CAPTIONS BY JASON CONRAN AND LENA ERAKOVICH. CAPTIONS WERE MADE WITH THE SUPPORT OF NZ ON AIR. WWW.ABLE.CO.NZ COPYRIGHT ABLE 2025 TENA KOUTOU. NAU MAI HAERE MAI. WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M JACK TAME. TODAY ` HE WAS ONE OF AUSTRALIA'S BEST-KNOWN BROADCASTERS UNTIL A HIGH-PROFILE EXIT FROM A HIGH-PROFILE JOB. I STARTED TO SEE THAT THE MEDIA, IN MANY WAYS, WAS THE POISON IN THE BLOODSTREAM OF OUR SOCIETY. BUT FIRST ` NICOLA WILLIS HAS DELIVERED HER SECOND BUDGET AS FINANCE MINISTER, WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND PRIME MINISTER TALKING UP THE DRIVE FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH. FINANCE MINISTER NICOLA WILLIS GOOD MORNING. YOU CALLED IT THE GROWTH BUDGET AND YOUR CENTREPIECE IS THE INVESTMENT BOOST POLICY ON CAPITAL DEPRECIATION. TREASURY FORECAST AT LEAST 1% OF THE NEXT 20 YEARS BUT MOST OF IT FRONTLOADED INTO THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, BUT IT WILL DEPEND ON HOW MANY PEOPLE MAKE NEW INVESTMENTS AS A RESULT OF THIS POLICY. THE FEEDBACK HAS BLOWN ME AWAY IN THE PAST FEW DAYS, FROM BUSINESSES SAYING IT IS THE THING THAT WILL GET THEM OVER THE LINE, WE WILL BUY THE NEW MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT, THANK YOU FOR INVESTING IN MY GROWTH AND BUSINESS. SO IT IS A POLICY THAT DELIVERS ACCORDING TO TREASURIES WERE CAST 0.1% OF GDP GROWTH PER YEAR FOR THAT A FIVE YEARS. TREASURY ARE EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE ABOUT ALLOWING FOR POLICY IMPACTS IN THEIR GROWTH FORECASTS, NOTORIOUSLY THEY ALMOST NEVER DO IT, BUT IN THIS POLICY THEY ARE SO CERTAIN THAT THEY ARE PREPARED TO DO IT. OF COURSE IT IS THE NOT THE ONLY POLICE IT WILL DRIVE GROWTH OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS. I'M 100% SURE SOME OF OUR OTHER POLICIES WILL LIFT THAT GROWTH NUMBER, FOR EXAMPLE REPLACING THE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ACT AND FAST TRACKING A NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENTS WILL STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY AND CREATE JOBS. AS YOU SAY, OFFICIAL ADVICE FROM TREASURY SAYS THERE IS A HIGH LEVEL OF UNCERTAINTY AROUND THAT MODELING BUT THE CENTREPIECE FOR YOU... WE WERE ADVISED THAT DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR, THIS WAS THE MOST GROWTH ENHANCING TAX POLICY WE COULD PURSUE. HOW WOULD IT COMPARE TO CHANGE IT TO THE CORPORATE TAX RATE? THE ADVICE WE RECEIVED SAID THAT IT WOULD BE BEST FOR GROWTH BECAUSE INSTEAD OF REWARDING PAST INVESTMENTS AND PROFITS IT WOULD REWARD FUTURE INVESTMENT. TWO THINGS ARE EXPECTED, MORE INVESTMENTS WILL HAPPEN THAT WILL DRIVE PRODUCTIVITY AND WAGE GROWTH, AND PEOPLE WILL MAKE INVESTMENTS WHEN TAUGHT OTHERWISE HAVE MADE AND GET MORE CASH FLOW. THAT MEANS MORE MONEY TO PAY WORKERS AND MORE ACTIVITY IN THE ECONOMY. WHAT IS TO STOP THE BIGGEST BENEFITS FROM THIS POLICY GOING OVERSEAS RATHER THAN TO NEW ZEALAND? IT DEPENDS ON YOUR PHILOSOPHICAL OUTLOOK, BECAUSE MY LOOK IS THAT IF AN INTERNATIONAL INVESTOR COMES IN BECAUSE OF THIS POLICY AND DECIDES TO BUILD A MASSIVE WINDFARM, THAT BUSINESS MIGHT PROFIT, BUT NEW ZEALANDERS WILL BE BETTER OFF AS A CONSEQUENCE. WE GET MORE RENEWABLE ENERGY, PEOPLE WILL BE EMPLOYED TO CONSTRUCT AND RUN THE WINDFARM, AND IT WILL ADD TO REGIONAL ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, SO WE ARE A GOVERNMENT NOT ASHAMED TO SAY WE ARE WANTING INVESTMENT IN OUR COUNTRY, BOTH DOMESTIC AND FROM OVERSEAS HIM AND IF IT RESULTS IN NEW ZEALAND'S JOBS AND INCREASES NEEDS OF INCOMES THAT'S A GOOD THING. BUT ASIDE FROM INVESTMENT BOOST DISTINGUISHES THIS BUDGET IN DRIVING ECONOMIC GROWTH? THE FACT THAT WE HAVE LOOKED TO THE LONG-TERM TO SEE WHAT IS HELD OUR ECONOMY BACK FOR YEARS, AND ALSO THAT IN THE SHORT TERM DESPITE HAVING VERY LITTLE MONEY LEFT IN THE KITTY, A VERY CONSTRAINED STATE OF FISCAL CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HAVE MANAGED TO PRIORITISE THIS GROWTH ENHANCING TAX POLICY. TOTAL POLICY FOR TECH SCIENCE AND INNOVATION HAS BEEN CUT BY $45 MILLION. I WILL THAT MEAN FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH? WE WILL MAKE SURE IT GOES TO THE RIGHT PLACE. WE ARE CREATING MUCH MORE COMMERCIALIZED ENTITIES AND KEPT IN PLACE THE RESEARCH AND SCIENCE TAX INCENTIVE, IN ADDITIONAL TO INVESTMENT BOOST. IT WILL COME FROM PRIVATE BUSINESSES DECIDING TO DO GREAT THINGS. I WAS AT THE HIGH TECH AWARDS ON FRIDAY NIGHT. NEW ZEALAND HAS SOME INCREDIBLY SMART BUSINESSES AND NOT ALL OF THEM DEPEND ON GOVERNMENT SCIENCE FUNDING. ALTHOUGH SOME OF OUR MOST SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES IN YEARS HAVE BENEFITED FROM THE INPUT OF CALLAHAN INNOVATION FOR EXAMPLE. SO MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE BENEFIT FROM CUTTING $45 MILLION. MAKING SURE THAT THE INVESTMENT WE ARE MAKING IS MORE COMMERCIALLY REALISABLE, CONSOLIDATING OUR FUNDS WILL BE RELIANT TO SCIENCE. WE ARE RELYING ON ADVISORY GROUPS FOR THESE REFORMS WE ARE MAKING. WE CANNOT JUST SAY WE ARE SPENDING MORE MONEY. THAT'S THE REPROACH OF THE LAST GOVERNMENT. IT HAS TO BE SMART. BUSINESSES HAVE A COMPLAINT TO ME THAT IT SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF CASH THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS PUT TO THE SIDE FOR US BUT IT IS AMA'S TO FIND IT. WE HAVE TO DO LOTS OF APPLICATIONS AND HIRE CONSULTANTS. WE WILL DO LESS OF THAT AND FOCUS ON GETTING BANG FOR BUCK. LET US LOOK AT WHAT THE BUDGET IS SET TO DO. 191 NEW ZEALANDERS ARE LEAVING EVERY DAY TO AUSTRALIA. THIS IS THE BEST WE CAN DO FOR GROWTH BUDGET AND WHY SHOULD WE STAY? THIS TELLS YOU THAT THINGS WILL FEELING TO BE A LOT BETTER IN THE PAST. THESE NUMBERS? YES, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN IN NEGATIVE NUMBERS AND HAD SKY HIGH INFLATION, SO THIS REPRESENTS A MUCH BRIGHTER PROJECTOR INTO THE FUTURE. WE WANT THE NUMBERS TO GO HIGHER? 