- Kia hiwa, kia hiwa. Kia whakahiwaia ai te ngakau ki tenei pa. Ka whakapuru tonu. Whakapuru tonu ki te tai o nga korero ki Te Hui. Haumi e, hui e, taiki e. This week on The Hui` Lakes in the Rotorua district are dangerously high, and some communities are already drowning. - I've been cut off from my family because of the floods. You know, I can't get through to them. - Time is running out for those living on nature's doorstep. And the leader of the ACT Party, David Seymour, is live in studio to talk about polling, policies and bottom lines. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2023 Nga mate o te wa, haere ki nga kurumatarerehu, waiho ake te ao kia whitingia e te ra, haere mai, haere. Tatou e pupuru nei ki nga aweawe o te whenua. Tihei wa Mauriora, and welcome back to The Hui. This year, the impacts of climate change have been clear for all to see. Now nowhere is this more real than in the Rotorua Lake communities of Rotoma and Rotoehu. Record rainfall is leading to the lakes filling to near capacity, and communities being cut off. Now residents are asking what lies ahead if the lakes were to overflow? Mea nei te purongo a John Boynton. (PENSIVE MUSIC) - They're the jewels of Te Arawa. - I grew up on these lakes. It recharges me when I come back here. - But after record rainfall, these lakes are reaching a tipping point. - What can we do, you know? It's just Mother Nature. - Communities are underwater, and access is being cut off. Is it time to let nature run its course? - I don't think that we can continuously engineer our way out of climate change. - Tucked in between Lake Rotoma and Lake Rotoehu lie the Waitangi Soda Springs. - This is a very important place for us in terms of rejuvenating our bodies, our souls and our minds, but also as a place for wananga. - This is what these natural hot springs normally look like. But they've been forced to close due to inundation of water from the lake. How long's it been like this for? - Approximately four months, I think, since about February this year. We've had to have the baths close. We haven't been able to use it, but Ranginui and Papatuanuku have spoken. - This year, major weather events have dominated news headlines. - Wahi tapu across Te Matau-a-Maui, submerged in sludge; drowned by the deluge caused by Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle. - And the Rotorua Lakes region hasn't escaped the force of Ranginui and Papatuanuku either, already having received its yearly average rainfall. Lake Rotoma is at its highest level since 1971, severely impacting homes and businesses. - In today's world, we tend to purchase a property and that's our kingdom forever. The environment may be changing that much. We need to be a lot more adaptable. - The lake doesn't have outlets like rivers to divert water, so it just keeps getting higher and higher. It only needs to rise another half a metre to overflow into neighbouring Lake Rotoehu. But Rotoehu is at full capacity, already flooding homes and roads. - This situation is a good wake up call. Not just for us here, but I think across the nation, around understanding the fact that climate change is real and it's now on our doorsteps, literally. - The Lake Rotoehu new settlement of Otautu Bay is among those having to adapt to these changes. Ngati Pikiao uri Robyn Skerrett has lived here for 25 years. - My tupuna lived here. It is special to me. I'm lucky to have my home here. - You feel them around you? - Yes, yes. My guardians. My kaitiaki. - But at the moment there's very little protection from the rising waters of Lake Rotoehu, with homes and roads slowly being swamped. - I'm cut off from my family because of the floods. You know, I can't get through to them. (TENSE MUSIC) - With Otautu bay residents' main road underwater, this is as far as they can come. And with lake levels being so high throughout the region, is there a threat that other communities are gonna be cut off as well? What used to be a five-minute drive to the main local highway now takes an hour through windy gravel back roads. - We've got three men who used to have a half-hour drive to get to work, and now have to drive for two hours to get to work; two hours to come back. When the ground water starts coming... - Today, Robin is meeting with locals who are worried about the future of their community. - I've lived here since 1979, and one's always just adjusted and adjusted. - But some whanau are already having to move. - They are leaving our valley because they really can't go on with not having a solution for their children and the schooling. - There are a number of local councils, authorities and iwi groups charged with fixing roads, infrastructure and reconnecting communities; but no time frames have been given so far. Arapeta Tahana says one of the solutions is using evaporation. - Essentially, big machines that suck up the water and evaporate it. - Another option is redirecting water. - People have touted the idea of running a pipe and sending it over to a major river. From a mana whenua perspective, we're not that keen on major engineering solutions. - We'd be foolish to think that we can just carve out big parcels of land to drain the lake, because we're just going to make that problem someone else's problem further down the catchment. ` Te Arawa Lakes Trust biosecurity manager Wiremu Anaru works to protect the well-being of the lakes. He says while there are devastating impacts from the high water levels, he's seeing the positive benefits for the environment. - We've seen an impact on the aquatic pest weeds. These weeds can only grow down to a certain depth and they're slowly starting to retreat away, which means some of that