Assuming that that's genuine, Ben, how likely is it that` - And I'm Simon Shepherd. Nau mai, welcome to Newshub Nation. - $1.9 billion and no better access to mental health specialists than five years ago. Andrew Little from Parliament. - Mariupol is her home town and her parents live there. We catch up with Ukrainian New Zealander Iulia Bielan. - And is Tamaki Makaurau reimagined or just rehashed? We dig into the new plan for the Super City. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2022 - Morena. Remember 2019 and New Zealand's first well-being budget? - The jewel in Labour's crown reported in news bulletins around the globe. - And the centrepiece of that budget ` $1.9 billion for mental health. - Three years later, a review has found it's no easier to access specialist mental health services than it was five years ago. Health Minister Andrew Little joins us now. E te Minita, welcome to the programme. What went wrong? - Tena koe. Well, nothing has gone wrong. So, the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission's report acknowledges that a) there was this investment, and b) that we've made good progress in relation to the primary mental health care that we invested in in that programme. They've acknowledged that when it comes to the specialist end of mental health services, so those services provided out of hospitals, there are still waiting times. They haven't changed a great deal. I acknowledge that, and we have an ongoing programme of work to do to lift and get improvement in those areas. - All right. So if you've done such a great job, why is it just as hard to get specialist care now as it was five years ago? - We know that there's been quite a significant increase in demand for services. I mean, we commissioned the review` When we became government, let's face it, the mental health services had been neglected. They were in complete and utter disarray, not helped also by the fact that the independent monitor for mental health services had been abolished by the previous government ` the previous Mental Health Commission in 2012. So there was no one actually keeping an eye on what was going on. The system was run down, and the previous government neglected it. We commissioned a report to do a stocktake on what was going wrong and what was needed. That report was very clear in 2018, the He Ara Oranga report. The biggest gap and the greatest priority was in mental health services for those with mild to moderate mental health issues. And we needed those services at the primary care end, that's to say, in GP clinics, community clinics and the like, and that's why we now have, two years in to the investment we've made, 850 people in roles right now providing those services to people. I think in the month of February, over 20,000 sessions delivered for that sort of work. - All right, Minister, you prioritised that then, the early intervention at GP clinics, but now you've said we need to do more at the specialist and acute end. What is your plan? - Yeah. Well, I mean, we set a long-term plan at the end of last year. We know that one of the biggest challenges is the workforce issues, a shortage of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, and there is a worldwide shortage of them. We've started the long-term investment in training our own. We do need to recruit more. And we have recruitment initiatives underway through the DHBs to get more of those frontline or those acute and specialist staff into our hospitals. - There's some evidence that GP work with mild cases doesn't reduce demand on specialists. Have you put a lot of money into a programme that might not deliver what's really needed? - No, and as I get around, I've just this week been meeting with those in the front line. I've met with the health improvement practitioners and the health coaches. They're the roles that we're putting into GP clinics and community clinics, and, for that matter, in, you know, youth-specific initiatives. I visited one in Tauranga during the course of the week. Actually, what they are saying is that with the early intervention that they are providing, they are seeing a much reduced number of referrals to acute services, because they're dealing with people in very early stages of anxiety or even mild depression. They're helping people get into good life habits that mean that they're not getting seriously unwell. That is having an impact on alleviating at least some pressure off that more acute end of services. - But acute services are really overloaded. Let me quote from a senior clinician, Minister. 'You can have a suicidal person referred to mental health services, 'and it will be months before they're offered their first appointment.' How is this not a mental health crisis? - There will be places where that may well be the wait time, but when I look at, generally speaking, across the system as a whole, and as a minister, I tend to get these kind of aggregate numbers. What I see is, at least for teenagers, those up to the age of 19, I think it's roughly one-third being seen by an acute specialist within a couple of days, two-thirds within three weeks, and about 90% within eight weeks. We still need to do better. And look, if you're somebody who is in major distress, and you're waiting a matter of days or weeks, look, I know that that is a long time, and it's hard for the families. We know that we have more to do at that acute end, and we're getting on to doing it. - Minister, you've got the numbers. The figures are there. But what we're hearing, what we're being told by people on the front line is they question whether or not you really understand what's happening on the ground, on the front line. And so the question really is ` does the fact` Let me move on. Does the fact that Dr Bloomfield thinks it's not a crisis actually cause a lack of urgency? - There is no lack of urgency on the part of the government in addressing the serious problems in our mental health services that were allowed to run down for nine years under the previous government. That's why, look, pretty much within becoming government at the end of 2017, we commissioned that report. That report was run by people with front-line experience, senior specialists, people with a long background in mental health services. They went out into the community. They talked to all those offering mental health services. They talked to users of mental health services` - Minister, when was the last time you were out there on the front line? - Their report laid out what the priority was, and we followed that reporting, fulfilling it. As I get around hospitals and services, I meet and talk to people and I talk to