- And I'm Simon Shepherd. Nau mai and welcome to Newshub Nation. On the program today ` soon to be stripped of her powers, soon to be stripped of her powers, the Children's Commissioner joins us live. - Disinformation researcher Byron Clarke on a week in protests and arrests on the far right. - And National's Paul Goldsmith tries to convince us he'd make a better Justice Minister than Kiri Allan. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2022 - Well, first on the program today, the care of our most vulnerable children. - This week, the Oranga Tamariki Oversight bill passed its third reading, bringing about significant changes to how the agency is monitored. - The Children's Commissioner will - The Children's Commissioner will be stripped of her power to investigate Oranga Tamariki and oversight will be split between a new independent monitor and the Ombudsman. - It's been roundly criticised and in a moment we'll speak with the Children's Commissioner, Judge Frances Eivers. But first, let's take a look back on the agency's troubled history. - Three years ago, this shocking video showed Oranga Tamariki attempting to take a newborn baby away from its mother. - Hold on to your baby. - We've taken them, we've removed them and we've put them somewhere else, and dislocated and separated them from culture and family. That's just got to stop. - These are children in care of the government. - We get reports from children of this happening. We know that it does. We've reported it to Oranga Tamariki time and time again. - I'm 62 years old now. I was institutionalised at 14. - You take me away from my whanau and placed him to someone who beats me nearly every single day. I was far safer in those first five years of my life than I was after the state intervened. - For decades, the state has ruined the lives of children and then blamed them for their adult mistakes. - We must own these failings, and ensure we do not repeat the mistakes and the grave injustices. that this Commission has heard about. - The controversial Oranga Tamariki Oversight bill will become law. - This is simply punishment - This is simply punishment to the Office of the Children's Commissioner for their staunch advocacy over They will not convince me that this is about anything other than them protecting their own reputation and the reputation of a system that is abusing our children. - And Children's Commissioner Judge Frances Eivers joins us now. Tena koe, welcome to the program. Do you feel like you are being silenced at the moment? - Tena koe, Rebecca. Silenced... perhaps not the word. I believe that the Oversight bill has... good intentions, but good intentions, but the model that's being proposed ` and it is` it will now become law ` may not have the` the impact that we` that is hoped it would. - I want to go into detail more about that in a moment, but I also want to, sort of, but I also want to, sort of, Who are the children who at the moment have your advocacy and who will be affected by this change and reform? - Well, in terms of the Oversight Bill, that's specifically about children in care, and it's the monitoring of Oranga Tamariki. And it started off as a` what they called an omnibus bill, so that was about oversight of Oranga Tamariki and the Children's Commissioner, and so it's now been split into two separate acts. So, in terms of the Oversight Bill, we're talking about all of our mokopuna, and when I say mokopuna, I mean all of our children in Aotearoa who are under the age of 18 years who are in state care. - And what is life like for them? - Well, it's not nice to be taken from your whanau. At times, it has to be done. But what this bill was an opportunity to do was to make sure that the state care system that we have ensures that they are safe, that there are` there are good protocols and practices in place, that it's a temporary measure, that whanau are supported so that mokopuna can be reunited with their whanau at some stage. But most essentially, it is so that our mokopuna are safe in care. And the Royal Commission, which` hearings on abuse, which, at the moment, is still proceeding, has` we've heard from so many has` we've heard from so many adults, now, who were not safe in care. - And why have we got that so wrong? You have worked in this area for a long time. Why have we got it so wrong? - It's complex. (BOTH CHUCKLE) Why have we got it so wrong? Uh... and... It's a number of factors. It is the impact, I believe` It is the impact, I believe` because, I mean, Maori mokopuna are overrepresented in care. Um, next, closely behind, are Pacific and disabled children, but you know 64 or... last time I looked, it was 65, maybe 70%, of mokopuna in care are Maori. Now that's not OK, and it's not OK for Maori and it's not OK for New Zealanders. I know every New Zealander out there wouldn't like to think that there are young children taken from their whanau, put into a place where their` measures are made to help support their whanau, from their whanau, put into a place help support them, and yet they may be sent from pillar to post. I mean, I can give an example of young people that came before me in the courts when I was a judge in the Care and Protection Court and the Youth Court, and some of them, in their very short life, had had something like 20 placements. - Mm. - How can you have any trust or faith in a system that doesn't deliver security? And so` So, it's the processes and procedures. The other issue is, of course, is` and I might have mentioned it already, the impact of colonisation is really showing itself. And I believe that it's the fact that Oranga Tamariki has become a really big institution. And I think we need to really look carefully at bringing it back to our communities and bringing it back to the people who` to whom those mokopuna belong. - You are losing, now, the power to investigate Oranga Tamariki, and monitor that agency or that institution, as you said. - Correct. - Do you understand why that is? And what impact is that going to have, do you think, for those children And what impact is that going to have, do you think, who we've just been talking about? - From what I` From what I can read and from what I've learned in my short time as Children's Commissioner, I've only been there since the 1st of November. It started off as an intention to do exactly what we're talking about ` make Oranga Tamariki a better place, and Oranga Tamariki acknowledge it themselves. They know that they need to have better processes and policies in place. They know that they need to work with iwi, with Maori. All of that needs to happen. I sincerely believe that those who have put this model together think it will