- Today on Newshub Nation Minister James Shaw says he can deliver on climate, but is it too late? On a mission to make New Zealand less racist, the Minister for Inclusion and Ethnic Communities gives her first in-depth interview. And how young is too young to vote? Tena tatou katoa. I'm Tova O'Brien, welcome to Newshub Nation. Ko nga pitopito korero i te whare paremata ` in political news this week. Veteran MP Nick Smith retired from Parliament Thursday, ending a 31 year political career. Judith Collins refuses to confirm or deny she warned Smith of an upcoming media story about him which sparked his resignation. The story never materialised. - 31 years equates to a billion seconds. Bar a few thousand, it's been a blast and an enormous privilege. - Thousands of nurses across the country walked off the job on Wednesday seeking better pay and staffing levels. The strikes followed their rejection of a third pay offer on Monday. Negotiations continue. Our quarantine-free bubble with Melbourne's been suspended for another seven days despite the city leaving lockdown. Chris Hipkins says the overall risk to New Zealand remains low, and the decision will be reviewed on Wednesday. The Climate Change Commission report shows the road to carbon neutral heaven will be tough, involving personal sacrifices and big societal changes that New Zealand's been avoiding for decades. - I view the commission's report as one of the most significant documents I will receive in my time as prime minister. - That document is 400 pages worth of finalised recommendations from the Climate Change Commission. - The latest data certainly shows that our emissions were higher than we thought. - We talk about seeing more frequent and more intense extreme weather events as a result of having a less stable climate. - The water that fell and came through farms around here was like nothing anyone had seen before. A week on from Canterbury's devastating floods, and farmers are facing a long road ahead. - I would almost roll my eyes at anyone who's saying this is our nuclear-free moment. - We haven't seen the initiatives in the transport space that will drive down emissions. And that's what we're still waiting for. - We're still continuing to see a lack of follow through. - We are not on track to meet emissions targets. Having a road map doesn't change the fact that the road will be steep and it will be tough at times. - And the dairy industry still gets basically a free pass to pollute. - Sadly, this does not do the job. - It's for all of us in Parliament to show our commitment to our nuclear-free moment. Rod Carr is the chair of the Climate Change Commission that produced the report. I spoke to him just now, and asked what the single most impactful change in his 400 page report is? - Tova, I think the most important thing is that New Zealanders understand the need for action and action now. So Inaia Tonu Nei is what we called our report, and it is a call for action, action by government, action by local government, action by each and every one of us, our communities and our businesses. - And Rod, is this final report, is it less ambitious, is it weaker, perhaps, than it could have been? - We believe that our recommendations are ambitious, they are achievable, and they are equitable, but we do need to get on now and make the changes. Because the Climate Minister is actually disappointed that parts of it aren't tougher. So did you go for what was more politically palatable, perhaps, than what was actually needed? - No, the basis of our advice is independence of any political process or party. Evidence based. So we didn't rely on, 'Tell me stuff,' we said, 'Show me stuff.' And we built a programme of work to support the targets which parliament has already agreed that we should seek to achieve. - So what do you say to all of those NGOs who have kind of piled on saying it doesn't go far enough? Greenpeace says that there is a cow shaped hole, that you've given a free pass to dairy, have you? - We don't believe so. Parliament has set the biogenic methane target as a target for biogenic methane emissions from both agriculture and waste, and that target is to receive a 10% reduction by 2030. Parliament set the target. Our plan shows us achieving that and a little bit more, so if the target is not appropriate, we need to have a different discussion. The act provides the grounds on which the targets can be reviewed, and those have not been triggered. - Do you think that that target is inadequate, that 10% reduction target? - We believe that that target, if and when achieved, would put us on a path to achieve a 24% reduction in biogenic methane emissions by 2050, which is the lower end of the target range set by parliament, which is why we say that government needs to fund and support farmers to make on farm practise changes. But it also needs to fund research so that we can use science and technology to reduce biogenic methane from agriculture while continuing to support ways of life in our community. - But it's still, I mean, compared to what the United Nations is saying, that methane emissions need to be cut by 40 to 45% by 2030, our 10% target looks piddly compared to that, doesn't it? - But I think we have to remember that half of all global methane emissions actually are fugitive waste products from the oil and gas industry. And that, to me, looks like low hanging fruit globally. And that's why we believe the 10% target is both achievable, but also ambitious. - You're not calling for an all-out ban on coal use. Why not? - We believe there are some uses of coal that are very hard to replace, for example, in steel-making. So the coal use in our plan out to 2050 is basically residual coal for the purpose of making steel. - But coal uses going up and up and up, and by not recommending an all out ban that increase could continue, right? What we are saying is that by 2030 on our demonstration path, we will not be using coal for baseload electricity generation. And by 2037 we won't be using it in medium and low temperature process heat. - And why, when you release that draft reports, do you only give it to select journalists? Were kind of angling for positive propaganda around the draft? - No, we were very clear back in February when the draft report was issued that there was market sensitive information in it, we did limit the circulation of redacted versions of that. And it was largely to journalists who had already invested a significant amount of time and effort in understanding the complexity of climate policy. - By restricting to some journalists, you also restrict access to the public, and climate change is an issue which affects us all. Just finally, though, Rod, will the government have to adopt every single one of your recommendations to keep us under 1.5 degrees? - No, we're very clear there are a range of pathways that would set New Zealand up to achieve its targets and therefore there is the opportunity for the government to follow our direction of policy without necessarily adopting every single recommendation. - Thank you very much for your time this morning. The Prime Minister maintains it's her generation's nuclear free moment, but has she left it too late? Climate Change Minister James Shaw joins me now. Big week for you this week, Minister. Thank you for being here. - You're welcome. - For some people, I think the problem is just so insurmountable, isn't it? So let's just drop it right back and take a look at this graphic over here. Here's where we are, and actually our gross emissions are going up. Here's