GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M SUSAN WOOD. ON THE PROGRAMME THIS SUNDAY ` THE WAR AGAINST ISLAMIC STATE. NZ WILL CONTRIBUTE MILITARY TRAINING AND HUMANITARIAN SUPPORT TO THE US-LED EFFORT, AS WELL AS INCREASED SURVEILLANCE OF NZERS HERE. HAVE THEY GOT IT RIGHT? WE ASK DEFENCE MINISTER GERRY BROWNLEE AND LABOUR'S DEFENCE SPOKESPERSON PHIL GOFF. ALSO ON THE PROGRAMME, TRADE MINISTER TIM GROSER FROM CHINA, WITH THE LATEST ON THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP DEAL. NO WAY. IT'S PROVOKED PUBLIC PROTESTS OVER ITS SECRECY. TIM GROSER SAYS NEGOTIATIONS ARE NEARLY OVER. WHAT ARE WE TRADING AWAY? AND WHAT WILL WE GET OUT OF IT? WE'LL TAKE A LOOK BACK AT THE WEEK WITH POLITICAL REPORTER HEATHER DU PLESSIS-ALLAN AND ANALYSE ALL THE ISSUES WITH OUR PANEL ` POLITICAL SCIENTIST DR BRYCE EDWARDS, HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER MARIANNE ELLIOT, AND LAWYER AND FORMER ACT MP STEPHEN FRANKS. GOOD TO HAVE YOU WITH US. WELCOME, HEATHER. TO THE WEEK IN POLITICS ` AND ON THURSDAY, THE FAMILIES OF THE PIKE RIVER VICTIMS WERE TOLD THE VERY THING THEY NEVER WANTED TO HEAR. WE HAVE MET THIS MORNING WITH THE FAMILIES TO INFORM THEM OF THE BOARD'S DECISION NOT TO THE PROCEED WITH THE RE-ENTRY INTO THE DRIFT, BECAUSE THE RISKS TO LIFE REMAIN TOO HIGH. HEATHER, HOW HAS THE GOVERNMENT HANDLED WHAT'S BEEN A DIFFICULT AND SENSITIVE SITUATION? I think sending John key down to Greymouth was exactly the right thing to do. I think it showed families that their concerns are being heard at the highest level of government. AND AFTER WEEKS OF ANTICIPATION, THE PRIME MINISTER FINALLY REVEALED HOW NZ WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE WAR AGAINST THE ISLAMIC STATE. HE'S WALKED A FINE LINE HERE, HASN'T HE? He has contributed just enough to be shown that he's doing his bit but not enough to put soldiers on the firing line. That will make the political discussion on that, but that will shift the attention to what's being done domestically in terms of surveillance. WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT THIS WITH DEFENCE MINISTER GERRY BROWNLEE SHORTLY. AND HERE'S WHAT JOHN KEY HAD TO SAY AS HE STACKED UP HIS CASE FOR MORE SURVEILLANCE. WHILE YOU'LL APPRECIATE THE LIMITED NATURE OF WHAT I CAN SAY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS HERE IN NZ WHO ARE ATTRACTED TO CARRYING OUT DOMESTIC ATTACKS OF THE TYPE WE'VE SEEN PREVENTED IN AUSTRALIA AND RECENTLY TAKEN PLACE IN CANADA. OUR AGENCIES DO EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWERS TO PREVENT THAT HAPPENING HERE AND TO KEEP NZERS SAFE. SEND US YOUR THOUGHTS. WE'RE ON TWITTER @-NZQandA YOU CAN EMAIL US AT Q+A@ TVNZ.CO.NZ OR TEXT YOUR THOUGHTS AND FIRST NAME TO 2211. KEEP THEM BRIEF. EACH TEXT COSTS 50 CENTS. LET'S GO TO HEATHER, WITH DEFENCE MINISTER GERRY BROWNLEE: The 80 people mentioned by the Prime Minister, do they know each other? Can you tell us more? The Prime Minister outlined that there people with various connections and links that would cause us some worries about what they may be attending to do. Are you saying you do not have enough evidence to identify them? We have a very strong law in New Zealand. We can end up having laws that simply take people off the streets due to some concerns. We need basis for gathering evidence and that's what we are talking about. The Prime Minister has said that they are number of these people who were New Zealand born. Can you give a specific numbers? No. We are not trying to create alarm. The New Zealand government has said for the first time that the situation has changed. The benign environment that New Zealand was thought to be in is no longer the case. We know that there New Zealanders were fighting with them now and that there are those wanting to go over there with them. It's valuable to know that we're being vigilant. We can't let that vigilance get in the way of the freedom of other New Zealanders. It sounds that you guys have gone public without much knowledge of what these people are doing. I think gone public without the full depth of what we know, and I think that is reasonable. The level of surveillance will be appropriate that we are