the families of people, particularly young people, using those services, and they are saying what a difference the new services that we've put in place are making right now. - So you have been out there on the front line, visiting some of these mental health facilities, talking to the people who are working on the front line day in, day out? - Yeah. I'm talking to` I've been to GP clinics. I've been to specialist services. I've been to hospitals. I've talked to the hospital management. I've talked to the people who are providing the services. And yes, as the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission pointed out, that we still got` we've still got a way to go. There are still people waiting too long. - All right, the report` - We still have a shortage` We still have a shortage of specialists, and we're working on filling those gaps. - The report also noted that funding was there, but the leadership wasn't good enough to execute a change. Have you lost confidence in the leadership who was spending that $1.9 billion, Minister? - Look, I think, I mean, one of the drivers behind the health reforms is to get some consistency across the country. We've got 20 DHBs. They all do things slightly differently or in different ways. And look, there are different challenges and different problems because of the different makeup of the population that each of those DHBs serves. I get that. But I think what we can expect, or should expect to see and do need to see, is a greater level of consistency across these sorts of services across all our hospitals. Health NZ, in partnership with the Maori Health Authority, I think will give us a much better chance of seeing greater consistency and getting on top of some of these challenges that we've struggled with before. - How satisfied are you with the current leadership? - Well, look, you know, our DHB leadership do what they do, and that is kind of where they are at the moment. Many are doing a great job. Many are doing a great job. - It's actually cold comfort, though, Minister. It's cold comfort for people who haven't received the urgent care that they desperately need, as well as for New Zealand taxpayers who paid that $1.9 billion. - And for which they're seeing amazing stuff being put in place. As I say, 850 people in roles who were not there two years ago, delivering those front-line mental health services and making a difference to people's lives. I know that. I've spoken to the people doing it. I've spoken to the people getting that care and attention, and it is making a difference. Do we have to do more? Do we need to do more in acute services? Yes, we do. Can we do better in terms of consistency right across our system, across the hospital network? Yes, we do need to. And the health reforms will enable us to do that. - All right. Well, we've spoken to doctors, and their number one concern is the money isn't reaching, isn't going to the front line. Understaffing is up to 40%, and we're losing senior experienced doctors, nurses and psychologists. They're telling us that they see tangata whai ora ` or patients ` with serious mental health problems once or twice. They only get to do a patch-up job. They're unsatisfied knowing that the patients go away, and they return with worse problems, and it costs more in the long run. They miss out. The practitioners miss out on doing effective therapeutic mahi that they're qualified to do and that's desperately needed. What do you say to those professionals? - I say that, look, you can talk to individuals, and you'll get various stories. I talk to the people in community organisations too. I was talking to a group of community mental health workers just a few weeks ago, and they were telling me their concern is that` Look, what happens at the hospital end and the acute end of the services is one thing, and often people are medicated, and that's pretty much what they get. But because there's nowhere to discharge people safely into the community, then those people don't get the follow-up care that they actually need. And actually, some of the senior specialists tell me that too. They tell me that there are people in mental health wards and hospitals across New Zealand who do not need to be there, but they're there because there isn't the support in the community services to provide the support for people who need to get there. That's gotta be a priority for us as well, and then we can move people through. They can get their treatment when they're acutely unwell, very unwell, then move into the community with support, giving families respite, providing support to them as they get their life back together back in the community. - Ka pai. - That's another gap we have to start filling as well. - Minister, in July, DHBs are out, and they will be replaced by the new entity, Health New Zealand. You've been open about wanting to get rid of the large DHB bureaucracy. How will Health New Zealand` I've just lost my sound. - Apologies, Minister. Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now? I will keep talking. - I can't hear anything. - Sorry. Can you hear me, Minister Andrew Little? I apologise. - Tonu mai. Stay with us. - We lost Health Minister Andrew Little there, but we'll be back to finish his interview after the break. Now, we're joined again by Minister of Health, Andrew Little. E te Minita, thank you for holding on. Next question ` DHBs go in July, and it'll be replaced by one entity, which is Health New Zealand. You've been open about wanting to get rid of DHB bureaucracy, so how will Health New Zealand be nimbler? - Because they will have responsibility for the entire hospital network. That means that they can make sure that, for example, the clinical leadership required across all the disciplines, there is a single kind of level of leadership, and we can get consistency across the board. And, you know, there's this one set of decision makers. There isn't 20 decision makers. If you look at some of the recent experiences that we've had, particularly the vaccination campaign, we do something like that on a nationwide basis, we've had to negotiate 20 times to get an implementation plan put in place. We won't have to do that in the future. - Does that mean management jobs will be cut? - I expect that some of those, that management corporate sort of level, we will see some reduction in numbers there, because we can consolidate a lot of those sorts of management functions. The most important thing is our ability to do better than what we do in the front line. We've got some great clinical leaders, some great clinical services, amazing people in our health system doing that front-line health