where we need to be. But even if we do everything that the report recommends, scientists say that the actual trajectory needs to be here. So do we need to get it done by 2030 rather than 2050? - We need to get about half the effort done by 2030. So if you look at, the IPCC's report has a very steep drop off in the first 10 years and then it sort shallows out, you know, between 2040 out to 2050. So it is a very significant effort. And that's basically a function of the fact that as a country, you know, we've really delayed action for the 30 years that we've known about climate change. - Based on what scientists and activists are telling us, do we need to` does the government need to go further than the report's recommendations? One of the functions that we've built into the Zero Carbon Act is that every five years the commission has got to come up with a third budget period. So 15 years out, when it does that, it can look at the more recent science that's happened since the last set of decisions. So in the clip, you talked about the most recent UN report on methane. That came out, you know, very, very late in the piece. The commission, of course, will have an opportunity to integrate that into its kind of next set of planning, which it has to start almost immediately to meet the 2024 deadline for that for that next emissions budget period. - But you can still go further. The government could still opt to go further, or has the commission kind of hamstrung you by setting these recommendations as a bit of a standard? Anything beyond that is it becomes politically unpalatable or difficult? Well, I mean, the model is kind of built in a way to try and maintain a level of social consensus, because we are asking a lot of everybody and there are some sectors that, you know, are, you know, for various reasons are quite resistant to change, or we find it very difficult to change. - Who are you talking about there? - And so having` Well, you know, I'm not going to name anyone in particular. But the point is that you've got here with the architecture of the system that we've set up, we've managed to create a level of social consensus that everyone can look at each other and go, 'OK, I get that I'm going to have to take action as long as everybody else does, too.' - When we talk to you after the report was released, you did seem a bit disappointed that the report had gone soft on some on some areas. Whereabouts specifically? What let you down? Look, my job ` and I'm not a patient person. I want to be moving a lot faster on climate change ` but my job here is to make sure that actually New Zealand starts finally reducing emissions over the coming decades and actually moves much quicker than we have in the past. - So what in that report was in that report that you down over? - Tova, I'm not going to say I'm not going to give you a response to that question, which I know I know that you're going to not find terribly satisfying. What I need to do` - But I think we need to know where you think. As Climate Change Minister, we could be going further where the commission let us down. - Well, I have to take the commission's word for what they've done. Right? They've done` They've kind of given us a bottom line, which is you've got to fit within this kind of shape, as you put on the screen over there, over that period of time. My bottom line is everything that we do has got to keep us within 1.5 degrees of global warming, within that pathway, that's written into the purpose of the act now. That's what we did in the last term. And then they've done a bottom up analysis and said, well, here's what we think industries can do. And in some cases, what they have said is similar to what the industry itself has said. In some cases, they've pushed industries to go further. In a couple of cases, they actually lowballed it, And the draft advice in the industry themselves came to them and said, Hey, we actually think that we can go faster than you're describing. And so they've upped the ante on some of those things. - Just reading between the lines, though, do you think that there should have been a faster cow burp reduction? - Based on what I've seen in the sector, my sense is that there is change happening in that sector at an incredible rate. And - So you're really comfortable with how the dairy sector is addressing climate change? - I think that things can go a lot faster than they have been going. My sense is that things are shifting pretty quickly, and actually there's a lot of innovation on the ground, which if you roll that out across the whole country, you'd see some really significant gains. - Sounds like our Climate Change Minister is backing is backing dairy, who says that that 10% methane reduction target will still be incredibly challenging. So do you think that's fair as well? -I actually think that they'll sail through that with some of some of the innovations that are going on. I know that in you know, some of the kind of test farms that they've had in different parts of the country have increased profitability and reduced methane output by over 10% I think by about 14%. Just with on-farm practise changes, no new technology, no kind of magic science or anything like that, just with improvements to the farm works. - There's no cow cull recommended either, unless farmers really bungle that 2030 target. Do you think that we need to stock reduction now? - Look, I think we need a methane reduction, and I think there are a lot of different` - Is that a good way to get there, Stock reduction? - Well, in a number of cases, yes. You know, if you see, you know, some of the most innovative and most profitable farms in the country have gone from a really high cost, high input model, a really intensive form of dairying, which actually had pretty thin profit margins. And they've gone to things like, you know, once a day milking. They've gone to less intensive stocking on the land, which means that they've got lower input costs. So a couple of things happen. Their methane output goes down, their nitrous oxide goes down, and their profits go up. - Would you have liked to have seen, then, based on all of that, herd reduction recommendations in the final report? - Look, my requirement for the report is that it has to be consistent with what the science says that we need to do in the time that we need to do it. You know, we created this body` - You just said you think it would be beneficial, though. So, would you have liked to have seen that recommended in the report? - Tova, what I'm saying is that the I have to take the commission's word for what they have done, right? They have spent the last 18 months assembling the best evidence base in the country on this kind of thing. They have come to a considered, politically-independent, expert-led view, and they've got access to a lot of information that I don't have access to. So, that is the point of having this commission, right, is that for all that I want to go further and faster, there's another politician who wants to put the brakes on and actually not get into action. The job here is to get this commission to do this kind of thinking in a way that everybody can trust, meets the science, meets what industry can do, and then say, 'Okay, let's crack on with it.' - Okay, but the report represents the bare minimum. Do you think that two degrees warmer is actually inevitable? - I think our chances as a planet of staying within 1.5 are very thin. That is why I'm so concerned that we actually crack on and get this job done. - Yeah. So, two degrees is inevitable, which