Today on Newshub Nation ` with four days to go before a strike by nearly 50,000 New Zealand teachers, will there be any last minute deal from Education Minister Chris Hipkins? Bereaved by the Christchurch mosque attacks, how ACC rules have caused one family further suffering. The Minister responds. And will he or won't he? We talk to National Party's potential renegade MP Alfred Ngaro. Kia ora, good morning. I'm Simon Shepherd. Welcome to Newshub Nation. Trevor Mallard created a frenzy this week when he told media there was a serial sex offender working in parliament. His comments came after an independent review uncovered a toxic culture in parliament, including bullying and allegations of sexual assault. The allegations are now with police, and a staff member has been stood down. Finance Minister Grant Robertson announced this week the government will relax its self-imposed 20% debt cap, to enable higher spending from 2021. The new aim will be to keep net Crown debt between 15-25% of GDP. National's Amy Adams has called the move a blunt admission the government can't manage its books. And the launch of a new political party, Coalition NZ, came on Thursday, following months of speculation. Controversial church leader Hannah Tamaki will lead the party. She said it will not be a Christian party, but it will be built on strong family values ` although she would not specify policies. One thing she did offer, however, was an open invitations to Christian MP Alfred Ngaro to leave the National Party and join her, so I asked him if that was something that he would consider. Look, I wish them well. They've obviously made a decision. They've been considering that decision for some time. I've always said, quite clearly, that this has been organic. I didn't make that announcement. That wasn't a party launch last Friday. That was a moment in which obviously the media dropped speculation about what was happening. The truth is though, Simon, people have been talking to me for some time ` talking about the concerns that they have with the current government's arrangements, and out of that those conversations have come to a point where people have said, 'Well, maybe it is an option to set up a party.' So has Coalition New Zealand jumped in ahead of you? Have they stolen your limelight? Look, I'm not about race. This is not a race, and I think people will know that any form of politics ` it's a long game not a short game. Although yesterday Hannah Tamaki said, 'Alfred Ngaro, come and join us.' They extended an olive branch. Do you want to join them? Well, I'm focussing on the things that are really important to me. You've got to remember, and I want to assure you, that I'm part of a team. I'm a National Party list MP. This morning I was seeing constituents as well, so I've got to make sure that I'm focussing on that task as well ` first and foremost. OK, well, will you rule that out then? Well, the thing is that I'm focussing on those, and there will be opportunities where lots of people are coming to talk to me, and, like I said, people` I've got invitations now to talk. I've had no phone calls and that. That just happened yesterday, so for my mind, stick to the task. I'm doing my role as a` performing my role as a National list MP and at the same time having lots of conversations. Do you` I mean, they want you to come along and say that you're looking for a home, but do you think there's enough space for two faith-based parties in parliament` Well, if` ...or even to run at the election? Yeah, well, if you think that at the history of New Zealand, as far as faith-based or values-based organisations or parties that have been there, they've often formed coalitions if they're to make it there. You can think about in 1996 ` you've got the Christian Democrats with Graeme Lee and then you also have Christian Heritage,` But they've been` ...so the way forward is to, actually, you would have to form a form of a coalition collectively together. Right, so that's a possibility, say with the Coalition New Zealand, then? You're not ruling that off the table? Well, the only two parties that are here on the table that we know of is the New Conservatives and this now Coalition Party. I don't have a party, as I said. Last Friday there were conversations` So hand on heart, I don't have a constitution. I haven't been planning a party. What I've been having is people coming to me, and I've been humbled, Simon, by the conversations that people have said. That actually this is something that maybe we should consider. Yes. Well, obviously you have to be considering it, otherwise you wouldn't be sitting here talking to me. You must be quite serious about this. I've gone on the record, and I've said that I am considering it. Yeah, so what's the time frame? Well, I think it's something` I want to be really clear and careful that I don't... I'm loyal to the party, and I think that's really important. I don't disrupt the direction of what they're doing as well. So that time frame's going to have to be fairly soon. What makes you think that there's a place for a faith-based party in government ` where everything seems to be based on evidence, in terms of decision-making? Well, faith is evidence as well. It's the value system that people have, and so when people act out of it, you can't say their faith doesn't have evidence. It's actually the evidence of the values that people have in the way they exercise them. But faith is belief. It's not a scientific evidence. That's right. That's right, and so you and I would say that, for instance, when we say that we show love, care and compassion ` well, that's faith that you and I have, right? We believe in each other. We believe in the people around us that they would act justly, kindly and caringly. Those things are really important. Well, that's values-based decision-making, isn't it? But here's the evidence, right? If you don't have a principle to act on, then the actions that you take is the evidence of those beliefs. You and I know that when we see people who don't act with kindness, who don't act justly, then that's the evidence that there's a lack of principles. So you can't divorce them. You can't just say that, 'Well, here's evidence, and here's faith or here's some values.' You and I act every day, in this nation, around this country, everybody acts with a set of principles. That's what drives us. OK, so you've been a National MP for eight years. You say you're trying to carry on doing that role faithfully. But what's going wrong with the party in order for you to want to do this? Is it just people saying, 'Come and do it, Alfred?' Or is there actually something wrong with National that's forcing you to consider this option? So there's nothing wrong with National at all. What's happened is that people are talking about the decisions that are being made by this current government. Let's think about some of the three core issues. At the moment ` and, yep, they're conscience issues ` but euthanasia, End of Life Choice Bill ` what people are terming as the 'Kill Bill'. We've got 38,100 submissions ` the largest in 165 years of government. 