- And I'm Simon Shepherd. Nau mai. Welcome to the program. On the show today ` new leader, old problems; following his toughest week leading the National Party, - And I'm Simon Shepherd. Nau mai. Welcome to the program. On the show today ` we bring you an extended live interview with Christopher Luxon. - If these walls could speak ` our workplace culture under scrutiny again with fresh allegations of bullying in the House of Representatives. - Plus ` tax relief for property developers; Housing Minister Megan Woods on her new plan for renters. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2022 All right, first on the program today ` it was a week of damage control for National Party leader Christopher Luxon, with rolling revelations about his newest MP Sam Uffindell playing straight into the criticisms that he leads a party for the elite. Tena koe. Welcome to the program, - Thanks for being here. How can you hold out hope of resurrecting the party into power when its MPs and its presidents keep stuffing up? - Well, look, I think we've made some progress around candidate selection and vetting. when its MPs and its presidents keep stuffing up? We haven't got it all right. It's not a perfect process, but we're dealing with people, and people are grossly imperfect, and so we've got to keep continually working at it and keep improving it. - What about your political instincts? I mean, when the staff broke the story on Sunday, why didn't you suspend Sam Uffindell straight away? - The story actually` I first became aware of it` Actually on Monday afternoon was when the story broke out. - And why didn't you suspend him straight away then? - In fairness, because, you know, having met Sam, it's quite clear that he had changed from the 16-year-old bully that he, you know, declares that he was as a 38-year-old man. And also, in fairness, our process` you know, the sense that Sam was able to come from day one, in his application, declare the incident in tremendous detail. We were able to investigate it, check with other references, and importantly, then make an assessment that this was a very different individual at 38 than the bully he was at 16. - OK. We'll talk about that in a moment. But what about your political senses? I mean, surely you would suspect or worry that would there be more to come out? - Well, I mean, what I wanted to be clear on on Tuesday afternoon or Tuesday evening was that actually that was the situation. But what subsequently happened on Tuesday evening late was that we received a new allegation, which is serious and concerning, around his time at university. And at that point, that's when I said, 'Right, we need to be able to have an independent investigator to look at that.' - OK. So, leading up to then, right, the timeline of events seems to give the impression that National Party doesn't want its preselection process to be open and transparent. I mean, they didn't want to reveal the details about Sam Uffindell to the public ahead of the by-election. Dribs and drabs of information about the preselection process came out over the Monday, then the Tuesday. The staff didn't even tell you. Is it transparent enough? - Well, I mean, that's the learning out of here is, ideally, I wanted to know earlier, not because I want to be involved in picking individual candidates ` that is a responsibility of the party and the local electorates ` but what I did want to know was to be able to say there's political risk; the public should be aware of this issue and be able to form their own impression and their own view on the election. - Absolutely. And so you rely on the people doing that preselection process. One of those is Sylvia Wood. She's your new president, right? She carried out the reference checks. She's in HR. And she's supposed to be the new face of candidate selection that you're talking about. How can you trust her now? - Oh, I trust Sylvia Wood completely. I've worked with her over summer as we've gone through actually trying to upgrade and improve our candidate vetting and selection processes. She did` We heard very clearly, from Sam, his story and the account at King's in all of its full ugliness. And then there was a really good investigation that took place to make sure` with Sam, but also with others, to make sure that he had changed as a person. - So you're still praising her, even after this week? - I think she's fantastic, and she's going to bring a lot of and she's going to bring a lot of good leadership and a new leadership to the National Party. and she's going to bring a lot of And I can tell you already, even things like, Simon, you know, as we go through new selections for candidates this year, but also existing MPs, they have to go through a process of submitting a new application form, new references. We go through with it whether you're an existing MP or a new candidate ` same process. So we've made some improvements. Yes, you're right; we need to make some more. The big learning out of this The big learning out of this is that we should have made this information available to the public to form their own impression and then, subsequently, you know, we'll continue to look at that after this investigation. - What does this say about your party culture, if your selection panel what Sam Uffindell revealed about his past wasn't open to the public to vote on. What does that say about your party culture? - Well, no` - That they didn't think it was serious enough to put out there. - Yeah, well, look, what I just say to you is, look, you know, they made an assessment that Sam at 38 was a different person from 16. He shouldn't be, you know, He shouldn't be, you know, held to the worst thing that he did as a teenager. And let's be clear ` it was a terrible thing. - Yeah. - It was a really serious thing, and I feel incredibly poorly for that victim. - But what does that say about your party culture? - Well, but, as I said to you, the judgement call should have come through to me to say, 'Hey, guys, that needs to be out in the public domain.' That's the mistake. 'Hey, guys, that needs to be - So you're changing that party culture? 'Hey, guys, that needs to be - Well, we are changing that culture. And I'd say to you that, you know, since` I appreciate we've had issues in our past, but that was before I even got to parliament. But I'd say, as a new leader and as a new president of the National Party, we are really determined to build a positive and a good culture, and I think we have been able to do that over the last eight months. - Right. So, I mean, you're talking about preselection changes and processes changing now, because if we look at the photo from the four potential National candidates ` these guys, right? I mean, what is wrong with that? - Yeah, I mean, the reality is we need a lot more diversity into the National Party. - Because even Nicola Willis said at the time, 'I want diversity in the preselection,' and she didn't get it. - And I said that as well. And the reality is` - You said that as well? - Three weeks into a by-election, you know, where we get short notice that we've got to go, people have to be ready to go. And the reality is, we didn't get the diversity we wanted. But what I can reassure you is, as we've been working incredibly hard on our candidates college, taking a lot of time to get people to know us and the reality of the job, us getting to know them, I am highly confident we're going to have outstanding, diverse candidates for 2023. - Because, I mean, you've been presented with this list before this week ` Aaron Gilmore, Jami Lee Ross, Aaron Gilmore, Jami Lee Ross, Todd Barclay, Hamish Walker, Andrew Falloon, Jake Bezzant; Aaron Gilmore, Jami Lee Ross, why does National keep selecting these sort of unsuitable candidates? - What I'd say to you is those issues were before my time, and I get it, I understand the point you're