confident that we are watching these people. Do these people know that they're being watched? I believe so. The important thing is the environment has changed, the awareness of people here who might want to do things that we never would've thought possible in New Zealand has heightened. You have proposed serious law changes. Will they allow you to arrest these people? You have to have good evidential base. The reason we want this is we either go to some sort of detention laws which we don't want in New Zealand or you continue to uphold the rule of law. I think that is the most important aspect of upholding our freedom here. He said they are five people fighting with Isis. Have those passports cancelled? What we do know is that the five we know of is because they left NZ to go there. There could be others. Are you certain that those five are fighting and Not visiting families? I think there's a difference between fighting and visiting families. To identify five shows that we are indicative of what they're up to. They're not welcome back? That's why they do not have a passport. We must be clear about canceling passports for people in NZ, however. Your intro said that we made a commitment. We have not. This Isis organization is a very different kind of organization. Organize, ruthless and no respect for government boundaries. It is a very different sort of an environment. We have outlined what we think if we were asked that we would have the capability to commit. Could we assume that there is a possibility that we might not go with at all? There are some strict conditions. We want people to be safe and behind the wire. Let's assume that we do go in. We send in 10 initially. How could this grow? We have already personnel spread across the Middle East. We have some in the Sinai as well for more than 50 years. Some of the people who are there now are part of those groups. That 10 will essentially find out what the proposals are. All this being on the Iraqi government asking us to join. How many people could you be sending in? All I can say is the Prime Minister made it clear it'd be less than number sent into Bamian. The reality is that Iraqi security forces have done reasonably well at times. But remember that this is a country with big tribal affiliations. A lot of the exercise I think is going to occur over the next two years be about restoring confidence. You have to have capability constantly being upgraded and reinstalled. We are only small. If we are in the end of these threats, we have to responsibly do what we can. Once we are in there, it is difficult to get out. Do you have an exit strategy? That is what we are still working out. We won't be doing it on our own. We will be partnered with someone in that. There a lot of European nations putting their hands up, the Spanish and the Danish, for example. Defense Minister Gerry Brownlee. THANK YOU, DEFENCE MINISTER GERRY BROWNLEE. STAY WITH US, PHIL GOFF JOINS THE DISCUSSION AFTER THE BREAK. LABOUR'S DEFENCE SPOKESPERSON PHIL GOFF JOINS ME NOW. Mr Goff, you have embraced by the government that they are 80 ISIS sympathizes in the country. Do you believe them? They are people out there who are potentially a worry for all of us. I wouldn't exaggerate, though. But they are potentially a threat. It sounds like you're not very worried about them I have a very large Muslim population in my electorae. Overall, they're good people, law-abiding and hard-working. But are you saying that the numbers are not as big as government saying? Not necessarily. But they must be kept an eye on. Based on what you heard, are you confident to support the government's plans for surveillance law changes? I am worried about the 48 hours where you can have surveillance without a warrant. It would only be extraordinary situations where you would want to give SIS those powers. The tragedy is we only have two weeks for the select committee and problem in the process this legislation. I would like to ask why hasn't been left until now until the select committee to move on concerns about this. We've been cut down to the bare minimum. Mr Goff has raised that point. Why is it legislation being rushed? Are you saying it is gone