Today on Newshub Nation ` Climate Change Minister James Shaw on how he's going to get farmers on board with his Zero Carbon plan. Plus with New Zealand's suicide rate now at a record high, we talk to campaigner Jazz Thornton about improving our mental health services. And an Auckland iwi's plans to lodge a treaty claim against the government over its response to kauri dieback disease. Kia ora, good morning. I'm Simon Shepherd. And I'm Emma Jollif, welcome to Newshub Nation. The final report on an incident between Ikaroa-Raphiti MP, Meka Whaitiri, and a staffer has been released a week after the draft report was leaked to media. Barrister David Patten found that, for the most part, the staffer's account of what happened was more likely that Ms Whaitiri's. He concluded Ms Whaitiri approached the staffer from behind, grabbing their arm and shouting. However, he said that Ms Whaitiri did not grab or pull the employee. Ms Whaitiri's lawyers dispute some of those findings in a letter released alongside the report. National MP Jami-Lee Ross is taking extended leave from Parliament to deal with some personal health issues. Leader Simon Bridges has been criticised for describing the issues like this ` Perhaps, actually, a bit embarrassing ` you know, a lot embarrassing, potentially. He later backtracked, saying that possibly wasn't the right word. Mr Bridges also said it was not related to the investigation into the leak of his expenses. And the government has moved to address the major skill shortage in the construction industry with a six-point action plan. One of the priorities will be to use government construction contracts to push firms to invest in local skills training. Another will be helping job-seekers get off the benefit and into a sustainable construction industry job. The government's considered more than 15,000 submissions as it develops its Zero Carbon bill. There are three options for the bill, ranging from only targeting carbon dioxide emissions, to including all greenhouse gases, including methane. 91% of submitters want a target of net zero emissions across all greenhouse gases ` The option least favoured by many farmers. But three-quarters of the submitters just filled in templates created by groups like Greenpeace and Generation Zero. I asked Climate Change Minister James Shaw how representative the process really is. Well, the submission in any consultation is the people who are most actively engaged in it. In this case there are a lot of environmental NGOs. There was also a very strong representation from businesses and business organisations as well. You do have to balance that against the general public opinion as well. There have been a number of public opinion polls during the course of the year. One was commissioned by IAG and the insurance industry and so on. The results that we're seeing through this consultation are broadly consistent with the messages we're getting from the public opinion polling as well. So, even though the majority are NGOs you can sell that to New Zealand, because they're consistent with other polling. Yeah, I mean, again, there's a consistency between, you know, what were seeing through that consultation, what were hearing through other channels. You've got to balance out all of this, of course, with other advice that were getting, whether its economic advice or scientific advice and so on. And it is part of that mix. One of the things that we've also got to be very mindful of is that, you know, while there's a very clear steer that's coming through from these submissions, there are some quite strong voices in there about concerns about the speed or the scale of the transition or how its going to affect particular industries. And you have to pay attention to those voices as well, otherwise you just don't have a sustainable solution. So of the quarter that were original submissions, what sectors did that feedback come from? It came from every single industrial sector and quite a good spread and also not surprised across a lot of environmental NGOs and so on. But the vast majority of submissions were from private individuals. So, the report says 91% of respondents want a target of net-zero emissions across all greenhouse gases in legislation now, but Federated Farmers has told us that that option would be the most harmful to them. Well, this is what I mean about saying that you've got to take account of the voices of people who are concerned about the impacts on their industries. And so, you know, I've had this conversation with Federated Farmers and with other farming organisations. There are opportunities in this transition, but we do have to be mindful of the transition that were asking people to undertake with this. What have you specifically been told by the agricultural sector in this process? Well, very much what they've said in those reports they feel that essentially, a net-zero all-gases target would put too much pressure on the agricultural sector. I mean, the difference between splitting out your gases versus having an all-gases target is actually simply about to what extent do you offset the residual methane? That's actually the only real difference, and so those are the kinds of issues that were working through as we try and form the bill. So agriculture does make up half of our emissions, and we cant meet our climate targets without those. If you cant get buy-in from the agricultural sector, do you just have to force them to make the changes anyway? Oh, look, actually, there is buy-in from the agricultural sector. I mean, this is the thing I think a lot of people haven't realised, is how far farmers themselves and their industry organisations and companies like Fonterra and Synlait and others have come over the course of the last 10 years or so and, in particular, in the last few years. DairyNZ, during the course of this consultation exercise, ran a huge number of workshops up and down the country full-day-long workshops for their members, talking through the science and invited us along and MFE officials along to those. So directionally, actually, you know, pretty much everyone's on board. What were really talking about is the scale and the speed of the transition and how you support particular industries, you know, like agriculture, like steel or aluminium production, which have got a pretty big hurdle to meet; and, actually, that there is a collective responsibility for us to work together to support those industries which do face the greatest change through that transition. So which option would you be going with? Will you just be targeting carbon dioxide? Would you target the long-life gases? Or would you go for the greenhouse all of them, you know, including the methane? What would be your preferable option? So this is going to be a frustrating answer for you, but actually, we are talking through the detail of the targets between the Government and the Opposition as we negotiate the final form of the bill. But you must have a view. Well, I mean, I have a view, but, you know, there are options that are in front of us, and were talking through the detail of how we do that. And I think, you know, the thing that people are going to have to realise is that its going to involve some compromise from everyone, right? No one is going to get everything that they want as a result