trying to make, but what I'd say to you is the National Party does not have a systemic cultural problem. What we are very excited about, in the last seven months, is we have retooled our candidate selection process. We have 90% of the people reaching out to us, wanting to explore candidacy, who we have never met before, and they come from all walks of life, because that's what we want. We want a National Party that represents all communities. - Uffindell was under your tenure as leader, all right? Did you ask whether he had any skeletons? Did you get involved? Should you have asked? - No. But, again, I want to be really clear ` I set expectations very clearly around what we expect from candidates and from MPs wanting to join us or good candidates potentially wanting to join us. It is a decision of the party and the local electorate to make sure that they select the individual that best represents them, and then, in this case, as I said before and I said through the course of the week, if I had known about the King's incident earlier, I would have wanted it in the public domain after Sam had been selected, so that the voters could make their own determination about that. - Is he toast? - No. We have a situation with a new set of allegations that have come forward on Tuesday. I take those very serious, because they are concerning. As a father with a daughter at university, I would want that properly explored from the complainants point of view. And equally, Sam refutes those allegations or the serious aspects of those allegations, and he deserves natural process as well. - OK. - So that's why I've appointed Maria Dew as the QC to go through that independent investigator. - We understand that. - I'll make the decision at the end of that. - All right. Has this episode made you wonder about what's lurking in the past of your current MPs? - Well, as I say, we have a process now that's different from before, and everybody will go through an application process and reference checking as well, as an existing` - Everybody as an existing MP? - Correct. - Has anybody come to you with any admissions this week? - No, they haven't. - Has anybody come to you - Right. - No. - Have you got any skeletons that you have to admit to? So you have to go through So you have to go through that same preselection` - I have, and I have gone through that same process as the first National Party MP that's been reselected by election. - So there's no skeletons in the Christopher Luxon` - No. I think the worst thing I can say is I was probably in a bus lane, and I might have got a $60 fine for it. That's sadly pretty` pretty` - And that's the worst? - It's not that exciting a thing that I've done. - And that's the worst? - OK. Let's talk about National as a party. You have raised $2.2 million in large donations this year, and that's come from people like Graeme Hart, who's New Zealand's richest man, Nick Mowbray, Murray Bolton, Craig Heatley, the entrepreneur. Are you fighting a perception that this is a party for the elite and the rich? - It's` It's not. And I can tell you, having just come out of a conference, where we spent` with 700 fired-up delegates that come from all walks of life. The reality is, the National Party, when it's at its best, is a national National Party, and it's able to represent all the communities across New Zealand aligned with our centre-right politics, principles, values and beliefs. And I think, you know, we've done a great job as being a great mainstream party, and that's what` the progress that we've been making, even over the last seven to eight months. - OK. How are you doing that ` representing them and fighting that perception ` when one of your tax policies is getting rid of the top tax rate for people who earn over $180,000? - Yeah, look, the reality is we're very clear about it ` we are a party of low tax. The Labour Party is a party of high tax. And we fundamentally believe in And we fundamentally believe in policies, as you've seen, around tax indexation and thresholds. We believe in the fact that we are going to unwind the Labour Party's seven taxes... - Yeah. - ...that they've introduced. One of them happens to be the 39% top tax rate. - But why that particular tax` Why do these people need a tax break? - The reality is this is a government that's creating a huge` - But why do these people need a tax break? - No. All New Zealanders actually need to be able to have a tax break. - Yeah, so why these people? - So they keep more of their money in their pocket, so that they can actually navigate this cost of living crisis` - People over $180,000 aren't the people that are navigating the cost of living, are they? - Well, we have a progressive tax system ` the more you earn, the more you pay. And that's the way it should be. - Does the $180,000 limit really equate to, you know, the indexation tax that you're going to raise the thresholds for the lower-earning people? It seems a bit of an unfair system. It seems a bit of an unfair system. - Well, what I just say to you on that is that, you know, we're in a situation of high inflation now. We haven't seen it for 32 years. The government has earned probably over $14 billion in extra revenue off the back of inflation, and all we've said, right from the beginning ` in the spirit of wanting to oppose the government, but also to propose some constructive ideas ` is tax indexation of tax thresholds is a common-sense thing. You take the current system as it is, just lift all the tax brackets up by the amount of inflation. That is a much, much better way than what we've seen,... - But doesn't that just` - ...which is ad hocery, Band-Aid payments, Cost of Living payment. - Yeah, but` Yeah, I know all of those things. But your tax policy gives more money back to those who earn more, especially those who earn 180 K or more. - It gives money back to all New Zealanders who earn money, who have incomes, because we want them to keep more of their money in their pocket to save and spend as they see fit. You sure as hang don't want to give your money to Grant Robertson to spend and waste as he's been doing. - All right. This is about perception for the National Party, and your conference speech emphasised, or empathised, should I say, with homeowners, who are feeling the inflation. It sort of makes sense for the National Party base, because a lot of your MPs own a lot of property; I've looked at the pecuniary register. But how does it attract the centre or the centre-left voter that you need to get back into power? How does it attract the Kiwi who can't afford his first home? - Well, the reality is that's what's been happening over the last seven to eight months. I was talking to, you know, a teacher and a nurse ` good jobs, average incomes, cannot get ahead in this country. That's what we call the squeezed middle. cannot get ahead in this country. They don't get formal assistance from the government, but they can't keep up with the rising cost of living. And the reason this is all happening is we've got a government that cannot manage the economy and doesn't have a plan, Simon, and that's the challenge. - So` - They don't have a plan to fight inflation. - Yeah. - They don't have a plan to grow the economy. And they're not planning` - I'm talking about your plan, though. I mean, how are you going to attract the centre-left, or the left voter, that middle or the left voter, that middle that you need to attract to get back into parliament? That focus on $180K, or tax indexation or empathising with homeowners? - What the people in the squeezed middle, which are our voters, are saying is they want us to run this economy incredibly well. When we have a good economy, we can fund great social services. When we have a good economy, we can build a great police. When we have a good economy, we can do a great economy` you know, great environment. - OK. So