June 4, 2025 • 21 mins
The Prime Minister's deputy press secretary Michael Forbes has resigned after allegations he recorded audio of sessions with sex workers, and captured photos of women in compromising positions.
But despite complaints being investigated by police in July last year, Luxon was never informed. Should he have been told?
Also, there have been 63 Kainga Ora tenancies terminated in the last ten months after complaints of unruly behaviour. But those properties were the homes of 52 children - has enough consideration been given to the welfare of these kids?
To answer those questions, Labour's health and Wellington issues spokeswoman Ayesha Verrall and National's Otaki MP Tim Costley joined Nick Mills for Politics Thursday.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk Said B focusing in on the issues
that matter politics Thursday on Wellington Mornings, News Talk said B.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Joining us for politics Thursday. This week is Labour's Health
and Wellington's Issue Spokeswoman i shaveraal, good morning, Ice.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Morning neck.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
How are you doing?
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Yeah, very well? Thanks good but a flu.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Going around the old Your boss was a bit crooked
today You okay?
Speaker 3 (00:38):
Yeah, I'm all right now. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Did you have it too?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
I was a bit croaky about three weeks ago or something.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Oh three weeks ago. That's that's lifetime ago. And National's
O techy MP Chris Tim Crossley, Tim, I just want
to ask you before we start on the show. All
the good morning. By the way, all the film footage
over the weekends road drama at Levin had a lovely
(01:05):
poster in the background. Yeah, did you notice that?
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Well, I was actually out visiting police at the time,
so I didn't see the news footage, but someone showed
me afterwards. But yeah, I work right in the heardle
of it, and I'm very proud to represent the hord
DEFENDERA and Company communities. But what a bunch of idiots
say like, we just don't need this in our town,
We don't want this in our town. I was really
impressed with the police response. They did an amazing job.
(01:33):
I was proud to take the next night Mark Mitchell,
the Minister, around along with the police Commissioner to thank
the guys for the work they did. Even took them
some trucky buckets biscuits for Spoto because they did a
phenomenal job. And I tell you what, I saw some
of the footage this people throwing molt off cocktails at police,
shooting fireworks at trying to set the town on fire,
(01:55):
and they did an outstanding job.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Sorry, Tim, but I think that the people of live
In want more. They want more than the police responding
when they arrived. They don't want to happen. They want
the police to be tougher, they want cars crushed, they
want something done and they are not getting it. And
I'm sorry, once again, I shouldn't even say I'm sorry
that I don't want to see the police minister arriving
(02:20):
the day after and smelling the tires on the roade
and I don't want, you know, the Minister you walking
around and giving chocolate biscuits. I want to see something done.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Well, you are saying something done, because this shows the
difference that's happened in a year. A year ago, boy
racers completely took over the town. This time we've seen
actually in multiple events since then, police have been prepared.
They have taken the you know, the Minister was very
clear a year ago that he wants police to reassert
themselves in our communities. They have done that. They had
the Eagle helicopter, they had undefender squads out, they had
(02:52):
the guys in the riot gear. You can never stop
people that decide to turn up, but you can absolutely
be prepared to meet them head on. That's what police did.
We've introduced legislation which takes away the three strikes for
boy racers. One offense you get your car crushed. Spectators
in the firing line as well. Even if you just
drive a completely road legal car to go and watch
(03:13):
and take part in those activities, you're still on the
firing line. One offense, you get your car crushed. Actually,
we're doing all the things that you're talking about, and
the feedback I get from Levin and you just come
up and ever chat to them it's very positive. People
are very grateful for the way police responded, and I'm
not sure the way that you characterize it is fair.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Okay, all right, Well we'll agree to disagree on that,
and I'm sure that I'll get people calling up or
texting on the show saying that I'm right. Let's get
into the big story of the last twenty four hours.
I want to get your, both of yours reaction to
the story yesterday of the Prime Minister's deputy Press Secretary
Michael Forbes has resigned after it was alleged alleged he
(03:53):
filmed woman in tight clothes and supermarkets and gyms and
had audio recordings of appointments with escorts.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
Hi.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
I mean we talked very very briefly as you walked.
How would women in the Beehive be feeling this morning?
You're one of them?
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Oh yeah. But look, before we get onto that, I
just want to say the women we know are impacted
by this are the women who went to staff, the
sex workers, and I just want to say that I
hope that they're okay, because they've been The allegations are
very very serious. So for me, this isn't about the beehive.
(04:36):
It's the women we know are already impacted, and they
are very serious questions to answer.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
But we also know and I totally agree with you,
and my thoughts go out with all the people that
were infected, but there'll be people that don't know whether
they were affected or not. They don't know whether they've
been filmed, and they've worked closely alongside them in a
place that should be wholier than wholier and safer than safe.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Women should feel safe wherever they work, even if they're
sex workers. The questions that you're raising our questions for
the Prime Minister to answer. He's the minister responsible for
ministerial services. Who who would have hired this man?
