Today on Newshub Nation ` who's brave enough to assume responsibility for our spy agencies this year of all years? The new Inspector-General of Intelligence Services, Madeline Laracy, joins us for her first media interview. Then the Children's Commissioner calls for a two-tier approach to child welfare ` one for Maori and one for non-Maori. And Backstory ` how well do you know your MPs? We talk to National's Denise Lee about surviving the loss of her toddler son Riley. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2019 Kia ora. Good morning. I'm Simon Shepherd, and welcome to Newshub Nation. Hundreds of protesters march from Ihumatao to the Prime Minister's Mt Albert office to present a petition calling for her to visit the site. The Prime Minister said she will, but won't say when, as she wants to give space to ongoing negotiations over the disputed land. Reports that Waikato-Tainui will buy the land from owners Fletcher Residential have been dismissed as speculation by protest leaders. The Commerce Commission took aim at Z Energy, BP and Mobil this week, saying our fuel market is not as competitive as it should be. Chair Anna Rawlings said fuel companies are earning profits beyond what the commission would consider reasonable. Its research was ordered by the government last year following comments by the Prime Minister that 'Kiwis are being fleeced at the pump'. The report's full findings will be released in December. And Oranga Tamariki signed a landmark agreement with Tuhoe this week, aimed at reducing the number of tamariki in state care. The document commits the ministry to informing the iwi whenever a Tuhoe child comes to its attention. Later in the show, reporter Mitch McCann with rare access to Tuhoe whanau and tamariki. Well, it's her personal responsibility to keep our spy agencies honest, and she's taken it on in the most difficult possible time, when both the GCSB and SIS are under review following the Christchurch attack, so who is our new acting Inspector General of Intelligence Services? Madeleine Laracy joins me now for her first media interview. Thank you very much for coming on the programme. I guess, what kind of person does it take to be a watchdog over our spies? My background is in public law. I've... and that's very useful in this particular context, because the jurisdiction of the Inspector-General and the Deputy Inspector-General is to make sure that the two New Zealand intelligence and security agencies, the GCSB and the NZSIS act lawfully and properly. So legality and law is at the heart of what we do. So that's why you were heading up New Zealand's biggest criminal prosecution office ` sorry, criminal defence office, weren't you? In terms of defence lawyers. My background before I came to this role was about 20 years, primarily as a criminal lawyer, but doing what's generally called 'public law'. So I had about 16 years doing the criminal prosecution side of the criminal law work in the Crown Law office. And then I moved to the Public Defence Service, which provides legal aid to clients who have been charged with criminal offences. OK. So you're responsible for making sure these agencies act legally, but also whether they act in, what do you call, propriety, what is deemed to be acceptable practice, is that what it is? Yes. Propriety is not defined in the act. The relevant statute says that's part of our jurisdiction, but it doesn't define it. So the office of the Inspector-General has had to think about what that means, and... but it doesn't have a strict legal definition, as I say. But what we say that means is that the standards that a reasonably informed New Zealander would expect in a modern, liberal democracy of the way a state agency with very intrusive powers should behave. OK. So that's the concept of propriety. It's definitely broader than legality. OK. All right, well, we'll get to that in a moment. Under your predecessor, the spy agency sort of moved away back into the shadows, out of the spotlight, but then been brought out into them by Kim Dotcom and Warren Snowdon. Is that what they should be? Is that where you want them to be? Away from the spotlight? Away from the spotlight, but in the public domain. You know, transparency is at the heart of accountability to the public. And as a result of those events you've talked about, it's been recognised by governments around the world that as much as possible as can be said about the activities of intelligence and security agencies. It's generally a good thing to put that information in the public domain. There are many operational details that are classified, which means sensitive to national security. And that material can't be in there. But the way in which the agencies go about their work, the rules that govern them, what those rules mean in the particular context, all of that material is enormously important for the public to understand how the agencies work and to have confidence in them. And the role of the Inspector-General over the last, particularly, five years has to been assist in putting the material that can be put in the public domain out there, yeah. Out there. OK, well, let's talk about spotlight. So the spotlight is in on the intelligence industry, intelligence agencies at the moment after the March 15 attacks in Christchurch. So this was a person who was active in the white supremacist community that wasn't on an SIS or GCSB list. Can you ascribe what that failure was put` What was that failure due to? Can you say that? Yeah, I can't talk about anything that's to do with matters that are before the Royal Commission, and the scope of its terms of reference are very clear. So that's not our` even though those two agencies are part of the work of the Royal Commission, and we have our normal jurisdiction is to understand what they're doing, that's not our role in this case. That's for the Royal Commission. But your predecessor has, sort of, been interviewed by the Royal Commission, haven't they? Cheryl Gwyn, as Inspector-General, has had a couple of meetings with the Royal Commission and has provided them with some general background information, which is actually on our website, a summary of what we provided. Right. But, we haven't` So, in the circumstances` I'm just trying to understand your role. I mean, if this Commission comes back and is scathing, does your office have any input in saying to these agencies, 'These heads should go,' or, 'This is how you should change things?' No. Not at all? No. So who gets to tell the agencies that they've done it wrong? That type of accountability ` that comes from ministers. From ministers, from the Prime Minister? From the Prime Minister, from the minister responsible for the agencies, which is a different minister in our context. That's Minister Little. Yep. OK. So, I guess the public would want to know, seeing somebody like you here, for a chance to have questions. We've seen the accused Brenton Tarrant's letters come out in public, and questions being asked about whether the GCSB should be monitoring those letters from the start. Does that fall under your jurisdiction? People want to know, should you have been saying to the GCSB, 'You should be looking at this kind of thing.' No, that