of this process. And I've been saying this recently as long as everyone's equally unhappy, we have a chance of getting this over the line. That's not an ideal proposition, though, is it? Well, look, you know, it depends where you stand. I think the most important thing here is that we do have a clear target and that there is a pathway over the course of the next 30 years as we do this transition, that we do set up the politically independent Climate Change Commission and that that process is really robust. And I think if you get those things in place, then you will see a huge signal sent into the economy about the scale of change, and things will start to unlock and move very quickly. Its actually a domestic version of the Paris Agreement itself. Paris Agreement isn't perfect, right? Its got a number of flaws to it, but the fact that we got a global agreement on that direction of travel sent a huge signal to countries and to businesses all over the world. And things have really changed massively as a result of that. So if you do exclude everything except carbon dioxide from the bill, you're going to have to work out how to get to those gases in the second half of the century anyway, aren't you? Well, ultimately, yes. I mean, we are signatories to the Paris Agreement, and, of course, it was a National Government that signed us up to the Paris Agreement, which does say that in the second half of the century the world has got to get to a situation where all of our gases are netted out against the removals or the sinks or the offsets. So, James, New Zealanders have told you that they want certainty around this bill. When's it likely to be introduced? Soon ` I don't have an exact date for it at the moment, because we are in a dialogue with the opposition about it, and in my view, its more important to get it right than to worry about a few weeks here or there. Earlier this year, you said transport was going to be one of your first priorities and were going to make a decision in the second half of this year around things like EVs and increasing the number of electric vehicles on New Zealand roads. What sort of incentives are you proposing? What decisions have you made? So there's a whole suite of options that are in front of us at the moment that we are working our way through. Again, I recognise that's a little frustrating because were unable to say exactly what were landing on. But the kinds of things that the Productivity Commission recommended were taking a very good look at ` as well as some of the policy options that other countries around the world like Norway, who have made huge inroads on EVs. So, somewhere like Norway they have cut the import tax, for example. You can get some free parking if you drive an EV. You can drive in the bus lanes. Would you look at those sorts of things here? We are literally looking at every option that we've got available to us. Were looking at things like fringe benefit tax. Were looking at things like, you know, there's the Productivity commission, were looking at that feebate scheme. There are many ways to skin that cat, and we've got to make sure that we develop something that works for the New Zealand context. You cant just import the same policy proposals that Norway has introduced, because their economy is structured differently to ours. Okay. You said on the show that going Carbon Zero would be as big an impact as the introduction of the Internet, and 92% of submitters on the bill said they need help adapting. What kind of help can you offer and particularly for workers who are going to be affected by climate change? Yeah, so there are a number of different aspects to the adaptation and the transition challenge. We know already that there are places in New Zealand that are affected by increased flood-risk and sea level rise and so on. Part of our job, and we need to move on this fairly urgently, is to work out what is our national risk assessment. What is the governments plan for how to support communities through those ` how to adapt to the effects of climate change. Can you explain what some of that support might look like? So, at the moment, for example, in places like Kapiti and Christchurch local councils and rate payers have run into difficulties with each other because the councils have formed assessments that certain properties are at risk in the future of sea level rise. And, of course, that impacts on peoples home values and their ability to re-sell it. One of the things we need to work through is, well, what are the economics of that kind of transition. How do you support people, who through no fault of their own, find themselves in locations that have an increased risk that other communities around the country don't necessarily face. And this is something that we've got to engage the insurance industry in, and the banking industry in, central and local government as well. Lets just touch on Green party principles. You have a proud history of your green principles, but you had to ignore those last week in order to support the Waka-Jumping bill. Are these concessions splitting the party? You've also made concessions about Chinese water bottle expansion. You wanted a refugee quota lift to more like 6000, and now you've swallowed this dead rat of the Waka-Jumping bill. How's that affecting the unity of the party? I would say its not affecting the unity of the party. We had an annual general meeting about a month ago, and I was pleasantly surprised at just how pragmatic people are being about the fact that being a part of a government, and a minor party in a government, means that you don't get everything that you want all the time. But the things that we are winning, like the zero-carbon bill that we've been talking about, like the largest increase in the Department of Conservation funding in 16 years, like the transition to a more fuel-efficient less emitting fleet ` all of those things. They're actually worth it. We know that there are battles along the way that were not going to win, and I think that people are pretty reconciled to that. On the matter of your co-leader, Marama Davidson, she appeared on the AM show earlier this week proposing a 20% boost for the support for solo parents. But she didn't know the details about how much it was going to cost and that did look like shed come unprepared. Do you know how much that's going to cost? Yeah, so, in total the package that were talking about has an estimated cost of about 1.5 billion, but we have to work through some of the details with the government on some of that, because some of those costs are estimated. There are also savings on the other side of the equation, which when we did the original costings we weren't able to fully get. For example, and this is a smaller part of the package, enforcing sanctions ` we spend over $40 million enforcing sanctions, but we only retrieve about $30 million in returns. So, were actually spending more money enforcing a sanctions regime than we are from returning it. And that was just what we able to get at the time when we were in opposition. We do have some estimates, but part of the budget process we've got to go through is to make sure that we can nail those down. Was that embarrassing having Marama Davidson on there not knowing the figures? Look, everybody has a bad interview sometimes. I've