habitat for our kouru and our taonga species is being reclaimed. - There's also been a reduction in major lake pests like catfish. - Our catch for this season is around about 11,000 catfish that we've caught. And compared to previous years, it's really, really down. Not much in that one. We seem to think that the depth, and the temperature change from that depth has had an impact on their breeding. - Wiremu thinks these events are an opportunity to look at how we manage our waterways. - There's so many political challenges around fixing our waterways, but at the end of the day, this is just the taonga that keeps us all alive. And that needs to be the driving force around why we actually look after it. - Back in Otautu Bay, the community is facing an uncertain future. - This garage was flooded with about 14 inches of water right through the garage floor. - But it's bringing locals together and igniting their fighting spirit. - We're interacting with each other, and it's enjoyable to know that we have that community spirit here to look after one another. We have to keep it up. (HOPEFUL MUSIC) - The Rotorua Lakes Council says Lake Rotoma has not overflowed since records began 70 years ago, and as summer gets closer, it is unlikely to happen this year. It says any predictions on what would happen if it did overflow are simply speculation. E kainamu mai nei e nga iwi ko te kaiarahi o te Pati ACT, David Seymour, descendant of Ngati Rehia, leader of the ACT Party, is next. I'm the other Louis Hamilton, from Rotorua. Skinny hired me to tell you about their low-cost broadband. Get Skinny Unlimited Broadband for just 45 bucks a month when on a $27 or above mobile plan, plus get 2 months free broadband. Kia ora mai ano. He's the leader of the ACT Party, MP for Epsom, a descendant of Ngapuhi hapu Ngati Rehia, who reckons that the chiefs who signed the treaty would sign up to the ACT Party today. Leader of the ACT Party David Seymour joins me now. E kara, tena koe. - Tena koe. - Thank you for coming on the programme. We really appreciate it. The two messages I hear from the ACT Party a lot are one rule for all, and particular focus on property rights. If you're a part of a government after October ` let's talk about property rights, for example ` would you agree to the return of the 15,000 acres promised to the Nelson Tenths represented by Wakatu now, which is a property right guaranteed to them? - On the basis of what you're saying, sure. But I think I'd want to know a bit more about the particular facts of that case. I'm not familiar with the facts of the case, so it would be a bit premature to make a commitment here on that. - But just based on that, though, on the fact that it was promised to them, there's been court decisions, Supreme Court decisions, and I'm not trying to push you into a corner on this. I guess it just means that if there's a case for a property right, as promised, as guaranteed under agreement all the way back from 1839, I think it is, you'd be prepared to support that and return that? - Yeah, we respect the common law. We respect property rights. We respect the right of people to have their day in court. Another way to think about it might have been Ngati Apa, we opposed the Foreshore and Seabed law. We supported the Marine and Coastal Area Act. I think the Churchman decision by overriding the common law with a new conception of tikanga is actually highly problematic. But that gives you a sense of where we come down in favour of people's right to have their day in court according to a common law system. - But I've heard you talk about nga tikanga, me te oritetanga. What did you mean when you talked about those, then? - About tikanga versus the common law? - Well, I've heard you say that the party believes in nga tikanga, me nga oritetanga, particularly when you're talking about race relations and relationships and partnership under Te Tiriti. - Oh, nga tikanga katoa rite tahi. So, Te Tiriti. Oh, look, absolutely. I think that everybody should have the same rights and duties as citizens of England. That's what the treaty said. But what's critical there is that the chiefs effectively said, 'Look, in return for giving the Crown kawanatanga, we would have those rights and duties, 'those rights to property, the rights to a fair day in court, the right to a fair hearing and so on.' So, you know, that's first of all, really important that that's what they secured. But second of all, it doesn't talk about those being exclusively for Maori. It does apply the word Maori in the second article, I believe, that the treaty gives everybody the same rights and duties, and that's why so much of what's happening in New Zealand politics today, where you have governance that is supposed to be divided. Take just this week; the Human Rights Commission effectively having dual CEOs. I think that's wrong. I think that there should be one opportunity for each person, and it should be the same opportunity as everybody else has. - I'll pick up on two of those points, but the bit you missed is the rangatiratanga bit. So how do we achieve the rangatiratanga bit? - Well, I didn't` I didn't miss it. I just` - No, I heard Article one and Article three, but Article two, right. How do we do that? - So the way I look at it, like, if I look at Kura Hourua, you know, if I'm proud of one thing I've done in politics, it's actually giving communities the right to run their own schools and do it on their terms, because they know more about how to engage the rangatahi than perhaps somebody sitting in Wellington. I guess where there's a difference is that we didn't say there's got to be a Maori education system in partnership with a non-Maori education