doesn't` At the moment, that obviously is no part of our function because of the Royal Commission. Anything can fall under our function. However, if it comes back to that fundamental jurisdiction, is the matter that's being raised, is it a matter of law, compliance with the law, or is it a matter where right-thinking New Zealanders would say, 'These agencies ought properly to have been doing that, 'and it would be proper to do something in a particular way.' And that's where I'm sort of asking you whether your office would be the one to say from a New Zealander's well-informed perspective, should the agencies have been doing that? And the answer to that has to be that if there's any matter of propriety, then we can comment on it, and that would fall within our jurisdiction, but in this particular case, that's... You can't because of the Royal Commission? I can't, and that's nothing we are looking at as a result. OK, all right, so, previous reviews have asked the intelligence agencies to become a bit more diverse in order to do their job properly, and the SIS is out there recruiting at the moment. Are you satisfied with the diversity that the agencies have in terms of covering all bases of potential terrorism? So, again, diversity is something that` because diverseness and having a diverse workforce can affect all aspects of an organisation's activities. If the way a particular diversity issue impacts on a question of legality or on a matter of propriety, then the Inspector-General in principle would always have the jurisdiction to go and look into that particular matter, but in terms of standing back and making comments about expressing our view about whether they are diverse enough for the sake of it, that's not our role. OK, but the 38% of SIS staff are New Zealand European, yet we have this issue at the moment of allegations that white supremacy has not been picked up by intelligence agencies, so are you happy that they are recruiting enough to cover all the bases of potential terrorism and threats? That's not a question for us. That's in part a question that could potentially fall within the mandate of the Royal Commission. But the New Zealand community is 61% of New Zealand European, and under the sort of propriety provisions under your office, would you expect` Could you ask those questions? Would a reasonably well-informed New Zealander be expecting you to ask those kinds of questions? We absolutely could. We could. But you're not at the moment? That's not a focus we've had, but as I say, when an issue or an event crystallises where diversity relates to our propriety jurisdiction, we absolutely could, but what I would say is that the agencies, as you indicated, both of them have over the last couple of years put a lot of effort into recognising that they need to recruit a more diverse` But have they done it enough seeing as what's been happening in our country just recently? That's a matter for the Royal Commission to look at. All right, we share information with our international partners ` Five Eyes is an example like that ` so how do we make sure that the information being shared by us, by agencies with those people remains safe? How do you make sure that they're doing that, keeping it safe? Yeah, so intelligence agencies are in the business of doing two things. One is collecting information, and one is sharing it with either domestic partners or their foreign partners. That's their core role, but every aspect of that for our New Zealand agencies needs to be governed by New Zealand law. So when they on-share information, they are bound by all of our New Zealand law that governs them, so that's the New Zealand Privacy Act. Sure, and are you talking to your equivalent, kind of, officers in those networks and saying, 'We're keeping an eye on what's been shared here and how it's being safe?' Undoubtedly, there are limitations on what domestic oversight bodies can do. We can look as far as the boundaries of sharing in New Zealand, but we have no reach into a foreign country who might be using that information. Right. But what we can do is, say, the Five Eyes partnership for example, there are very well-constructed rules that govern how a recipient country under that partnership can use New Zealand information, and we can look at that body of rules and say, 'Do we think these rules as far as New Zealand is concerned, 'are they legal, are they proper, do they go as far as they need to?' And then we can look at instances of sharing at the New Zealand end and say, 'You know, has this happened in accordance with those rules?' But your point does raise a really interesting issue, which is a developing principle amongst international oversight bodies, and that's ` there's no tidy way of saying it ` but it's expressed as, you know, if it's` we need to get to a point where if it's exchangeable, it's oversight-able. Right, but that's an impossible position to get to, isn't it? It's a difficult thing to achieve. I just really briefly want to ask you ` what is the challenge for your office with the approaching 2020 election? What's the agencies` and what are you doing to prevent us from being interfered with foreign interference coming into that election? So, our role follows on from the work of the agencies, so it's not for us to direct them. To prescribe to them, right. To tell them what their job ought to be in a particular sphere. We're an after-the-fact review body. So it would certainly be proper for us to ensure that to the extent that they have responsibilities to ensure that New Zealand's electoral processes are able to be conducted with integrity and protected from foreign threats. We can certainly ask and make sure we understand what they are doing in that space, and then afterward, we have the jurisdiction, or the responsibility, to make sure that the way they've managed that is consistent with their legal obligations and what is proper in the context of an election to do. And what is proper. Back to propriety again. Yes, that's right. All right, Madeleine Laracy, Inspector-General` Acting Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, thank you very much for your time this morning. Thank you, Simon. All right, if you've got something to say about what you see on our show, let us know. We're on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram ` Newshub Nation NZ. Our Twitter panel this week is Tim McCready and Deborah Morris-Travis. Using the hashtag NationNZ. You can email us at... And our whole show is now available on podcast form. Google, iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts, but still to come ` we dissect the week's political news with our panel. Plus ` should we be bracing for another dressing down from the UN on our child welfare record? The Children's Commissioner and the editor of the International Journal of Children's Rights says it's not looking good. Welcome back. In 2016 the United Nations slammed New Zealand's child welfare record. The next report is just two years away, so should we be preparing for a similar dressing-down? I spoke to Children's Commissioner Andrew Becroft and the editor of the International Journal of Children's Rights, Professor Laura Lundy. I began