work. - Mm. - I don't think it will work. I'm not the only one. - Why not? - Uh... Because it's... It's... Look, it's a matter of opinion, I suppose, but at the moment... well, no, prior to the new law going through, the Children's Commissioner's Office had the role of advocacy, monitoring Oranga Tamariki's practices and also investigative powers and complaints. It's now being` So, it's a one-stop shop, you could say. And over the years, different` the commissioners before me have developed procedures within our office, specialist skill sets, who` young people or teams who go out in the community, meet with whanau, meet with children, and we're trusted. It's a trusted model. And when you are working with and talking to mokopuna and whanau who are at a state of needing real support, they have complex issues in their lives, who are at a state of needing real uh, they need someone they can trust. So... I` and I'm not the only one, there were 300-odd people, groups, that submitted to Parliament. It's just that` We're keeping the advocacy role. The Independent Children's Monitor will be monitoring Oranga Tamariki, and the Ombudsman will be doing complaints and investigations. We've now` Whanau now have three different agencies to navigate and I'm not saying that the integrity of the work that will be done will not be good, that's not the issue at all. It's just that whanau will have three different groups to navigate. - And that will` That will` Will that make these children safer? Will it be` serve them better? Because you're saying that you don't think it will. - It's` it's` The issue of safer is` is` sort of, goes back further than that, I think. It's about providing a gap, providing a... a place for whanau to go. So, that's` That's what Oranga Tamariki does. Oranga Tamariki looks after our children who need care. But the model and the institutions that help along the way are the Children's Commissioner, the Independent Monitor. So it's just, I think, making it more bureaucratic. - Well, yeah, it sounds like they're losing their safe and trusted place to be able to make complaints about Oranga Tamariki or question the care that they're receiving. That's the role of the Commissioner's office, isn't it? - It is. - You're their advocate. - I think if we look at it from a child's perspective` - Yes. - I think if we look at it - right, they're going to say, 'Who do I call? 'Do I call the Children's Commissioner or do I call the Independent Children's Monitor 'or do I call the Ombudsman?' Even if they understand what each of our separate agencies do` I mean, we are required, and I will be working with, the Ombudsman's office and the Independent Children's Monitor, because I want to do what's best for our mokopuna. But I guess in terms of a model, I'm concern` I'm worried that mokopuna and whanau out there will go, 'Where do I go?' and they might just get, what we say, hoha, and not bother to go there. Because I've sat and listened to whanau in court say, 'I'm tired of telling my story again and again 'and again. Every week I have to talk to a different person and retell my story 'and I don't want to do it anymore.' And that's what it's about. - Yeah. They give up. It's overwhelming. - They do, they give up. - And why do you think` just finally, briefly, I think we're running out of time ` Why do you think that the government Why do you think that the government is so wedded to this model that it has been rushed through, particularly at this time when we have the Royal Commission into Abuse in State Care? - Look, I honestly believe the government think this is the right way forward. However, I'm` It's disappointing that they haven't listened to what mokopuna are saying, they haven't listened to what whanau are saying, and they haven't listened to what those out on the ground ` and I'm talking about the 300-odd agencies and different groups working up there with whanau in places like South Auckland, in places like Porirua, in places like Kaitaia, who are saying, 'Actually, we don't think this in places like Porirua, in places like Kaitaia, who are saying, will work,' and that's the issue. - Judge Frances Eivers, Children's Commissioner, thank you so much for joining us here, and for all of the work that you do. - Nga mihi ki a koe. Kia ora. - Well, if you've got a news tip, get in touch. We are on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram or you can email us at ` E whai ake nei, we dissect the week's political news with our panel, E whai ake nei, we dissect the Shane Te Pou, Ben Thomas and Dita De Boni. Plus, disinformation researcher Byron Clark joins us following a week of protests, politics and police. It's been an active week for the anti-government movement ` parliamentary protests and new political party Freedoms NZ, and the arrest of a man and woman in Christchurch on Thursday evening. Supporters of the far right were hosts Kelvyn Alp and Hannah Spierer. They have been charged with sharing objectionable material and failing to carry out obligations in relation to a computer search. Disinformation researcher Byron Clark joins me now. Welcome to the program. - Kia ora. - What do we know about these people and why they were arrested? - So these two started Counterspin Media in 2021. - What do we know about these people and why they were arrested? It initially aired on a platform that was founded by former Trump adviser Steve Bannon and the Chinese dissident billionaire Miles Guo. That company has since gone bankrupt and they now upload their videos to a website that's to a website that's part of a network of conspiracy theory websites operated by Alex Jones, a prominent American conspiracy theorist. operated by Alex Jones, a prominent The... arrests this week was somewhat surprising, but not entirely unexpected. It likely relates to a so-called documentary that they shared links to, which has been deemed objectionable publication. - And what of the police` Counterspin Media says that the alleged offence, in a statement they put out last night, was a link to an offshore site containing parts of that documentary investigation into the Christchurch massacre shared on Telegram. So clearly that would be a prohibited publication here in New Zealand. - Yes. Yeah. Yeah, the documentary incorporates a lot of footage from the shooter's live stream, which, of course, was deemed objectionable. And the documentary itself has also been deemed objectionable. - Well, um... What's been the reaction from them and since these arrests and how` How is it sort of affecting their supporters? How are they using this? - Well, for a lot of their supporters, it's fuelling a lot of their conspiratorial ideas. They are