had some shockers in my time as well. I thought that the response was a little over the top, but Marama went on and had a couple of other interviews during the course of the day which were a lot stronger than that. I think all of us in this business have had those kinds of moments. Is she the right co-leader for the party? Yes, she is. She has the support of the party? Yes, she does ` strong support of the party. You've got an all-day Green leadership meeting this weekend. What are you going to be discussing there? So, we've got a new leadership group. You know, Marama and I are the public face in Parliament of the party but also we do have co-conveners for the party organisation and also for our policy network. And those positions were elected at our recent AGM. This is our first opportunity as a group to sit in a room together and go, how do we want to shape things in the coming years ` especially as were gearing up towards election 2020. James Shaw, thank you very much. Thank you. And if you've got something to say about what you see on our show, let us know. We're on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram ` Newshub Nation NZ. Our Twitter panel this week is Lewis Holden and Deborah Morris Travers. They're using the hashtag 'Nation NZ' or you can email us at nation@mediaworks.co.nz the address is on your screen right now. But still to come ` we dissect the week's political news with our panel. Plus, we speak to a young woman using her own mental health struggles to give hope to people in similar situations. Welcome back. Joining Emma on the panel today, we've got Russel Norman, Greenpeace New Zealand executive director and former Green Party leader ` welcome ` and former National Party press secretary Ben Thomas, who's now with Exceltium PR. Welcome to the show. Ben, I'm going to start with you. 75% of the submissions made on the Zero-carbon Act via forms prepared by NGOs ` do we believe the minister when he says it's representative? Look, in any submission or consultation process, you will be flooded by these form submissions that are one line long or just say 'yes' or 'no' or just cut and pasted from a website. Mm. And the way that these are assessed by officials and by politicians is not just, you know, as a kind of punchcard where they say, 'Oh, 75% are against it; 25% are in favour. That will guide all of our decision making.' It's much more nuanced than that. They understand that backing each business submission is a certain number of employees, a certain number of jobs on the line. And they are certainly not sort of naive enough politically to think that that's an accurate representation of the votes that they stand to lose or gain. Yeah, but on the face of it, Russel, it seems like, you know, an organisation like yours is flooding the process. Well, I mean, we provided an opportunity for people to submit on the process, and they're all individual submissions representing millions in future generations. Mm. So who are the people who are not at the table in this conversation? All the people who are yet to be born, all the people that are young today that are gonna have to live with the consequences if we don't take action on climate change. All those people are not in the process, and yet they're the ones who are gonna be most affected. Instead, we've got special pleading from polluters. Seems to be like, you know, (CHUCKLES GENTLY) the show this morning ` special pleading from farmers, it's like, 'Yeah, OK, so you got, you know, 'special pleading cos they're polluters and they want to be subsidised.' Well, what about all the future generations that are gonna bear the consequences of all that pollution? But this has to be an inclusive process for everybody, including the special pleas. Well, it has to be a process which responds to the reality. So we're about to receive a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which is gonna say, from all reports, that this is extremely serious; we're not doing enough. That should be the framework in which we operate. We need a Climate Commission which has really strong targets. We need it to have teeth. The proposal at the moment just gives advice; it's just a talk shop. Imagine if we` Well, that` James Shaw raised an interesting point when he said, 'I want everyone to be equally unhappy here,' and I think that's important, because the ETS ` the Emissions Trading Scheme ` was initially sold to us by National and Labour as kind of financial wizardry that would mean that the planet would be cleaned up and we would all become millionaires from carbon trading` Right. ...without any harm. And so whenever its cost to a particular industry was brought up, that was seen as a bugger or a mistake, not a feature, but an ETS just puts a cost where a cost didn't used to be. And so it's essential that we go into, you know, whatever the new, revamped ETS or carbon future is with our eyes open. Well, let's talk about detail, and, Emma, I just wanted to bring you in here. James Shaw seems to be a bit light on detail, and he acknowledges that. Yes, he does in that interview, and you say 'eyes open', Ben, but, you know, you need to be open to how it's going to affect you individually. So we really do need, in order to get on board, to know what those incentives for electric vehicles, for example, are going to be. We need to know how the government is likely to be able to support those workers who are being impacted by climate change. We're already seeing a reduction in quotas in the hoki fishery on the West Coast, and that's being attributed partly to warmer waters and the fish not breeding. You know, people's jobs are already being affected now, and they need to know detail about how they're gonna be supported from the government. Well, Ben, I was just gonna say, James Shaw is working hard` seems to be working hard with the farmers ` as you say, the special pleaders, Russel ` I mean, do you think he's actually getting them on board? He says he is. Well, I think he has to. I mean, he's already taken that huge step of getting the National Party seemingly on board. Appears they have New Zealand First on board ` I mean, that's quite the achievement in itself. Yeah, look, I think most of these organisations do agree that something needs to be done and that they need to be part of this, you know, whether it's for venal PR interests or for the actual future of the environment. We've got Russel... - (EMMA, SIMON BOTH TALK AT ONCE) - (CHUCKLES GENTLY) I mean, you know, do you really want climate policy in New Zealand to be hostage to the backbenchers in the National Party? Cos that's essentially` If you're saying you wanna get National on board, you gotta get Judith Collins to support the thing, right? She is never gonna support something which involves real action on climate change, right? Did we get`? You think about the nuclear-free ` did we go, 'Oh, let's all` hands together and Kumbaya;' that's how we got nuclear-free? No. The government took a strong lead, and eventually, National came in behind and admitted it had to follow. Votes for women, gay-law reform ` whatever you wanna name, these things didn't happen because we all said, 'Oh, we can't possibly have a fractious disagreement.' Government took leadership; we took a strong position on it. Climate change is the same. This