most scientists agree that that it is, what does that look like for New Zealand materially, and then what difference as well would that report and those recommendations and new changes make? - Well, everything comes down to sort of probabilities, right? And the commission themselves talk about these different pathways that we can take to` - Maybe focus on what that 2% looks like for New Zealand. How does that look for us? - It looks like more frequent and more severe droughts, more frequent and more severe storms, flooding, fires like the ones that you saw in the Port Hills or in the Nelson region just a couple of years ago. And the impact on that is actually mostly on our agricultural sector. So, the really severe drought that we had in 2014 knocked about $1.5 billion off our agricultural exports. - And also, more people killed globally annually than by COVID-19. That is that is our future, right? - Well, yes. I mean, this, Tova, is why we need to crack on with it and get into action. - And Jacinda Ardern, she's a prime minister that likes to be liked. She's called it her generation's nuclear moment. But do you think she's the actual person, the prime minister that can deliver these changes? - Yes, I do. - You do? - Yes, I do. - Do you still think that she's acting with the right urgency to kind of justify that statement, that this is our generation's nuclear-free moment? - Look, I think that you can level a lot of criticisms about the pace of change here. The last three years, we weren't waiting for the commission's report. We've done things like we've brought in the clean car standard and brought back the biofuels mandate. We've invested in heavy rail and so on. But we had to create an enduring architecture to create a level of consensus across society and across industry about the pathway for action. And that that was a pretty significant piece of work, and the country's moved on hugely in the last three years as a result of that. But now that we have that in place, we have to move from putting in place the architecture to really strong, really urgent action, and the commission's report's really clear about that. - Let's talk about EVs. You had a chance last term to incentivise electric vehicles with the buyback scheme. There's $300 million earmarked in the budget for EV uptake. What are you going to do? What's that for? - There will be an announcement coming up from the Minister of Transport and myself in the not too distant future about the shape of that incentive scheme. - I mean, I'm not proud of it, but I drive a '91 V8. Are you going to tax people like me to get more people into electric vehicles? - Well, the emissions trading scheme does impact the price of petrol. It doesn't impact it much at the moment because the price has been too long to make a difference. But I think what you'll see is that people will have the incentive to move towards an electric vehicle. In fact, at the moment, I mean, yes, the upfront cost of the vehicle is expensive, but it's already far cheaper to run an electric vehicle than it is to run an internal combustion engine vehicle. I don't know what you spend on petrol each week, but an electric vehicle runs for the equivalent of about 40 cents a litre as opposed to the current petrol price. - As Greens co-leader, you care about equality as well. Do you recognise that given the cost of EVs and also gas bills are going to go up by $300 a year based on these recommendations, do you recognise that these climate change recommendations, these changes are going to disproportionately affect poorer and more vulnerable households? - Well, there are a number of chapters that speak exactly to this. So, previously, governments have said, 'Oh, look, the distributional impact of this change is significant, so we won't do anything. 'So we'll actually put off making any changes because we're worried about the distributional impacts.' That's actually the wrong way to go about it. What you need to do is to say, 'Actually, the country has got to do these things, 'the whole world has got to do these things, and we need to support people through that transition.' And so, that's a big part of the commission's recommendation. - OK, just finally, as Climate Minister, you're not even in cabinet, but if cabinet doesn't go far enough, it doesn't adopt all of these recommendations, yes or no, will you resign as minister in protest? - If they don't accept the recommendations, they've got to come up with something better that produces the same outcome. - Otherwise you'll go? - No, otherwise they are in violation of the law. The law says we have to stick within that 1.5 degree pathway to stick within those emissions budgets. If they don't accept the series of policy recommendations for how to fit into that, they've got to come up with something that does do that, otherwise the government itself is in violation of its own law. - Thank you very much for your time this morning. Kia ora, James Shaw, Climate Change Minister. If you've got a news tip, get in touch. You can email us at nation@tv3.co.nz. We're also on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. And our Twitter panellists today are John Hart and Mark Thomas. - E whai ake nei, we dissect the week's news with our political panel. Plus, 16-year-olds seeking a political voice. Anna Bracewell-Worrall on how young is too young to vote. and some of them want the right to vote on their own futures. Here's Anna Bracewell-Worrall. For climate change, for Black Lives Matter, young people have been marching in the streets calling for change. Cate Tipler was one of them. We're watching as our world completely changes. We have more extreme weather events ` i.e. the flooding in Canterbury recently. For many young people, they feel like the government isn't taking the issue seriously. Concerned too, about the debt racked up by the government's COVID-19 response ` billions in wage subsidies for today's workers. Why does the government get to spend money that my generation will be paying off when my generation has no say in how it is spent? - Cate's helping lead the charge for young people to have more say, to lower the voting age to 16. The group 'Make It 16' is challenging the age through the courts. They've been defeated once but are trying again. - Well, voting is a human right, and there is insufficient justification to stop 16 and 17 year olds from being able to vote. - At the age of 12, Sophie Hanford's family were warned their home was at risk to sea level rise. Increasingly concerned about climate change, she ran and won a seat on Kapiti Council, age 18. - Young people are becoming more increasingly engaged, but it's only because we feel like we really have to. We're destined for pretty much a future that's unliveable. - She believes now's the time to change the voting age and to act on the future young people are worried about. - If this kind of action doesn't happen now, when's it going to happen? What kind of ancestors will we be when we look back on this moment and go, 'Shoot. We wasted so much time.' - 16 year olds can and do vote overseas in Argentina, Austria and Scotland in a dozen jurisdictions in total. At boarding school in Scotland, 16-year-old Taylor Torkington has just cast his first ever vote. - It did feel quite empowering, actually, to be able to think that it does improve participation. - Scotland lowered the voting age so young people could have this say on its possibly life-changing independence referendum. 