Speaker 2 (05:15):
Okay, Tim, is it right that the Prime Minister was
never informed?
Speaker 4 (05:20):
I know the Prime Minister was informed and this was
dealt with really swiftly. Look, I just back up. I
just comment so I certainly feel for the women involved,
and you know that those that are the victims in
this case is as I understand it, and I really
only understand what was in that stuff article, but also
from what I understand at the timeline, the Prime Minister
was very quick to act as soon as he found
(05:41):
out He was informed as soon as that employer and
Ministerial Services obviously let him know. And so I'm not
quite sure what you're getting at Mere.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Well, I'm getting at that there's a breakdown somewhere. I'm
getting it that that surely that the security services someone
should have known something. I'm getting at the fact this
is not an attack on the prime minister. This is
nothing what so ever to do with the Prime minister.
The Prime Minister should not have been put in a
position where he had someone that was probably hopping in
(06:11):
a car with him very close to him, that he
didn't know. I mean, this is not a prime ministers problem.
You know. I'm not having a crag. I'm having a
crack letting this guy get to a position like he's
got to without somebody grazing some kind of red flag.
Speaker 4 (06:28):
Yeah, I understand, so so not informed because he was
obviously informed as soon as the story.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
Yeah, but this is last year.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
There was obviously something happened last year, and he wasn't
informed that. That's a really interesting question. I don't know
the legalities around that in terms of that. If the
police dean there was no offending from what the article
I read said, But as there are rights for people.
Know that that. I think that's probably one of the
questions that will will come out of this, But it'll
(06:54):
take people with more intricate knowledge and experience to probably
answer that. And I can understand why people might want
to want to know that and might think that, But
there will always be elements that that difficults between duty
of care and privacy and things that get weighed up
by those that are experts in this area.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
I shall, I get all that legality stuff, and I
understand it, and I've cop criticism all morning by even
talking about it. But this is innocent people involved, and
the Prime Minister is an innocent person involved. You know,
someone somewhere in this very small city with two degrees
of separation knew something and nobody did anything about it.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
The processes for how you end up working in a
minister's office are governed by ministerial Services. The Prime Minister
is the minister responsible for ministerial services, so those processes
are his responsibility. He has questions to answer about this.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah, well, I see, I'm okay. Let's move on. Let's
talk about the polls. The One News poll on Tuesday
narrowly had the national government in front, but the aar
and zed Read Research poll yesterday had labor in front
or in government. If the polls were right, I said,
what did you make of the polls? I mean, how
(08:13):
do you get two poles with two different decisions over
twenty four hours?
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Yeah, well, I know you didn't invite me on for
a statistics lecture, but you know, I guess they all
have their different ways of sampling. But I think the
overwhelming finding from both those poles is that the government
had a pretty negative reaction to their budget, didn't get
any post budget left when all eyes in the country
are on the government during that budget period. And look
(08:40):
some pretty good findings for Chris Hapkins in terms of
his preferred prime minister being five points ahead of Luxen.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
So, Tim COSTI, why are the left and the right
so tight right now when you guys are doing everything
so perfectly right, cleaning up our country, sorting everything out,
and yet it's still very very close. I mean, explain
that to me.
Speaker 4 (09:03):
Well, look, things a tough fact here, right, It's been
a tough few years for New Zealand coming out of
that you know, huge inflation, massive spending, massive debt. It
means you can't just throw money around like the last
government did. You actually have to be responsible and make
some really difficult choices. But that's how we get this
country going for growth, providing the decent public services like
(09:26):
health and education and police that we need in our communities.
It's not a lot long excamble. It's not always feel good,
but doing the right thing is and always the thing
that feels the best. And I am really confident that
come the election next year, people are going to ask themselves,
do you know what is life a bit better or
not than it was at the election of twenty three
The answers resounding, You're going to be yes, and that's
(09:48):
what we'll see us returning for second ten.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
I want to ask you both the same question, which
I don't often do. Sure, I'm going to start with you,
how the hell are the Greens holding up so well
after everything? And they're crazy alternative budget? I mean you
know why.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
Look you go around Wellington, you'll find a lot of
Green supporters and they admire the Greens for their values
based and on things. Now I'm in a different party
because probably because they share many of those values, but
I disagree on the way to on the way to
achieve them in many cases. So that's probably what people
(10:26):
are reacting to. Clear statements about values, not much about
practicality or delivery.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Why why are the Greens holding up so well actually
improving Both poles had them improving.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Yeah, look, I just don't understand why people. I get
it twenty years ago when it was an environmental party
that people wanted to ensure there was a strong environmental
focus in parliament. I think you see that across almost
every party now, and they've just become this radical social
issues party. They've had all sorts of issues around their MPs,
(10:58):
around their policies. Now they want to take on what
is eighty eight billion dollars of new taxes foot for
billion in debt. Labor can't decide if they agree with
it or not. Sipkins won't rule anything out. You imagined
the two of them and government and as the party
Mariti on top, it'll be an absolute nightmare. This country
will burn to the ground. But for some reason, there
are just some entrenched people that don't really care. They're
(11:20):
just gonna go on tick a green box no matter what,
and Jesus not my cup of tea.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Politics on a Thursday, Labour's Health and Wellington's Issue spokeswoman
Aishaveril and Nationals O TACKI MP Tim Costly. Now the
government is cracking down on disruptive social housing tenants is
clearly working. They have evicted sixty two families in the
last ten months or groups or people in the last
(11:46):
ten months. But lots of kids have been kicked out
of their homes too, fifty two children living in these
homes where the tendancies has been terminated by congeror social
housing is the last resort team? Where do these kids
go to once you've kicked them out?