system. We said that everybody will have an equal chance to devolve the provision of education. That for me is tino rangatiratanga in action. - So, Kohanga reo, Kura kaupapa Maori, Wharekura; developed by communities for the preservation of te reo; me nga tikanga Maori. - Yeah, I mean you've got to remember that Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi was one of ACT's founding members, and also the founder of Kohanga reo. So there's been a long connection in those kaupapa. - So you would agree then if, for example, the kura kaupapa claim said that it wanted to set up a kura kaupapa commissioner or indeed a kura kaupapa commission funded directly by the government to oversee all kura kaupapa and wharekura. You would agree with that? - I think there's a slight` almost` - Hang on, yes or no? Because that follows is that then` - Then no, and let me tell you why. - OK. - When we introduced partnership schools, we didn't say that there would be two parallel systems. We said that anybody could self-determine within that system on their own terms. And so you could have a school, whether you were Michael Jones' Pacific Advance Senior School, Vanguard Military School, which had no ethnic backing, or you could have Te Kopuku High in Hamilton. You know, that wasn't two different systems, that was devolution for all. - What we're really talking about is funding mechanism, aren't we? The commission would simply be there to make sure that each school gets access to every other resource it can as aligned with other schools. And there's commission in the middle that distributes the money to do that. So what's the difference? Because it just sounds to me like a political difference. - No, because if you think about the way partnership schools worked, the Partnership School Authorisation Board, there was one board that authorised schools to operate in order to receive taxpayer money on a common set of standards. There weren't two parallel boards with different sets of conditions for getting taxpayer money. - OK. - Yeah. - OK. All right. So is that the reason why? - I mean, it's not` it's not a major difference. - No, but there's still a difference, and you're still saying no, which to be honest, I still don't quite get. But is that what drove the decision that you undertook during Covid, where there was a code set up for Maori` specifically for Maori, for vaccinations, and you shared that publicly for everyone. Is that why you did that? Because you see it simply as black and white, and not grey. - It was, well, it was already been publicly shared. You could argue I was trying to help, but I also made the point that it was morally wrong to have a public service that discriminated, because equally` - How is that discriminatory? - Well, it said that if you are Maori you can use this thing, and if you're not, you can't. I believe that that is death to any civilised society to allow open discrimination on racial grounds. - But you know what happened at the end of Covid? And yes, we're still going through a lot of that now, but 15% are Maori of the total population in New Zealand, yet 30% of those who died under Covid under the age of 60 were Maori. So you see the problem here, right, is that you're talking about equality, except for the real impacts that has on the ground. So they were trying to address that, to try and stop that from happening. You arguably were helping contribute to what happened at the end. - Not at all. If anything, I was helping more people be aware of it. But let's get down to the real issue here, and that is the fact that, yes, Maori on average have worse health outcomes. However, there are many Maori people who are doing quite well, thank you very much, and are not in need of the extra assistance. There are non-Maori who have all of the comorbidities and disadvantage that many Maori have. My point is that if you are committed to an equal chance at life to all, then there are much better ways to target that necessary assistance than racially profiling. - That doesn't give you equitable outcomes. - When you` Well, actually it does. - No, no, it doesn't. The science proves it. I mean, the fact that we have the inequities in the health system at the moment proves that we don't have equitable outcomes. - Well, it proves we don't have equitable` equitable outcomes. That is true. However, my argument is not with the fact that there's inequity. My argument is with the racial framing of the inequity. And I would argue that if you were to look at the quality of housing people have, whether people have spent time on a benefit, whether people have spent time on prison, whether people have been employed, whether they've had good education; once you start looking at all of these factors, what you find is that the health inequities are not caused by race. They are caused by a lot of factors, some of which Maori people on average are more likely to have. But if you believe that, the answer is to target the real problems, not to racially profile people. - You've picked up on a couple of things I do want to keep talking about, if that's OK. We have to go for a break. And I wasn't trying to interrupt` - No, no. It's an important point. - So I do want to pick up on some of that after this. Stay with us. We'll have more with the leader of the ACT Party, David Seymour, after this break. Kia ora mai ano, welcome back. You're with The Hui. And with us today live in studio is ACT Party leader David Seymour. I just wanted to` if I could try and tie this conversation a little bit more around equitable outcomes. I think the way that a lot of people see this, particularly the wish to want to devolve or get rid of the Maori