1.8, 1.7, 1.4, IS THAT IT? YES BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS IN CONTEXT. WE HAVE HAD NEGATIVE PER CAPITA GDP POSITION, SO THE REASON PEOPLE ARE FELT THEY ARE GOING BACKWARDS IS THAT IN MANY CASES THEY HAVE BEEN. GDP RELATIVE TO BEING IN A RECESSION COMING OUT OF THAT INTO HEALTHY PER CAPITA GROWTH IN THE FUTURE WILL FEEL REMARKABLY DIFFERENT. IT WILL FEEL LIKE THINGS GET BETTER THIS YEAR AND BETTER NEXT YEAR AND AND INTO THE FUTURE. NOT QUITE SO GOOD INTO THE FUTURE ACCORDING TREASURY FORECAST. WE COMPARED THE GROWTH FORECAST OF THOSE IN AUSTRALIA. TODAY NEW ZEALANDERS ARE $25,000 PER CAPITA BEHIND AUSTRALIA IN TERMS OF GDP OUTPUT. FEEL GROWTH BUDGET COMPARING IT TO AUSTRALIA'S FORECAST, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW WE ARE FORECAST TO BE 25,000 YEARS BEHIND AUSTRALIA. BUDGET BUT THIS WILL NOT MEANINGFULLY CLOSE THE GAP. I THINK YOU GET THE QUESTION, WHICH IS HOW SHOULD WE BE DOING MORE TO HELP OUR ECONOMY. NO I AM SAYING HOW CAN YOU COLLECT A GROWTH POLICY WHEN IT IS NOT CLOSING THE GAP WITH AUSTRALIA. IF WE TOOK THE APPROACH SOME OF OUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS ARE PROPOSING, IT WOULD THREATEN GROWTH. I'VE BEEN EMPHASIZING THAT THIS IS AN ECONOMIC RECOVERY WE ARE FORECASTING. DO NOT TAKE IT FOR GRANTED. ALTERNATIVE POLITY CHANCES WOULD PUT AT RISK. YOU SAID THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT WAS ADDICTED TO SPENDING. NOW THAT YOU ARE IN THE HUTS MADE THIS YOUR GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS ACTUALLY INCREASING AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL ECONOMY. WHY ARE YOU SO ADDICTED TO SPENDING? IT GOES UP THIS YEAR. REFLECTS THAT WE HAVE HAD DIFFICULT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS. SO DID THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT. WE ARE PROPOSING AND HAVE PUT IN OUR BUDGET THE LOWEST OPERATING ALLOWANCE IN A DECADE. THAT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY AVAILABLE FOR OUR DISCRETIONARY SPENDING. WHAT REALLY DRIVES SPENDING IN THE FUTURE INTO THE FUTURE AND IN OUR FORECAST IS NEW ZEALAND SUPERANNUATION, OUR BENEFIT COSTS, AND WE HAVE NOT MADE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS ABOUT THOSE YET. THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR INITIATIVES ARE BEING FUNDED FROM SAVINGS ELSEWHERE, AND I NOTICED THAT YOUR THE ALTERNATIVE APPROACH IS TO SAY DON'T DO ANY SPENDING, SAY YES TO EVERY NEW COMMITMENT, AND THAT WOULD SAY ARE SPENDING GETTING OUT OF CONTROL. YOU SAY THE OPPOSITION WAX IT ALL ON THE CREDIT CARD. THIS YEAR ALONE YOU HAVE BORROWED $13 BILLION MORE THAN YOU SAID YOU WOULD IN LAST YEAR'S BUDGET. ACCORDING TREASURY FORECAST YOU ARE NOW FORECAST TO BORROW AN ADDITIONAL $72 BILLION BY 2029, LEAVING US WITH TOTAL GROSS DEBT OF $283 BILLION. OUR FIRST FIVE YEARS OF GOVERNMENT USA TO BORROW MORE MONEY THAN JACINDA ARDERN'S GOVERNMENT DID IN SIX. WHY ARE YOU SO ADDICTED SPENDING? I SHARE YOUR DISCOMFORT, WHICH IS WHY I HAVE SAID WE NEED TO GET THAT IF YOU ARE BORROWING MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT HE MIGHT SHARE MY DISCOMFORT BUT YOU ARE NOT TAKING THE ACTIONS IT WOULD ADDRESS THAT SURPLUS PROBLEM. I AM TAKING THE ACTIONS BECAUSE WE SET OUT IN OUR BUDGET A CLEAR PATH THAT DOES TWO SIGNIFICANT THINGS. THE FIRST THING IS ELIMINATING INSTRUCTIONAL DEFICIT. BY THE END OF THE FORECAST. WE WILL GET THE BOOKS BACK IN BALANCE. LET ME PICK UP ON THAT POINT. BEFORE THE ELECTION, YOU PROMISED TO RETURN THE BOOKS TO SURPLUS IN 2027. LET US HAVE A QUICK REMINDER. THIS IS THE ELECTION MANIFESTO. THIS CAME OUT AFTER THE GOVERNMENTS BOOKS WERE OPENED AHEAD OF THE ELECTION. YOU ARE PROMISING TO RETURN TO SURPLUS AND 26/27. WHEN WILL WE RETURN TO SURPLUS? 28/29 FISCAL YEAR. YOU ARE SAYING THERE IS AN ACCOUNTING TRICK THAT ACTUALLY CHANGES THE GOALPOST FROM THAT. IF WE USE THE MEASURE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE THE ELECTION, THE ONE IN YOUR MANIFESTO, WHEN WILL WE RETURN TO SURPLUS? JACK, THIS IS THE RIGHT CONVERSATION TO BE HAVING. CAN YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION AND THEN TELL ME WHY IT IS THE RIGHT CONVERSATION TO HAVE? YOU HAVE CHANGED THE GOALPOST. YOU SAID WE WOULD BE BACK IN 26/27 WHEN ALL THE GOVERNMENTS BOOKS INFO WAS RELEASED, AND NOW BY THAT SAME MEASURE WE ARE NOT JEWS TO RETURN TO SURPLUS IN THE FORECAST PERIOD. . THIS IS THE RIGHT CONVERSATION TO BE HAVING BECAUSE UNDER THE LAST GOVERNMENT WE HAD MORE THAN $120 BILLION ADDED TO THE NEW ZEALAND DEBT THE INTEREST WILL AND THAT IS PHENOMENAL, $9 BILLION, RISING TO $12 BILLION. AS A GOVERNMENT WE HAVE TO CLEAN THAT UP. IT WAS 88 BILLION, THE GHOSTED, UNDER THE PREVIOUS GOVERNMENT. I AM TALKING ABOUT THE CORE CROWN DATA MEASURE AND IT HAS BE EXCEEDED. NOT TO MY QUESTION THOUGH, YOU HAVE BROKEN THAT ELECTION PROMISE. I DON'T CONSIDER THAT BROKEN. WE PRESENTED A FISCAL PLAN, THE BROKER MATURES WHICH WE HAVE STUCK TO. TWO SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THAT WE SHOULD REMEMBER. FIRST TREASURY DOWNGRADED THEIR OPTIMISM THAT THEY PREVIOUSLY HAD IN THE PRE-ELECTION BOOKS, SO ANY GOVERNMENT SITTING WHERE WE ARE WOULD HAVE FACED A SMALLER FORECASTING THAT WOULD AFFECT THE BOOKS. SECONDLY WE HAD LIBERATION DAY, THE TRUNK TARIFFS AND THE RESPONSE AROUND THE WORLD'S LEADING TO A DIRECT DOWNGRADING IN NEW ZEALAND'S ECONOMIC FORECAST, YOU KNOW AS WELL AS I DO THAT YOUR FORECASTS WERE OUT BEFORE LIBERATION DAY. YOU PUSH IT BACK TO 20 $0.29 LIBERATION DAY. I DON'T ACCEPT THAT. SINCE THE HALF-YEAR UPDATE WE WERE ON TRACK TO OUR OUTLOOK LOOKING BETTER. BUT 20/20 NOT AS OPPOSED TO 2027 AS HE PROMISED IN THE ELECTION, AND ONLY BECAUSE OF THAT ACCOUNTING TRICK. CHANGES TO THE KEY RECEPTOR SCHEME AND ANTICIPATED REDUCE PAY EQUITY GOVERNMENT SPENDING LOWERS WAGE GROWTH, BUT YOU HAVE CLAIMED THAT YOUR BUDGET WILL GROW WAGES. WHO IS RIGHT, YOU ARE TREASURY? THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT INVESTMENT BOOST AND OTHER POLICIES IN THIS BUDGET INCREASE WAGE GROWTH. INTERNET'S OUTS THAT AT THE MARGIN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT 0.1%, BUT 0.1% FOR KIWI SAVER, RIGHT? IT WILL BE OFFSET BY INCREASED WAGES BY 1.5% OVER 20 YEARS FOR INVESTMENT BOOST. TREASURY'S ADVICE TO