MORENA, GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M GREG BOYED. TODAY ` (OVERLAPPING QUESTIONS) PATRICK GOWER: I'M ASKING YOU. DID HE LIE? DID HE LIE? IT WAS HIS WORST WEEK AS PRIME MINISTER. CAN BILL ENGLISH EMERGE UNSCATHED FROM THE TODD BARCLAY SCANDAL? THEN LABOUR LEADER ANDREW LITTLE JOINS US WITH HIS TAKE ON THE TODD BARCLAY AFFAIR. PLUS ` THE FOREIGN CAMPAIGN VOLUNTEERS COMPLAINING ABOUT THEIR LIVING CONDITIONS. IS THIS ANOTHER OWN GOAL FOR LABOUR? WELLINGTON LIKES TO BOAST THAT IT'S ONE OF THE MOST LIVEABLE CITIES IN THE WORLD. WHENA OWEN LOOKS AT A WRANGLE OVER ITS TRANSPORT FUTURE THAT MANY FEAR COULD PUT THAT REPUTATION AT RISK. IT SENDS A TERRIBLE MESSAGE TO THE WORLD THAT WELLINGTON IS TAKING A STEP BACKWARDS. AND WE'LL HAVE ANALYSIS FROM OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, PUBLIC AFFAIRS SPECIALIST AND DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; JOHN TAMIHERE, CEO OF THE WAIPAREIRA TRUST AND FORMER LABOUR MP AND BROADCASTER; MICHELLE BOAG, PR CONSULTANT AND FORMER NATIONAL PARTY PRESIDENT. THE NATIONAL PARTY CONFERENCE IS UNDERWAY IN WELLINGTON THIS WEEKEND. IT'S UNUSUAL FOR A NATIONAL LEADER, OR ANY PARTY LEADER, FOR THAT MATTER, NOT TO TALK TO US LIVE ON THE MORNING OF THEIR NATIONAL CONFERENCE ESPECIALLY IN ELECTION YEAR. BUT BILL ENGLISH REFUSED, AND SO POLITICAL EDITOR CORIN DANN ENDED UP INTERVIEWING HIM FRIDAY EVENING AND ASKED, 'WHAT WAS GOING THROUGH YOUR HEAD 'WHEN YOU WERE FIRST ASKED ABOUT TODD BARCLAY?' OH, LOOK, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME. THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED. I HADN'T SEEN THE FULL SCOPE OF WHATEVER... THE MEDIA WERE PUBLISHING. WHEN YOU CAME DOWN AT 10 TO 10, THE TRADITIONAL CAUCUS RUN THAT WE HAVE ON TUESDAY MORNING, YOU KNEW THERE WAS GONNA BE A LOT OF MEDIA THERE. DID YOU COME DOWN THINKING THAT YOU WOULD ACTUALLY TELL THE TRUTH AND GIVE PEOPLE THE FULL STORY? WELL, I CAME DOWN AND ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS I WAS ASKED WITH WHAT I THOUGHT AT THE TIME. HAD IT CROSSED YOUR MIND, THOUGH, THAT THIS WAS MAYBE THE TIME YOU NEEDED TO TELL EVERYBODY WHAT HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED? WELL, LOOK, A LOT OF WHAT HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED HAD BEEN IN THE MEDIA OVER A PERIOD OF 12 TO 15 MONTHS, SO` WELL, WE HAD NO IDEA, OF COURSE` FROM MY VIEW, THERE WAS NOTHING PARTICULARLY NEW ABOUT WHAT WAS BEING SAID. BUT FROM THE PUBLIC'S POINT OF VIEW THERE WAS. AND ON THE MATTERS OF REAL PUBLIC INTEREST, WHICH WAS MY STATEMENT TO THE POLICE, I WENT` AND AFTER THOSE INTERVIEWS ON TUESDAY MORNING, WENT AND LOOKED AT THE POLICE STATEMENT AND CLARIFIED WHAT I'D SAID. BUT WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL US ON TUESDAY MORNING WHEN I THINK I ASKED YOU WAS IT TODD BARCLAY THAT TOLD YOU? WHAT WENT THROUGH YOUR MIND? WELL, I SAID WHAT WAS IN MY MIND AT THE TIME. THEN I WENT TO CHECK THE POLICE STATEMENT AND CLARIFIED WHAT I'D SAID TO THE POLICE, RELEASED THE STATEMENT AS SOON AS I COULD. AND ARE YOU SERIOUSLY TELLING NEW ZEALANDERS THAT YOU COULD NOT RECALL THAT IT WAS TODD BARCLAY WHO TOLD YOU ABOUT THE TAPES? WELL, AT THE TIME, IT'S WHAT I SAID. ALL SORTS OF PEOPLE HAD SAID ALL SORTS OF THINGS. I WENT` HAD ANYBODY ELSE TOLD YOU ABOUT THE TAPES? WELL, YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER EVERYONE'S LOOKING AT THESE EVENTS IN HINDSIGHT. THEY HAD OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME ` IN FACT FOR OVER 12 MONTHS ` ALLEGATIONS HAD GONE BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS. THERE'D BEEN INTENSIVE DISCUSSION` BUT HAD ANYONE ELSE, APART FROM TODD BARCLAY, TOLD YOU ABOUT THE TAPES? WELL, PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME. IT WAS THE BACKGROUND TO THE CANDIDATE SELECTION AND A WHOLE LOT OF RUMOUR IN THE ELECTORA` BUT YOU COULDN'T RECALL THAT TODD BARCLAY HAD TOLD YOU, AND YOU HAD TOLD THAT INFORMATION TO THE POLICE IN PERSON? WELL, I KNEW THAT I HAD BEEN QUESTIONED BY THE POLICE. I WENT AND GOT THE POLICE STATEMENT, WHICH I HAD NOT LOOKED AT FOR A LONG TIME, AND WHEN IT WAS CLEAR WHAT I HAD SAID THERE, THEN I CLARIFIED THE MATTER PUBLICLY. DO YOU REGRET NOT TELLING US AT THAT POINT IN THE MORNING THE FULL STORY? WELL, I COULDN'T BE MORE DEFINITIVE THAN I WAS. I WENT AND CLARIFIED IT FROM THE POLICE STATEMENT. I MEAN, THIS IS A MATTER THAT HAD BEEN SUBJECT TO AN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT, WHICH I WASN'T PARTY TO. YOU COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT MORE CLEARER. YOU COULD HAVE TOLD US WHAT YOU MUST HAVE KNOWN. WELL, THE WAY THAT THE MEDIA WORKS AND THE INTENT, I SUPPOSE, OF THE PUBLICATION OF THE STORY WAS THE ELEMENT OF SURPRISE. I` BUT THIS IS THE POINT I'M COMING TO FROM THE BEGINNING. YOU HAD A FEW HOURS. YOU HAD TWO OR THREE HOURS TO JOG YOUR MEMORY IF THERE WAS ANY DOUBT ABOUT YOUR RECOLLECTIONS. SO ISN'T IT IN THE MINDS OF, I THINK, MOST REASONABLE NEW ZEALANDERS, NOT CREDIBLE FOR YOU TO SUGGEST YOU COULDN'T RECALL WHO IT WAS? WELL, LOOK, PEOPLE WILL MAKE UP THEIR MINDS ABOUT CREDIBILITY. I'D SAID WHAT I THOUGHT. I WENT AND SORTED THE ISSUE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE BY CHECKING WHAT HAD BEEN SAID, MADE THAT CLEAR. THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAD TO MOVE ON TO ACTUALLY DEALING WITH THE ISSUE AS IT UNFOLDED. I MEAN, MY JOB AS THE PRIME MINISTER IS TO DEAL WITH WHAT WAS A SAD, BITTER EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE, TO THE EXTENT IT HAD AN EFFECT ON GOVERNMENT, AND GET IT DEALT WITH SO WE CAN GET ON WITH THE BUSINESS OF GOVERNING. SURE, AND I THINK PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YOUR CREDIBILITY AND YOU TELLING THE TRUTH. AND I WONDER, DO YOU THINK POLITICIANS NOW JUST DON'T HAVE TO TELL THE TRUTH? NO. I THINK THE STANDARDS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED ARE MUCH HIGHER THAN THEY USED TO BE, BECAUSE OF SOCIAL MEDIA, BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE ALWAYS ON LIVE VIDEO. DO YOU BELIEVE POLITICIANS SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE TO TELL THE TRUTH? I THINK THEY SHOULD AS MUCH AS IS ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE. AND IS THIS A CASE WHERE IT WASN'T POSSIBLE FOR YOU? NO. I'M NOT SAYING THAT AT ALL. I SAID WHAT WAS IN MY MIND AT THE TIME. I TOOK THE RESPONSIBLE POSITION OF GOING AND CHECKING WHAT HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED, WHAT I HAD ACTUALLY SAID, AND THEN I CLARIFIED THAT. ANDREW LITTLE WAS ASKED THIS WEEK IF HE HAD LIED AS A POLITICIAN, AND HE SAID YES. WHAT ABOUT YOU? HAVE YOU LIED AS A POLITICIAN? I DON'T RECALL SETTING OUT TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD PEOPLE, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN. IN THE RESPONSE TO THIS SAGA, YOU DID LAUNCH, I GUESS, A DEFENCE OF YOUR CREDIBILITY, CLAIMS OF A COVER-UP AGAINST YOU, BY SAYING THAT YOU HAD REPORTED THE MATTER TO THE ELECTORATE CHAIR, THAT YOU HAD REPORTED THE MATTER TO POLICE. IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, WHEN I SAID I REPORTED IT, THAT, OF COURSE, WASN'T TECHNICALLY CORRECT, AND I'M QUITE HAPPY TO BE CORRECTED ON THAT. I RESPONDED TO QUESTIONS FROM THE POLICE. BUT THE ALLEGATION OF COVER-UP IS RIDICULOUS. THERE IS NO HIGHER STANDARD THAN A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. AND ANY ROLE I HAD OR ANY ROLE TODD BARCLAY OR ANYONE ELSE HAD WAS DEALT WITH BY THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE. SO THAT CANNOT BE` BUT THE SEMANTICS ARE IMPORTANT, PRIME MINISTER, BECAUSE YOU STOOD UP IN THE HOUSE TO DEFEND YOURSELF AGAINST THE ALLEGATIONS OF A COVER-UP BY SAYING, 'NO, NO. I REPORTED THIS TO POLICE, 'AND I REPORTED IT TO THE ELECTORATE CHAIR.' BUT IN FACT, YOU WERE PROMPTED BY THE ELECTORATE CHAIR IN THE TEXT FOR A RESPONSE, AND THE POLICE CAME TO YOU. AND THAT'S QUITE DIFFERENT. THOSE SEMANTICS MATTER. WELL, AS I SAID, WITH RESPECT TO THE POLICE, I REPLIED TO A STATEMENT, AND WE CORRECTED THAT, CORRECTED THE USE OF THE WORD 'REPORTED'. BEAR IN MIND, EVERYONE'S BEEN OPERATING IN THE LAST FEW DAYS ON THE IDEA THAT THERE WAS SOME CERTAINTY OF A CRIMINAL ACT. THAT HAS NEVER BEEN ESTABLISHED. THE PROCESS IN NEW ZEALAND IS YOU'RE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. THE POLICE CONDUCTED A 10-MONTH INVESTIGATION INTO THIS AND DID NOT LAY CHARGES. AND EVEN IF THEY HAD, IT'S UP TO A COURT, NOT THE MEDIA, TO DETERMINE WHETHER A CRIMINAL ACT'S OCCURRED. YEAH, BECAUSE YOU SAID YESTERDAY, 'WHILE THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING 'THAT THERE WAS A POTENTIAL OFFENCE, AT THE TIME THAT WAS NOT THE CASE.' DO YOU STAND BY THAT? YES, I DO. WE'RE NOT ALL LAWYERS OR WALKING AROUND WITH LAWYERS ON OUR SHOULDERS. THE CONTEXT FOR THIS WAS A COMPLICATED EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE, PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES THAT HAD BEEN BUBBLING AWAY FOR SOME TIME. NO ONE'S QUITE SURE YET WHAT HAPPENED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. I ONLY KNOW WHAT I WAS TOLD. WELL, IF I COULD STOP YOU THERE, PRIME MINISTER. HOW DOES THAT SQUARE WITH THE TEXT YOU SENT IN FEBRUARY LAST YEAR THAT SAYS, 'THE SETTLEMENT WAS LARGER THAN NORMAL BECAUSE OF 'THE PRIVACY BREACH, AND IT HAD TO BE PART-PAID FROM 'THE PRIME MINISTER'S BUDGET TO AVOID POTENTIAL LEGAL ACTION.' SO, CLEARLY, AT THAT POINT THERE WAS SOME THINKING THAT THIS WAS A LEGAL MATTER. WELL, IT WASN'T MY THINKING. AND IN ANY CASE` THAT WAS YOUR TEXT. YES, IT WAS, BUT I WAS NO PARTY TO THE DISPUTE. PEOPLE FORGET THAT. I WAS THE FORMER MP, AS A MINISTER OF FINANCE, NOT DEALING WITH STAFFING ISSUES. THEY WERE NO LONGER MY STAFF. BUT YOU MUST HAVE KNOWN THAT THE MONEY WAS COMING FROM THE PRIME MINISTER'S BUDGET TO HELP PAY FOR IT. WELL, I'D BEEN TOLD THAT, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS IN THE TEXT. I MEAN, THE POINT ABOUT ALL THIS IS THAT THE EMPLOYEES HAVE RIGHTS; THE EMPLOYERS HAVE OBLIGATIONS. THE RELEVANT PEOPLE WERE DEALING WITH IT. ANY SUGGESTION OF A COVER-UP IS RIDICULOUS BECAUSE ALL THOSE MATTERS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED` BUT YOU'RE TRYING TO DOWNPLAY THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EVENT AT THE TIME, SAYING IT WAS UNCLEAR ABOUT WHETHER THERE WAS A POTENTIAL OFFENCE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOUR TEXT IS QUITE CLEARLY SAYING YOU WERE SO WORRIED ABOUT POTENTIAL LEGAL ACTION YOU INCREASED THE AMOUNT PAID OF TAXPAYERS MONEY. NO, I ABSOLUTELY DISAGREE WITH THAT. I WAS NO PART OF THE SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTE AS YOU'RE TRYING TO IMPLY. I WAS NO PARTY TO IT. I DON'T MEAN TO IMPLY THAT. I'M NOT TRYING TO IMPLY THAT. YOU DID, AND I WAS NO PARTY TO IT. WHATEVER HAPPENED THERE WAS A MATTER OF THE LEGAL ADVISERS AND WHOEVER NEGOTIATED THE SETTLEMENT. I DON'T MEAN TO IMPLY THAT, PRIME MINISTER. I APOLOGISE FOR THAT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS HOW SIGNIFICANT AND HOW SERIOUS YOU THOUGHT IT WAS AT THE TIME BECAUSE THERE IS AN ISSUE ABOUT IF IT WAS THAT SERIOUS AT THE TIME, WHETHER YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE ABOUT IT. WELL, I HAD NO ROLE IN A CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN AN EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE, OF