Health Authority; I mean, this was established by the Crown in response to Wai 2575 and the stage one report by the Waitangi Tribunal. Can you understand` have you read that report, first of all? - Yeah. Yeah, not every word, but I understand it. - OK. And obviously there were some really important points made in there which led to the establishment of the Maori Health Authority. So given that, why do you still want to get rid of that? - Look, I understand what they're saying. I just disagree with it. I think the challenges that we face are primarily as individuals, and as individuals, we have many different characteristics. What's happened under that report, under the Waitangi Tribunal in general and the general drift of race relations in the last 30 or 40 years in New Zealand is that we've focused on one characteristic of people above all others that they have, and that has been race. I think that's really unfortunate. I think it's divisive. I think a lot of people are very sad about it. I don't think it is ultimately supported by the treaty, and I think it will take us to a bad place. - So you don't see this as a means of achieving equitable outcomes for all New Zealanders? You simply` you see this as race. - When I look at how we achieve equitable outcomes for all New Zealanders, we want better delivery of social services for all people. We want better access to housing for all people, we want better education in particular, and we want lots of investment in a growing economy with jobs that mean people can start off low and get high in their careers. That's what we want, so that a rising tide lifts all boats, to borrow a common phrase. But once we get into arguing about the past, profiling each other racially, trying to say that you're a prisoner of identity, that's not going to get us where we need to get. In fact, it will take us backwards. - Aren't cultural backgrounds are important, particularly in sentencing? Understanding someone's history, because it is a means by which judges can make a full and better humanity decision. - You know` - That's what KCs have been saying. That's what lawyers have been saying. Russell Fairbrother said the same thing` 'Natural humanity in justice.' - You know, these people have been almost entirely focused on the welfare of the offender. They've forgotten about the welfare of the victim. And by the way, one thing people often forget is that according to the Ministry of Justice's victimisation survey, if you want to start grouping people by ethnic group, you know which ethnic group is by far and away the most likely to be a victim of a crime` it's Maori. This approach to crime of thinking that the offender's welfare and their humanity is more important than the victim` ain't been good for anyone. And that's why we say let's put the emphasis back on the victim and stop spending so much money and attention on the offender. - Well, actually, cultural background reports aren't that expensive. In fact, they're pretty cost-effective when you take into consideration how much it costs to keep someone in prison a year ` over $100,000 ` and the massive impact of having a huge population of Maori in prisons, which adds up to billions of dollars. - It's $200,000 a year, nearly, to keep someone in prison. But I would argue that if it prevents people from further offending, if it deters people from offending, then it's actually worth it. So any saving you make from people not being in prison has to be counterbalanced by the dangers of people who keep offending, or aren't deterred from offending in the first place. - But if you don't understand the determinants that lead to that person` I mean, let's take, for example, what we're hearing in the Royal Commission into state care, the horrific impacts of what the state did to these people, which lead many to the pathway of crime. If we don't understand the determinants of that, we're just wiping our hands of this, aren't we? - And you think it should excuse a crime? I agree the state has been terrible. That's why I have the kind of politics I have. I don't believe the government should do more stuff` - But removing cultural background will` that's what you're doing. And the unfortunate impact of that is not taking into account the determinants which lead someone` - This whole discussion is about the welfare of offenders. Let me give you an example of reality. There was a guy in the Napier District Court two weeks ago. He'd been prosecuted of entering a woman's house with a screwdriver as an aggravating factor; sexually violating her. She was pregnant. She had a toddler in the next room. The person got on home detention after a cultural report reduced his sentence. And he walked out of that courtroom; he thanked the judge and he yelled, 'Cracked it!' Like, 'I did a great job because I managed to work through the system.' Now you say that this guy's a victim. He's got a bad background` - That's not what I'm saying. You're putting words in my mouth. Let's be clear with each other. That's not what I said. - OK, fair enough, sorry. That's not fair on you. But the general thrust, if you read what people are saying, that we need to think about the humanity and be more sympathetic; well, this guy worked that system and celebrated` - Again, that's not what I said. I'm talking about a humane justice system. That's what I said. And the determinants that lead to crime. - And here's a guy that` here's a guy that took advantage of that goodwill and celebrated having manipulated it, while the victim gets no sympathy whatsoever. And that is unfortunately not sustainable. And it's victimising far too many people. - OK. There's a number of things I wanted to talk