- E haere ake nei. Today on Newshub Nation ` Judith Collins on bad reviews, bad polls. Can she keep the show on the road? A Queenstown tourism operator responds to Stuart Nash's rescue plan. And a special investigation into the booming business of fertility treatment in New Zealand. Tena tatou katoa. Good morning. I'm Simon Shepherd and welcome to Newshub Nation. In political news this week, Tourism Minister Steve Nash is planning to shake up visitor pricing as part of his industry game plan. The government isn't promising more cash for the crippled sector, instead saying it's an opportunity to reshape tourism. The industry would be helped if a trans-Tasman bubble is put in place during April. A proposal is to go before Cabinet as soon as Monday. The bubble may fully extend to the Cook Islands and Niue. And the government plans to make Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield responsible for fluoridating New Zealand's drinking water. Currently, local councils decide whether to fluoridate or not. Well, bad polls, bad reviews and a bit of bad behaviour. And the government still riding on a pandemic popularity high. Who would want to be Opposition leader? Judith Collins does, and she joins me now. Kia ora. Good morning. Thanks for coming in. - Good morning, Simon. - OK, let's kick it off. Let's first talk travel bubbles. Now, this morning, you are calling on the government to allow quarantine-free travel from Samoa, Fiji and Tonga. Why do you want to move quickly to that? - Well, there's loads of reasons. One, that Fiji hasn't had a COVID case in the community for over a year, or around a year. Samoa and Tonga have never had one. We also need to support our Pacific neighbours with tourism, because they have just gone through devastating economic times. Fiji is looking at 27% unemployment. We've had Samoa's GDP dropped by about 9.8%. And then we also have the RSE workers who we need in this country now to pick fruit and do the jobs. - Let's talk about that in just a moment. Fiji currently has four COVID cases in managed isolation. Are you confident enough that they have strict enough protocols in place not to export it here? - Well, we've got cases in managed isolation too, and clearly they haven't had a case in the community for over a year, so, clearly, they do know what they're doing. I think we do need to be far more upfront with our Pacific neighbours and stop treating them like they're, you know` like they can't make decisions for themselves. If they want to come here, why shouldn't we be` - But what about the reverse, though? I mean, if we, as you say, have cases in managed isolation here and have had community outbreaks, wouldn't it be devastating, even more devastating for them if we exported COVID to the islands? - Absolutely. But it's also important to remember that we should not be paternalistic towards places like Samoa, Tonga and Fiji. These are countries who can make their own decisions. And if they want to be able to and they're calling for those this trans` Let's say the specific bubble that we could have. - Yeah. - Why aren't we doing it? - But we do have a history of exporting diseases to the Pacific in the past, don't we, and that causes devastation there. We should be very gentle and careful about this. - We should also not be paternalistic. - Right. - And, you know, we're not talking about people, the countries there who can't make their own decisions. If they want to have a trans` let's say, a Pacific bubble with New Zealand, they are also very aware that, for instance, an RSE worker in New Zealand could take back the income of around seven years work after` from six months in New Zealand. We have to be realistic about it. These economies have got nothing other than tourism, and we're the main driver of that, and we're just blocking them off. - OK, so let's talk about tourism and the Australian bubble, the trans-Tasman bubble. So most of your recent press releases have been focused on, you know, pushing for that with Australia. But the government can easily now say, 'Look, we are doing this.' I guess I wonder whether there's any other fresh policy ideas that National can bring to the table, which isn't just COVID related, just pushing the government to something that they can say, 'Oh, we're doing it already.' - Well, obviously, the economic growth or recovery, which we need to obviously go through, because we've got a 2.9% drop in GDP in the last year. That's the highest drop that we've ever recorded in New Zealand. And one of the reasons for that` - This is volatility, isn't it? - One of the reasons is that we completely killed our international tourism market, and also we're now facing horticulture going down. So we've seen today an announcement that a business Perry's Berrys is going to close up shop. They can't get people to work in picking the berries. So we've got, for instance, in horticulture, that's worth $6 billion to New Zealand. Is that important? Yes, it is, but it's not just the money. It's the fact that these are family businesses that are just going to the wall. And we've got an opportunity. The government says 13,500 RSE workers are needed. - Yeah. - Well, where are they? - OK, well, let's talk other policy areas, because, you know, that's where you've been concentrating. But we have other issues going on as well. - We certainly have. - So we've got housing coming up this week, an ongoing crisis. Where are you in this? I haven't heard any fresh policy on you. I've heard the Greens this week. Nothing from National. - Oh, no, we have got policy on it. So Nicola Willis, our housing spokesperson, has been doing a great job holding the government to account. So obviously in housing and infrastructure` is another one of our planks. - Yeah. - And part of that is` So, for instance, take the Kaianga Ora, which is the Housing New Zealand. At the moment, they are borrowing money to buy, in many cases, houses off the private sector. How about they provide some of that money to some of our housing foundation people to actually do the community housing that we need? How about also we get rid of the Auckland urban limit, which is said to add $50,000 to the cost of a new house? How about we do some emergency powers around the RMA? How about we actually just make it easier? - The RMA's been dealt with, right? - Yeah, but it's not going to be the way these guys are doing it. They've already got Eugenie Sage in charge of the select committee. It's never going to work. - So, what are you saying? You're saying, like, just treat it like an earthquake, treat New Zealand earthquake,... - Yeah, exactly. Yeah. - ...like you did with Canterbury and just go and consent the holus-bolus. - That's the one. Just get on with it. - Just like that? No controls? - Isn't it amazing how well it worked in Christchurch? - OK, but I just wonder whether you` Will these policies`? Are you hoping to bring house prices down? Because you did say in the leaders debate in some areas. - There will be some, but` - So, where? - Where houses are well overpriced and people don't think that they're worth that. - So that's Auckland, right? - But if you have loads of` Well, no, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that where you have loads of opportunities for people to buy houses, you will obviously get some people who say, 'Actually, I'm not going to pay that sort of money 'for that house because I can get one at a better value.' But one of the` you know, one of the things you need to understand too is councils don't have the money for the infrastructure that's