WHICH I WAS NEITHER. SO I COULD NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTIONS TAKEN WHEN I WASN'T THE EMPLOYER; I WASN'T THE LOCAL MP; I DID NOT EMPLOY THE STAFF; AND IT WAS DEALT WITH LEGALLY QUITE SEPARATELY, AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. I WAS SIMPLY AN OBSERVER OF THE PROCESS, WHO USED TO BE THE MP. IN ANY CASE, IT DIDN'T REALLY BECOME CLEAR THERE MAY BE AN OFFENCE INVOLVED UNTIL THERE WAS A POLICE COMPLAINT, AND THE POLICE APPEARED TO TAKE THAT SERIOUSLY. THEN THEY CAME AND QUESTIONED ME, AS I PRESUME THEY QUESTIONED OTHER PEOPLE, AND THEY INVESTIGATED THE MATTER. SO WHATEVER SERIOUSNESS WAS THERE, THE POLICE TOOK THAT UP AND STARTED TO DEAL WITH IT. DID YOU TELL PRIME MINISTER JOHN KEY AT THE TIME ABOUT IT? WELL, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH IT THROUGH HIS STAFF BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THE RESPONSIBILITY GOES THROUGH PARLIAMENTARY SERVICES. DID YOU TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT? WE HAD SOME BRIEF DISCUSSIONS, BUT AGAIN, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY FORMAL ROLE IN IT. I KNEW THE PEOPLE, THOUGH, AND THAT'S THE INVOLVEMENT HERE. SO LET'S FLIP THIS AROUND. IF YOU WERE PRIME MINSTER AND YOUR DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER CAME TO YOU AND SAID, 'THERE'S THIS POTENTIAL ISSUE HERE WITH ALLEGATIONS OF 'SECRET RECORDINGS,' AS PRIME MINISTER, WOULDN'T YOU TAKE SOME ACTION? WELL, THAT WAS DEALT WITH IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE. AGAIN, THE PRIME MINISTER'S NOT THE EMPLOYER. PARLIAMENTARY SERVICES IS THE EMPLOYER. YEAH, BUT IT'S ONE OF HIS MPS... THAT'S RIGHT. ...WHO'S CONTINUING TO DENY ALLEGATIONS IN THE MEDIA, GOING FOR RESELECTION. YET, A MATTER WHICH HAS NOW COST HIM HIS JOB, NOTHING WAS DONE ABOUT IT AT THE TIME. WELL, A PRIME MINISTER CAN'T SACK AN MP. AN MP IS THERE BECAUSE THEIR CONSTITUENTS VOTE FOR THEM. PRIME MINISTER CAN SACK A MINISTER. PRIME MINISTERS CAN USE THE MEDIA. THEY CAN USE ALL SORTS OF MECHANISMS IN ORDER TO EXPRESS THEIR DISPLEASURE ABOUT SOMEONE'S BEHAVIOUR. WELL, THERE'S ALWAYS BEHAVIOUR OF POLITICIANS ABOUT WHICH ANY PRIME MINISTER MAY HAVE VIEWS OR NOT HAVE VIEWS. BEAR IN MIND, IN THIS CASE, THAT THERE WAS NO PARTICULAR CLARITY ABOUT WHAT MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT HAVE HAPPENED. IT WAS SEEN, AT THE TIME, FOR WHAT IT WAS AND IS, AND THAT IS AN EMPLOYMENT DISPUTE WHICH WAS NOT UNIQUE. THEY HAPPEN. THERE'S THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN POLITICS, AND SOMETIMES THOSE PEOPLE FALL OUT, AND THIS HAPPENS TO BE A PARTICULAR INTENSE AND SAD DISPUTE, BECAUSE I KNOW THE PEOPLE INVOLVED. AND NOW... SURE. TODD BARCLAY'S MADE A DECISION TO LEAVE POLITICS, AND LET'S HOPE THAT'S GOING TO WORK WELL FOR HIM, BECAUSE IT WAS A BRAVE DECISION. ARE YOU DISAPPOINTED THAT THIS MAY HAVE DAMAGED YOUR REPUTATION? YOU'VE BUILT A REPUTATION AS AN HONEST BROKER, AS A STRAIGHT-UP POLITICIAN, AND YET NOW THERE ARE PEOPLE CALLING YOU A LIAR. WELL, LOOK, PEOPLE WILL MAKE UP THEIR OWN MIND ABOUT THAT. I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT IT HAPPENED AT ALL, NOT BECAUSE OF THE EFFECT ON ME` BUT ARE YOU DISAPPOINTED WITH YOUR BEHAVIOUR IN THIS PARTICULAR EPISODE? NO, I THINK I DEALT WITH IT, KNOWING THE COMPLEXITY AND INTENSITY OF THE SITUATION... CLEAR CONSCIENCE? ...ABOUT AS WELL AS YOU COULD, KNOWING THAT THIS IS A MESSY, DIFFICULT DISPUTE THAT WENT ON FOR A LONG TIME, AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH BETTER` YOUR CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR. YES, IT IS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH BETTER IF IT HAD BEEN RESOLVED EARLIER IN THE WAY THAT THESE THINGS USUALLY RESOLVE RATHER THAN IN THIS VERY HIGH-PROFILE AND DIFFICULT MANNER. ALL RIGHT, IF WE LOOK AHEAD NOW TO YOUR CONFERENCE AND TO THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, DO YOU THINK YOU CAN WIN THIS ELECTION ON YOUR PAST RECORD? YOU'VE GOT TO PUT A CASE FOR THE FUTURE. I GOT NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. NEW ZEALAND'S DONE WELL, BUT THIS ELECTION'S ALL ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO BETTER. WHAT IS THAT CASE? WHAT DOES IT MEAN IN TERMS OF PEOPLE'S BACK POCKETS? WELL, THE BUDGET PACKAGE AROUND FAMILY INCOMES IS A VERY GOOD START AND A CHALLENGE WHICH WILL COME INTO PRACTICE ON THE 1ST OF APRIL. DOES THAT GIVE PEOPLE A SENSE OF HOPE IN THEIR FUTURE? I THINK IT HELPS. LOOK, THERE'S A LOT OF CONFIDENCE OUT THERE NOW. AN ECONOMY CREATING 10,000 JOBS A MONTH, WHICH IS PROBABLY A PEAK, BUT IT'S PRETTY IMPRESSIVE. MORE PEOPLE THAN EVER IN WORK. THAT IS HOPE AND ASPIRATION. BUT THEY'RE NOT EARNING ENOUGH, ARE THEY? IS THE SYSTEM BROKEN TO SUCH A POINT THAT WAGES AREN'T RISING ENOUGH THAT YOU NEED TO STEP IN? I MEAN, THE RESERVE BANK OF AUSTRALIA IS MAKING THESE SORTS OF NOISES THAT PEOPLE NEED TO DEMAND MORE IN TERMS OF WAGE RISES. IS IT TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO SEND THE MESSAGE TO BUSINESS IN NEW ZEALAND THAT THEY NEED TO PAY MORE? LOOK, I THINK THAT OUR BUSINESSES AND OUR EMPLOYEES HAVE VERY REALISTIC AND EFFECTIVE VIEWS ABOUT WHAT THEY SHOULD GET PAID AND HOW THEY WORK THAT OUT, AND THAT'S UP TO THEM TO DO THAT. PRIME MINISTER BILL ENGLISH, I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. 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 50C. WE'LL BRING IN OUR PANEL AFTER THE BREAK. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, PUBLIC AFFAIRS SPECIALIST AND DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; JOHN TAMIHERE, CEO OF THE WAIPAREIRA TRUST; AND FORMER LABOUR MP AND BROADCASTER; MICHELLE BOAG, PR CONSULTANT AND FORMER NATIONAL PARTY PRESIDENT. John, how did Bill English handle this? In retrospect not as well as he got up. I am not a good mate of his, bbut I have been around him since 1983 and he will put on that blue jersey and say he's the best for it ut he always plays within the rules. He has been caught being frugal with the truth. And on another level, his error of judgement aas with dealing with his own community nd sometimes you don't get the clarity in your own mind when you're dealing with folk that you've employed 18 years. You live in a close-knit environment and sometimes is good to step aside and let others engage. I think that is property what happened. But as it played out, he has not come out squeaky clean. But he is a pretty honest bloke. How has it affected his reputation of a straight shooter? Has this dinged that? I think is mistake was not doing due diligence earlier. Wwe saw with John Key, that you can make assumptions that you can recall precisely what happens bbut in politics you have thousands accommodations every week, and this was milling around for a long time. And what we should have done before confronting the media, he should have gone back and looked at everything that he said. I think JT is right. He felt very compromised and sad about this, ecause she had served them a long time. I think the whole fact that this was happening hurt deeply. And therefore your recall of these things, you just don't think exactly on this day this exact thing happened. He should have known that this would have come back andbite on the bum? He was badly prepared. And that is usually what National is good at. When he was asked to politicians have to tell the truth all the time the answer is yes. Even if the truth is I can't recall exactly what happened, but what I do know is I don't want to compromise a police investigation, o I'm not gonna say anything to mislead you. There is a way of being truthful even if you can't recall. I think the real thing and what came out in the interview as of John Key was the Prime Minister today he would have been in resignation material bbecause of the hypocrisy I've going on in search of the teapot tapes with a recording of John Key and John Banks and if at the same time you know one of the Mps has the same aand you are covering it up, the policy of that would mean John would have to resign. Ut I think he survives this time because he was not prime minister. He should have said he was aware of at any talk to Jonty about it aand I told Barclay he should have told police what he told me. Bill English should have done more. Winston Peters said he should resign. Is there any case about? I think if you are prosecuting and putting the case against Bill, e does it marvellously and better than most. He is remarkable at it. I don't know whether this issue will linger into the election and that is the issue. If there is continued? Is about as credibility integrity of him as a leader hat is the question of where it goes from here. On the lingering side of it he didn't want to do this live interview, which is unusual. There will be something they get a lot of headlines. How deliberate is that? You guys get really upset about that, and I don't think the public give a damn hether you can get a live interview or not. It is that there will be more news from six onwards. This is Bill English as first conference as leader. His is a hugely important conference. It is in Alex in the conference. I can understand him wanting to focus on that. He fronted up alive for his first. He is desperate for any ublicity. He will go to this conference and see lots of people wwho have been embroiled in this, hhis own people there, nd he wants to focus on that and make sure he can do good as job as he possibly can. The issue that Josie raised about whether politicians should always tell the truth there are many in sensors where you can't tell the whole truth such as issues with security. Look at what is winning overseas, and that is politicians who look as outsiders and a genuine. Trump is not genuine he just has anything. I am looking at France, UK and Canada. If you are prepared to take a risk and front with uncomfortable stuff you do earn brownie points. And the problem with national. If you look at Theresa May and how she did in front the debates he has to step outside the business as usual. Would you tell him to front up on the program? I think it over to apology to say I might've missed stepped Or on reflection after going back to my files, I might have been more clear and concise about how this rolled out So there is always you could play it out. Him not fronting isn't about you getting a pitch On who wins or not, It's about whether you can bump the story after what he says at the conference. So we will see how this rolls out. I don't know if this will linger and if there are other smouldering things waiting to blow Coming through into the election. Are there? I am not even at the conference. Tthe excuse that we aren't all lawyers, here are plenty of lawyers and the party. Does that wash? I think what caught him was that he was so concerned about the confidentiality agreement between the employer that he wasn't aware of. And I think he was constantly talking about` hen he was talking about legal issues he wasn't talking about police He was talking about come back on the employment side. Surely there was a way he could saythat he was worried about the legal issue He said that. So it is a test of how we answer the questions, Rather than the substance of it. He could have said that this is something deeply personal to me This was my