delivery. That's what we need to focus on. - Yeah, but health services are unequal around the country, Minister. How will you make it equal? - Well, that's an obligation that we've signed up to, and Health New Zealand will work closely, as they already are, hand-in-glove, with the Maori Health Authority, because we know that one of the big challenges we've got in the way we deliver health services is that inequitable access. A whole bunch of people who are not enrolled with a GP clinic or simply don't get access to health services. And we saw again, you look at the vaccination campaign, when we handed responsibility over to, for example, Maori-led organisations, health organisations, the difference that that made. They reached into households and whanau and communities who had not had health services before. - There is no dispute, Minister, that Maori health providers have been doing great mahi. But some of them that we've spoken to, a lot of them actually, are saying that the money still hasn't trickled down to the front line, and actually Maori health has been the last on the list. They aren't thought of. They're an afterthought. That's what we're hearing. Do you accept the report's findings that the Mental Health Service has also not served Maori well? - Yeah, we know that. The report that we had in 2018 told us, though, that need for services that are accessible to Maori mental health services and also` - So, then, where has the money gone? - ...delivering support and care in a way that is relevant to Maori is a critical part of what we do. - So, then, where has the money gone in terms of addressing Maori mental health inequities? - So, part of the money we put out, and we've commissioned and contracted Maori health organisations delivering Maori mental health services in a way that's relevant to them. So when I talked about 850 positions, about 650 of those are in GP clinics. The other 200 are kaupapa Maori health services and Pacific health services and youth-specific health services. Can't get a more detailed breakdown than that. But we are funding specific positions within kaupapa Maori health services. - OK, let's shift our focus to COVID. COVID restrictions are lifting. Cases have peaked in some places. And of course, the question is when will COVID be absorbed in the Minister of Health Portfolio role? - Yeah, look, I think we're getting to a point now where, you know, we just learn to live with COVID, and the way we deal with and manage and respond to COVID becomes business as usual. In the end, it's a question for the Prime Minister and Cabinet to work out at what point, you know, you start saying of particular ministers or their agencies, 'Right, you're now going to just roll that into everything else that you do.' We've been well served by Chris Hipkins as the COVID 19 response minister. Done a brilliant job, and I could not be Minister of Health and COVID 19 Response Minister. We are both dealing with the health system, but we are getting to a point where they will have to be a re-integration. - Ka pai. How will doctors catch up with the backlog of elective surgeries that have been cancelled given that staff are burned out and COVID patients are taking up the beds? - Yeah, look, that's a major challenge that we're` A lot of work going on right now. And you're absolutely right. We stopped a lot of planned care so we could make beds available for COVID patients to get their care. We're starting to see the numbers, at least in Auckland, in hospital have kind of stabilised and going down. Other parts of the country, I think it'll be another couple of weeks, I think, before we see a major downturn in those numbers. There's a lot of work going on within the ministry, with DHBs, with the senior specialists working at what we do now to make sure that those people who've waited for their surgeries ` the hips and knees and all those sorts of things ` will get those just as quickly as possible. Like all these things, you know, we had to have a plan to respond. We've got to have a plan for the recovery phase as well, and that's underway. - E te minita, thank you very much for your time and for joining us this morning. Tena koe. - Nga mihi. Tena koe. - Right. To Ukraine now. Four weeks ago, most New Zealanders had never heard of the port city of Mariupol. Now sustained Russian bombing has almost completely destroyed it. - Watching from this side of the world is Iulia Bielan. Mariupol is her hometown. Her parents still live there. She hasn't heard from her father, though, and her mother has just managed to escape. - Iulia spoke to us because she wants the world to follow Ukraine's example and stand up to Russia. I asked her what it's like waking up every morning waiting for news. - It's quite stressful, and the first thing I do in the morning is to reach out for my phone and hope for good news. But unfortunately, it's just getting worse and worse. And basically, this is not how you want to start your day, knowing that someone you know possibly died or have died already. So it's quite` Yeah, it's like a vicious circle. You can't get out of this trap. It's like a nightmare. - The pictures are incredibly confronting of the centre of Mariupol, aren't they? - Yes. It doesn't look like Mariupol any more, at least not like I remember it. Mariupol is a beautiful city. It's a port city. It's an industrial city. And you know, it wasn't perfect, but it was very special and it was mine. It's a city where I grew up, where I was born, so yeah, it's definitely very sad that it's no longer there any more. - And you say they had just started to beautify, to gentrify Mariupol. - Yes. So, in the past five years, they started making it look better. They tried to make Mariupol look like it's a European city. A lot of parks, a lot of playgrounds for kids. It looked so much different from what I even remember it. - Your parents live there. They're not together. But have you heard from them? Have you heard from your father? - Last time I spoke to him was the 1st of March. And since then, no, I haven't heard from him. My mum, though, she` How can I say? She got lucky to escape from the city, and she's on her way to Poland right now. - Your mum, how did she managed to get out of there? Because the humanitarian corridors kept closing because of the bombing. - When the war started, first she decided to stay home, but then she was invited by one of her friends to come and join them and just stay with them in their house. And she decided that she felt like she should go. So she took money. And basically, that's all she took with her. And she ran to their house, and she stayed with them. They didn't have