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Well that remember that they don't lose the support that
those families that are getting from MSD, whether they look
still getting their accommodation supplement. There are still a number
of other housing providers out there with that's through another
social housing provider like a SASH, or whether that's through
a private tendancy. But you've got to remember what got
them to this point, right, this is the third strike
(12:25):
and we issued over the last year, I think fourteen
hundred and sixty three notices for this poor behavior. Only
sixty three got to the point of tenants being evicted,
and only fourteen of those involved children.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Well, I mean that's you're not suggesting as the kids.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
You're not suggesting.
Speaker 5 (12:42):
As they labor for years, was not wanting to take tenants.
And you've got to remember that next door to these
houses because I hear from these families are other families
with children, and living across the road are other families
with children and waiting to get into social housing, other
families with children. And we cannot let this kind of unruly,
(13:02):
unsafe and dangerous at times behavior just go unpunished. At
have to say, you have a responsibility when you get
one of these houses, and you have to you have
a responsibility for those that live around you. And it's
not okay to let that kind of behavior go unchecked
because it does impact that the families and the children
living next door, living over the back fence, and those
that are missing out on a house because we were
(13:24):
not willing to move these disruptive tenants out.
Speaker 4 (13:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
I get the point that bad behavior by tenants have
impacts on others, But Tim your peered have completely forgotten
that these are kids. The kids won't necessarily and highly
unlikely to be behind that behavior. That's so challenging to
the other other tenants, and to me, there's just smacks
of the problem your government has seeing kids. You know,
(13:50):
Prime Minister wasn't able to answer questions about kids being
homeless in the streets of Auckland in parliament yesterday. What
about your budget? Child poverty statistics absolutely awful cuts to
audong A tamariki meaning some of the kids having the
hardest time I am aren't being locked after and you're
restarting the failed experiment with boot camps. You know, kids
(14:11):
deserve a proper start when you're moving them on from tenancies.
The state is responsible for them. I just think it's
a disgrace.
Speaker 4 (14:20):
Oh, I think so. It's what I should say here.
That is, if you've got a kid, you can just
get away with any kind of behavior you're want.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
That was exactly not what I said.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
There are children living next door. I had a dad
come to me who had three kids living next door
to one of these disruptive tenants. This was just before
the last election. I wasn't even an MP at the time,
I was just running for Parliament and said we can't
give them KAO aren't willing to act. It's impacting his children,
his children, He felt were in an unsafe situation, there
were gang members involved, and these are the kind of
(14:51):
situations that, yes, it is it is tragic that children
are growing up in a home like that with that
kind of behavior is taking place. But it is equally
if not more tragic, if that means that we have
to subject all the children and all the families that
live around them to it. And there's another great family
that we've moved out of Immencity accommodation that could be
moving into social housing, but we're blocking that house to
(15:12):
them because we have to protect the kids in these
disruptive houses because of all behavior.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Can I just ask you if you think or feel
that it's ethical to do this.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
I believe that No. I think there's a massive problem
for the kids of these families that the government needs
to take responsibility for. He don't like the fact that
Tim's sitting there saying, oh, well, we'll just deal with
the great families. You know, those kids deserve a decent shot.
So what if their parents aren't people that we know
find agreeable or not. Those kids need to be looked after.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Yeah. I can't help but agree that when it becomes
kids become involved, it's a bit scary. I want to
ask you both about something that I saw this week
and I kind of thought to myself, really, it's one
of those really moments. This week the brand new bar
at Para and opened after the old one was turned
into an office. A new one is called pint of point,
(16:11):
pint of order, pint of order. I mean the logo
was Okay, it was and I went saw it. I
didn't go through it. I saw it on TV. I
should do taxpayers really be needing to foot the ball
for a parliament to have its own bar? And by
the way, can I just say it looks very boring?
