MORENA, GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M GREG BOYED. NEXT MONTH THE TRANS-TASMAN FOOD REGULATOR FOOD STANDARDS AUSTRALIA NZ WILL MAKE A DECISION ON WHETHER TO BACK A PROPOSAL TO REQUIRE MANDATORY LABELLING OF PALM OIL. CROP LINKED TO DEFORESTATION AND THE DESTRUCTION OF ANIMAL HABITATS. WILL WE FIND OUT HOW OUR GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO VOTE? FOR A LABELLING PROCESS WHICH IS ONLY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT VEGETABLE OILS WILL BE LABELLED ON THE PACKET, IT'S AN EXTREMELY SECRET PROCESS. THEN AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH FORMER PRIME MINISTER MIKE MOORE, STRUCK DOWN BY A STROKE A YEAR AGO. JESSICA MUTCH TALKS TO HIM ABOUT THE US ELECTION AND THE LABOUR'S CURRENT POSITION ON THE TPP. I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT I DISAGREE WITH MY LEADER, BUT THAT'S NOT THE POSITION. AND KATIE BRADFORD IS BACK FROM INDIA WITH AN INTERVIEW WITH AN IMMIGRATION AGENT WHO SAYS THE GOVERNMENT'S IMMIGRATION CHANGES HAVE BEEN GETTING BAD PRESS THERE. PLUS, HE TALKS ABOUT THE STUDENTS FACING DEPORTATION OVER FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS AND CALLS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO TAKE ACTION. THERE IS ONE FACT BEHIND THIS ` THAT THE AGENTS WHO PUT THEM IN THIS WRONG SPOT HAVE GONE SCOT FREE. NOTHING HAS HAPPENED TO THOSE AGENTS. DUE TO THE LIVE NATURE OF Q+A, WE APOLOGISE FOR THE LACK OF CAPTIONS FOR SOME ITEMS. AND WE'LL HAVE ANALYSIS FROM OUR PANEL ` POLITICAL SCIENTIST DR MARIA BARGH, HEAD OF TE KAWA A MAUI ` THE SCHOOL OF MAORI STUDIES AT VICTORIA UNIVERSITY; DR DEBORAH RUSSELL, A FORMER LABOUR CANDIDATE AND A SENIOR LECTURER AT MASSEY UNIVERSITY'S SCHOOL OF ACCOUNTANCY; AND CHARLES FINNY, A GOVERNMENT RELATIONS CONSULTANT AND FORMER DIPLOMAT. BEFORE WE BEGIN THIS MORNING, A QUICK UPDATE ON THE STORY ROCKING THE US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WITH DEMOCRATS NOW ACCUSING THE HEAD OF THE FBI OF A POLITICALLY MOTIVATED ATTACK ON THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN. YESTERDAY, FBI HEAD JAMES COMEY SAID AN INVESTIGATION INTO MRS CLINTON'S EMAILS IS BEING REOPENED BUT GAVE LITTLE DETAIL ABOUT WHY, CAUSING FURY AMONGST DEMOCRATS. THE MOVE HAS HANDED A REPRIEVE TO HER OPPONENT DONALD TRUMP, WHOSE ODDS OF WINNING THE ELECTION ROSE 30% ON THE NEWS. THE INVESTIGATION IS THE BIGGEST POLITICAL SCANDAL SINCE WATERGATE, AND IT'S EVERYBODY'S HOPE THAT JUSTICE, AT LAST, CAN BE DELIVERED. MRS CLINTON'S CHANCES OF WINNING THE ELECTION HAVE DROPPED 10%. AND FROM NEXT WEEK ON Q+A, WE'LL BE BRINGING YOU FULL COVERAGE OF THE US PRESIDENTIAL RACE IN ITS CLOSING DAYS AND IN THE LEAD UP TO VOTING ON NOVEMBER THE 8TH. IN A MONTH'S TIME, NINE AUSTRALIAN POLITICIANS AND ONE OF OURS ` FOOD SAFETY MINISTER JO GOODHEW ` WILL BE VOTING ON WHETHER PRODUCT LABELS SHOULD DISCLOSE WHETHER THEY CONTAIN PALM OIL. THE VOTING PROCESS IS STRANGELY SECRETIVE, SOMETHING THAT HAS FRUSTRATED THE CAMPAIGNERS PUSHING FOR UP-FRONT LABELLING. ARE THEY A MORAL MINORITY WITH IMPRACTICAL DEMANDS OR IS SPECIFIC LABELLING SOMETHING WE ALL SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT? HERE'S REPORTER WHENA OWEN. I'M OFF TO WELLINGTON ZOO TO LEARN ABOUT THE POLITICS OF PALM OIL. I'M HERE TO MEET KAREN. OFF TO THE ENCLOSURE NEXT TO THE SUN BEARS. BUT THIS MORNING I'VE ALREADY LEARNT THAT AS A CONSUMER, I'M COMPLICIT IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL CATASTROPHE DRIVEN BY THE PALM OIL INDUSTRY. THE PALM OIL IN MY SHAMPOO THIS MORNING WAS THE LATHERING AGENT. IT WAS IN MY SOAP, GAVE THE CRUNCH TO MY CEREAL AND IN MY TOOTHPASTE. IT WAS IN MY LIPSTICK AND MY MASCARA. BISCUIT, WHENA? AND IN THAT BISCUIT. YES, PALM OIL IS IN 50% OF SUPERMARKET PRODUCTS, BUT UNLIKE EUROPE, CANADA AND THE US, THERE'S NOTHING ON THE LABEL CONFIRMING THE OIL IS PALM AND WHETHER IT'S BEEN ETHICALLY PRODUCED. AH, THE SUMATRAN TIGER. AND THAT TIGER IS THE ZOO'S AMBASSADOR FOR THE UNMASK PALM OIL CAMPAIGN CALLING FOR CLEARER LABELLING. SUMATRAN TIGERS ` THE SMALLEST TIGER IN THE WORLD, ONLY 300-400 LEFT IN THE WILD. THEY ARE IMMINENTLY AFFECTED BY PALM OIL CLEARING. INDONESIA'S SUMATRA WAS A TREASURY OF ENDEMIC FLORA AND FAUNA, BUT 11 MILLION HECTARES OF ITS ANCIENT JUNGLES HAS BEN CLEARED TO GROW PALM OIL. THE EFFECTS OF THE BURN-OFFS ARE MULTIPLE. DISPLACING COMMUNITIES, DRIVING SPECIES TO THE BRINK OF EXTINCTION, CHOKING PARTS OF ASIA AND PUTTING INDONESIA AT THE TOP OF THE CARBON EMISSIONS TABLE. WOMAN: WE'RE RUNNING A CAMPAIGN AT THE ZOO. A LOT OF THE ZOOS AROUND NZ ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE SAME THING. WE WANT MANDATORY OF PALM OIL ON THE PRODUCTS THAT WE USE. IN AN UNPRECEDENTED MOVE, ZOOS ACROSS AUSTRALASIA ARE URGING THE FOOD REGULATION STANDING COMMITTEE TO VOTE FOR MANDATORY LABELLING OF VEGETABLE OILS. AND THE WORST THING ABOUT PALM OIL IS IT'S UNSUSTAINABLE. SO WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO IS INSTEAD OF REUSING THE LAND WHEN THEY'VE HARVESTED THE OIL, THEY GO ON TO ANOTHER PART OF THE RAINFOREST AND START CUTTING THAT DOWN AS WELL INSTEAD OF REUSING THE LAND. PALM OIL IS COMMONLY LABELLED AS JUST VEGETABLE OIL AND MASQUERADES AS MANY OTHER THINGS ` SODIUM LAURYL SULFATE IN SHAMPOOS AND DETERGENTS. THE STANDING COMMITTEE TAKING THE VOTE IS MADE UP OF NINE AUSTRALIAN MINISTERS AND OUR FOOD SAFETY MINISTER JO GOODHEW. AND LEADING THE UNMASK PALM OIL CAMPAIGN IS KIWI BEN DOWDLE. JO HAS PROBABLY BEEN THE MOST NEGATIVE MINISTER AMONGST THE 10. SHE'S SUPPORTED ARGUMENTS WHICH, QUITE FRANKLY, JUST DON'T MAKE SENSE. SHE'S SUPPORTED THE BELIEF THAT LABELLING SHOULD ONLY BE DONE FOR HEALTH REASONS. I HAVEN'T HEARD WHICH WAY THE MINISTER'S GOING TO VOTE. BUT WE WILL NEVER KNOW, WILL WE, BECAUSE IT'S ALL DONE IN SECRET. IT'S ALL DONE IN SECRET, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THE MINISTER TO SAY BEFORE SHE GOES TO THE MEETING WHICH WAY SHE'S GOING TO VOTE. THE MINISTER WOULDN'T TELL Q+A WHICH WAY SHE WOULD BE VOTING; SHE WAS WAITING FOR A TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE ISSUE. BUT IN A STATEMENT, SHE SAID... THE ENTIRE MEETING IS DONE BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. WE DON'T GET TO HEAR WHO VOTED WHICH WAY. SO FOR A LABELLING PROCESS WHICH IS ONLY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT VEGETABLE OILS WILL BE LABELLED ON A PACKET, IT'S AN EXTREMELY SECRET PROCESS. AND FURTHER, HER OFFICE POINTED OUT THAT THE FOOD INDUSTRY COULD VOLUNTARILY HAVE CLEARER LABELLING, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE PALM OIL FREE OR CERTIFIED SUSTAINABLE. TIP TOP ALREADY DOES THAT. BUT CERTIFICATION TRADEMARKS ARE NOT ALWAYS RELIABLE. GREENPALM, FOR INSTANCE, MAY MEAN THE PRODUCER, LIKE CARBON TRADING, HAS JUST BOUGHT GOOD OIL CERTIFICATES. THE MINISTER'S MEMO ALSO SUGGESTED THAT CONSUMERS DO THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION OF LABELS WITH THIS NEW APP ` A PALM OIL BARCODE READER. UNKNOWN STATUS. BUT THE PROBLEM WE FOUND WITH THE APP IS THAT MANY PRODUCTS ARE NOT IN ITS SYSTEM. HERE ARE A FEW WHICH ARE. ARNOTTS BISCUITS. SO, LEMON CRISP BISCUITS ARE ALMOST 100% CERTIFIED SUSTAINABLE PALM OIL. WELL DONE, AUSSIE ARNOTTS. SO LET'S TRY A NZ CLASSIC ` GINGERNUTS. FAIL! GINERNUTS DIDN'T PASS THE TEST. # THERE'S NO GINGERNUTS TASTE QUITE THE SAME. # IT'S REALLY JUST A MATTER OF SUPPORTING THE PUBLIC ON THIS, BECAUSE THE PUBLIC DO SUPPORT IT. 92% OF NZERS AND 84% OF AUSTRALIANS ARE SUPPORTING THIS CHANGE, SO THE MINISTER WOULD BE VERY MUCH GOING AGAINST THE PUBLIC TO GO AGAINST THIS. WHATEVER THE OUTCOME OF THE VOTE, THE PALM OIL ISSUE ISN'T GOING AWAY. WHILE INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE HAS FORCED SOME CONTROLS OVER DEFORESTATION IN ASIA, PRODUCERS HAVE BOUGHT AND LEASED VAST AREAS OF LIBERIA. WEST AFRICA IS THE NEW PALM OIL FRONTIER. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL ` POLITICAL SCIENTIST, DR MARIA BARGH, HEAD OF TE KAWA A MAUI, THE SCHOOL OF MAORI STUDIES AT VICTORIA UNIVERSITY DR DEBORAH RUSSELL, A FORMER LABOUR CANDIDATE, AND A SENIOR LECTURER AT MASSEY UNIVERSITY'S SCHOOL OF ACCOUNTANCY. AND CHARLES FINNY, A GOVERNMENT RELATIONS CONSULTANT AND FORMER DIPLOMAT. DEBORAH, WHY SO SECRETIVE? 92%, as is what New Zealanders want. I think it is fair enough for her to wait for her technical report. We all know a lot of politics is better done behind closed doors when you are doing explicit bargaining. I would like to know which way she has voted at the end of the meeting. Once a decision has been made, couldn't hurt to know. It is clear what we want, isn't it? We want to be labelled. There is public demand and the zoos are for it. It seems to me there are two issues going on. One of the round the consumer rights, and clearly the self-regulation has not worked in the industry, hence the pressure. There are questions about what our rights as citizens to participate aand these kinds of decisions. Why the secrecy? Is it a fear of backlash from the public in terms