private car, but somehow they found some car somewhere that wasn't even working. So they had to start the car, they had to find gas and just` They didn't have the keys to start the car. So it's quite unbelievable, but it's a miracle. - And what about your father? What are your fears for him? - Well, reading the news, I have less hopes every day. But... You know, I'm following lots of chats online where I'm looking for his building, like, the building where he lives. And I'm just hoping that it stays, like, whole ` not damaged. Yeah, so that's the biggest fear. And obviously, I hope that he has something to eat or drink. Yeah, and it's also cold in Ukraine because it's winter, winter/spring. So it's been, like, minus-5, minus-10 one night. Imagine having no heating, no water for around a month now. It's a catastrophe, really. - In your words, how would you describe what's happening to your country? - I believe that it's genocide of Ukrainian people, because the way Russian military acts is not by the rules of war. They're bombing maternity hospitals and they're bombing shelters with civilians. You know, there was a theatre that was bombed, and there was a sign written 'children', and they still dropped a massive bomb on the theatre. So I believe that, yes, this is a genocide and very unfair on those civilians, young mothers, unborn children, newborn children. It's a catastrophe - What do you think of the world's response? - I think no one` I mean, Ukrainians didn't expect this war to unfold so fast. - Is the world doing enough? - I wish the world acted faster, and maybe there were more lives saved by now. But sanctions are obviously working, but people are dying. How can you compare a sanction? I think I would want NATO to get involved and at least protect the sky, like a lot of civilians were asking, even in Mariupol. Cos Mariupol were bombed 100 times one day. 100 bombs were dropped. And it was, like, every 10 minutes, every 15 minutes. And if we had the sky closed, we could prevent a lot of deaths, I believe. - Do you still have friends back in Mariupol? - Yes, a lot of them are still there. A lot of parents of my friends, friends that I went to school with. Their parents are still there. Elderly grandparents. - Your mother, though, it's good news. She's in western Ukraine, isn't she? - Yes. On the 24th of March, she celebrated her 68th birthday. And the message that I got from her, she said, 'War is war, but you should always celebrate birthdays.' And it's that just shows you how strong the spirit of Ukrainians. And a lot of the times, even when I contacted my friends, I would tell them, 'How are you? Are you all right? I'm so worried. I can't sleep,' but it would be them who would say, 'Don't worry. We are fine. We have food. We will be all right.' So Ukrainians are a very strong nation, and I'm very proud of them. - Iulia has just heard from her mother, Viktoriya, overnight. She has made it safely into Poland, and now they're hoping to fly her to Canada, where Iulia's sister lives, as that visa is apparently quicker to get than the three weeks it could take in New Zealand. - E whai ake nei ` up next ` a double dose of hard politics with our panel, Ben Thomas and Rukuwai Tipene-Allen. - Plus ` should Auckland become an urban national park? Sir Peter Gluckman's ideas for the super city. are Maori TV reporter Rukuwai Tipene-Allen and former National Party staffer Ben Thomas. Tena korua. Thanks for your time. To you first, Rukuwai ` you heard the minister this morning sort of justifying the state of the rollout of the mental health system. How did he go? - Uh, not very well, really. Mental health is a true crisis in New Zealand and particularly for Maori, who are dealing with inter-generational trauma, who are dealing with` all New Zealanders, dealing with the effects of COVID-19. The strain is real, and obviously, there's been a gap between the government and their advice around what they should fund and what that actually looks like practically on the ground, because we have too many families that are going to suffer should that not turn around and turn around quickly. - Yeah. Ben Thomas, if that is the perception, does that add to, say, the opposition playbook of lack of delivery by Labour? - You know, the problem here comes back, actually, to that mental health inquiry that Labour insisted on running. We've had numerous mental health inquiries over the years. Most of them have come out with the same sort of recommendations. This inquiry, uh, that came out of the 2017 election was really a sort of status quo but on a bit of steroids. You know, as we heard from the minister, it focused very much on mild to moderate mental health needs. We heard the minister say community care has been neglected. That was actually ignored almost completely in that inquiry. And that's actually where, you know, a lot of the sticking point is. Ultimately, you can, you know` There's certainly nothing wrong with its declared intention, which has always been well flagged ` that they were focusing on mild to moderate mental health issues to begin with, and that is a need, but it is actually a bottomless need. You know, in a western country in the 21st century, you'll never actually reach the end of people who would like to talk about their issues, you know? And that's not to take away, in any case... in any way from the severity of those sorts of things. But, you know, the acute care` the acute focus was lacking, and that community care aspect was almost completely absent. I think Andrew Little's doing a good job with what he inherited. - Right, OK. Rukuwai, just quickly, is it a bit rich for National to be criticising the government over this? I mean, Andrew Little is obviously trying to sheet home a lot of blame to previous governments. - Absolutely. I think National's just kind of clutching at straws with this one, because I don't think that we` I don't think that things would've been very different if we were under National. In fact, I think that... that if anything, Labour has had a stronger focus on well-being and mental health. And Ben's right ` he's doing a good job of what he's inherited. The problem probably is that there's still a lot of disconnect across the sector, in government ` who's talking to who, who's listening to who ` and most importantly, who's actually being seen in this, because, like Ben said, there's so many holes in the report that you can just only imagine the amount of families and people who have fallen through the gaps of that report. - All right, lots to get through. I'm going to move on to the Solomons now. So, we've got this potential security deal with China. Assuming