ME THAT THE EFFECT OF INVESTMENT BOOST AND OTHER POLICIES WILL BE TO INCREASE WAGE GROWTH BETWEEN 0.1% AND 0.2%. THERE IS OBVIOUSLY DIFFICULTY IN ASSESSING THESE THINGS BECAUSE THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THING THAT DRIVES WAGE GROWTH IS UNDERLYING GROWTH, AS A RESULT OF THE GOVERNMENT'S PAY EQUITY CHANGES, THOUSANDS OF LOW-PAID WORKERS IN FEMALE-DOMINATED SECTORS WILL BE PAID LESS IN THE FUTURE THAN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER THE PREVIOUS SYSTEM. ALTHOUGH A FORM OF PAY EQUITY REMAINS, CHANGING THE RULES IS FORECAST TO SAVE THE GOVERNMENT ALMOST $13 BILLION. NICOLA WILLIS IS BACK WITH US. SO THIS SO THIS BUDGET IS TOTALLY UNWORKABLE WITHOUT THE SAVINGS. WHY SHOULD WORKING WOMEN IN LOW-PAID SECTORS BELIEVE YOU'VE MADE THIS CHANGE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN SAVING THE BUDGET. BECAUSE WE HAVE KEPT UP PAY EQUITY REGIME IN LAW, WE HAVE KEPT OR PROTECTIONS FOR EQUAL PAY, WE HAVE PUT ASIDE MONEY TO MAKE SETTLEMENTS WITH WOMEN DOMINATED WORKFORCES IN FUTURE. BUT NOBODY CAMPAIGNED ON THE FACT THAT WOMEN WERE GOING TO BE EXPECTED TO FUND SO-CALLED PAY GRITTY SETTLEMENTS. THOSE SETTLEMENTS WERE NO LONGER ABOUT CORRECTING SEX-BASED DISCRIMINATION, IT WAS BEING USED AS A TROJAN HORSE FOR OTHER CLAIMS. WE WILL CONTINUE COULD CORRECT SEX-BASED DISCRIMINATION. HOW MANY FEWER WORKERS WILL CONTINUE TO BENEFIT? I GENUINELY CAN'T GIVE YOU THAT, BECAUSE THAT IS A LEGAL JUDGEMENT. THAT SAVINGS THAT YOU HAVE BANKED HAS TO BE BASED ON SOMETHING. WE HAVE GOT RID OF A PREVIOUS ASSUMPTION THAT THE GOVERNMENT SET UP REASONABLY QUIETLY. IN 2021 THEY DECIDED THEY WOULD UNDERWRITE CLAIMS THAT WILL BE IN PROGRESS BETWEEN PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYERS AND THE UNIONS. THEY SEE THE GOVERNMENT WOULD BE PREPARED TO FUNDSETTLEMENTS AS THEY WOULD ARISE, THAT INTO A HUGE EXPLOSION OF COST. THE SECOND THING WE HAVE TIGHTENED CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY, SO THE FUTURE POTENTIAL COST OF SETTLEMENTS IS LOWER. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT IS PRINCIPLED, BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE A REGIME THAT WORKS, JUST NOT ONE THAT WILL GIVE EQUITY TO AS MANY WOMEN AND WORKERS UNDER THE PREVIOUS SYSTEM. THE CHILD POVERTY REPORT ` LET'S JUST REMIND YOU OF WHAT YOU SAID WHEN LABEL WAS AN OFFICE. AND YOUR GOVERNMENT, IF ANYTHING IT IS GETTING WORSE. IN MY VIEW, THE ABSOLUTE BEST THING WE CAN DO IS TO SUPPORT THEIR PARENTS INTO WORK, ECONOMIC GROWTH IS THE ENGINE FOR GETTING KIDS OUT OF POVERTY. THE SECOND THING IN THIS BUDGET, WHICH I BELIEVE WILL HAVE SIGNIFICANT MEDIUM TO LONG-TERM AND PACKED, AS WE HAVE BEGUN THE SOCIAL INVESTMENT FUND. THAT IS SAYING THE GOVERNMENT SPENDS A LOT OF MONEY ON FAMILIES A DIFFICULT CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING GOOD ENOUGH RESULTS FROM IT. A LOT GETS LOST IN BUREAUCRACY. WHAT IS THAT MEAN FOR THE CHILD POVERTY FORECAST? IT IS NOT REFLECTED IN THE FORECAST YET, BUT WHAT I AM HOPEFUL OF AND WHY I'M SETTING UP A NEW APPROACH, IS THAT WE MEET A GOOD DATA, WHICH HAS BEEN ABSENT, THAT WE CAN START TO INTEGRATE INTO OUR FORECAST. THERE ARE THREE CHILD POVERTY TARGETS ` CHRISTOPHER LUXON WAS EMPHATIC, THAT WE WERE COMMITTING TO THEM, HOW MANY HAVE WE BEEN ABLE TO HIT> BEING ON TARGET TO HIT THEM DEPENDS ON HOW WE GOING OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS? HOW MANY OF THOSE THREE TARGETS ARE WE ON TARGET IN 2028? IT DEPENDS HOW WE GO OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS. IN THE REPORT, NONE ARE CURRENTLY ON TARGET TO HIT. ARE YOU STILL COMMITTED TO HAVING THOSE TARGETS? ARE YOU STILL COMMITTED TO HAVING THOSE TARGETS? YES WE ARE. FAMILIES ARE GOING TO BE RECEIVING THE EQUIVALENT OF A BLOCK OF BUTTER. WHAT DIFFERENCE IS THAT GOING TO MAKE? WE DID NOT CAMPAIGN ON THAT, BUT WE PRIORITISE IT. IN THE ABSENCE OF THAT, FAMILIES WOULD NOT BE GETTING ANY ADDITIONAL INCOME, AND THE CHILD POVERTY RESULTS WOULD BE DIFFERENT. I STAND BY THE CHANGE. WE THINK PEOPLE WANT TO BE INDEPENDENT AND STAND ON THEIR OWN FEET, BUT WE THINK THE SUPPORT SHOULD BE TARGETED FOR THOSE WHO REALLY NEEDED, NOT HIGHER INCOME PEOPLE. YOU ALWAYS PRESENT THIS AS AN AND/OR, WE WANT TO GET PEOPLE INTO WORK THAT WE CAN SEE THE ECONOMIC FORECAST, WHICH ARE COMPLETELY OUT OF THE CONTROL OF MANY POOR AND UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE. WHY CAN'T YOU DO AND/AND? WILL SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO WORK? WE ARE GENEROUS AND DOING THAT. SEVEN BUCKS A WEEK IS NOT GENEROUS WHEN WE'RE ON TRACK TO MISS THOSE TARGETS. FOR 2028. AS I SAID TO YOU, THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL THING THAT WILL HELP THOSE TARGETS IS THAT IF WE HAVE FUNCTIONING ECONOMY AND BETTER WAGE GROWTH. WHY NOT GIVE THEM MORE SUPPORT? THAT MAY TAKE YOU STRUGGLE THROUGH. YOU HAVE GOT CONCERN FOR NEW ZEALAND'S DEBT LEVELS, THERE IS NOT A MAGIC MONEY TREE THAT ALLOWS ME TO SHOW SUCH GENEROSITY THAT I CAN SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM AT ONCE. I GOT A SHORT-TERM, BUT THE ACTUAL RESULT WILL BE NEW ZEALAND WOULD BE SO INDEBTED THAT WOULD MEAN HIGHER INTEREST RATES FOR EVERYONE. FUTURE GENERATIONS WOULD HAVE TO GET RID OF ALL SUPPORTS. THAT IS HOW A AUSTERITY HAPPENS. YOU FOUND 16 MILLION FOR PRIVATE SCHOOLS. THAT CAME OUT OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE EX-PARTY. I KNOW THAT IF DAVID WAS ON THE SHOW, HE WOULD SAY A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH LIMITED MEANS CHOOSE TO PRIORITISE FUNDING A PRIVATE EDUCATION FOR THE CHILDREN. WHY IS IT FEAR TO MEANS TEST FOR THE KIWISAVER CONTRIBUTION BUT NOT SUPER SUPERANNUATION? WE HAVE A COMMITMENT ` THE COST OF THAT COMMITMENT IS INCREASING BY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS. UNLIKE AUSTRALIA, WITH A WHERE THEY MEANS TEST SUPERANNUATION, WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT KIWISAVER IS A SUSTAINABLE PRODUCT ALONGSIDE SUPERANNUATION. YOU'RE WORKING FOR FAMILIES CHANGES WILL CUT SUPPORT FOR 61,000 FAMILIES. BUT YOU