is it just tax indexation - OK. So is it just tax indexation that's gonna get back the squeezed middle? - No, it's not. No, it's not. I mean, the reality of this country is we need a long-term growth plan. That means investing very strongly in a world-class education system at a time when over half our kids don't go to school regularly. It means making sure we have infrastructure that connects us to each other and to the world. It means much more investment in research and development and technology, a much more pro-business, and then strong international connections. - All right. - Those are the those are the drivers of prosperity. When I look at other small, advanced economies around the world, which I've studied a lot over the last five years, like the Irelands, like the Denmarks, like Singapores. Those are the drivers of ` why are they fundamentally wealthier than New Zealand? It's those five things. - Let's talk about the other end of the spectrum. And this was the key policy launch from your conference, and that was cracking down on the free ride ` your term ` for the young people on social welfare. Is that original thinking, or is that just same-old, same-old National thinking? - No, it's really different thinking and it's actually bringing Bill English's social investment thinking to life very powerfully. Here's the problem, right? You've got a situation in New Zealand with record job shortages, low unemployment, and at the same time we have 50,000 more people with record job shortages, on a Jobseeker benefit from when the government came to power. - But a lot of those are people with disabilities. - No. - But a lot of those - But you're talking in particular about young people, right? - And I want to be really clear - And I want to be really clear about that, because we are talking not about sole parents here. We're not talking about supported living people. We're talking about people who are on a Jobseeker. - Jobseeker is separated into two things ` work-ready and disability or health condition, right? - Jobseeker is separated into two So this particular youth policy, how many people is that going to affect? - Well, the reality is this, is that we're not going to be like the Labour Party, giving up on young people, consigning them to a life of welfare. - OK. How many people` - Because young people under the age of 25 on the Jobseeker for longer than a year is up, is almost double. - So how many people? - So what we're going to start off with as initially a cohort of 2000 people, because there is 13,00 young people` - So 13,000? - So 13,000 young people who have been on a benefit, on the Jobseeker benefit for over a year. - OK. - So we'll start with 2000. - But on that 13,000, I need to pick you up on that. 13,000 includes people who are on a health condition and disability. - Yes. So let me take you through it. - So if you were going to include them, are you saying that the young people on Jobseeker for health reasons are going to have a job coach and be sanctioned if they can't get a job? - So let's take` Let's just walk it through so we really understand what we're talking about here. - But that's` - No, no. Hear me out. Let me` Let me answer. 34,000 young people under the age of 25 on Jobseeker. You're right ` about 75% of them are what we call work-ready; about 25% are what we have health conditions. What we're proposing is we want each and every individual, whether they've got health conditions or are work-ready` Health conditions may not be ready for work until another two years. - That's right. - But we're going to give them a jobs coach, a needs assessment and an individualised job plan and someone that helps support them work through their plan so that they can get a pathway ultimately into` - OK. And what happens to them, if they're on a disability, and they can't meet what the job coach wants them to do? Do they get sanctioned? Do they get money management? - What we really want them to be able to do is to be out of work with their job coach` - Do they get sanctioned or money management? - Well, the next piece is, if you can work, and you're able to work, or you're on a pathway to work, we will have sanctions we will have sanctions if you don't participate and actually join in what it is` - Right. So I'm on a disability, and I'm going to get sanctioned if I don't get a job. - I wanna be really clear ` the health conditions under the Jobseeker category are different from people who might have permanent disability and supported living arrangements or on a different arrangement. - Right. - The reality is they're still identified as being able to, ultimately, work. It might be part time work. It might be some volunteering. It might be some skills that they need to get around literacy or a drivers licence or` - And still the question is ` if they can't do that, will they get sanctioned and will they have their money management put in place? - Our view is very simple. We're gonna work with young people to make sure they can get` - Will that happen? - And then, yes, we will` If they refuse to participate in their job plan, we will employ the sanctions. The existing sanctions regime is not being applied today. - I know. Even if they have a disability? - Our first focus will be money management, yes. - Even if they have a disability. Are you going to` - They're people with a health condition. - Yeah. - And their pathway will be different, and it will be very individualised. and it will be very individualised. - So you're saying that they could work. - Sorry? - Are you saying that they could work? - Well, they are on a Jobseeker because, ultimately, they've been identified that they can ultimately` - OK. We'll move on from there. Are you gonna extend this idea of money management to other beneficiaries who don't` are on Jobseeker who don't get into jobs? - Well, look, here's our focus is on the under-25s. - Yeah. - And I wanna be really clear` I will get to your question. - Yeah. - But under-25s. You know, we've now got a situation where 55% of our kids don't go to school regularly. We now have a raise of young people under 25 on the Jobseeker benefit. So we're focusing on that. We don't want to write that generation off. - What about what about by people older than that who are on long-term beneficiaries? Will you extend that policy to them? - We're open to getting outcomes in the National Party, and we will look at extending that if that's the case and it's successful. - So you will look at extending it. - Because we have a different belief system. We think that community organisations, as we saw in vaccination roll outs, as we're proposing with this policy, can be much more effective, often in this case, than MSD. MSD is not getting an outcome. It's not getting an improvement in those young people's lives. - OK. So you're open to extending that. - We'll look at anything and everything to get outcomes. - Let's just finish off with your performance. So recently, you holidayed in Hawaii, OK? Things are tough back home. You admit that? Things are tough back here. - Absolutely. The cost-of-living crisis is` - You're overseas. You said you said Kiwi businesses are getting soft, whilst you were overseas. You said you said And your staff didn't tell you about Sam Uffindell's background. Are you out of touch not only with the party but with the electorate? - Look, no. What I'd say to you upfront is I'm not a career politician. I am new to politics, but I know how to lead, and I know how to get things done. And that is the fundamental problem in this country at the moment ` the economy, education, health, housing, crime; every single thing, good intentions, lovely statements, no delivery, no outcomes. - A lot of people` - That's what I bring to the party. - OK. A lot of people have been saying you are the next John Key. Are you? - I'm the next Chris Luxon; that's