that that's genuine, Ben, how likely is it that` how concerning is it that China could get into the Pacific and maybe, you know, undermine some sovereignty? - Yeah, look, I mean, this is obviously a big development, but it's charting the course that actually the New Zealand Defence Force laid out in its strategic white paper a couple of years ago, which is sort of... an unnamed country that doesn't have consonant values with New Zealand trying to expand its reach, you know, both for military purposes, for food supply purposes. Yeah, look, this is a concern to Australia. It's a concern to New Zealand. We've already seen the massive amount of cash that have been pumped into the Pacific Islands by China. You know, it's kind of soft power diplomacy. And, you know, at the point where they're signing an agreement where they can sort of park warships in our region, that's certainly a concern` - It seems like a hardening of the policy towards the Pacific. I mean, Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta is raising her concerns directly with Beijing. Rukuwai, will that have any effect? - I think that it's just quite a scary conversation to have when you think about the effect that that can have, the ripple effect that it's gonna have on all of us. While raising concerns is a great step, I think that making sure that New Zealand is in the best position to be able to look after itself and its Pacific neighbours is the conversation that needs to be had here in Aotearoa. - All right. From the wider Pacific geopolitical issues to Tauranga now. So, look, National's opened its nomination. Ben, who do you think's gonna throw their hat in the ring for the seat of Tauranga? - For National, you know, I think that they would be likely to want to address some of those issues that Christopher Luxon has already identified about his caucus ` you know, lack of diversity. Tania Tapsell, who stood in the... nearby Rotorua seat` not Rotorua, sorry. Uh... who stood in East Coast, rather, right next door, the last election and missed out cos she didn't have a high list placing, I think she'd be an obvious candidate for them to put in. In terms of other challengers, you know, I think Labour will sort of, you know, show up to run, but I don't think they'll put everything into it, to avoid embarrassment. Shane Jones from New Zealand First has been penning a lot of editorials recently. (LAUGHTER) Now, it could just be that, you know, we know he likes words. He might have been browsing the thesaurus and wanted to put it to good use... - In Tauranga, yeah. - ...or he might be profile-raising. - Rukuwai, I think you've got some connections down in Tauranga. - I do have some connections. I even have a picture of my great-grandparents on their deck with Winston Peters back in the day. - So, Winston... So, I mean, why not Winston? - I mean, it would be entertaining, and it would be great to watch that rollout. I'm sure that we'd have some great banter on what that would look like in a by-election. I don't know that that's a reality, though, whether or not Winston Peters would stand. But what I do hope is that whoever stands really tackles on some of those issues like the pollution that's been experienced out at Whareroa Marae and some of the things that are happening across the region that are often ignored or at least only talked about in smaller hui and smaller circles. I think that` We've talked to a few Maori leaders around Tauranga moana who have said there's major Maori issues here, particularly around pollution, and they hope that the next candidate or the next person that sits in that seat really takes a focused look at it. - OK. I just want to bring in` broaden it a little bit ` and a potential partner for National ` this is ACT, right? So, David Seymour this week has put a bottom line out there. He wants a referendum on Te Tiriti and Waitangi, and so, I mean, is that really` I mean, Rukuwai, I'm going to go to you for this. What do you think about that? - I think that if anyone read a book that had a real critical analysis on how constitution really works in New Zealand, they would see that Maori have continuously been the floorboards on which Aotearoa has built its constitutional arrangements. So to write something or to put something out that says that just because your grandparents are something, you get better treatment here in Aotearoa, yeah, it is a thing, except the ones that are treated badly are Maori. You only have to look at statistics to see the constant bashing of Maori across the board and across sectors. I think that what he's done is... It's actually come from a position of fear. There's a line that Kelvin Davis said at the end of his response that said, 'Ko mataku na wa ko kinonga tamariki a kuare,' which loosely translates to, 'Fear and harmful acts... 'are the result of... 'misguidance or being uneducated.' And I think that, ultimately, that's a conversation that Aotearoa needs is get some education on what it really looks like in Aotearoa. - OK, so, but I wanna ask Ben ` I mean, why would David Seymour go into this particular part, this political playbook? - Well, I think Christopher Luxon has obviously tried to stay away from that kind of He Puapua conspiracy theory stuff that got Judith Collins sort of bogged down in a quagmire. And look, you know, there is a constituency for that. There's always been a constituency for these sorts of issues in New Zealand. If Winston Peters isn't taking it, if he's out of the picture, if National's not going for it, makes sense for ACT to go for that vote. You know, on the other hand, I remember when I worked in the Treaty minister's office. ACT, David Seymour ` very, very much against maunga co-governance in Auckland. In his speech on Thursday, he said that, you know, some co-governance was all right, like the maunga in Auckland, because of the long historical connections. So actually, I think we're making progress. - OK. Oh, well, let's call it progress. OK. Ben Thomas and Rukuwai Tipene-Allen, thank you so much for your time this morning. E haere tonu nei ` still to come ` Auckland reimagined or just rehashed? Sir Peter Gluckman joins us live after the break. Plus ` who is Raf Manji, and what's he going to do with the TOP party? Our biggest city is in danger of not delivering for the country, so futurologists based at Auckland University have put together what they call a provocation, a report to spark debate on what the Super City should be in 50 years' time. It was led by the Prime Minister's former chief science adviser, Sir Peter Gluckman, who joins me now. Thank you for your time. Sir Peter, what is Auckland not doing right now? - Well, it's