Good morning and welcome to The Nation. I'm Lisa Owen. Today ` two major issues on the government's to-do list. We talk to Housing and Transport Minister Phil Twyford about how to build 100,000 houses in 10 years, how to ban foreign buyers, and how to pay Auckland's infrastructure bill. Then ` it's been a year since the impossible happened and Donald Trump became US president. We look back on his highs and lows and talk to Teen Vogue's Lauren Duca about how the anti-Trump resistance has changed American politics. I hope that anybody who is invested in this moment will change the way they think about having political conversations, and politeness doesn't have to part of them; bravery does. Entrepreneur Derek Handley on why our new government could be a sign of generational change in politics. We need to rethink the entire construct of what the solutions look like. Because the way we've looked at them in the past are that they're either blue or they're green or they're red. And actually my belief is incoming generations believe that everything is a hybrid. And we wrap up the week with our panel ` Simon Wilson, Trish Sherson and Tim Watkin ` and comedians Jeremy Corbett and Paul Ego. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2017 It is great to have you with us today. If you've got any feedback, do get in touch. Our details are on-screen now. And if you're watching live on Saturday, you can follow along with our Twitter panel, the New Zealand Initiative's Dr Eric Crampton and policy analyst Filipo Katavake-McGrath, and you can use the hashtag #NationNZ. After years of accusing the National government of causing a housing crisis, the Labour Party now finds itself in charge of getting out of it, and the bulk of that responsibility has fallen on Housing Minister Phil Twyford. He'll be relying on KiwiBuild, Labour's plan for 100,00 new affordable houses over the next decade. So, how will it work? Well, Phil Twyford joins me now. Good morning. Good morning, Lisa. As we said, KiwiBuild 100,000 houses over a decade. But the prime minister has said that it will take a while to ramp up; in the first few years, you'll probably only do about half of that. So at the back end of this project, you're going to have a bit of a bottleneck. How are you going to deal with that? So, you're quite right. Because of capacity problems in the industry, particularly workforce issues, it is going to take us a little while to ramp up. And our modelling has always been based on the idea that in the first three years, we'll probably deliver about 16,000 homes, and in the third year, we'll start to hit the average of 10,000 a year. There are three main ways that we're going to deliver KiwiBuild. So, the first is that we're going to say and are already saying to the private sector, to developers and builders, if you're doing a development and you think that some of the properties in that development ` might be a set of townhouses, for example, somewhere ` would meet the KiwiBuild affordability criteria and the design specs, then come to us. We'll look at them, and we could buy them off the plan, speeding up your development, taking some of the risk out of it, and ensuring that we get a supply of high-quality affordable homes for first home buyers. Now, the second thing we're going to do is `and I've kicked this off; it's underway ` we're doing an immediate review of all of the developments that are underway or planned, in Auckland at first, that involve some kind of government stake. It might be Housing New Zealand land. And we're going to look at how we can ramp up the level of ambition and build more affordable homes, KiwiBuild homes, as well as more state housing. And that's the second way. And the third way is that we have an ambitious plan to do 10 to 15 large-scale urban development projects around Auckland, particularly around the rail network, that will deliver new infrastructure, the kind of amenities and open spaces that communities need, and a mix of different kinds of affordable housing. OK. Let's pick that apart, because that's a lot there. So when you talk about going to developers and buying off plans, that's KiwiBuy; that's not KiwiBuild. Those things are already in the pipeline. Well, we've always said this is the way we're going to deliver KiwiBuild. We've always been really upfront about that. One of the problems at the moment, actually, is that many of the apartment projects that are underway are having real problems with financing. So by the government willing to underwrite or buy units off the plan, that actually takes away some of the risk and uncertainty and will speed up those developments. What about the risk and uncertainty to tax payers in underwriting something like that? There is a risk involved. Well, there is, but we think that the government is well-placed to do this, Lisa. We have a market failure at the affordable end of the market. There's no shortage of 300m2 waterfront homes, but there's a dire shortage of the kind of high-quality affordable homes that young families could afford to buy and live in. So we're going to intervene in the market to fix that market failure by building large numbers of affordable homes. That's the job of government ` to do that. I'm going to move on to how you're going to build, in a minute, the specifics of that. But just in terms of underwriting and buying off plans, have you allowed for that in your budget? Yes, we have. So is that just the simple $2 billion, the seed fund that you've put aside? That's correct. But you know that KiwiBuild is an idea that came into being around 2012, right? And that was the costings done then. Your own finance minister has said, 'Mmm, we're not sure that there's enough in the pot there. Construction's gone up 30% to 50%.' When are you going to revise that number and actually tell us what it's going to cost? So, when we announced it originally, it was $1 billion. So the $2 billion that we're talking about now is the kick-start for KiwiBuild. Yes. That was done a year ago. And prior to the election campaign and, I think, actually, about the time that I spoke to you last on this show, we reran the numbers. The 2 billion will be sufficient to crank up the kind of numbers that we're talking about. You're absolutely confident about that? Yes. All right. So, when you talk about developers who might have KiwiBuild-priced houses, are you going to put a quota on people who go into a private-public partnership with you? You know, if you build on this piece of land and you're in this deal with the government, how many of those houses are going to have to be affordable? This first option I'm talking about, where we might buy off the plan, there's no compulsion because we're talking about private developers coming forward. That are already underway. But if we're talking about developments where the government has a stake, then absolutely. And what will that be? One of my big criticisms of the last government was that they were building hardly any affordable homes; they were selling off two-thirds of the state housing land into private ownership and not delivering any affordable homes in the process. So my concern and what I've told officials is that I expect, if we're doing a big development in a place like Northcote or Roskill or Tamaki or anywhere else, then I would expect 30% to 40% of the new homes in that development