ARE INCREASING SUPPORT FOR SUPERANNUATION, IT REFLECTS OUR APPROACH TO FOCUS ON PEOPLE WHO NEED IT THE MOST. THE REBATE TARGETS PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST BELOW SUPERANNUATION. FOR BETTER START, WE ARE TAKING THE SAME MEANS THE THING WHICH EXISTS FOR THE YEAR TWO AND THREE. IT'S VERY CONSISTENT WITH OUR APPROACH, LET'S FOCUS ON SUPPORT ON THOSE WHO NEED IT MOST. LIKE PRIVATE SCHOOLS. UNDER THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT, NEW ZEALAND IS ON THE HOOK FOR CARBON AGREEMENTS, WHICH AREN'T ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BUDGET. ARE WE STILL COMMITTED TO THOSE TARGETS? WE HAVE HAD IS REVIEWED BY THE AUDITOR GENERAL, THERE IS NOT ENOUGH CLARITY ON HOW WE WILL MEET THAT CAN COMMITMENT. YOU LOOK TO BE CUTTING MILLIONS AND POLICE FUNDING OVER THE NEXT TERM IN GOVERNMENT. THAT REFLECTS THE FACT THAT CAPITAL SPENDING IS QUITE LUMPY, YOU TO JUDGE US ON OUR TRACK RECORD. WE INCREASED OPERATIONAL FUNDING LAST YEAR FOR THE POLICE AND THIS YEAR, BY HUNDRED AND $20 MILLION OVER THE FORECAST PERIOD. THERE IS ONLY ONE PARTY IN PARLIAMENT THAT WANTS TO DEFUND OF THE POLICE. THE NUMBERS FOR THE FOUR YEARS AHEAD REPRESENT THE FUNDED DECISIONS WE HAVE MADE ` BEYOND THE FOUR-YEAR PERIOD THAT MAKES DECISIONS THAT ARE YET TO YET TO BE MADE. MAKE NO MISTAKE WE BACK THE POLICE. UNEMPLOYMENT FORECASTS HAVE WORSENED AND, DEBT HAS INCREASED, USING YOURSELF AS THE PARTY A LOT ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT, BUT ALMOST ALL ALL HEADLINE ECONOMIC INDICATORS HAVE GOTTEN WORSE, HOW DOES IT MAKE YOU REFLECT ON YOUR TIME IN THIS ROLE? WHAT I REFLECT ON, AND I THINK NEW ZEALANDERS UNDERSTAND THAT, IS THAT WE DID INHERIT AN AWFUL FISCAL AND ECONOMIC MESS. THE GOVERNMENT HAD RATCHETED UP SPENDING IN AN UNSUSTAINABLE WAY, I NEED NOW TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR GETTING IT THE HOUSE BACK IN ORDER AND GETTING DEBT DOWN AND TAKING A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT APPROACH TO PUTTING GROWTH FRONT AND CENTRE. I AM CONFIDENT THAT MY DECISIONS HAVE MADE THINGS BETTER, NOT WORSE. NEXT ` HE SPENT DECADES ON CAMERA, REPORTING ON WAR AND CONFLICT AROUND THE WORLD. SO WHY DOES STAN GRANT BELIEVE THE MEDIA HAS BECOME POISONOUS? STAN GRANT IS ONE OF THE BEST-KNOWN BROADCASTERS IN AUSTRALIA. HE SPENT DECADES REPORTING FROM WAR ZONES AROUND THE WORLD, AND HAS FORCEFULLY ARGUED TO IMPROVE THE RIGHTS AND OUTCOMES FOR HIS FELLOW INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS. BUT TWO YEARS AGO, AFTER A FLOOD OF ABUSE AND THREATS IN THE WAKE OF HIS COMMENTARY AROUND THE QUEEN'S DEATH AND KING CHARLES' CORONATION AND IN THE LEAD-UP TO THE VOICE REFERENDUM, HE QUIT HIS ROLE AS HOST OF THE ABC'S Q+A, STEPPING BACK WITH A STINGING CRITICISM OF THE INDUSTRY TO WHICH HE'D DEDICATED DECADES OF HIS LIFE. NOW, STAN GRANT HAS A NEW BOOK REFLECTING ON THAT DECISION AND THE WOUNDS FROM THE REFERENDUM LOSS. IT'S ALMOST EXACTLY TWO YEARS SINCE YOU STEPPED DOWN FROM YOUR ROLE` YEAH. ...ON Q+A, AND YOUR REGULAR BROADCASTING ROLES HOW HAVE YOU FOUND THE SPACE AND PERSPECTIVE THAT THAT DECISION HAS AFFORDED? UM` IT'S BEEN A LUXURY. (CHUCKLES) I'VE REALLY, UM... I'VE REALLY ENJOYED IT, ACTUALLY, TO SORT OF STEP OUTSIDE THE DEMANDS OF DAILY NEWS, WHICH HAD SORT OF SET THE CONTOURS OF MY LIFE FOR SUCH A VERY LONG TIME. AND YOU KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE WHEN YOU'RE INVOLVED IN NEWS, AND YOU'RE CONSTANTLY PLUGGED IN ` TO STEP OUTSIDE OF THAT AND BE IN A MORE CONTEMPLATIVE SPACE, AND BE IN A SPACE WHERE I CAN` I'VE ALWAYS WRITTEN, BUT I'VE ALWAYS WRITTEN WHILE I'VE BEEN IN THE BELLY OF THE BEAST. TO BE ABLE TO SIT BACK AND TO WRITE WITH SOME DISTANCE, AND TO ENTER A MORE CONTEMPLATIVE SPACE HAS ALLOWED ME TO... TO HAVE A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE ON THE WORLD, ON MYSELF AND MY HISTORY, SO IT'S A BIT OF A LUXURY. IT'S BEEN HARD-EARNED, BUT I'M ENJOYING IT. HAVE YOU SECOND-GUESSED YOUR DECISION AT ANY POINT? OH, NO. NO. IT WAS IT WAS TIME FOR ME TO LEAVE THE MEDIA. UM... PROBABLY IT WAS TIME FOR ME TO LEAVE MANY YEARS EARLIER, AND I` YOU KNOW, I'D` I'D WRESTLED WITH THAT. I THINK SOMETIMES` WELL, FOR ME, ANYWAY, I HAVE TO BE SORT OF THRUST OUT OF SOMETHING (CHUCKLES), AND IN MANY WAYS, THERE WERE EVENTS THAT LED UP TO MY WALKING AWAY FROM THE MEDIA THAT WE CAN DISCUSS, BUT THEY, UH... THEY PUT ME IN A POSITION WHERE I` I REALLY HAD TO CONFRONT WHAT I WAS DOING, AND WHAT I SAW, I THOUGHT, IN THE COMPLICITY OF MEDIA IN... IN THE CONFLICTS OF OUR AGE. YOU KNOW, I STARTED TO SEE THAT THE MEDIA, IN MANY WAYS, WAS THE POISON IN THE BLOODSTREAM OF OUR SOCIETY. YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AND WE POINT THE FINGER AT EVENTS OR INDIVIDUALS ` DONALD TRUMP IN AMERICA, OR VLADIMIR PUTIN, OR XI JINPING IN CHINA, OR WE MIGHT LOOK AT THE WARS OF UKRAINE OR THE WAR IN GAZA, AND WE IMAGINE THAT THOSE EVENTS DETERMINE WHAT'S HAPPENING. BUT ACTUALLY, THE MEDIA ITSELF CONTRIBUTES THROUGH ITS OWN OBSESSION, ITS MODUS OPERANDI, REALLY, AROUND CONFLICT, AND GENERATING CONFLICT, AND POLARISING DEBATE. AND I STARTED TO FEEL VERY COMPLICIT IN THAT, AND PARTICULARLY WHEN IT CAME TO ABORIGINAL ISSUES, FIRST NATIONS ISSUES IN AUSTRALIA, AND I FOUND MYSELF VERY MUCH AT THE POINTY END OF THAT, SUBJECT TO A LOT OF THE HEAT OF THAT DEBATE MYSELF, THAT I STARTED TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT MY OWN COMPLICITY IN CREATING CONFLICT. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE MEDIA SIDE OF THAT, AND THEN LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME OF THOSE INDIGENOUS ISSUES AS WELL. YEAH. COS I THINK THEY'RE VERY IMPORTANT. YEAH. AND` AND THEY ARE CONNECTED. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. SO... DO YOU THINK, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE MEDIA BEING THE POISON IN THE BLOODSTREAM` MM. ...OF MODERN SOCIETY ` I MEAN, IT'S AN EXTRAORDINARY THING TO HEAR FROM SOMEONE WITH YOUR CAREER IN THE MEDIA ` WHO PARTICIPATED IN IT. WELL, YEAH. SO IS THAT A MODERN`? AND WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT TOO. IS THAT A MODERN PHENOMENON? NO, I DON'T THINK IT IS MODERN. I THINK IT IS` ACTUALLY, IN A WAY, IT'S VERY TECHNOLOGICAL, AND MEDIA ` MASS MEDIA ` IS A TECHNOLOGICAL PHENOMENON. YOU KNOW, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE INVENTION OF THE GUTENBERG PRESS, WHICH OF COURSE LED TO AN EXPLOSION OF LITERACY THROUGHOUT EUROPE, AND CONNECTED THE WORLD THROUGH THE WRITTEN WORD IN WAYS THAT HAD NEVER BEEN PREVIOUSLY POSSIBLE, AND IN MANY RESPECTS, HELPED PAVE THE WAY, OR WAS A CATALYST FOR, THE WARS OF RELIGION, THE 30 YEARS' WAR, THE SCHISM OF FAITH, NOW THAT PEOPLE HAD BIBLES IN THEIR HANDS, IN THEIR OWN HOMES, THAT THEY COULD READ. SO THE CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY AND THE MASS MEDIA THAT CAME FROM THAT DID, IN ITS OWN WAY, GENERATE CONFLICT. YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT, SAY, THE RISE OF FASCISM IN THE 1920S, MUSSOLINI AND HITLER ` YOU KNOW, WITHOUT THE SPOKEN WORD, WITHOUT THE FILM, WITHOUT THE MICROPHONE, HITLER IS A RABBLE-ROUSER IN THE BEER HALLS OF MUNICH. BUT SUDDENLY, WITH THE IMAGE THAT IS CREATED THROUGH MASS MEDIA, WITH THE SPOKEN WORD, WITH THE MICROPHONE, HIS VOICE WAS AMPLIFIED. LOOK AT THE LENI RIEFENSTAHL FILMS THAT CREATED THE MYTH OF THE CHARISMA AROUND SOMEONE LIKE HITLER. SO IT WAS GENERATIVE IN THE EXPLOSION OF FASCISM ACROSS EUROPE, AND YOU WOULD HAVE TO SAY IN THE MODERN ITERATION, THE MORE RECENT ITERATION OF MEDIA TECHNOLOGY, THE CAPACITY TO BROADCAST FROM ANYWHERE AT ANY TIME, THE RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA HAS SHRUNK OUR WORLD, BUT IT HAS ALSO HYPER-ADRENALISED OUR WORLD. WE ARE CONSTANTLY PLUGGED IN, AND WE ARE BOMBARDED WITH NEWS AND IMAGES, AND I THINK THAT HAS CONTRIBUTED TO A SCHISM IN OUR SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE WHO ARE SO ENGAGED, SO ADRENALISED, ARE AT WAR WITH EACH OTHER IN SOCIAL MEDIA, AND THE TWITTER WARS, AND THE` THE PREDOMINANCE, THE PREVALENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA AGAIN GIVES RISE TO THE CHARISMATIC INDIVIDUALS` DONALD TRUMP'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT ` WHO ARE ABLE TO SEIZE ON THAT. SO I THINK TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN A BIG FACTOR, AND MEDIA HAS BEEN LED BY THAT TECHNOLOGY, AND THEN I THINK THERE IS A BLOOD SPORT ` I THINK MEDIA, MASS MEDIA, HAS ALWAYS BEEN ATTRACTED TO THE BLOOD SPORT OF SOCIETY, THE KINETIC ENERGY, THE KINETIC FORCE OF SOCIETY, WHICH POLARISES US AND INEVITABLY FEEDS ON CONFLICT. BUT IS CONFLICT NOT ALSO CENTRAL TO DEMOCRACY? CONTEST IS, BUT I DON'T THINK CONFLICT IS, AND I THINK WE MISUNDERSTAND THAT. CONTEST OF IDEAS, ABSOLUTELY. BUT WHAT DOES DEMOCRACY EMERGE OUT OF? IT EMERGES OUT OF POLIS ` IT EMERGES OUT OF A SHARED PUBLIC SPACE, AND THE DELIBERATION OF A SHARED PUBLIC SPACE THAT, AT ITS BEST, HOLDS CONTEST TO DELIVER US TO CONSENSUS THAT EVEN THE PERSON WHO DOES NOT GET THEIR OWN WAY CAN, UH... CAN SEE THE LEGITIMACY OF, AND BE RESPECTED WITHIN. BUT I THINK CONFLICT ERODES THE CONTEST. IT DIMINISHES THE INTEGRITY OF THE CONTEST, AND IT TURNS IT INTO A 'WHO SHOUTS LOUDEST' COMPETITION. SO I DO THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE, AND I THINK, ABSOLUTELY, CONTEST OF IDEAS IS IMPORTANT. ABSOLUTELY, WE NEED THAT IN A DEMOCRACY. AND THE MEDIA HAS A ROLE OF OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY TO PLAY, BUT I THINK IT... I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THE MEDIA HAS` HAS GRAVITATED MUCH MORE TO THAT KINETIC CONFLICT OF SOCIETY. AND IF YOU WANT THE PROOF OF THAT, JUST LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND SEE THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IN THE COUNTRIES THAT ARE APPARENTLY BUILT ON TRADITIONS OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION AND A FREE PRESS, WELL, DEMOCRACY'S IN RETREAT. YOU KNOW, FREEDOM HOUSE NOW SHOWS US THAT THERE ARE 16, 17 YEARS OF DIMINISHED DEMOCRACY AROUND OUR WORLD. BY SOME MEASUREMENTS, THERE ARE ONLY SIX OR SEVEN WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER REALLY FULLY FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACIES IN OUR WORLD. AND I THINK THE MEDIA HAS A BIG PART TO PLAY IN THAT. SO` NOT TO WANT TO MAKE THIS ABOUT ME, BUT` YEAH. (LAUGHS) UM... SO, MY ROLE IS TO` IS TO INTERVIEW POLICY-MAKERS. YEAH. AND IN THIS MODERN AGE, IT'S MY EXPERIENCE THAT MOST SUCCESSFUL POLITICIANS ARE EXTREMELY WELL MEDIA-TRAINED. YEAH. AND EVEN IN A LONG-FORM INTERVIEW, A LOT OF THEM WILL ENDEAVOUR JUST TO RUN DOWN THE CLOCK. SURE. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. AND I'VE ALWAYS SEEN IT AS MY JOB TO NOT JUST POSE QUESTIONS BUT TO PURSUE ANSWERS` MM. ...AND KIND OF DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THOSE POINTS, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S IMPORTANT. BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD LOOK AT SOME OF MY INTERVIEWS AND SAY THAT THEY WERE OVERLY CONFRONTATIONAL, THAT I INTERVIEW` INTERRUPTED PEOPLE TOO REGULARLY, THAT I WAS MORE INTERESTED IN CONFLICT MM. ...THAN NECESSARILY GIVING SOMEONE THE SPACE TO SPEAK FREELY. WHAT WOUL BE YOUR ADVICE TO SOMEONE LIKE ME IN TRYING TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE? WOULD YOU FEEL THAT THAT'S A REASONABLE CRITIQUE? NO, IN THAT WHEN I DO AN INTERVIEW, I JUST WANT AN ANSWER. AND SO I'M ALWAYS LISTENING FOR AN ANSWER. THAT'S THE` THAT'S THE KIND OF PHILOSOPHY THAT I TRY TO HAVE UNDERPINNING MY INTERVIEWS, AND I'M NOT SAYING I GET IT RIGHT ALL THE TIME` NO. ...BUT I WONDER IF THE NATURE OF POLITICS TODAY MEANS THAT POLITICIANS ARE SO ADEPT... MM. ...AT NAVIGATING KIND OF, LONG-FORM INTERVIEW SPACES` YEAH. ...THAT ACTUALLY, IT KIND OF BECOMES INCUMBENT ON INTERVIEWERS TO ACTUALLY INTERRUPT THEM MORE REGULARLY THAN THEY MIGHT HAVE IN THE PAST. YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT DOES COME DOWN IN MANY RESPECTS TO THE SKILL OF THE INTERVIEWER AS WELL, IN BEING ABLE TO OWN THAT SPACE, AND BEING ABLE TO CONDUCT THAT INTERVIEW IN A WAY