what` The real issue is that we don't have enough alignment between those who are involved in its long-term planning, its strategy and engagement. And so what we have is almost contestation between central government and local government, a somewhat disaffected or disengaged population of Auckland. And we have no real sense of the long-term vision of where Auckland could be. Auckland has many opportunities, but it keeps on being talked about as it's a city of problems. New Zealand can't afford that. New Zealand needs Auckland to really thrive, because the flow-on effect to the rest of New Zealand is critical. - So, Auckland's not delivering for the rest of New Zealand, and you talk about it hollowing out. Like, the CBD at the moment, after the pandemic, is pretty empty. Is that what you're worried about? What would a hollowed-out Auckland be? - Well, if we think long-term` and remember, our goal was put to us by Auckland Unlimited, the economic arm of Auckland ` was to think inter-generationally, not just in the acute, simple, in the short-term. The issue is if Auckland cannot thrive and be a modern city with environmental and human characteristics fit for the second half of this century, young people won't see Auckland as a future, and we'll end up with an ageing city. And we've already seen how quickly we've seen flight out of the CBD in recent years, and we don't want to be like one of those decaying North American cities. And I think that would be overdramatic to say that it will end up like that, cos Auckland's just got so many fantastic amenities. But let's think about how we can really develop the biggest asset New Zealand has in a way that is both fantastic for the more than two million people that will be soon living in Auckland with an economy that will thrive, which is fit for the world, where there's more technology, more digital, and we have to confront climate change and the fact that our export profile will change over the next two generations. - Right. - We have to think cleverly now and think ahead, and that's not happening. - OK, but in terms` OK, it's a long, long roadmap ` 50-year outlook. But the vision affects the city's youth, as you say. We don't want them to leave. So did you consult with rangatahi for this report and this particular vision? - Yes. We had a rangatahi advisory group that's been engaged, and one of our major recommendations is that the city should do what a number of institutions around the world are now doing ` create a commissioner for future generations to think inter-generationally, to input into the... into the plan and also to promote more use of rangatahi advisory groups across the local democracy. But I think there's much better ways to strengthen local democracy than that, using some of the new techniques of participatory and deliberative democracy, and I think we've seen around the world but not in New Zealand these techniques used to engage citizens in thinking about their future much better, and in doing so, I think it helps the policymakers in both Auckland and Wellington get better aligned. - OK. I wanna put one thing that a commentator who's been quite critical of it ` Rod Oram of Newsroom called it 'dismal' and argues that it's all the same as the previous reports that we've seen before ` Auckland 2040, Auckland 2050. I mean, how do you respond to that kind of criticism? - Oh, I think that's just unfair and wrong, simply wrong. If they've read the report properly, the report highlights the problems of just more of the same. It highlights the critical need for a strategic view of Auckland owned by all those with decision-making. It actually talks primarily about the problems around decision-making for Auckland over the long term. That is unique and the key issue about Auckland's future. We cannot have the situation continuing where there are seven or eight or nine different planning views of Auckland, all distinct and unaligned. - Right. - So I think if people look particularly at chapter three of the report, those criticisms would be taken back. - I mean, about this particular report, what is going to change from Auckland 2040 and the other reports? What about this report is going to be that provocation? What's gonna make us excited about developing this city that you see in 2070? - Well, we've tried very much to say that this is the start of a conversation. A provocation is designed to force a conversation to start; that's what we were asked to do, and we have. I think concepts like having an urban national park based in Auckland, concepts like proper precinct development, concepts about dealing with the distribution of education in Auckland, etc, etc, and thinking about Auckland as a test bed for new technologies, developing a much more distinctive and deliberative policy on innovation and particularly weightless economy innovation in Auckland are all things that are important. But most important of all, it focuses on Maori. It focuses on the diverse number of ethnicities and cultures in Auckland, which fundamentally are Auckland's greatest strengths and have not been seen as such. - And you talk about this in terms of being an urban national city or national park ` I'm not sure exactly what the phrase is ` and that would be indigenously inspired. What does that even mean? What does that even look like? - Well, if you think about Auckland, it's not just an urban city; it's also a region. We have a magnificent gulf, three harbours, the maunga, the mountains. We have good regional parks. There are cities around the world that are now saying we want to take some of those attributes into the city itself ` green spaces, urban farming, dealing with thinking about more environmentally friendly ways of transport and so forth, particularly about urban design to create amenities, social and human amenities, which make Auckland live up to its original name ` Tamaki Makaurau, the place where people want to live. Remember, this was already the biggest density of Maori before Europeans arrived. - So, just before we go, I mean, could you name a city? If you look around the world and say, 'Auckland should follow that example,' who would that be? - Oh, I think we could take examples from Vancouver, from Copenhagen, from Amsterdam, from many other` Geneva, from many other cities where there are elements that need to be achieved. Auckland is relatively unusual, because other than Vancouver, there's no other primate city in a state or country... which is not also a seat of government power, either central or state provincial. And that does have influences on why Auckland has not been as well developed ... in a strategic sense as it might