would be KiwiBuild affordable homes, and I also want to see more state housing built and market homes as well. OK. So, in terms of affordable housing, if you're going into a public-private partnership deal and they're building on Crown land, will your partners have to pay market prices for that Crown land? Yes. Yeah, we're not intending to subsidise. There's no hidden subsidy in the land. But let me say this, Lisa ` some critics of the idea of the government building affordable housing argue that by choosing to build affordable housing and foregoing the potential profits that could be made by building what the market could bear, that that's an effective subsidy. We don't buy that. We are in this game to build affordable housing for young Kiwi families, and we make no apologies for that. So, one of the things that went wrong, arguably, with special housing areas, which was, again, a combined development with private developers, involving the council and government assistance, was that they've taken too long to build these houses. Are you going to put a caveat on it ` so you've got to build around 30% of your houses to be affordable if you're on this bit of Crown land ` and are you going to tell them that they have to build it within a certain timeframe? Well, the special housing areas of the past government were a total washout. Lisa, they built less than 100 affordable homes in Auckland over three years. And land banking was one of the problems. Yes, it was. So what are you going to do to make sure that anyone you're in a partnership with is not land banking? So, if private developers are part of a master planned urban development, like in Northcote or Roskill or Tamaki, then they're locked into deals that they will have to supply housing. Land banking is simply not an option in those circumstances, just as it hasn't been in` So, how do you stop it, though? If they're dragging their heels, that is, in essence, land banking because they're slowly rolling out houses while the price of the land goes up and the price of the construction goes up. How do you stop it? So, Hobsonville's the best model here ` where you've got a public agency like Hobsonville Land Company that's coordinating it, setting very high urban design standards, and parcelling up a block of apartments or a row of terraces for a developer to come and supply. You deal with it through the contracting process. Land banking is simply not an option, and we won't allow it to be. So, when you talked about ` when we started this conversation ` building in new areas, are you talking about outside the Metropolitan Urban Limit? My view is that, given the shortfall of housing in Auckland and the population growth projections, this city is going to have to grow up and out. So I said the other day I was very interested in work that had been done by Infrastructure New Zealand on a large new development in the south of Auckland there, Pukekohe. But there are massive opportunities for us` So, are you going to ditch it, the Metropolitan Urban Limit? We're going to spread out in Auckland, absolutely. Let me just finish what I was saying, Lisa. So we want to build most of the development we can in the city around the transport network. We want to do density well and build great urban communities for people to live, work and play. So as far as I'm concerned, it's got to be up and out. On the question of the Metropolitan Urban Limit, we're going to build affordable houses. We're going to tax speculators. We're going to do all of those things, right? But if we want a lasting solution to this problem, we have to make reforms that will allow the market to deliver better outcomes on its own, and the two really big things that we have to fix there are the broken system for financing infrastructure that stops the city from growing and the highly restrictive planning rules, like the urban growth boundary. But you can't get rid of the urban growth boundary without fixing the infrastructure financing issue. So this is going to be a major priority. Yes, because... once you build outside those urban limits, the price of getting infrastructure to a house goes up to about $130,000 versus several thousand. That's right. OK. Quickly, before we move on to talking more about infrastructure ` KiwiBuild. You've said $600,000 for a free-standing terraced house in Auckland. Do you stand by that figure? Yes, I do. And what work have you done over how much that price is going to increase over the 10 years of the scheme? It will do, and we've done some projections on that, and we'll have to` And what do they tell you? Well, 10 years is a long time. Yes. And it's very hard to predict what will happen to the housing market over those 10 years. But...? But I hope, Lisa, that by squeezing` Can you give me a figure? No. But by squeezing much better deals out of the supply chain when we're tendering 10,000 homes a year, and when the government has more control over the land costs by coordinating these big developments, we will be able to drive down costs. I want to crack into the infrastructure, but are you going to get people to go into a ballot for a KiwiBuild house? How is it going to work? Yes, in the early days, we will because there's so much pent up, unmet demand. But, Lisa, let me say this ` the first KiwiBuild house will be important, but actually the most important one will be the last KiwiBuild house because at that point, we'll know that every Kiwi family has had a shot at affordable housing. And then we'll know that our job is done. OK. Your other big problem is transport and infrastructure in Auckland. We know that Phil Goff has about 26 billion-dollar projects coming up, and he's about $6 billion or $7 billion short of the money. You're renegotiating the Auckland Transport Alignment plan. What's out? What are you ditching? You've ditched the East West Link. What else is going to get jettisoned? So, you're right. For the first 10 years of Auckland's transport plan, there is a $6 billion hole. Now, that's not a fictional hole that's been made up for electioneering purposes. That's an actual $6 billion fiscal hole. And the first thing we're going to do is` Auckland Council has requested that we legislate for a regional fuel tax. That will deliver about $1.5 billion over 10 years, we hope. That's a significant chunk. That's Aucklanders. That still leaves you with $4.5 billion. It does. That's Aucklanders chipping in over and above what they pay normally, as every other person in New Zealand does, to fund this budget. So you can get rid of some of the things on your to-do list. What about Penlink? Are you going to keep that or get rid of it? I've already asked for all of the business case information on Penlink, and we're going to look at it, along with the other projects. You mentioned East West Link. We're not saying we're not going to do anything ` that's a vital freight corridor ` but we just don't believe that the government's $2 billion project stacked up. And I've asked for all of the business case information for that. So Penlink is under review as well? We're going to look at it. Whangapaaroa Rd is under review? We're going to look at it. OK. I want to go through a list, and we're running out of time, so it would be great if you could give me direct answers to this. So, in terms of raising revenue, do you think the council should be selling assets? I don't