Good morning, and welcome to The Nation. I'm Lisa Owen. Today ` waiting on Winston Peters. No matter what you ask or say, I can't with any intelligence ` and nor can my colleagues ` tell you what we're going to do until we have seen all the facts. As New Zealand First decides whether to go with National or Labour, we ask Tau Henare, Peter Dunne and Richard Prosser exactly what will be going on at the negotiating table. Then we meet three of the brand-new MPs to talk about the first few days in their dream job. Later ` why oil-rich and now independent Timor-Leste hasn't been able to reduce poverty. Maybe there'll be some international assistance to ameliorate that for a while. Or maybe the international community will say, 'Well, you had the money, and you wasted it.' Being a Timorese and a Timorese politician, it worries me, and I do not want to see that future. And we'll wrap up the week with our panel ` Jane Clifton, David Clendon and Marg Joiner and comedians Jeremy Corbett and Paul Ego. Copyright Able 2017 Great to have you with us today. We do love hearing from you, so get it touch. Our details are on the screen now. And if you tweet, follow along with our Twitter panel ` columnist Liam Hehir and Piko Consulting's Stephanie Rodgers. Use the hashtag #nationnz. Now, as the polls predicted, the election results have left Winston Peters in the box seat, and he appears to be loving every minute of it. He says the negotiations proper with National and Labour won't take place until after the special votes are counted and made public next weekend. But the first steps are underway, so what can we expect? Joining me now are former New Zealand First MPs Tau Henare and Richard Prosser and former United Future leader Peter Dunne. Good morning to you all. Good morning. Good morning, Lisa. Tau, if I can start with you. You were there in 1996. Yup. So how are things different this time round, do you think? Oh, I think there's a smaller team, for starters. Back in '96, there was 17 MPs. Yup. I think this one should be pretty easy. I think Winston's already made his mind up. He plays his cards very, very` Actually, he doesn't play his cards close to his chest. He plays them within his chest. So nobody else knows? No, nobody else knows. He's made up his mind. He'll go through the process. What he's doing now, I believe, is he's just having a look at the public reaction about where it's going to go. Okay. Well, Richard Prosser, at the press conference this week Winston Peters said that his team had gone through National and Labour's manifestos during the campaign and already looked at where the policies lined up and didn't line up. Were you part of that? Were you aware that that had gone on? No, that was happening upstairs. So that was being done by one or two key people, and that was actually quite a long time prior to the campaign proper starting that all those were being lined up against each other. To see who had the best match, so to speak? So that everyone knew what page everybody else was on and where things could go. Was there a conclusion drawn at that time or one that was verbalised? Not verbalised, no. I'd certainly go along with what Tau's just said ` (CLEARS THROAT) the game will have been played inside Winston's mind over quite a long period of time, and all the permutations of possible outcomes and the different roads leading off from them, he will have been contemplating. So it's like a long game looking forward to, you know, what final outcome we do get and which of those roads is going to lead to the best outcome. So, Peter Dunne, Winston Peters has said he's going to act in the nation's best interest. Do you believe that he's that responsible? No, I don't. I think that he will act in what he sees to be a) his own best interests, and b) New Zealand First's best interests. And to some extent, that's understandable, but I don't think it's justifiable. So what is in his best interest and the party's best interest? If those are things that are going to drive him. I'm not sure, to be perfectly honest how he might judge that, because I can see plusses and minuses about coalescing with either of the major parties. The experience ` and, you know, he and I can both testify to this ` overall, has not been a good one for minor parties. They tend to get swept up in the whole process. But I think the issue that New Zealanders are concerned about is not so much the time that it's taking to form a government, but just the charade we seem to be going through ` the press conferences and the non-events and everything else. They simply want to get on and see where things stand so we can start to move ahead as a country. Do you agree with these two ` that he's probably already made his mind up? I think he probably has, and I think that probably just highlights the farce of what's happening at the moment, actually. That's right. I mean, you have a look at the press conference that he held in the Beehive the other day. Why would you hold a press conference when you've got nothing to say? Well, why do you think he held it? Well, because it's all about theatre. It's all about, you know, King Lear jumping up and... You know, it's a game ` well, personally ` to Winston, you know, and he loves the theatre of it. I mean, if you've got nothing to say, close your door. Don't talk to people. You know? Okay. Well, the leaders from the two major parties have not called him. As far as we know, there's been no direct contact made. Are they pussyfooting around him, Peter Dunne? Well, I think they are. Pick up the phone and make a call. I think that part of the problem we've got at the moment is everyone's sitting, waiting to see what Winston does. He has 7.5% of the vote. He's going to be a critical part of the next government, but he's not going to be the next government. The next government will be lead by either Bill English or Jacinda Ardern. And I think both of those need to stop the pussyfooting and step up to the plate and start to exercise a bit of leadership here, actually. Otherwise, we're going to end up in this game where it's, 'We can't say this,' or, 'We can't do that, because we might offend Winston,' which is not the way you form a viable government. And while he's doing that, or while they are doing that, while they are sitting back waiting for him to move, his members can slag the government off. I mean, I've seen a report from Ron Mark about some issue. I mean, it's phony. And, quite frankly, there's a couple of things over this process. Why the hell, in 2017, do we have to wait two weeks? That's not Winston's fault; that's the Electoral Commission's fault. And, I mean, he has raised that, but you actually think that that's a genuine criticism? Oh, it is. Okay. Why is it that in two weeks, you and I can't talk to each other and sort out a deal, and whatever happens after the specials are counted, we just push button A. Mm. Okay. Well, I mean, the reality on that is that they might not have spoken directly leader to leader, but chiefs of staff will certainly have been talking for quite some time. Yeah, but this is not North Korea and America. This is little, old New Zealand where, basically, pollies know each other. And