electorate and I chose not to answer your questions directly because I'm worried about compromising the investigation. Annie has said that but if he said that at the beginning then he sounds like politics as usual. But the things as he didn't recall. He was telling the truth. E should have checked up. We will leave that there. THANKS, PANEL. AND AFTER THE BREAK, WE'LL HAVE MORE ON THE TODD BARCLAY AFFAIR. JESSICA IS HERE WITH LABOUR LEADER ANDREW LITTLE. WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL US ON TUESDAY MORNING WHEN I THINK I ASKED YOU WAS IT TODD BARCLAY THAT TOLD YOU? WHAT WENT THROUGH YOUR MIND? WELL, I SAID WHAT WAS IN MY MIND AT THE TIME. UH, THEN I WENT TO CHECK THE POLICE STATEMENT AND CLARIFIED WHAT I'D SAID TO THE POLICE, RELEASED A STATEMENT AS SOON AS I COULD. THAT WAS PRIME MINISTER BILL ENGLISH FROM EARLIER IN THE PROGRAMME. JOINING ME NOW IS LABOUR LEADER ANDREW LITTLE. Thank you for your time this morning. What is your response to building wishes interviewing. Do you think he has been honest with the public? No he hasn't. And if you go back to his interview in March whether he had any contact, he said he had no direct contact. We can go across all the events in 2016. It is what he has done this year as Prime Minister that is telling. When he had an opportunity Tuesday morning, he delayed. And even after all that came out later that day, In Parliament this week he made a statement that he approached the police When the opposite was true. This is a total failure of leadership on his past. He has been found wanting. It sounds like you're calling for his resignation. Iicenot saying that, But people should know that the straight shooter is a straight shooter. It's one thing to avoid embarrassment to other people And even for yourself But when you say something is not true that is demonstrably is That is a completely different kettle of fish. He had nothing to lose in March by being honest By saying he had contact with the people involved. He had nothing to lose on Tuesday morning when he was told That Todd Barclays made recordings. But he decided not to do that. Is there times in politics when politicians have to be economically with the truth. I don't think it's not unusual for politicians to try and preserve the dignity and dignity of others. Sometimes you are caught by a sense of embarrassment. And you might not say absolutely everything that is to be said. Eventually you have to front up. Because if you don't you will be caught out. And an issue that has been festering for 18 months, People have been caught out. Andy goes beyond was happen this year and back a long way. Leadership isn't about asked covering It's about what you do when faced with difficult circumstances and dealing with colleagues and comrades, And sometimes you have to face up and say that's wrong has to change. Should the Prime Minister and other senior members of the National handled Berkeley differently? Did they fail him? Looks to me like he didn't have the support or mentoring he should have had. He employment relationship do break down. This whole thing isn't about employment relationships breaking down, It was about alleged legal contact in terms of recording a staff member. It is about a police investigation when Barclays said he would cooperate and then he didn't and they came out this year. People should have been around them saying that's not how you do things. And at the end of last year when he said there was no recordings Knowing that was completely untrue, Bill English knew that was clearly untrue, He should have called amount. What would you have done if you are in that position? If I was aware that an MP and my caucus was the subject of a police investigation, I would say you're obliged to operate. I don't believe in the legal right to stay silent. You are an elected official and public confidence is absolutely vital. You unlike every citizen you have privilege and have to cooperate with police Because that is what our system of confidence an undemocratic and solutions require. Watching this play out what did you learn from this? You do have to step up and take responsibility. And that's what I was confronted with With a situation earlier this week With the complaints about the students being treated. I found out they were here because people associated with the Labour Party got them here and made promises. I said to the party that we have to make moral duty. We don't wait until our story broke We responded straightaway. Leadership is about taking responsibility and doing the right thing. In this case was that the right thing to do? As you have seen students have come out sticking up for conditions in the marae Saying that they enjoy the program. Maybe if you stepped back and assessed it for yourself, You may been able to handle it another way. Did you take the right approach and a circumstance? The right approaches once we got notification, I said we get up there straight away. Andrew Curtin and his team did and an outstanding job talking with the students and sorting things out. Some did want to have different arrangements. But the vast mmajority said they wanted to stay under the program. How many are staying? As of yesterday was about 65 of 80. They are still working through the final things. But it comes back to when you're confronted with something about personally embarrassing, Your personal issues aren't at stake. It is about people's livelihoods. If you are the head of an organisation is not about you. If you are the primacy of a country it is about the country in a cell use and standards. And that is what the prime minister role is about. How did this get out of