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Haven't been in yet? Nick? Look, I think the big
issue here is why did we need a new bar?
What was wrong with the old one? And that new
bar was built because ministers in this large government of
three three party coalition wanted to move into the third
four of the beehive where the old bar was. It
costs seven million dollars for those renovations to be made
(16:52):
and that's why we have to have why the bar
was bar was moved, So in my view it misses
the point. The big point is here minister's egos who
couldn't handle having an office that was outside the beehive
had to be pandered to and that cost us seven
seven million.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Dollars seven million dollars to gosh, I'm going to go
back to your old nickname soon.
Speaker 4 (17:16):
Uh you go, You go what you like. And look,
I'm mean to the bar. I'm to be feared. It's
not really my thing. But let's just be a little
bit real about this. This is nothing to do with
minister's egos. Ministers don't make these decisions. It's the Speaker
of Parliamentary Service. I think when you say what's what
(17:36):
should be in a beehive? Should it be a minister's
office or a bar? I think most people would go, well,
it probably should be a minister's office. But none of
the ministers that have moved in here he had anything
to do with it. Let's not start making this out
to be something that it's not. They relocated the bar
from one place to another so that it was to
it to an unused corner of the building. I understand
(17:58):
that's what happened. I'm not involved the government, it's not involved.
The opposition's not involved. There's a bar in Parliament like
there's always been. You know, do you drink.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Do you go to the bar? Do you have a drink?
Do either of you do know?
Speaker 4 (18:10):
I never went. I never went to the old one.
I've been to the restaurant here, Bellamies once. I normally
just go to the if I even have time for dinner.
Last night, I ate a bowl of the old microwave
Veg's two minutes in the microwave. That was my dinner
last night. But otherwise I just go to the cheap
cafe that's on site here. In fact, I had unch
with I should there the other week, I think, And
(18:30):
that's where most of us just go because time is
really tight here and if you can get food, you
do it really quickly and you go to the next meeting.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
You said you didn't go to the bar. Would you
go to the bat?
Speaker 3 (18:39):
I went to the old bar, and I will go
to the new bar. At some point. We have, you know,
we have to find places where we can be collegial
with each other both, you know, across other members of
Parliament from all sites. So I think it's nice to
have that place on precinct. I just don't know why
(19:01):
we had to move it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Can I just ask you both, because this is quite
interesting to me. I saw this the other day when
I saw the think the document or the news skit
on the new bar. Foreign to me, but apparently parties
from all different walks of life will hang out, socialize,
spend time together at Parliament. Now that to me seems
really weird. But does it happen that way.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
I've never been to the bar to have it, but
I simply have had meals with people from other parties.
We play sport together. I play cricket with Green and
Labor and New Zealand First MPs and yeah, what you see,
you get an interview like this with There's a few
issues that we might get a bit fired up on.
And the problem is media only ever put on the
(19:43):
news is that they're really exciting controversial, But there's a
lot of I've spent all morning in a Select Committee
today working through how we could make a bill genuinely
better for everyone involved, and that's most of what happens
in this place.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Can I just ask you sorry, I'm not going to
let you get comment on that, because I just want
to know what you think. I mean, the co leaders
of the Maori Party, you know that whole controversy of
the Harker and the whole what the suspension should be.
It's all going to be debated this afternoon in a
one sentence only because I've got to be really really quick.
What do you think is going to happen? Is the
punishment too harsh? Will it come down? What's going on? Aisha?
Speaker 3 (20:20):
It is an unprecedented punishment that is far harsher than
any other that has been meted out by Parliament.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Tim, what do you think is going to happen?
Speaker 4 (20:30):
Uh? I'd like to think people are going to do
the responsible thing. Look at would have been good if
everyone if Pali Maori did what Penny heneractrom Lady did,
stood up and said sorry I got that wrong, turn
up to the committee. Faith consequence has moved on. It
seems that that's not what the course of action they've chosen.
The labor is suedescing. We basically just say, oh, it's
(20:50):
okay and rubbish. So I don't know.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Will it be reduced? Do you think it will be
reduced quickly?
Speaker 3 (20:56):
But yes, no, otherwise it's in the government's hands.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
You don't think it'll be reduced, You do.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Not, judging by Tim's and the Prime Minister statements.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Tim, do you think it's going to get reduced? No,
I do. There you go. I'll go out in the limb. Oh,
I'll be not the one sitting on a fence. But
Tim mudn't serre on the bench. You said. No, I
don't believe it'll be twenty one days or seven days.
There you go. I think it'll be all seven days,
the whole thing right across the board. That's what I think.
Do I get a choice? Do I get a vote?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
No?
Speaker 2 (21:24):
I don't, Tim Costly, and I should thank you very
very much for joining us have a great afternoon of
discussing it. I should go down there and get fired up.