we should be able to ring each other and say, 'Hey, let's get it on. Let's talk, hey? Well, yeah, but, I mean, effectively they are doing that, because we've got high-ranking staff members talking to each other. Then at the end of` They're not elected. Yes, but whatever the outcome is, it's still a mouthpiece. The elected officials` Whatever the outcome is, if they haven't spoken directly, then you've got deniability in there. I've been through five of these negotiations. Yes, you have. (CHUCKLES) And in every instance ` both with Helen Clark and with John Key ` the first communication was a direct conversation between Clark and me or Key and me on election night, followed up by a conversation the following day to set up the process. Nothing else was different in the sense that we still had specials to wait for and all of those sorts of things. So why aren't those leaders doing that? What do they fear? Well, that's my question. I think they fear rebuff. Okay. Well, Peter Dunne has raised, and so has Tau Henare, this idea that Winston's got 7.5% of the vote. So let's talk a little bit about what that should buy him ` what it entitles him to. In your mind, does it entitle you to a shared Prime Ministership? Oh, I think everything is on the table, but I mean` Seriously? You think`? Well, if you start looking at percentages and how the components work, that's probably more First Past the Post thinking. If in the MMP environment, when we're talking about coalitions of one form or another, be they formal coalitions, where you've got people from both sides or many sides in the Cabinet, whatever it is, it's a bringing together of parties that have delivered members into the Parliament and forming a government out of them. So in terms of component bits, that's probably proportionally less important. The proportionality of the Parliament stays the same; the make-up of the Government then has to be determined by who's prepared to work with who and` Okay. So to be clear, you think that the Prime Ministership, the deputy Prime Ministership, Cabinet numbers, Cabinet positions, policy costs ` all on the table for a grab-bag ` doesn't matter if you only got 7.5%. Whatever you can leverage is what you can leverage. Yes, absolutely. That's the` You can't walk into the place with 7.5%... If the country wanted you as Prime Minister, New Zealand First would have got 46%, 47%, but they didn't. Yeah, but winning is a binary thing. You're either in or you're out. Aren't you, Peter Dunne? Yeah, but you can't` So the cost of being in is whatever he wants. Yeah, but I agree with Tau. This whole exercise works on, as Richard said, people coming together and forming combinations. But at the same time, tails cannot wag dogs, and at 7.5%, it's a tail, and it can't actually wag the bigger dog. It can be part of the dog, it can make the dog function effectively, but it can't be the tail that wags` That's where the public will draw the line. You know what a tail does to a dog? It balances it, and that's what the small party should do. Well, unless you're a Rottweiler and you've had your tail chopped off. (LAUGHS) But you say 'balance'. Okay, so where is the balance? Is deputy Prime Minister` Is that fair game, Peter Dunne? It depends on the nature of the agreement that's reached. If they reached a formal coalition, then that is fair game. If they go for a confidence and supply, then clearly a different set of arrangements. Do you think Cabinet ministers should be proportionate to what your vote is? Well, again, if you've negotiated that type of arrangement, yes. But if you're going to start from the position of saying, 'Let's divvy up the spoils before we've even decided what this Government's going to stand for 'in terms of policy and direction,' then I think you're sowing the seeds of your own destruction very early. Okay, I want to get an idea of what you think he'll be bothered by ` some quick answers. Will he be bothered that National's a fourth-term Government? Richard? Yes, he will be. Yep. He will? That'll be a concern. What about that Jacinda Ardern has never been a minister, never in Government? I think that will be an issue too. But he may see that to his advantage. Okay, so a clean slate. What about bad blood, Tau Henare? Does that matter to him? If there was bad blood, there wouldn't have been a coalition between National and New Zealand First in '96. Does he really care about the specials? Is that genuine concern? No, I think that's a convenience. The specials aren't going to significantly alter the result. They'll manipulate it around at the edges, but after the specials, National will still be the largest party, New Zealand First will still be about 7.5%. Yeah, but it may change the balance of the size of a particular majority, given that there is some public concern about` So you think he might use it as an out clause to go with Labour and Greens if the balance is more even after the special votes? Well, yeah, for a lot of people, it is a concern that if the difference between the two biggest parties is smaller, then in terms of public perception, it's more easy to justify going with one that's, say, 54% versus 56%, as opposed to them being further apart. Okay. At the moment, there's 11% difference between National and Labour. The magic figure is 61. Exactly. Yep. And in most combinations, even if you're saying National is going to drop a couple or whatever, a Government is going to be formed with about a minimum of 63 seats, maybe more. So I don't think the stability issue is quite as critical, because you're going to have a Government with a comfortable majority in terms of passing its Budget and major matters in the house. Peter Dunne, is there a case for Labour and National to work as a cartel, if you like, to kind of price-fix, in essence, to get together and say, 'Okay, the shared Prime Ministership ` neither of us will give that away; neither of us will give away the deputy's position, and we will limit Cabinet positions to proportionality. Is there an opportunity to do that? Would that be acceptable behaviour? I think that's wishful thinking, frankly. I don't think that's going to happen, given the culture of the two main parties. The idea of a grand coalition or even some coalition negotiation establishment rules ` I just think we're a long way from getting to that point. What could happen, and I thought for a while may well be what's happening, will be for the Labour Party, as the second party in the Parliament, to say, 'We'll stand back and let National and New Zealand First have first dibs, 'and if that works out, fair enough. If it doesn't, then we are ready' ` cos this is quite a strong position to be in ` 'we are ready, then, to step into the breach 'and put something together.' But I don't think that's going to happen either. They seem content on this 'worst of all worlds' outcome of parallel negotiations, where they just get played off. Okay, Richard Prosser ` do you think there is a likelihood that Winston Peters will actually sit on the crossbenches and vote issue by issue? Do you think that that is actually something that's in his mind? Oh, it's certainly a possibility, yeah. It's a possibility, but` At