needed for housing. So we've said Infrastructure Bank have a housing infrastructure fund that can help those councils do the work. And the other thing is you've got to bring in people to do the work. That's the other thing. So, again, trans-Tasman bubble, but also look to the Pacific as well. - In your election night speech, you said National would re-emerge a stronger, more disciplined and connected party. - Yes. - Are you stronger? The polling says no, you're not. Still 27%. - Well, we've gone up, then, haven't we? - Well, you went down, then up. - What you're seeing is` around the world is that every Opposition is finding it really hard to get those numbers to shift because of the COVID thing. You can see it in Western Australia, where the Opposition went down two places, MPs. I think it's important to understand and do the groundwork first, which is what we're doing now. That caucus is going to be` - So you're not worried about the poll levels? - No, I'm not at all. - Not at all? - We're two and a half years out from an election. We have` The caucus is working well. - OK. - We've gone through a review where the caucus have been able to see that review. They've been able to learn from that. - And I'll ask you about the review in a moment. But let me just remind you of a couple of quotes... - Sure. - ...from you on this programme in July last year. - Yes. - You were asked if the party polled 35% whether you would resign. You said that's not going to happen. It did happen, less than that. So where's the accountability? - Well, I've been re-elected unanimously by the caucus. And the other thing is, is we've seen what's happened with COVID around the world and how that's actually worked for every incumbent government. I mean, even Donald Trump got more votes this time than he did at the time before. - So when Simon Bridges was leader, you also said on this show 35% polling was not sustainable. Are you saying that's pre-COVID as well? - It was pre-COVID, actually. But also since then, we've had other things happen. - So, yeah, OK. 35% now` 35% is not sustainable, 27% now. OK? What polling number would make you resign? - Well, nothing's going to make me resign, like that is all about the confidence that the caucus and the party has in me. And they do, and I am very happy working with that caucus. - So what polling number has the caucus said to you? - No one's said anything to me about that, and the thing is, Simon, is I'm focused on doing my job and my job is building that caucus, building a team. And what you'll hear from me is a lot of me talking about the team and 'we' and that's because I have a whole lot of people in our caucus, the whole caucus, who have talent and drive and they want to do well and I want them to do well. - Is it a question of your own political ambition rather than the good of the party? - No, it's entirely about the good of the party. - Right. - I did, actually, not want this job, but having got this job` - You didn't want this job? - I did not want this job when it was basically offered to me. And I'm very happy, though, to have the job and to do it well. - So, why'd you take it? - Because if I hadn't, Simon, I would have let down people when we could have` we had to find another leader after Todd Muller resigned. And if I hadn't taken it, after people who were asking me to take it, who had never previously ever suggested I should be, I would have actually been` frankly, I would have been running away from my duty to do my best. - OK. To do your best. So if you didn't want it and you did it because you got asked to take it and you didn't want to let people down, do you still want it? - Yes I do, now. - You do? - I'm really enjoying it. I'm really enjoying it and I'm really enjoying building our caucus, so that caucus has moved a long way this year. We are just doing very well. - Yeah, and you have mentioned that building a caucus is part of your job, that is your job, isn't it, to rebuild the party after such a devastating loss. And you've had the party review by the party board. What is the most important message out of that review to you? - Disunity will always be very, very difficult for a party. Never have three leaders in four months in an election year. - Yep. - This is never a good idea. But also COVID was absolutely a devastating hit for our party even before the changes to leadership. It had massively impacted us. - Are you happy that that review has been open and transparent enough? Did all the key of all the key interviews happen, all the key people, campaign managers? - Well, I think that certainly from my point of view, because I wasn't in charge of that review` - But you are on the board. - I'm on the board. And I have read the review. I thought actually, you know, I thought, gosh, I didn't realise everyone else could see the same thing that I could. - Which is what? - That there was disunity, that COVID was very difficult to deal with, and also, I think, you know, we had a prime minister standing up every day telling the country that she was saving them. So, it's very hard to do that. - OK. So did everybody receive the same raw version of the report to read? - Well, the one that I have seen is the same one that all of the caucus has been able to read. - Right. And is that that the raw version that the board put together? - That's the raw` That's what I saw. - So everybody in the caucus saw that? - Has had the ability to read it. - OK. - Not everyone has chosen to read it. - Not everybody has chosen to read it? - It's their choice. - Not everybody in your caucus has chosen to read the review? - Well, they don't have to. We're not a party of` - Surely it should be mandatory reading after a devastating election loss. - Do you know what, Simon? I'm not going to stand there and say to people, chain them to a table and tell them to read it. I treat people like adults. - It's in their best interest, is it not? - It's up to them. - OK. I find that extraordinary, that a National MP who's been through such an election loss, would not read the results of the review. - Everybody who wants to can, in terms of the caucus and everyone in that caucus knows exactly what went wrong in that campaign. - When people were presented with that report, no phones were allowed. Nobody was allowed to take away a copy. - Yeah, well, why would they be? I mean, we had` - Is that because you don't want it out in public domain? - We had Sue Moroney from the Labour Party saying the other day that after their 2014 massive loss that they weren't` no one got to see, the caucus didn't even get to see their report. I mean, we have` the board has actually gone out of its way to make sure that those who want to see it do. But look, I'm not going to apologise for our caucus not leaking to Newshub. (BOTH LAUGH) - Is the report that bad, that you just don't want it out in the public? Is it, you know? - It's commercially sensitive. Basically. - It's commercially sensitive. - If it was a business, it would be commercially sensitive, and it's not written for that. Look, the report is no more than what you know and I know what went wrong. It's not` There's nothing in there that's utterly secret` - So why not just put a public copy out there? Because if it's what I know, just put it out. - Because we do not give our opponents extra ammunition to attack us on every day. That's not what we do. We're here to build, rebuild, not to destroy. - Is this a pattern of, sort of, secrecy? Because when Simon Bridges commissioned the investigation, the allegations of bullying and harassment in