90%` We've got lawyers, we've got doctors saying, 'This is wrong.' You've got a wave of concern around a conscience issue, but that has been driven by one side. The predominance of that private member's bill has come from Maryan Street, and before then it has always been a left-leaning Labour approach towards how we see the end of life. So you believe out there on issues like end of life, abortion law reform, maybe even cannabis, there is a wave to ride into power? Well, Simon, I don't need to believe it's out there; it is out there. You say that you've got people approaching you, there's all these issues that this is riding on, but is it more a political thing where Simon Bridges says he's giving you space to consider your options ` National didn't have a coalition partner to get into power last time. Has that party, has National, asked you openly or quietly, to do this? So the long answer is no. That's the short answer. (LAUGHS) Well, the thing is that it is no. This has not come out of the National Party. There is no one in the leadership that's turned around and said, 'Hey, we should consider this.' So they're happy for you to do this though? Well, put it this way ` they've asked me, and` Look, I'm really thankful. I'm grateful that the fact is that they've given me space, and I've been to Simon, and Simon ` as he declared ` that I went to see him. In fact, I went to him two months ago, just to say to him, 'Look, people are coming to see me and talk.' I want to be respectful to his role of leadership` So who are these people, who are the backers? Well, they're` (CHUCKLES) Well, these are people that are coming from community. These are people who are leaders, and they're not just Christian people. Here's a good example, the lawnmower man who turned around and said to one of my family members, 'Oh, that guy that comes to your house ` is he a family member?' I said yes. 'Well, I tell you what, tell him that I might not be a Christian, but I'll vote for him.' The guy on the side of the road who's the road-markings ` the stop-go sign, who turned around at a cafe and said to me, 'You're Alfred.' And I said, 'yes'. 'I may not be a Christian, but I'd vote for you. Why? 'Because of the values that you have that I think are really important that are roading in our country.' If you do this, are you going to take other National MPs with you? No. Just going to be you? Well, put it this way ` I'm not going to go and actually take people away from what their roles are. People are free to choose, to make their choices. I'm not seeking to divide the party. I'm not seeking to distract from the party, and if it means that, for instance, even when I was speaking down at the LNI Conference last Sunday, I withdrew myself. Why? Because no one person is bigger than the party. OK. Can I ask you` It hasn't really been a stellar week for you. You've had to apologise for a couple of missteps about sharing a Facebook post linked to abortion and saying, 'No woman has been made to feel like a criminal.' Do you really think you're a safe pair of hands to lead a new party? You know, leadership is about having humility as well. None of us are perfect. I think what people are looking for in leadership is the ability to say, 'Look, if you've made a mistake, what's wrong with saying no?' Are we going to judge people by the fact this is that they're not willing to be humble? If they're not willing to say, 'Actually I've made a mistake.' Is that how you and I want leadership? We demand integrity in this nation. You demand integrity. What does integrity mean to you? If you've made a mistake, if I've made a mistake, would you not want me to own up to that? So you're big enough to own up to mistakes? Absolutely. But let's see this, OK. The mistake was the fact that it was posted. The intent didn't read through it, and it talked about the Holocaust and the event there. I am the Chairperson of the Israeli Parliamentary Friendship Group. I speak at the Holocaust events as well. I also too have descendancy where my great-grandmother was the daughter of a Polish Jew. I would not be intently doing anything, but a mistake was made. I own it, and that's there. OK, well, let's see if you own this. Will you confirm right now that at the next election you're going to be leading a faith-based party? I can't confirm that. Why can't you do that? Now is the time to do that. Well, Simon, when you say you're considering, that's what consideration means. If you say you're planning, then that's different. So what are you doing here right now? If it wasn't serious, you wouldn't be sitting here talking to me. I tell you what I'm serious about. I want to clarify things. OK, that's really important. I want to clarify the fact is that where my position is. OK? People have been coming in, and I chose to come here, as opposed to some of the other programmes by the way, because I wanted to have a conversation like this, so we could actually talk through what those issues are. They're coming to me and saying, 'When are we going to have a voice for our values 'in the House of Representatives?' And when are you going to answer them? Well, Simon, here's the thing ` I've got a political career that I've been a part of for eight years. I've got a family, also I've got a party that I've been hugely grateful and thankful for. That's not something that you make lightly. I did not make that announcement last Friday, by the way. These were just conversations that people were having` So the ball's in your court now, and you're not giving us an answer` The ball is in my court. No, what I'm telling you is, 'Watch this space.' OK. Rest assured, I'm not going to leave people hanging. I think that's really important. OK. Alfred Ngaro, thank you very much for your time. All right. Well, in big news out of the UK, Theresa May has resigned as British Prime Minister. So we're going to cross live now to our Europe Correspondent Lloyd Burr. Lloyd, bring us up to speed. What happened? Yeah. Well, she came out of the door at Number 10, we're outside of Number 10, she came out of that door ` it would have been late last night New Zealand time ` and she announced her resignation. She says she'll stand down as the leader of the Conservative Party on June 7th. She will stay on as caretaker Prime Minister until a replacement is found. Now she gave a six-minute speech, and in that speech she gave she talked about her deep regret of not managing to pull-off Brexit, not managing to deliver Brexit. She said whoever replaces her is going to have to work really hard to get cross-party support, and her advice to them was to compromise ` to try and find some kind of compromise. As she finished, though, she was overcome with emotion. She said it's been an absolute privilege to serve the country she loves. She got very emotional, became quite teary and turned around and walked away. Well, why now? Why has she resigned now? Well, it's essentially the Brexit stalemate has come to a head. It's been going on for a while, about six months this has been building up. And the back benches, the head of the back benches, the number-crunches, if you like, sort of gave her an ultimatum, saying, 'You've got to leave or we're going to change the Party rules to force you out.' She saw the writing on the wall, and so she decided to resign. So what's this set the scene for now? A dirty fight within the Conservatives to find out who's going to be the new leader? Yeah, so the Brexit negotiations, the Brexit process, kind of gets put on the back-burner as a whole lot of people in the Tory