75% of 16 and 17 year olds cast their vote. The brain's not fully developed in 16 year olds. That can see young people making decisions governed by emotion. - It might make what we probably would label as the wrong decision ` not necessarily weighing the long-term consequences of their actions. - The prefrontal cortex is not mature at 18 either or at 20. It matures in the mid-20s. That affects some types of decision-making but not others. - Where there's more time to consult with others and to do some research about certain things, then the decisions are gonna be quite good. - 'Voting would normally fall into that category.' So, there's no real fundamental difference between the brain of a 16-year-old and an 18-year-old when it comes to making those slower, more considered decisions. - Well, yeah, the 16-year-old should have the ability to make a well thought through decision on matters where time is not an issue. - Throughout history, the right to vote has been hard won. In 1852, only men who owned or leased property could vote, effectively excluding Maori. In 1879, all men over 21 could vote. That was extended to women 14 years later. It wasn't until 1969, the voting age was reduced from 21 to 20 and then finally to 18 in 1974. Some in the halls of power think the voting age should be lowered to 16. - I believe we should, yes. - Oh, absolutely. - Why's that? - Well, for Maori, we bring our kids up` You look at every kapahaka competition, every school, they're very politically minded. - But far from the support of 75% of parliament needed to change the law. - Uh, that's not something that I have given much consideration to. - Lowering the voting age to 16 means another 120,000 voters who pay little tax and vote for more government spending. It's a disaster. - You don't think any of them would vote for you? - Oh, look, I'm sure some. - 18 is the age of adulthood in New Zealand. - 18 works well. Let's keep it at that. - It's worth a conversation. - But young people are just frustrated that politicians will talk about them but won't give them the most important democratic power. - ...and that, I hope, means the next generation will see that we in New Zealand were on the right side of history. - Jacinda says she cares about what young people have to say, so what is stopping her from giving young people the vote? It's excuse after excuse, and it's unjust. - During the election campaign, Jacinda Ardern said Civics Education needs to come before lowering the voting age. That hasn't happened yet, but still extending the vote hasn't been completely ruled out by those in power. Anna Bracewell-Worrall, Newshub Nation. - Coming up ` analysis from our panel ` Elouise Gibson, Sarah Perriam and Shane Te Pou. But first, Youth Minister Priyanca Radhakrishnan responds to Anna's report. Watching our report on youth voting was Youth Minister Priyanca Radhakrishnan, a first time minister, and her first in-depth interview. Welcome to Newshub Nation, Minister. Thank you. - Kia ora, Tova. Thanks for having me. - As Anna reported in that story there, a lot of young people really want the right to vote. Should the voting age drop to 16? - Voting is an important part of democracy, but we've got the realities that we've got to draw the line somewhere. I know that we will continue to look at ways to strengthen the Electoral Act and that Cabinet will make those decisions around scope and timing of that in due process. - Sounds like you may be going a bit cold on it because, at the election, the prime minister said she was open to it, but we needed civics education first. So have you have done the civics education part of the plan? - Yes. So we've` Through the school leavers toolkit, there is a focus on strengthening civics education, and there are components as part of that toolkit to help young people understand what voting is, how government makes decisions, how the government works and so on. So there are toolkits both focussed on learners and teachers to be able to teach that component. - OK, so you've checked that box, which means you can now start looking at whether you're going to lower the voting age to 16. So can you commit at least to doing the policy work this term with a view of implementing it if you get another chance next term? - It's not for me to commit. It's up to Cabinet to look at the scope. - Will you be advocating for that, though? - What I do, you know, is to be committed to, as Minister for Youth, to ensuring that our rangatahi are able to have their say on issues that matter to them` - What matters to them is who's in government. They want to vote on that. - I totally understand that. But as I see it, that's work that needs to be done by Cabinet. What I can do now is to ensure that they're able to have their voice heard on the issues that matter to them. And I do that, for example, through the youth voice component of the youth plan that I lead. - It sounds like you won't be advocating for them to get a reduced voting age. Is that fair? - Look, I'm not opposed to it personally, but that work does need to be done by Cabinet. - And you'll do it this term? - Cabinet will have to look at the scope and timing of that. - OK. This year, in March, the number of NEETs - young people Not in Employment, Education or Training ` grew by 4000. That is a damning indictment on your ministry, isn't it? And actually on you as minister. - Look, one of the things just going back to the point around Youth Voice, I'm really focussed on ensuring that we have those conversations with rangatahi and I hear directly from them. Back in March this year, I held a 'zui' that about 135 of them came on. Youth employment was an area that was raised` - This is 4000, you know` - Yeah, there's been an impact` - 4000 young people with nothing. - COVID has had an impact on our young people. We know that. And that's why, over successive Budgets, we've invested in programmes like He Poutama Rangatahi, He Poutama Taitamariki, that focus on ensuring that we're able to work with rangatahi to get the skills that they need, for example, to get off benefit and into employment, Mana in Mahi, there are a fair number of initiatives that are focussed on supporting rangatahi into employment. - Mental health as a major issue for youth. Why not mandate mental health skills training, resilience training in all skills for children ` something The Mental Health Foundation has recommended? - There's an absolute focus on supporting mental wellbeing for young people. In fact, that was the other issue that was raised directly with me by rangatahi. We've expanded youth-focussed mental health` - Mandate it. Make it part of the curriculum. Resilience training to help kids get through anxiety and depression. - Manaaki's is a programme that we've funded initially in Canterbury that we're now expanding to five other areas and that is about` - I'm talking about all schools, Minister. Mandate it. - Yeah, we're rolling it out in a way, based on the feedback that we've seen from, you know, the pilot of Manaaki. We've got a pilot called Piki that, you know, is focussed on the greater Wellington region, and we're looking at what feedback comes out of that as well. We've funded Youthline additionally, we've expanded funding into Youthline. We've funded Rainbow Youth Mental Health for the first time as well. There's a fair bit underway in that space to support. - In select schools. Um, pop your other hat on for a minute. Diversity, inclusion and ethnic communities. - Yes. - How does New Zealand's rich fabric, its diverse, inclusive and ethnic fabric` Are our migrants` When desperate split migrants were getting in touch with