the National Party, that report was never released either ` into the culture. - But then, nor did the Labour Party release the one into their sexual harassment cases, either. That one in that camp, remember that? They were going to release it, never did. It's` political parties don't normally go round and give their opponents all the ammunition to attack them on little bits and pieces. - Do you think that the leadership of the board needs to change? - No, I think the board is always chosen by the members. And whoever the members choose, I will support them. That is, I respect the members and I respect our volunteers and they will make those decisions. - All right, so you talk about disunity, OK, and how that was a key factor. Simon Bridges is drumming up a lot of attention lately. His 'wokester' comments about the police commissioner, he's created a bit of a ruckus in the House, getting kicked out, he's talking about issues outside his portfolio. Should you be reining him in? If you're worried about disunity, rein Simon Bridges in. - Well, why would I want to do that? I mean, Simon is one of our really good performers. Why would I want to say, you know` - Is he a distraction from your leadership? - No, I think that we are very focused as a caucus on doing our job. We're not going into a campaign at the moment. We're two and a half years out from an election. We are doing the rebuild and part of it is actually people being able to speak. - So why are you a better leader than him? - I guess that that's up to the caucus. And I'm not going to go around trying to be disparaging of anybody, any previous leader. But what I know I'm very good at, in my opinion and experience, is in bringing along people and letting people have their opportunity to shine. That's not to say that he didn't, but it is really important that we do that. - OK` - So I'm just the person who's been chosen by the caucus. - Just the person who's been chosen. One last question there. Do you miss the days when you could just be yourself? You could just be Crusher Collins and you didn't have to be someone` everybody else. - (LAUGHS) - Just be Judith Collins. - Yeah, I actually am, because Crusher Collins was only ever a name someone else gave me. I am actually not a one-dimensional person. You don't end up with 20 years of law practise and being President of the Auckland District Law Society or company director because you're one-dimensional person. No, I'm not. What I am is, what you see is what you get with me. And I'm very happy to say what I need to say in my field. But, ultimately, my job is to lead our team and to build our team and to build that capability. That's what I'm focused on. - Judith Collins, thank you very much for your time this morning. - Thank you. - If you've got something to say about what you see on the show, please let us know. We're on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, NewsHubNationNZ. Twitter panel this week is comedian Ed Amon and comedian` sorry, Auckland councillor` Sorry, Richard Hills. They're using the hashtag #nationNZ and you can email us at: E whai ake nei, still to come, we dissect the week's political news with our panel. Plus, would you like some fries with that? Upsizing your fertility treatment. - Hoki mai ano. Welcome back. With more and more people seeking help to fall pregnant, the business of babies is booming. But are desperate couples paying thousands for optional extras that aren't backed up with science? Anna Bracewell-Worrall reports. - At eight months, Ihaka is one loved-on baby. - You don't know what love at first sight has until you meet your kids, and (SIGHS)... we're so blessed. Lucky. - He's got something different that makes some extra extraordinary ` Ihaka got a jump-start in a petri dish. - Part of his whakapapa now is the long, winding road, the labs of Fertility Associates at St George's Hospital. - For mum Tania and dad Ryan, it's been a huge journey. They really wanted a baby, but when it wasn't happening, discovered Tania needed surgery to remove a blocked fallopian tube. They would probably need help to fall pregnant: in vitro fertilisation ` IVF. To qualify for public funding, women must have a BMI of less than 32. so Tania went on a weight-loss programme. - I was running. (CHUCKLES) I was running blocks. Not fast. (CHUCKLES) - She lost 25 kilos only to discover how long she'd be waiting for publicly-funded IVF. - Between 18 months and two years was the wait time. - With time ticking, her family offered to step in and pay around $16,000 for a private round of IVF, which took some getting used to. - What if it doesn't work? I'm gonna have that burden to carry (SNIFFLES) (TEARFULLY) and I didn't want that. - Its financial stress familiar to many of those who go for IVF. In this case, it's a happy ending. - Ran into the kitchen and got the pregnancy test and threw it at his face, and he didn't know what was happening, and there was tears and screams and so much happiness. - But depending on age, at least half the time, it won't be so successful. - Particularly if you end up going through years and years of trying to conceive or treatment, it takes a real toll on every aspect of your life. - Since Louise Brown became the world's first test-tube baby in 1978, more than eight million IVF babies have been born. In short, around the world, business is booming for fertility clinics. - ADVERTISEMENT: Families are built on trust. - ADVERTISEMENT...offering a comprehensive range of current technologies. - ADVERTISEMENT: There's no such thing as the right time. - In New Zealand, the biggest fertility business, Fertility Associates, is seeking $100 million from private equity companies to expand. - It is a business, and I think that's grown out of the fact that few countries in world do fund it. It's a successful business. There's no doubt about it. - Basic IVF usually costs well over $10,000, and now there are optional extras at premium prices. There's preimplantation genetic screening for more than $1000 per embryo, time-lapse morphology for 1000 bucks and oocyte activation for 380. Professor Cindy Farquhar's Research found 80% of Australasian clinics are offering add-on services and that none of them are backed by high-quality evidence showing they improve chances of a live-birth. - There's insufficient evidence really to recommend them and especially to ask people to pay for them. - Where there are studies, they're not big enough to satisfy academics. - Pretty inconclusive and not very convincing. - She says the only add-on with reasonable evidence is something called EmbryoGlue. As for the rest: - My advice to patients is, hey, maybe that we don't have the evidence for this and that you're better to save your money for something that we do know is worthwhile. And in many cases, that does mean having, you know, a second cycle of treatment. - Fertility Associates says the problem is a lack of big trials. - To show a small difference in effect, you need a huge, large study that might take many years to complete, and that's just time our patients simply don't have. - Consumer New Zealand says patients should seek independent advice before buying add-ons. - Those options need to come with an evidence base that backs them up, and if providers are claiming a benefit from add-ons, they should be able to back that up with robust scientific evidence. - I feel very comfortable with the conversations I have with my patients because, honestly,... often, this is something that's initiated by them. They've perhaps done one or two rounds of IVF already. If