believe they should. I think the council should look at all of the available options. But I want us to be smart about how we raise revenue, and one of the ways that we can do it is ` when you build new transport infrastructure like a light rail or even indeed a motorway, it generates massive increase in the value of the property around that infrastructure. I want us to look at ways that you can capture some of that value and recycle it back into the public for good. So targeted rates on sections or developments that are alongside your rail development? I want us to explore the idea of setting up an urban development authority alongside the light rail lines so that we can get the best redevelopment outcomes for those communities` But that is targeted rates, is what you're talking about. Yes, that is one of the ways that you do it. OK. What about congestion charging? Because the other government was looking at this, and, in fact, a report was due out around now. Are you going to pursue congestion charging? I think the report is about to land on my desk, and I'm awaiting it eagerly. Our view is that the regional fuel tax is a short- to medium-term interim measure. Some kind of road pricing or network charging will come in in the medium to long term. I think probably between five to 10 years. There are powerful arguments` So you're not thinking of bringing that forward? I'm going to read the report and get the best advice we can before we make that decision. It may generate some revenue. But the most important thing about road pricing is that it allows you to do demand management and smooth out some of the peaks, the congestion peaks in the system, allowing you to get much better value out of the transport system. OK. Infrastructure bonds you've stated before that Labour is keen on this. So that's where you borrow money, it's paid back over decades so the cost is shared around the generations. Where do you see that working, and have you accounted for that? Because I looked at your budget, and in the small print, it said your budget doesn't take into account infrastructure bonds. No, we haven't, because much more work needs to be done. So the problem we've got at the moment with` So how can you go ahead with them, then? We're going to do the work now as a matter of priority. The past government did some work around setting up a special purpose vehicle so that you could borrow money, the debt would sit on the balance cheque of an independent entity, the special purpose vehicle, and it would be serviced by a targeted rate on the properties in a new development. So we're going to take that and develop it even further. Because the critical thing we need to do` If you haven't accounted for it in this budget, then how far off is the likelihood of infrastructure bonds under a Labour government? I can't give you a time on that now, Lisa, but it is a huge priority. What we need to do is move from a system where the government writes a cheque every six months or 12 months for infrastructure to a system where there is a pipeline of infrastructure finance available for infrastructure that meets the quality standards and is serviced by a targeted rate on those developments. Without that pipeline of ready finance, we're never going to fix this problem of urban growth. All right. We need to leave it there. Thanks for joining me this morning, Phil Twyford. Plenty there to discuss with our panel later in the programme. But after the break ` it's been a year since Donald Trump was elected. We'll talk to Teen Vogue writer Lauren Duca about how his presidency has changed the way Americans see politics. Welcome back. It's been a year since Donald Trump won the presidency ` a year of turmoil, tweet storms and executive orders, but little progress on his election promises. Sarah de Croy takes a look at the conflict and the controversy. This is the moment the billionaire reality TV star find out he was the president. His supporters were ecstatic. (CHEERING) Everyone else was stunned. Everybody is crying and so upset, and it is the end of their world. Feels like the end of the world. On Lifetime last year, and I was slowly getting drunk is what happened there. How do we explain how this is possible? (CHANTING) Protests erupted on the streets of New York, and at least a dozen cities. ALL CHANT: Donald Trump's not welcome here. He moved his sons into run his businesses, and his son-in-law was appointed a special advisor. But building the rest of the team proved difficult. And a year on, many key positions in the administration still remain vacant. The desire for a peaceful transition of power drew past presidents and Trump's harshest critics to the inauguration in January. But instead of the conciliatory speech many desired, Trump's words drummed home the nationalistic rhetoric that had seen him take the presidency. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now. The depth of anti-Trump sentiment was clearly seen the following day in the Women's March, where millions rallied on Pennsylvania Avenue, across the U.S., and the world. But it was the reports of crowd size at his inauguration that were front and centre for the new president. Sean Spicer, in his first appearance as White House Press Secretary, sent out to slam the media. This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe. The queen of deflection, Kelly-Anne Conway, almost couldn't get the words out trying to explain that one. You're saying it's a falsehood, and they're giving Sean Spicer, our Press Secretary, gave alternative facts to that. And while Trump's approval ratings plunged to record lows, late night TV shows were seeing unprecedented ratings. I know that myself and the press have gotten off to a rocky start. (LAUGHS) Right. He wasn't lying (!) He gave alternative facts (!) Like, if you told a police officer, 'I wasn't speeding, I was just accelerating excessively.' (LAUGHTER) This is what makes covering Donald Trump so very difficult. What does he mean when he says words? (LAUGHTER) Wow. 'What does he mean when he says words?' We are talking about the president like a Tinder match we've been on four dates with. But what of his legislative programme and the big changes Trump had promised? Could the self-proclaimed deal-maker make a deal in Washington? He started with the flourish of a pen, signing executive orders like he was trying to break a record. Including the controversial ban on entry for people from seven Muslim-majority countries. The move sparked spontaneous protests at airports, and a number of legal challenges were filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, which received nearly $35,000,000 in donations in just one weekend. But some grand promises haven't eventuated. There's no money for the Mexican border wall, several attempts at repealing Obamacare have failed. Hillary Clinton was not locked up, and so far, no successful moves on tax. And even the Republican majority have started to hit back. I don't know why he lowers himself to such a low, low standard and the basis of our country in the way that he does, but he does. Is the President of the United States a liar? The president has great difficulty with the truth. When the next generation asks us, 'Why didn't you do something? Why didn't you speak up?' What are we going to say? Mr President, I rise today to say, 'Enough.' The White House has seen its