control? Was this lack of organisation? At the beginning of the year when I became aware of it, I said it is a party issue that has to be dealt with. It was called the 2016 labour Fellowship. Because people closely associated with the party were involved. Ithout any mandate they went ahead and did stuff. In May when I got messages from students, The party stepped in straight away And people associated with it said there was no approval. The party were given assurances. But there was something to worry about. And the minute we got the complaints and we knew that our name was associated with it. It is not about legal technicalities. It is moral responsibility that is the most important thing. Matt McCartin has been a fall guy for you. He has taken responsibility for this Have you talked to this. I haven't personally spoken to him. Is he the fall guy? Azzi taken responsibility for how this played out? I haven't spoken to him. The priority and what I said to the party from the outset As the well-being of those young people. And that is what we focus on. Next week in the weeks that follow, when this question still follow we will get on top of it. Why not use New Zealanders for this type of work? We have thousands of New Zealanders in our campaign. Why do we need those foreign students or interns coming in? We have been proud of in our party international political internship programs for donkeys years. We have had small numbers involved in the past. National people send young people off the USA UK and Australia to participate in internship programs to get to see a campaign in another country's political systems. We are a part of that. We stepped in to take over. The marae has had bad PR over this. Has this been fair? No it is a good marae with good facilities. So why are students complaining? That is just the fact. You deal with complaints as you get it. I don't go around quibbling about it's only being a few people. If there is a complaint you get stuck in and deal with it. You have to deal with it and that is what taking responsibility is about And even if it was embarrassing, as it was for us, you have to step in and do the right thing at the time. AFTER THE BREAK, JESS WILL BE TALKING TO THE HEAD OF AWATAHA MARAE ON AUCKLAND'S NORTH SHORE, WHERE LABOUR'S INTERNS ARE STAYING. AND WE LOOK AT THE CONTROVERSY IN THE CAPITAL OVER THE CITY'S TRANSPORT FUTURE. IF WE SPEND ALL OF THAT ON STATE HIGHWAYS, THEN WE'VE LOCKED OURSELVES INTO A CAR-DEPENDENT MODEL, LABOUR'S BEEN IN DAMAGE CONTROL THIS WEEK BECAUSE OF CONTROVERSY OVER CONDITIONS AT A MARAE WHERE A GROUP OF FOREIGN INTERNS WORKING FOR THE PARTY WERE STAYING. ANTHONY WILSON IS HEAD OF THE MARAE IN QUESTION, AWATAHA MARAE ON AUCKLAND'S NORTH SHORE, AND HE JOINS ME NOW. KIA ORA. Can you tell me about the conditions that the student stayed in at your marae? I would like to sayThe people of that but I feel maligned by the accusations. We have heard people saying that we have slum conditions and a second rate. We take that really seriously. We have had tens of thousands of people use the facilities over the years and we have never had a complaint like this before. We are not a five-star hotel. Definitely not. We have never said that. But in terms of the facilities We are at least on par with other marae around the country. I have seen photos like the broken shower. Is accurate? We have eight showers. It is not like we only had one shower. The broken cabinet. We get broken things all the time when we have groups of this sort of size and nature using our facilities. We resent the implications of disgruntled students Trying to make a point out of this. It is good now That some of those stories have been out. I have seen some articles recently where the students have come out and defended the marae. They were saying they had a wonderful time and the facilities were adequate for what they required. How many students are still with you? Last count there were 60 people forward dinner the other night. There is a rolling number. Last count was about 60 still at the marae. How many complaints did you get over the last few weeks? We got no complaints. The only ones we saw were in the media. We question what the legitimacy of the complaints were. Was it trying to cause harm to us Always trying to cause harm to the program? We now realise A lot of those complaints were from disgruntled people who were on the program. Do you feel frustrated at the way labour have put you in this position? If you asked me whether we would do it again, the answer is yes because we are open to anyone using our facilities. The fact is turned into a political football, that is not about doing. There are many elders who work at the marae. They are hard-working. They cook the breakfast. They make the lunches every day in the dinners. They are hard-working people and community-based people. They do not deserve to be maligned like this. Labour is a more people came and than they expected. Howdy people did you expect the beginning? I expect around 80 people But we ended up with more than that. How many more? I think 90. By the time everything started to go pear-shaped. We brought an extra accommodation to accommodate the overflow. What was not said about the facilities was We arranged a one minute walk to another gym. They were able to use other facilities. Thank you for your time this morning. We will talk about the marae and the response shortly. First your response to how Andrew Little has fronted this? I think it has been disingenuous. The fact that these guys was coming was long known. Andrew made it sound like it was a surprise to him. David Fisher wrote about this in the