Party are going to have to fight for the leadership. And there are a lot of them. We're not just talking one or two. There are a lot of them. The front runner is Boris Johnson, the former mayor of London, the former foreign secretary. He's out there as the front runner, if you're looking at some of the Ladbrokes or any of the other betting agencies over here. He's out there as the front runner. Behind him, you've got the likes of Dominic Raab. Dominic Raab's the former Brexit secretary. He's the one who quit despite being the one who negotiated a deal earlier. You've got Michael Gove, who's a very loyal minister to Theresa May. He's currently Environment Secretary. A very loyal supporter. He was in the leadership race back in 2016. You've got Andrea Leadsom. She's also a very loyal minister She's the latest minister to quit. She was the 36th minister to quit. She quit just a few days ago. And then there are nine other contenders, so there are a lot of contenders. It's going to be a bitter race, and for someone like me, it's going to be quite a fun race to report on. OK, and if Brexit could get even more of a shambles, it has. Lloyd Burr, thank you very much for your time. And if you've got something to say about what you see on our show, please let us know. We're on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. NewshubNationNZ. Our Twitter panel this week is former mayoral candidate Mark Thomas and Newshub reporter Laura Tupou. They're using the #NewshubNZ or you can email us at nation@mediaworks.co.nz. The address is on your screen right now. But up next ` Education Minister Chris Hipkins and his message to teachers before Wednesday's mega-strike. Plus ` a young woman forced to pay child support for a baby conceived by rape receives a response from IRD Minister Stuart Nash. For the first time in New Zealand history, all state and integrated schools will strike together on Wednesday. The action comes after talks failed to secure an offer acceptable to the 50,000 affected teachers and principals. So I asked Chris Hipkins if he had a last-minute deal to stop the strike going ahead. Oh, look, we're gonna continue talking to the teachers right up to the point of the strike action. If we can avoid strike action, of course we would like to do that. We've been very clear, though, that, you know, with $1.2 billion on the table and a $10,000 pay rise for most teachers on the table, we think that that's as far as we can go in terms of putting more money in their pay packets in this pay round. But we also recognise that for many teachers, this is about more than just pay, and they're raising a whole lot of other issues that they also want us to address. Well, let's talk about pay. I mean, they want a package ` between them all ` of, like, $3.9 billion. It seems you guys are, like, a universe apart. Is there no more money to just get this done? We've been really clear that for salaries, there isn't any more money on the table, and there's not going to be, but there are many other issues that teachers are raising. We know that there are more kids in classrooms that have additional learning needs, for example, and we do need to do more in that area. We know that there are big workload issues that teachers are grappling with, and we need to do more in that area. So we'll keep talking to them about how we can address those issues, but in terms of the pay round, we've been pretty clear that, you know, $1.2 billion is what there is. The Crown had a surplus in the March figures of $2.5 billion, and the teachers are gonna be looking at that and going, 'Look, there's some money.' Well, look, I don't think teachers will put their hands up to take a pay cut if the surplus were to go down. You can't base your decisions about pay negotiations based on government surpluses, because actually, every other workforce in the public sector is looking at that money as well. We've gotta look at what's sustainable. We've also got a number of other big workforces ` nurses will be back in bargaining next year. We've got doctors in bargaining. You'll have police back in bargaining next year, and we do have to think about ` what are sustainable pay rises across the public service? Teachers are right at the top of those. You know, they are being offered some of the biggest pay rises across the broader public sector. Secondary principals now have a pay claim as well. Are you fearful that you're going to see another strike on your hands from them? Look, we'll go into those negotiations in good faith. - The secondary-teacher bar` secondary-principal bargaining ` sorry, I should say ` just getting underway, and we need to let that take its course. You talk about this pay round. What about next pay round? Is that one of the reasons that the government's decided to loosen its debt cap ` to create more money, to be able to borrow more money to be able to make these kind of pay rounds work? Oh, look, I'm not going to pre-empt the next pay round before we've even concluded this pay round, but I've always been very clear with the teachers as long as I have been doing this job for the Labour Party ` and that was five years in opposition as well ` that they need to think about their pay strategy over every pay cycle and not just a big action roughly every 15 years when there's a Labour government. But so this mega strike that's coming up on Wednesday, I mean, that's hundreds of thousands of children, parents affected. Do you understand what kind of effect that this is going to have for families? Well, look, I know that this'll have a big impact for families. I don't think that the strike action is justified. As I said, you know, the pay rise on the table now over the next two years is worth an average of $10,000 to the majority of teachers. So that is a pretty sizeable pay increase. It's $1.2 billion` Yeah, but` ...and actually, parents are also saying that they want the government to get serious about mental health; they want the government to properly fund district health boards so that the hospitals that they go to are well funded and well resourced. They also want us to deal with the housing shortage and the housing crisis. They want us to lift children out of poverty. We need to be able to do all of those things. But how long can you let this drag on for? Because, you know, one of these pay negotiations has been going on for more than 18 months. Yeah, look, we continue to negotiate. We went to the Employment Relations Authority late last year. The Employment Relations Authority, in fact, said to the primary school teachers at the time that they thought the government's offer was very competitive. 