seeing this is the state cracking down on critical voices or critical journalists, as they call themselves, when the state is not arresting them because of what they're saying, even though some of what they're saying is quite abhorrent. It's the specific, objectionable material that has resulted in these arrests. But for many of their supporters, it's reinforcing their worldview that the government is becoming tyrannical and is cracking down on free speech and things like that. - It's galvanising. - Mm. - And we've seen that in other places, haven't we? - We have. - We see that with Donald Trump all the time? - Yes. - That when he comes under attack, this is, sort of, he uses it to his benefit for political purposes, and they are` Are they doing the same thing? - They're doing the same thing, yeah. Their bail conditions are preventing them from themselves being on social media Their bail conditions are or making new videos, but they're getting information out via others who are involved with Counterspin, and they're using this to solicit donations, so... - We've seen some talk from some of their supporters of this being a declaration of civil war. Also a very familiar theme from out of the United States, isn't it? - Yes. Yeah, and certainly what's happening in the United States and other countries has an` Has an influence on people here. So the talk of civil war may originate overseas, but the people who are watching Counterspin are likely watching Alex Jones and others from the US and elsewhere and getting these ideas and spreading them further in this country. - Well, what did you think when you saw that these arrests had been made? What was your reaction? - Like I say, it was surprising, but not entirely surprising given the history of the things they've shared on their social media channels. - And it comes in the same week that we have seen another anti-establishment protest at parliament. This sort of activity isn't dying down. It isn't going away, is it? - Mm. - What are you finding in your research? - Yeah, it's definitely not going away any time soon. I'm not sure it's growing at the rate that perhaps it was a year ago. But there's a significant number of people now who... have really disengaged with mainstream media, often disengaged with their traditional social networks of friends and whanau as well and are really committed to these conspiratorial worldviews where they believe that the government is becoming tyrannical and various conspiracy theories and various conspiracy theories about Covid and the vaccine and things related to that` - Well... yeah. - And I think that, um... you know, we` We need to, as a society, confront that, that we have a` It's not really a fringe anymore. It's a few thousand people or possibly even tens of thousands of people. - And how do you confront that? You know, many of us will have people who we know are a little bit into these theories and this movement or a lot. But how do you confront that? - It's a really big question. - (LAUGHS) - So for individuals who have a friend or family member who is getting into this, maintaining that relationship with them is something that I would recommend trying to do, if it's possible. The evidence shows that for people The evidence shows that for people getting out of this space, it's not dissimilar to leaving a cult. So people can only really leave when they're ready to leave. And when they are ready to leave, it'll be friends and family, people they have a strong relationship and who they have trust with who will be able to help them leave. It won't be... It won't be watching a video debunking watching a video debunking the conspiracy theories or something like. That doesn't have the same effect as people who have a relationship there and have that trust. - So how dangerous is it then that we that there are sort of` Like this... Brian Tamaki wants to start a political movement to try and capture some of this sentiment. What do you think about that? What's your opinion on that? - Yeah, so he's done this a couple of times before with the Vision Party in 2020 - Yeah, so he's done this a couple of times before and the Destiny Party back in 2005. The vote for these parties has never been huge. It's mostly just been, I think, existing Destiny Church members and a few others. But there's more than just Brian Tamaki, of course. There's the Outdoors and Freedom Party, led by Sue Grey, who's been a very prominent, sort of, anti 5G, anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist, and there's talk now of these two uniting under an umbrella, and then there's various other small parties as well. I'm sceptical of them being able to get an alliance together and hold that together long enough for an election, because there's a bit of infighting between these groups and there's also a lot of big egos. But that doesn't mean that their participation in politics isn't going to be disruptive and isn't going to introduce some of these ideas, some of these conspiracy theories more into the mainstream, and has the potential for more people to be influenced by that. - Well, and just finally, they would say, actually, that is their right to be represented in the political sphere and that this is free speech. We hear that often. What do you think about that? - Well, they certainly have a right to free speech. I think the thing with free speech but they're not entitled to their own facts. but they're not So... when you have groups and platforms like Counterspin spreading disinformation and misinformation, yes, they have the freedom to do that, but it's important that that is confronted, that that is responded to, and so you have things like the Fire and Fury documentary, which made the decision not to go and interview these people who were profiled, because those people have already had their say. They don't need a right of reply because the documentary was itself a right of reply. And I think that's what we need to do with a lot of this disinformation ` confront it by responding with the correct information. - That is so interesting. Thank you so much for your insight and your analysis this morning her Byron Clark. Thank you. And late last night, Counterspin Media released this statement... - Yeah, I've got it here. - (LAUGHS) - I've got it here, Rebecca. - Yeah, I've got it here. In part, it says, 'A sustained and orchestrated attack campaign has been waged by the state against Counterspin Media and it is the opinion position of Counterspin Media that the New Zealand government has become an internationally influenced criminal organisation who's working against the interests of people.' And so there's plenty there for our political