the end of the day, it will come down to policy concessions and how much of policy that is out there, that was promoted through the campaign, can be implemented. And if that's the best way of doing it, then that's the best way of doing it. His whole MO is about immigration, foreign ownership and regional development. I mean, therein lies the key for either Jacinda or Bill to get their heads around. What can they offer in those particular areas, to Winston? I mean, if it was me, I'd be sitting in the crossbenches, and I'd be saying, 'You can have confidence and supply in terms of stability, but these are the concessions that we want.' I wouldn't worry too much about ministerial portfolios. Okay. Richard, who is he listening to? Because there's been talk about the fact that his lawyer and confidante friend Brian Henry has been on the scene; Shane Jones is in there. Who does he listen to? The people who will be playing the biggest part, other than Winston in terms of formulating the approach to the negotiations, will be people outside the party who most of the party have never heard of. That's just the reality of it. Like? Well... Hobson's Pledge? (CHUCKLES) No, there will be a few names that actually` There will be people that I don't know either. I've seen people around, I've seen faces. There's a chap, Paul Karag, who I met, for the first time a couple of weeks ago, for example. It turns out that he's a long-time trusted confidante. So there will be people like that who, certainly none of the party membership, and probably almost none of the current caucus, will have had anything to do with. But they'll be people that he's known for a long time and have certain skills and who he trusts. So when he talks about consulting the party faithful, not going to happen? Well, I think he stated earlier there's a process that will happen that will be a bit like the debating chamber in Parliament. It's a necessary part of the process, but actually it doesn't affect the outcome. Okay. We're out of time, but I just want to know ` Peter Dunne, do you think that National and Labour should both walk away from this if you think it's the train wreck that you've been predicting? Well, I think there could well come a time where one or other says, 'We don't want to be part of it. You wear the rap and the consequences.' Put you on the spot. Who's he going with? I'm still picking he'll go left if he can. Peter? I think he'll go National. Tau? Crossbenches. Okay, there you go, across the full spectrum. After the break, three of Parliament's new faces ` Kiri Allan, Chris Penk, and Chloe Swarbrick. And later ` East Timor has taken in billions from its oil reserves, so why is the economy in big trouble? Welcome back. Well, the politicians we talked to before the break may be feeling a bit of 1996 deja vu. The ones we've got around the table next probably don't remember those days quite so well. They weren't even out of school. But now they've had their first few days as MPs, and they join me now to talk about it ` Labour's Kiri Allan, National's Chris Penk and Chloe Swarbrick from the Green Party. Welcome to you all. Kia ora. Chloe Swarbrick, can I start with you first? Let's get this out of the way. So, is it in the best interest of your party to sidle up to Winston Peters now, or would it be better to wait for a secure government in three years' time? I think that that is something that I am not authorised to speak on. And this is something which I'm... So we've got our negotiating team working through all those different variables. I'm asking you personally. I joined the Green Party because I believe in a movement that's bigger than myself. So does that movement need Winston Peters to be in government this time round? Yes, it does. So what do you reckon? I think that the negotiating committee will come up with the best position for the Green Party. Chris Penk? I'm part of the crowd in the square watching for the smoke signal from the chimney, so I'm with you and everyone else, really, in that regard. So I'm not able to give any insights or tell you things that people` But do you think Winston Peters is a responsible politician that you'd like to go into government with? Really and truly, it's not something I can get into. I'm a silent spectator in that crowd. Wow. People voted you in to have opinions. People have voted me in as the local MP for Helensville, so I'll be strongly advocating from that local level. Okay, well, let's see if I can get through third time lucky. (LAUGHTER) Well, I described it last week as the feeling is we've all just showed up at Hogwarts. We don't even have our little wands yet. We can barely speculate in terms of what's happening at those higher levels in the higher echelons. One thing you are entitled now is you could put a member's bill into the ballot, right? So have you thought about what your issue might be or what you might use that for? Well, I probably have quite a few, but a bugbear of mine from the last term was particularly when it came to free trade negotiations and the public disclosure information that was available to the populous. I would really like to see a regional breakdown of the economic benefits per trade agreement, so we can all engage on an informed basis. And for a region, understanding what the actual job implications are going to be per region. All right. Chris Penk, what would you look at? Well, for me, actually, the opportunity will be other than advocating at that local level, maybe some of the work around select committees. So, for me, that will be the focus more so than member's bills. So I think that's probably the best` You don't have a thought for a private member's bill? Oh, I have lots of thoughts, Lisa, but not one specifically that I've got drafted ready to go. Chloe Swarbrick, what about you? Yeah, so going through the Green Party candidate selection process, we had to come up with an idea of what we would want to put in. So the idea that I came up with, because, like everybody else, I do have quite a few different priorities, but it would be entrenching a commitment to the Housing First model. So essentially ending homelessness in this country. Right, okay. So, you were in Maungakiekie, and it was your job to focus on party vote, right? So you managed 3000 votes personally, which was great. But the Green Party party vote almost halved in that electorate. So what went wrong, and did you do your job? Well, I think that we can look across the country and see similar trends, actually, so it is unfortunate that obviously the Green Party vote did drop this election. But if we are to compare the Green Party vote in Maungakiekie last general election to what happened this election, we went up about 10% proportionally to the party vote generally across the country. But I was campaigning for the party vote, as you rightly pick out, and in that respect, I was campaigning across the country, across university campuses up and down Aotearoa. So you said it was a broad trend. So was that Metiria Turei's fault? I don't think that we can pin what happened this general election to any one variable. There are a lot of different things happening in this campaign. But that was a significant