you on Facebook asking for help to reunite them with their partners and kids, what did you tell them? - Look, to clarify, and I know comment that you're referring to, to clarify, I've heard from a number of people who've been in that situation. I continue to hear from them and I'm mindful that it is incredibly difficult` - You told them to stop spamming you. - I told them` To the view that I was sharing there was not meant to shut down engagement at all, My view there` - By saying stop spamming me? - My view there was that there was a better way to engage than posting en masse on every social media post of mine` - That speaks to their desperation, Minister. - I understand that` - I'm sorry, but you're an MP. Your job is to help people. - I understand that, and I reached out to the group that I made the comment to and we had a really good conversation about some of what I would like to hear from them that I could share with the immigration minister. They shared that with me offline. And I've done` I've shared it with the immigration minister, as well. - And have you apologised to those families or do you apologise now to those people? - I clarified that there's a better way of engaging and I engage with them that way. - Yeah, and say sorry. - Look, look, I feel for them, you know, I feel for the position that they're in, I understand the difficulty that comes from border closures, but I maintain there's a better way of engaging. - Yeah, but perhaps as well, being dismissive and saying stop spamming me is not` - Being dismissive was not my intention at all. - So, apologise for that, then. - If that's the way` if that was what people thought I was doing, I do apologise for that. That was never the intention. - OK In July, your Office of Ethnic Communities gets an upgrade. It becomes a full ministry. What will the tangible difference be? - The main difference there will be that for the first time that ministry will have a chief executive that is solely focussed on lifting the well-being of ethnic communities. The current CEO of DIA has, you know, six different portfolios and ministers to work with. This time, for the first time, we'll have a chief executive focussed solely on lifting the well-being of ethnic communities and really taking some tangible actions that will make a difference to people's lives. - And you're also working on a report into social cohesion. You've told us it's to make New Zealand slightly less racist. How? - I want us to be a society where everyone feels safe, valued, heard, where everyone feels that they can belong as New Zealanders and participate fully in every aspect of society` - How racist is New Zealand? - Look, we know that it exists. We know` we've heard from reports that people have experienced racism, both, you know, structural and also day-to-day. That needs to change. It's not acceptable. There are steps that we must take. The Social Cohesion Work Programme came out of the Royal Commission of Enquiry into the Christchurch mosque attacks. 44 recommendations. It's an ambitious piece of work, but it's really work we're embarking upon now to make a difference. - And you want to make New Zealand less racist? - I want to make New Zealand safer for everyone. - Less racist. - Absolutely. - Great. Paul Goldsmith ` were his comments this week about colonisation being good for Maori, were they racist? - I don't agree with the statement. And I think, you know, equally you could talk to Maori who would tell you that that's, you know, not true. Equally, many of us who are migrants to New Zealand have come from countries that were colonised as well, and so have an experience of what that is like and what it feels like to be stripped of your language, culture and land. And so, no, I don't agree with his comment. - And this week, sadly, we saw two incidents of racial abuse. There was a March 15th attack survivor, outside a Christchurch mall, and a voice mail to a Pasifika University lecturer. What do those incidents say about New Zealand's acceptance of different cultures? - It seems that we have a bit more work to do to get to a point where we actually see the benefits and value diversity, and where we become more inclusive so that we take down the barriers that exclude too many from various sectors and spheres. - And also on March 15th, Hollywood's making a movie about the events. Is that poor taste? - Oh, look, the government has no involvement in that movie` - Just personally, do you think...? - I have seen, you know, through social media, for example, that there is some anxiety around what that's going to look like. And I hope they will be respectful of the Muslim community who bore the brunt of those attacks. - And do you think it's poor taste? It's too soon. - That's not a call for me to make, Tova. - You can have an opinion. I mean, especially given your ministerial responsibilities. - Yeah, I mean, I just heard about the film yesterday, so I haven't had a lot of time to drill into it. But I know there's a bit of anxiety for particularly the Muslim community, and I hope those who are part of that film will be respectful. - And do you really think that Jacinda Ardern should be the hero of a movie about March 15th? - Look, it's not my film, so... - But you can have a view, Minister. - Choose` I mean, you know, it's a film. It's up to them what they do. I'm concerned more about how they portray the Muslim community and respect in the way that they do that. - Kia ora, Priyanca Radhakrishnan, thank you very much for joining us. - Thanks for having me. - E whai ake nei, Nick resigns, Judith goes to ground, Paul gets himself in hot water. What's up with the National Party? The political panel and National MP Chris Bishop join us next. I'm joined by our panel, rural broadcaster Sarah Perriam, political commentator Shane Te Pou, and Stuff's Climate Change Editor Eloise Gibson. Tena koutou, thank you very much for joining me. - Kia ora. - Eloise, we'll start with you. We've got the recommendations now. We know what the final report is. What was your take on it? - So the draft came out in January. Nothing hugely shocking to me between then and now. But there are a couple of things that were added this time around that I was very happy to see in there. So when we talk about climate change action, it's easy to see, you know, Gosh, here's the bill for a second harbour crossing. Here's how much it's going to cost to get to the airport. This is what it will cost to put software to every farmer in the country to reduce their emissions. And it's piling up and it's sounding expensive. And it's easy to think, 'You know, we could just do nothing and it would be free. 