panel to discuss, which is lucky because I'm joined now by director of Capital Government Relations and in a new role ` Ben Thomas, congrats on your new gig ` political commentator Shane Te Pou and NBR senior journalist Dita De Boni. Thanks for your time, guys. There's lots to talk about there. Dita, in your opinion, Dita, in your opinion, will these arrests fuel the fire of conspiracy theorists? - Yes, and I think even talking about it, sadly, gives them, kind of, an imprimatur of credibility that they don't really deserve. The problem is that their themes are being picked up not just by Brian Tamaki and others, but even the National Party, but even the National Party, for example, talking about Trevor Mallard this week, talking about what a terrible guy he is and this and that. I feel that that kind of rhetoric has come from the protests and from places like Counterspin Media. - Really? Isn't that just normal hustle and bustle of Parliament? Does it` Is that...? - No, it's got a sheen about it that is kind of a visceral hatred and it comes from that movement. - Visceral hatred, Ben? - I think we have to be very careful when we're dealing with this kind of conspiratorial disinformation thing, that we don't tie up any politicians that we don't like in the idea of dirty politics or conspiracy thinking. - Yeah. - Look, there's plenty to complain about with Trevor Mallard's (CHUCKLES) almost 40 years in politics. Trevor Mallard himself, you know, look, I worked for a minister that Trevor Mallard was going after in the early 2010s, and he also pursued that with a sort of, you know, in the early 2010s, single-minded malice that... (CHUCKLES) - OK. Well, we won't talk about Trevor at the moment. - All of which is a roundabout way of saying, look, I think we have to distinguish that, you know... the regrettable, you know, tough-as-nails sort of politics from yellows on the parliamentary forecourt. - OK. So, yes, Shane. - But to a point, Ben. To a point. Luxon was asked outright, 'Would you` Would you dismiss 'a possible coalition with these folks?' And he said, 'I'm not willing to rule that out at this point in`' - Well, isn't that fair? He's just keeping open about all parties. - No, it's not fair. These folks` These folks aren't about enhancing democracy. - No, it's not fair. These folks` These folks aren't These folks held a lynch mob mock trial on parliamentary lawns and there are a number of them that want to make this the reality. He needs to show leadership and he needs to denounce it, and he needs to say that these folks have no place in mainstream politics. and he needs to say that And, you know, here's the good news ` and he needs to say that with Luxon, in three or four weeks, he'll probably get it right, and they'll probably do that cos that's a stick. - (LAUGHS) - All right. So you said that it was too soon. Is it too soon to rule them out, Dita? - I would rule them out. - OK. Ben? Should he have done it? - Of course. If you rule out a fringe party, you not only send a clear signal that you don't support their values to all the median, mainstream voters that you need voting for you, but you also actually give a signal to the people who might vote for that ` the 3% or 4% ` that there's no point and they should vote for you instead. - But I don't understand... So, can you enlighten me as to why he would make that statement? Can anybody? Well, what's the point of doing that? - I could. - What? - Because there are a number of anti-vaxers that support National and ACT ` they're bleeding numbers to ACT ` his personality numbers are going down and he wants to at least hold` - So you're just saying it's a political` - Absolutely. He wants to at least hold that vote for the meantime. - Isn't that cynical, Ben? - No, I don't think so. I think Luxon is very much targeted at the, sort of, median voter. I think he's, you know, we've seen, he's more than happy to, kind of, let ACT do race-baiting, you know, co-governance, that kind of thing and have them at, you know, a very high level for a minor party. - But is` Sorry, Dita. - Can we not disregard the idea that actually Luxon is an evangelical Christian and Tamaki is a so-called Christian, and I think it actually justifies a level of, uh... suspicion about his evangelical Christianity. - So you think there's a synergy there? - Yeah, I do think so. I think he is piggybacking on those ideas, even if those crazy people won't get in to parliament, their ideas will filter through. - They do have synergy. That's the reality. They both believe that... a woman's sovereignty, on a woman's body, over her body or abortion is tantamount to murder. - OK, so that synergy in those beliefs but from a political point of view, though, is it not just wise to say, 'Look, I'm not dealing with any of that kind of stuff until election?' - Yes, it's wise. - Yeah. So that's why he took that position, Ben. - I mean, look, I'm pretty sure that there would be theological differences between the two on whether Brian Tamaki is appointed by God (CHUCKLES) to lead New Zealand. Yeah, look, of course. Yeah, look, politically, it would be wise; morally, it would be wise, to just say, 'Of course I'm not going to go to coalition with these people.' - And just quickly, Sue Grey has ruled out working with them. - (CHUCKLES) - (STUTTERS) Well, and here's the interesting thing, Simon. I think we give these guys a lot of daylight, a lot of oxygen. This was the Million Dollar Ma` The Million Person March. Remember? That's what he was talking about five or six weeks ago, even people who used the Trump methodology of counting numbers... - (LAUGHS) - Probably said it was more like 5000. Reality it was 2500. Actually, their influence is dissipating. - So you're arguing that it's out of steam? - Yeah. - Do you believe that this sort of movement is out of steam, given what happened on the grounds of Parliament this week? - I believe that anti-Jacinda sentiment is coalescing together. I think the fringe right will never get more than it's got, but their ideas are seeping into right-wing politics. - All right. Shall we move on - All right. Shall we move on to our lead interview today ` Justice Frances Eivers. So this is very controversial but very important. I mean, so the current Children's Commissioner believes that the new oversight bill I mean, so the current is well-intentioned, but it's not going to work. So that surely is a signal to Labour So that surely is a signal to Labour that they just push something, ram something through, Shane. - Well, they didn't ram it through, it's gone through the parliamentary process` - Well, but they do` - They do have the majority. But here's my overall perspective