Go and get fired up and reduce the penalty. There
you go.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news Talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talk Said B focusing in on the issues
that matter politics Thursday on Wellington Mornings, News Talk said B.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Joining us for politics Thursday. This week is Labour's Health
and Wellington's Issue Spokeswoman i shaveraal, good morning, Ice.
Speaker 3 (00:32):
Morning neck.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
How are you doing?
Speaker 3 (00:34):
Yeah, very well? Thanks good but a flu.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Going around the old Your boss was a bit crooked
today You okay?
Speaker 3 (00:38):
Yeah, I'm all right now. Thanks.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Did you have it too?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
I was a bit croaky about three weeks ago or something.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Oh three weeks ago. That's that's lifetime ago. And National's
O techy MP Chris Tim Crossley, Tim, I just want
to ask you before we start on the show. All
the good morning. By the way, all the film footage
over the weekends road drama at Levin had a lovely
(01:05):
poster in the background. Yeah, did you notice that?
Speaker 4 (01:11):
Well, I was actually out visiting police at the time,
so I didn't see the news footage, but someone showed
me afterwards. But yeah, I work right in the heardle
of it, and I'm very proud to represent the hord
DEFENDERA and Company communities. But what a bunch of idiots
say like, we just don't need this in our town,
We don't want this in our town. I was really
impressed with the police response. They did an amazing job.
(01:33):
I was proud to take the next night Mark Mitchell,
the Minister, around along with the police Commissioner to thank
the guys for the work they did. Even took them
some trucky buckets biscuits for Spoto because they did a
phenomenal job. And I tell you what, I saw some
of the footage this people throwing molt off cocktails at police,
shooting fireworks at trying to set the town on fire,
(01:55):
and they did an outstanding job.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
Sorry, Tim, but I think that the people of live
In want more. They want more than the police responding
when they arrived. They don't want to happen. They want
the police to be tougher, they want cars crushed, they
want something done and they are not getting it. And
I'm sorry, once again, I shouldn't even say I'm sorry
that I don't want to see the police minister arriving
(02:20):
the day after and smelling the tires on the roade
and I don't want, you know, the Minister you walking
around and giving chocolate biscuits. I want to see something done.
Speaker 4 (02:30):
Well, you are saying something done, because this shows the
difference that's happened in a year. A year ago, boy
racers completely took over the town. This time we've seen
actually in multiple events since then, police have been prepared.
They have taken the you know, the Minister was very
clear a year ago that he wants police to reassert
themselves in our communities. They have done that. They had
the Eagle helicopter, they had undefender squads out, they had
(02:52):
the guys in the riot gear. You can never stop
people that decide to turn up, but you can absolutely
be prepared to meet them head on. That's what police did.
We've introduced legislation which takes away the three strikes for
boy racers. One offense you get your car crushed. Spectators
in the firing line as well. Even if you just
drive a completely road legal car to go and watch
(03:13):
and take part in those activities, you're still on the
firing line. One offense, you get your car crushed. Actually,
we're doing all the things that you're talking about, and
the feedback I get from Levin and you just come
up and ever chat to them it's very positive. People
are very grateful for the way police responded, and I'm
not sure the way that you characterize it is fair.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
Okay, all right, Well we'll agree to disagree on that,
and I'm sure that I'll get people calling up or
texting on the show saying that I'm right. Let's get
into the big story of the last twenty four hours.
I want to get your, both of yours reaction to
the story yesterday of the Prime Minister's deputy Press Secretary
Michael Forbes has resigned after it was alleged alleged he
(03:53):
filmed woman in tight clothes and supermarkets and gyms and
had audio recordings of appointments with escorts.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
Hi.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
I mean we talked very very briefly as you walked.
How would women in the Beehive be feeling this morning?
You're one of them?
Speaker 3 (04:12):
Oh yeah. But look, before we get onto that, I
just want to say the women we know are impacted
by this are the women who went to staff, the
sex workers, and I just want to say that I
hope that they're okay, because they've been The allegations are
very very serious. So for me, this isn't about the beehive.
(04:36):
It's the women we know are already impacted, and they
are very serious questions to answer.
Speaker 2 (04:41):
But we also know and I totally agree with you,
and my thoughts go out with all the people that
were infected, but there'll be people that don't know whether
they were affected or not. They don't know whether they've
been filmed, and they've worked closely alongside them in a
place that should be wholier than wholier and safer than safe.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Women should feel safe wherever they work, even if they're
sex workers. The questions that you're raising our questions for
the Prime Minister to answer. He's the minister responsible for
ministerial services. Who who would have hired this man?
Speaker 2 (05:15):
Okay, Tim, is it right that the Prime Minister was
never informed?