by asking them how they rate this government's performance so far. It's good that it's cross-party. It's good that it's systemic. It's good that we have measurements, annual reporting and a commitment to halve poverty by 2028. OK, but at the moment, the statistics are not great. Like, 23% of children living in poverty after housing costs. I mean, that's a terrible statistic, isn't it? Yeah, it's a shame on our country. It's utterly unacceptable. Those figures show that transformational change will be required. Incremental, small steps won't cut it. There'll need to be some big commitments, and we'll need to spend as a country, and there's no way round that. Professor Lundy, from an outsider's point of view, the UN sort of slammed New Zealand about five years ago, saying it had a terrible record on child poverty. How is New Zealand regarded in terms of meeting its obligations? I think it's a mixed picture. I mean, I think at the minute, New Zealand has quite a good reputation in the international world. I mean, your Prime Minister has a very strong, positive reputation, particularly commitments to children and the idea that New Zealand is going to be, like, a great place for children to grow up. To be fair, the United Nations slams everybody; it's its job, you know. It has to find what you do` Poverty is one of your weaknesses. That's not to say there aren't strengths here. There are things that New Zealand is leading on. I mean, it was one of the first countries to ban corporal punishment of children, and that's a really positive thing. But then you flip that and then you realise that you've got one of the highest rates of child homicide. So it's a really mixed picture in New Zealand. And when I arrived, I thought, 'It's going to be great. 'I'm going to learn so much in terms of positive practice,' and we have done. But on the other hand, I'm really surprised by the scale of some of the issues that you're facing at the minute. So what are you surprised by? Your children who are in detention and in care and the disproportionate number of children from your Maori community, which is just unacceptably high. Next week, we understand that the child welfare strategy is being delivered. What is your hope from that strategy? That things will shift statistically. Overall for New Zealand children, 70% do pretty well ` some world-leadingly well. 20% are in and out of disadvantage, and it's tough for them. 10%, about 100,000 ` about two Eden Parks' full worth of children ` are really doing it tough in chronic disadvantage. That's not an inevitable life script for bad outcomes, but it's a hugely elevated risk. This the revolution that you've been calling for? I mean, you've used that term ` you need a revolution in looking after our children. Yes, I'd like to see some ` to use the government's language ` transformational change. Something of a paradox in New Zealand ` we do so well for so many of our kids but yet so badly for quite a significant group. Those two things stand, I guess, in stark contrast. Youth suicide, child abuse and neglect, child homicide ` that we've talked about ` bullying; just about lead the world in those areas. And it's hard to see how in a country we're all so proud of ` where we want better for our children ` that that can be the case. But the Child and Youth Wellbeing Strategy, I hope, targets all those areas. We'll be judged on it. We got a pretty mixed report card from the UN five years ago. I hope in 2020 we can go` or 2021 we can go with our heads held high that we've committed to make some significant change. As I say, it can't be incremental. It's got to be revolutionary, yes. One of the areas which the UN convention talks about is stating a child has to be able to express their view freely and that view has to be given due weight. Now, Professor, you've developed models about this. They've been widely accepted. How do those actually work, though? Well, they should work` I suppose the first thing is that people need to know that this provision exists, and again, quite a lot of people don't realise that they do exist or they don't understand what it actually means. So they think that you listen to children but you don't really have to do anything with what they say, and the crucial thing about the convention is that it wants both. It wants you to actively go after children's views, and then it wants you to take them seriously, and then it wants you to show children what you have done in relation to what they've said. And that's where most countries ` including New Zealand at the minute ` seem to fall down. But, I mean, don't adults know best? Do you think adults know best? No, adults do not know best. Adults know a lot, so I'm very keen to emphasise in my model that it's not` Sometimes people say children are the experts in their own lives, and that's wrong. But children do have expertise in their own lives, and we have to bring that into the picture, along with the perspective of other adult experts. Right. So how do we break down that notion that`? Adults, you know, think that they know best, but really, they should take on children's views a bit more. How do we break that down? Well, first thing ` you make it law, you know, and it is law in New Zealand. And actually, New Zealand has one of the best forms of that law that I've ever seen, going around the world, in relation to actually just repeating the wording of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. But law's not enough. Then you actually have to realise that the people who are implementing the law understand it, and are committed to it and have a conception of children and young people that aligns with that. And that's the tricky bit, and that's through training, and it's through practice. And often the adults, then, who do that realise the benefit of talking to children. They realise that when they talk to children, they learn how to make their services more effective ` how, basically, they can do their own jobs better. And we need more of that. Now, you've been spending this year listening to tamariki Maori, so what have they been telling you? The new Oranga Tamariki legislation consulted widely with children and young people. The Child and Youth Wellbeing Strategy has an obligation to consult with them, listen to children and young people. So that, I hope, will inform the strategy. It's being released next Thursday. I'm looking forward with anticipation. Maori children in particular told us that they are disadvantaged; they know that. They are judged by the colour of their skin too much. They use the word 'racist'; we don't. They say there are stereotypes. In education, there are expectations that they won't do so well. Speaking to Maori children, particularly those who are marginalised, they definitely feel on the outside, in a way that I think would concern if not shock many New Zealanders ` many Pakeha New Zealanders. We've already known for years, so what is it`? How are we actually going to break through this? Honestly, I think for 30 years, well-meaning adults we thought could be trusted to deliver for children in terms of policy, we didn't. We dropped the ball. Things didn't trickle down to children. Children weren't prioritised. The