'Handsome and competitive' was how they described it. And so we're doing everything that we can. And you've gone back there now? I mean, there's new, urgent talks on the table, isn't there? That's right. We are doing everything that we can to continue to sit around the table to try and resolve the issues that the teachers are raising. But obviously, you know, any government ` whether it's our government or any other government ` is always gonna have a limit to the amount of money that they can put on the table in any given pay round. OK, Let's talk about this week in Parliament ` haven't really seen anything like this before with allegations of bullying, harassment, sexual assault. How surprised were you at the findings of the Francis report? Look, I think Parliament has come a long way over the last 20 or 30 years in terms of changing its culture, being more representative of all New Zealanders, but we've still got a long way to go. And I think the Francis Report clearly highlights that. We need to change the culture around this place. We need to create a much more people-friendly environment, and clearly, you know, there are some big areas for improvement. You've been here, what, almost 10 years, 10-and-a-half years? Have you been involved, have you seen, have you experienced bullying and harassment of this nature? Look, I wouldn't say that I have been the victim of bullying. I have seen people treating other people inappropriately and unfairly. Now, let's just be clear about thi. You know, in a democratic system of government, like we have here in New Zealand, an adversarial approach is built into it. You know, it's designed to be adversarial, and that is going to create conflict. There's a difference between legitimate conflict, legitimate scrutiny, legitimate accountability and bullying. And, you know, certainly, the staff` the interactions that some MPs have with staff, the interactions that some staff would have with each other ` they're not OK, and we need to be really clear in saying that. You can be adversarial; you can do your job in a democratic system without treating people as abysmally as some people around here have been treated. It's also been described as a very high-intensity workload. I mean, you're a father; you've got to manage your family as well as this. I mean, how hard is it to be able to do the job? Oh, look, it's a tough job. MPs are away from their homes a lot. I'm lucky in one sense, in that ` as a Wellington MP ` I get to go home every night to my family. I think everybody, you know, who's working who has a family struggles with this. I think MPs particularly, given the lengths of time they spend away from their families, do really struggle with that. OK, but what changes do you think should be made within Parliament, both for staff and members, to make it more family-friendly? Well, I think that the Francis report again sets out some good recommendations around how we can improve the culture of this place. And what recommendations do you like? Well, I think, you know, having a single point of contact or various points of contact for people who are feeling bullied or feeling harassed so that they know where they can go to get extra help. We've been working for some time to make this place a bit more family-friendly. I think it humanises Parliament a bit more, and I think we've made real advances in that in recent years, and there's more that we can do there too. So do you think we need a wider review, like the Francis report, but for the wider public service? Do you think this kind of culture exists out there? Look, I think any workplace is going to have challenges if they have a culture that allows bullying. Now, without going through every different department or agency, I can't say where that might exist, but my message to every chief executive in the public service is ` my expectation of them is that they will ensure that their workplace is not one of those workplaces that has that type of culture. OK, it's Budget week, and Finance Minister Grant Robertson has been looking around for extra cash, and he's taken $197 million from the tertiary-education policy ` the fees-free policy. Why not just give that to the teachers? Well, when we set up the fees-free policy, we deliberately budgeted conservatively, because it's very difficult when you're introducing a new policy like that to understand the behaviour and effects of that. You know, enrolments could've gone up significantly; they might not have. And, you know, you've gotta be conservative. You have to make sure that the money is there if you need it. We knew that we were probably gonna get some money back from that. That money is going to go back into tertiary education, particularly into vocational education, where we know that our polytechs have been scaling back, where we know we've got critical skill shortages in areas like building and construction. So that money is still going into education, and it's going into an area where we've also got a very pressing need. With this tertiary policy, I mean, the Labour policy was to roll out three years and the second and third year by 2024. Has that gone? No, that hasn't gone. That continues to be the Labour Party's policy. Of course, it's a coalition government, so everything is` So you can't commit to that post the next election ` is that what you're saying? Well, what I'm saying is ` we'll go into the next election campaign with a very clear policy. Under this government where it's a coalition government, the commitment that we made in this term was to introduce the first year free, which is what we have done. And, you know, beyond the next election, of course, that's gonna depend on the outcome of the election. OK, finally, one last word to the teachers and the pupils and the parents who are going to be the subject of this strike this week ` I mean, what would you say to them? I would say that this strike isn't necessary, that we are hearing the concerns of teachers. We are committed to addressing them. We have given teachers a very significant pay offer ` the largest that they've had in over a decade. In fact, it's worth more than all of the other pay offers that they've had over the last decade put together, and we're also committed to working on the other issues that they're raising. Education Minister Chris Hipkins, thanks very much for your time. Thank you. Well, earlier this month, we told the story of a woman forced to pay child support after becoming pregnant by rape at just 15. Well, the IRD stopped demanded payment in March. It said it couldn't legally refund the thousands collected from the young mum, so she called on the government to change the law. Here's Mike Wesley-Smith with their response. MIKE WESLEY-SMITH: It was both brave and difficult for Grace to speak publicly of the night she was sexually assaulted. DISTORTED: Grace's mother, Tamara, took over care of the baby. Because Grace was too frightened to put her attackers name on the birth certificate, it meant Grace was required to pay child support. Each letter from IRD ` a painful reminder. Since 2011, Grace and Tamara have made repeated approaches to IRD, asking them to stop taking the money, but it still went on. DISTORTED: Finally in March, the payments ceased, but the law did not allow IRD to refund Grace what she had already paid. Tamara then contacted Newshub Nation, and we put her concerns to Revenue Minister Stuart Nash. Turned out Grace was not alone. When I first became the minister of revenue, I received three letters which really distressed me, and these were from women who had conceived as a result of rape, and then were being charged` sorry, chased by IRD to pay child support. IRD officials told the minister that the law as it stands means there was little they could do. So I said we've got to change this law, because these women are` you know, they've been through absolute hell, and to be chased for child support was just wrong. Under a new tax bill expected to pass through Parliament by the end of next month, Grace will be able to