we just dismissed every idea they came forward with, you know, from things they've perhaps read about online, just said, 'Look, there's no evidence for that,' I think that would be a very patriarchal thing to do. - Overseas media about add-ons have seen changes. In the UK, a traffic light system gives red or amber lights to add-ons with no or conflicting evidence of effectiveness. - This is a really emotional time for a lot of people. It's a huge financial outlay. And, you know, a lot of people find it a struggle to afford even the baseline treatment, let alone add-ons that can come at quite a hefty price tag as well. So with financial, emotional pressure mixed together, consumers can be quite vulnerable through this process. - In New Zealand, two rounds of IVF treatment are funded, but not for everyone. Limited public funding means waitlists. In Auckland, it's currently 12 to 18 months, and to qualify, you must meet certain criteria ` age, BMI and at least a year of trying naturally first. That BMI criteria is disproportionately shutting Maori and Pasifika women out. - We really feel that that excludes a lot of people on a cultural basis. So Maori and Pasifika we know are just genetically slightly heavier. It doesn't mean that they're any more or less healthy or fertile. - Professor of Nutrition Elaine Rush describes it as a crude measure. - Yes, we've known for quite a long time, that for the same BMI, Maori and Pacific have more muscle and less fat than European. - So what might be a fairer way to, sort of, decide whether someone is fit and healthy for IVF? - Well, I think perhaps one thing you could do is look at the fitness, the physical fitness. - One study describes the BMI criteria as an example of institutional racism. - For Pacific and Maori women, you know, that's quite punitive. So maybe we should be looking at having BMI thresholds along ethnicity lines and not just a blunt, one-size-fits-all. - BMI has been crafted by, you know,... (SIGHS) I hate to say it. They've been crafted by white supremacists who actually don't want to see any other body shapes. - Advocates also say the criteria are unfair to same-sex couples who have to try 12 cycles of private insemination and to those with unexplained fertility who have to try for five years naturally first. - There are equities. There are people who simply won't be able to become parents because they can't afford to pay for it. - If the criteria is widened, advocates say that funding needs to increase too, Otherwise that dreaded waitlist will only grow. - We're just treading water. - Absolutely time for change. Overdue time for change, for sure. - So that more families can spend hours reading and rereading Sleepy Kiwi to the next generation. - A report from Anna Bracewell-Worrall. Coming up ` our political panel, Tracy Watkins, Dr Lara Greaves and Dita De Boni. And New Zealand's former Chief Mines Inspector on the safety of going further into Pike River Mine. - Welcome back. New Zealand's former Chief Mines Inspector says going further into the Pike River isn't just feasible, it's safe. Some families of the 29 killed are pushing to expand the recovery mission. They say information, new information proves it is possible and answers could lie just metres away. Senior reporter Conor Whitten has more. - Buried in the catacomb of Pike River Mine, buckets, wood pellets and pipes in the dark. Boreholes with cameras can provide a snapshot. But for Bernie Monk who lost his son at Pike River, the dead and the truth still lie beyond reach. - I do not want people of Pike River to die not knowing the truth of what happened to their loved ones under ground. And I think they deserve that. - This is as far as anyone's ventured since the mine exploded in 2010. Through the pink seal called the Rocsil plug lies the end of the Pike River Drift. It's the end of the road for the recovery mission, totally blocked by a roof collapse. It was long thought to be impassable, but now there's hope things have changed. - We now know that the major barrier to entry, the thing that's been referred to up until now as the rockfall, is actually a lot smaller than we thought. Our experts say this is a simple task to get beyond that roof fall. - The Pike River Recovery Agency now knows where the roof collapse starts. There are two separate blockages, one 15m and small enough to see over the top. The second row full is right up against it. And another 15m away is the road to the mine's main fan. It's thought the fan may have sparked the explosion. The roof fall is all that stands in the way. - The families of these miners have not had answers for 10 years, and they deserve answers. Those answers are now a mere 12m, 15m away through well-crushed coal. - International mining expert Tony Foster was New Zealand's chief mine inspector. Now he's advising the families at Pike. He told Newshub Nation the new information means going beyond the rockfall isn't just feasible, it's safe. He says... He believes it could be easily cleared with arches supported by steel and timber. But it isn't in the recovery agency's mandate. - It's not up to me or us to speculate whether it's feasible or not. We have a quite specific mandate from government, which is to recover the mine drift. - Instead, it's a question of political will. And Pike River Recovery Minister Andrew Little says nothing's changed. - The families agreed, and we were all very clear what the mandate was. It was to recover the drift. Anything beyond that is just a phenomenally greater and more expensive exercise. And I'm sorry, but we cannot commit to doing that. - We've spent $50 million to get this far. We are metres away from the answers. Don't stop now. - The mine will be handed over in June to the Department of Conservation, when it will become a national park. - Unless we get re-entry before the mine is sealed and handed back to DOC, that chance is gone forever. - Buried with the 29 men at Pike River who could lie a matter of metres away. - Conor Whitten with that report. Time now for our panel. Joining me today, editor of the Sunday Star Times, Tracy Watkins, Dr Lara Greaves from Auckland University of Politics, kia ora. And Dita De Boni, who's a senior journalist at the National Business Review. Thank you for coming today. All right, Judith Collins, let's get into it. Tracy, how's she performing so far? - About as well as could be expected, I imagine. As you said, she's at 27% in the polls. Huge pressure on her. And the government at the moment is completely controlling the agenda. I mean, it's in crisis mode the whole time. And it's incredibly difficult to get your head above` to get above that noise. I think the year ahead will be crucial for Judith. I think, you know, if the polls don't improve, there's going to be challenges. But whether that changes anything at this point... - Yeah, I mean, because she's` before COVID, Lara, she pegged herself around 35%, and now that's all gone out the window. She'll just say it's COVID; it's affected everything. 