is too important to water down to some kind of commission which has no powers, doesn't even affect all gases. You think about the Reserve Bank, right? The Reserve Bank ` we go, 'We wanna control inflation and financial stability,' so we give it real tools, right? The Climate Commission needs real tools. It's gotta be able to influence the price of carbon; it's gotta have some tools to do that. If it's just jawboning, it just issues reports, I mean, how is that responding to the reality of the science? OK. Well, this is the process we're going through to try and get those details and see what sorta structure we have. In the meantime, we have the Green Party, which seems to be having a bit of tension within itself. Now, Russel, obviously, you're a former Green Party co-leader. Do you believe that they're making too many compromises ` things like waka-jumping? Or are they being pragmatic, as James Shaw talks about? Look, I mean, you know, obviously, the waka-jumping thing was against everything the Green Party had previously done, so it was extremely problematic for them. But, you know, you come to something like climate change; this is now, you know, obviously a core issue for the Green Party. Is it gonna be taking a really strong position, proposing 'a' all-gases target, giving the Climate Commission actual tools not just to issue reports? And people will judge them, I think, internally on issues like that. Are you worried that the Green Party's gonna be too pragmatic over climate change in terms of a political standpoint. What's pragmatism when it comes to climate change? Like, we know the science says there will be a catastrophe if we don't cut our emissions. Yeah, but we're talking about politics here. Yeah, and so I am too. So this is pragmatism. Pragmatism means actually cutting emissions quickly, decarbonising our economy rapidly. That, to me, is pragmatism. OK, all right. So, Green Party's holding a leadership meeting this weekend, and James Shaw is standing by his co-leader, Marama Davidson, isn't he, Emma? That's what he said, yeah. Yes. He is. He has said that she's the right women to be co-leader, right person to be co-leader. He talked about the fact that her interview didn't go terribly well when she showed up without the details on the sole-parent support. But 'she' is absolutely standing by her. I guess that, you know, one of the issues is that we've already got a coalition government that can be fractious at points, and you don't really want one of those coalition partners to have disunity. So what sorta choice does he have? Was it just a bad interview, Ben? Or are there greater concerns, do you think? Well, it was a bad interview. It was terrible. A leader of a major political party turning up without even the costings of their policy, not knowing what current benefit levels were, showing a complete lack of familiarity with the cause that she was ostensibly championing was a terrible look. On the other hand, she has the support of the members, and she's not going anywhere. Right. So what do you say, Russel? Is she the right person to be the co-leader of the Green Party? Look, I agree with Ben. I think that she was (CHUCKLES DRILY) a terrible interview. (CHUCKLES) She obviously needed to have those numbers. You can't walk in having announced a policy and not know what it costs. I mean, that's just not one of the options on the table. OK. All right, just a quick question on Meka Whaitiri. The report came down yesterday ` again on Friday afternoon, Emma. It seems to be a bit of a track record with this government. It does. We've seen the resignation of Clare Curran; we've seen the backtracking on the appointment of Derek Handley on Friday afternoon. Is this a strategy, Ben? It's the most open and transparent government in our history,... (LAUGHS) ...at least after 4pm on Friday. (CHUCKLES GENTLY) That's when things really start coming out. Yeah, no, look, I mean, it's more a tactic than a strategy` Mm. ...to try and minimise bad news as it comes out. I actually had a bit of sympathy for Meka Whaitiri after reading the redacted report. Why's that? Obviously, no minister should ever lay their hands on a staff member. They have these almost feudal-like powers to sack staff whenever they want, so any disagreement should never get to the position of a physical confrontation. On the other hand, the amount of time that was spent talking about whether the minister raised her voice to a staff member ` I mean, if that's a new standard that's coming in in terms of political working environments, everyone will be gone by the end of the year. (CHUCKLES SOFTLY) OK, no more staff left. What about the photograph of`? The Greens might have some staff. CHUCKLES: They might. All right. What about the bruises on the arm? Oh, we're gonna have to leave it there. Sorry, we're just outta time at the moment. Sorry, Emma. Thanks, Ben. Up next ` why mental-health campaigner Jazz Thornton says Kiwis' pleas for help aren't being answered fast enough. Plus ` the microscopic attacker killing our kauri. We look at whether enough's being done to combat dieback disease. Welcome back. After 14 suicide attempts and a long battle with mental illness, Jazz Thornton co-founded the advocacy group Voices of Hope to help others going through similar struggles. Her first short film, called 'Dear Suicidal Me', made international headlines. Now she's got a web series and a documentary in the works. The 23-year-old film director is speaking about her experiences at TEDxAuckland next weekend, and she joins me now. So thanks for coming on the programme. So that short first film, 'Dear Suicidal Me', has been viewed online 80 million times, which is amazing. Why do you think it resonated so much? I think when I was thinking up the idea for the video, I wanted people who are struggling to be able to identify with one part of it, because I know that hearing inspirational stories is great, but when you're struggling, you can only kind of see the person who now is in front of you, and you struggle to identify with them struggling. And so I got four people to read out their suicide notes from when they tried to take their life. And then I got everyone to write a letter called 'Dear Suicidal Me', which was so hope filled. So people who were struggling identified with that first part and were like, 'Okay, that's exactly how I'm feeling'. And then they heard everyone be like, 'Dear Suicidal Me, I know that right now 'it feels like you can't do it, but what you don't know is you're about to become an award-winning actor, 'you're going to be a father, you're going to travel the world'. So they can't see into the future, people going through these problems. Yep. And so that's what you were trying to get them to look to. Yes, yeah. All right. So you're now working on a web series about mental health and you yourself are the focus of a documentary called 'The Silence Project'. What do you hope these projects are going to achieve? So the series that I'm directing is very much trying to` We're constantly talking about 'we need to find solutions, we need to find solutions'. And I think that the only way to find solutions is to look at what it is that we need to solve. Yes. So that's what the series is kind of looking at. We're looking into the life of a particular girl whose story