on it. I think having the monitoring group with people with lived experience can only help, but really that's at the pinnacle of where the issue is. What I say as a Maori ` and we are overrepresented about 64,000 ` hand the keys over ` whanau, hapu and iwi, that's the answer. We've seen models already ` Tuhoe, that mana motuhake down there in terms of handing the tamariki back to Tuhoe ` that is the facts. - But we're talking about investigation and oversight of OT here... - I get that. - ...not the delivery model that you're talking about. - But the delivery model is where it really matters. - Ben, do you believe that Labour has been, sort of, tunnel-visioned on this, as the judge seems to indicate? - It's really difficult because children and young person services are just in a constant state of flux. The whole thing has been overhauled so many times, and we will see another overhaul, and we will see another overhaul, you know, following the conclusion of the Abuse in Care Inquiry. And so the questions arise about timing. You know, should you change the monitoring system when we haven't yet had outcome from the inquiry. - That's right. - Well, I think it shows there's never a good time with children and young person services, because there is always this political pressure. You know, there are always` It's a portfolio where essentially ` you know, apart from some of these good news stories that are emerging out of Tuhoe who I do some work for and some of the other iwi ` it's an area where there are basically only bad news stories` - But what I want to zero in on here is they're the replacing one trusted source or one trusted advocate with three. Now Dita, is that going to be Now Dita, is that going to be successful or are people gonna go, 'I don't know where to go,' As again, Justice Eivers said. As again, Justice Eivers said. - She is right. It looks like it's going to be more bureaucratic. I mean, I do feel as someone who's never had any dealings with I don't Oranga Tamariki and I think most people are like that, that we don't really know the best way to do it. And so having random commentary, I don't believe is the best way. - OK. - And can I also point out that I'm pretty sure the Children's Commissioner, you wouldn't have to go too far back to see the ACT Party, for example, seeing it as a as an example of crazy bureaucracy in Wellington (CHUCKLES) like they do so many other offices. So it's interesting to see them suddenly rise to the, you know, the support One last quick question ` I'm gonna go to you, Ben, on this. The Uffindell review is probably due out this week. What are we gonna see? What do you think? - Well, they've already said that they won't release the full review. I would say, they'll... I would say they'll give him the best, sort of, Kings College ticking off and say, 'Do better next time.' (CHUCKLES) - Right. So he's staying. - I think he's staying at least until the next election. You might see a challenger. - It's not a transparent process. - We don't know what the terms of reference are. We won't know what the outcome is. I disagree. I think I think he's goneburger. Look, you can't have, on one hand National saying we are the party of law and order, and then have this shenanigans. - Dita, how do you feel about Sam Uffindell? - I think the National Party was gifted a huge gift in Gaurav Sharma. - (LAUGHS) Yes. - They will be saying thank you. - OK. We're gonna end it there. Thank you so much for your time ` Dita De Boni, Ben Thomas and Shane Te Pou. All right, up next ` National rising star Erica Stanford defends her immigration policies. Plus, justice spokesperson Paul Goldsmith on why he'd make a better minister than Kiri Allan. New Zealand is in a battle with other countries for workers. We have a nursing shortage; rest homes have been forced to shut down; regional businesses are crying out for migrants. That is perfect political fodder to get National on the news, but what is their long-term vision? Immigration spokesperson Erica Stanford joins me now. Tena koe. Thanks for your time. So, you talk a lot about nurses and nurses shortage, but I want to know ` what is the one thing that you would do to stop a nurse choosing Australia over New Zealand? - Well, there's a number of things that you can do to make nurses decide to come to New Zealand, and that is give them immediate residence. - Yep. - If they're coming to do their CAP course, which is a 12-week course they have to do before they can get registered, let them bring their families. We've never done that. Let's do that. You know, we can pay costs, There's a lot of things we can do to encourage them here. Keeping them here in New Zealand ` it's making sure we don't shift the goalposts when it comes to residence, which we keep doing. - Well, let's talk about - Well, let's talk about the attraction part first. To get a nurse here, wouldn't you have to pay them more? wouldn't you have to pay them more? And Australia's paying 16% to 17% more for nurses. So would you support a pay rise for the nurses here? - It's always been the case that New Zealand doesn't pay as much as Australia when it comes to nurses, but we've always been able to attract them. - So you're saying a pay rise for nurses is not necessary to attract them here? - Look, that's outside my portfolio, and you can talk to Shane Reti about that. But in terms of my portfolio, when it comes to attracting nurses to New Zealand, there's a number of things that you can do. We've done it quite well in the past, but at the moment, the settings are such that they're choosing Australia not` potentially because of pay, although that is a consideration, but choosing Australia ` let me tell you why they're choosing Australia ` because you can walk into Australia and get residence immediately, and you can walk into Australia without a job offer, being a nurse, and here, we're just making it so difficult. And why, when we're 4000 short? - But you also get paid more in Australia. You do get paid a lot more in Australia. - You get paid more in Australia for most jobs. It's very difficult for us to say, 'Hey, let's pay everybody more.' - If we're talking about nurses, I mean, you could talk to your colleague Shane Reti and say, 'We need to pay them more,' right? You could do that. You could lobby him to say that. - I'm working really closely with Shane, actually, on a workforce strategy, and there's a number of things in there that we're doing to increase the number of Kiwis getting into nursing, but also increasing the number of migrants coming to New Zealand, and you're gonna see that from us very shortly. - OK, great. coming to New Zealand, and you're If you want to pay