what I'm about. And the reality is, I think it's great that someone like me can come from a very different background. I'm not a career politician. I'm not a union organiser. I'm not someone who's been preparing for this all my life. I come from outside, and I think that's a healthy and a really good thing. I think someone like me, who's been successful outside, you're saying I can't come to parliament, well, I actually I've got something to offer. It will be different, and I will sound different, and I won't play by the same rules. And I'm not the same career politician, as I said. But I know how to lead. And most of all, I know how to get things done. - Christopher Luxon, thank you so much for your time this morning. - Pleasure to be with you. Thanks for having me. - Well, if you've got a news tip, get in touch. We're on Twitter, Facebook and We're on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram or you can email us at nation@TV3.co.nz. So what did our political panel think of that? Shane Jones and Mike Williams join us next. Then ` Housing Minister Megan Woods on tax breaks for developers to boost the rental market. former New Zealand First MP Shane Jones and former Labour Party President Mike Williams. Tena korua. Nau mai. Welcome to the show. Shane, let's start with you. What did you make of how Luxon has handled the Uffindell situation? - Well, he was on-stage with Cinderella last weekend, What did you make of how Luxon has handled the Uffindell situation? and he didn't know he was about to step into number twos, and that's the test for him coming out of the corporate world into politics; there is a randomness. I think that his 2IC showed the judgement of a mid-level bureaucratic manager. The reality is, this is a guy who's been subjected to media trial, and his leader needs to ensure that due process is shown and that the guy is not destroyed based on things that happened 20 years ago. There are no good outcomes, however ` either a by-election, an independent member of parliament or on the backbench as a lame duck. - All right. You're nodding there ` in agreeance? What are your thoughts, Mike? - Yeah, I absolutely agree with what Shane said. There's something badly wrong going on in the National Party if the leader does not know that this thing's going to come out of the woodwork if the leader does not know that this thing's going to come out of the woodwork Now, the story sort of changed over the week where Chris Luxon said, I think, on Wednesday, that his staff knew of the accusation` of the admission of Sam Uffindell. But it's really difficult to believe that, you know` - Yeah. The question really is ` why didn't they pass that message on? - Exactly. This is a dysfunctional party. - Mm. - OK. Do you believe that Sam Uffindell, based on what's happened this week so far, that he still has a future in politics, Shane? that he still has a future - Oh, let the dust settle. I mean, the guy's subjected to an inordinately vehement campaign, not necessarily from him. - How do you come back from that? - Well, not` Hmm... Far be it for me to talk about my own misdeeds; however, you've got to be straight up. He will not survive in the event and the clique around him want him back. The only way he can survive is if the QC does not find grounds for him to be decapitated. - Right. Well, it's not a great start for the party's new president, Sylvia Wood, who was a part of the selection process. But, Mike, what can they do` What can they do better to have better candidates? - Look, I was president of the - Look, I was president of the Labour Party for nine years and went through three rounds of selections, both of electorate candidates and list, and I even selected this gentleman here, and I don't regret it. (LAUGHTER) I would never have selected Sam` - You're just saying that cos you're live on TV. - CHUCKLES: Yeah, that's right. I would never have selected Sam Uffindell. He would not have had my vote. Because when you hear about this kind of thing ` no matter whether it's 20 years ago ` there is a victim out there, and as soon as that person puts their head up in public, that victim is quite likely to come out in public, and that is exactly what's happened. - Mm. Shane, you know, it is a new leader for National, but they do still have the old problems, although Luxon just said National doesn't have a systemic problem when it comes to its culture. Do you agree with that? Do you agree with that? - Oh, he's lacking diversity. That's number one. I think the foolish thing that Christopher Luxon said is that Sam bought a new branch of diversity. Look, Sam had been out of the country for a long time, as I understand. He had only recently come back. He had jumped on the waka with Todd, the Bay of Plenty member. And I really think that this And I really think that this speaks volumes about the delegates who select the people for Tauranga. - Mm. National is, though, leading in the latest poll, Mike. How` - Yeah, not by much. My view is that we're going to get back to normal MMP neck-and-neck elections, and I believe that` I'm looking at the numbers; I think Labour will win next year. and I believe that` I'm looking at the numbers; It'll be tight, though. - Yeah. What about National's welfare policy, Shane? You heard there Luxon's korero around, you know, low tax, high tax, saying that National's the low-tax party. - OK, I'll say one thing ` if you're going to shrink the tax base, if you're going to shrink taxes, what are you going to cut? - Exactly. - You cannot shrink your revenue without trimming your sails, and National have got to fess up ` what are you going to cut? We know ACT's going to cut. The only thing I'm looking forward with them is a cut in their poll, and that'll soon happen when people go back to find another home. But you cannot blurt out you're going to cut taxes without cutting services. - Yeah. - Either that ` you're going to rack up debt or you failed School C maths. - Yeah. Mike, your opinion on what, you know, National is pushing in terms of welfare policy. - What you saw announced there, again and repeated, were massive tax cuts. And Shane's quite right ` the CTU's added up, and they think it's somewhere in the vicinity of $7 billion in tax cuts. Well, something's got to go, and that will be in the big areas ` health and education. And I would remind you that when John Key came in, he brought in tax cuts, and we then had a series of zero budgets, which they seemed quite proud of at the time, and that's when the hospitals and and that's when the hospitals and schools got run down. So it's a kind of deja vu we're seeing here. But I agree with Shane. You've got to be definite about what you're cutting. - The other thing too is that how are you going to grow the economy? And Kiwis are desperate to see the economy grow. We've got lots of imports coming in; as we have more electric cars, our import bill's gonna go up, and a country cannot pay its import bills unless it's got export receipts. 