over-65s have a six times' greater advantage rate in New Zealand than under-18. If that weren't bad enough, that's one of the highest ratios of differences in the world. Structurally in our economy, there is something badly wrong in our policy settings. What we did for over-65s, we could do for our children if we had the will and we had the commitment. Professor Lundy, the convention says that if a child can't live with their family ` so if they're taken away from the family ` the government must provide care that respects the culture, language and religion. So we talk about, you know, New Zealand Maori being overrepresented. Is New Zealand not living up to its care of Maori children in this context? Look, I'm nervous to speak without the evidence, but the impression I have in the days that I have here and what I've read and what I've listened to is that they're not and that actually much more needs to be done to be sure a) that Maori children are not overrepresented and not removed in the first instance, but that when they are, they're somewhere that's culturally appropriate and culturally sensitive and doesn't undermine their sense of self. I mean, that's a challenge in other parts of the world, but it seems to be a very big challenge here in New Zealand at the minute. And that's a review that you're carrying out at the moment, actually. You're looking at how Oranga Tamariki takes children under 3 months old. What have you found so far? Well, we're talking about the care and protection decision-making when issues are raised. At the moment, we're beginning to engage directly with Maori families. We want to do that in a way that is respectful. It's a pretty critical decision, because the new model ` only started 1 July ` is consistent earlier intervention and prevention and real assistance. And if there is to be removal, it's in the sense of maintaining whakapapa and cultural links and providing real support for the wider family, hapu and iwi to do that. But is there a pushback against that particular kind of legislation? Because we have seen an increase in the number of babies under 3 months being taken in the last couple of years. Yeah, as from 1 July, things have at least stabilised. What is good is that nearly 70% of Maori children who are removed are kept within their wider whakapapa, but there are some real questions that have caused and perplexed a nation as to why the number of removals of Maori babies 2016, 2017 went up so much. There is this Maori movement at the moment. There's a Maori-led inquiry. Do you actually agree with what they're proposing? They're saying that, 'We should have our own organisation 'to look after Maori separate from Oranga Tamariki.' There's a common cry for ownership by Maori and delivery of services by Maori for Maori. I think the time has come, as a nation, for us to seriously consider that. If you look in education, you see some real changes, and I think that's probably the big issue for our country. Where do you stand on that in terms of Oranga Tamariki? Well, the law now requires it. I stand absolutely for it. I think that's consistent with the Treaty obligations. I think it's likely to deliver better results, but that's not actually the reason. The reason is it's a fundamental obligation utterly consistent with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. So just to be clear, you would be in favour of a separate organisation that dealt with Maori, rather than Oranga Tamariki? Oh, on that point, it may well be that there is a Commissioner for New Zealand Children, Commissioner for Maori Children; maybe the same for children in care. I think there are a variety of ways of doing it structurally to make sure that Maori interests are actually focused on and prioritised as never before. So on this anniversary of the convention, Professor, what advice would you give to New Zealand based on what you've heard and seen about us? Core advice at the minute is ` you're going to be in front of the Committee on the Rights of the Child the year after next, and they're going to ask some, I think, very definite questions, from what I've heard. One of the things is ` they're going to ask about your wellbeing strategy. I'm not sure they're going to be satisfied with it. I think they're going to welcome the fact there is a wellbeing strategy, but they're going to be asked about what you're actually doing to implement children's rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and your wellbeing strategy is not the same. It's a different thing. So their second question they're going to ask you is what you're doing to ensure that the Convention on the Rights of the Child is incorporated in law. And that's coming in at the minute in little piecemeal bits and pieces, and I think they're going to push New Zealand to have a legislation which incorporates the convention. I think they're going to push more, certainly, on the circumstances of your most marginalised children. I think that's going to be very big focus, and I do think they're going to be emphasising initiatives that are involving children. Perhaps voting age, the things that they're looking at the minute; your budget ` is there transparency in how much you spend on your children? Are you spending enough on your children compared to other really rich nations like New Zealand? I mean, you're a tiny population, really, and you're a rich population. It just feels that they're going to push you to do a lot better than you're doing. Professor Laura Lundy there. Sticking with the theme, it's been two months since video of a newborn baby being taken from its mother in Hastings sparked national outrage. Since then, four inquiries have been launched, and the Ministry for Children, Oranga Tamariki, has promised to do better. And despite seething anger from many in Maoridom, iwi are still willing to work with the ministry. In Tuhoe country, here's Mitch Mccann. There has been a lot of criticism about Oranga Tamariki. But in saying that, then the criticism is warranted towards me. If they are found wanting and guilty of something, well, so am I... because those are Tuhoe children. Today has been a long time coming for Tamati Kruger and the iwi he leads. For seven years, Tuhoe has worked on an agreement with the government about how to deal with its tamariki, tamariki that is, taken away into state care. We are alarmed at the number of Tuhoe children in state care and the number of Tuhoe that are what they call 'on watch'. Around 215 Tuhoe children are currently in the care of the state. 