event. Yes, it was a significant event, absolutely. It was an unfortunate event, and it's something which we've taken responsibility for. Okay. Kiri Allan, you did a respectable job in the East Coast electorate against Anne Tolley. And you said prior to the election people in that electorate, they understand about poverty, they understand about there not being enough work and not getting enough of that economic pie. So why didn't Labour's message resonate with those people more? Yeah, well, I probably disagree a little bit, because our party vote did increase significantly in that electorate. They didn't deliver you the seat, though, did they? Well, I think I would've been very stoked if I had've won that seat, and there was an 8000 majority prior. But it used to be a red seat. Not for a very long time, Lisa, and never since it's been in this particular boundary. So I was optimistically hoping I would be able to shave 3000 votes off, and we done better than that. So from a campaign team perspective, we excelled our own personal goals. But I'll definitely be gunning for that seat come 2020. But the goal is to win. Like, in your seat, the goal is to bring the highest numbers back. You weren't. That wasn't your party. That was Chris Penk's party. My goal` So I'm wondering why you think Labour's message didn't resonate as strongly as you would've wanted it to. Well, what we have seen, and we saw it across the country, within a period, I think, of seven weeks, our message managed to resonate more stronger than what it had, from 24%, and we increased that to 36% in seven weeks. I think that is a phenomenal job, led by Jacinda Ardern, and we all bore the benefits of the campaign that she ran, and, obviously, we worked very hard regionally as well to emphasise those messages. So my personal view is that we done an exceedingly good job in the short time that we had. Okay, Chris Penk, you did a stonker of a job in your electorate, but it was a gift, wasn't it? So what makes you worthy to be there? Well, it's an area that's been traditionally kind to us, and I always use that phrase rather than 'safe seat' or whatever else people might want to say to me in terms of the character of Helensville and the fact that we had a very high profile and successful politician preceding me in the form of Sir John. So it was actually really about re-earning and continuing to build that trust. So, yes, certainly fortunate in a personal capacity to have that opportunity, but conscious of the wider themes of the party and the needs of the area. So what makes you personally worthy to have that gifted seat? Well, I think that I was able to demonstrate firstly in the National Party selection process and then in the election when I was seeking the candidate vote, but, of course, primarily I was seeking the party vote, because as we all know under MMP, that actually determines the result ` not that it has yet, but it will in due course. For me, it was about emphasising my background, having been a naval officer, so having skills around leadership and as a team player and then in the law, so our skills analysis and advocacy to be able to get good results. Okay. Do you live in that electorate? I live two-and-a-bit kilometres from the boundary of Helensville. So you don't live in that electorate? Just outside, Lisa. Okay. Chloe, do you live in Maungakiekie, or did you live in Maungakiekie? No, I did not, and I answered that whenever it came up on the campaign trail. Do you think it's necessary to live in` or you should be living in the electorate? I think it's important to be a strong local advocate and be very visible and active. What I've said is if within the first three years I am not able to be a strong local advocate who's very visible, if people are asking me the question whether I live in the electorate in three years' time, that will be an indication that I should move. Okay. Kiri Allan, there was predictions of perhaps a youth-quake which didn't really come` But I do live in the electorate. (ALL LAUGH) I was waiting for my turn then. All right. Fair call. Yes, you do live in the electorate. So, this youth-quake didn't happen. There were some young people who enrolled and voted but a whole chunk didn't. Why? Well, first of all, there's still 15% of the vote to come through, right, so, I mean, I'm interested to see what proportion of that is younger voters. Secondly, I think there was an increase in younger voter turnout. We can be proud of that. But there's a lot of work to be done. So why? Why didn't they? My personal view on that is I think there's a large disconnect between our political systems and infrastructure from our young people. I think a lot of people have no idea what the heck it is that our political constitutional framework is. And so engaging in the political process seems ` why would you? And so I think that's been something that both us and the Greens have been very committed to ` is that we do need a comprehensive civics education in our schools so that our kids coming through understand what's going on right now. Like, a lot of people right now have no idea what's happening right now, and they don't understand MMP, and I think, you know, why would you? Because we don't get taught this stuff. And so that's something that is a large piece of work that I think our country probably needs to be committed to. Further to that as well, I think we've seen an erosion of trust in politicians over the last few decades, and I think as well with the hardship that a lot of people are experiencing in their everyday lives, politics seems like a really privileged game at the moment. Okay, we're running out of time. I want some quick answers on this next round of questions. Where do you stand on abortion and euthanasia? Well, with everything that would be a conscious vote, I wouldn't be casting a ballot before I talked to the good people of Helensville. Starting point, first thing on abortion would be scientific, evidence-based model. So if calls to liberalise the law were to be supported by me, then I would need to be convinced that the evidence around the foetus or the unborn child, whatever you call that entity, should not be deserving of that protection that adults have. So that'd be a pretty high bar. So you're saying the unborn child has the same rights as us? Is that what you believe? Well, if you can convince me otherwise, then I'd be more likely` So is that what you currently believe? That an unborn child has the same rights as us sitting here? Is that what you're saying? Well, I think` I just want a quick, clear answer. Well, let's give it the attention it deserves. A week before a child is born, it is not very far different from how it is a week later. A week before that, it's slightly` But in law, that's not what we're talking about when we're talking about terminations. Well, this is the thing. In law, we've got a different position the minute before a child is born and a minute after. So to me, that's an anomaly. It sounds like you're a bit uncomfortable with liberalisation of abortion laws. Would that be fair? Correct. Okay. Kiri Allan, if you had to choose between the Maori seats and being in government, what