apply to the IRD Commissioner for a full refund. A reward for persistent ` and a reminder of what can come from ` courage. So what I would say to those three who wrote and to other people out there is ` it is worth writing to ministers with these sorts of things, because it does make a difference. A good result. This week Finance Minister Grant Robertson delivers the government's first-ever Wellbeing Budget, so Newshub Nation will be on-air this Thursday as it happens with a one-hour Budget special from 2pm with expert analysis of what it all means for you. But up next ` has the Christchurch terrorist attack uncovered a major failure in the ACC system? Plus ` it's been a week like no other in Parliament. We have a look at what happened in the House. Welcome back. So far, ACC has rejected 52 requests for mental health assistance related to the Christchurch mosque attacks. The reason ` because there was no physical injury and the emotional trauma didn't happen at work. ACC lawyer Warren Forster has received many calls for help from these victims, and one of these was Yama Nabi, whose father was killed at Al Noor Mosque. Now, a warning ` Yama is going to talk about events that triggered his mental distress, which could be upsetting for some viewers. Yama Nabi and Warren Forster, thank you very much for your time this morning. Yama, let's cut to that day; let's talk about that day. You were late for prayers. You arrived at the mosque straight after the attack. At what point did you see your father's body? I was with my daughter, going toward the mosque. Then the people were saying there was a shooting, so I went just Riccarton Rd and Deans Ave and stopped the car, and I asked, 'What's going on?' The guy said there's a shooting at the mosque. So I had to leave my daughter at the car, gave her the key. Then I ran toward the mosque, and on the footpath, bodies were lying and on the driveway. And you can see at the entrance of the mosque, it wasn't a good state. No. Yeah. And so you had to find your father. Yes, finding Dad, and then the officers wouldn't allow anyone to go any more further. Right. Yes. And I understand that you also saw the live stream of this attack. Yes, to find what happened and... I've been watching it couple of times just to find Dad, where he was. Were he there at` Was he at the mosque? Was he not at the mosque? Cos people were telling me Dad had helped people escape. Right. But I came to the end, and my heart was telling, 'No, Dad's not... He's not alive.' Mm. But you had to subject yourself to that to find the answers. Had to watch, and the brothers has. You know, every loved one wants to find out where their loved one is. Your family had cultural ceremonies to perform after your father's death, so like washing and dressing your father's body. Did that actually happen? It was delayed, then the family, the brothers got together. Yeah, the men, the brothers did. I had to walk out after five minutes. And it was delayed, was it, did you say? Delayed because of the crime scene and more investigation, so... They had all the evidence, so they don't need to investigate too much. What effect did that delay have on you and the family? Every loved one wanted their father to be buried in peace, you know, and the fact that, you know, my mum, my brothers and the whole community, they've lost a loved one. And your father, for the wider family, he had a special role in the lives of your children, didn't he? He had this` Being a... Like a hero, you know ` his role model as a father, as a role-model grandfather. So, mm, like, he bought the grandchildren... You know, give them love, give them hug, take them out and teach them. As a family, how did you cope with the grief of losing your father? Did you have the children take time off school? Did you have to take time off work? Took off work, and it hurt a lot to lose a father that gave you love, brought you up. I wish he was here and see the grandchildren grow up ` education, learn ` and see them become someone, get married; you know, for their grandchildren. I mean, for me being a father, I can't answer. You know, they ask me something, and I can't answer them. That's pretty hard for me. And obviously, as a father and as a senior figure in the family, you have to lead the way now. You have to, sort of, take on those patriarchal duties. Yes, correct, but it is hard for me. Yup. You know, as the oldest son, it is hard for me to do that as father, you know. Mm. And what about in the weeks following? Did you have to go back to work? Or was there any assistance for you to take time off? The company, you know, been helpful; they want me to have time off and change my position. But I just wanted, you know, just... It's very quick. It seems like two months been over. Doesn't seem like two months through the tragedy; it's just been like two weeks for me. And what about help from ACC? When did you ask for help? And did you get any? After the tragedy, you know, once I left Dad in peace, the family, you know, I went to my doctor, and then asked for help from ACC. And they said that, 'Unite with your family,' and they said, 'You're not a victim.' So despite all you'd been through, the mental stress, trauma, they said you weren't eligible? No, because I'm not the victim. You know... What did you think of that? What I've seen... What I've seen, and they haven't seen it. Like, what can you say to them? The only thing I said was, 'Thank you very much for your help.' What can you say? You can't take your anger toward, you now, human being to anyone. You can't take your anger what happened, the tragedies, so I just say, 'Thank you.' That was... The last thing you want to say is thank you. So you thanked them for not being eligible? OK. I'm going to bring in you here, Warren. So, you've dealt with ACC quite a bit, and you've also had these calls from people like Yama. How common are these stories? Unfortunately all too common. I used to spend a large part of my day talking to people who have experienced trauma through one mechanism or another, and everyone needs the same thing. Everyone needs help. Everyone needs our system to respond in a way that cares, but they don't get that, and, I must say, it's a very disheartening experience as a lawyer to be talking to people, telling them that the system doesn't work and doesn't deliver what's needed. And we went through this with the Christchurch earthquake; we went through this with Pike River. These are not new experiences for people. There's thousands of people that experience trauma from sexual assault and family violence each year, and every one of those people needs us to help, and unfortunately our system doesn't actually respond in a way that's effective. So, I mean, you want ACC expanded to include mental injury, not just physical injury, is that right? Yes, I'm actually working with the Law Foundation on a massive project to expand ACC out to cover all impairments, so it doesn't matter if it's mental health, physical health, cancer, what have you. Everyone needs the same thing, but when you look at how a physical injury is responded to, we jump in at the beginning; we fix your broken leg. We don't say, 'Let's wait for a few months and see what happens. 