90% of those are now outside, away, from wider whanau or iwi. There have been 14,000 Tuhoe children in recent years on watch, kids the government has received concerned calls about. We find ourselves in a crisis, and we should react and respond as if there is a crisis. After years of negotiation, the agreement is just one page long. But Tuhoe says it's much more than words like 'support', 'collaboration' and 'kinship'. The agreement will ensure when a Tuhoe child is reported to Oranga Tamariki, Tuhoe will now be notified straight away. It's then Tuhoe's job to help find a home with an iwi or wider whanau. Tuhoe and Oranga Tamariki will take a closer look at what's preventing Tuhoe families from fostering kids. It's hoping to implement new standards reflecting Maori values. This will allow more children to stay close to their iwi, close to their roots. This isn't the first agreement of its sort to be signed between Oranga Tamariki and an iwi, but it is the first to be signed since the issue of uplifting children was thrust into the national spotlight, only a couple of months ago. Kia ora, good evening. Iwi leaders are concerned of the number of Maori babies being taken from their mothers, but Oranga Tamariki is defending its policy, saying they only do it when there are fears for the child's safety. Newsroom published confronting footage of a social worker trying to remove a newborn from her mother. The footage shocked many, but Maori leaders say they already knew this was happening. The story has prompted four separate inquiries and a large march on the steps of parliament. Unfortunate timing, perhaps, for the government, which says agreements and work like this was already underway. Children's Minister Tracey Martin says social workers are playing a very important role. She says alliances like this signal a huge shift for iwi and the Crown coming together. We're going to see less Tuhoe children coming into the care of Oranga Tamariki. And you can guarantee that? Well, it's what's happened with Tainui. It's what's happened with some of our other strategic partners, so there's no reason to believe that if we work more closely together from the first moment that we get a call of concern about children who have whakapapa back to Tuhoe, that is should be any different than it has been for Waikato-Tainui. To say this is just a Tuhoe problem, or any other iwi for that matter, would be wrong. This is an issue that affects all corners of Maoridom, and that's because every week three Maori babies are uplifted from their families, and more than 50% of all children in state care are Maori. Not everyone, though, is on the same page. Merepeka Raukawa-Tait leads the Whanau Ora Commissioning Agency. She wants Maori to care for Maori, without Oranga Tamariki. Merepeka says while OT holds all the money, these alliances will prove challenging. All of the resources, which is the money, will still be going in to ensure that a government department remains relevant, and I'm saying, 'No, the government departments these days, they should actually be down-sizing, and all of the 'resources going either to the Maori service providers who know their communities 'or to the iwi themselves.' Despite that, and after a troubled relationship in the past, Tuhoe and Oranga Tamariki say this can work, but like every new relationship, trust is everything. Can they trust Oranga Tamariki? Trust is built; you don't just get it in a moment. What they've said is, 'We will step forward and take a risk.' That's what Tuhoe has said, 'We're going to step forward and take a risk, 'and we're going to partner with you, and take you at your word.' There is a high dependency here on faith, trust and confidence. And only we can let ourselves down. (ALL SING IN TE REO) There is one thing all can agree on though, and that's the importance of keeping children within iwi. It's where they have roots, connections; it's who they are. It's really, really important that the children are biologically connected within their own DNA, whakapapa. Marie Steward would know. She raises nine young foster kids as their gran. She's been doing it for 40 years now because it's all she knows. It's like a fabric, and it's a pattern. Mine has always been to be able to give children the same love, the same care, that same sense of belonging. And for many people we talked to doing the same thing, it's all about providing love. Not many lows in it. There's a lot of highs. Mummy! Hey, I'm talking. I think the wealth and the success of an iwi should be measured by how much they care for and bring about hope for the future of their children. The partnership signed here in Taneatua takes immediate effect. Tamati Kruger says this is all about new beginnings. Admitting at times, Tuhoe has been absent for its tamariki. He says those days are now over. Tamariki come first. Up next ` our panel traverses the highest highs and the deepest lows of this week in politics. Plus ` who's fleecing who, and who let the Speaker hold their baby? Behind the scenes in the House. Welcome back. I'm joined now by our panel, Radio New Zealand journalist Indira Stewart, political commentator Shane te Pou and Marg Joiner from the Senate SHJ. Thank you all for coming in this morning. Shane, to you first, an agreement signed between Oranga Tamariki and Tuhoe this week ` is that significant? Ae! Ko tua taku iwi. I'm a child of the mist. I'm very proud and pleased that our leadership has taken this position, I think it will work and can work for Tuhoe in the beautiful Eastern Bay of Plenty, it might not be the paradigm that works in West Auckland. So I think Merepeka Tait, John Tamihere are right. Tamati Kruger is right. I think we need to have an equilibrium in between. But I am pleased that this initiative is shown, I think that King was right in this week. I think that Tamati Kruger is right, it starts with us. We'll look after our kids. OK. This has come, all this sort of movement has come as Oranga Tamariki has a new legal emphasis to reduce the disparity, Marg, between Maori and other children taken into care. So, are Oranga Tamariki gonna be able to regain public trust while they're trying to do this work, and yet, Maoridom is saying, 'We don't really want you.' Yeah, I think what it points to is the complexity of the issues, and the fact that they do go beyond the state. And we've seen Minister Martin's approach here to co-opt a broader spectrum of society into the discussion, so that we're not all passive bystanders. She's challenged everyone to ask, 'What are you doing for child well-being?' So I think that's what we're seeing play out here, and the Maori organizations being brought into the fold. I just hope we have the courage to continue to trial this, and bringing in the principle of mana motuhake is a really positive thing to see. Indira, the Children's Commissioner, they seemed to be backing the idea of having separate organizations for Maori Children and New Zealand Children in some form, a commissioner for this, a commissioner for that. Could that be the way of the future? Is that what? It seems to be the movement. It certainly was an interesting point that he raised. And I do think that many people think that there needs to be prioritised leadership, particularly with this issue. It's been a hot topic for months, it's been under media fire. And we've seen with the thousands of supporters that have been rallying support for this, with the key, core hashtag #handsoffourtamariki. I think many people would see that an appointment of a Maori Commissioner, or a Maori head for Maori children in Oranga Tamariki would be a key role. I think with the Tuhoe tribe signing this agreement, it could be seen as a very positive step of maybe, perhaps, a Ministry listening to Maori. I mean, John Rangihau had that report 30 years ago on the perspective of Maori, and every report since then, many