'I'm going to peg myself to any poll numbers.' Is that her out? - I think she is the worst job in politics at the moment. I don't think anyone would necessarily want to have that role, because we often look to other people in the party, like, for example, Dr Shane Reti, who would actually have that sort of authority as a medical doctor to be able to say alongside COVID and, kind of, people would respect his experience in that space, so he could be an alternative. But why would he do that? Why would anyone want to be National Party leader up against this popular government while they're doing so well? And I mean, these things, to some extent, work in cycles. And we're currently, like, not quite at that sort of` I think if I was sitting there as a national MP that wanted to challenge for the leadership, I would wait until, sort of, Labour was sort of at that third term, sort of, at that slump there. I think that's where I'd go for it. Right now is not on. - Right now is not on. So Judith has the job for this year at least. Is that right? Is that what you saying? - I'd say so, because, like, why would you roll her? Because you're just going to be unpopular too. You're just going to make the party look more unstable. And you know what people want in a crisis ` they want stability. They don't want people leaking, rolling, doing all of these things and sexting and all those things. People don't want that in a government. They don't look like a government-in-waiting at the moment. - Right. So part of that, Dita, do you think is Simon Bridges? I mean, what's he up to? He seems to be creating his own, sort of` He's getting a lot of cut through, don't you think? And I don't know if that's helpful for Judith Collins. - I think he is getting cut through. He's relishing his time in the limelight as a maverick of the National Party. But I actually would take issue with what Lara was saying. I think there is a groundswell happening against Labour, and it's happening in the business community. I mean, we can see it in the sentiment that we cover. It hasn't translated into a general public sentiment yet. But I think Judith Collins has a lot of freedom to sort of really pick up that constituency and take it with her. - Was that where she's going? I mean, so that constituency, as you're saying, so she's going with regional seasonal workers today, you know, help out the orchardists. She's going trans-Tasman bubble. Is that where she is going to pick up that constituency? - Absolutely. The field is wide open for her, and she's hitting all the points that businesses are saying, 'These are our concern.' - That's interesting. So you're saying that there is an opportunity here for Judith Collins this year rather than say last, say, Lara saying you've got a very popular government in crisis mode. - And I think she's very bullish. She's going into it like a bull at a red flag. - Yeah. - In her usual manner. But I mean, I think there will be some fans of that. - I think I think the one thing I'd say about that is that` and it will be about the economy, and I do agree. I think there is that groundswell, and it's not just about the business community, but also perhaps that... I think there was a column last week talking about Jacinda Ardern sort of empathising with people all the time. It's starting to grate with people. Someone's best, strongest point sometimes becomes their weakest in the same way we saw with John Key. - Right. - But if you then look at it, if you're National and you're still at 27% in the polls at the end of the year going into next year, then do you say, 'But if we're going to win the next election on business and the economy, is Judith that person?' Or is someone like Chris Luxon the right person to do that? - OK. - You know, I think that's the equation they're going to make. A little bit of a John Key thing. - OK, so the... I mean, they've been concentrating on the travel bubble. But do you think, Lara, that they should be bringing out fresh ideas? The point is that we've got housing coming up next week. OK? We're going to be focusing on that. The Green Party jumps in early and get some air on that. But National's pushing travel bubbles still. I mean, are they doing enough? - I think they need to reinvent themselves as well cos I would actually argue that all those people, a lot of the business owners and stuff, were already National voters anyway, already lean National. I think that National needs to reinvent itself, especially in the face of what we would call 'super diversity' going forward. So in 2038, the majority of the population won't be Pakeha. So, like, we're gonna have this super diversity. National's traditional voter base is changing, and they need to get with the times. Their percentage of women in their caucus dropped between 2017 and 2020, and they've only got two Maori, like, they need to reinvent and think about what does a right-wing, what does a sort of centre-right, slightly conservative party look like? - That's a good point. That brings us to the review. I mean, they've got to restructure, rebuild. Dita, what do you think about the fact that not everyone has read it in the caucus? - I would question whether that's true. - Why? - I think` (CHUCKLES) I think the whole thing is shrouded in mystery, like every report done on any political party, as Judith Collins pointed out herself, but particularly with National. She's a very controlling, I think, person behind the scenes, and she will let people see it if she thinks it's in her best interest, but I think otherwise we're never gonna know the full story. - OK. All right. I just want to move on to the fertility story now. Dita, while we're talking to you, you've reported in depth on this issue. Are want-to-be parents paying for expensive add-ons that they don't need? - Certainly, yes. And that's going to happen more as private equity gets involved in the sector, I believe. In Britain, though, it's very strongly regulated, and that's why the British have that traffic light system, which I think is very helpful. Here, it's sort of halfway between a good service and, you know, a money-making service. In America, it's a complete Wild West. - Right. So is there room for regulation here? - Definitely more room for regulation. - You saw, Lara, the Fertility Associates saying it would be patriarchal not to offer people things that they may have researched on the internet. It's a... - I found that` I kind of sniggered at that, I have to say, because it was one of those situations where you were like, 'Hmm, um...' (CHUCKLES) trying to, like, adapt that framing to sort of, like, trying to sort of appropriate feminism. It just doesn't` Where it suits them. It suits them as well. - Yeah, OK. - So, I mean, I was quite sceptical of that framing there from them. - And also the other issue there ` BMI restrictions in the public system. So, the Maori Party saying it's white supremacy, Lara, I mean, uh... - I think we've seen time and time again that BMI is not a good measure and it does unfairly discriminate against Maori and Pasifika and people from other ethnic minority groups. I think that, like, you saw that the experts that were interviewed in there kind of hinted to there being other measures and other sort of directions. I know there's been a lot of researchers in this space that have been saying that we need to expand some of those public fertility treatments, especially in light of the aforementioned super diversity and increasing rainbow couples wanting to access public funding, you know, the social infertility model. - So there's a lot of room for regulation there. Like Dita's saying, Tracy, we're in, sort of, an evolving space here, aren't we, between fertility and business? - Yeah. And it's gonna become an even bigger business proposition as the years go by, because we've all seen the numbers around fertility. And yeah, I did notice the comment about white supremacy. You could also argue maybe it's discrimination against, you know, sizeism. I think it's one of those areas, as Dita talked about, we need to find that middle ground between overly regulated and the Wild