would it be? So if the Maori seats are the cost of being in government... Our party position is that we are strongly for those Maori seats and that they are off the table. I strongly support the Maori seats. So if it's a question of the Maori seats or government`? Well, first of all, I'd never be in the decision-making capacity. But you personally, you're not prepared to sacrifice the Maori seats to be in government? And Jacinda Ardern has said that herself, and I agree with her position. If it happens, will it be a short-lived career as an MP for you? (LAUGHS) Well, Jacinda Ardern said that it's not on the table, and I'm glad she said that, and I agree with her position wholeheartedly. But you can't give us an answer of whether you'd stick around if you did lose the Maori seats? We're not going to lose those Maori seats, Lisa. All right. Chloe Swarbrick, is your salary now enough to buy a house in Auckland? (LAUGHS) I haven't got so far as to think about calculating that, but I think it will have an impact on my student loan. Yeah. So backbench MPs, with your increase, I think it's about 156,000 a year. And David Seymour said prior to the election, on about 190,000, that still ruled him out of the housing market. So do you think that your salary now means that the housing market is accessible to you? I guess so. I'm obviously in a really privileged position to be now in this tax bracket along with my new fellow MPs. But in that same vein, I think we still have a lot of work to do in actually making the housing market affordable for everyday families. We're out of time. I just want a quick answer on this. Name me an MP that's not in your party and is not a new MP that has inspired you in some way. I was going to say Kiri. (LAUGHS) Former, current? Go. Just give me a name that pops into your head. Oh, not in my party. I'll say Jacinda. Chris? I think David Shearer had a good reputation and a decent guy. And I'll say Metiria Turei. All right. Thank you very much for joining me this morning. After the break ` Timor-Leste has brought in billions of dollars from its oil reserves since gaining independence, so why are so many of its people still living in poverty? But first ` Jeremy and Paul have some advice for any politician who might be trying to make a big political decision. (THEME MUSIC PLAYS) The big question this week ` which one of us, Paul, should decide what we're having for lunch? You or I? Well, of the 10 of us going for lunch, five want you, four want me, so the casting vote come down to you-know-who. Three-quarters of Brian. Three-quarters of Brian. Why does three-quarters of Brian get to decide what 10 people have for lunch, Paul? Well, that's the way it works under MMP, Jeremy, or Mixed Meat Plate ` it means even people with minority food needs are catered for. Like for instance someone who wants a hangi? Well, not them. People allergic to cats? No, not them. No. Like bow ties? They're not invited. What about the guy in yellow? Well, he was gifted an invitation, but he won't be sitting at the big table. All right. Ah. What if I get half of James to join me? Then I'd have a majority. Well, that's never gonna happen, is it? Because you hate salads, and James won't agree to a lunch without salads. So, we wait for three-quarters of Brian, then. We do. What's he like? Well, it's a bit like a cave drawing in Central Otago. How so? Ancient, hard to read and full of schist. (THEME MUSIC PLAYS) Welcome back. It's been 15 years since a huge military effort by New Zealand and Australia helped secure Timor-Leste's independence from Indonesian occupation. Now, since then it's made huge progress and has brought in millions of dollars from its oil reserves. But now some analysts fear it's in danger of bankruptcy. In association with the Asia New Zealand Foundation, Caitlin McGee went to Dili to find out why. With rugged mountains hugging a pristine coastline, Timor-Leste is one of the world's unsung natural beauties. But for people living in the slums surrounding the capital, life is anything but idyllic. This is Dili's dump. As smoke billows around them, people sift, sort and scavenge to find value in other people's trash. One of them is Fortunado de Costa. (SPEAKS LOCAL LANGUAGE) TRANSLATOR: We've been abandoned by the government. For the veterans, they were heroes in the past, but now they have betrayed us. We supported the resistance movement, but those who supported the Indonesian government are still living a good life. Today we have independence, but we have nothing else ` just the peace and stability. He's here to collect iron, copper and plastic bottles to sell. He says life has barely improved since Timor-Leste gained independence 15 years ago. (SPEAKS LOCAL LANGUAGE) TRANSLATOR: We feel unhappy because we have not received any assistance or support from the government ` not from our state or our country. It means that we are still living in poverty. It's not just me living in poverty, but there are many people living in poverty. Sometimes our official government is not able to see the people who are living, like they just block it out of their minds. He knows it's not good for his health to be here breathing in fumes from the burning rubble but say she has no choice. About 42% of Timorese live in poverty, and the people picking through the scraps of this rubbish dump are among the most desperate. As rubbish trucks arrive with a fresh load, people crowd around. Maria Suarez is a regular. She's been coming here every day for 10 years, looking for anything that will help her get some money to feed her five children. Like de Costa, she supported the movement for independence, and she too feels abandoned and forgotten. This year marks 15 years since Timor-Leste gained its independence after 25 years of oppressive Indonesian occupation. In that time, its leaders have stitched together a relatively stable democracy and brought electricity to remote villages. But they have struggled to reduce widespread poverty among the 1.1 million Timorese. When Indonesia left, they basically destroyed the country. They burned down three-quarters of the houses, they destroyed almost all of the public infrastructure ` electricity systems, cell phone systems, all those kind of things. So when Timor-Leste became independent two and a half years later, after the UN transitional government, they had a lot of work to do just to get back to zero. Plus, they had to invent and create all the institutions for a new state, pass all the laws that other countries take hundreds of years to create. And I think they've done pretty well in those areas. But then in other areas such as education, such as child nutrition, health care and particularly diversification of the economy, they have not done very well. Money, or the lack of it, is not the problem. Timor-Leste has been blessed with oil and gas reserves. When the revenues started rolling in, in 2006, the government set up a petroleum fund which holds all the money generated from those oil and gas reserves. Cash only leaves the fund to be transferred back into the government's budget. Timor-Leste has pocketed more than $21 billion from Bayu-Undan, its biggest oil and gas field. But this