up since the beginning of the year? That is not alarming at this stage. The incident in Sydney a few days before Our election has had an effect. I don't think this is A Muslim problem. It tends to brand Muslim as a religion in a very unreasonable way. Are you saying that some of those 80 people are not Muslim? I'm saying there's a chance they're not. Phil hit the nail on the head that There are people who are disaffected and find causes to align themselves to. I agree with the Ministers's last point. If we're not careful and balanced in our response than we can marginalize and alienate people in the Musliam community. It is important that we embrace people of different communities and religions. On the point of the rushed legislation, the fact is the British and Australians introduce legislation is months and months ago and went through a full select committee. The good thing about this legislation before the house is that it is limited and subject to a sunset clause. Frankly if foreign fighters were concerns from the start, why are we only given two weeks until select committee to pass the legislation? I'll say it again that the situation has changed. We go into two-month recess from the mid part of December, and we think it is appropriate to go into this process before the long break. The real problem is there some drip-fed points being made about military action. It diminishes the confidence on what we are being told. Labor's position is that the first Thing we should be focused on is the humanitarian aid. There are refugees in Turkey. If it was simply a case of training, the billions of dollars invested in by the United States would've made more of a difference than it has. The Iraqi army collapsed in the face of ISIS is because of corruption and bad leadership within the Army. We can't do the Iraqis job. What you see on TV is only a shot on the screen. That is not the full picture. There still basis there for us to make a contribution if that is what we decide to do. Thank you both very much for joining us. THE PANEL'S HERE NEXT. AND LATER, WE LOOK BACK IN POLITICAL HISTORY TO THE AD CAMPAIGNS FOR THE 1972 ELECTION. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL NOW ` POLITICAL SCIENTIST DR BRYCE EDWARDS FROM OTAGO UNIVERSITY; MARIANNE ELLIOTT, HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER AND THE NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF ACTION STATION ` A NOT-FOR-PROFIT THAT HELPS PEOPLE CAMPAIGN ON ISSUES; AND STEPHEN FRANKS, LAWYER AND FORMER ACT MP. Good morning to you all. You are all making very good points. In foreign affairs, the debates should be behind the scenes. We lost that to some extent a few years ago. The debate is more about what we do internally, surveillance. I disagree. I think the more debate there is, the better it is. We should be looking for highlighting what the differences are and finding different approaches. I am just saying that we have had a long tradition seen as powerful for New Zealand of government being up to speak without political debate. There is opposition. And I think the population does want debate. They want an opportunity to be a part of that debate. They want to be a process of being teased out than quickly agree on what's going on, because it is quite a significant issue. Two weeks, Phil Goff made the point of. We need to be suspicious when the state is encroaching on our civil liberties. I think it is appropriate to ask questions why the government has Left it so late and rushing it. There's been so many experts pointing holes at what the government has been doing turned of state Surveillance. However, I don't think the NZ public will be necessarily too concern. I think the public is recognizing that they're more encroachment on liberty when password is being seized. I think there's interest in that. And I'm very much against it. There is a lot of tension in the 1930s when there are New ZealandErs willing to go fight Franco. It's a risk for the state. The foreign state can say if there were your people in our country fighting, that could be considered a hostile act. The Prime Minister was outlining the difference between terrorist groups and fighting for