and situation pinpoints many areas where systems and people failed her, and the outcome was a tragic one. And then the film is very much all hope based. And it's, kind of, how do we see these systems change. Yeah, hitting both people who are suicidal, but also those who are surrounding those people who are suicidal and saying, 'These are the mind sets that need to change, 'in order for our statistics to change.' Yeah, well, the statistics that you mention are terrible, the highest level since records started ` 668 people died by suicide last year. Why isn't the current system working? The current system's not working because unless you are very wealthy or you're on your deathbed, there is nothing available for you. You are told` If you're saying, 'I'm feeling suicidal', they will say, 'Come back when you've tried to kill yourself'. So at the moment, we're being the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. And we're wanting to build the fence at the top, but we're not willing to build the fence at the top. Right. So it has to be an extreme case before you get attention. Yes. Have you seen that yourself? Yes, I have. I mean, there was one time that I quite severely tried to take my life. I was in a coma, and then I came out of that, was in the medical ward for a little bit, for a few days. And then a psychologist came and saw me for about, oh, seven minutes or so and then let me walk home. Because in her eyes, I wasn't a worst case, even though I had literally nearly just died. And then there was another time that I had told a worker that I was about to take my life, that I had method to do so in my car, and she let me leave. And so it really is kind of this thing that unless you have already tried` and even then, it's specific cases, because the system is so overworked. Should we be talking about this that openly? I think so. I think that that's the only way that we're actually going to see change or else everything stays under. People are so afraid of talking about suicide, because they think that it's going to trigger other people to take their own lives, but the reality is something` talking about suicide doesn't make someone suicidal. It simply reveals what's already there. Because that seems to be the fear. That's why we are tentative about talking about suicide. Yeah, yeah. But that's not a thing. People watching something like '13 Reasons Why' or looking at media, that doesn't make someone suicidal. And so people who are going through this, they are now going, 'Okay, I'm not the only one going through this. 'I'm going to ask for help.' Where we're lacking is that there is no help. Right. Well, let's talk about some specific examples about that. We've had` 20 to 24 year olds are some of the worst affected; university students among that age group. And they say they're having to wait weeks to access student counselling. So should the government be stepping in there? 100%. Yeah, the government needs to be releasing funding into that area. I think organisations like what we're doing and like what other people are doing and even the universities themselves ` they're getting people to a place where they can see hope, and they're going, 'OK, maybe my life is worth fighting for. I'm going to ask for help.' And then they're getting put on these week, month waiting lists. And I think that if we want to be able to see the change, the change starts with not only us, but seeing the government actually stepping in and` Well, I should point out though that the government, or the Green Party, has the policy of $10 million for free under 25s counselling. Is that the kind of programme that you're hoping will make a difference? Yes, definitely, definitely. That's the kind of thing that's building a fence at the top. That's the kind of thing that the very first time someone says, 'I need help', being able to access that help is key to ensure they're not needing to escalate their actions before they get the help they needed down` But the process to get that help at the top of the cliff, as you say, is going to take a while. $10 million now doesn't mean that everybody's going to be safe. Definitely. Yeah, it's something that, unfortunately, is going to take time to, obviously, install and that kind of thing. And with the pressing issues, it's something that we have to act on fast or else our statistics are going to continue to rise. OK. So you've made a submission to the government's Mental Health and Addiction Inquiry. What did you hope to get across to them? It was all around the area of funding, especially within mental health wards. You know, there's often, kind of, usually 12 beds available within certain wards across Auckland. And so people who are high-end suicidal are ` and I don't want to use the word 'competing' ` but, you know, are going against people who are high-end schizophrenic and all of that kind of thing. And so there's very minimal space for you to go in. And so funding for beds in hospitals and in respite centres is massive, because at the moment people are going in to hospital for maybe, like, a day or two. And then because of the pressing issue, they're getting kicked out. It's kind of like a one in, one out type thing, which I saw when I was in a mental health ward` There is such demand for beds that as soon as you have a glimmer of being well, you're being told to leave. Yeah. Yeah. And then it is like, 'Oh, go out there, and then someone will call you in the next few days'. Then that goes for maybe a couple of weeks, and then you're out of the system. So what does it take` what will it take for this inquiry to find a way to get confidence back in the mental health system? I think it's going to take people of influence and people in government to actually stand up and to be willing to talk about it and be willing to not just speak, but then follow it up with action, not be afraid to try things that are new, because everyone's so, like, 'Oh, there's not enough evidence in this'. But we're not going to be able to get evidence unless we actually try. And what we're doing is not working. Yep. There's evidence. It's everywhere. It's not working. And so we need to see people stepping up. We need to see them willing to invest into this area. One of the areas where it's not working which doesn't get as much spotlight shone on it as the young people is the older` the men in their 40s. Now you've been speaking to CEOs and finance executives recently. What sort of reaction have you had from them about the high level of suicide among that age group? It's been incredible when I've been in those different environments. Suicide does not discriminate, and that is evident when you're speaking to those kinds of people. When I was speaking at the finance conference, it was 400 CEOs. I remember going up there, and as I was looking around, there wasn't a dry eye in the room. Everyone was crying. I had people coming up to me afterwards. One that, kind of, stands out in particular saying that he had walked into that room deciding that he wanted to take his life, but he felt guilty about it, because on paper his life looked perfect ` you know, wife, kids, owns his own house. But then as he was listening to me speak, he was like, 'I am now going to tell my wife what's going on. 