people in the sector have said that the Ministry has failed to listen to Maori. And if this is a step forward of where they are going to say, 'We wanna listen.' I mean, as a Polynesian, to see our Maori brothers and sisters go through this, not just incarceration rates, record numbers in childcare ` it's disheartening. And you lament over the fact that you see ` because you understand that when you're raised in a village, and you're taken out of that village, it has an incredible impact on your sense of identity, and it affects so many facets of your life. So returning children to their iwi and their hapu is positive, and I think many people would agree. Shane, I just wanna ask you, I mean, the Tuhoe agreement is not the first that Oranga Tamariki has done with the iwi. But is it more significant given Tuhoe's distrust of the crown? For good reason. (LAUGHS) In 2008 where our lands were impinged upon and there was this terrible raid ` and I still don't think... And that's what I'm referring to. Yeah, for good reason. I think that they think that the time is right, so that's the important thing. They're the hau kainga, they're the people that keep the fires burning. 670 kids removed last year, lost to state care forever, by and large. You know, the current construct, conservative construct isn't fit for purpose. It doesn't do our kids any good, it doesn't do our Whanau any good. And also it doesn't do taxpayers any good ` there's no return on it in terms of taxpayer money. We need a new construct. No return on investment. Yeah. And we saw that there are the experts, the people closest to this. I mean, they barely gave us a pass mark, and the thing I think we're very lucky to have is Andrew Becroft in terms of his mana that he brings, and he has undisputed respect in the sector. So when he does say something, people do sit up and listen. But politically, is it going to be embarrassing for the Prime Minister, who's committed to halving poverty within a decade, to have the UN possibly coming out and saying, 'Well, you're not doing enough with your well-being strategy.' Well, I think when you sign up, you ratify an agreement to say, 'We are gonna hold these standards 'that this convention says,' you've got to do your best those standards. It's very clear in many countries a failure to reach those standards is not news to us. I think it was interesting to hear the Irish Children's Commissioner, I think it's more the goal, the setting of 'This is the standard that we wanna reach.' You know, many people outside of New Zealand might see us as clean, green. We have, you know, Jacinda Ardern is heralded by international media, but the statistics of children in this country paint a very different reality. Yeah, they do. OK, I just wanna move on to Madeline Laracy, who's the acting Inspector-General of Intelligence Services. Marg, what did you make of her? I mean, she's between a rock and a hard place, I think, cos we've got this focus on our spy agencies at the moment after the March 15 attack. Yeah, and these are big issues that weigh heavily on the minds of voters and the public, for good reason. She would never see the inner workings of the agencies that deal with these issues. But it was good to see the woman in charge of watching the watchers, if you like, and some of her approaches. And I understand that's probably to give some level of comfort to the New Zealand public. Did she give you any insight at all, Shane? Well, I think that we need a proper review. I think we need to ensure our services are fit for purpose. It seems to me we've spent a lot of time and money and resources chasing alleged copyright infringers, Maori activists, neither, in my view, are a possible attack on our sovereignty or our security. I think we've been asleep at the wheel. You know, 51 of our people were murdered on March 15. And not one person has been made accountable, not one resignation. It's taking too slow, too long. It's not good enough. Yeah, well, and she said, you know, that's all down to the Royal Commission. That's not really up to her. But she is the public face of watching the watchers, as you say, Marg. So, Indira, she's in a really hard place there, cos she couldn't answer those questions, could she? No, there wasn't much that we could get out of that. And very tough, obviously bound by the Royal Commission, and with that report coming out in December, I think it's still so fresh, March. The terror attacks in March are still so fresh. And considering the things that have come out recently, with the gunman's letters being published online, lots of people are really, desperately wanting to know who's going to be held accountable for this. And you know, she couldn't answer, did they have blind spots? Were they targeting the wrong people? But it was very clear from the Muslim community, many advocates after Christchurch terror attacks were saying, 'We've been telling the government this for years, we've been telling security and intelligence this for years.' There was hate speech, and nobody was listening. So I think many people want to see what happened there. Yeah, to be fair to her, the GCSB and NZSIS are two of the agencies involved, but it goes a lot broader. So, into police, immigration. And, so, she was limited in what she could say there as well. But she has to also say that it's not up to her to tell them off, it's up to the politicians, really, isn't it, Shane? Well, I think it's up to all of us to hold them to account. They're probably` To make them accountable` It's probably the hardest bunch to be held to account, because just the secret nature of it. I think that they've gotta be allowed to get on with their jobs, but the public and the politicians and the agencies such as these need to hold them to account. That's a fundamental of a democracy that we live in. Well that's, the Christchurch terror attacks have never happened before in New Zealand. So, I think for a lot of people that are in government departments, they're learning, 'Are the current structures we have fit for purpose?' So it'll be interesting to see what that report says. And do we have the resource? Do the watchers of the watchers have the right resource to be doing that job well. Enough money to watch everybody. Yeah. Thank you very much from the panel for the moment, thank you. All right, coming up ` babies, petrol and finger pointing. What happened in the house this week? Plus Backstory ` National MP Denise Lee on losing her beloved son, Riley, at just two-years-old. Welcome back to Backstory, where we ask, 'How well do we really know our MPs?' Well, she grew up in the Coromandel, she's an adrenaline junky, and she followed her father and grandfather's footsteps into politics. But Denise Lee has also lived through the ultimate tragedy ` the death of her two-year-old son, Riley. We joined Denise at the Waikaraka Speedway in South Auckland to hear her Backstory. This is where I come to let it all hang out, to blow off a bit of steam. I've done four demolition derbies. Next year I'll definitely do my fifth cos I love it every single time. And this is the car and the bits that are left from this Easter. Took a few good knocks. They do big fireworks in the middle