'If you get worse, then we'll amputate it.' That's not how our system works. Everyone understands the physical injury, but people don't understand and have a good way of responding to mental injury. Treasury has looked at this before, and one of the numbers for reforming ACC to include this kind of thing is like $4.3 billion. How can we afford to do this? Well, my message is we can't afford not to. What we see at the moment is cost shifting. Cost is shifted from ACC to the health and welfare system, and then on to individual families. What we see here with Yama and his family is exactly that. The cost doesn't go away. It just gets shifted around, and what we need to do is innovate how we fund, and ACC is a fantastic example. Its return on investment in recent years is between three and four billion dollars. The total cost of all its entitlements is between three and four billion dollars. That's a fantastic model. We can use a sovereign wealth fund and return on investment to fund the expansion. We just need to innovate how we fund. So you say it's doable? Absolutely, it's doable. We just need a plan, and we need agreement and consensus politically, and we need leadership. You talk about how the government transfers these costs elsewhere and they get absorbed by the system. Isn't that what they're doing right now, because the government has just announced that MSD will pay for mental health care of Christchurch mosque victims in lieu of ACC. So, first of all, Yama, have you received any help from the Ministry of Social Development over this? Only victim support. No extra money to take time off work or anything like that? Not from the government. Have you applied for anything like that with the ministry or been made aware of that? No. OK, are they just` Warren, why are they doing it that way? I don't know why they're doing it that way. They could change the law very quickly. It's very easy to amend the statute and put in a provision that says in these circumstances, people who suffer trauma will be covered, but they haven't. We've had the firearms law change, but we aren't actually addressing what's going on in peoples' lives now. And anyone who seriously believes that the health and welfare system provide the same level of support and outcomes as ACC needs to actually go and look at data, talk to people who experience the system, because that's not what our people experience. Our people experience a system that discriminates based on cause, and the outcomes are completely different. We need integration. We need to get involved at the beginning. We need to help people maintain their financial and social capital. Getting involved two, five, six months, five years later is too late. I want to ask Yama ` what is it that would have helped you, and what is it that would help you right now? How can I put it? My kids, you know, give them love, so time off would have been, you know... work would have been good, and, like,... support, like, you know, uniting with people, you know. Try to put a smile on their face and mend, you know. It's not an easy thing that you have lost, you know, a loved one. It's not easy. And for people who don't know, you work as a butcher, don't you? Yes, correct. And so you've had to go back to the butchery? I have to. This is life that you have to, you know. You have to pay the mortgage? What can you do? Pay the mortgage and, you know, look after the family. Not only my children, my mum, and my sister, you know. How long have you been back at work for? Three weeks. Three weeks. Is it the time` The one thing you're asking for is time to heal, really, and to be able to give them the benefit to heal, is that what you're asking for? Correct. And, Warren, is that what we need to ` just briefly ` is that what we need to do? Yes, we need to help our people. When Yama rang me, he was very upset, and he had to go back to work, and he said, 'All I want is some more time. 'All I want is financial support so I can pay my mortgage. 'The school holidays are coming up. I need to do something with the kids. 'Just give me time.' OK, right, Warren Forster and Yama Nabi, thank you so much for being very brave and coming on the show this morning. Thank you very much. Thank you. ACC minister Iain Lees-Galloway declined an invitation to appear on Newshub Nation, but he did send us a statement, and it said, 'All governments receive requests to expand ACC coverage, 'but reform would be time-consuming and expensive.' It said, 'Mental health care is under addressed in New Zealand, and the government is investing in it, 'including now paying for care for Christchurch victims,' like we mentioned through the Ministry for Social Development. The minister has no plans to reform ACC this parliamentary term. OK, up next ` we dissect the week's political news with our panel, plus laws, guns and money. We look back at our memorable moments in the House this week. Welcome back. I'm joined now by our panel ` the Hui's Annabelle Lee; Thomas Pryor from Sherson Willis PR; and former Alliance MP Laila Harre. Thanks for your time this morning. Laila, you broke away from Labour to form the Alliance, and then you later led the Internet Party. What chance do you give this new party, this new Destiny Church based party, Coalition New Zealand. Well, this is clearly a stitch up to` Oh, sorry, the Destiny Party? I thought we were talking about Alfred Ngaro for a moment. Let's talk about the first new party this week. Alfred Ngaro is actually a break-away party if it comes to be, and it's clearly a stitch-up by National lobbying for a new friend to make a coalition with. I think it really emphasises the weak position that Simon Bridges is in. It looks awfully desperate. I'd be very surprised if they pull it off. OK. And if they do, now that we've got competing, so called, Christian parties on the block, it will be very difficult for either of them to achieve their objective. Well, Annabelle, we do have competing Christian parties on the block. Although the Coalition New Zealand says it's going to be Christian and Maori, so what kind of support do you think they're gonna have? I think that they will struggle. I think what they do have in their favour is loyal foot soldiers who will knock on the doors and put the leaflets in the mailboxes and those sorts of things. I think they have a track record of working with whanau that everybody else has given up on. And they're both incredibly charming in the flesh, but I think that there is not a strong appetite for leather-clad Christianity in te ao Maori, so I think that they will struggle. OK, and what do you think, Thomas? Is there enough room for two faith-based parties? You wait for a bus, and there's none for ages, and three come at once, because there's also the new Conservative party. That's right. I think it's now an incredibly` It's now a very crowded area. I think it's one of these things that looks good on paper, right. There is clearly a Christian vote in New Zealand. But I'm not sure it's a defining-enough issue to actually coalesce around one party, around one organisation, so I think, you know, Destiny or Coalition Party will suck up all the oxygen. I think Alfred, as much as he talks about the lawnmower man and things like that, is almost too reasonable, actually, to be leading that sort of breakaway party, so my prediction is he might just fade away, and it wouldn't surprise me if he stands for National. So Alfred has missed the bus? He's missed the