income looks set to vanish by 2023, because those oil and gas reserves are now dwindling. And the $16 billion of savings left in the petroleum fund that was supposed to provide a cushion is being ploughed into grand development schemes. So, one of the largest projects in process that they've already spent about $300 million on and they plan` if they build all the things they say they'll build as part of this project, it'll be around $10 billion ` almost the entire petroleum fund ` is what's called the Tasi Mane Project. It's a petroleum infrastructure project on the south-west coast of the country, and it includes an oil refinery, a supply base for offshore oil operations, liquefied natural gas plant, um, offshore gas pipelines, onshore oil pipelines, 150km-long highway. And there are no highways in the country now. All in an area that's fairly sparsely populated and that is the prime agricultural land of the country. Charles Scheiner works for a local think tank called La'o Hamutuk. He believes the Tasi Mane Project is pointless. It's investments like that that are, sort of, demonstration or projects to show that the government can build things that don't really have any use and don't provide any benefit for the people. Actually, provide negative benefits, because a lot of people have to move to make room for this airport. From our understanding, and unfortunately the people promoting this project have not been very forthcoming with analysis ` I hope they've done them ` but from our understanding, the cost-benefit analysis just from an economic point of view is highly questionable. As well as the Tasi Mane Project, the government is pumping hundreds of millions into developing an enclave called Oecusse and turning it into a special economic zone it hopes will attract foreign investment. Again, it's proving controversial. The Oecusse project has very little transparency. They never released their plans. They have Powerpoints that show pictures of things they'd like to build, but in terms of serious planning and how much it's gonna cost, when it's gonna be built, what the return on investment is going to be, that information is not public. Whether it exists at all is a question that somebody else will have to answer. La'o Hamutuk warns that at current spending rates, the cash pile could evaporate in 10 years and says the government is devoting more time and money to a few risky mega-projects than to worthier sectors. Timor-Leste's greatest resource is its people. It's not oil. It's not hypothetical minerals or fish or things that might be found in the future. Health care, education and agriculture are all floundering. In nearly every category of health, Timor-Leste's numbers are worse than most of South-East Asia. It has the highest rate of leprosy, and 50% of children are stunted from malnutrition. Education is another concern. 60% of the population are under 25 years of age. And nearly 80% of the population scrape together a living from subsistence farming. Yet agriculture only receives about 2% of the budget. It's not being spent on education and health care. The two together get about 15% of the state budget each year. And it's considered good practice or sort of a benchmark for developing countries, countries in a similar economic status to where we are, is about twice that. So half of the people have been born since the end of the Indonesian occupation in 1999. There would be a higher need for spending on education because those kids are in school and on health care because children's health expenses are higher than adults'. When the government presented the budget to parliament at the end of last year, they said that four priority sectors for government are ` education, health care, water supply and agriculture. And we agree. Those are the right priorities. But then if you look at how the money is allocated in the same budget, those four sectors all together only get 20% of the overall budget. The other 80% is poured into big infrastructure projects or government expenses. Estanislau da Silva is the minister for agriculture, fisheries and coordinating minister for economic affairs. At the moment we are using the revenue from oil and gas to invest in infrastructure and as well as in order to implement what we have envisioned for our country that by 2030, Timor-Leste will be in the middle-income country, in which we hope to have... eradicate malnutrition and then... even eradicate poverty, overall poverty in the country. This is our aim. Da Silva says the government is on track to building a sustainable economy and the money won't run out. People think that the money is going to run out in 10 years' time. But this is a prediction. We are developing the economy, and I don't think that we will be left empty-handed in 10 years' time. This is the best bet that we're doing at the moment is to diversify our economy, invest in infrastructure but also in health and education, of course, and to other areas that we need to do more investment, so this, I believe that we can overcome, and then the development become much better than what people are predicting. Resistance fighters from the Indonesian occupation still loom large over life here. The two main political parties, Fretilin and CRNT, have absorbed most former independence fighters and turned them into politicians. They're now in talks to form a coalition government after July's parliamentary elections. But while still the biggest winners, both parties lost ground to newcomers. One of those was the People's Liberation Party that gained eight seats. The concern is that if we continue with the current pattern of spending and without strategically looking at the kind of investments, the long-term investments, we might have a nation where the people are not productive in the long run and where the growth would only benefit a few but not the people, the majority of the population. Magalhaes' party wants to clamp down on corruption and big spending. Infrastructure that only focuses on big highways and big airports without clear economic return or the possibility of it in sight will only lead to white elephants to be around without clear gain or return economically. Timor-Leste had hoped the Greater Sunrise oil field would provide a new, untapped oil supply. But it sits in contested waters in the Timorese Sea, and after a lengthy standoff with Australia, both sides are now in conciliation at The Hague. As builders busy themselves on this bridge in Dili, Alexandre Gutierrez is carrying out back-breaking work of his own. Bent over the dry riverbed, he shovels gravel in the bridge's shadow. He did this during Indonesian rule. He told us he doesn't expect anything to change. If the government fails to diversify its economy over the next decade and cleans out its petroleum fund, its feared the country's economy will collapse and leave an even more dire situation for people like Alexandre. Poverty, massive poverty, lots of starvation, things like that ` yes, that could happen, and maybe there'll be some international assistance to ameliorate that for a while, or maybe the international community will say, 'Well, you had the money, and you wasted it, 'and you have to live