Speaker 4 (05:20):
I know the Prime Minister was informed and this was
dealt with really swiftly. Look, I just back up. I
just comment so I certainly feel for the women involved,
and you know that those that are the victims in
this case is as I understand it, and I really
only understand what was in that stuff article, but also
from what I understand at the timeline, the Prime Minister
was very quick to act as soon as he found
(05:41):
out He was informed as soon as that employer and
Ministerial Services obviously let him know. And so I'm not
quite sure what you're getting at Mere.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Well, I'm getting at that there's a breakdown somewhere. I'm
getting it that that surely that the security services someone
should have known something. I'm getting at the fact this
is not an attack on the prime minister. This is
nothing what so ever to do with the Prime minister.
The Prime Minister should not have been put in a
position where he had someone that was probably hopping in
(06:11):
a car with him very close to him, that he
didn't know. I mean, this is not a prime ministers problem.
You know. I'm not having a crag. I'm having a
crack letting this guy get to a position like he's
got to without somebody grazing some kind of red flag.
Speaker 4 (06:28):
Yeah, I understand, so so not informed because he was
obviously informed as soon as the story.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
Yeah, but this is last year.
Speaker 4 (06:34):
There was obviously something happened last year, and he wasn't
informed that. That's a really interesting question. I don't know
the legalities around that in terms of that. If the
police dean there was no offending from what the article
I read said, But as there are rights for people.
Know that that. I think that's probably one of the
questions that will will come out of this, But it'll
(06:54):
take people with more intricate knowledge and experience to probably
answer that. And I can understand why people might want
to want to know that and might think that, But
there will always be elements that that difficults between duty
of care and privacy and things that get weighed up
by those that are experts in this area.
Speaker 2 (07:13):
I shall, I get all that legality stuff, and I
understand it, and I've cop criticism all morning by even
talking about it. But this is innocent people involved, and
the Prime Minister is an innocent person involved. You know,
someone somewhere in this very small city with two degrees
of separation knew something and nobody did anything about it.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
The processes for how you end up working in a
minister's office are governed by ministerial Services. The Prime Minister
is the minister responsible for ministerial services, so those processes
are his responsibility. He has questions to answer about this.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah, well, I see, I'm okay. Let's move on. Let's
talk about the polls. The One News poll on Tuesday
narrowly had the national government in front, but the aar
and zed Read Research poll yesterday had labor in front
or in government. If the polls were right, I said,
what did you make of the polls? I mean, how
(08:13):
do you get two poles with two different decisions over
twenty four hours?
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Yeah, well, I know you didn't invite me on for
a statistics lecture, but you know, I guess they all
have their different ways of sampling. But I think the
overwhelming finding from both those poles is that the government
had a pretty negative reaction to their budget, didn't get
any post budget left when all eyes in the country
are on the government during that budget period. And look
(08:40):
some pretty good findings for Chris Hapkins in terms of
his preferred prime minister being five points ahead of Luxen.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
So, Tim COSTI, why are the left and the right
so tight right now when you guys are doing everything
so perfectly right, cleaning up our country, sorting everything out,
and yet it's still very very close. I mean, explain
that to me.
Speaker 4 (09:03):
Well, look, things a tough fact here, right, It's been
a tough few years for New Zealand coming out of
that you know, huge inflation, massive spending, massive debt. It
means you can't just throw money around like the last
government did. You actually have to be responsible and make
some really difficult choices. But that's how we get this
country going for growth, providing the decent public services like
(09:26):
health and education and police that we need in our communities.
It's not a lot long excamble. It's not always feel good,
but doing the right thing is and always the thing
that feels the best. And I am really confident that
come the election next year, people are going to ask themselves,
do you know what is life a bit better or
not than it was at the election of twenty three
The answers resounding, You're going to be yes, and that's
(09:48):
what we'll see us returning for second ten.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
I want to ask you both the same question, which
I don't often do. Sure, I'm going to start with you,
how the hell are the Greens holding up so well
after everything? And they're crazy alternative budget? I mean you
know why.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
Look you go around Wellington, you'll find a lot of
Green supporters and they admire the Greens for their values
based and on things. Now I'm in a different party
because probably because they share many of those values, but
I disagree on the way to on the way to
achieve them in many cases. So that's probably what people
(10:26):
are reacting to. Clear statements about values, not much about
practicality or delivery.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Why why are the Greens holding up so well actually
improving Both poles had them improving.
Speaker 4 (10:37):
Yeah, look, I just don't understand why people. I get
it twenty years ago when it was an environmental party
that people wanted to ensure there was a strong environmental
focus in parliament. I think you see that across almost
every party now, and they've just become this radical social
issues party. They've had all sorts of issues around their MPs,
(10:58):
around their policies. Now they want to take on what
is eighty eight billion dollars of new taxes foot for
billion in debt. Labor can't decide if they agree with
it or not. Sipkins won't rule anything out. You imagined
the two of them and government and as the party
Mariti on top, it'll be an absolute nightmare. This country
will burn to the ground. But for some reason, there
are just some entrenched people that don't really care. They're
(11:20):
just gonna go on tick a green box no matter what,
and Jesus not my cup of tea.