West. - So does mean, Dita, perhaps that somebody's gonna put a private member's bill in, or would there be scope for the government to be doing a working group on this? - I think it's more that the government listens to science and, you know, scientists and medical professionals and so forth have a body that has an oversight on the sector in New Zealand and how it operates, because they're also looking at bringing people in from Asia ` Asia's the big market for fertility. And there is scope for an inbound export market, if you like, of these services. - Oh, OK. - You know, not only up there, but here. - Yeah, yeah. - So once travel starts up again. So, you know... - Export the fertility... - Well, we are` Fertility Associates have done a great job, so they have an exportable product. - Right. We'll just have to leave it there on that export note. Dita De Boni, Lara Greaves and Tracy Watkins, thank you so much for your time. Coming up ` a tourism boss who's underwhelmed by the government's rescue plan. Plus ` National's Erica Stanford on why her plan for immigration is better than Kris Faafoi's. - A 24% surge in domestic travellers hasn't covered the loss of international tourists for businesses suffering from our border closures, especially in a place like Queenstown. That's where Tourism Minister Stuart Nash outlined his vision for the industry, but did it fall flat? Matt Wong owns and operates iFLY Indoor Skydiving in Queenstown. I spoke to him earlier and asked him what he thought of it. - Yeah, I've only picked up bits of information from the media press releases. Unfortunately, a lot of the tourism operators down here didn't get the opportunity to hear him in person. It is a bit disappointing, really, because there was an opportunity for him to talk to some of those operators that were really hurting and feeling the pain over the last 12 months. I think the essence of it is good. You know, we all want to have a lighter environmental footprint. We want to be engaged in the community, and we just want to be a nice industry. But it is challenging to see` - Yeah, I mean` Sorry. But if you had the chance to actually see him or speak to him, what would you have said? - I would have said does he actually realise some of the pain and hurt that we are actually going through, and how would he actually know that if he hasn't actually spoken to many of the operators? When you exclude 95% of the operators from being able to see and speak to you, it is quite challenging to know where he's getting his full information and understanding fully what's happening in these towns that rely on tourism. - Right. So when you say, 'Exclude 95%,' were you not invited? - No, it was invite only, and certainly there was plenty of operators that weren't invited. There was a handful, hand-picked, that were invited to a conference that he spoke at. But his message from his office was that he didn't have time to talk to us. - OK. Well, that's disappointing for you. I'm sure you've got a lot to say. Just briefly, can you describe what the last year has been like? - Yeah, it's been really challenging, really tough. I think, mentally, a lot of the owners and the operators and the staff here have really struggled, and it's like battling for 12 months solid and no end in sight. I think the idea of having no certainty, no security around your jobs or your businesses really starts to weigh on you, and it's almost like the silent killer COVID has been. There's no ambulance, there's no sirens, there's no buildings collapsing, and so everyone's starting to forget the impact that it's had on the travel and tourism industry. And yet we feel it every day. We wake up in the morning not knowing whether we're going to have any customers or not. - So, Tourism Minister Stuart Nash outlined his vision for a more sustainable industry and said it wasn't going to be business as usual, but there was no extra cash promised. Did that hurt? - Oh, look, we're used to this now. We're used to being told that there's nothing else coming for us. There was the stat funding. There's $400 million that was given to the tourism industry. The reality is, is 300 million of that didn't go to the places it needed to. It went to 130 operators and that's it. So, you know, for most of the tourism operators, they're small SME, Ma and Pa family operations and they are still suffering. They never got any handouts in the first place. We got the wage subsidy, but that's about it. So, you know, to hear that there's no cash coming for our industry, it's no surprise. So we weren't necessarily let down. It's exactly what we thought was coming. - OK, do you think that tourism should be a special case, though? I mean, you've accessed the wage subsidy, there were some small business grants and loans available, but should you be a special case? - Yes and no. There's certain regions where the communities are starting to get affected. We're talking places like the West Coast ` Te Anau, for example ` and to an extent Queenstown, who have relied, quite solely, on the international market, through no fault of their own either, but they've been asked to change their way completely from what they were doing, the trade that they were in before, and reimagine their whole business structure to pivot towards something that it wasn't designed for. It wasn't our fault that the borders were closed. We accept the reasons why it was closed in the first place. I think everyone does, and we don't hold the government accountable for that at all. But I think to walk away and leave us stranded here when we do contribute a significant amount of revenue to the government each and every year is kind of painful. Do I expect us to have any more? No. There's some really talented and positive stories coming out from tourism where we've done the pivoting. We've realised that there's revenue elsewhere within our business, and we are surviving. We're keeping afloat. But there are certainly a lot of hospitality and tourism businesses out there that aren't that way, and they can't pivot that easily, and they are really drowning. - OK. A travel bubble seems to be on the way with Australia. Will that help those businesses survive if it does happen in April? - Yes, it will. It's not everything, and we appreciate the fact that it's not everything. But at the same time, Australia represents a significant portion of the international market back. And combined with Australia and New Zealand, that's about 50% of certainly my business back again, and that's a significant amount, and that definitely means that we're going to survive easily. - OK. But the Minister was warning that mass-scale international tourism is not likely until 2022. It's not going to be business as usual. It's just not going to be the same ever again. - Oh, look, it won't be the same ever again, and in some respects, that's a good thing, you know? He has touched on some very valid points and that is that the industry was getting a little bit too big. You know, we weren't being sustainable and we need to work on that, so we fully acknowledge that there are some issues within the industry. But we were working on those beforehand, and for most, as I said, the small to medium enterprises and some of the bigger players, they were already working towards that anyway. - You just need to head to that stage. You need a helping hand to get to that stage. Is that what you're saying? - Well, it sort of does mean that. When you look at how much the tourism industry contributed ` it's $41 billion, I think it was, contributed to the economy, and