101. - All right. We'll leave it at that. Thank you very much. We'll come back to you shortly. But stay with us, e te iwi. Taihoa e haere. After the break ` Housing Minister Megan Woods joins us in studio with the details on with the details on her newly announced plan for tackling the housing crisis. Plus ` Parliament's work culture is in the spotlight again. Newshub political reporter Imogen Wells brings us the latest. The government has announced a brand new policy for renters. It's tax breaks for developers who agree to build or operate long-term rentals. Housing Minister Dr Megan Woods is here to discuss it. But first, we really need to address the ongoing allegations of bullying by Labour backbencher Dr Gaurav Sharma. Minister, thanks for your time. Dr Sharma's accused his own party, your party, of workplace bullying. Is he right? and comment extensively on this yesterday and take questions. Is he right? I don't have a lot to add. It's not something that I know anything about, and nor should I. It's not something that I know anything about, and nor should I. This is not something that ministers or MPs get involved in. There's really clear processes. So I really don't have anything to add beyond what the Prime Minister said yesterday. - But despite what she said yesterday and the denials that she did, Dr Sharma, again, is, you know, carrying on with these allegations and naming names. - Look, absolutely. And look, I think one of the things is that` my concern in the party's concern and everyone's concern is that everybody's being really well cared for through this. Clearly, this a number of people on all sides of this dispute. This will be a pretty difficult few days they're going through. And we're really mindful of that. - There isn't just one allegation. There's another allegation - There isn't just one allegation. There's another allegation that surfaced this morning against another MP. Are you concerned that there's evidence that Labour's MPs are sort of acting in an entitled manner? - Look, again, I only know what you know, Simon ` that my only kind of information on that is what I read in the newspaper this morning as well. that my only kind of information on I haven't seen anyone acting in an entitled manner. I think that we put more resources, both at a parliamentary services level, but certainly at a party level as well, through the Whips office and training MPS. It's a complicated employment situation. It's not a direct employment. It's through the parliamentary service. I haven't seen an entitled manner, but I don't really have anything more to say. I'm not privy to information. - OK. All right. You were Labour's campaign manager for the last election, weren't you? - That's right. - And so, given what's happened this week, not only with allegations of bullying by Labour backbenchers, but also what's happening on the National side` But do you` are you confident that Labour's selection process is at question as well? - No, I don't think so. I think that what` we've gone through really robust selection processes where we do a lot of vetting of candidates. Part of that is actually also that we've really looked for diversity in our candidate base. You don't just accidentally get to a caucus that has gender diversity, has ethnic diversity that we put a lot of effort into it. Mike Williams was on earlier talking about the selection processes he was involved in. And I think that Labour has put a lot of thought and a lot of effort. - I'm not talking about diversity. - I'm not talking about diversity. I'm talking about transparency and background checks and things like that with candidates. - Well, when you have to give thought to your selection process to come up with a diverse caucus and a diverse set of candidates, you, by nature, have to give a lot of thought to that selection process, and I think Labour has done that over the last few years, and that's going back a period of time. - So you're confident - So you're confident in the selection process they brought to the last selection? - I think we had a really robust selection process. I mean, we ended up with 65 MPs, more than any party ever banks on, and we've got a really good and talented group of people. To give a list that goes down that far and that many people running the seat's not expected. - All right. - I think you got to point to a pretty good process. - Let's move on to policy. So the policy this week ` build-to-rent is what you've announced, and that's tax breaks for developers who offer to build or operate long-term rentals. So why do developers need tax breaks to do that? - So what this is, is yet another lever to incentivise new build and new supply coming into the rental market. What you saw when we ended interest deductibility that we left a giant lever there for everyone with the 20-year interest deductibility for new builds because we want to be encouraging new builds. This is going a step further in terms of the incentives for these purpose-built, long-term assets. They're not built to sell; they're built to stay in the rental market. So the reason why we need this incentive is` the way in which we stop rent prices shooting through the roof is by adding to supply. You just need to look at the evidence. - OK. So, yeah, so developers have to offer a 10-year fixed-term lease; is that correct? - They need to offer the ability to have it. There's no onus on the tenant necessarily to have to sign up 10 years. - Yeah, so the tenant can offer a shorter term? - If that's what they choose. - And the tenant can also offer 56 days' notice to get out of that. - That's right. - But can the developer or the landlord opt out of it at any stage? - Oh, well, the normal conditions of the Residential Tenancy Act in teams of if someone's behaving inappropriately. - Antisocial behaviour? - Yeah. So you know by breaking the rules in terms of what you'd expect a good tenant to be doing ` of course that remains. The whole point of this is actually introducing into New Zealand what most other developed countries have, which is these long-term rentals. I mean, you're signing a lease, and you're signing it knowing your child's starting school. They're going to be able to continue through and continue their education at their local schools. - So how personalised? Because you say that these developers have to offer personalised policies for these long-term renters. How personalised can they be? I mean, can they make alterations to walls, or is it just internally? I mean, why do you need that? - Oh, well, people are making homes here. People are going to be living here for 10 years. I mean, if you don't like that khaki shade on the wall, you're going to have to live with it, not just for 12 months, but 10 years. - Yeah. OK. - The ability to actually make it your home` and I think this is a mind shift in New Zealand. This is actually about a different way of renting, and the fact that these are people's homes, and they should have the ability to make them how they want them to be. - So if a developer sells, what happens to the tenant? - So if a developer sells` - If I signed up for 10 years, and the developer sells after two or three...? - So if they sell to another build-to-rent investor, the asset is just shifting, and the class stays. So` - But what happens if the new owner doesn't want to carry on in that way? - Well, the whole point of these, and why they there's quite a strong criteria around this, this isn't just 'I own a house. I'm going to offer a 10-year lease. Therefore, I'm build-to-rent.' this isn't just 'I own a house. That's not the way it is. It's not only offering 10-year leases. You've got to have 20 properties. They've got to be not on the same title, but on contiguous titles. This isn't just, 'I own a house. I want to get the tax break.' These are long-term assets. So where we launched it yesterday is an example that is already operating. They're fund investors. It's Ngai Tahu. It's a super fund. - Sure. All right. You say you're targeting the developers and the investors who want to be in it for the long term, but you didn't answer the question. If a developer sells it after five years, and I have a 10-year lease, what happens to me if they don't want` if the new owner doesn't want to carry on doing build-to-rent? - So the point I was making, Simon, is that in terms of actually getting through the criteria, that actually the criteria should be weeding out those people that are actually building to sell. The people that should be The people that should be granted this classification in this asset class are people looking for long-term assets. - So you won't be able to get the tax breaks until you can prove that you are there for the long term. - You're in it for the long