there. They have jet drags, and the boy racers come out and pull doughnuts in the middle. So it's a lot of fun. So when I'm not in Wellington, I'm here. And spending time with the girls and doing just the daily, usual stuff. Put the jug on. I thought you were making the tea. Yeah, I told you. (CHUCKLES) We play lacrosse, so we have training on the days that Mum's gone, and we also have a game on the night that Mum just comes back. Of course, I don't get there anywhere near as much as I would like. Those special ones. You take leave off to come watch. I have got leave for the big events. When they first started playing lacrosse, remember me asking, 'What is that?' The number of Harry Potter jokes we get. Love you. Love you too. Yeah, have a fun day. See you after training. See ya. Bye. So I've got a few bits and pieces here. Photos that mean a lot to me. This is me as a youngster. I'm the middle of three girls. Oh, this is very Paeroa, calf club days. I was a townie in Pae` Yeah, there is such a thing as a townie in Paeroa. But I'd go and borrow a calf from Mr Wood, the farmer up the road, and this particular year, I won. And my farmer friends, they weren't too happy about the townie who borrowed the calf and won. Granddad lied about his age to go to World War I. So you had to be 16, and we're pretty sure he was 15 ` may have even been 14 ` but he had four brothers serving, and there was no way that he was going to miss out. Oh, that's him when he had the mayoral chains on, and then my dad became the mayor straight after him. So there was a bit of a legacy in Paeroa. So this is what he looked like back then. You know, good-looking, 80s glasses. But this is, like, a young daughter who thinks that her dad is pretty cool. And he did do some cool stuff like meet Margaret Thatcher. You know, Dad was quite an outspoken conservative MP. While Dad and I share a lot of similarities, we're also different people and different politicians. I love him very much. He's been the most amazing dad. Despite politics being a real drain and a sacrifice on family life, we've really, really, been an awesome tight family. You've got to have a real tough hide. There's no two ways about it. Let stuff roll off your shoulders, and I think over the years I've been through quite a bit in life ` some real highs and some real lows. That's helped me, sort of, get an even keel when it comes to the tough stuff. My gorgeous son, Riley, who died at the age of 2. This is one of my favourite photos of him here. So one night, I went and checked on my 10-week old daughter, and discovered that she was still sleeping, and that things were fine and fantastic, you know, at 10 weeks old, she didn't need to be fed. And then I went and checked on my son as well. And that's when I discovered that he had died in his sleep. He was perfectly healthy. There was nothing wrong with him. He'd be 20 at the end of this month. 18 years on. I have notebooks, heaps of them, where I just write down every single little thing that he did, the tiny things. You know, what kind of meals who used to like to have, and now when I read them, it's the best thing I ever did. Sometimes it's the little things ` you'll see a boy that looks like him or you'll see or hear of another sudden death of some kind... It was weird for me because he was never allowed to be called cot death. That's only reserved for those under the age of one, so as soon as you're older than one, it's in the adult category. You know, you also then begin to live in fear because you think, 'Well, if that can happen to me, and just so random, 'and he was perfectly healthy, could it happen again?' But you also have to trust, and that was part of the journey. I wrote some grief notes, trying to get out some of that ugliness and numbness and just complete despair. Cos we had no time to say goodbye. No time at all I called it reality. READS: 'Is this really my reality cos I don't understand 'how a healthy little boy and death can exist hand-in-hand. 'I'm struggling to grasp the basics. My life has turned around. 'I'm walking each day standing upright, but I'm really upside down. 'Is this really my reality? 'Time came and stole from me my first born son called Riley. 'Time came and set him free.' (SOBS) (CHUCKLES SOFTLY) Nah, he's a gorgeous boy. I definitely consider him a gift. It helps me understand what really counts in life. For me, what I've been through in my life and the tragedy and the ups and downs, kind of doing stuff that has a little bit of adrenaline, a little adventure to it, it makes me feel like I'm living. It reminds me that I'm small, that life can be random and precious and short. Hey, while we're here, just go for it. National MP, Denise Lee, sharing her story with us. Stay with us. We're back after the break. Welcome back. Last week on the programme, we asked Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones how many jobs the Provincial Growth Fund had created so far. And this was his answer. But we're well over the 1000` we're over the 1000 mark, and soon I'll be releasing some more figures. So you're well over the thousand mark. Is that actual jobs and where are you sourcing those figures from? We're not making these figures up. They are actual jobs? Although I'm a politician, this afternoon I'm not making them up. Good to know. Well, he did release some figures, and, yes, tick, the total is 1023. But what kind of jobs? Were they full-time? Which is what we asked last week. So they're full-time equivalent jobs? Well, over time, yeah, they are. Yeah, so over time, yes, but not right now. Because of those thousand jobs, 730 are more than 30 hours a week, and that's considered full-time. 293 are part-time. 730 full-time, 293 part-time, so maybe those stats are looking nice and relaxed because they've just had a little bit of a massage. OK, so we're now back with our panel ` Indira Stewart, Shane Te Pou and Marg Joiner. Shane, what do you make of that? Well, what I do make of this is that I'm... I was born and bred in the regions. There's hope. There's aspiration. There's a sense of vibe out there. I think it's a good thing. (CHUCKLES) Yeah, OK, but this is just politicians doing what politicians do, isn't it, Marg? Yeah, I think they are all gearing up to get used to this. We're coming into an election year, and that's when the media and others, voters, start asking about the numbers and the delivery. They've called it themselves the year of delivery. So, yeah, let's see the numbers. Do you think he's massaging those figures? (CHUCKLES) Yeah, I definitely think if you're gonna say 1000 jobs, a lot of people will think 1000 full-time jobs. So, I think the public generally wants clarity on what that exactly looks like on the ground, but you know Shane Jones. He's a master lyricist and a poet. I think just on Checkpoint earlier this week, he said, 'It's like an angel peeing on your tongue,' about a certain talent in an interview, so it's massaging lyrics and figures. I think he's an artist, but I think the clarity of figures is important. OK, well, let's talk about his leader, Winston Peters, so Winston Peters hit out at Paula Bennett this week, cos Winston was in hospital, and Paula sent him flowers, and he gave them