there was almost $4 billion worth of GST revenue that they contributed every year, and that was pre-COVID. There's a significant amount of money that's going back into the government's pockets to be able to spend within New Zealand. Without that, I think we're not going to appreciate what that means until a few years down the track. And if we want to get that revenue back again, which I'm sure every Kiwi does certainly appreciate that revenue, we're going to have to make sure that the industry survives. - OK. Well, we all hope you do. Matt Wong, thank you very much for your time this morning. - Kia ora. Thanks, Simon. - Matt Wong from Queenstown tourism business iFLY. Stay with us. We're back after the break. - Welcome back to The Pitch, where we give MPs just five minutes to sell you on their ideas. This week, Ben Hogan put National's immigration spokesperson, Erica Stanford, in the hot seat. Immigration is a portfolio that could be completely reimagined post-COVID, so he started asking, what her first move would be, if she were the minister in charge. - We've got migrants who are split from their families, who have been for a year, and that needs addressing. The first thing we need to do is allow them to apply to get their families here, and none of them are expecting to have their families arrive tomorrow. They all understand that it's going to be a process. Over a manageable period of time, have a reasonable number of these families being brought in, because the alternative is these nurses will leave, at a time where we're 1000 nurses short, and we're about to undertake the largest vaccination programme in our history. We can't afford to lose them. - Just on the Trans Tasman bubble, we've got reports now that it's going to be open, potentially in April. When would you have it open? - I think that's probably a reasonably good timeframe. I'm under no illusions that there are things that need to be done. The airports have got to get ready. The airlines have got to get ready. I understand those things have to happen, but I think that mid to late April is a really good timeframe, because then we have choices. We can start to bring in those desperate Kiwis who need to get home. We can start reuniting migrant families and we can bring in those medical professionals that we absolutely, desperately need right now. - And this is a once in a generation time to reimagine immigration. What's your vision for post-pandemic immigration to New Zealand? - My first priority when it comes to, sort of, looking long term is to change the narrative, because we have, for too long, been listening to people like Winston Peters tell us that migrants are the cause of all of our problems, that they take our jobs, that they are the cause of our house prices. And actually, we couldn't be further from the truth. Now we are going to be in a world where people are going to be clawing their way` different countries clawing their way out of COVID, trying to rebuild their economies. They've also all got declining birth rates and ageing populations. We are all going to be competing for the same highly skilled people. If we continue to treat our migrants like rubbish, they will go elsewhere. - Specifically on a policy level, who's going to get priority, under a National framework, in immigration? - There's lots of conversations to be had. But I think one really important thing to note is that we have a rapidly ageing population, in terms of the proportion of people, and not that many people entering the workforce. By 2040, it's going to be 10 people leaving the workforce, going to retire, for every five coming in. That's a huge problem. We're not going to just have problems at the very skilled end, we're going to have problems right across society, in different sectors. And we're going to need to think really carefully about how we address those problems. And that's the long term thinking that we need to be doing now, which we haven't really done in this country. - Right. But I'm not hearing a lot of specificity about what the transformational ideas National has when it comes to immigration. Where's the fresh thinking? - Oh, the fresh` there's fresh thinking around the fact that we need to value migrants, the fresh thinking around the fact that we need to plan long term. Who was the party that said Chinese-sounding last names, and too many Indian chefs? Who are the people that are blaming migrants for the housing crisis? That is squarely the Labour Party. The National Party values migrants. - OK. To move away from immigration now, to your other role in early childhood education. What is your vision for transforming that sector, post-COVID? - You have a very small window of opportunity, when it comes to young children, to be able to intervene to give them a much better life. Otherwise, you're causing problems down the track that are much more difficult and much more expensive to try and solve. So if you can put more resources and more emphasis on early intervention, especially at ECE, whether that's mental health or early intervention around learning, then we need to be doing that. - Should early childhood teachers have pay parity with kindergarten teachers? - There are a lot of problems at the moment in the sector where we can't get enough people in ECE teaching. And at the moment they're being pulled out to work in kindies, because they're paid more, they're being pulled out to work, and the good ones are going to primary schools as well. So we've got an issue there. So, yes, we need to value them more and it has to be something done around pay parity across the sector because` - So they should have pay parity? - Well, it's interesting because what we've done at the moment, what this government have done is cause gaps between different ECE providers, and that's what's causing some of the problems at the moment. So we have to solve that first. - You've clashed with Peeni Henare in the House this week. Comments were made. I just want to clear it up, were the comments that he made sexist in your eyes, and has he apologised to you? - He hasn't apologised to me. And, look, shall I just start by saying, I wasn't particularly overly offended. I thought what he did was was silly and it was lazy. I don't think it was done maliciously. I don't think he meant to be sexist, Peeni Henare's a nice guy. I mean, I think if he saw me walking through the House, he would, no doubt, apologise to me. - Right. Judith Collins did say on Twitter that it was sexist. She very explicitly said that. So, your leader is saying that. Do you disagree with that? - No, no, I don't disagree with her. I think cat-calling a woman, doesn't matter what circumstance, is wholly inappropriate. And I think on reflection, he would agree and he would apologise to me. - Should Judith Collins step down as leader? - Of course not. - How many bad polls does it take for her to step down, in your eyes? - We're going through a transitional period in the National Party, we've had a really bad election result, we've had a review, we've learnt some lessons and we are moving on. - Have you read the full, unedited version of National's post-election review? - Yes, I have. - Describe it. - It was honest. There wasn't anything in there that I didn't think would be in there. - Erica Stanford, there, and we're back with our panel, Tracy Watkins, Dr Lara Greaves and Dita De Boni. Dita, what did you make of Erica Stanford? - She's an excellent performer. She's nice-looking, confident, she's got the patter. I think she's got good ideas about immigration. I agree with