own turmoil. The president's famous phrase, 'You're fired', echoing in the hallways. National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, leaving in disgrace over his meetings with Russians. Also gone, Sally Yates ` Acting Attorney General. Sean Spicer ` White House Spokesperson, Katie Walsh ` Deputy Chief of Staff. Reince Priebus ` Chief of Staff, Tom Price ` Health and Human Services Secretary ` over his use of private planes. Chief Strategist, Steve Bannon, and National Security Adviser Sebastian Gorka. Anthony Scaramucci ` Communications Director ` after just 10 days, and FBI director, James Comey. Foreign leaders have tried to win Trump over with outward displays of pomp and ceremony, but it's the power play handshakes that have grabbed the headlines. French president, Macron, is even said to have planned out his first handshake with Trump in advance. Tensions have escalated with North Korea. Failing to act now on the most pressing security issue in the world may bring catastrophic consequences. Troubles at home for Trump's failure to condemn a violent white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. You had many people in that group other than Neo-Nazis and white nationalists, OK? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. And the president called for NFL players to be sacked for kneeling during the national anthem. The players responded by unifying in protest. National tragedies like the mass shooting in Las Vegas and the devastating hurricanes, Harvey and Maria, Gave Trump a chance to demonstrate his leadership. We are with you, we will stay with you, and we will come back stronger than ever. But it is the growing storm over Russian meddling in the 2016 election in connection with Trump's teams, which could prove the most damaging. The sacking of FBI director James Comey and his testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee arguably the most dramatic testimony since Watergate. And the question, 'Did the president's request Comey drop the Flynn investigation 'amount to obstruction of justice?' I don't think it's for me to say whether the conversation I had with the president was an effort to obstruct. I took it as a very disturbing thing, very concerning, but that's a conclusion I'm sure the special council will work towards to try and understand what the intention was there, and whether that's an offence. Good morning. Tip of the iceberg? Are the indictments` And just this week, Justice Department's Special Counsel Robert Mueller unleashed what has been a legal version of shock and awe, with criminal charged against Donald Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and others involved in the Trump campaign. You need only take a look at all-star lawyers on Mueller's team to see this is just the beginning. Well, playing against type, Teen Vogue magazine has become a major voice in the anti-Trump resistance that's been led by columnist Lauren Duca. I spoke to her from New York and asked her what exactly she thinks the threat is. I think the greatest threat to our country right now is our president. The threat is an undermining of democracy ` of the right of the press, of the right for citizens to be fully informed, and their participation in democracy. I think that the biggest threat is the way that the legitimacy of journalism is being challenged. Recently the president came out against the First Amendment. I'm not really sure what his intentions were with that quote, but overall, there's this kind of fear mongering around 'fake news', and part of our problem is actual fake stories, but, beyond that, it's this perception that you can decide what is true based on what you feel, and the way that facts have been taken from us, the way we've been deceived repeatedly by the president, who has lied literally thousands of times, since taking office. There are a couple of things there that I want to talk about. The first one being this idea that he is a propaganda machine ` that's the allegation in respect of him ` throwing out false information, hundreds of tweets, thousands of tweets, and in other environments too. So you talk about the Fourth Estate and what their role is, how does the media combat that when he tells people that the media is 'fake news' and a whole bunch of people would agree with him. So how do you fight that? I think that journalism as an industry has failed in the sense that it hasn't adequately communicated that its role is to empower citizens with information, that its first and foremost allegiance needs to be to its citizens, and I think there's a lot of confusion about what the purpose of a journalist is. We hear so much about the lying liberal media', and ideas about both sides and equal times. The truth is not a math equation. We need to have objectivity of method, and be transparent about how we're presenting facts, be clear with our audiences about why we've chosen to give things the way that we're given them ` why we've used anonymous sources in certain cases, why we've provided certain statistics, being really clear about the editorial decision making within the articles themselves, not in an editorial piece released days later. I think creating things that are accessible, easy to understand and trusting readers, but also meeting them at their level and doing the works of that political writing is not alienating. So many of the stories coming out of this administration, you need to be five kinds of highly specialised lawyer to fully understand it. And I think another thing that political journalists need to do better is talking directly to the people and putting things into terms that they're able to understand amid their busy and hectic lives. Politics shouldn't have to be a full-time job. We should all be actively informed, and not just when we have a Disaster in Chief. But when you talk about the fact that he is potentially America's biggest threat to democracy, 63,000,000 people engaged in that process and voted for him. They voted for him. He is democratically elected. So how is that a threat to democracy? The way that he was elected and what he's doing in office are two different things. I think that the way he is abusing his power, the way he is abusing executive orders to hurl bombs in our culture war, and completely disrespecting the system of checks and balances, will have a real red alarm if he tries to fire special investigator Robert Mueller, but what we actually, I think, this week have seen is the way the system does function. His trans military ban was shut down in the courts. We have Mueller having updates in his investigation. These are the branches of government working to check the executive branch, and that is significant. At the same time, I think that my fellow countrymen need to be reminded that democracy is not a finished product. It is not something that was nicely sealed and finished when a bunch of white guys in wigs finished writing them up. We need to be involved and participate and stay informed, and contact our representatives, and, frankly, have a re-democratisation of our citizenry that is overdue and was still necessary in happier times under Obama and even George Bush beforehand. So I think that what Trump is doing to challenge democracy is undermining the level to which people are able to participate, challenging our understanding of the truth, and abusing his