different purposes. I'd much rather see surveillance open. If you go to Syria, you could expect To have bracelet on following your every whereabouts. The question is whether there'll be an appetite in NZ regarding Surveillance law changes. And if not, why noT? It is quite a serious issue. Our membership are very much interested to be engaged in this debate. And they're very clear that there must be a clear Select committee process. We are concerned about economics, effect on ourselves. The government has done a good job in terms of scaremongering, frankly. I think it is the opposite. They both said it is not a thing about Muslims. The public's anxiety is behind there feeling that they don't necessarily agree with it. When I was in Parliament, we are once told by British Mps on a visit telling us that we are living in a false paradise. Winston peters push that line. He has a let pass for who years, but the rest will not debate that issue. What makes terrorism successful is when the oddball don't have the announcers or have their resumes cut off. Look at the Pugh research. There's a huge support in the Muslim world for Isis, at over 30%. Isis is crystallizing stuff that Islam has not dealt with. This suggests there's no adequate response to this that can be achieved by dispatching troops on the ground. I spent a couple of years in Afghanistan, and what we saw with the distressing blue on blue attacks, is not entirely safe place to be. The support for Isis in the Islamic world cannot be attacked and destroyed by counterattacking. John key has been talking about a political solution and getting the Israel-Arab problem solved for this. He's not a traditional politician. IT'S 25 YEARS SINCE APEC WAS ESTABLISHED BY COUNTRIES IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC THAT WANTED TO FOSTER BETTER ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION. BUT AS APEC COUNTRIES MEET IN CHINA THIS WEEKEND, THERE'S ANOTHER TRADE DEAL THAT'S ON THE MINDS OF MANY OF THE LEADERS ` THE TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. OUR TRADE MINISTER TIM GROSER SAYS HE'S HOPING A DEAL WILL BE READY IN SIX MONTHS, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE STILL SOME SIGNFICANT HURDLES. HEATHER DU PLESSIS-ALLAN SPOKE TO HIM EARLIER AND STARTED BY ASKING ABOUT NZ'S ABANDONED FREE TRADE DEAL WITH RUSSIA. THIS LATE-EDITED ITEM WILL BE CAPTIONED LIVE. I THINK IT'D BE VERY INEPT FOR NZ TO TRY AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS SITUATION BY MOVING AHEAD ON THAT FRONT. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, I STILL HOPE THAT WE WILL SEE ENOUGH FOR RECONCILIATION IN THE MEDIUM TERM FOR US TO RESUME WHERE WE WERE, BECAUSE I WAS AT AN ADVANCED STAGE, BUT IT'S JUST NOT THE RIGHT POLITICAL SETTING TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW. WHEN WOULD BE THE RIGHT POLITICAL SETTING? I THINK THAT'S A VERY SUBJECTIVE JUDGEMENT. THE SITUATION IN EASTERN UKRAINE CLEARLY IS VERY VERY FRAGILE. WE WOULD NEED TO FEEL THE MOMENTUM HAS TURNED BACK IN A MORE POSITIVE DIRECTION. THIS IS THE MOST DISTURBING THING TO HAPPEN TO SECURITY ON THE EUROPEAN CONTINENT FOR DECADES. AND RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH I'M THE TRADE MINISTER, I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THIS THROUGH A POLITICAL LENS, NOT A COMMERCIAL LENS. BUT I'M HOPING WE WILL SEE SOME SCIENCE OF RAPPROCHEMENT BETWEEN THE MAJOR WESTERN POWERS AND RUSSIA, AND WE'LL HAVE ENOUGH POLITICAL SPACE THEN TO RESUME WHAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A LONG-TERM BUT VERY INTERESTING COMMERCIAL AND STRATEGIC PLAY BY NZ. ONE OF THE BIGGEST DEALS ON OUR HORIZON IN TERMS OF TRADE, OF COURSE, IS THE TPP. ARE YOU EXPECTING TO TALK ABOUT THAT THIS WEEKEND? OH, DEFINITELY. IT'S NOW CLEAR` I MEAN, THERE'S BEEN MASSIVE SCHEDULING ISSUES TO GET THROUGH, BUT IT'S NOW 100% CERTAIN THERE'LL BE A TPP MINISTERS MEETING, WITH ME BEING OUR REPRESENTATIVE THERE. THE PRECISE WAY IN WHICH A LEADERS MEETING IS BEING FORMATTED, IT'S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR, SO WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT FOR AN ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE WHITE HOUSE ON THAT. BUT IT'S CLEARLY GOING TO BE, AS THE PRIME MINISTER'S MADE IT CLEAR THIS MORNING IN NZ, SOME TYPE OF LEADERS DISCUSSION, AND THAT'S A BIG DEAL FOR NZ. GOING INTO THIS MEETING, HOW CONFIDENT ARE YOU THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO SEE THE TPP SIGNED? ARE YOU 100% CONFIDENT, 80%, 50%? WLL, WE'RE CERTAINLY MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION NOW AFTER YEARS OF FRUSTRATION. I MEAN, I'VE JUST COME BACK FROM A TPP MINISTERS MEETING IN SYDNEY ` I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WAS, TWO WEEKS AGO. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT WAS, TWO WEEKS AGO. OUR OFFICIALS HAVE BEEN MEETING MORE OR LESS AROUND THE CLOCK SINCE THEN. SO WE'VE GOT MOMENTUM. I THINK` FRANKLY, THE PRIME MINISTER AND I BOTH FEEL THAT WE ARE PROBABLY MORE LIKELY TO GET THIS DONE THAN NOT. THE TIMETABLE FOR THAT IS PROBABLY IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF NEXT YEAR. BUT, LOOK, THE POLITICS ARE VERY FRAUGHT IN MOST COUNTRIES. IT'S NOT, I THINK, IN NZ. IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS TO US WHERE NZ'S INTERESTS LIE. AND IF THE POLITICS DON'T ALLOW THE GREAT POWERS ` JAPAN AND THE UNITED STATES ` TO FIND AN ACCOMMODATION, WELL, IT COULD GET KICKED DOWN THE LINE, BUT I'M BECOMING MORE OPTIMISTIC, NOT MORE PESSIMISTIC. OK, WHAT ARE THE STICKING POINTS, THEN? They're basically around market access issues. One is around autos. We are interested in the outcomes. The Americans and Japanese markets aren't so interested, but there are huge opportunities in the Mexican market. The more sensitive issue is the agricultural market access. The nature of our competitive economy, we are a superpower in world agriculture. We are at the center of the maelstrom than that. How war to you that the US in Japan are going to stitch of the deal and we are going have to lump it? It always is like this. It always come down to one or two products, dairy being the most sensitive. It is 34% of our exports, so of course that is the concern. I am not going to pretend that we are sitting on the sidelines. We have a position, but it is Tense. The deal is not there yet. It's never there until you're absolutely over the line. Seeing how difficult the deal may be to get over the line, the midterm elections in the America, how is that going to affect that? The Republicans have controlled both houses, and it would be very interesting to see how it plays out. Trade has been identified immediately as something that could provide the basis for some bipartisan movement forward. That sounds promising from a New Zealand perspective. What has aroused a lot of the feeling is the secrecy around the toss. Could you not tells more so we feel more comfortable? We discussed this at multiple levels. All the 12 parties agree to maintain confidentiality. You can't have it both ways. This is really only a transitional problems. If there is a deal, although this would be out in the political debate. I'm increasingly confident. If something will have a big debate on over the time, but this is not the right time yet. When would be the right time? When the deal is finalized. I've made a variety of statements on matters such as prescribed drugs. The government will be able to convey to New Zealanders that there is no cause for concern whatsoever here, and the deal provides all the prediction that New Zealand will expect from New Zealand government for New Zealanders. There are some extremely ridiculous proposals, but we have made progress there. I understand where you're coming from, but there are further concerns. There are concerns that it will allow foreign governments to sue our government if would bring their chances of profit. Can you tell us that is not on the table? If you send in dummies to write badly constructed ISDS conditions, you can expect problems. But we have a good team here. They are experienced in these kind of negotiations. I'm extremely confident that we can get an agreement that makes a lot of sense to New Zealanders. While a lot of these concerns are legitimate, they are being whipped up by people who are ideologically opposed to trade agreements. What would make