away. Shane? Yeah, well, I'm a humorous chap, but I don't find that much funny about what Paula did. I think it was a bit of a... a nasty cut by her, and he... Well, let's just be clear. What did Paula do wrong in sending him flowers? Well, look, what was her purpose of it? It's not as if they're best friends. They're` You know, they've got a legal challenge` Winston's got a legal challenge about her. I think it was just a little bit of nastiness with Paula, and she has a bit of a reputation in that area. Right. Marg? I think the Deputy Prime Minister came out looking good. You know, he put up his classic tongue-in-cheek style to rebut it. And that was a good move, I think. OK, all right, so we shouldn't read too much into it, like Winston going rogue? He's actually in the right on this? Oh, well... Yeah, I think some people` Well, on Twitter, to be honest, lots of people were like, 'Well, that's just mean. It was a kind gesture,' but as Shane said, there's also, you know, it could be snarky. It could be a tongue-in-cheek gesture. Considering the fact that, you know, there are the allegations that she leaked the overpayments, the superannuation overpayments. Right. The payments to Winston. That's still very fresh. So that's the context there? Yeah, the context that is missing. So understand that, what would you think if someone who did that to you sent you flowers? All right, so, no, not all is as it seems ` as always in politics. Let's talk Ihumatao, so the Prime Minister changed her wording yesterday from 'no plans to visit Ihumatao' to 'I will visit but not just right now'. So, Marg, I'm gonna ask you ` how hard has it been for Jacinda Ardern to go from, sort of, a populist opposition MP on this to a prime minister who has to make these hard decisions? Yeah, I think, I mean, she's made a good first intervention. And that created space for the Kingitanga to come in. And which then kick-started the discussions that are going on now in the tikanga process. And I think she's done a good job there, but for me, it's an interesting case study in social media and the power of social media and politicians, the way they take notice of that these days. It's a good case study in that. So, Shane, should she have gone there? Yes. Or is she letting those negotiations simmer away? She should have gone. She was the person that laid down the first intervention, rightfully so. There's an old saying sometimes that ringarewa, the workers turn up; sometimes you need the rangatira. She's the rangatira. Maori invested seven seats in her. It's time that she did front. You know, Waitangi Day, she said` she called on Maori to hold her and the government to account. And they` Pania said herself that she felt like she was failing to live up to that call by not coming, and there's a difference between just wanting to visit or visit to bring a resolution. But I think lots of the protesters out there are ` just show face, experience the whenua, experience, you know, what we're experiencing. Right. Whether that results in a resolution or not. OK. In terms of a resolution, we've got these reports at the moment ` whether they're true or not or just speculation ` that Tainui, Shane, is gonna come in and buy the land. Well, I understand that the talks aren't going as well as they` as they've been reported. I understand that Pania ` who's such a clever, articulate, brave person. the winner of the week politically, I think ` she hasn't been involved in any of these discussions, which is a bit of a gap, but I think that Tainui certainly have the ability, the financial ability, and the moral authority to sort this out. So, why word 'sold' not be incorporated in these discussions, then? I'm not quite sure. This is what's been reported to me. I think that would be an unnecessary problem. But I think that, you know, that the King's speech on Wednesday set the ground, fertile ground for settlement, and, yeah, I am hopeful of resolution. So` Sorry. Pania has also said herself that she wants the Crown to take responsibility. That's how she feels. The Crown should take responsibility for this. They stole the land. They should take responsibility for resolving the issue. She sees it as more about the moral, ethical issues. But how is the Crown going to be able to do that, Marg? Because they're saying, 'Look, we're not going to buy that. That's, you know, private land, 'and that would open the door to relooking at other Treaty settlements,' so, Marg, how can the Crown actually take responsibility? I think just circling back to the comments made this week, I think` I imagine in a tikanga process, that if people were respecting that, they'd let it run its course. And I imagine that uninformed commentary, which is possibly what this is ` it's been called speculation ` is unhelpful in one of those processes. And Waikato-Tainui have shut down those claims and so has the Kingitanga. They said the claims are unfounded. So, we've still got a while to go on this, Shane? Still got a way. What the government can do is they can recognise a historical injustice. And for many, that may well be enough. Tainui` Waikato-Tainui helping assist with the actual issue, and the government recognising an historical wrong. And the historical issues would have been weighing heavily on the Prime Minister's mind and probably behind her initial intervention, which did create the space that got us to where we're at today. But, you know, her children reporting in the media this week, 'If you can come to a rugby game. Why can't you come here and show up for your people?' The people who love you. And it's gonna fester on. We're gonna leave it there with our panel. That's true. Indira, Marg and Shane, thank you very much for your time. It was a battle at the pumps in Parliament this week, with both major parties pointing the finger over petrol prices, so here's Finn Hogan with the week that was in Wellington. Well, it was a petrol-fest in Parliament this week, with Jacinda Ardern hitting back hard at National's 'fleecer-in-chief' label. New Zealand has the third highest petrol prices in the OECD before tax. And that, quote, the core problem in our view is that an active wholesale market does not exist in New Zealand. I note that the last government could have acted, but decided it wasn't easy and decided to do nothing. It seems to me that was their general philosophy in government. But the Prime Minister wasn't the only one on the attack, with Paula Bennett firing a broad salvo at the Government's record. We're in the 'avoid' government at the moment. Avoid the letter. Don't talk about the letter. Avoid the letter. Do not talk about that. Avoid Ihumatao. So avoid talking about it, avoid the people, avoid going there. Trying to, sorta, throw in a bit of a 'we're gonna halt the building' and then hope that kinda goes away. Avoid talking about Corrections. But amongst all the usual political scrappiness this week, a moment of sweetness with Trevor Mallard showing us his softer side with Tamati Coffey's new baby. The Honourable Mark Mitchell. All right, and that's all from us for now. Thank you so much for watching, and we will see you again next weekend. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2019