'We could carry on as we are.' And of course, that's not true. So what I was very happy to see in the report this time around was a projection of the cost of further dithering for want of a better word. So if we are to keep mucking around, not reducing our emissions, accepting that at some point we've got, what, 2050 we need to get to net zero either way, what is that gonna cost us? And it was approximately twice the reduction to GDP of meeting these budgets. Those numbers aren't very precise. I mean, it's hard to know what GDP is going to be next year, let alone in 2050, but they gave us an idea of the, you know, the cost of not acting as well. And there was some stuff around jobs in there as well that had a similar flavour. So as well as, you know, maybe about 3000 job losses to oil and gas, and mechanics for petrol cars, They were saying that overall the jobs market is going to grow as a response to having a low carbon economy. And to me, having that information out there is really important because otherwise it's a one sided discussion. - The cow-shaped hole. Sarah, is there a cow-shaped hole? Is dairy getting a free pass, as Greenpeace has said? - I don't think we're getting a free pass at all because, I mean, He Waka Eke Noa was born, and it is a government, iwi and industry partnership which has been internationally recognised, the split-gas approach, by IPCC. And they are on track for those targets. And the fact if they were getting a free pass with it, if we do not meet those targets by 2022, of knowing our number in 2024, by having those farm management plans in place, then agriculture's in the ETS. - Is Dairy NZ trying to make it sound harder than it is by saying it's still going to be incredibly challenging to get to that 10%? James Shaw over there was saying that it's going to be cruisy as, they'll get there. - Of all the press releases that I have in front of me across the entire industry, because farming is more than dairy, and is that Dairy NZ were the most welcoming of it in the writing of that. The thing is, what will make it challenging is where we direct both regulation as well as funding into the sector. There is actually regulatory barriers which contradict farmers actually moving forward, and they actually want a goalpost which is fixed in the ground, so we can help win this game. - Shane, no New Zealand First this term, the government has no excuse for not implementing radical change. Do you think they will? - I think they will. And I think they'll be empowered and empowered, especially as a result of last week's polling. And the analysis is, in fact, New Zealanders are ahead of the bell curve in terms of what they want to be done. I just want to make the point about farmers. I think that there is diversification. I think farmers are coming on board and we ought not to vilify them, we've seen massive diversification. The answer is IP premium brands. You know, our little hapu farm down in the eastern bay of plenty, not only are we growing cows now, we're going to grow our oak trees and truffles. Things are happening. - Interesting point. If I can just follow on from what Shane said, is The recommendation of 10 to 13% reduction is the flow on effect of projections of land use change going the way that they're already on track to do. But the thing is, the capital of putting in 10 hectare of kiwifruit is ten dollars million. So to make those land-use changes, we need a finance industry that's on board with it, with sustainable finance. And we also need regulation that makes it fair. And coming back to the final verse, the draft report is the fact that the commission took into account beef and lambs, you know, recommendations around a fairer playing field for carbon farming. And we want to really stop this emissions laundering of overseas companies by buying up our sheep and beef. - And Eloise, Rod Carr saying that putting eliminating coal or a total ban on coal into the too-hard basket, is he not being ambitious enough when it comes to coal? - So I think an important point to make about the recommendations is that a lot of them aren't, kind of, bans. What they're doing is saying here are the budgets that we need to meet. We've run some scenarios on how we can get there without bankrupting ourselves, and without driving people into poverty. And so they're kind of simulations of how we could get them more than bans. So it's more, I would say, that they've looked again at what is likely to happen without massive disruption, and decided that this is going to be some residual coal in there for steel,. What I would be concerned about, as if that was taken to take the foot off the brake for getting coal out of other places. We still have coal in schools. We still have coal in hospitals. We still have Fonterra burning coal. There are a lot of places where it's not that really, really high-intensity heat that steel needs where it could go now. And I think a lot of people would actually be surprised to know how much coal we are still burning. We're still burning it for electricity. So, you know, and that's what drives our emissions up in 2019. So I personally don't think that that last little bit is what we should all be arguing over. I think it's the next 5 to 10 years, getting all of that other stuff out. - Oh, sorry, an acknowledgement of where biofuels are going to come from, the wood slash from our current forestry is nowhere near enough to convert our boilers over. And they are already underway in terms of conversion across all parts of the processing sector. I know that forestry will need to be planted purely for biofuel alone. -Shane, a pretty muted response from National, the Act Party saying that the whole report should just be binned. Where's the opposition landed on this? Are they on the right side of. - I don't know where we` Who was the opposition spokesman? Do we listen to Simon Bridges? Do we listen to Chris Bishop, they're schizophrenic, on the on the issue, And I think it's living proof of the internal turmoil that's happening not only in parliament, but in heartland National Party. - Well, we'll put that to Chris Bishop shortly. Just a quick whip around, guys, where you all stand on lowering the voting age. - I'm on both sides of it. I totally acknowledge the fact that 16 year olds should be genetically smarter than the parents. The whole point of evolution. But at the same time around, some of those key points, and David Seymour brought that up, I mean, and having that life experience of money in, money out, something that you don't have at that stage, what I'd like to see likes of youth representation in parliament that's voted from that group of demographic. Shane, yes, no? - I support it. I have a 15-year-old boy going on 16, a 12 year old girl going on 22. They're politically aware. We empower 16-year-olds to allow them to do certain things as it is. And I think 16 is not arbitrary, because we endow them to do things legally anyway. - Eloise? - I'm a climate change person, so I'm in favour. I think status quo entrenchment has held us back. And actually we need to be listening to the people who are going to clean up this mess. And this ethnic ministry, no longer just an office, I think it's getting to about $14 million, which is, you know, a drop in the bucket, really. The Pacific People's Ministry has $51 million so three times, three and half times that. Is it actually going to make a difference, Shane, having an ethnic ministry? - I think it will. But I think what's more important is diversity of voices, and we see that in the current minister who's got the lived experience. And I think really that is the key, that not only allowing the ethnic community to have their say, but having leaders that that have lived experience, I think that's very important. I'm really hopeful about New Zealand in terms of our diversity. And I mean, there's lots of good programmes I think, Mana and Mahi, that they're pointing to. But we need to push further, don't we, across all schools. Do you think we need that kind of mental health and resilience training, teaching kids how to deal with anxiety, depression? - Oh, absolutely. I mean, they are growing up in Gen Z with only knowing social media, and anxiety. our youth is something that worries me hugely, and, diversity within one of the most multicultural countries in the world. So, of course, we should be representative of our ethnic community. And the Minister's pointed out some great points on that. - Well, Eloise, is