THAT YOU DO SEEK THE ANSWERS, AND THERE IS A DETERMINATION AND THERE IS AN ACCOUNTABILITY, BUT THERE IS ALSO A RELATIONSHIP OF RESPECT IN THAT. AND I THINK TONE GOES A LONG WAY TO BEING ABLE TO SET THAT. YOU KNOW, I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND I'VE DONE THAT MANY TIMES WHEN I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN AN INTERVIEW, AND I KNOW THAT A POLITICIAN IS RUNNING DOWN THE CLOCK. THEY ARE OBFUSCATING, OR THEY'RE JUST LYING, AND TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT WAY TO HANDLE THAT, SO THAT I DON'T ACTUALLY COME ACROSS AS BEING SOMEONE WHO IS JUDGEMENTAL OR ARGUMENTATIVE IS A REAL CHALLENGE. AND WHEN YOU GET IT WRONG, YOU KNOW IT, AND YOU WOULD KNOW IT WHEN YOU GET IT WRONG. AND THERE ARE MANY TIMES I'VE WALKED AWAY FROM THOSE INTERVIEWS SAYING, 'WELL, I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I OVERSTEPPED THERE.' AND OFTEN IT IS IN TONE, UM... IT` IT IS IN JUDGEMENT THAT'S INHERENT IN THE SORT OF QUESTION YOU ASK, BUT IT'S` BUT IT IS` IT IS IN THE AGE WHERE PEOPLE ARE VERY WELL MEDIA-TRAINED. IT IS A CHALLENGE. IT ALSO GOES TO THE FORM AND THE FORMAT ITSELF ` YOU KNOW, WE OFTEN TRY TO SQUEEZE SO MUCH INTO A PROGRAMME. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A NIGHTLY CURRENT AFFAIRS PROGRAMME, AND MAYBE HALF AN HOUR, AND YOU'VE GOT TWO STORIES AND AN INTERVIEW, AND YOU'VE GOT SEVEN MINUTES FOR THE INTERVIEW, AND OF COURSE, SOMEONE'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO MANIPULATE THAT IF THEY'RE A SKILLED PERFORMER. SO LET'S LOOSEN THAT UP, AND LET'S SAY, 'YOU KNOW WHAT? 'I'M GOING TO SIT HERE FOR THE WHOLE HALF-HOUR IF I HAVE TO. 'SO YOU KEEP TALKING, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GET THE ANSWER 'THAT I THINK THE PUBLIC REALLY NEEDS.' AFTER THE BREAK ` 18 MONTHS SINCE THE VOICE REFERENDUM WAS VOTED DOWN, I ASK STAN GRANT ABOUT THE FUTURE FOR INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS. AUSTRALIA'S VOICE TO PARLIAMENT REFERENDUM WOULD HAVE ESTABLISHED A BODY OF ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERS TO MAKE REPRESENTATIONS TO PARLIAMENT. ALTHOUGH THE REPRESENTATIONS AND ADVICE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN BINDING, THE VOICE PROVED DIVISIVE AS A PROPOSAL, AND ULTIMATELY THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT WAS REJECTED. SO TO GO BACK TO YOUR EXPERIENCE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO ` YOU HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO INTENSE TROLLING, TO RACIST ATTACKS. YOUR FAMILY HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO THREATS, BUT WHEN YOU STOOD DOWN FROM Q+A, YOU SPOKE OF A CONCEPT ` YINDYAMARRA. MM. FOR THOSE OF US WHO CAN'T SPEAK WIRADJURI` YEAH. ...CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THAT TO US? WELL, YOU'VE JUST SPOKEN WIRADJURI BEAUTIFULLY, SO THANK YOU. YINDYAMARRA IS A WIRADJURI` IT'S A` A WIRADJURI PHILOSOPHY, A THEOLOGY THAT VERY MUCH GUIDES OUR WAY OF BEING. IT IS A DEEP RESPECT. IT IS A DEEP LISTENING. AND THESE THINGS ARE ANTITHETICAL TO OUR AGE, GIVEN THE SPEED OF OUR AGE, AND THE TECHNOLOGY, AND THE THINGS WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT IN THE WAY THAT WE CONDUCT OUR PUBLIC DISCOURSE, BUT THEY ARE ROOTED IN A SENSE OF DEEP RECIPROCITY AND RESPECT. IT COMES DOWN TO THIS, I THINK ` MY FATHER HAD ALWAYS TAUGHT ME THAT IF PEOPLE ARE ON OUR LAND, THEY ARE OUR PEOPLE. AND IT IS NOT NO LONGER JUST OUR LAND. AND` AND THIS WAS THE HARD BIT. WE ARE RESPONSIBLE NOT JUST FOR WHAT WE DO, BUT FOR WHAT THE OTHER PERSON DOES. THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT AS A MORAL CONCEPT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SOMEONE WHO MAY SEEK TO DO YOU HARM. ARE YOU RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERSON DOING YOU HARM? WELL, YOU'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACT, BUT ARE YOU RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING THE SOCIETY WHERE THE ACT IS POSSIBLE? AND I THINK WE DON'T ASK THAT QUESTION ` WE DON'T ASK THAT QUESTION ENOUGH. AND AGAIN, THAT'S A MEDIA QUESTION. SO WHEN I WAS IN THE MIDST OF WHAT WAS A VERY HURTFUL EPISODE THAT EMERGED OUT OF A WHOLE CONFLUENCE OF EVENTS ` ONE WAS THE QUEEN'S DEATH, THE KING'S CORONATION ` BOTH OF THOSE THINGS OCCURRED DURING A DEBATE FOR A REFERENDUM TO ESTABLISH A VOICE FOR ABORIGINAL` A CONSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLE TO HAVE MORE INPUT INTO POLICY DIRECTED TOWARDS US. AND IT WAS VERY HEATED, AND IT WAS VERY CULTURAL, SO IT PLAYED RIGHT INTO THAT HOT SPACE OF CULTURE WAR, AND MYSELF BEING IN THE MEDIA AND BEING A PROMINENT ABORIGINAL PERSON AND SOMEONE WHO I THINK HAD TRIED TO MANAGE THAT` THAT SPACE BETWEEN THE PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL QUITE EFFECTIVELY, I BECAME A TARGET AND MY FAMILY BECAME A TARGET, AND THE LEVEL OF ABUSE JUST GREW LOUDER AND LOUDER AND LOUDER. BEING MISREPRESENTED, UM... HATEFUL COMMENTS MADE TO ME, MY WIFE, MY CHILDREN, MY PARENTS, AND DEATH THREATS AGAINST US AND THE PERSON ARRESTED AND CHARGED, AND THROUGHOUT IT ALL, I HAVE TO SAY, WITH SOME SADNESS, A FAILURE ON THE PART OF MY EMPLOYER, THE ABC, TO PROPERLY HANDLE THAT AND TO BE ABLE TO SHOW PROPER DUTY OF CARE TO SOMEONE IN MY POSITION WHO WAS EXPOSED IN WAYS THAT I COULDN'T CONTROL. AND SO, GIVEN ALL OF THAT, I DID MAKE THE DECISION THAT IT'S BETTER THAT I WALK AWAY FOR THE PROTECTION OF MY FAMILY, THE PROTECTION OF MY OWN SANITY, THE FACT THAT I DIDN'T FEEL PROTECTED AND SUPPORTED IN A WAY THAT I SHOULD HAVE BEEN WITH MY EMPLOYER. I DON'T NECESSARILY BLAME THEM ` I THINK THEY WERE SORT OF WORKING IN WATERS` YOU KNOW, SWIMMING IN WATERS THAT WERE FAR TOO DEEP FOR THEM. MM. AND, UH... AND THE COMPLICITY OF MEDIA IN SO MUCH OF THAT. AND WHAT I RETREATED INTO WAS THAT SPACE OF YINDYAMARRA ` I RETURNED TO THOSE VALUES THAT MY FAMILY AND MY CULTURE HAD RAISED ME IN, WHICH IS, EVEN IN THE MIDST OF SOMETHING LIKE THAT, HOW DO YOU SHOW LOVE TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SEEKING TO HURT YOU? AND I