with the results of your leader's decisions.' And the money in the petroleum fund starts to run out, what happens then? Hmm. Um,... academically there are certain scenarios. But being a Timorese and a Timorese politician, it worries me. And I do not want to see that future. And next week on The Nation, Caitlin McGee explores whether coffee could provide the key to Timor-Leste's economic prosperity. Stay with us. After the break, our panel ` David Clendon, Marge Joiner and Jane Clifton. Welcome back. I'm joined now by our panel ` former Green MP David Clendon, PR consultant Marg Joiner and Listener political columnist Jane Clifton. Welcome to you all. Let's get it out of the way ` so, is going into coalition with Winston Peters potentially the booby prize, the poisoned chalice? Jane? I get the sense that Winston Peters has made up his mind who he would be more comfortable with, but the question is now what can he get away with? What can he sell? And he's also hyperconscious of not overplaying his hand, so I think whoever ends up in that position, if anybody does, because he may well go on the crossbenches, as Tau said, I think he's very conscious now that he cannot throw his weight around, because he doesn't have much weight. Yeah, I think the thing is, David, there was concern expressed by all three of those who have previously negotiated or been in coalition or been in the party with Winston Peters, about this idea that the tail is wagging the dog. Do you think he's going to absolutely try and maximise what he can get out of this with no consideration to the fact that he's got 7.5%? Sure. Winston's completely in his happy place, I think, being in the centre of attention ` the guy who can determine who governs. I think he will probably try to assert more authority and more weight and more influence than perhaps a 7.5% party should. It's the nature of the beast. It's what he does and who he is. I think it will be a very very difficult coalition to hold together, whether he goes with National or with Labour-Greens. He hasn't got a great history in terms of sustaining relationships over a three-year term. So it could be very much a poisoned chalice for whoever picks it up. For that reason, I don't think either of the major parties should really go the 110% to establish at any cost that coalition. I think they need to` We need leadership from the leaders of the two main parties to make sure Winston understands he will be very much the junior party. You mean set some ground rules? Set some boundaries and say, 'Winston, you'll be a...' Obviously he has to be part of a coalition, but if he's allowed to go in there thinking he's really going to rule the roost, that won't bode well for a happy three years for anybody. Marg, what do you reckon? Yeah, I do not think it's a game, and I do not think it's a trainwreck, which your panel said. I think we're also not waiting for Winston Peters. What we're seeing is MMP unfolding as it should, more or less. So we picked this system up holus-bolus from Germany and put it in New Zealand, and over there at the moment, they are currently facing three months of negotiations. And the electorate are not batting an eyelid at that, so it was a case of the system maturing here in New Zealand. Yeah, well, that is interesting, and I wanted to ask you about that. Do you think we are impatient? Are voters impatient? Cos it's a two-week wait compared to, as you say, in European countries, waiting for maybe four months to be a government. Look, having an outcome the day after an election is fiction under this system. And also summarising the drivers of Winston Peters in a sound bite is also, I think, a disappointing mistake that's been made by some of the media coverage this week. And it's not helpful for New Zealand, who are trying to come to grips with a system that doesn't give an outright majority and does require party, whether it's two or seven parties, that can get a majority together. They're all legitimate options under MMP. But the thing is, Jane, we haven't had the system for five minutes. So I would have thought that people would have got used to it, and it would have bedded in. 21 years is a twinkle in the eye, really, for something` I mean, because you need to move the psychology, and it probably takes a generation. I mean, we're still a Westminster system, with this European exotic system grafted on to us. I mean, I think the other thing about this, though, is that Winston's been his own worst enemy in the sense that he conveyed all these bottom lines, and in fact he made them up seemingly as he went along. I mean, in` I think it was Kaikoura, he promised to pay for their waste-water system, you know, as a bottom line. I mean, that's ridiculous. So now it is very unclear what his bottom lines are. And when you've only got 7%, 8%, 9%, whatever, around that level, you don't have very many trophies that you're gonna get. I think, picking up on Marg's point too, that the European system, I mean, with the Greens in Germany, for example, they could legitimately go, credibly go, with all sorts of different relationships. Whereas in New Zealand, we've kinda backed ourselves into a corner a bit. Do you think that's a mistake? I think for this term of Government, there's no credible way the Greens could go into coalition with National. The chasm between them is too great. But I think in the future, the Greens have to position themselves to go into elections with a suite of policies saying, 'We will give confidence and supply to whichever party or group of parties 'will advance some selection of these policies over the first term.' And as you well know, being an insider, that means you're gonna have to get the majority of people to come on board with that and the Green Party. Do you think that will wash with the membership? Uh, this year it won't, but I think the party has to get to a point where it can. We had a slogan in the '90s ` neither left nor right, but in front. Locking yourself into that place left of Labour ` that's a guarantee to stay as a 5% or 6% party. And again, I think it's the maturing of the system. So as David pointed out, in Germany, there is talk of the Green movement going with the centre-right, and no one, again, is blinking an eyelid at that, so it is a case of parties getting used to that. We've had a coalition of the willing in the more recent history. We've got something more different now, as Jane can probably contest to it. We had this again in 1996, so we've been here before, in a way. Do you think that National is talking about the Green Party? I mean, Paul Bennett talked about the Green Party and calls and things like that. Are they just being used as leverage at the moment just to show Winton, 'Hey, maybe we've got some other option that we can pursue'? I think everyone will be looking at all the options, including Mr Peters. So you'd be a fool not to look at all the options that are on the table. And this is complex. It is not a binary, kind of one or the other. There are many things in front of this country at the moment. All right, we'll leave it there for the moment. So stick around ` after the break, we'll talk about what could be making the news