Herald weeks ago. It was organised by Matt McCarten who was employed by the Labour Party at the time. He was chief of staff until late last year. So for Andrew to say it was someone associated with the Labour Party he knew Jolly well it was happening. It sounded great because they were going to get all this free labour. I know what they were doing because a friend of mine was rung by this American person who was doing this for the Labour Party. So I think saying he knew nothing about it and now they are taking moral leadership, of course they knew about it. To deny Matt McCarten, who appears to now have disappeared .Stop laughing John We know where he is. He is a friend of yours. What is a side of it? He is not a friend. He is an acquaintance. I am now the rose between two thorns. There is no doubt Matt McCarten floated this idea. There is no doubt American internships are huge in the American political spectrum. They have elections going all the time. It is part of the game. I agree That the position that It could be seen as disingenuous by Andrew has some foundation to it. Notice was there. It was not approved Because there was no budget approval et cetera. As soon as you bring in a group like this There was always going to be an allegation that you broaden foreign labour. And New Zealanders have a sense of unease about that. It took just one German last election to get them dizzy. The immigration status allows for volunteerism. It is huge whether it is people coming here to work on organic farms et cetera. It is the people we are talking about. Young people. International people. It is what labour are supposedly fighting for. That is the biggest problem for labour. He gets brownie points for fronting on this as does Awataha Marae. The real problem is the hypocrisy of bringing an 85 foreign students To run a Campaign we were blaming foreign students for the housing crisis And taking jobs from Kiwis. That labour is accountable for. I did a recent trip to the EU Where the Labour Party said do not go out and be copycat anti-immigration And the perception that you are racist, because voters will always go for the real thing over the copycat. Labour wins when it sticks to its job of representing working people. And being on the side of work. They are targeting then campaign on anti-immigration and the housing crisis ticket When another way of looking at it is that it is a wage problem and at the average wage cannot buy a house. They are bringing over a bunch of foreign students to campaign against foreign students. Michelle, one thing surprised me from Andrew Little. He said he has not spoken to Matt McCarten. To that surprise you? Perhaps he cannot find him either. Matt McCarten was his chief of staff. I am sure he has a mobile number. If he has not spoken to him it is because he did not want to speak to him. You are right Michelle. He was Andrew Little's chief of staff not that long ago. So he thought he was able to run the country when he was chief of staff and now he is not able to run a foreign intern scheme. You have to say that I was hung out to dry bit fronting up today shows the credibility. They were the meat in the sandwich. A marae in Christchurch Was in limbo And there was also the marae in Mangere That has stepped up for the homeless. It is unsavoury. STAY WITH US. AFTER THE BREAK ` YOUR FEEDBACK, AND WE LOOK AT THE CONTROVERSY IN THE CAPITAL OVER THE CITY'S TRANSPORT FUTURE: IF WE SPEND ALL OF THAT ON STATE HIGHWAYS, THEN WE'VE LOCKED OURSELVES INTO A CAR-DEPENDENT MODEL, AND I THINK ANY AUCKLANDER CAN TELL YOU THAT DOESN'T WORK. WHILE AUCKLAND'S TRANSPORT ISSUES HAVE BEEN FRONT AND CENTRE, WELLINGTON HAS BEEN FIGHTING ITS OWN ROADING BATTLES. THE CAPITAL IS CONSIDERING A NEW TRANSPORT PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. AS WHENA OWEN EXPLAINS, SOME OF THE DECISIONS ARE PROVING CONTROVERSIAL FOR A CITY THAT PRIDES ITSELF AS BEING ONE OF THE WORLD'S MOST LIVEABLE. (MUTTON BIRDS' 'WELLINGTON') # I WISH I WAS IN WELLINGTON. # THE CAFES AND THE BARS... # IT WAS RECENTLY VOTED THE MOST LIVEABLE CITY IN THE WORLD, BUT ITS COUNCILS AND THE NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY RECKON ITS ROADING AND TRANSPORT NETWORKS LET IT DOWN ` ESPECIALLY HIGH-CONGESTION ROUTES COMING IN AND OUT OF THE CITY AT PEAK TIMES. SO LET'S PUT THIS TO THE TEST. I'M OUT AT THE AIRPORT, IT'S MORNING RUSH HOUR, AND I WANT TO GO INTO THE CBD. HOW LONG'S IT GONNA TAKE ME? IT'S 10 PAST 8. LET'S FIND OUT. # I WISH I WAS IN WELLINGTON. WELLINGTONIANS ARE PROUD OF ITS CITY'S UNIQUENESS WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING ROUND TOWN. # THE OLD CABLE CAR... # YEAH, THERE'S THE CABLE CAR, THE TROLLEYBUSES AND THE CITY'S WALKABILITY. THEY'RE BIG ON TRANSPORT ACTION GROUPS TOO, BUT WHAT ALL PLAYERS AGREE ON IS THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO PUT A PLAN INTO PLACE NOW. WELLINGTON'S GOT A CHANCE HERE TO PLAN FOR THE TRANSPORT SYSTEMS OF THE FUTURE. THIS IS WELLINGTON RESIDENT TIM JONES. WE'RE STANDING WHERE NZTA'S NOW-ABANDONED BASIN FLYOVER WAS TO BE BUILT. HE CALLS ROADS LIKE THAT 'BABY-BOOMER ROADS' ` TRANSPORT OF THE PAST. RUMOUR HAS IT THERE'S ABOUT A BILLION DOLLARS ON THE TABLE. NOW, IF WE SPEND ALL OF THAT ON STATE HIGHWAYS, THEN WE'VE LOCKED OURSELVES IN TO A CAR-DEPENDENT MODEL. AND I THINK ANY AUCKLANDER WILL TELL YOU THAT DOESN'T WORK. (BRIGHT MUSIC) IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS, THE CAPITAL WAS EXPECTING A SURGE OF GROWTH IN ITS POPULATION AND THE NUMBERS OF PASSENGERS GOING THROUGH THE AIRPORT. THE TWO COUNCILS ARE THE TRANSPORT AGENCY, UNDER THE NAME 'LET'S GET WELLINGTON MOVING', HAVE JUST PUT OUT A LIST OF 12 POSSIBLE TRANSPORT SCENARIOS. BARRY MEIN IS HEADING THE PROJECT. WE ARE LOOKING AT THINGS THAT WILL ENDURE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, AND SO IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THE DECISIONS RIGHT. SO, WELLINGTON'S PRETTY LUCKY BECAUSE IT'S AIRPORT IS ONLY 8KM FROM THE CBD, BUT WE'VE PRETTY MUCH BEEN CRAWLING ALL THE WAY FROM THE AIRPORT. SOME OF THE SCENARIOS HAVE MORE LANES FROM THE AIRPORT AND DOUBLE MT VICTORIA AND TERRACE TUNNELS. GREATER WELLINGTON COUNCILLOR SUE KEDGLEY. THERE'S A WHOLE COLLECTIVE OF PEOPLE IN WELLINGTON WHO ARE SAYING THERE IS AN ALTERNATIVE. WHAT WE WANT IS LIGHT RAIL ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE AIRPORT. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SAID THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE LIGHT RAIL AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, AND SO ONE OF THE PIECES OF WORK WE'RE DOING AT THE MOMENT IS UNDERSTANDING HOW WE MIGHT MAKE PROVISIONS FOR THAT GOING FORWARD. IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE SHORT TERM. SO WHY NOT? WHY NOT JUST GO AHEAD AND DO IT? BECAUSE THERE HAS ALREADY BEEN A COMMITMENT TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUS SYSTEM. AH, THE BUS SYSTEM. IN OCTOBER, WELLINGTON'S BUS FLEET WILL BE FULLY DIESEL. THE ELECTRIC TROLLEYBUSES ARE GOING, AND EVERYONE HAS AN OPINION. THEY WERE SUPERB. THEY WERE COMFORTABLE TO RIDE IN, AND THEY WERE ENVIRONMENTALLY CLEAN, SO IT'S REALLY SAD TO SEE THEM GO. THE ANNOYING PART WITH THE ELECTRIC ONES IS THAT THEY DON'T ALWAYS WORK. THE ANNOYING ONE WITH THE DIESEL ONES IS THAT YOU CAN'T ALWAYS BREATHE. YOU KNOW? I MEAN, I'D RATHER WAIT. 'WAIT,' THE LETTERS TO THE PAPER SAY, 'UNTIL ELECTRIC-BATTERY TECHNOLOGY SUITABLE FOR WELLINGTON'S HILLS 'HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.' JOHN RANKIN HAS WORKED IN CANADA DESIGNING TRANSPORT SYSTEMS AND APPLAUDS WELLINGTON'S ELECTRIC ASPIRATIONS. BUT... IT'S NOT CLEAR THAT THE TECHNOLOGIES THAT THEY'RE BETTING ON TO DO THAT ARE GOING TO BE FIT FOR PURPOSE IN THE TIME THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. (BRIGHT MUSIC) ALL 60 TROLLEYBUSES WILL GO THIS OCTOBER, AND 32 DOUBLE-DECKER ELECTRIC BUSES WILL GRADUALLY BE INTRODUCED OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS FROM JULY NEXT YEAR. THE OTHER BUSES WILL BE NEW DIESEL UNTIL THEY CAN BE CONVERTED TO ELECTRIC. IT SENDS A TERRIBLE MESSAGE TO THE WORLD THAT WELLINGTON IS TAKING A STEP BACKWARDS LIKE THIS. THE DECISION TO DITCH THE TROLLEYBUSES WAS MADE BY GREATER WELLINGTON REGIONAL COUNCIL, HEADED BY CHRIS LAIDLAW. THE REST OF THE WORLD ARE GONNA LOOK AT US, THE CAPITAL CITY, GOING FROM ELECTRIC TO DIESEL. COS PEOPLE WILL SAY THAT. YES, WELL, THAT'S AN UNFORTUNATE LITTLE GAP, BUT, YOU KNOW, A NINE-MONTH GAP IS A SMALL PRICE TO PAY. AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT IN EMISSIONS TERMS, EVEN WITHOUT THE TROLLEYBUSES, OUR EMISSIONS IN WELLINGTON WILL DROP BY SOMETHING LIKE 38%. HOW CONFIDENT ARE YOU THAT THOSE OTHER ELECTRIC BUSES ARE GOING TO COME ON STREAM? IT'S NOT JUST THE ELECTRIC BUSES, BUT IT'S THE HUGE IMPROVEMENT. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A EURO 2 AND A EURO 6 DIESEL BUS IS ENORMOUS IN TERMS OF EMISSIONS. THEY DO GET RID OF SOME POLLUTION ` THE NITROUS OXIDES ETC. BUT EVEN THE LATEST-TECHNOLOGY DIESEL BUSES STILL HAVE THESE CANCER-CAUSING PARTICULATE EMISSIONS, AND THEY STILL HAVE THE CLIMATE CHANGE CO2 EMISSIONS. SO THEY'RE NOT A SOLUTION. THEY STILL DON'T ELIMINATE SOME OF THE HARMFUL... NO. THAT'S TRUE. ALL BUSES DO THAT. THERE ARE DIFFICULTIES WITH EVERY KIND OF TECHNOLOGY. A SHORTLIST OF TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS FOR WELLINGTON WILL BE PRESENTED IN NOVEMBER. WE WANT THE PUBLIC TO FEED BACK AS TO WHERE THEY SEE THE PICTURE GOING FORWARD. SO, I'VE JUST ARRIVED ON LAMBTON QUAY, AND IT HAS TAKEN ME IN MORNING RUSH HOUR 29 MINUTES. AND THAT'S A LOT FOR AN 8KM WELLINGTON ROAD JOURNEY. THINGS PROBABLY NEED TO CHANGE, AND THE FIRST BIG CHANGE WILL BE IN THREE MONTHS WITH THE $11M DE-RIG OF THE TROLLEY WIRES. THAT'S AFTER WELLINGTON'S LAST TROLLEYBUS MAKES ITS FINAL TRIP BACK TO THE DEPOT. LET'S TAKE SOME OF YOUR FEEDBACK NOW. SOME OF YOU SAY THE TODD BARCLAY SCANDAL HAS DISTRACTED FROM IMPORTANT ELECTION ISSUES. BUT MELANIE D SAYS PRIME MINISTERS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO APPLY PRESSURE ON AN MP TO 'SUGGEST' THEY DO NOT RUN AGAIN. SHE SAYS HISTORY IS LITTERED WITH CAST ASIDE MPS. Michelle, the Prime Minister's office has been a touch upset that we implied that he did not front up this morning. Your take on that? I don't understand. Let me answer for Michelle. The problem he has by not fronting live Is that he did not have the free had on labour that Andrew Little managed to get by fronting live on national just now. If you do a pre-record, the story is two days old. It was a tactical error. Was an error? They are saying that he fronted because he did a prerecord? Yes. That is their decision. Melanie Reid newsroom, For all of Paddy Gowers bluster, he did not get the story. Melanie Reid did. The government whips where were they with Todd Barclay? I feel sorry for my mate Matt McCarten He is now the Osama bin Laden. We always need a head on the platter. Todd Barclay let's move on. The number of amount of dollars that is lost in public service bad decisions. We will leave it there. Sorry we missed you Josie. MARAE IS NEXT. REMEMBER, Q+A REPEATS TONIGHT AT 11.35PM. THANKS FOR WATCHING AND THANKS FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS. THOSE WERE THE QUESTIONS, AND THOSE WERE THE ANSWERS,