haul. The fact` I mean, you've got to have 20. They've got to be together, all those kind of things. This happens in just about every other developed country in the world. I think we should be able to manage it here too. - Yeah. So you have taken away interest deductibility for mum-and-dad landlords, right? You've extended the Brightline Capital Gains Tax. You've regulated the number of rent increases per year. So this is the end, is it, of the so-called mum-and-dad investor in their retirement rental? - Oh, absolutely not. - But there's no incentive for them. - That is Absolutely not correct, Simon. - Well, yes, if there's no interest deductibility. - If you're a mum-and-dad investor, and you're building a new place, then you still have the 20 years. What we've done is we've said come be part` mum-and-dad investors, but part of` - New builds only. - New builds only. - Help us solve the housing crisis. Don't compete with your kids in the suburbs for houses that already exist. Don't compete with your - OK. - We need more supply of housing. - Yeah, so you have tried to build affordable housing. I mean, KiwiBuild has finished 1380 homes, zero in June. So that's probably wrapped up. You've tried` - That's not correct. We just changed the settings. There's actually about 1200 that are currently under construction. It just happened none were given their code of compliance in June. - Right. So 1380 completed so far, 120 Progressive Home Ownerships so far? That's what the Housing Dashboard says. - So I think Progressive Home Ownership ` you need to understand what this is. - Yeah. - This is changing who buys a house. So we actually have about 4000 people who are going through the application process at the moment. So we actually have about 4000 - And 120 have got it so far. - Who have moved in. For some of these people, this is about wiping debt. This is actually about rebuilding a credit history. You're not going to move into a home in two years. It takes longer. - But we are well into your second term. I mean, I would say that giving affordable homes to people hasn't been successful. I mean, KiwiBuild has not been successful, hasn't lived up to its lofty aims at all. - And look, I mean, I think Labour, when we did the reset, we did not shy away from that. KiwiBuild did not reach the targets that we thought it would. A number of things that we've found out along the way, but I tell you what, we won't be giving up on it, and I will put out 1300 over five years against the less than 100 affordable against the less than 100 affordable homes that the previous National government helped people in over nine years. We've got another 1200. But the changes we've recently made to KiwiBuild around the lifting the thresholds and the price caps to make it more relevant, in many ways having an underwrite to de-risk development is what's going to work in a market that's cooling off. When you've got a hot market like we've just been through, KiwiBuild wasn't a necessary tool, but the number of inquiries we're getting around using that mechanism to de-risk development, they're on the increase` - So you're saying developers are coming on board. How are developers going to be able How are developers going to be able to build these, and how are they going to build the build-to-rents when we are in such a problem when we are in such a problem with our construction industry at the moment, in terms of supplies, in terms of inflation and in terms of skills? - So I think if we unpack those one at a time` so skills ` one of the things I think that has done an enormous amount of work and been a fantastic example of what can be achieved is the Construction Sector Accord. So working with the industry` - So it's the apprentices, right? - Oh, no, not just apprentices. Apprentices is a big part of it, but also we were able to work with the industry right through lockdown, not only to open up sites, but to work out what skill people needed to come across the border and when. - All right. - So we've been doing that and working with them and continue to do that. They're informing all the decisions we make. - But the suppliers and inflation? - In terms of building supplies, I mean, there's no country around the world that isn't suffering from constrained supply chains. from constrained supply chains. We're doing a lot in New Zealand to ease those. I mean, the biggest example, of course, is plasterboard. - So with plasterboard, it's crazy that we got into this situation where you have one brand of one product that dominated the market and actually sent people to the walls and businesses to the wall. - And look, this thinking and all of the issues around building supplies are exactly why that, we as a government, asked the Commerce Commission to do the market study into building supplies. But we realised we needed some shorter term work on the particular issue of plasterboard. We're really starting to see that ease off, so I look at the beginning of the year ` 91% of it was one brand ` dominated 91%. That's down to 87% now. We've bought new entrants in in that short space of time. - We're going through another boom and bust cycle in the construction industry. Is that right? - Well, I think everybody sees a cooling off and a coming down of where we were. - So we're going to see construction companies failing? - Look, I think one of the things that the Accord is doing a lot of work around about how we can avoid some of the things that happened post-GFC. One of the big differences after the GFC ` of course you had a government that had no build programme. This is a government that has a very strong public house build programme. - So you're confident that we're going to avoid` - We're not going to save every business. But I know talking to our build partners ` they've got the surety of the builds that we're doing as a government. they've got the surety of the builds We're being countercyclical. We've added over 10,000 new houses in five years since we've come into government. 8500 of those are new. - And you've still got 26,000 on that on the housing list` - Absolutely. - Register. Yeah. - Yeah, Well, I can tell you about 26,000 on the housing register ` If the previous government that built houses and not sold them. We would have nearly 20,000 more houses today than we do have. And I can also tell you, if they hadn't extracted half a billion dollars in dividends out of Housing New Zealand, might not have a housing crisis. - I'm going to leave it there - I'm going to leave it there for the moment. We can talk about housing forever, it seems. Thank you very much for your time, Housing Minister Megan Woods. - Thank you. - E whai ake nei ` our political panellists return with their thoughts on that interview and the rest of the week in politics. Plus ` Newshub political reporter Imogen Wells with the latest on the allegations of bullying in the halls of power. Shane, as the former Construction Minister, what did you make of Megan Woods' korero there? - I think one thing that we should really focus on is the recent Commerce Commission report. BRANZ is an organisation in New Zealand, and they set standards and they look at the fitness of various building products. But look, there has been a big problem, the costliness of supplies, and I think if Megan Woods can get behind the Commerce Commission's recent report, show some political will and drive more competition in the suppliers, that's going to be good. As you know, lots more resource sorry, building consents have been issued, but the real challenge is affordability. And perhaps she's found a way to break affordability. People will never, ever own, in many cases their own home in New Zealand, but they will have long-term security to live in long-term rentals, very much like Germany. Right. Going back to your corridor around suppliers, this is ridiculous that one building