them more, how are you going to pay for that? Because you're the party that wants to cut taxes. - Yeah, well, as I said to you earlier, I'm focussed on how you get migrants into New Zealand. If you want to talk about nurse pay, then you need to talk to Shane Reti. But of course, there's a balancing act. I mean, we've talked to you many times about the fact that this government are hiring backroom bureaucrats, and they're doing it and they're doing it in all of my portfolios and not putting money into the front line. So, you know, we've said a number of times, actually, we would have different priorities. - Different priorities, OK. But just finally, I mean, if you want to pay public servants more, you can't reduce the amount of tax that you take, can you? - There's a number of things you can do, and if you talk to Nicola Willis and hear what she's got to say around priorities, there is a lot of wastage. I can go through each one of my portfolios and tell you where they're wasting money and where we would put it to get outcomes, targeted outcomes. That's the difference between us and Labour. - It's the line-by-line argument. That's the difference - And that's what my boss, Luxon, has asked me to do is go through, line by line, look at where - All right. National ` you want to Should you attract lower-wage workers to support that? - We should attract the workers that we need, and that's what I've said all along. In fact, if you take a look at the Productivity Commission report that came out just recently, they debunk everything Labour has been saying, which is, I think, coming across in your question, which is low-wage, low-productivity economy, which is caused by migrant labour. In fact, that has been thoroughly debunked. - OK. I'll quote the Productivity Commission to you here right now. It said that skilled and long-term migrants' contributions exceed moderately skilled Kiwis. So yes, you're right there. Non-skilled migrants are associated with lower output and lower wages. That's what the Productivity Commission found. Is that not right? - The wonderful thing about the Immigration portfolio is that we've got levers that we can pull and push to get the skills that we need, and the key factor of that is talking to the individual sectors. to get the skills that we need, So when I talk, for example, to the electricians sector, they say to me, 'We need to make sure that we're bringing in high- to medium-skilled people, 'because if we bring in low-skilled 'because if we bring in low-skilled electricians, then it stops Kiwi businesses taking on apprentices.' So the wonderful thing you can do in the Immigration portfolio is pull those levers and say, 'Here are the people that we want.' But what it means is you have to talk sector by sector to work out what you need, not just put in some blanket` - The government's done that. They've just released a sector by sector... - No, no, that's absolute rubbish. They've put in a $28 per hour price that everyone has to pay for every job, every sector, every region, every skill level. - Actually, they've walked back from that. - Of course they have walked back from it, because it was never going to work. - Do you support a median wage - Do you support a median wage for those workers coming into those sectors? - No, I don't. 100%. - No, you don't. No median wage for them? You don't want that target? All right. All right. - What you need to do, sector by sector ` is what we've always done, but it can be tweaked to make it a bit more effective ` is pay a reasonable, fair amount for that person. Why would you pay a migrant Why would you pay a migrant $28 an hour when the Kiwi working next to them is being paid $26? - OK. Let's just look at your record, this National Party record over here, on the screen over here. So, you can see since John Key came in in 2008 ` this is net migration ` so red line, net migration, how many workers are coming in. - No, look at it under Labour. - Yeah, but that was just a spike there. But if you look at the John Key years, post-GFC recession, post the Christchurch earthquakes, it ticks up for a long period of time. Is that the level of net migration that National wants to bring back in? - I want to bring in the number of migrants that we need to have an economy that's firing. - So what is that number? - Well, it's hard to say at the moment, - So what is that number? because we're in such a state of flux. At the moment, we've lost` as you can see from that wonderful graphic that you pulled up, we've lost 12,000 people. Actually, at the moment, we're desperately trying to get people in the country. So what we're doing at the moment ` and I'm in the middle of a big planning session on looking at exactly this ` what is the right level of migration? The difficult thing is that you can't control Kiwis coming and going, so what you need to do is take a look at who's coming and going, the conditions of the day, and then pull those levers up and down as to who you need to balance that out. - Because if you attract too many low-skilled wage` Again, if we quote the Productivity Commission, which looked at a migrant survey ` found 20,000 temporary migrant workers during that high immigration period did not receive minimum employment rights and had to pay money to keep their jobs. So can you give us a guarantee that you're not going to return to that kind of immigration policy? - The Productivity Commission also said that there was no evidence to suggest that migrant labour drove down wages. In fact, they slightly improved wages overall. There are some sectors, no doubt, There are some sectors, no doubt, that we need to work more carefully with, but what Labour have done is throw the baby out with the bathwater. - But we're talking about your long-term vision here, that if you're in the portfolio, if you're in the position to pull those levers, is it the higher-skilled or the lower-skilled that you're going to put the emphasis on? - We need people across the board, and if there is a company out there that says to me, 'I have gone out to the New Zealand sector, and I cannot find workers. 