power and profiting from, frankly, the presidency in ways that we have never seen in the history of the United States. Didn't people know that that was what he was like beforehand? I mean, they heard him talking about ` and I'm using his words when I say this ` they knew he was saying things like about grabbing women's pussies. People knew that before they voted for him, yet they still voted for him. The great shame of our nation is that the things that people were willing to stomach in order to vote Donald Trump to office, and I think there were a lot of different motivations for that. There's been a lot of coverage of who the people are who voted for Trump. My parents voted for Trump, and I think they would've voted for anything that ran as a Republican. There are all kinds of reasonings, but what I` I think the most concise way to put it is that he seems kind of like a CSI black light in a hotel room. All the gross white shit has been revealed now from his election ` all of the bigotry and the sexism, the racism, the homophobia ` that runs to the currents of American culture; the things that people are willing to stomach for political gains, especially the Republican Party. The GOP is usually complicit. We're almost out of time, but, very quickly, I'm quoting you here. You say, The idea of total civility, in that everyone has to be polite, is bullshit.' So in the context of Trump, what exactly are you asking or giving people licence to do? I think that there is a code of respectability about talking about politics. We're told that it's rude, that you have to be polite, that you have to respect and honour everyone's views. I think that certainly we could all get a little bit better at having civil conversations, but I think that we need to reject the idea of being sweet and silent, and` I think we need to reject the idea of being sweet and silent, and we need to talk about politics, and we need to ruffle feathers and have the difficult conversations. I think that anybody that counts themselves among the resistance to Donald Trump needs to have those one-on-one conversations with the family members who maybe did vote for him, and fully understand what it means to fight for this country, to fight for a truer democracy and to fight for equity. Those personal connections ` that is how grass root movements start, and how we can form communities and make change, so I hope that anybody who is invested in this moment will change the way they think about having political conversations, and politeness doesn't have to be part of them, bravery does. Well, I think you might've started a conversation here this morning. Thanks very much for joining us. Lauren Duca. Thank you. After the break, entrepreneur Derek Handley on why he thinks young people should follow their dreams rather than get a real job. But first, two men who did just that ` Jeremy and Paul. The big question this week ` how did Jacinda Ardern react to being named 13th most powerful woman in global politics? Well, she probably started by thanking the old white man that put her there. I don't think Winston's white, Paul. Well, not on the outside. Good point. Her ranking may have helped New Zealand, though, to be named one of the world's most gender equal countries. Good stuff. Yeah, that'd be awesome if there was such a thing as most equal. Hmm. Labour's timing is good, Auckland house prices dipping for the first time in six years. Yes. On average now a very affordable $1 million. Cheap. Although maintenance on those houses now is astronomical. Why's that? Well, now that they're 'sensitive', you can't just repaint. No. You've gotta ask the house what it wants. Does my backyard look fat in this? That sort of thing. Exactly. I think we're going to see a lot more black this season. Bill English putting together his shadow cabinet. There's a term that sounds way cooler than it actually is. And pledging to frustrate progress for the new government as he pushes the button on opposition. Yes, that's fightin' talk, isn't it? Of course, Bill's gonna soon realise that in the opposition, none of the buttons are actually attached to any machinery. And finally, Jacinda's first overseas meeting with Malcolm Turnbull. It might be a bit tense, given that he lost his majority thanks to her party. Yes. I do not think he will be getting the kayaks out. Welcome back. Entrepreneur Derek Handley has been back in the country identifying more young people to join his era fellowship. The programme assigns what it calls 'socially transformative projects' to those heading overseas to study. Hanley encourages young people to chase their dreams over getting a sensible job, so I asked him for some advice on finding a balance. I think you obviously to have find a way to pay the bills. I think the best way to make a living or a life is to do that by doing the things that you really care about. So finding a way to carve your own path ` not necessarily chasing dreams but making sure you're following what's inside and what's telling you what things you should be working on, what problems you should be solving and how you should be using your life and your skills. And I think a lot of people are either encouraged to do that and do really well at it or are discouraged entirely and told to get jobs that they may not necessarily love. For me, I'm hugely a proponent of people following what's inside and the path that they know they should carve and then finding a way to make sure they can make a living out of it. And I'm convinced that almost everybody should be able to do that. What makes you so convinced? Because I think that's what life's about. Life is about your particular role at this particular time in history and what unique contribution you can make. And I'm convinced that every single person has such a unique contribution, but society is often telling people not to do the thing that they feel they should be doing. Yeah, because I kind of see it as an interesting conundrum, because it's slightly anti-establishment in some ways, that view. A lot of these people who were involved in the fellowships are going off to Ivy League schools, which are super establishment, aren't they? Right, which is why I'm trying to kind of counterbalance that. And they're kind of like an insurance policy. It's your Willy Wonka ticket if you go to an Ivy League school. So do you see any clash in those, kind of, two things? I definitely do, but I think part of that's about challenging them about what they think they should be doing, because they think they maybe should be going and doing finance or something else. And maybe there is actually some other thing that they should be doing. But I think generationally, the shift for younger people is more and more accepted and encouraged that they should be following the path they think they should be following ` the true path that they are most interested in, most passionate about as opposed to getting a job and building some sort of career that they may later on regret. And I think this is inherent and indicative of a lot of the things that are changing in society at the moment. We're not accepting and looking at the status quo and thinking that this is the way we should continue. When you have different young politicians joining the fray, I think these are all people indicating, 'Actually I am going to follow the things that I think I should be doing.' Yeah, okay. So with that current project, which is your venture capital investments, what percentage of the companies that you have chosen and put money into ` what percentage of those do you actually think will succeed financially as well as socially? So, with the venture fund, we only invest in companies that we think will succeed in a big way financially, so that's the first criteria ` they have to have a prospect` 100% of them, though, you would expect to go the distance? Well, with venture investment, you often think a few are going to fall because they're shooting after such big dreams. But the primary category is they must be solving some sort of social issue. The second criteria is that they have a really strong chance of being very successful financially. And in New Zealand, a good example is Eat My Lunch, which is doing both and making a real difference in society. So this is where you buy a lunch for yourself and at the same time, they'll give a lunch to someone ` a child ` for free. Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's also indicative of a generational shift of how we build businesses and what businesses should achieve and the kinds of jobs people want. You have talked about generational change. We now are about to have one of our youngest prime ministers in our history. What difference do you think that is going to make in terms of the kind of politics we see over this next term? Or will it make a difference? Well, we're all hopeful that it'll make a difference, right? I mean, every time something changes and new leaders are installed, we're all hopeful that there will be a positive difference. And I think a young person becoming our prime minister, like Jacinda, is amazing, right? And it's happening all around the world for different reasons. The guy in Hungary's 31. Macron in France is 39. Trudeau's pretty young. This is great. It is essentially an indication of a generational shift. And this is, I think, what's most exciting about New Zealand ` we still have had in recent times people with their hands on the tiller that have been in Parliament before I was born. You know, 1978 ` Winston Peters; Phil Goff, 1981 ` I think I was 2 or 3; Peter Dunne ` 1984. It's time to move on. So what do you expect from the new guard that you are not getting from the old guard? I think that we need to rethink the entire construct of what the solutions look like, because the way we've looked at them in the past are that they're either blue or they're green or they're red. And, actually, my belief is incoming generations believe that everything is a hybrid, you know? We need to pick from different quarters to create new types of policies for a new way. We can start with common ground, build on common sense, but we need to have policies that look like things that are unlike what has been previously put to` So you're talking about consensus politics, basically. No, I'm talking about looking about what works and what looks like it'll work, no matter where it came from, and finding a new strategy going forward. I think what's been the problem in traditional politics is you can't really applaud the other side's policy, even though it's good and even though it makes sense and even though it's better than yours, and what we need to see from a new way and a new generation is moving beyond that and being proud to pick from other parties' ideas and policies and threading them together. Yeah, so, why do you think a younger person will do that better? Well, I'm hopeful that they will believe that that's actually a better way forward, because previously, people boxing themselves into the corners has meant that we've ignored things, right? So, a lot of people would say National's success economically has ignored the environment and society. And we wouldn't want to go into the phase of the next 10 years focusing entirely on society and then collapsing the economy or the environment or any of the other kind of combinations of those three. So whoever's looking at the next decade and beyond, I hope we'd be looking at how you weave these three things together so that you can sustainably build a country around people, planet and profit. Hey, the super interesting thing about that ` the youngest prime minister is paired with Winston Peters. She's not there alone. Right. No, and that's a little bit scary, because Winston Peters has said he would want to go back in time in many ways. I mean, I've seen lots of interviews where he just harks back to how things were in the '80s. And I don't think that's necessarily a way forward either. So hopefully the wisdom that he has and the energy that Jacinda has creates new solutions and new ways of thinking. If it doesn't, I think we'll see probably a more interesting continual surge of young people trying to create new paths. And at least whatever happens with government, I'm most interested in making sure that that happens over the next decade. Okay. We're almost out of time, but I want to hear what you think of this. If young people are so interested in change and all the rest of it, why didn't they get off their bums and vote? Well, that's a mystery to everyone, right? I don't know if it's the young people as a bucket, whether they are interested enough in the content of what people are selling in terms of the politics. If you think about you have to buy whatever someone is selling. Maybe there's a whole gap between what they think politics at a national level has in terms of an impact on their own lives. And going back to the comment I made earlier about, well, how does it make a difference to my life on a day-to-day basis, on a local basis, on a daily basis, and the more that gap between government and politics and a person's average daily life is, I think the more people are apathetic to be engaged in politics. So if there are any ways that we can start to string together how does a new government or a new mayor from almost day one change my life on a daily basis, even in a small way so that I know he's making a difference` Or she. Or she, I think that people will start to feel more engaged. But you are totally right there is a big gap, and a lot of people put a lot of effort this election to try and get young people involved, and I don't know if it turned out that well. Okay. Hey, it's great to talk to you. Always an interesting conversation. Thanks for joining me. Thanks for having me. After the break, our panel Simon Wilson, Trish Sherson and Tim Watkin. Welcome back. I'm joined now by our panel ` RNZ producer Tim Watkin, PR consultant Trish Sherson, and Simon Wilson from The Spinoff. Good morning to you all. Morning. KiwiBuild. The details are starting to build up, aren't they, Tim? 100,000 houses over 10 years. Is it looking workable now with those numbers? Look, I think there's a huge amount of pressure on Phil Twyford. If this Labour government fails on this front, it's got all kinds of problems. This is probably its most important delivery package. It has been talking about a crisis in housing for so long now. It now has a crisis that it has to be seen to be fixing. I think the first term's got some potential problems. It has always been that there are very few houses built in the first year. He's talking about 16,000, I think he said, in the first three years. That seems hard. If he can achieve that, then that will help. If he