you walk away from this deal? It would be excluding our best exports. I don't think they'll be a black-and-white situation we'll be faced with. Or could be some extreme proposal coming to the table at the very last minute that we have never seen so far in these negotiations. But these are very extreme scenarios that I don't think we will come cross. Minister, it begs the question if the big countries other problem here. That is usually the case. When you get great powers like the United States, the number one economy, or Japan, the number three economy, it is complex. But you can't move forward without them. Trade Minister Tim Groser. THE PANEL'S BACK AFTER THE BREAK, AND WE LOOK BACK IN POLITICAL HISTORY ` HOW THE ADS FOR THE 1972 CAMPAIGN CHANGED POLITICAL ADVERTISING. WELCOME BACK. The panel is back, and we're joined by Heather. Interesting point by Tim Groser of ideology-driven people stirring. He dismisses the same people who hold those legitimate concerns as being ideologically driven. There's something very strangely... misplayed here. That's how democracy works. A consensus would be nice, but in my experience, they are a group of people who just don't like globalism and free trade and such. In the end, this will be a majority one. The major point was the secrecy of the talks, and he was saying that you can't have it both ways. This week we've had the president of the Federated farmers say what comes out of TPP may be worse for New Zealand. What made that interview interesting was that he was very optimistic. He give a specific timeline and word confident was used a lot. This will be one issue that the President could be happy to lay The responsibility on the Republicans. Those who benefit from free trade agreements may be dispersed and not even recognize the benefits. So you can see why all 12 countries are saying until we seal the final deal, don't throw me into a political maelstrom for the next two years. But there's nothing that can be point was the deal has been ratified. At that point, It is not so useful to the public. If we bring a deal and push through Parliament, we will pay a heavy political price if it's a bad deal. I don't know if there is any alternative, but I'm not sure I am absolutely comfortable with ISDS. But I have seen the minister At the top of his game. They're both so adept at dealing with these issues, and sometimes in a democracy you have to trust that people are doing the best they can. Our worry is not that negotiators are dummies. It is that what's being discussed are powerful interests and we want to make sure it's being made in New Zealand's interest. The underlying issue is that being seen as a deal for corporates and not countries. It is because of trade that we are richer than we were before. APEC is underway in China. In between John key will be squeezing in some meetings. Barack Obama expected to be a no-show. Do you think APEC is more than Asian politicians enjoying a cocktail? They seem to work very hard from what I've seen. There's a golf that needs to be closed of what is known and seen of APEC and what actually is going on. More debates, and not less. Thank you, panel. BEFORE WE GO, LET'S LOOK BACK AT WHAT WAS MAKING POLITICAL NEWS THIS WEEK IN 1972. THE ELECTION WAS JUST WEEKS AWAY, LABOUR LEADER NORMAN KIRK WAS ABOUT TO END NATIONAL'S FOUR TERMS IN GOVERNMENT. THERE WAS ANOTHER CHANGE ` IN THE STYLE OF POLITICAL ADVERTISING. POLITICAL COMMERCIALS MOVED AWAY FROM BORING TALKING HEADS TO MORE EMOTIONAL THEMES. THIS LATE-EDITED ITEM WILL BE CAPTIONED LIVE. NZ is a clean country. TRANQUIL MUSIC NATIONAL ` strength where it counts. Vote National. IDYLLIC, TRANQUIL SONG PLAYS Can you imagine nation get away with a man for man slogan now? MARAE IS NEXT LOOKING AT NEW ATTEMPTS TO PLANT THE SEED OF TE REO MAORI. AND REMEMBER Q+A REPEATS TONIGHT AT 11.35. THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND THANKS FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS. THOSE WERE THE QUESTIONS AND THOSE WERE THE ANSWERS. THAT'S Q+A. SEE YOU NEXT SUNDAY MORNING AT 9. CAPTIONS BY ABLE CAPTIONS WERE MADE POSSIBLE WITH FUNDING FROM NZ ON AIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2014