'I've advertised widely. I'm advertising a job at a rate that is fair,' I'm not going to be a minister that turns around and says, 'I'm sorry. I'm not going to allow you to have those workers.' The difference is, though, whether or not we allow those workers to stay in New Zealand and have their residence. That's the key difference. Do we want to bring in workers to supplement labour while we're trying to either train up Kiwis or get more Kiwis into work? 100%. - So, residence for higher-skilled workers? - Well, we've always had a policy, quite a high bar to get to in terms of residence. It's been 160 points. You have to have a good education. You have to be skilled. You have to You have to be skilled. You have to have good English language. I mean, there's a number of things, right? - So, residence for high-skilled workers, not for low-skilled workers, and you're not going to support a median wage for low-skilled workers? - I'm not putting a median wage in at all. I think there should be a fair wage. And Immigration New Zealand have always done this. This is not a new thing that I'm saying we should do. - Yeah, but this is the government's policy now. - Well, the government's policy, of course. And do you know what the new median wage is? It's $29.66. So next year` At the moment, it's almost 28. Well, the new median wage out Well, the new median wage out last week was 29.66. When is Minister Wood going to kick that in? I mean, he's probably seen that, and he's panicking a little bit, because he knows next year he's got to bring that in. And it's not going to work. It's going to make things much, much worse. - We're going to leave it there. National's Erica Stanford, immigration spokesperson, thank you so much for your time. - Thank you. - E whai ake nei ` Paul Goldsmith gets five minutes to sell you on his ideas. Plus, Kirsty Bentley's brother was just 19 when she died. Decades on, having been cleared of suspicion by police detectives, John Bentley gives a rare interview. of suspicion by police detectives, National's Paul Goldsmith thinks that he'd make a better Justice Minister than Kiri Allan. In particular, he wants to reinstate a highly controversial, scrapped policy. Finn Hogan asked National's Justice Spokesperson what his first move would be as minister. - Reducing the number of victims of crime. That's what we're focussed on. And so, having a clear message from the government that people will be accountable for their actions and that we'll have a system that's focussed on reducing the number of victims of crime. - But just to zero in on something more specific, you want to bring back the three strikes legislation. Why? - It was introduced 10 years ago under the National government with ACT and the message it sent` I mean, you look around, what's going on? Everybody can see there's been an increase in violent crime, increase in gang membership, youth crime is troubling, RAM raids are everywhere. And so we think that's a perverse message to be sending right now. That right now, what we need to do is have shorter jail sentences for our worst repeat offenders. That right now, what we need to do - OK, but what evidence-based is there that this works? - Oh, there's not a great deal of evidence either way. - Isn't that a problem, though? Because shouldn't the onus be on you` When you're talking about sending people to prison for extremely long periods, shouldn't the onus be on you to prove it works? - What it certainly does is` is keep the worst offenders out of circulation for longer so that they can create fewer victims. Now, I'm not` We haven't said that we're going to bring it back exactly as it was, 'cause it wasn't perfect. - Like what, for example? What's one thing you would change? - Oh, well, you know, the law was quite clear that you wouldn't impose these very long sentences if there were` if they were manifestly unjust. And so, that doesn't seem to be working perfectly, because there have been one or two cases where it seems out of whack. - Let's talk about one of those cases that you bring up. In the 2018 case of Daniel was sentenced to seven years in prison. Do you think that was just? - No, well, that, of course, is where the manifestly unjust phrase should come into effect, and that was the whole purpose of it. But most of the people` I mean, look, there are about 13,000 people on a first strike, 600 on the second, and about 20-odd on a third. So it's not large numbers of people. - Let's talk about the people that are on that first strike, or on that second strike. Based on data from 2018 to 2020, Maori were nine times more likely to receive a first strike, 18 times to receive a first strike, 18 times more likely to receive a second strike, and made up 82% of those on their third strike. Does that kind of disproportionate effect concern you? - Yes, it does concern me. And the rate of Maori crime concerns everybody and it's a huge issue for the country to address. But this legislation just reflects what is the situation in the community` - What do you put that disproportionate effect down to? - Oh, well, look, I mean, there's a whole host of reasons and look, I don't profess to understand them all, but there's history, obviously. There's a very clear connection with social and family dysfunction. social and family dysfunction. You know, poverty. A whole host of reasons, as well as people making bad decisions. And, you know, if you think at the moment we're in the youth space where we're seeing this explosion in youth RAM raids and things like that, well, I mean, one of the most obvious drivers of all this is the fact that they are aren't at school and we've got these colossal truancy` - We're talking about` We're talking about the justice portfolio. You're not Education any more. - Yeah. But when you talk about the causes of crime, those are the sorts of issues to deal with. Also housing, you know. - OK, let's` Let's focus on justice, here. Let's talk about youth crime. You've said that you want to focus on youth being` facing the consequences of their actions, particularly on RAM raids. Can you just tell me, specifically, what that looks like? - There's a spectrum, isn't there, of potential consequences for crime, and for young people. Throw them in jail and throw away the key ` very few people want to do that for kids under the age of 18. At the other end of the spectrum, it's` let's have a group conference, pat them on the head and we'll see you next weekend` - Specifically, what changes would you bring in? - For those repeat offenders, have some more serious consequences, and the options are residential facilities. It's actual, you know, community work over the weekend. More hard consequences for that More hard consequences for that small group ` it's only a small group of people that are out there. - In general ` I just want to talk from a big picture for a moment ` a tough-on-crime approach inevitably is going to lead to more people behind bars. Does a growing prison population concern you? - Yeah. I mean, prison is not a good outcome for anybody. Nobody wants to see large numbers of people in prison. What you can't do, however, is just say we're going to wave a wand like Kelvin Davis and this government has said, and we're going to reduce the