faith-based bus? Well, I think perhaps he jumped on the wrong bus. I think, you know, looking at that interview, he clearly didn't want to announce or clearly didn't want to be flushed out, you know, this early. And so it's this, sort of, slightly ham-fisted` it's not really a launch. He's not sure what he's doing. He's talking about it, but he's not really. And it's, sort of` I think it's been a bit of a mess for him, really, so you get the sense that` he can't answer the question, 'What's wrong with the National Party?' Why would he leave the National Party? You know, the breakaway you mentioned from the Labour Party back in 1989, that was clearly a breakaway based on fundamental disagreement with the political direction of the then Labour government. He didn't want to criticise the National Party, did he? Winston Peters' breakaway with National was clearly a differentiation from National's position. This is a sweetheart deal to try and build a base that Simon Bridges and National Party can coalesce with. ...a sitting list MP can have these conversations out loud and not use their inside voice, and like Laila says, I think it shows that, you know, that someone who doesn't have the mandate of his community can talk about this. What does this mean that he's been given space by Simon Bridges to do this? I mean, like Laila says, I think clearly National would love or they need a support party, so they are kinda floating around, looking for one. And Christian party does it, but also there's risks, right? Because there is a large swathe of, sort of, liberal` Well, not large sway, but there are liberal National voters who are probably quite uncomfortable with their party, which is a Broad Church party, seen to be, kind of, you know, actively working towards a, sort of, Christian conservative vote, so I think they need to be careful on that, because, you know, Key, when he was leader of National, went really hard to bring some of that vote back, and they risk losing that, and, I mean, the other thing is, actually, if this party does do well, if it does get 5%, where's that vote gonna come from? It's just gonna come off National. National, OK. They haven't thought it through. Let's talk on the other big issue of the week. What a week in parliament. Laila, again, back to you. I mean, you worked in Parliament. I mean, should we be surprised by what's been outlined by the Francis Report this week? Well, I think that` The report I found a little bit dissatisfying, actually. For me, it didn't really explain fully, you know, what the causes or solutions are to the problems that have been identified. Oh. And it seems, you know, in a lot of the public discussion to have been focused on, you know, like what we do about is we deal with individual behaviour, which is clearly not what the intention of the report was to do. But also I think we have to accept that every time a, sort of, major institution has been looked at in this detail, there has been the revelation that, surprise, surprise, we have some real problems with violence, personal disrespect, hierarchy, conflict, stress. Right, OK. A lot of our professional workplaces, and, you know, I don't think parliament` And isn't any different? Is proving itself an exception to that rule. One of those that you just mentioned, like, the issue of sexual assault. We saw a staffer stood down after a formal complaint sparked by Trevor Mallard, talking about rape in an interview. How do you think the Speaker handled that issue this week? Thomas? Terribly. I mean, I just thought, I think it landed in the right place, but the way he got there was pretty atrocious. I think, you know, to come out in a morning media round and essentially say there's a rapist on the loose in parliament, A, you know, there are, you know, every female that works at Parliament would rightly be very concerned about that and going to work and the safety of their workplace. Secondly, for every male who works there is under a cloud of suspicion as well. And thirdly, and importantly, actually, when the people came forward for this report, they did so on the conditions that it would be` you know, remain anonymous. And so I think you have to be really careful about that. If these people didn't feel comfortable for whatever reason, laying that complaint; they did it under these certain conditions, and the Speaker, kind of, essentially flushed it out. Now, I think he was well-intentioned. He didn't handle it very well. But the way around it was ham-fisted. OK, now, there's a call for code of conduct for members, staff and media and an independent commissioner to oversee it. Do you think it's going to be necessary, Annabelle? I think what we need to be careful of is that Parliament doesn't appear to become too obsessed with itself and to remember that actually,... Surely it already is. ...bullying. Well, where you have 120 titanium-coated egos, we shouldn't be surprised that this is what's happening. (ALL LAUGH) But bullying is rife throughout New Zealand. We see it in Parliament, in the media and throughout our schools, so I think, certainly, I think we need to look at, perhaps, our laws around bullying, because the threshold is so incredibly high and difficult to prove, that it actually allows this to flourish, you know, throughout the country, so will it happen? I don't know. Should it happen? Yes. Do we need to have a wider approach and look at what's happening everywhere? I think so, yeah. I think also a little bit of context is needed. I mean, I've worked in Parliament. I've worked for a number of MPs, and most MPs are really good bosses. So I think we've got to be careful not to say that actually every one of those 120 MPs is a terrible, terrible employer and treats their staff terribly, but there is something unique about that culture which is pretty toxic. OK, we'll leave it there. Thank you, very much. Stay with us. We're gonna be back after the break. the Hui's Annabelle Lee, Thomas Pryor from Sherson Willis PR consultancy and former Alliance MP Laila Harre. Thanks for your time again. Laila, what are your thoughts on opening up ACC to mental injury claims? Could we afford to do that? Well, it's not a question of whether we can afford to do it, it's whether it's consistent with the purpose of the scheme, and I think that dealing with the mental health consequences of issues that are generally within the scope of the scheme is absolutely arguable, if expensive. But I think we also have to be careful because I think a lot of this push is coming for, really, the entitlements of the ACC scheme to be available well beyond the original intentions of the scheme ` which was to get rid of the right to sue and replace it with a fair, no-fault system. So there are some huge issues here. And I mean, the real opportunity, it seems to me that the government or a government would have to deal with these, is through major welfare reform. Right. And reform of health-service entitlements. But it's unfortunate at the moment that we get people like Yama Nabi who gets caught in the middle of this. Absolutely. You know, in the wake of the Christchurch terror attacks, it was really comforting when the Prime Minister came out so early and said that the government was talking to ACC to ensure that all victims would get the support that they needed. And` So to hear that that hasn't