'I can't live like this anymore.' And what's become a very common thing is that whole stigma around men of 'We don't talk about things. 'We're strong. We don't do that.' And that is the stigma killing their own generation. Really? So this 'she'll be right', 'just harden up' attitude? Yep, very much so. I heard Mark Richardson was talking about how our generation just need to harden up on a show recently. And I went on radio, and I was responding, and I was like, 'You do realise that out of all the age brackets, you are what makes up 'the highest percentage of suicides in our country. 'Do not put on to the younger generation the beliefs that is killing your own generation.' We can't` That doesn't work anymore ` the 'harden up', 'she'll be right'. So people of my age group do take that kind of attitude. Does that trickle down as an example to the younger generation? Definitely. Especially into our males, I think. I think girls are a lot better at talking about things. But males, they look up to their fathers, they look up to the men of this nation, and they see men who are looking to be succeeding in business or things like that, and they're the people that they're mimicking. And so that 20 to 24 age bracket that we've seen increase, they're the ones who've adapted those kind of attitudes. Just finally, what advice would you give to someone whose friends and family are actually dealing with mental health illnesses or mental health problems? I think one of the biggest things that helped me when I was going through this time is that the people around me where never just like, 'Oh, it will be okay. There's always hope.' Because when you're feeling like that, that does nothing for you. And so what they did is that there was a lot of tough love there, but they chose to continuously speak into my future. Because when you're struggling to that extent, you really can't see into the future, and it is impossible to fight for your life if you don't know what you're fighting for. And so speak into their future, speak hope, speak against their core beliefs. For me, it was, 'I'm unlovable. I'm a burden.' And so those closest to me were like, 'Jazz, I love you.' So do they need to be challenged? Yeah, definitely, all the time. The soppy fear of just going 'Oh, it's okay. It'll be OK' does nothing. It's not working. They need to be challenged. They need to be taught how to fight and what are the practical things that they can do to help fight through this. Jazz Thornton from Voices of Hope, thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Well, if you or someone you know needs help, you can call or text 1737 any time to speak to a trained counsellor or you can call Lifeline, Youthline or the Samaritans. And the numbers are on your screen right now. Well, still to come ` National MP Melissa Lee fronts up for this week's Facebook Live interview. Plus, we talk to the Auckland iwi planning to lodge a Treaty claim over kauri dieback, saying the government's not doing enough to protect important forests. Welcome back. Newshub Nation can reveal an Auckland iwi is planning to launch a treaty claim over government inaction on kauri dieback. Te Kawerau a Maki has been at the forefront of the battle to contain the disease over the past decade, but the trees ` which grow from Northland down to Kawhia ` are still falling to this tiny pathogen. John Michael Swannix has this exclusive report. (WAIATA, WOMAN VOCALISES) It was an unprecedented step in modern history. In December, Te Kawerau a Maki placed a rahui on the entire forested area of the Waitakere Ranges. All to protect the chief of the forest ` the kauri ` under attack from a pathogen smaller than a pinprick. Rahui was an emergency response to do something, because at the time no one else was doing anything. More than one million people visit the Waitakere Ranges every year, unwittingly spreading a kauri killer. And in just five years the number of infected trees doubled ` from one in ten to one in five. Waitakere forest is very, very strongly linked to the well-being and the identity of Te Kawerau a Maki. So, if this forest goes ` everything about Te Kawerau goes with it. In 2015, Te Kawerau a Maki settled its treaty claim with the Crown for past grievances. As part of the settlement, the Crown committed to a new relationship based on mutual trust, co-operation, and respect for the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles. But Edward Ashby says this hasn't happened, and the lack of action on kauri dieback is proof. The speed of response has been too slow. There's basic questions that are still unanswered, and we've been not really engaged throughout the whole process. So, central government has a long way still to go. Te Kawerau a Maki is about to start proceedings in the Waitangi Tribunal, alleging the Crown has failed to protect taonga kauri and by extension ` the iwi. When contacted earlier this week, Minister for Maori/Crown Relations Kelvin Davis refused to comment. A spokesperson said his ministerial colleagues, Damien O'Connor and Eugenie Sage, could seek his advice if needed. Kauri dieback was first recognised a threat in 2008. Biosecurity 101 ` what do you need to know? You need to know what this organism is. You need to know where it is. You need to know how to kill it, and you need to know what else it infects. Out of those four questions, in the last 10 years, we've only answered one of them ` what is it? The answer? A microscopic mould that travels in dirt. When it gets wet the spores germinate and are able to swim through the soil, looking for kauri roots. It then spreads through the tree's tissues, stopping water and nutrients from reaching the canopy ` killing the leaves. The kauri tries to bleed to pathogen out, but in vain. It is now terminal. If we continue on the trajectory that we're currently on, I would expect kauri to be, essentially, extinct within 20 years. And it won't just be kauri that disappear. The tree supports 17 other native species. Once your keystone species go, everything that that supports goes with it. And then all of the animals that rely on that go as well, and you just end up with an ecological wasteland. So where is this disease in New Zealand? Well, MPI has identified more than 450 kauri sites ` from Northland to Kawhia. The areas in red are where kauri dieback has been found. The areas in green are where soil tests have come back clear, and the areas in yellow are where tests are yet to be done. We don't even know where the healthy and sick trees are, so how do we know what it is that we're supposed to be protecting? And MPI admits its testing isn't 100% effective. Sometimes a healthy forest or a healthy tree doesn't show disease symptoms but could be infected by the pathogen that causes kauri dieback. And it may take them decades for those disease symptoms to express themselves. Mel Barton says the solution is obvious. All of the kauri forests should be closed as a precautionary principle. Forest and bird has closed all of its kauri forests. We're just incredibly exasperated that it's us who have had to show this leadership, and it hasn't come from the Ministry for Primary Industries. But MPI says it doesn't have the power to close forests. It's important to remember that MPI doesn't own any land. We're not a land manager, so we provide a co-ordination role in the programme. It's up to our