of which way she votes? Is it an assumption that public are not sufficiently intelligent to be able to cope with these discussions? This is a question about broader international trade agreements being negotiated. Is that a philosophical position on the part of the government where they see their role is primarily about supporting the functioning of markets and private property rights. In that case, they are projecting particular companies. Does the need to bemore transparency and those or do you agree that they are playing at right? As discussion has gone on, I am wondering why there is any need for huge secrecy. I cannot say strong reasons for stretch secrecy. I would hope that there is full transparency over the advice given to the Minister in the position we take at the Australian Council meeting. If there were no negatives to it, such as deforestation and the possible nutritional value or not, it would not be so cloak and dagger. I cannot understand why they are being so cautious. I accept, but that ministers do need to debate without fear. They need to be able to try out all the arguments. It seems that to me the solution is obvious. Put a label on their. It is low-cost. And companies are already engaged in labelling, it is only a few more words to add. I do not understand why we will not include more information to consumers. Europe and Canada and the US, have even done it, we look slow. I wonder if there are other aspects that are not apparent at the moment. I'm thinking about palm kernel. Recently we have seen a ship turnaround and sent back. Maybe there are other industries worried about it. The government conceded by this particular kinds of behaviours. The dairy industry is an area that the government is keen to encourage. Maybe that is an aspect as well. We only have one voice on the panel and could be outvoted. That is the way it goes with food things. This is a labelling issue which would seem to extend beyond food ` shampoo, what have you. In terms of the food safety angle, we are part of a treaty of Australia and have one 10th of the voting power. That may be constraining us, but in terms of other products we are not similarly constrained. Do we need to review this? This would seem absurd that we're going to have to` as they say, no, no labelling sshould be made mandatory, it is off the tablebut there are still other hurdles to jump. Do we have to review this? Part of this is because we have some joint policy around food standards. That is just straightforward. So many of our products are in the shops and vice versa. It is silly to have two different labelling regimes. The worry is only one voice, but that goes back to the quality of the argument that the Minister can make. It is not a matter of brute voting but reasoned argument. We are relying on her to make those reasoned arguments. Which made you think it will go, Maria? Technical got a table? I have no idea. We need more information. You are not getting it, I you? Why are we able to access greater levels of information? We have seen in the last elections are voter turnout decline. If people want to be engaged, they need information. The other point I found alarming, which is in the story it can be labelled as one of 200 other things. That has to raise suspicions as to what is going on, doesn't it? You just call a palm oil. This is not an issue. I am deeply knowledgeable about. On the syrface, what you have suggested seems entirely sensible. I'm not sure why this is becoming a contentious issue. It is becoming. It would be very useful for everyone to see the advice that is given to the Minister after this meeting Australia. We will leave it there. NEXT, WE TALK TO AN IMMIGRATION AGENT IN INDIA WHO SAYS OUR RECENT IMMIGRATION CHANGES HAVE HAD SOME BAD PRESS THERE, AND HE'S PREDICTING A DOWNTURN IN STUDENTS AND SKILLED MIGRANTS. AN IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT IN INDIA SAYS OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD ASK THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT TO PRESS CHARGES AGAINST THE AGENTS WHO SENT STUDENTS TO NZ WITH FRAUDULENT APPLICATIONS. ABOUT 150 INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS ARE FACING DEPORTATION AFTER THE FRAUD WAS DISCOVERED. MUNISH SEKHRI, PART OF AN ORGANISATION THAT REPRESENTS LICENCED AGENTS IN INDIA, ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE RECENT CHANGES TO OUR IMMIGRATION POLICY. HE TOLD KATIE BRADFORD THAT IT WOULD HAVE A BIG IMPACT ON THE NUMBER OF INDIANS WANTING