COULDN'T DO THAT WITHIN THE MEDIA, SO I WALKED AWAY FROM THAT, AND I HAVE SINCE TRIED IN EVERYTHING I DO TO WATER THE GROUND WITH THE LOVE AND RESPECT THAT COMES FROM YINDYAMARRA, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE. MM. HOW DID THE RESULT OF THAT REFERENDUM AFFECT YOU? IT WAS` IT WAS HARD, UM... BECAUSE THE REFERENDUM, WHILE IT MAY HAVE APPEARED TO BE VERY ABSTRACT TO MANY AUSTRALIANS, AND APPEARED TO BE ANOTHER AMENDMENT, OR PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION` AND TRADITIONALLY, REFERENDUMS FAIL IN AUSTRALIA. OVERWHELMINGLY, THEY FAIL. IT'S A VERY HIGH BAR. YOU'VE GOT TO GET A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE AND A MAJORITY OF STATES. SO IT'S A` IT'S A DOUBLE JEOPARDY. IT'S VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE. BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING EXISTENTIAL ABOUT THIS VOTE FOR US AS ABORIGINAL PEOPLE. IT WASN'T JUST A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. IT FELT LIKE A VOTE ON US. INEVITABLY, IT DOES. YOU KNOW, WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY WHERE WE'RE 3% OF THE POPULATION; WE ARE THE MOST DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE IN THAT WE ARE THE MOST IMPOVERISHED, WE ARE THE MOST IMPRISONED. WE COME OUT OF A VERY HARD HISTORY. AND THAT'S... ALMOST UNKNOWABLE TO MANY AUSTRALIANS, BECAUSE AUSTRALIA IS... IT'S A` IT'S A POSTCARD, AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL, AND IT'S` AND IT'S RICH, AND IT'S SUCCESSFUL, AND IT'S MULTICULTURAL, AND IT'S PEACEFUL, AND THERE ARE PHENOMENAL ACHIEVEMENTS. AUSTRALIA IS A PHENOMENAL` AS NEW ZEALAND IS ` A PHENOMENAL ACHIEVEMENT WHEN YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD. AND SO IT'S SO DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO IMAGINE WHAT IT IS FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLE TO LIVE IN A SHADOW WORLD, A WORLD WHERE THOSE WONDERFUL VIRTUES OF AUSTRALIA DON'T GO ALL THE WAY DOWN. AND TO SEE THAT REJECTED WAS VERY PERSONAL AND VERY HARD, AND I THINK ALL OF US FELT THAT VERY DEEPLY. YOUR GREAT-GRANDFATHER WAS` YEAH. ...ARRESTED` YEAH. ...AND JAILED FOR SPEAKING WIRADJURI IN THE STREET. YEAH. UM... INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS HAVE BEEN THE SUBJECT OF WARS OF EXTERMINATION YEAH. THEY'VE HAD NO PROPERTY RIGHTS. YEAH. NO VOTING RIGHTS. AND YET THIS VOTE FELT LIKE IT WAS AN EXISTENTIAL QUESTION FOR YOU. YEAH, DEFINITELY. DOES IT STILL FEEL EXISTENTIAL WHEN YOU PUT THAT REFERENDUM IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT ABORIGINAL AUSTRALIANS HAVE EXPERIENCED AND SURVIVED` YEAH. ...OVER THE LAST FEW HUNDRED YEARS? INEVITABLY, I THINK, MORE BROADLY ` AND NEW ZEALAND'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THIS ` I THINK THE RECONCILIATION OF THE FORCES OF OUR HISTORY SIT AT THE HEART OF THE SHARED IDENTITY OF EVERY COUNTRY, AND IT IS AN EXISTENTIAL QUESTION, NOT JUST FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLE ` IT'S AN EXISTENTIAL QUESTION FOR AUSTRALIA. HOW DO YOU RECONCILE SUCH A DEEP WOUND THAT SITS AT THE SOUL OF THE NATION? AMERICA HAS THE GENOCIDE OF FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE AND SLAVERY, WHICH SITS AT THE HEART OF THE AMERICAN PROJECT. EUROPE, OF COURSE, IS A COUNTRY OF TRIBAL WARFARE THAT HAS PLUNGED IT INTO CATASTROPHE AFTER CATASTROPHE ` IN NEW ZEALAND WITH THE MAORI WARS, AND, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE TREATY, AND I KNOW THERE IS A PROCESS AROUND THAT NOW THAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH. BUT THEY ARE EXISTENTIAL QUESTIONS. IT'S INTERESTING BEING IN NEW ZEALAND, AND THE EASE AT WHICH PEOPLE, UM... MOVE IN AND OUT OF THE SHARED SPACE ` YOU KNOW, THE DUAL NAMING OF PLACES, YOU WELCOMING ME ` YOU KNOW, 'KIA ORA', WELCOMING` YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE IN A PLACE THAT IS FOUNDED ON SOMETHING THAT IS VERY VERTICAL, VERY DEEP AND VERY SHARED ` CONTESTED, YES, AND NOT EVENLY DISTRIBUTED, BUT SHARED, AND I THINK THE TREATY GOES A LONG WAY TO THAT. YOU KNOW, I'VE READ ABOUT THE SIGNING OF THE TREATY, AND, UH... AND THAT THERE WAS THE` YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT WE ARE ONE PEOPLE. WELL, NO COUNTRY'S ONE PEOPLE` MM. ...A COUNTRY IS MANY PEOPLE, BUT THERE IS A FOUNDATION. AND AUSTRALIA DOESN'T HAVE THAT. WE DON'T HAVE TREATIES. WE DON'T HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION. THERE IS STILL THE OVERHANG OF TERRA NULLIUS ` THAT IT WAS CLAIMED BECAUSE WE SIMPLY WEREN'T THERE IN A LEGAL SENSE. AND THEY'RE EXISTENTIAL WOUNDS THAT WE HAVE NOT DEALT WITH. AND I THINK IN AUSTRALIA, FOR ME, I'VE COME TO THE... TO SEE THAT I CAN IMAGINE THE AUSTRALIA THAT I WANT, OR I CAN LIVE IN THE AUSTRALIA THAT I HAVE, AND THE AUSTRALIA THAT I HAVE IS NOT GOING TO NECESSARILY DEAL WITH THOSE EXISTENTIAL QUESTIONS, BUT IT IS THE AUSTRALIA THAT I HAVE. TO IMAGINE A TREATY THE LIKES OF WHICH YOU HAVE HERE IN THE AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT ` IT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE. WE'RE NOT MADE THAT WAY. WE WERE ESTABLISHED BY A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT IN ENGLAND FOR A START ` PENAL COLONY, VERY, VERY DIFFERENT ` AND WE'RE NOT MADE THAT WAY. SO I NAVIGATE THIS NOW AS MORE A QUESTION OF THE VOICE BEING A POLITICAL FAILURE RATHER THAN A MORAL FAILURE. AND THAT'S DIFFICULT, BECAUSE THERE ARE MORAL QUESTIONS. BUT I SEEK TO NAVIGATE THIS NOW; I SEEK TO SEPARATE. THAT WAS A POLITICAL QUESTION WHICH GOT A POLITICAL ANSWER, BUT OVER HERE IS A MORAL DIMENSION WHERE I FIND MYSELF MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE IN BEING ABLE TO ESTABLISH A RELATIONSHIP WITH AUSTRALIANS THAT EMERGES FROM THE SHARED SPACE THAT WE HAVE. THE ANZAC DAY COMMEMORATIONS IN MELBOURNE` MM. ...A GROUP OF PROTESTERS CRIED OUT DURING THE WELCOME TO COUNTRY, SAYING THEY DIDN'T NEED TO BE WELCOMED TO THEIR OWN COUNTRY. YEAH. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF THAT? THE WONDERFUL THING ABOUT THAT IS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO APPLAUDED THE WELCOME AND SHOWED RESPECT FAR OUTWEIGHED THE SMALL NUMBER OF NEO-NAZIS, WHO IS WHAT THEY ARE, WHO HAD BOOED THAT WELCOME. AGAIN, MY REFLEXIVE RESPONSE TO THAT, THAT COMES FROM THE DEEP SCAR, THE WOUND THAT WE HAVE IN OUR SOULS FROM OUR HISTORY, IS TO TRY` IS TO LOOK AT THAT AND IMMEDIATELY FEEL AGAIN A JUDGEMENT ` 'ALL OF AUSTRALIA HATES US. THIS IS WHO AUSTRALIA TRULY IS.' AND THAT'S MY IMMEDIATE RESPONSE. THAT'S MY VISCERAL RESPONSE. BUT MY CONSIDERED RESPONSE IS, 'HANG ON. 'THERE WERE MORE PEOPLE THERE WHO SHOWED RESPECT. 'AND THAT'S THE AUSTRALIA I WANT TO SPEAK TO.' VASTLY MORE. VASTLY MORE. WHAT I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED BY WAS THAT IT HAPPENED, OF COURSE, DURING AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN, AND IN THE WEEK AFTER THAT, WE SAW FOR PETER DUTTON WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A MORAL FAILURE ON HIS PART TO TAKE THAT AND TO LAND THAT IN THE MIDST OF A CULTURE WAR WHERE ONCE AGAIN, ABORIGINAL PEOPLE WERE A POLITICAL FOOTBALL. AND, UM... AND IT BACKFIRED ` YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, TO TRY TO MARRY THE VOICE VOTE WITH THE VOTE OF THE ELECTION ` THAT TELLS YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THE AUSTRALIAN CHARACTER. THEY COULD NOT GET THE IDEA OF THE PHILOSOPHICAL CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM, BUT THEY DID GET THE IDEA OF A MORAL INJURY, AND THAT, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE OF POLITICS SOUGHT TO INFLICT A MORAL INJURY OUT OF WHAT WAS A HATEFUL ACT FROM A VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE. AND, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT THAT RISKS AMPLIFYING THE VOICES OF HATRED FAR BEYOND THE LEVEL THAT THEY SHOULD. AND WE SAW THAT IN THE LAST WEEK OF THE POLITICAL CAMPAIGN. THE OTHER POINT I'D MAKE ABOUT THIS TOO IS FROM THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE OF POLITICS, THAT'S A DEEP MISUNDERSTANDING OF CONSERVATISM, BECAUSE CONSERVATISM IN A TRADITION THAT EDMUND BURKE` YOU KNOW, 18TH-CENTURY, YOU KNOW, PHILOSOPHER HAD TALKED ABOUT WAS A PRESERVATION, A HANDING OF` A COMPACT THAT IS HANDED DOWN BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE ALIVE AND THOSE WHO ARE DEAD, AND THOSE WHO ARE YET TO BE BORN. WHAT DEEPER COMPACT, WHAT DEEPER CONSERVATIVE TRADITION COULD THERE BE THAN A WELCOME TO COUNTRY THAT IS THOUSANDS OF YEARS OLD, THAT IS JOINED WITH AN ANZAC SERVICE THAT IS A SOLEMN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SACRIFICE FOR THE GREATER GOOD? AND TO PUT THOSE TWO BEAUTIFUL TRADITIONS TOGETHER CREATES A SACRED SPACE THAT WE CAN ALL SHARE IN. ANY DECENT CONSERVATISM WOULD SEEK TO PRESERVE THAT AS A COMMON GOOD. SO IT WAS A FAILURE OF CONSERVATISM AS WELL. YOU WRITE A LOT ABOUT YOUR FAITH. MM. YOU HAVE A PHD IN THEOLOGY. I DO. DON'T WE ALL? (BOTH CHUCKLE) I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN ASKED THIS BEFORE AND YOU WRITE ABOUT IT ELOQUENTLY, BUT HOW DO YOU RECONCILE YOUR FAITH` YEAH. ...WITH THE ROLE OF CHRISTIANITY AND EMPIRE-BUILDING? YEAH. YOU KNOW, I SAY TO PEOPLE THAT GOD DIDN'T ARRIVE ON THE FIRST FLEET, AND IT'S A VERY SIMPLISTIC AND VERY NARROW UNDERSTANDING` OR MISUNDERSTANDING ` OF GOD TO CONFLATE WHO GOD IS WITH THE ACTIONS OF A CHURCH AT A PARTICULAR TIME, OR INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY CALL THEMSELVES CHRISTIAN AT A PARTICULAR TIME. IT WAS A FAILING OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO BROUGHT THE BIBLE TO AUSTRALIA TO LOOK INTO THE EYES OF ABORIGINAL PEOPLE AND TO NOT SEE THE SPARK OF THE DIVINE, BECAUSE IT WAS ALWAYS THERE. OUR WORLD WAS A WORLD WHERE WE WERE UTTERLY AT ONE WITH A DIVINE, WITH A CREATION. AND, YOU KNOW, I SEE CHRISTIANITY` AND CATHOLICISM` AND I'M A CATHOLIC, AND CATHOLICISM IS A MYSTICAL TRADITION, YOU KNOW? AGAIN, WE MISUNDERSTAND CATHOLICISM. WE LOOK AT CATHOLICISM, AND WE THINK IT'S ABOUT TRAFFIC LIGHTS. WE THINK IT'S ABOUT 'STOP, GO, DON'T DO THIS, DON'T DO THAT'. THAT'S AN ELEMENT OF IT, BUT AT ITS HEART IS A DEEPLY PHILOSOPHICAL THEOLOGICAL TRADITION. IT'S A GRAPPLING WITH THE GREAT WONDER AND MYSTERY OF THE WORLD. IT'S A PLACE OF ANGELS. IT'S A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE FLY. IT'S A PLACE OF VIRGIN BIRTH. IT'S A PLACE OF RESURRECTION. IT'S A PLACE OF LIFE AFTER DEATH. IT'S A PLACE OF ENDLESS FORGIVENESS AND LOVE AND KINDNESS. YOU KNOW, WHAT DO WE KNOW OF JESUS CHRIST? WE KNOW THAT HE WROTE NOTHING ` EXCEPT ONE THING. WHEN MARY IS BEING JUDGED, MARY MAGDALENE IS BEING JUDGED, AND TO BE` YOU KNOW, HE WRITES ON THE GROUND, AND THEN STANDS UP AND SAYS TO PEOPLE, 'YOU CAST THE FIRST STONE. I JUDGE NO ONE.' YOU KNOW, THERE ARE DEEP PHILOSOPHICAL, THEOLOGICAL TRADITIONS HERE TO DRAW ON THAT SPEAK TO ME AS AN ABORIGINAL PERSON. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, FOR ME, GENERALLY, WHEN I GO TO MASS, I FEEL FULFILLED AS AN ABORIGINAL PERSON. AND I SEE MY CULTURE AND MY FAITH COMING TOGETHER IN A BEAUTIFUL EXPRESSION. THAT'S` THAT PAUL THE APOSTLE, WHEN HE SAID, 'THERE IS NO JEW, THERE IS NO GENTILE, 'THERE IS NO SLAVE, THERE IS NO MALE, THERE IS NO FEMALE.' THERE IS A SPACE OF COMING TOGETHER IN ONE AROUND A FAITH THAT GOES DEEP DOWN AND IS OF ALL TIMES, AND IN ALL TIMES. SO I THINK WE MISUNDERSTAND IT. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE WORDS FOR GOD. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE UNDERSTANDING OF GOD. I THINK WE TURN GOD INTO A CARTOON CHARACTER. I THINK WE POLITICISE FAITH, AND THAT'S NOT THE FAITH THAT I SEEK TO EXPRESS. THAT'S STAN GRANT. HE WAS HERE FOR THE AUCKLAND WRITERS' FESTIVAL. HIS NEW BOOK IS MURRIYANG: SONG OF TIME. HEI AKUANEI ` WE'RE BACK AFTER THE BREAK. KUA MUTU ` THAT'S Q+A FOR THIS WEEK. WE'RE OFF NEXT WEEK FOR KING'S BIRTHDAY WEEKEND, BUT WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN IN A FORTNIGHT. PAI TE RA ` HAVE A GOOD DAY! CAPTIONS BY JASON CONRAN AND LENA ERAKOVICH. CAPTIONS WERE MADE WITH THE SUPPORT OF NZ ON AIR. WWW.ABLE.CO.NZ COPYRIGHT ABLE 2025