doesn't get that, then, going into the next election, I think that there's going to be all kinds of pressure on the fact that they have not started quickly enough. Because obviously, the slower you go in the first three years... ...the harder you have to go in the last part of it. Last few. Exactly. Simon, he moved the conversation on pretty quickly because construction, the workforce is a real issue, isn't it? We're, like, 56,000 short of workers in that industry. In the construction industry, it's not just the workforce; it is the whole industry. Fewer than 10% of the construction businesses have apprentices. You know, they talk about the way in which they're committed to training and development and so on, but, actually, they're not walking that talk. So there's that. Houses are built essentially the way they were 50 years ago still. There are real issues for construction around making sure that houses are constructed well. We know because of leaky homes. We know because of a whole lot of things that you can't just cut the corners. But at the same time, it takes too long, it is too hard to consent housing to be built, and the methods by which they're built` the technology has moved way ahead of the regulatory industry. And that needs to be freed up. It's a very, very complex job, but the government needs to get right in front of it. All the problems that existed... They're not new. ...six weeks ago still exist now. That's true too. Yeah, I think the interesting thing, though is` Back to the construction industry. And I was talking to one of the biggest developers in the country this week, and they are still shaking their heads and saying, 'Look, we are working at absolute capacity,' particularly in the Auckland market. They just have no idea how the government is going to be able to squeeze the additional capacity out of the construction industry, let alone pick up on all of the pieces that Simon said. So in terms of the timing of these types of things` The guy I was talking to said, even if we've got consenting done, we've got at least 10 to 12 months on each project. That's working at absolute capacity when you've got all of your systems in place. Having said that, there are projects that are well underway now in parts of Auckland, Northcote, Glen Innes and elsewhere. The ramping up is already happening. It's nowhere near where it needs to be, but it's not like they're starting` It's not a standing start for Labour. There is development underway. There is progress. And I think` Didn't we get a bit of an insight into where he's going to get his numbers from, there? Because I thought that was quite interesting. It's not just KiwiBuild; it's KiwiBuy as well, KiwiBuyOffPlans, with the government underwriting finance and also government have a look round, see what projects are already going on and suck some of those into your 100 grand. Is that cheating? Is that cheating? (CHUCKLES) Well, the interesting thing and new thing for me there came from the talk about existing apartment buildings, right, and apartment buildings that were struggling because they can't get the finance. So that's another big issue in Auckland ` is the squeeze on financing for projects. And why they are being squeezed is because often the numbers don't stack up. So there's been two things happen ` finance companies have been wiped out, and that was sort of that second-tier lending. But also the banks in the last year particularly have stopped financing these kinds of projects. So again, for me, that's a question mark again about government intervention in the market if the numbers aren't stacking up for the market itself. And that's absolutely critical, and that's why it's not cheating ` because if the developments that are underway are simply allowed to go the way in which the developer wanted, there would not be enough affordable housing being built because the numbers aren't there. No. Because the finance companies aren't there. That's right. The lack of that second-tier funding is a huge problem. As Twyford said, it's a market failure, and it is a market failure. Yeah, it is. It needs to be addressed by central government or council government. But I can hear National warming up its 'communism by stealth' lines. This is very interventionist. Not just going into the building sector. They're gonna build more houses. It's getting to the finance sector. They said it's going to be an active government. 'Active government'. It's the government into a finance sector. Remember the whole 'too big to fail' thing. This gets complicated for governments, when they get into the finance sector. I'm not sure National stands on very high ground when it comes to areas of organising how the finance sector will work. (CHUCKLES) National made sure that they did in their term. That's fair. But the other issue also too is at the back end of this. So, you've built the homes, and someone gets to buy them first time round. From a ballot, we learnt. But what happens off the back of that? So, yes, there is a stage where you can intervene and you can suppress or create affordable prices, and I still have an issue with this title ` 'affordable' ` because for most young couples in Auckland, servicing a $600,000 mortgage is still a pretty big push. And that's $600,000 now. Because he was saying he's doing costing. It's going to get worse. Of course it's going to go up. When they announced KiwiBuild in 2012, it was $300,000. Yeah. So it has marched along. 30%, he says, of any public-private partnership. 30% of the houses built will be affordable, he says. The other restriction they're going to put on` The land banking was interesting, that they're going to actually contractually require people to build rather than allow to land bank, because that is a huge problem in Auckland. The other thing that Trish was getting to was the question of how long the first home buyers who can get into KiwiBuild will have to own their home` Five years. Originally they said five years. They did say five years? We are hearing that it might be a bit longer than that. And there is another issue. The urban development authority that Twyford talked about, that is incredibly important. Council on its own has not been able to integrate its own approach to housing development. Government does need to step in, to take the lead, to say there will be centralised planning, integrated planning of communities, so that the transport is planned at the same time as the housing and the shopping centres and the rest of it and all those things happening together, cos it's not happening now. And that is actually all great stuff. So, that really has been a terrible failure. You've got all of these processes that happen individually and not coming together. And that's where you've seen Auckland grow as a shambles, really, because it hasn't worked together, so that is a really good thing. But all of that takes a lot of time. Yeah. We'll leave it there for the moment. Stick around. After the break, we'll look at some of the things that could be making the news next week. Then ` it's been a year since the impossible happened and Donald Trump became US president. Welcome back. You're with The Nation and our panel. Phil Twyford there has another portfolio which is possibly going to cause him some headaches. Transport ` he had a meeting with Phil Goff this week. Today he told us that congestion