item has been holding up the construction of new homes for such a long time now. - Well, you are talking about Fletchers and they are a very powerful commercial force in New Zealand. BRANZ is an But also in New Zealand we've now But also in New Zealand we've now got builders that are highly qualified. They should be able to consent their own work, like a plumber, like a drain layer. And in more rural areas if you've got a qualified builder working say on Maori housing and papakainga, the council, in my view shouldn't even be involved. They should focus where the risks are high. the council, in my view shouldn't And MBIE in this respect has never, ever got off their rear end and gone to actually ensure that there's consistency across all the councils of our country. - OK, Mike, what do you make of the government's build-to-rent kaupapa? - Well, it's another arrow in their quiver. It's a good idea. - Is it an answer to the housing crisis, though? My view is that the housing crisis is already abating. Shane's quite right, a record number is already abating. is the number that springs to mind, Really low immigration, low reproduction. So we're going to see that that housing crisis, as Megan Woods put it, abate quite rapidly, in my view. I live in a suburb where every time I live in a suburb where every time a house on a full section comes up for sale, it seems to be moved off and replaced by up to 12 other buildings. So you know what that does to the sewage system I shudder to think about. - Intensification. - Yeah. Intensification is really happen. - Which really does go back to your korero, you know, about the dream of owning a home, is that now something of the past? - Well, look, until we massively boost supply and drive down the value of houses. Look, when my wife and I, we were in our early twenties, you'd remember this, Mike, interest rates shot up to 19, 20% and perhaps because houses were cheaper back then, and we've got to be very, very mindful that until such time more land is made available, more supply is available, we're going to be stuck with excessively high based property. - But I would make a point that these intensified houses where I am, they go for about 850,000. Well, I worked it out that a couple making the average wage could actually afford one of those. So I think you will see home ownership pick up. The real worry, in my view, is the rapidly descending number of Maori who own their own homes. I think that really has to be addressed. Yeah. And what solution would you have on that? Yeah, that's a very` I actually think that the solutions in many respects lie in the regions because a lot of our whanau, they still do own land. Admittedly, it's multiply owned land, and there's been a market failing, you can't build on multiply owned land. Now I know that the economy is really strong in Auckland and a lot of our people live in Auckland, but there's a lot living in Tauranga, despite Sam, Northland, Tairawhiti, and the over the last three or four years we've seen a major level of economic activity in those areas. Provide the homes for the whanau Maori in those areas and they will arrive. So do you both believe` what's your thoughts around this government ` Are they on the right track to ensuring that some part of the housing crisis is fixed? - Yeah, look, I don't want to be churlish. This is the plan that Megan's predecessor needed to unveil in 2018, and sadly we've got an election next year, and I would say lost two or three years on a host of housing initiatives that have not actually boosted supply. But I think that tractions beginning to show now. - Yeah, I would agree with that. And I'd make a point that when I was president of the Labour Party, there was a celebration of the first ever state house being And it was built in 1938. Now, the government that actually built that house was elected in 1935 So it took them three years to build one house. I always thought that Kiwi's say that` - They're called Micky Savage houses and my mum lives in one to this very day. - They're called Micky Savage houses and my mum lives in one to this - That's right. - All right. On that note, thank you very much for joining us on today's show. Taihoa e haere ` stay with us, everyone. We'll be back right after the break. Labour MP Dr Gaurav Sharma publishing a scathing opinion piece in the Herald describing a culture of bullying and gaslighting that he claims extends right to the top of parliament. - Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has strongly refuted Sharma's allegations, and Newshub political reporter Imogen Wells has spent the last two days covering the story, and she joins us now from Te Whanganui-a-Tara. Imogen, tena koe. Tell us ` what's the latest with the Gaurav Sharma situation? - Well, Oriini, I hope you're comfortable, cos there's no short way to answer this. Obviously, on Thursday, we saw that opinion piece dropped from Sharma alleging widespread bullying. After that, though, a source informed me it was Sharma who had had complaints laid against him by his staff members. And certainly yesterday at that press conference, the Prime Minister was at pains to articulate that this centred around a dispute between Sharma and his staff. But then what followed next was nothing short of extraordinary. We saw Sharma launch another grenade at the Labour Party, taking to Facebook in a very lengthy post with further allegations. I've got some of them here. It's important to note that these are still allegations and untested at this point. It's important to note that these He says, 'The main bully was Kieran McAnulty, who kept gaslighting me, 'shouting at me, degrading me in front of caucus members, telling me that I was a terrible MP.' He writes, 'In August 2021, I found that a Member of Parliament of the Labour Party He writes, 'In August 2021, 'and a parliamentary staff member were misusing taxpayers' money.' He says, 'I met the Chief of Staff of PMO,' or Prime Minister's Office, 'for over an hour. An investigation was never done.' And then he writes, 'I stand by my claims that I've been subjected to ongoing bullying 'by the Parliamentary Service and the Labour Whips, and none of my concerns have been investigated.' Now, by the time he posted that on Facebook, the reports that he had had complaints made against him had already started to come out. had already started to come out. Now, he didn't address these as such. Instead, he wrote, he has 'hundreds of pages to prove that my staff wasn't doing the work they were hired to do.' Now, in response to that very lengthy Facebook post with some very serious allegations, a Labour Party spokesperson said that the party disputes the allegations. They reiterated the ongoing issues between Sharma and his staff. And the spokesperson says the party believes it has acted appropriately throughout the entire matter. In terms of Kieran McAnulty, well his team told me he wouldn't be commenting any further than that. So certainly a wild ride here at Parliament after a day or so after that opinion piece. - Yeah, let's go back to the fact that Sharma is naming and shaming his own colleagues. Does he bring the Labour Party into disrepute? - Well, Oriini, while this is one Labour MP going nuclear, it certainly does open a can of worms here. As you say, these naming and shaming ` these are very serious allegations. And of course, we do need far more robust answers and responses to those than what we've received so far. On the flipside, though, Sharma is from a high caste. He's a Fulbright scholar; he's a doctor, and then he's come into Parliament as a backbencher MP with zero influence. So certainly a very different experience to what he's used to. - Imogen, the Prime Minister says these concerns relate only to Sharma, to his situation and don't reflect a wider issue. Could that be interpreted as meaning Parliament doesn't have