TO MOVE HERE TO STUDY AND LIVE. THE MAJOR MOTIVATION FOR INDIAN STUDENTS TO STUDY IN NZ AS MIGRANTS IS TO GO AND TRY AND SETTLE IN NZ THROUGH STUDY OR THROUGH WORK ROUTES TO IMPROVE THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE, RIGHT? NOW, FOR INDIANS THE FIRST PREFERENCE IS ALWAYS GOING TO US OR CANADA OR TO AUSTRALIA, SO WE HAVE TO AGREE THAT NZ IS THE THIRD OR THE FOURTH CHOICE FOR STUDENTS OR FOR MIGRANTS RIGHT NOW. IT'S A GOOD THING THAT THE CHANGES ARE HAPPENING, BUT THE PROBLEM IS THERE HAS BEEN A LOBBY WHICH IS WORKING AGAINST THE REQUIREMENTS OR THE EXPECTATIONS OR THE GOALS OF EDUCATION NZ AND GOVERNMENT OF NZ AS A WHOLE. AND THAT LOBBY IS OF THOSE UNLICENSED AND UNREGULATED AGENTS IN INDIA WHO USED TO SAY UP TO TWO YEARS AGO THAT NZ IS ONE OF THE EASIEST COUNTRIES TO SETTLE IN. YOU DON'T NEED ENGLISH. YOU DON'T NEED OLD FUNDS. ALL YOU NEED IS TO PACK YOUR BAGS AND TAKE A FLIGHT TO NZ. AND THAT WAS BEFORE THE RULE 18 WAS INTRODUCED BY NZQA, WHERE ENGLISH LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS BECAME MANDATORY. NOW THE SAME AGENTS ARE INTERPRETING THIS POLICY IN A VERY BAD LIGHT, AND THEY'RE SAYING, 'PLEASE DO NOT GO TO NZ NY MORE. 'NZ HAS SHUT DOWN ITS DOORS.' NOW NOBODY IS COUNTERING THIS RHETORIC IN INDIA OR IN NZ. AND HOW MANY REGISTERED AGENTS VERSUS UNLICENSED ARE THERE? AS PER THE IMMIGRATION NZ INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THEIR WEBSITE AND VARIOUS NEWSLETTERS THAT WE RECEIVE FROM INZ MUMBAI, THERE ARE MORE THAN 2000 AGENTS OPERATING IN THE INDIAN MARKET, AND THERE ARE ONLY ABOUT 30 OR 33 LICENSED IMMIGRATION ADVISORS THROUGHOUT INDIA. SO OUR ORGANISATION, LIANZ, HAD BEEN LOBBYING, HAD BEEN MAKING REPRESENTATIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE MANDATORY LICENSING HAPPENING FOR OFFSHORE ADVISORS AS WELL. WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO MONOPOLISE THE BUSINESS. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS THAT MORE AND MORE PEOPLE SHOULD BE BROUGHT INTO THE LICENSING FOLD SO THAT SOME ACCOUNTABILITY CAN BE BROUGHT TO THIS INDUSTRY. NOW, I'M SURE ALL OF US HAVE HEARD QUITE A LOT ABOUT THE STUDENTS BEING DEPORTED FROM NZ AND THEY'RE PROTESTING IN FRONT OF THE MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT'S OFFICES AND THEY'RE DOING WHATEVER BEST THEY CAN TO STAY BACK INTO THE COUNTRY. NOW, MANY OF THE STUDENTS HAVE ALSO SAID THAT THEY ARE BEING VICTIMISED, WHICH MIGHT NOT BE THE CASE IF YOU LOOK INTO THE CASE DETAILS, BUT THERE IS ONE FACT BEHIND THIS ` THAT THE AGENTS THAT PUT THEM IN THIS WRONG SPOT HAVE GONE SCOT-FREE. NOTHING HAS HAPPENED TO THOSE AGENTS. SO WITH THE PRIME MINISTER'S VISIT TO INDIA, I HOPE THERE COULD BE A MUTUAL DIPLOMATIC SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM, WHERE IF SOMEBODY, SOME AGENT IN INDIA'S FOUND TO BE DOING SOMETHING WRONG OR BEEN EXPLOITING OR DOING SOME FRAUD IN THIS INDUSTRY, I THINK, THROUGH DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS, A COMPLAINT WOULD BE LODGED WITH THE INDIAN AUTHORITIES SO THAT A MESSAGE COULD BE SENT OUT TO THE MARKET. I HOPE THAT THE PRIME MINISTER OF BOTH THE COUNTRIES AND THE OTHER DIPLOMATS COULD REACH SOMETHING LIKE THIS. IN THE PAST WE HAVE SEEN THAT THERE HAS BEEN ACTION TAKEN AGAINST AGENTS ON THE COMPLAINTS FROM AUSTRALIAN AND BRITISH HIGH COMMISSIONS. HOW MUCH OF THE FRAUD WE'VE SEEN IS THE STUDENTS' FAULT AND HOW MUCH IS THE LICENSED OPERATORS? DO YOU KNOW THE NUMBER? THERE MUST BE SOME STUDENTS, FOR INSTANCE, WHO KNOW THEY DON'T HAVE THE MONEY, WHO KNOW THEY DON'T HAVE THE ENGLISH REQUIREMENTS? THAT'S RIGHT. SEE, I WOULD SAY THAT IT GOES BOTH WAYS. YES, THERE WOULD BE A FEW CASES WHERE THE STUDENTS WERE REALLY INNOCENT AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THEIR APPLICATION. WE SEE THAT ON A DAILY BASIS. BUT WE SEE EVEN MORE IS WHERE A STUDENT COMES WITH HIS PARENTS AND WANTS OR EXPECTS THE AGENT TO PROVIDE EVERYTHING, RIGHT FROM A GAP-FILLING EDUCATION OR WORK-EXPERIENCE DOCUMENT, TO PROVIDE FUNDING. SO IT IS WRONG TO SUGGEST THAT THE STUDENTS ARE PURELY INNOCENT. THE STUDENTS ENTICE THE AGENTS THAT, 'WE WOULD PAY YOU ANY MONEY. 