charging here maybe in the mid to long term. No asset sales ` he's not pushing for those but maybe targeted rates. But still, he's got a lot of money to find. Phil Goff's got a lot of money to find. Phil Twyford's gotta help him to find it. Yes, he does. Congestion charging, the issue, the difficult issue there is that it takes time to set up, and it's not just that it takes time ` it's quite expensive to set up, because you're setting up a whole electronic system and it's got to be very smart and comprehensive. And that's not the same as building a railway or building a road where you can say, 'We built this.' It's just backroom infrastructure that you've got to spend money on. But they will need to do that as quickly as possible because the regional fuel tax must have a limited life. They're going to have to move towards a much more smarter version of charging people to use the roads. The reverse of raising money is that you just throw things off your to-do lists. So what's going into the pit, do you think? There'll have to be some of that too. I think some of the more marginal roading projects of the last government that don't have good business cases, and I'm afraid Penlink is one of them, they will be obviously at the top of the list for re-evaluation, shall we say, with some political issues as well as the economic ones. But I think we'll see fewer roads, and they have already committed to more light rail, so that's going to be the way it works. Yeah, exactly. Hey, Jacinda Ardern is off to Australia to meet with Malcolm Turnbull. How is that going to go? Because it's different when you're in opposition. You say all these things about Australia, and then off you womble. Well, when you're a government, you have to act like a government. It's much different. It's going to be really interesting to see. This is where she has always been a bit of that foreign-policy wonk element to her. She grew up on the knee of Helen Clark. I will be really interested to see` I don't want to pre-suppose. She'll charm them, won't she? She'll charm him, she'll charm Australia. There will be a temptation, though, for her to leave some kind of gouge mark in the Australian psyche. It will be called 150 refugees. I was going to say ` you say 'at the knee of Helen Clark,' so immediately I think Tampa. Manus Island ` what's going to happen? You know what happened with Tampa ` was that Helen Clark mused on the Tampa, and within hours, got a phone call from the Australian foreign minister, Alexander Downer, at the time, saying, 'If you think so much about these blimmin' Tampa people' ` I don't think he said blimmin' ` 'then you take them.' And she went, 'OK.' This is not what's happening now. This is not what's happening now. Australia does not want New Zealand to take them. So she's actually in quite a bind. That may not necessarily happen, but I do think that will be the gouge. Mm. And I think what we have to watch for in these next forays overseas is how the international community reacts to our new framework for relentless positivity (LAUGHS) and how these things actually play out in public. And especially with the Aussies ` you know, the Aussies are a really tough bunch. This is such a sensitive issue for them around the likes of Manus Island. Also education ` she said she's going to bite back if we have to pay for education in Australia. Yeah, and that's a whole new setting for our relationship with Australia, right? It's been very matey and very, you know, sort your stuff out behind the scenes. And so this might be more overt and out the front. This is a new world we're in now. It isn't matey in the golf club any more. It's a different way of doing things, generationally different, it's obviously gender different, and people will adjust really, really rapidly to it, you know? Jeremy and Paul are quite right, though ` he won't be getting the kayaks out. He will be` There will be a tenser thing, but the more important thing is the trip to TPP land. Speaking of new generations, we've actually got three generations off to APEC ` we've got David Parker, Winston Peters and Jacinda Ardern going. Are they, between them, going to sort out the TPP? No pressure. (CHUCKLES) No. They're not going to sort out the TPP. Yes, they are. They're going to get the key concessions that they've talked about, and there are only two, and I think they're probably going to get them. Do you think they'll get both of them? I think they probably are. I don't think in the shape we're` I think they'll be in a different shape than what they probably have created an expectation around. I don't think they can get it quite how they wanted, but... look... I think you're going to hear the beeping of the truck as it backs up slowly, trying to create a bit of wiggle room about that stuff. I think they're ready. The Japanese are not just gonna go, 'Yeah, if you want a bit of future changes, that's fine.' The round robin ` is it dead in the water or not? No. No, I don't think it is. No, it's not dead in the water. Not yet? I think it'll be signed with the concessions Labour have identified which will not please an awful lot of people that don't want the thing at all. But... OK, so the other people, the opposition, National Party, reshuffled this week. Bill English only taking on national security. Is he showing himself the way out, Tim, or what? I think this is a very temporary move for a number of things. Is Chris Finlayson really going to stay there? Is Steven Joyce, Gerry Brownlee, David Carter, Bill English himself? In a year's time, there are any number of new questions to ask about this. There is a certain amount of loyalty to the party where I think a lot of people will settle things down. Yes, they'll use their experience to put pressure on. They know where the soft points are, they know where the bodies are buried. They will be able to use that against Labour for the first year, but that might start to run out of being fun quite soon, and we might see some exits, and then we'll get the proper reshuffle. So, are we expecting fireworks in the first session in Parliament on Tuesday? Well, I would say it's a numbers game in the house, and even if you think about fronting up to question time every day when you've got an opposition of that size. And, as Tim said, the important thing here is that these guys know where all of the skeletons are, and they know every closet door to pull open and just have that coming out. And then, um, you noticed we were talking about before, we get Jacinda and Winston away and then potentially you've got Calvin Davis fronting question time, that's going to be new and interesting for everyone as well. I think the opposition will try everything. They'll try low tricks, high tricks, they'll try being better and smarter and try being lower and meaner. And whatever works is what they will stay with. The full menu is on offer. Time now for a look at some of what will be making the news next week. Jacinda Ardern goes to Sydney today for her first meeting with Malcolm Turnbull. On Tuesday, the new Parliament holds its first session. And on Thursday, the prime minister, deputy prime minister and trade minister leave for APEC in Vietnam. Who's gonna be in charge? That's all from us for now. Thanks for watching. We will see you again next weekend. www.able.co.nz Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2017