happened, is deeply concerning. But it does raise the question ` there's an expectation that ACC takes care of these things, are they actually things that should be provided by the health system? And the government has gone down the MSD route anyway, Thomas, they're providing some welfare that way. Yeah, that's right, and there is support. I mean, I guess the interesting thing is it's a significant cost, and the Minister seemed to rule out pretty comprehensively in that statement, but then on the other hand, we are hearing the government talk about the Wellbeing Budget and not looking at these costs in isolation, but actually is this an investment? And I just don't know. I mean, it would be an interesting analysis to do. Actually, if you fund treatment and support for people with mental health issues upfront, are there some overall savings to the economy in the long term? And there may well be actually. OK. Well, let's talk about the Wellbeing Budget. Actually, let's talk about the teachers. They want lots more money. I think we said that they want like, $3-4 billion to settle, and the government's got $1.2 billion. The government's saying, 'Look, there is no more money.' How long can this go on for, Laila? It's just a stand-off. Well, let's, first of all, be clear about what the teachers want. They want to fix the crisis in schools, and it is going to cost a certain amount of money to fill the gaps to give teachers non-contact time, which they're demanding, and to deal with pay parity. I mean, I didn't realise until this week that primary school teachers are now about 3% behind secondary school teachers, and the government isn't even proposing to close that gap with this settlement. Yet, this is a government that has always` The Labour Party has always been committed to pay parity for teachers. So I'm not sure how Chris Hipkins is getting away with some of the numbers he is. If the government can move the debt cap up in 2021, why can't it move it up this year to deal with some of these urgent issues? They are reporting surpluses all the time, Thomas. Is it not a good look for the government to say, 'Look, we've got this money, this surplus. We're going to raise the debt cap, 'but, nah, we've got none of that money for you.' If you close your eyes, Chris Hipkins almost sounds like a National Education Minister in parts of that interview. And I mean, it's a challenge for Labour governments, right? The expectations are certainly raised that they are, in their core areas and core constituencies, they will be well-funded and well-supported. I mean, the politics will be interesting because I think, at the moment, clearly public support is very much with teachers. It will be interesting` And not with the government. If strikes carry on, it will be interesting to see if that moves because it is always finely balanced. I think if you sit back, some people might go, 'It's about a 12-12.5% pay rise over three years.' For a lot of people out there in voter-land, they'll think that's quite reasonable. They'd happily take that, so that'll be the challenge for the government how they manage the politics of this. When will that tipping-point happen? Especially after so much disruption this Wednesday, Annabelle. Mm, yeah. It's 800,000 students, probably, on strike` not in school. There's a saying that the difference between a National government and a Labour government is that National delivers to its support-base, and I think that this is a classic example of this. And I think Labour really needs to step-up, and get this sorted. There's such a distortion now, that if you happen to win one of those TeachNZ scholarships, you actually earn more money as a student than you do as a qualified teacher, so... Change needs to come, and it needs to come rapidly. Just briefly ` it's Wellbeing Budget week. There's been a lot of spin about this. Thomas, do you think it's going to be a PR exercise or groundbreaking? Uh, maybe both. (CHUCKLES) I mean, I'll be intrigued to see. I saw the Prime Minster speak about it yesterday, and, you know, she articulated it beautifully, and it sounds amazing. I'm still struggling to see actually, practically, what it will mean, and how different it will be ` beyond the actual presentation. And, Laila, do you think it's just puffery? Well, I hope not. (LAUGHTER) There have been a lot of dashed expectations already this year, and I think the hype that's been built up around this budget ` the fact that there have been virtually no significant pre-budget announcements. Well, there have been some, but they're not big enough, in your` I mean, maybe what we're going to be getting on Thursday is a collection of smaller initiatives sort of bundled up as a big bang. I'm not sure. I can't think of a big bang that they're likely to include. But potentially there is some issues ` one close to my heart, free school lunches, (LAUGHTER) ...would be nice to see in the budget. And things of that kind of magnitude, which could, together, create a sense of a government that's on the side of the poor. And last word to you, Annabelle. Are you expecting big things on Thursday? I'll be keeping a close eye on what happens with Whanau Ora. I think for Maori that will be the litmus test. Big promises were made during the election about increasing funding to Whanau Ora. That hasn't happened. We know whanau are desperately in need, so that'll be one to keep an eye out for. Great. Annabelle, Thomas, Laila, thank you very much for your time this morning. Well, National was on the attack in the House this week, with Chris Bishop drilling Stuart Nash over the gun buy-back, and Amy Adams calling out Grant Robertson for raising the debt cap. And while Winston Peters came to his colleagues defence, he seemed a little confused over who was doing which job. Was it his intention for his gun buy-back scheme to start with the police buying guns back that were stolen from them in the first place? (LAUGHTER) It is not in the public interest to disclose the specifics of some information as that could put public safety at risk. (SCATTERED YELLING) Does he think it's responsible to burden future generations of New Zealanders with extra debt simply because the government can't manage the books, and is wasting billions of dollars on failed policies like 'Fees-Free' and KiwiBuild. The member is completely wrong. Our debt target stands, and we're meeting it in this budget, as we met it in the last budget. And the fiscal projections that the member will see on budget day show that not only are we meeting it now, we're meeting it out to 2032. Uh, can I ask the Foreign Minister, is he saying` (JEERS) Oh, sorry! (LAUGHTER) Can I ask the Finance Minister` Come on. It's not part of the 10-year plan (!) Can I ask the Finance Minister, after consultation with the Foreign Officer` (ALL LAUGH) And don't forget Finance Minister Grant Robertson delivers the government's first-ever Wellbeing Budget that we've been talking about this week, and Newshub Nation will be on air this Thursday, as it happens, with a one-hour Budget special at just before 2 o'clock with expert analysis of what it all means for you. That's all from us, for now. Thank you for watching. We'll see you again next weekend. Captions by Shrutika Gunanayagam, Antony Vlug and Ella Wheeler. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2019