'HELP US.' DO YOU THINK THE CHANGES WE'VE SEEN AND THE CHANGES THAT MAY COME ` WHAT EFFECT DO YOU THINK THAT WILL HAVE ON NUMBERS COMING TO NZ? WHAT WE SEE IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT IDEALLY WANTS TO ATTRACT GOOD TALENT, GOOD EDUCATION, GOOD STUDENTS WITH GOOD ENGLISH. THAT'S FINE. BUT BEFORE IT GETS BETTER, IT'S GOING TO GET MUCH MORE WORSE IN SHORT-TERM TO MEDIUM-TERM, AND WITH THAT I MEAN ABOUT THREE TO SIX MONTHS ARE GOING TO BE VERY INTERESTING. WE'LL SEE A HUGE DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF STUDENT VISA APPLICATIONS BECAUSE PEOPLE SEE IT IN TOTALITY, THAT, 'IF I'M NOT GOING TO GET A PATHWAY TO RESIDENCY, 'I'M SORRY, I'M NOT GOING TO STUDY THERE.' BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME, THERE ARE SO MANY STUDENTS WHO'D LIKE TO STUDY IN NZ, BUT THE IMMIGRATION NZ FUND REQUIREMENTS DO NOT ALLOW THEM. THE CHANGES ARE GOOD, BUT ITS INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN VERY VERY NEGATIVE IN INDIA. AND I THINK THE NZ GOVERNMENT SHOULD INFUSE SOME MONEY AND ENERGY TO HIRE A PR AGENCY IN INDIA AND TRY TO DO SOME KIND OF A DAMAGE CONTROL. FORMER PRIME MINISTER, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE WTO, MIKE MOORE. LOTS TO TALK ABOUT WITH THE PANEL AFTER THE BREAK. NOW THE SAME AGENTS ARE INTERPRETING THIS POLICY IN A VERY BAD LIGHT, AND THEY ARE SAYING, 'PLEASE DO NOT GO TO NZ ANY MORE. 'NZ HAS SHUT DOWN ITS DOORS.' NOW, NOBODY IS COUNTERING THIS RHETORIC IN INDIA OR IN NZ. LET'S GO TO OUR PANEL NOW. Charles, have we gone too far on this?? Have we shot ourselves in the foot? I chair education New Zealand. I am donkey deep in this issue. We need to do something because there's been an explosion in student numbers. A lot of people have, with fraudulent documents. There is a real quality issue. We have already seen quite a reduction this year. That will continue into next year. We will be back on the 2013 levels of students by the end of this year There was quite clear trends apparent at the quality end ` universities are still see a good flow of Indian students apply an approved. The problem is with the lower in training establishments. There is a correction underway. Does this ring true with you, what he said? Education means residency. That's one of the primary drivers, is residency.. It's very different from China. Indian students choosing to have the primary motivation around coming to New Zealand to work. Deborah, we're second, third choice for these people. Does that mean that they are the second or third choice people we want? These are people we are not offering permanent migration to. The upcoming the onset of migrations permanently. Chinese students come here because they want to learn English. Indian students come here are being exploited at every stage of the chain. All they are as a source of money. To those private training establishments have financial links to the agent in India? Something has to be done ` only 1% of these guys are the real deal. Something does have to be done, but what exactly? What effect does it have on our tertiary sector? We need to think we are turning the corner to the election. The national government has put a freeze on the parent category in terms of residency. They have not touched the students issue. This is where people will capitalise. Low skill jobs are going to people who are meant to be just a year. Those jobs could go to New Zealanders. As the turned the corner to the election, the pressure will come on. The Maori party Labour Party might come on to this. As we have discussed before, this could start zinging into xenophobia. We need to have a very careful discussion around immigration. One of the things that the New Zealand government could usefully do in the space right now is having a very careful look at the quality of those Establishment at the lower end. Are they offering quality courses? Those PTE's must demonstrate that no more than 40% of the applications are fraudulent. 40%? Is that good enough? NZQA needs to be going in there in having a look at the qualifications they are offering. When talking but the Indian side of things, I think the scale is daunting. What Deborah is calling for is happening. Last year we introduced rule 18 about the English. IT'S having an impact already. This is a very complex issue. We have to look at the in the sophisticated way. We don't want to cause too much negativity to the Indian markets. We still want students to come to New Zealand. But we don't want people coming in here with forged documents and qualifications who can't speak English and who are basically here for a low-level job it's a complex issue. Who is most to blame and needs to be taken to task for this? We have some policy issues which have been addressed. What education New Zealand is trying to do is make accredited agent policy. We try to educate agents are what you should