it a no brainer? - I think if anything has shown us, you know, that children are bearing anxiety, it's COVID, right? They're bearing a mental burden, that we didn't have to when we were their age. So anything we can do to help. - But having said that, I'm really hopeful for our kids too. I reckon they get these issues, and they understand not only personal responsibility, but collective responsibility. I reckon our kids are on to it. - Yeah, totally, but` - My kids certainly think they know everything. - Yeah. - Helped by the fact that there's resourcing as well in schools to allow them to do that. Thank you all very much for joining us. Eloise Gibson, Shane Te Pou, Sarah Pirriam, kia ora koutou. - Kia ora. - Kia ora, Tova. Stay with us. We're back after the break. Between Jake, Nick, Judith and Paul ` and that's just the last fortnight ` National cannot catch a break, making it hard to do its actual job as Opposition, holding the government to account. Joining me now is National's COVID spokesman, Chris Bishop, who is trying to do that actual job, vehemently. Tena koe, Chris, thank you for joining us this morning. - Good morning. - Describe the government's vaccine rollout in one word. - Shambles. - OK, if it's a shambles, what would you do differently? - Well, I think we're now bearing the brunt of decisions that were made or not made back in September, October last year. So the government was very slow to order vaccines. We were one of the slowest countries in the OECD, right down the bottom of the pecking order. And now, of course, we find ourselves one of the slowest countries to roll it out. So there's a direct correlation between those dates. We're the second slowest in the OECD, Chris Hipkins said we were going to be at the front of the queue, the prime minister says it's meant to be the year of the vaccine, we're the 115th slowest country in the world. And, you know, Australia has been described as a shambles. We are way slower than Australia. And so I think shambles is the appropriate description. - And taking a step back from that stuff, what, materially, is at stake for Joe Blow Kiwi? - Well, I think there's a couple of things. The first is, if you look at what's happened in Victoria in the last couple of weeks, and these new variants, you know, the Delta variant, that have been spreading around the world, the highly transmissible ones, we have an unvaccinated population here. All it would take is one breech in MIQ, and with this new transmissible variant to make its way into the New Zealand community, community transmission, further lockdowns again. People might think I'm scare mongering, but, you know, that's that has been the experience in the past. And we've got an unvaccinated population. You know, the UK, the US, they've seen what happens once you vaccinate. Their infection rates are declining markedly. So that's the first thing, is it's protection. But then the second thing is the Budget forecasts are predicated on opening up to the world from the first of January 2022. Now, I don't think anyone seriously thinks that's going to happen, but the point is we've got to vaccinate and get to herd immunity so we can open up. - So on that, what percentage of the population needs to be jabbed for us to open the borders? - Well, if you look at what the scientists say, 70%` when COVID first started, it was about 70%, they thought. You've now got Dr Fauci in the States saying 80, 85, maybe even 90%. - So is that where the Nats are sitting now? Is that what your preference would be? 80, 85? - I think you've got to be guided by the science. I think it's as much as you can possibly do, but 80 to 85, which means you've got to vaccinate a lot of people because these new transmissible variants, you know, do require higher up rate. - You're still leaving 15 to 20% of the population vulnerable, though, right? - Well, if you get to herd immunity, that the point of that is, of course, that they won't be as vulnerable. But, you know, look, the reality is, some people don't want to get vaccinated and they do want to, you know, kind of free ride on the back of others. That's just the reality. And we're not going to make people get vaccinated. - How's your fortnight been? - Oh, it's been good. I mean, you know, I love parliament. I've been up there in Question Time and, you know, select committees and asking questions of the government. So it's been good. - And Jake Bezzant, that scandal there, then there was Nick Smith's resignation, Judith Collins refusing to say whether or not she smoked him out, also Paul Goldsmith's colonisation cock-up. How is the caucus morale? - Oh, look, I mean, it's been a tough year or so for the National Party. I don't think I'm breaking confidences to say this. - Does it keeps getting worse? - Well, look, I mean, Nick is a valued colleague and he's been a friend to me, it's sad to see him leave the parliament after 30 years. He actually hired me, back in the National Research Unit days, back in 07, or partly hired me. So, look, I like Nick and it's sad to see him go, particularly under the circumstances` - So, if Judith Collins misled him, told him that there's a story about to drop about him, which never materialised. If she did do that, is that a sackable offence for a leader? - Well, I just don't have any idea about exactly what happened. I genuinely don't know what transpired between Judith and Nick` - If she misled him, though, I mean, that's not very democratic, is it? - I suspect` You know, I don't know what happened. I genuinely don't know. I don't think Judith Collins would have done that to Nick, but I have genuinely no idea. - OK, I mean, what are you going to do to try and get back on track? Because it seems like you keep talking about not being distracted, trying to do the mahi, but you just cannot catch a break, right? - Yeah. I mean, obviously, you know, things like the Jake Bezzant stuff, you know, incredibly untidy. No one wants things like that coming into the public domain. I think what we've got to do is just remain resolutely focussed on the government's lack of delivery. The reality is this is a structurally incompetent government. I mean, just in the last week alone, they have cancelled a whole series of projects that a year ago they campaigned up and down the country, saying they were going to build, you know, things like Tauranga to Omokoroa, for example, one of the most dangerous highways in the country` - And people might take you a bit more seriously if your party had its proverbial together. Who is the person to save the National Party? - We've got a leader in Judith Collins, she's doing a great job. And, you know, she inherited the job in very difficult circumstances last year, as everyone watching will know. And we've just got to get some forward momentum and get on the front foot and as I say, start focussing on the government's lack of delivery, whether it's transport, climate change or the vaccine rollout, for example. And there's a whole series of other things. - Were you happy when your name popped up in our poll as a potential future leader? - I was a bit surprised, to be honest. I think what was it, 1.8? 