what she's saying, but completely wrong-headed on education. - OK. (LAUGHS) - Pretty typical for a National Party politician. - All right. I see Lara and Tracy, you're both nodding your head, Lara? - Yeah. Seems like a good performance, seems like a potential future star. - Wow. OK, and quick review from you, Tracy? - Well, I think the sort of person that they need to have on their front bench. She's obviously very articulate. They do have a woman problem, they always have. And she's certainly someone that you'd want to see go up the ranks. - She` Do you think that she handled that sort of question about sexism from Peeni Henare? - I thought she handled it brilliantly, actually, because I think most people would be a bit, 'Was that cat-calling? Is that what that is?' Or, you know. Yeah. - It's not really cat-calling. - No. - That's not what cat-calling is. - (LAUGHS) OK. - It is silly. - Yeah. Yeah. In the House people always say stupid things and making pig noises and whatever. It's the debating chamber, it's where the kids play, you know. - Lara, you're rolling your eyes. - I hate politics. - You hate politics? - Yeah. - You're in the wrong job. - Yeah. - OK, Nicola Wilson and Marama Davidson also clashed in the House and outside of the House, that was over Nicola Willis saying that she didn't feel safe walking at night in Wellington, and linked that to emergency housing and gangs. And Marama Davidson labelled her comments racist and classist. What do you think, Lara? - I think that is kind of slightly coded racial language, when you're talking about people in emergency housing and you're talking about homeless people, I think that that's quite clear, that that's kind of what that is. I think that Marama Davidson on housing is potentially the wrong person to be getting into an argument with. I think there are some really good criticisms of the Labour government in housing. But if someone like Megan Woods more owns the issue of housing, whereas Marama's still quite soon into the job, so I think that if they were to get into a bit of a fight, they would have had better critiques to` if it was a back and forth between Willis and Wood. - Which leads me to my next issue. So housing is going to be one of the issues of the week. Dita De Boni, I mean, what can Labour actually come up with? I mean, everything else seems to be tried. They've ruled out taxes. What's your answer? - Well, they can reduce the amount of tax paid on KiwiSaver, for example. - OK. - I've written down a few that I thought might might work. But, you know, there are a number of ways. They're talking about a carrot and the stick, right? - So what other carrots have you written on your pad? The other carrots, I've written a tax on capital that is less than a tax on labour. - But how? - Well, so the way people say how much they make in dividends and interest each year, they pay less on that than other forms of investment. These are numerous ways you could do it. - But they` So, there's no new taxes, though, Tracy, so they've backed themselves into a corner. - They've ruled out the` Well, that would be incentivising, wouldn't it? I think is what you're talking about. Incentivising other forms of investment, like on` rather than totally incentivising property without any other investment getting that same tax treatment, I think is Dita's talking about. I think the biggest issue, and this comes back to the Marama and Nicola thing, because this has been a big debate in Wellington and this comes back to the whole idea of just dumping people in hotels. And if you dump a whole lot of people in hotels with all sorts of problems and there's absolutely no support around them, then of course you're going to have issues. I don't think it's classist or racist to call that out. I know of people who've talked about witnessing assaults in central Wellington at nine o'clock in the morning on their way to work, when they're` and they get quite fearful about the environment there. So it has become a real issue in Wellington. But that comes back to the housing policy, which is the lack of social housing. And I think until they, you know, they sort of need to start addressing that from the bottom up as well. But there's always this constant sort of focus on house prices, rather than actually just let's just try and figure out how to get people in houses. - Do they have to` Don't they have to do something about house prices and dampen that demand or even get house prices to fall and able to get some sectors of the market to be able to afford a house so you can have less people on the housing register? - But how many people are making, you know, how many people are renting, for instance, to making a fortune out of renting to, I think, Kainga Ora, I think that, you know, it's quite a lucrative return for someone to rent out to state house tenants there. So, you know, I mean, that's the thing. I mean, why not just build the social housing? I know it's sort of like a bottom up approach, but they have to do` It's something they're going to have to tackle on all levels and not just about interest free loans. - They're wrong to conflate homelessness and gangs, though. Those two don't necessarily have anything to do with one another. It's always been unsafe to walk through Wellington as a woman or a man. I mean, an RNZ colleague was murdered, coming home from night shift, so that's always been a problem. The National Party are using it as a cudgel against the Labour Party as a home` over the housing in general. - Yeah, yeah. - But they haven't got` Where's their solution? - So that's the other thing about that. I mean, Judith Collins, I don't know, she mentioned various policies. Lara, did you hear anything that told you that she had fresh thinking? - I think we do need some kind of fundamental shift here, and I think Labour is going to like, what is it, swallow a dead rat? One of those metaphors? - Yeah, yeah. - In terms of house prices and just getting a lot of us, sort of, younger millennials and the Gen Z-ers into the market because we're kind of screwed. And I think this is going to have a lot of flow on effects to those communities and those super diverse communities I mentioned before, like, how are we going to create a sense of community? Are we going to like we know from, like, we know from so many good longitudinal studies in New Zealand that like secure housing and staying and being embedded in a community is important for our well-being. I mean, that's the ultimate sort of measure of well-being, being able to form our own homes, whether it's like for social housing or renting long term or something. But that's like a really important long term concern. And I think it really speaks to a lot of the short term, sort of, you know, back and forth in the House or the short term policy thinking, when what we need is some long term solutions. - And I think we keep hearing about the Resource Management Act being this magic tool that's going to fix it, and I think, how many years are we going to debate that? - It's going to take forever. - And it's not going to happen. - All right, I'm going to have to leave it there and let them try and solve it, not us. Dita De Boni, Lara Greaves, Tracy Watkins, thank you very much for your time. And that is all from us for now. Nga mihi nui, thank you for watching, And we will see you again next weekend. Captions by Sophie Pearce, Julie Taylor and Sally Harper. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2021 - This programme was made with the assistance of the New Zealand On Air platinum fund.