about. Your tax policy. Did you consider a wealth tax? And if not, why not? - No. If I look at the proposals of some other parties, what they would effectively do is prevent people from wanting to invest. One party proposes an 8% tax on wealth. You know what, the annual return on the NZX for the last 10 years has been 8%. Now, if people are going to lose all of their return from investing to that tax, nobody's going to invest. And in a world where we actually need more investment` - Well, hang on` - Are you arguing` - So a potential wealth tax would only apply to 1% of New Zealanders, who, by the way, can afford it. It won't` - So it's OK to pick on minorities now. - No, no, no. I'm not picking on minority. - Well, why is it` why is it all right that it's only 1%? - Because it's affordable to` and by the way, if they were going to leave the country, they would end up paying the same amount of tax anyway. So there's the likelihood of them leaving the country as` - An 8% wealth tax that one party proposed` - I'm not saying 8% wealth tax. I'm saying a wealth tax... it would lead to about $3.4 billion to the economy, which would help actually achieve` - To the economy? No, to the Crown. - To the country. - No, to the Crown. - No, to the country. - No. - Because it would be reinvested. It's actually just a switch. It's not a tax, it's a switch. - This is the problem with socialism. And this is the problem with your way of thinking` - This isn't socialism. This is just a tax. - No, no, no. Let's be very, very clear. It would not bring $3.4 billion to the country. The money was already within New Zealand. It would be transferred from certain individuals who had invested and earned it to the Crown, who would put` use it for something else. Now, let's be very clear about who is doing what to whom here and why. If you do that, then people who would have taken risks to invest, to gain more wealth, are going to say, 'Well, hang on, 'if I do that and I succeed, the government takes it. 'If I do it and I fail, I lose my money.' What happens over time is that people are less willing to invest; We have less interesting jobs because people haven't invested in creating them; we become poorer; we can't afford the things that` - I actually don't think that's true. I actually think people will continue to do what they keep doing. - Well, I think you'll find that around the world over the last 40 years, countries have been rapidly moving away from capital taxes, because what I just told you is the basic evidence of the last 40 years of economic policy around the world. - I was hoping we'd be able to talk about the want to get rid of some government departments` - You got some economics instead. - I think we're gonna run out of time, and the director is gonna kill me. What I would say is this` is that the want to push to remove Crown agencies; is this just a way of appealing to an electorate, or do you actually believe` say, for instance, Ministry for Women; the work that that does, particularly in the latest budget` - Give me an example. - Gender pay gap. - What? - Women in technology. - What do you think they've done? - Women` Sorry, what? - Give me one example of something practical they've done that's helped anyone in New Zealand. - The policies that drive this year's budget looked at trying to decrease the gender pay gap, looked to try and increase participation. - I mean, this is the problem. Your example` - So if you don't do it, then how does` how is that achieved? - Well, if your best example is looking` the way that we would do it` - Actually, it's applied in policy. - OK, so they looked at a policy or they applied a policy that looked; this is my point. I asked you to name one tangible, useful thing they've done for anyone, and you said they looked. My point is we want lower, flatter taxes; we want a regulatory environment that encourages people to take risks and succeed. That is how we get investment. We get a wealthier, healthier, longer-lived society. We don't do that from having lots of government departments that suck up huge amounts of your money, And when you ask what they do for you, they say they looked. - I'm being told off. No, actually, that was applied in the policy, it was applied in the budget. - Rubbish. Rubbish. - And the numbers look like` growing population. Oh, well you would say it's rubbish. (LAUGHS) - Stop wasting our money. They should` if that's the best you can come up with, you have proved that that department` - No, you said they haven't done anything. I said they have. - They've looked, and you have proved` - No, they were consulted, actually, as a part of the budget and the way that would be applied. - Oh, OK, 'consulted', well... I think you're just proving that the department does nothing and it should be gone. - Well you said they didn't do anything. I'm just showing you that they did. - That they looked. OK. They should be gone and we should be able to keep our taxes. - I'm being told off. (LAUGHS) I'm being told off. I actually think there's a lot more we could talk about. And I hope you take the opportunity to come back, it'd be good to talk again... - Me too. - ...in the election. Wish you all the best for that. - Thank you so much. - Tena koe. David Seymour, nga mihi nui ki a koe. Kua iri ake te kete korero ki te patu o te whare iaianei. You'll find links to our stories on Facebook and YouTube, or indeed on this interview as well, on Newshub.co.nz. Kia mau ki te turanga o Taputapuatea. Haumi e, hui e, taiki e. Captions by Kate McCullough. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. www.able.co.nz Copyright Able 2023 - Ko te reo te take. - Na Te Puna Whakatongarewa Te Hui i tautoko.