18 people out of a thousand. - Bit chuffed? Are you trying to get on the leadership radar? - No, I mean, look, it's` It was nice, I suppose. I mean, I've been working really hard, in the first six months of this year, on the COVID role that I've been given. When Judith gave it to me at the end of last year, I was a bit, you know, 50/50 because it's been such a tough area for us in Opposition and it was so hard to navigate through 2020, obviously. But what I've tried to do is be constructive where I can and critique where I can as well. So on the vaccine rollout, I'm a bit critical, but generally the government's done a good job overall and I've tried to get that balance right. I don't always get it right. No politician ever does. - Just very quickly before we go, can you rule out a tilt at the leadership this term? - Absolutely. Judith's doing a great job. - OK. And Judith Collins will be the leader that takes National Party into 2023. - Absolutely. - Chris Bishop there. We're back with our panel. Sarah Perriam and Shane Te Pou and Eloise Gibson. Kia ora koutou. Shane, Chris Bishop. What do you think that Judith Collins will make of that interview? - Oh, she won't be happy. The leader, any political leader, when they're asked about their leadership by one of the caucus members, they want a glowing endorsement. He did that at the end, I think he sort of checked himself. But I think, here's the reality ` The reality is, we all know, and as does the National caucus, there would be a shiver down their spine in terms of how she worked at that, how she moved Nick Smith out for one of her own. So it's just the reality of the situation. - And Sarah, do you think those comments, when he ruled out a tilt at leadership ahead of 2023, do you think those comments are going to come back and bite him in the bottom? - Oh, no. I think most people have, Judith herself is very good at it, too, and look where that ended up. I really do believe that Chris genuinely didn't know, and being put in a position to defend a leader, when you have a party that is in the situation it is, is extremely hard, and they have a lot of work to do. - One of the biggest things that happened for the National Party over the last week was, of course, Nick Smith's resignation, strong conservation environment. Is that a loss to the parliament, losing Nick Smith? - Look, I think there is a challenge for National and displaying their blue-green credentials. There, historically, was quite a strong vein of that in the party. You know, we've got Simon Upton, who's now the parliamentary commissioner for the environment, and that kind of group of MPs. I don't see, personally, a high-ranking group in a shadow cabinet like that now. Maybe they're there and I don't know who they are, but, you know, I think that the onus is on them to bring those people up through the ranks and to show that there's kind of depth in their shadow front bench, on environmental and climate issues, now. You know, Nick Smith was the climate change minister during a time when Tim Groser was doing the international negotiations and he was a minister at home for climate change. He also presided over the Auckland tree` the ban on protection for Auckland trees, which was probably the biggest thing that I reported on under his watch. I'd be curious to know if he thinks he was on the right side of history on that now. I'd love to ask him one day. Exit interview, please, Nick, if you're out there. - Yeah, he's got a bit more time on his hands now. - Yeah. So, look, I think, length of experience on things like the Resource Management Act is always an asset. And I would like to see the equivalent, not just one person, but a group of people making themselves heard on that side of parliament, now. - And Nick Smith's` Uh, Judith Collins, rather, her good Harete Hipango comes in, with Nick Smith leaving. Is she better for the parliament, or is Nick Smith better for the parliament? - She's not better for the parliament. - Why's that? - Because of` because she's a bit of a loose wheel and I think she` under a bit of pressure, she will, sort of, expose herself and she doesn't have a level of expertise and experience, an in depth experience, that Nick had, in terms of environmental issues. I don't think they have anyone in their current caucus, actually, that has that level of credentials. There is some hope on the horizon, people like Megan Hands, down in Canterbury, so, you know, there needs to be a renewal, and this renewal has to start with the leader. - And it's hard to see past all this shemozzle of the last couple of weeks, isn't it, Sarah? What's next for the National Party? - I totally back up what Eloise and Shane have said around the blue-green credentials of the National Party. And I saw, through the election campaign, them avoid that as a` to campaign on because they thought they would better represent agriculture by not talking about environment issues, and the rural sector wanting representation on the fact of the work that they had been doing. So I think it was a poor move. - So does that risk alienating farmers, then, for National? Because they don't want to be doing that. - They want to be representative of the great work that they are doing. And our government is effectively one of the loudest voices to this entire community that we live in, here in Aotearoa New Zealand. And so therefore, if they are not representative of standing forward and doing that, then they are on the back foot. So therefore, what we saw was a resurgence of voting for Labour to avoid the Greens. So... - Mm. - To National's detriment. - Do you` Just on the Hollywood movie that's being touted on March 15th do you` you're shaking your head there, Shane, do you`? - Well, I think it's gross. - Why is that? - I think it's gross, I think it's far too soon. They've said that they've been talking to the Muslim community. That's not the fact, if you talk to the Muslim leaders. Look, this hasn't been promoted, this hasn't been pushed by Ardern and this government, they ought not to fund it. I just think it's gross and unnecessary. - It's not being pushed by Ardern, but it's not really being kind of condemned by her either. Do you think she should come out against it and, likewise, her ministers? - I think it's a pretty hard thing for a prime minister to do, to kill a movie. It's hard to see` - Not necessarily to kill it, but she could just... - It would kill it, though, wouldn't it, if she said this movie glorifying how amazing I am is a terrible idea and I won't watch it and I want nothing to do with it, that would kill it, right? If it does get made here, it's very difficult to see how the government could get out of funding it through the` - True. - Through the screen subsidies. Um, my personal view on it is that when I'm mainly concerned about is what Shane just said, that the people who have most reason to be hurt by this move, they weren't involved, weren't consulted, and we should be past that, I think. - And weren't` they aren't really the key people in the movie, either. It sounds like it's going to focus on Jacinda Ardern rather than the victims, or` - Well, this is the thing, this is our prime minister who didn't want the attention of a Nobel Peace prize for doing her job. So therefore, why is she acknowledging the celebrity status that she would get? It is great for us, internationally, to be recognised by her leadership. Absolutely. But in saying that, if we're going to tell our story, we should be in control of telling our story and the Muslim community should be right at the forefront of that. - That's all we've got time for. Thank you so much for joining us. I appreciate your reflections this morning. Sarah Perriam, Shane Te Pou and Eloise Gibson. Kia ora koutou. - Kia ora, Tova. - That's all from us for now. Thanks for watching. Nga mihi nui, see you again next weekend. Captioned by John Gibbs, Kristin Williams, 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.