prison population by 30%. Our focus is on keeping the community safe. - If you're talking about being more punitive, it's going to rise. - The point is it's not about being tough on crime. It's having an effective` - Well, you do say 'tough on crime' a lot, for someone who says that's not the point. - Well, it's about the effectiveness of it. We'll always have crime, but the point is to try and reduce its impact on people. - Finally, Paul, is this the portfolio you're going to be gunning for at the next election? You've bounced around a bit. You've gone from Finance, Education and now Justice. Where are you going to land? - Well, I don't know. Opposition is the land of opportunity. Justice, of course, impacts enormously on the lives of many New Zealanders, in terms of safety, but when they are victims of crime, ensuring that they get access to justice, and in a timely fashion, and there's a lot of work to do, unfortunately, in our sector. We can be doing a lot better. - Stay with us. We are back after the break. Kirsty Bentley's murder is our country's most famous cold case, and a new police investigation profiled in the Listener by journalist Chris Cooke is now offering a $100,000 reward for anyone with information that leads them to her killer. - For a long time, her own father and brother came under suspicion, devastating both of their lives. - For a long time, her own father But a new investigation has cleared them as suspects, and I sat down with Kirsty's brother, John, to ask him what he remembers about that day back in 1998, when she disappeared, and the days that followed. - I think... it took a long time for... me to realise that Kirsty wasn't coming back. I mean, maybe that was just me being, you know, naive and hopeful, I mean, maybe that was just me but I didn't really... appreciate the gravity of it. You know, I thought, 'Oh, look, she's gonna get found, 'and it'll be a big deal for a day or two, and then we'll move on.' And then... there was one day where I just looked at my parents. They were talking to each other, and I could just see it on their face. And I was just like, 'No. They believe she's never coming back.' And it was at that point I realised that... And it was at that point that was what's going to happen. - And you became a suspect in Kirsty's murder. The police believed that you had The police believed that you had murdered Kirsty and your father had helped to cover it up. What was that like? - It just didn't make sense. You know... that you didn't have anything to do with it. But yet, they're still pushing, and they're pushing. It's worrying, and it's frustrating, and there's nothing you can do about it. You just have to sit there and take it. - You felt helpless? - Yeah. You're helpless. You're... You're kind of... just relying on them finding... evidence to prove who the killer was, to prove your own innocence. - And that cloud of suspicion hung over your family for many years. - There was` I mean, in particular, my dad. He... had spent... the rest of his life in Ashburton, and lots of people thought that he'd done it, that he was involved, and they would gossip, and they would say things. And I'm ashamed to say that, at some point, you know, I... began to wonder why... why his story had changed, and I began to doubt him. And... it just upsets me that he died... not knowing that he didn't have to go through that, that it was actually... You know, he died thinking that people thought he was a liar, and that was wrong. - And you left New Zealand to get a fresh start? - I left for other reasons, for personal reasons. But... once I had... left New Zealand, I realised that I was... no longer Kirsty Bentley's brother. I was John Bentley, and people didn't know about this, and they treated me for who I am rather than being associated with the case. and they treated me for who I am - Well, a new detective has now taken over the case, Greg Murton, publicly saying that despite every available investigative technique being used, the police have been unable to find any evidence that you or your father colluded in murdering Kirsty. And he has a new theory that Kirsty was abducted while she was on a dog-walking route, taken somewhere and later moved to the Rakaia Gorge. - It's not something I like to think too much about, because... the... the previous conclusion was that Kirsty died quickly and probably didn't know what was happening. And... the new conclusion... opens up some sort of scary possibilities that aren't really great to think about. - Well, Greg Murton also has a new profile of the killer, saying that it was probably a stranger who murdered Kirsty, someone familiar with the Rakaia Gorge area, a good chance that they were involved with cannabis, and they might also have been a farm worker. How important is it to you that people take a look back on that day with that in mind? - It's really important. The... The crucial bit of evidence we need ` someone might not really be aware of what they've got. And if... the profile of who the police are looking for has changed, then suddenly, things that a person might have dismissed as probably being irrelevant could really be the... you know, the thing that gets us... that breaks the case. - And you have an appeal for the public? - I would ask for you to look back... around that time and just think about anything that possibly you could tell the police. It could be something really small that might not seem important but could break the case. It's the police's job to determine what's important and what's not, and I'd rather that people flood the... the helpline with everything that they know, everything that they've seen, and let the police sort out what's important and what isn't. - It must be hard to step back into the public eye after all of this time. Why is it important for you to talk now? - I have to be Kirsty's advocate. Mum has to be. If we don't keep this alive, then people will forget about it, and the opportunity to... make a change in the case might be lost. You know, we need to remind people that Kirsty existed. - John Bentley there, brother of Kirsty Bentley. And anyone with information about Kirsty Bentley's murder can contact police via 105 and reference Operation Kirsty. - Right, well, that's all from us for now. Thank you so much for watching. Before we go, I've got to say ` nice work on your first programme as an official co-host. I know you've been here before, but well done! Great. - It's official now. Thank you, Simon. Nga mihi nui. We will see you again next weekend. Captions by Sally Harper, Sam Baker and Alex Walker. 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 on Air Public Interest Journalism Fund.