a bullying problem? - No. We know that Parliament has had long and ongoing issues with bullying. In 2019, we had that Debbie Francis report that highlighted a systemic culture of bullying and harassment. And while it's been a few years, of course, since 2019, turning around a culture like that identified is certainly going to take time. Just this morning, we had further reports from a former staffer of a different Labour MP alleging bullying behaviour. So as I said, a can of worms has well and truly been opened here. So as I said, a can of worms has - Yeah. So where to from here? - Well, Oriini, the timing here is, of course, very interesting. All of these allegations have come out at the end of a sitting week, and then next week, it's recess. So in terms of what to expect, in terms of answers or having things further addressed, it's hard to say what we'll get, because on one hand, the Labour Party and the Prime Minister of course will be wanting to look like they're front-footing this, but on the other hand, using that opportunity of recess to go to ground, to tidy things up in the background and quietly using that opportunity of recess will, of course, also be very tempting. - Imogen, thank you very much for joining us on the show today. Imogen Wells ` Newshub political reporter live there from Parliament. - All right. We're back with our panel ` Shane Jones and Mike Williams, thanks for your time. Mike, what did you make of the Mike, what did you make of the allegations of bullying this week by MP Gaurav Sharma? - I simply don't believe them. The piece he wrote was, to me, quite irrational, and I think that this is a nightmare and I think that this is a nightmare for the leadership of the Labour Party, because they're actually dealing with a mental health issue, in my view, particularly when I read what was said on the front page of the Herald this morning. I don't believe bullying is I don't believe bullying is widespread in Parliament, and I hung around there for many years. - Well, we've had the Debbie Francis report, though, and the MPS are supposed to be signing up to a code of conduct. So there is something there. - There is. But I mean, bullying is a very slippery term, and people call bullying when they're given instruction by a boss. I don't know how you avoid that, but I never saw much bullying, and I know Kieran McAnulty very well, and I simply do not believe what has been said about him. - Shane, you've spent a bit of time in Parliament. What do you make of this? - Parliament's a robust environment. I served under Helen Clark, and she was aided by Heather Simpson and, more recently, led by Winston Peters ` redoubtable people. You know, Parliament's not for everyone. And I think young Sam's probably learning with his life. Maybe it wasn't for him. And I don't know anything about the doctor, the Indian doctor, but these outbursts of his, if a shred of evidence can be found, certainly if it's a misuse of taxpayers' money, then someone's going to have to definitely look into this. But I'd say also, when But I'd say also, when you do strike people that are under enormous pressure, the last thing the media should the last thing the media should be doing is actually conducting Salem Witch Trials over them. If there's a process for them to be dealt with... - Right. - ...without the glare of the media, because, let's face it, this week, we spoke about two MPs no one's ever heard of. - Well, so there's another MP too who's in the spotlight this week in terms of the Stuff article, which I don't know whether this has been encouraged or facilitated by the fact that there was bullying in the headlines. So` but that is another allegation out there this morning against another MP. - Yeah, that's true. But look, Parliament is not for the faint-hearted. New Zealanders need to recover their resilience. A key part of our national character is the ability also to grin and bear it, not to turn ourselves into a bunch of snowflakes. Parliament attracts people where there's a lot of rough and tumble. Not everyone is made for Parliament. - OK, so should it be that way that you can't be a snowflake and be in parliament? - Well, if you're in charge of the nation's affairs, and you're delivering for the community, ensure that your own insecurities are not blighting the mission which is to deliver for the country. - Mike, are we trying to hold MPs to a higher standard than the average citizen here? - Oh, that's inevitable, I think. But I can only repeat that I never saw much evidence of this. And I think that there are people who interpret bullying as being told what to do. - OK. All right. Well, let's talk Sam Uffindell, Shane. I mean, do you believe` you're calling what's going on there a Salem Witch Trial. I mean, do you believe` you're That's what I understand you to be saying? - Yeah, and, I mean, look, the guy has been sub` he will be totally discombobulated. He will be fearful. There'll be sweat pouring off him. He's come into a world of invasiveness that he's ill-prepared for. Now, I don't want to talk too much as to what he told his leader and didn't tell his leader. But it's not credible that the people close to Christopher Luxon did not know that. It just doesn't pass the sniff test. - Right. Does` I mean, we've talked before about whether National has a systemic issue or not. Chris Luxon denies that. But this comes at a time when they have had some momentum in the polls. Although, this week, National's lead has` not lead, but its vote has stalled somewhat, hasn't it, Mike? - I think it has. Be interesting to see what happens over the next year, but I would not be terribly unhappy if I was the Labour Party to be... - Really? - ...in the position I'm in. Things can only get better. I think what you're seeing is a reflection of COVID. You know, people are just` - Well, that's the Labour Party line though, is it? Just another party line ` it's tough out there. People are unhappy. The All Blacks are losing. - Look, I think it's true. - Do you buy into that, Shane? - National are going to struggle maintain their current level of support, and, really, I don't see them offering anything particularly new. I don't see one skerrick of evidence that they've worked out how to grow the economy. If we don't grow the economy, you can't just tax yourself out of the current situation. But the deeper problem, I think, for them is that they bled to ACT. And ACT, in my view, are not` not so much they're unelectable, but their solutions will completely destroy social cohesion. - OK. Well, that's a big statement. - I'd like to make the point that there was a big wipe-out of National MPs in the last election, and it left behind a very conservative core. And there's almost nobody in that caucus who supports action on climate change, for example. And that's going to make it very, very difficult for them to reach out to that centre. - Well, they need that centre-left, right? OK, just one last question. You must be happy though, because they're targeting NFs on the couch. - Yeah. (CHUCKLES) Well, it's one of the pearlers I left behind in Parliament. But working with our young Maori people, you need a carrot` and Pasifika and Pakeha people` you need the carrot as well as a stick. - Oh, well, I've always felt that we're on the verge of returning to a kind of handout culture in New Zealand after COVID, unless we boost people's resilience and remind them ` you have a right to call for the state to help you, but you have an obligation to look after yourself. - OK. And I'm going to leave it here. Shane Jones, Mike Williams, thank you so much for your time. And thank you all for watching. That is all from us for now. Nga mihi nui, and we'll see you again next weekend. (THEME MUSIC) Captions by Able. (THEME MUSIC) 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 New Zealand Public Interest Journalism Fund.