have. - So you're saying Auckland should be the capital of New Zealand, then? (LAUGHS) - No, I'm not. I'm saying I think New Zealand` No, it was once. That's not the point. The real issue is that there needs to be a strategic understanding across the whole country, and Auckland's got to look at itself too, very deeply, about how... the biggest asset, economically and socially, this country has will thrive through the rest of this century, which is going to be a century of a lot of change. - OK. Sir Peter Gluckman, thank you very much for your time this morning. All right. Stay with us. We'll be back after the break. This year on Newshub Nation, we're bringing back our supplementary question podcasts in a new format. A long-form interview by Finn Hogan released as an online-only feature. - Well, first in the hot seat is brand new TOP leader Raf Manji, who wants to give every Kiwi, even the kids, $13,000 a year with no strings attached. Here are some highlights from their half-hour interview, starting with why Manji took the top job. - Because we have this very narrow window of opportunity to change the status quo. And when changes in the status quo come, they often do not come from a mainstream opposition party, and people will be looking for something new. And that's why I took this job, because I want to be part of that. - Universal basic income ` one of the biggest changes you're proposing. - Yup. - Very simply, could you explain what universal basic income is and then why we need it? - It is an annual payment to... every person in the country, even children ` $13,000 per year, which is around $250 a week. At its fundamental level, it recognises the value and dignity of everybody and recognises the... huge contribution that many people make outside normal paid income in terms of caring, supporting, all the bits that go on in our community. I mean, it's valued around 25% of GDP. It's a big number. And of that, probably 75%, 80% is done by women. So it has huge gender issues as well. But it's also a much more efficient way of putting purchasing power into society. So it's a fundamental change in how we view people, their contribution, their value, as opposed to a welfare system which is just out of date. - How much is that going to cost a year, and how are you going to fund it? - Yeah. So again, 2020 numbers, we are updating those for next year. The cost was around $35 billion, but in terms of funding it ` and this is where the tax policy comes in ` we will tax housing properly, which we do not do at the moment, and we will institute a flat tax. At the moment, it's 33%. So all income gets taxed at 33%, including company profits, which are currently at 28%. PIEs, trusts ` all income is taxed at 33%. Not the first $13,000. So that's tax-free. Then everything you earn above that is at 33%. So we get rid of all the abatements. We get rid of whether you work an extra hour and your marginal tax rate is 80% or 90%. All of that goes out the window. Now, normally, a flat tax would not be seen as particularly progressive, but with the UBI attached to it, it is. - Wouldn't this just be a disincentive for people to go out and work? - No, I mean, let's be clear about this. The beneficiary bashing, this kind of dependency thing, it's got to stop. I mean, that's been sitting over us for the last 30 years, and it's been appalling. It has discriminated against people who are often, you know, dealing with structural issues around their lives, structural poverty, historical issues. And all the research shows that actually, if you treat people with dignity, they actually go out and make something of their lives. That's the reality. - But looking internationally, UBI has actually been trialled in several places. Finland had the largest trial. - Yup, yup. - But they ended it after two years and don't currently have plans to continue. If this is such a good idea, why isn't it being taken up? - Because it takes courage. I mean, it takes courage to say, 'We are gonna do things differently.' Now, a lot of the trials that have been done, they've been very small. So, they picked a group of people, and they've done it like any kind of, you know, psychological trial, social experiment. And generally, what we see is that the health outcomes, mental health outcomes are really good. Now, doing a trial for one or two years is not going to really tell you that much. It's going to confirm whatever bias you bring to it anyway. - And just lastly on UBI, one of the common arguments for it, which you've made yourself, is that the coming wave of automation is going to replace so many jobs that we have to radically rethink our economy. But I'm just wondering if you could point to any examples of automation actually replacing widespread jobs, because I can't really see much evidence for that. - We see automation in factories. We see automation that is starting to appear, and it's not yet having massive impacts. - Automation seems to always be just around the corner. - Yes. (CHUCKLES) - It's one of the oldest fears that we have. It's this economic boogeyman that we've been afraid of for hundreds of years but never actually gets here. So do you think it's sort of losing its potency as an argument for UBI? - Not really, because I think, in a way, on the other side of that, we're seeing jobs becoming a lot more precarious. We're seeing people in, essentially, the gig economy. We're seeing rise of zero-hour contracts. So people are working, people are employed, and the employment numbers we get show unemployment at a low level. But that will be measuring people who are working an hour a week. So I think this is likely to accelerate over the next five to 10 years. - Can you just tell me what you mean by 'New Zealand needs a new social contract'? Very simply, what does that mean? - What it means is that the status quo system we've got, which is really the last 25, 30 years of MMP, but essentially two major parties, is not really delivering the changes that we need. So, we tend to have a status quo, and it's nine years of Labour and nine years of National, six years of Labour, and everyone can complain about the previous one beforehand. The social contract is a sense of ` what does it mean to be a citizen in the 21st century? And I think that's something we need. We've got issues around social cohesion. How do we address that? I mean, my worry, and the reason I've thought about this a lot, is what happened in the US. - And by 'what happened in the US', you mean January 6th and Trump? - Yeah, but it's been coming for a long time. And essentially, it's been a failure of the major parties to deal with the underlying issues. - So