Speaker 2 (11:25):
Politics on a Thursday, Labour's Health and Wellington's Issue spokeswoman
Aishaveril and Nationals O TACKI MP Tim Costly. Now the
government is cracking down on disruptive social housing tenants is
clearly working. They have evicted sixty two families in the
last ten months or groups or people in the last
(11:46):
ten months. But lots of kids have been kicked out
of their homes too, fifty two children living in these
homes where the tendancies has been terminated by congeror social
housing is the last resort team? Where do these kids
go to once you've kicked them out?
Speaker 4 (12:03):
Well that remember that they don't lose the support that
those families that are getting from MSD, whether they look
still getting their accommodation supplement. There are still a number
of other housing providers out there with that's through another
social housing provider like a SASH, or whether that's through
a private tendancy. But you've got to remember what got
them to this point, right, this is the third strike
(12:25):
and we issued over the last year, I think fourteen
hundred and sixty three notices for this poor behavior. Only
sixty three got to the point of tenants being evicted,
and only fourteen of those involved children.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Well, I mean that's you're not suggesting as the kids.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
You're not suggesting.
Speaker 5 (12:42):
As they labor for years, was not wanting to take tenants.
And you've got to remember that next door to these
houses because I hear from these families are other families
with children, and living across the road are other families
with children and waiting to get into social housing, other
families with children. And we cannot let this kind of unruly,
(13:02):
unsafe and dangerous at times behavior just go unpunished. At
have to say, you have a responsibility when you get
one of these houses, and you have to you have
a responsibility for those that live around you. And it's
not okay to let that kind of behavior go unchecked
because it does impact that the families and the children
living next door, living over the back fence, and those
that are missing out on a house because we were
(13:24):
not willing to move these disruptive tenants out.
Speaker 4 (13:27):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (13:28):
I get the point that bad behavior by tenants have
impacts on others, But Tim your peered have completely forgotten
that these are kids. The kids won't necessarily and highly
unlikely to be behind that behavior. That's so challenging to
the other other tenants, and to me, there's just smacks
of the problem your government has seeing kids. You know,
(13:50):
Prime Minister wasn't able to answer questions about kids being
homeless in the streets of Auckland in parliament yesterday. What
about your budget? Child poverty statistics absolutely awful cuts to
audong A tamariki meaning some of the kids having the
hardest time I am aren't being locked after and you're
restarting the failed experiment with boot camps. You know, kids
(14:11):
deserve a proper start when you're moving them on from tenancies.
The state is responsible for them. I just think it's
a disgrace.
Speaker 4 (14:20):
Oh, I think so. It's what I should say here.
That is, if you've got a kid, you can just
get away with any kind of behavior you're want.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
That was exactly not what I said.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
There are children living next door. I had a dad
come to me who had three kids living next door
to one of these disruptive tenants. This was just before
the last election. I wasn't even an MP at the time,
I was just running for Parliament and said we can't
give them KAO aren't willing to act. It's impacting his children,
his children, He felt were in an unsafe situation, there
were gang members involved, and these are the kind of
(14:51):
situations that, yes, it is it is tragic that children
are growing up in a home like that with that
kind of behavior is taking place. But it is equally
if not more tragic, if that means that we have
to subject all the children and all the families that
live around them to it. And there's another great family
that we've moved out of Immencity accommodation that could be
moving into social housing, but we're blocking that house to
(15:12):
them because we have to protect the kids in these
disruptive houses because of all behavior.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Can I just ask you if you think or feel
that it's ethical to do this.
Speaker 3 (15:24):
I believe that No. I think there's a massive problem
for the kids of these families that the government needs
to take responsibility for. He don't like the fact that
Tim's sitting there saying, oh, well, we'll just deal with
the great families. You know, those kids deserve a decent shot.
So what if their parents aren't people that we know
find agreeable or not. Those kids need to be looked after.
Speaker 2 (15:48):
Yeah. I can't help but agree that when it becomes
kids become involved, it's a bit scary. I want to
ask you both about something that I saw this week
and I kind of thought to myself, really, it's one
of those really moments. This week the brand new bar
at Para and opened after the old one was turned
into an office. A new one is called pint of point,
(16:11):
pint of order, pint of order. I mean the logo
was Okay, it was and I went saw it. I
didn't go through it. I saw it on TV. I
should do taxpayers really be needing to foot the ball
for a parliament to have its own bar? And by
the way, can I just say it looks very boring?
Speaker 3 (16:28):
Haven't been in yet? Nick? Look, I think the big
issue here is why did we need a new bar?