next week. Welcome back. You're with The Nation and our panel. Well, we saw this morning some of our new MPs. More than 30 of those turning up to Parliament are what we call newbies. So who impressed you from our panel? Kiri Allan, and she impressed me in the campaign as well. She definitely caught my eye there and has continued, so I'm excited to see how she goes in Parliament. Yeah. Dave? Yeah, Kiri Allan. I think she is potentially a significant MP. I think she'll do a good job. Chloe carries an enormous burden of expectation. I don't envy her that. I think it will be very difficult for her that there is that expectation that she will be a star. That's something that I think is probably unwelcome for any brand new MP going in to that place. To be watched too closely while you're finding your feet? Absolutely, yes. Jane, what do you reckon? There are a lot of very promising MPs, but when you have big new intakes into caucus` And this is going to be one of Labour's problems, potentially, cos some of those people, not put too fine a point on it, they weren't expected to get in at the places on the list that they are, and so they're going to have potentially some discipline problems, and there are some quite outspoken people, like Willie Jackson and Tamati Coffey, who are going to be wildly overstimulated, and we're not going to die wondering what they reckon. Dave, do you think`? I mean, for the Greens, let's say, where there was a lot of experienced people that they lost, is that going to be difficult for them? They've got a lot of new blood and refreshed and all the rest of it, but some of the solid players, including yourself and others, are not there. It's going to be a real challenge for James, particularly, to lead it. The Greens in the next four, five months are going to be very distracted with their female co-leadership vote. You'll have a couple of brand-newbies in the mix. A much smaller caucus. At best, it'll be eight. It may only be seven. So all of those things, it's almost the perfect storm. It's going to be a very difficult first half of the year for the Greens, especially if they're part of a government, because then, of course, James and perhaps one more... You've got other distractions. ...will have other major distractions as well. So it'll be a very difficult time for them, absolutely. Marj, you've kind of identified Labour's Maori caucus as a cluster to watch. Yeah. I do. I think so. And we saw the ascendency of it with Kelvin Davis' position as deputy leader. And I think when you look at them sitting there today, it'll be really interesting to see them once they get humming. What do you think will happen if they were to go into a coalition and they have to sacrifice Kelvin Davis from that deputy position and give it to a partner? What kind of impression do you think that that may leave their voters with, having just won a clean sweep of the Maori seats? I mean, I think he's already said he'd be happy with that, so I think that says a lot in terms of the people who voted for him. Yeah, OK. Well, let's look at a party that disappeared ` the Maori Party. Jane, what went wrong for them? It's really difficult to say, because the Maori seats are not very easy to research, but it seemed to be generally a 'come home to Mother' election. And you saw that with Maori voters going to Labour. I wonder if Tukoroirangi Morgan and the Kingitanga movement have played their hand. They thought they had it in the bag. Well, plainly they didn't create as much mana as they thought they were going to. I mean, it's a big loss for Parliament, but I think we need to know... some research needs to be done... ...to find out exactly why? ...to find out` Yep. David, the Greens were obviously rapt that they got over 5%, because they were thinking they were borderline there. But, hey, they were polling` You were there when they were polling 14% in July. You know, Chloe referred to the Metiria Turei thing as an unfortunate event. But how much of that erosion in the vote would you sheet back to that? I think it was a substantial influence on the erosion of the vote. It showed the Greens as divisive, fractured, and, of course, I was part of that. Yeah. The fact that it's not so much what Metiria did when she was in her 20s. It's the fact that the way she responded, the reaction when it did become public and then the layers, the backstory, the electoral fraud issue and so on. It certainly rocked a lot of confidence in the Greens. The Greens have always stood on a very high moral high ground. Both internally and externally we've had this tendency to self-righteousness, I'm afraid. And that has come back and bit fairly hard unfortunately. So, do you think they need to own that mistake a bit more in order to rebuild? Have they put their hand up enough for that? I think it'll be more about the party now having a really good, hard look at itself and trying to not point to external factors, but to think about what it was about the Greens' strategy, the way that the election played out, and really to do some internal soul-searching, perhaps ` to think about, 'OK, what have we done wrong? What could we do better next time round?' And I think partly that will be going back to basics. To say, 'Why are we locking ourselves into this positioning?' The ol' left-right spectrum. I was recalling this morning ` I was teaching politics at Auckland Uni in the mid-late 1990s; even then I was saying that that single dimension, left-right spectrum is way past its use-by date. Get beyond that. Think about policy. Think about outcomes. Think about what can be achieved with different coalitions and partnerships. That's interesting because, Marg, I'm wondering, what about National where they seem to have limited buddies that they can go with in a coalition, because of, obviously, the Greens' position and the fact that ACT is small. What options are they left with? Do we need to see more parties emerging, or what is the future? Yeah, and as David said, it will trigger, probably, a review for the Greens, and potentially other parties, and looking at how they fit within our party system and how they can best use their influence. And I think as our system matures ` this is only the eighth election under MMP ` as it matures, we will see different parties arising. Do you think National will already be looking at that and thinking, 'OK, well, next time, what are our options? Can we help those options along?' Yeah, no doubt. I think all the parties will be looking at that. All right. Thank you. Nice to talk to you all. Time now for a look at some of what could be making the news next week. Treasury publishes its final accounts for the fiscal year to June on Thursday, and on Saturday the final results of the election will be released by the Electoral Commission after special votes are counted. And coalition negotiations are expected to ramp up after that. And that is all from us for now. We will catch you again next weekend. Thanks for joining us. Captions by Chelsea Thoresen, Desney Shaw and June Yeow. www.able.co.nz Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2017 This programme was made with the assistance of the New Zealand On Air Platinum Fund.