESDAY FOR THE LABOUR LEADERSHIP RACE; AND WE'LL FINALLY FIND OUT ON FRIDAY WHETHER NZ WILL GAIN A SEAT ON THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL. AND I'LL BE GOING ACROSS THE DITCH NEXT WEEK TO BRING YOU AN INTERVIEW WITH AUSTRALIA'S FIRST FEMALE PRIME MINISTER, JULIA GILLARD. BUT THAT'S US THIS MORNING. FROM ALL THE TEAM, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR WATCHING AND DO HAVE A GREAT WEEK. CAPTIONS BY HUGO SNELL. WWW.ABLE.CO.NZ CAPTIONS WERE MADE POSSIBLE WITH FUNDING FROM NZ ON AIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2014