programme partners and other land owners to implement the other measures on the ground. The response to kauri dieback has been juggled between MPI, DOC, local iwi and councils. Forest and Bird says a lack of co-ordination between these groups has allowed the disease to spread quickly. The response to kauri dieback has seemed, more or less, a gesture and a pale imitation of what we would be doing as a country if this was a threat to one of our commercial crops. MPI says that's unfair. I would say we are as committed to protecting the environment as we are supporting economic growth. So what is happening at a national level? Department of Conservation have recently completed a major upgrade of tracks and installing boardwalks in many areas. There's discussions around potential closures of more forest areas. Previously it's been going far too slowly, but with this government and the commitment national pest-management strategy and an independent agency being set up, it is going faster. The national pest-management strategy will coordinate the response to kauri dieback over the next decade. While the new independent agency, as yet unnamed, will be in charge of seeing it implemented. We're looking to have that plan in effect by mid-2019. But the Tree Council says nothing but forest closure will make a difference. We're supposed to have a Labour, Green, New Zealand First Government here that gets it, and they're not doing anything. It's about time we saw some action. And making excuses about this new national pest-management plan is going to solve all our problems it's frankly just bullshit. Auckland Council voted to introduce a Controlled Area Notice over the Waitakere and Hunua Ranges in May. People can still enter the forest, but must make sure they don't bring any soil in ` for example, on shoes. Stopping the movement of dirt is the most effective way to stop kauri dieback spreading, so cleaning stations have been set up at key points in the forest. When an enforcement officer is on patrol, compliance has been around 99%. When the compliance officers aren't there, because we have many tracks ` we can't be everywhere at once ` our cameras show that compliance is patchy. The council is working with MPI on new legislation to enforce the use of the cleaning stations. If we were able to fine people for not following the Controlled Area Notice, that would be a much quicker, easier, and probably more effective way of managing that compliance. But the Tree Council says that won't help. Cleaning stations are pointless, because the spray ` the trigene/sterigene disinfectant does not kill the oospore. The oospore is one of the life stages of the kauri dieback pathogen. You can spread this disease in a pinhead of soil. If your shoes are not so clean that you'd lick them, then they're not clean enough. Auckland council also introduced a targeted rate for the environment in May. It will help provide more than $100 million over the next decade to combat kauri dieback. We will see things like boardwalks in areas that are particularly close to kauri trees. Sometimes it will just mean re-rooting a track away from the kauri trees, and then in other areas we'll have much better surfacing so that you can't move that mud. Unfortunately there's no cure, but we can develop building knowledge and tools to make sure that we reduce the impact and reduce the spread of the disease. Injections of the chemical phosphite can slow down the disease. It works by boosting the trees immune system, which help it fight the disease. But phosphite is only a temporary measure and doesn't stop the disease from spreading. We know already that it affects rewarewa and tanekaha, and that it hides, cryptically, without causing symptoms, in pine forest and pasture. But it's important to note that none of those species were significantly impacted. Nevertheless, we are investing huge sums of money ` in terms of extensive field trials to find whether other plant species, beside kauri, can host the disease. Cross-species infection happened in Australia, with what used to be called Jarrah dieback, a similar disease. Subsequently, we've discovered that Jarrah's actually quite resistant to the pathogen, but many other species are very susceptible. Professor Hardy says they've found ways to eradicate the disease. So, we've actually looked at removing all plants from small areas and making the area fallow for a period. The pathogens tend to need a living host in order to live, so they die quite quickly. Within two years of fallowing we can actually start to rehabilitate. But MPI says laying waste to infected kauri forest is not on the cards. There could be spot eradicated in individual trees, but unfortunately the current signs indicate that it's impossible to totally eradicate the pathogen from a kauri forest ` hence the reason why we're focusing our attention on building origin tools to reduce its impact. Ashcroft admits MPI just doesn't have the money to do all the research it needs. It would help if we could have more funding available. Currently we're investing about $800,000 a year. We're making good value of that money, but there's always opportunities for further investment. There's some hope that a resistant strain of kauri will be found, but just 1% of pre-human kauri survived being logged by settlers, while another 3% has been grown from those survivors. So the chances of having 1%, or even 4%, of the gene pool providing a resistant strain to a disease that has arrived in the last few decades, and that is killing kauri just like that, is pretty minimal to the point of highly unlikely. In Australia, the devastation caused by dieback has seen some healthy forests put into long-term quarantine. So we selected these priority sites that we think can be protectable and quarantined for the next 50-100 years. This is what Te Kawerau a Maki hopes to achieve with its new treaty claim ` I can't solve the country's problems. I can't solve the last 10 years of inaction, but we want to focus on getting it right here. And we really, really need the community to work with us to protect something that we all equally value. We can't do it by ourselves. This isn't just about Kawerau. This is about all of us together. In response to Newshub Nation's queries the government spokesperson says Biosecurity Minister, Damnien O'Connor, and Conservation Minister, Eugenie Sage, will meet with Te Kawerau a Maki in the next few weeks. Stay with us. We're back after the break. Welcome back. And we're with our panel. Now this week, it was announced that Jami-Lee Ross is standing down to deal with some personal health issues. Did Simon Bridges make a tricky situation worse, Ben, by describing the issue as 'embarrassing'? The short answer is 'Yes, he did.' He could have gone for a word like 'sensitive'. A better option would have been to not have a stand up about it, just put out a statement between him and maybe Jami-Lee Ross saying that the MP was taking some time out for some personal health reasons. That draws a line under it, says that we don't really need to inquire about this. We can trust the leader's judgment, and we can move on. I think it's a bit symptomatic of some of the things that Simon Bridges has been doing wrong, which is forgetting that he's just the Opposition leader and realising that his issues