What was wrong with the old one? And that new
bar was built because ministers in this large government of
three three party coalition wanted to move into the third
four of the beehive where the old bar was. It
costs seven million dollars for those renovations to be made
(16:52):
and that's why we have to have why the bar
was bar was moved, So in my view it misses
the point. The big point is here minister's egos who
couldn't handle having an office that was outside the beehive
had to be pandered to and that cost us seven
seven million.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Dollars seven million dollars to gosh, I'm going to go
back to your old nickname soon.
Speaker 4 (17:16):
Uh you go, You go what you like. And look,
I'm mean to the bar. I'm to be feared. It's
not really my thing. But let's just be a little
bit real about this. This is nothing to do with
minister's egos. Ministers don't make these decisions. It's the Speaker
of Parliamentary Service. I think when you say what's what
(17:36):
should be in a beehive? Should it be a minister's
office or a bar? I think most people would go, well,
it probably should be a minister's office. But none of
the ministers that have moved in here he had anything
to do with it. Let's not start making this out
to be something that it's not. They relocated the bar
from one place to another so that it was to
it to an unused corner of the building. I understand
(17:58):
that's what happened. I'm not involved the government, it's not involved.
The opposition's not involved. There's a bar in Parliament like
there's always been. You know, do you drink.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Do you go to the bar? Do you have a drink?
Do either of you do know?
Speaker 4 (18:10):
I never went. I never went to the old one.
I've been to the restaurant here, Bellamies once. I normally
just go to the if I even have time for dinner.
Last night, I ate a bowl of the old microwave
Veg's two minutes in the microwave. That was my dinner
last night. But otherwise I just go to the cheap
cafe that's on site here. In fact, I had unch
with I should there the other week, I think, And
(18:30):
that's where most of us just go because time is
really tight here and if you can get food, you
do it really quickly and you go to the next meeting.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
You said you didn't go to the bar. Would you
go to the bat?
Speaker 3 (18:39):
I went to the old bar, and I will go
to the new bar. At some point. We have, you know,
we have to find places where we can be collegial
with each other both, you know, across other members of
Parliament from all sites. So I think it's nice to
have that place on precinct. I just don't know why
(19:01):
we had to move it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Can I just ask you both, because this is quite
interesting to me. I saw this the other day when
I saw the think the document or the news skit
on the new bar. Foreign to me, but apparently parties
from all different walks of life will hang out, socialize,
spend time together at Parliament. Now that to me seems
really weird. But does it happen that way.
Speaker 4 (19:23):
I've never been to the bar to have it, but
I simply have had meals with people from other parties.
We play sport together. I play cricket with Green and
Labor and New Zealand First MPs and yeah, what you see,
you get an interview like this with There's a few
issues that we might get a bit fired up on.
And the problem is media only ever put on the
(19:43):
news is that they're really exciting controversial, But there's a
lot of I've spent all morning in a Select Committee
today working through how we could make a bill genuinely
better for everyone involved, and that's most of what happens
in this place.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
Can I just ask you sorry, I'm not going to
let you get comment on that, because I just want
to know what you think. I mean, the co leaders
of the Maori Party, you know that whole controversy of
the Harker and the whole what the suspension should be.
It's all going to be debated this afternoon in a
one sentence only because I've got to be really really quick.
What do you think is going to happen? Is the
punishment too harsh? Will it come down? What's going on? Aisha?
Speaker 3 (20:20):
It is an unprecedented punishment that is far harsher than
any other that has been meted out by Parliament.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Tim, what do you think is going to happen?
Speaker 4 (20:30):
Uh? I'd like to think people are going to do
the responsible thing. Look at would have been good if
everyone if Pali Maori did what Penny heneractrom Lady did,
stood up and said sorry I got that wrong, turn
up to the committee. Faith consequence has moved on. It
seems that that's not what the course of action they've chosen.
The labor is suedescing. We basically just say, oh, it's
(20:50):
okay and rubbish. So I don't know.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Will it be reduced? Do you think it will be
reduced quickly?
Speaker 3 (20:56):
But yes, no, otherwise it's in the government's hands.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
You don't think it'll be reduced, You do.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Not, judging by Tim's and the Prime Minister statements.
Speaker 2 (21:05):
Tim, do you think it's going to get reduced? No,
I do. There you go. I'll go out in the limb. Oh,
I'll be not the one sitting on a fence. But
Tim mudn't serre on the bench. You said. No, I
don't believe it'll be twenty one days or seven days.
There you go. I think it'll be all seven days,
the whole thing right across the board. That's what I think.
Do I get a choice? Do I get a vote?
Speaker 1 (21:24):
No?
Speaker 2 (21:24):
I don't, Tim Costly, and I should thank you very
very much for joining us have a great afternoon of
discussing it. I should go down there and get fired up.
Go and get fired up and reduce the penalty. There
you go.
Speaker 1 (21:36):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news Talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.