just to be clear, you're saying that you think New Zealand is on a track towards where America is today? - I think if we don't address these issues, yeah, I really think we do. And I think what I see from the major parties is nothing. I really don't see anything. I think Labour` You know, the most popular prime minister, who could talk about this stuff, no doubt about it, is just` no, has just kind of given up. - What do you say to someone watching that says, 'I like some of the things you say, but a vote for TOP is a wasted vote 'because the chances of you getting in are historically not great'? - So, I would say to people, vote for us and get us into Parliament. Because if you don't, we're going to keep getting the same result. Otherwise, we're going to be stuck with the same National/Labour status quo that we've had for the last 20 years. - Raf Manji there. All right. We're back with our panel Rukuwai Tipene-Allen and Ben Thomas. Thanks for your time. Let's talk media. So, NZME is going alone on a deal with Google to charge the tech giant for use of its news content. Ben, good for NZME, but what would it mean for the rest of the media sector? - Yeah. Well, look, it's certainly weakens that collective bargaining effort that, you know, a number of organisations, especially the larger organisations, have been trying to get approval to begin with the tech giants, basically. You can understand why NZME might sort of break ranks, you know, and take the opportunity that's in front of it, in the sense that, you know, the Commerce Commission has sort of, you know, been slightly sort of uncomfortable about, you know, the sort of supposed cartel-isation of that kind of negotiation. - Right. - Even though, when you actually look at the relative powers, you know, the tech giants obviously dwarf New Zealand media companies. - So does it mean, Rukuwai, that other media companies, no matter how big or small, are going to have a reduced bargaining power if we're all going to go and make our own deal with Google. - Well, that's one of the major concerns, isn't it? And just like Ben said, you can see why that deal would go ahead. I mean, it just makes sense if you can get it done yourself, then you would. But what it does do is kind of leave New Zealand as a whole, New Zealand media as a whole, in a little bit of a lurch and almost makes you question, 'OK, what can what can New Zealand as a whole do to make sure that we're still current 'and still at the top of the ball game when it comes to international coverage of our stories.' - All right. Let's move on to another topic this week ` refugees. After nine years, Australia has finally taken up our offer to take some Nauru refugees. Rukuwai, why would they do that now? - To quote someone else, it seems politically convenient. It's about time there was some movement on this conversation. I think Australians have woken up to the to the kind of experience that refugees are having in Australia at the moment. Elections are coming up. It seems like a good time to start making those moves. Also New Zealand taking on 150 over three years, so 450 refugees, isn't actually a significant amount when you really think about it, particularly when we look at our own refugee quota. So I think it's just one of these conversations. It was a must-have conversation leading into those Australian elections. - Right. But as you pointed out, we have a limited refugee quota. And for the last three years, Ben, we haven't even actually fulfilled that, probably because of the pandemic. But how should we make up for that now? - Yeah, I think that's right. I mean, it's easy to, you know, look at the Australians and the way that they treat, you know, these refugees is appalling. You know, we can't get around that. But then, you know, we sort of all think of ourselves as sort of the good guys, even though, you know, even in good years, we take about sort of half, half at best, the per capita number of refugees that Australia does. It's almost like if somebody pays for your dinner and then you leave a generous tip for the waiter and sort of expect a bit of praise. Yeah. You know, we do need to up our game. This isn't a recent issue. This is a perennial one. The refugee quota got bumped up, you know, significantly in terms of the existing numbers under the previous government. But, you know, it's still far too low for a country of... our size. - Yeah. I wonder whether there's an opportunity` - And our professed values. - Oh, yes. - Mm. - You know, the sort of way that we portray ourselves in the world. And whenever we do take these steps, we just sort of take it in as part of our ordinary quota. So it's hardly going above and beyond. - I just wonder whether there's an opportunity here. I mean, the government is saying, in terms of refugees from Ukraine and wider family, they've brought a visa in. But as you saw earlier, I mean, it's taking a while to process that. And so, those refugees, those wider family refugees are unnecessarily going to come here. I mean, it seems to be quite a bottleneck, Rukuwai. - Yeah. And I think that we need to make sure, government needs to make sure, that when we're making these announcements, that we're actually creating a system that makes it easy for people. We're talking about people who are coming from war-torn countries. We are talking about people who are in dire straits. So making announcements and saying, 'This is what we're doing,' but actually working on a system that's going to help bring families together, working on a system that's going to be helpful and useful for people who are stuck is just as important as chucking out numbers here and there on how many people we're going to take in. - OK, and one quick answer from both of you. Should Auckland become the capital of New Zealand and make it great? Ben? - No, absolutely not. It's a well-known principle that you make the capital the least pleasant place in the country to go to discourage people from entering government. - (CHUCKLES) OK, and Rukuwai, is Wellington the least pleasant place to go and should it remain that way? - Uh, yeah, keep it in Wellington. I mean, the weather can be pretty miserable on most days, so let's keep the politics and everything there too, I think. - (CHUCKLES) All right. It's decided. Thank you very much for your time, to our panel ` Ben Thomas and Rukuwai Tipene-Allen. - Ae. Tena korua. (SPEAKS TE REO MAORI) That's all from us for now, e te iwi. Thank you for watching. - And we'll see you again next weekend. Captions by Able. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2022 - This show was brought to you by the NZ On Air Public Interest Journalism Fund.