aren't the most important issues in the New Zealand political landscape. We don't need to know every detail of leaks from the National Party caucus. We don't need a grand inquisitorial inquiry. And this just takes the focus off what he should be doing as leader. So, Russel, as a previous co-leader, I mean, it's not such a big deal for an Opposition MP to take time off. No, I mean, obviously, he made a meal of it, I mean, very plainly. Cos it's a pretty simple thing to deal with. But it wasn't just the one stand up, was it? He called a second stand up to say he shouldn't have used the word 'embarrassing'. And if that's not digging yourself a hole, I don't know what is. And the use of the word 'embarrassing' suggests it's a behavioural issue, rather than a health issue, wouldn't you think? We don't know what the issue is. (CHUCKLES NERVOUSLY) Yeah, we're not going to go there, but it was embarrassing that Simon Bridges used 'embarrassing'. That was embarrassing. He just` He just made a meal of it. There's agreement on that. So this comes at the same time as the investigation into who leaked Bridges' travel expenses, which is not related to the Jami-Lee Ross situation, but that's been widened. So, Emma, wouldn't that story have been over if Simon Bridges hadn't even bothered with the inquiry in the first place? Yes, I think it probably would have died a fairly quick death. He's clearly very worried about disloyalty in the party. And now, as you say, he's wanted to expand it. But I think, you know, it was a bit surprising that that travel expenses information isn't publicly available anyway. I don't see, really, what the big deal about the expenses themselves is. Then does anybody really care who this leaker is? Isn't this just part of the political shenanigans? There's always a temptation. We've seen the prime minister saying that there'll be an investigation into who leaked an early copy of the Meka Whaitiri report. And there's always a temptation to know who's the mole, who's been talking behind your back. But it's the same as getting an offer from somebody to tell you what your friends really say about you when you're not there. It's tempting, but you should always resist that temptation, because nothing good can come of finding out. In your experience, Russel, is it hard to keep a lid on everybody? Ah, I don't think you've got to keep a lid on everybody. I mean, you know, like, if you've got a healthy caucus room, then generally you don't have a lot of problems. So you're suggesting that this is not a healthy caucus room? Well, I mean, it's` you know, he's clearly got a few problems. I mean, there's no question about that. Do you think this is the end of Simon Bridges as leader? I think it's a bit early for that. He's got problems, clearly. And you know, what's his bigger problem? His bigger problem is he's chasing every car that's passing and barking at every hubcap, and he's not telling a bigger story about what does the National Party stand for? What's their metanarrative? You know, what is it all about? And that's, kind of, what he needs to be doing. Ben, he's had lots of opportunities. The government's given him lots of ammunition. Is he firing? Or is he out? Look, he's performing well in some of the Opposition roles. He's doing well in the House. He's getting out, and he's meeting the country, but he seems, just recently, to be unable to shift the focus on to the government, on to the cost of living, on to the problems that this coalition has and away from really trivial internal National Party matters. OK, well, let's just move on to the issue raised by John-Michael Swannix ` the kauri dieback. So, Emma, Forest & Bird and Tree Council iwi are all calling for the tracks to be closed. Australia's done this. Could be something that we go down? Well, there doesn't seem to be any cure, does there? And that's a very worrying thing about our kauri forests. I guess, to close it? We've got to do what we can to save these precious giants. We know that humans are the biggest culprits. But soil's also going to be moved around by livestock, by pigs. It's not just human feet, is it, Russel? That's true, but there's some things we can control, and some things are harder to control. And I mean, you know, those cleaning stations that you go through? I mean, clearly that's not going to work. So, yeah, we need to take a precautionary approach and close access for the greater good of all of us to look after those trees. Russel, do you think the Greens are active enough on this? It's very hard to know. Obviously, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes. One would hope that in the very near future, they make some decisive decisions and actually make MPI, you know, get off the couch and actually start being much more active in this space. Just quickly, Ben, I was just wondering whether` there's a treaty claim coming out of this. It seems` I mean, is that frivolous or is that a serious thing? I think it's serious for the iwi, for Te Kawerau a Maki. It's not the best forum for dealing with it ` five historians and a Maori Land Court judge, you know, asking witnesses and learning about botany in real time. This is the sort of thing, actually, in terms of treaty grievances` contemporary claims, that Minister Kelvin Davis, with his new Maori-Crown relationship office, could actually be getting involved with his colleagues and saying, 'Look, there isn't anything in our settlement agreement with the iwi that covers this. 'But, you know, are there ways that they could be better involved in the management of the Waitakeres?' All right. Ben Thomas, Russel Norman, thank you very much for your time this morning. Well, National Party MP Melissa Lee joined us on Facebook Live this week to discuss being the first Korean woman to hold elected office outside of Korea, as well as her thoughts on how Simon Bridges is going as leader. We also asked her about her role in the Clare Curran saga. To the Minister ` what government business has she conducted via her Gmail account? To the best of my recollection, um,... uh,... I haven't` I haven't used my` I've answered` No, I don't have any regrets, because I think the question that I asked was very valid, and it was a very straight question ` what government business did she use her personal Gmail address to do? And I don't think that's a nasty question. I've just been doing my job, asking the questions that I needed to ask and discovering more information. And we've actually ended up with the result that we had. And particularly because, I mean, I guess, the minister should have learned from Carol Hirschfeld's issue and what happened then. And it looks like she actually did not learn from that experience. And we've got the issue of the CTO ` you know, the meeting with Derek Handley was never declared. The thing is that we all make mistakes. And the issue with that is that, you know, she did that in front of the whole nation, I guess. You know, on Parliament TV and, eventually, on, I guess, news as well, so, you know, everyone got to see her falling apart. And I feel for her. And that's all from us for now. Thank you for watching, and we'll see you again next weekend. Captions by Shrutika Gunanayagam, Ella Wheeler and Elizabeth Welsh. www.able.co.nz Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2018