and should not be doing. We look at which agents are performing badly, and if you have any doubts, Talk immigration New Zealand. All the students coming here is about one billion dollars? We are up to 3.5 billion. Surely some of the word is that you are not going to get residencies so don't do the trip. It is drying out. We have seen that in the applications and the number approved if you are coming here to study for a high level qualification from a good-quality institution, and all the institutions should big high quality ` you have a good chance of getting a job in New Zealand. The Indian students coming here to study high-level qualifications are very welcome. These people who are coming in on these fraudulent applications ` they are taking desperate measures. They are spending a lot of money, impoverishing themselves in order to get to New Zealand. Only 30% get residency, but they think they have a one in three chance. Can you see any of the other parties except New Zealand taking on this bandwagon towards 2017 selection? I think the Labour Party will. If we look at a nationally, the questions about immigration, concerns about jobs and housing and so on have created backlashes against those particular sitting governments, so any political parties are wanting to form the next government will be looking at those international trends and hoping to capitalise on them. WE'D LIKE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS ISSUE. WE'RE ON TWITTER @NZQANDA, YOU CAN EMAIL US AT Q+A@TVNZ.CO.NZ OR TEXT YOUR THOUGHTS AND FIRST NAME TO 2211. KEEP THEM BRIEF; EACH TEXT COSTS 50 CENTS. AFTER THE BREAK, FORMER PRIME MINISTER MIKE MOORE ` AS FOR TRUMP, WELL, GOD HELP ME. < WHAT DO YOU THINK OF TRUMP? IT'S NOT PRINTABLE. 'PITY THE OLD BODY GAVE UP.' THE WORDS OF MIKE MOORE AS HE REGRETFULLY GAVE UP HIS MISSION AS NZ'S AMBASSADOR TO THE US AT THE END OF LAST YEAR. 18 MONTHS AGO, THE FORMER LABOUR PRIME MINISTER AND WTO DIRECTOR-GENERAL HAD A SERIOUS STROKE, AND THAT LED TO THE END OF HIS TIME IN WASHINGTON AND A LONG RECOVERY BACK TO HEALTH. BUT WHEN JESSICA MUTCH INTERVIEWED HIM AT HIS AUCKLAND HOME ON FRIDAY, MIKE MOORE WAS ADAMANT HIS LONG POLITICAL CAREER WAS FAR FROM OVER. HE HAS AT LEAST A FEW BOOKS STILL IN HIM, HE SAID. JESSICA BEGAN HER INTERVIEW BY ASKING HOW HE WAS DOING? I'M DOING WELL. ABOUT A YEAR AGO I HAD A STROKE IN DC, AND I CAN JUST MOVE THAT HAND JUST SLIGHTLY. NOW WE'RE OK, EXCEPT I CAN'T MOVE. I CAN'T WALK AS FAR AS I USED TO BETWEEN MEETINGS AND THINGS. SO I'VE HAD ONE STROKE, AND TWO MORE AND YOU'RE OUT. HOW ARE YOU GETTING YOUR HEAD AROUND IT? IS IT A TOUGH THING FOR SOMEONE IN YOUR POSITION? NO. I THINK I'VE DONE OK. I WAS GOING TO RETIRE ANYWAY FROM DC. IT TOOK SIX MONTHS OFF ME. AND I THINK I GOT WHAT I WANTED TO DO IN DC THROUGH IN THE MAIN, SO I WAS AT PEACE WITH THAT. BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU DID DO IN DC, OBVIOUSLY A BIG FOCUS WAS THE TPP. MM. YOU KNOW THAT INSIDE OUT. IS IT DEAD IN THE WATER? HILLARY CLINTON, DONALD TRUMP HAVE BOTH PUBLICLY SAID THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED. YES. WELL, HILLARY IS STRONG FOR TRADE. SHE'S SPOKEN FOR TRADE. SHE LIKES TRADE. SHE UNDERSTANDS. SHE'S NOT A FOOL. SO IT MAY HAVE TO BE DRESSED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY AND REWRITTEN SOME OF IT, BUT I THINK IN THE MAIN SHE UNDERSTANDS HOW WEALTH IS CREATED. AND THE REST OF THE WORLD THINKS THE TPP IS A JACK-UP BY THE STATES, AND THE STATES THINKS IT'S A JACK-UP AGAINST THEM. SO THAT'S HOW IT IS. DO YOU THINK IT'LL JUST BE TPP BY ANOTHER NAME? DO YOU THINK IT WAS A POLITICAL DECISION FOR HER AND SHE NEEDS SOMETHING TO CHANGE SO SHE CAN COME OUT AND SUPPORT IT? I WOULD THINK SO. I WOULD THINK SO. BUT, YOU KNOW, THE WORLD HAS GONE AGAINST TRADE IN A NUMBER OF AREAS. BECAUSE, INTERESTINGLY, ANDREW LITTLE HAS COME OUT AND SAID THAT IT MEANS THE GOVERNMENT LOSES ITS RIGHT TO MAKE LAWS AND IT WON'T BE THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS THAT'S PROMISED AND THERE'LL BE THOUSANDS OF JOB LOSSES. WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THAT? I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT I DISAGREE WITH MY LEADER, BUT IT'S NOT THE POSITION. DO YOU THINK THAT HE IS PERHAPS TAKING A POLITICAL STANCE ON THIS AS WELL? PERHAPS SIMILAR TO HILLARY CLINTON'S? YES, IN A WAY LIKE HILLARY CLINTON. THEY'LL WANT TO TIDY UP ONE OR TWO THINGS. LOOK, A LOT OF THE DISAGREEMENT I DISAGREE WITH. I THINK IT DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH. IT DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH. OUR DAIRY FARMERS ARE GETTING VERY LITTLE, NOTHING, SO WE CAN ASK FOR MORE. SO MAYBE WE'RE OPPOSED TO IT BECAUSE IT DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH. IN TERMS OF GLOBALISATION, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT YOU'VE BECOME A WORLD LEADER ON. YOU SPEAK OUT ON IT OFTEN. DO YOU THINK IN NZ, WITH THINGS LIKE OUR SELLING OFF OUR FORESTS AND OUR WATER AND OUR LAND, IS THAT WHAT YOU INTENDED WITH GLOBALISATION? SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENTS CAN DO WHAT THEY LIKE OVER THE LAND, ELECTRICITY AND THAT SORT OF THING OR SCHOOLS. THAT'S NOT TO DO WITH GLOBALISATION. THAT'S BY-PRODUCTS. SOME DO, SOME DON'T. I WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE A SELL-OFF OF SOME OF OUR KEY ASSETS, BUT A GOVERNMENT MAY INTEND TO DO THAT. YOU CALL IT A BY-PRODUCT, THOUGH. IS IT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE PERHAPS LOST CONTROL OF, DO YOU THINK, AS A RESULT OF GLOBALISATION? NO, I DON'T THINK WE'VE LOST CONTROL OF IT AT ALL. I THINK WE'VE GOT ARROGANT. WE'RE TOO BUSY DOING THE JOB, NOT BUSY EXPLAINING TO PEOPLE WHAT COMES OF IT, AND THEREFORE THE PUBLIC RESENT IT. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ARROGANT? WELL, WHEN YOU'RE A MINISTER AND YOU'RE WORKING ON THESE SORT OF THINGS, YOU WORK SO HARD, YOU TRAVEL SO MUCH, YOU'RE DOING SO MUCH WORK THAT YOU SOMETIMES LEAVE THE PEOPLE BEHIND. AND IT HAPPENED TO US. IT HAPPENED TO THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT. IT MAYBE HAPPENED TO THIS ONE IN THIS ONE AREA. BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE SAY THAT GLOBALISATION IS FAILING A LOT OF PEOPLE. WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THAT? IT IS FAILING THOSE PEOPLE AT THE BOTTOM, SOME OF THEM, BUT WAIT A MINUTE. HANG ON, WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE LAST 30 YEARS HAS BEEN REMARKABLE. WE'VE PRODUCED MORE WEALTH IN THE LAST 40 YEARS THAN THE REST OF CIVILISATION PUT TOGETHER. LOOK WHAT'S HAPPENING IN CHINA ` 400 OR 500 MILLION PEOPLE OUT OF EXTREME POVERTY. INDIA THE SAME. EUROPE THE SAME. AND LOOK AT NZ. WE'RE GOING QUITE WELL, THANK YOU. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? KNIT OUR OWN AEROPLANES? WE CAN'T DO IT, AND WE NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN THE GLOBAL SUPPLY CHAIN, AND I THINK WE'VE MANAGED QUITE WELL. THANK GOD LABOUR WAS IN IN THE '80S TO FIX THIS COUNTRY SO IT COULD STAND UP. I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE US ELECTION AS WELL. HOW WELL DO YOU KNOW HILLARY CLINTON, AND DO YOU THINK THAT THE US IS IN SAFE HANDS WITH HER? I KNOW HILLARY CLINTON QUITE WELL. SHE UNDERSTANDS NZ. SHE WENT TO THE RAROTONGA MEETING. SHE IS A FRIEND OF MURRAY MCCULLY. I THINK SHE'S PREPPED AND SHE'S READY TO GO. BUT OUR INTERESTS WILL NOT REPLACE AMERICA'S INTERESTS, AND THEY NEVER WILL, AND THEY SHOULDN'T. WHAT'S SHE LIKE? WAS THERE ANY MOMENT WHERE YOU MET HER WHEN SOMETHING STUCK WITH YOU OR RESONATED WITH HER? NO, SHE'S VERY PROFESSIONAL, AND SHE'S SPOT ON IN HER ARGUMENTS. BUT SHE KNEW WHO SHE WAS TALKING TO. YEAH. BUT THEREFORE, IT'S GOOD, THOUGH, THAT SHE'S DONE HER HOMEWORK. DO YOU THINK AMERICA IS IN SAFE HANDS WITH HER? I THINK SO, YEAH. WHY DO YOU THINK PEOPLE DISLIKE HER SO MUCH? CAN YOU GIVE US A BIT OF CONTEXT, HAVING BEEN IN AMERICA FOR SO LONG? I THINK SHE'S BEEN IN IT SO LONG THAT SHE'S ROBOTIC AND YOU CAN PREDICT WHAT SHE'S GOING TO SAY, AND IT'S ALWAYS TO THE POINT AND WELL BRIEFED. AND DO YOU THINK THAT'S WHAT GRATES WITH THE US PEOPLE, THEY SEE HER AS THE ESTABLISHMENT? SHE IS THE ESTABLISHMENT. YOU TALK ABOUT HER BEING ROBOTIC. DOES SHE HAVE CHARISMA BEHIND CLOSED DOORS? OH YES, SHE IS A VERY BRIGHT PERSON. SHE'S ON TOP OF THE SUBJECT, AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YOU'RE CRITICISING HER BECAUSE SHE KNOWS WHAT'S GOING ON. AND AS FOR TRUMP, WELL, GOD HELP ME. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF TRUMP? IT'S NOT PRINTABLE. GIVE US A LITTLE GLIMPSE. HAVE YOU HAD MUCH TO DO WITH HIM? NO, I HAVE NOT. I HAVE NOT SOUGHT IT OUT. IT'S NOT REALISTIC THAT HE'S GOING TO BE THE PRESIDENT, IS IT? I HAVE TOO MUCH FAITH IN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO THINK THAT THEY COULD VOTE FOR HIM. BUT WHY IS HIS ANTI-IMMIGRATION AND HIS`? YOU HAVE A LOOK. ANTI-IMMIGRATION IS QUITE A POPULAR POSITION TO TAKE. IT'S TAKEN IN NZ BY SOME AND BY AMERICAN BUSINESS. SOME IN NZ DO THE SAME. IT'S A POSITION GLOBALLY THAT'S ACCEPTABLE` WELL, NOT ACCEPTABLE, BUT YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S HAPPENING. BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH 30% OF THE VOTE, 40% OF THE VOTE. I SHUDDER TO THINK WE'LL HAVE A WORLD WHERE THESE KIND OF PRIMITIVES CONTROL IT. HE'S GOT SOMETHING, THOUGH, DOESN'T HE? YEAH, HE ABUSES PEOPLE. DO YOU THINK THAT'S WHAT IT IS? YES. WELL, IT'S MORE THAN THAT. THOSE WHO ARE HURT AND FEEL THEY CAN DO BETTER, AND HE SPEAKS TO THEM. AND SO AMERICA'S AN INTERESTING PLACE. THE POOREST CONSTITUENCIES, ELECTORATES, WHITE ONES, THE REPUBLICANS HOLD. THE REPUBLICANS HOLD MOST OF THE STATES IN AMERICA. YOU'VE BEEN EXPOSED TO ALL THESE LEADERS. YOU'VE BEEN PRIME MINISTER YOURSELF. YOU'VE SEEN UP CLOSE THE BEST PRIME MINISTERS IN NZ. WHAT ADVICE DO YOU HAVE FOR ANDREW LITTLE AT THE MOMENT? OH, ANDREW'S GOT TO STICK TO HIS GUNS. HE'S GOOD, AND HE OUGHT TO LOOK AT CHANGING THE PARTY RULES. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? PARTY LEADERSHIP SHOULD BE CONTROLLED BY THE CAUCUS. AND WHY DO YOU THINK THAT'S SO IMPORTANT? BECAUSE YOU GET 5000, 10,000 PARTY MEMBERS, AND THEY'LL GO IN A BLOC, BUT THEY AREN'T THE CAUCUS. IF EVERY MEMBER OF THE LABOUR PARTY LIVED IN MY OLD ELECTORATE AND VOTED FOR ME, I WOULD STILL LOSE THE SEAT. WHY AS A FORMER PRIME MINISTER IS IT IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE BACKING OF THE CAUCUS? BECAUSE YOU NEED TO LEAD PEOPLE AND TAKE THEM DOWN ROADS THEY'VE NOT TRAVELLED BEFORE. IT'S A VERY LONELY JOB, AND THE ROADS WE HAVEN'T TRAVELLED IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS ARE GOING TO BE IMPORTANT TO US. THE JOBS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IN THE FUTURE ARE NOT LIKE THE JOBS WE HAVE NOW. AND YOU'VE GOT TO TALK YOUR PEOPLE THROUGH IT. IF YOU CAN'T DO THAT BY WORKING THE BASE AND WORKING IT OUT, YOU'LL BECOME A CONSERVATIVE PARTY. YOU TALKED ABOUT ANDREW LITTLE BEFORE AS 'MY LEADER'. HAS HE SOUGHT ADVICE FROM YOU? BEFORE HE BECAME LEADER AND WE'VE TALKED ON THE PHONE, I THINK, YES. AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ANDREW. I WISH HIM WELL. IS HE RESONATING, THOUGH? I DON'T KNOW. OUR LATEST POLLS SAY HE'S NOT. HE'S 26% AT THE MOMENT FOR THE LABOUR PARTY. IT'S VERY SELDOM YOU GET A LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION WHO WINS. I WON FOR THREE YEARS. EXCEPT FOR ONE MONTH, I WON THOSE POLLS, JOHN KEY WON THEM. BUT WE'RE THE LAST OF ONLY TWO. YOU CAN'T EXPECT` AND NORMAN KIRK DIDN'T WIN THE POLLS, BUT ONCE HE WAS IN, BANG. HE HAS TO DO A BIT BETTER THAN 26%, DO YOU THINK? HOW DOES HE GET OUT THERE AND RESONATE WITH THE PUBLIC? IS IT THE MESSAGE? IS IT THE PERSON DELIVERING THE MESSAGE? I THINK HE NEEDS TO THINK CAREFULLY ABOUT WHAT HE BELIEVES IN AND GO FOR IT. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT? WELL, WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE? WE'RE DRIVEN TOO MUCH BY OPINION POLLS. YOU'VE RAISED THIS. JUST DO WHAT'S RIGHT, AND THE OPINION POLLS WILL COME THE OTHER WAY. AND OPINION POLLS SHOULD BE A MECHANISM TO JUDGE POLICY TO SEE HOW IT FLOATS, BUT IT SHOULDN'T DECIDE POLICY. YOU CAN'T DO IT. WHEN YOUR BANKING SYSTEM'S COLLAPSING, ARE YOU GOING TO RUN AN OPINION POLL? WELL, AFTER THE DECISION TO SEE WHETHER IT'LL FLOAT OR NOT, BUT NOT REALLY. DO YOU STILL FEEL ANY BITTERNESS OR RESENTMENT FOR HOW YOU WERE TREATED IN LABOUR? LABOUR'S HARD TO ITS LEADERS. I DO FEEL A LITTLE RESENTFUL. I GOT THE BIGGEST SWING TO LABOUR EXCEPT FOR 1935. I THINK IT WAS 29 SEATS. TO WALK INTO THE ROOM AND TO BE ATTACKED FOR THAT, I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST STOPPED AND SAID THANK YOU. BUT, ANYWAY, THAT'S POLITICS. IT'S TOUGH, AND THAT'S THE WAY IT IS. IN HINDSIGHT, THOUGH, DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU WOULD'VE DONE ANYTHING DIFFERENTLY AT THAT TIME? WELL, I'D HAVE DONE A LOT DIFFERENTLY. CAN YOU THINK OF ANYTHING? WE HAD NO MONEY. WE DIDN'T DO OPINION POLLS IN THE LAST MONTH OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN. REALLY? DON'T TELL ANYONE THAT. WE'LL SEEM LIKE AMATEUR HOUR. BUT THAT'S HOW WE OPERATED, AND A LOT OF WORK INSIDE THE PARLIAMENT. THERE'S NEVER BEEN A NATIONAL PARTY DEFEATED IN THREE YEARS. IT'S A HELL OF A JOB. AND A LOT OF THE MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WERE JUST TIRED. THEY COULDN'T GET UP IN THE MORNING, COULDN'T DO THE HARD WORK ANY MORE. HOW ANNOYING WAS THAT, THOUGH, AS PRIME MINISTER? WELL, IT WAS ANNOYING, AND I WENT OVER THE TOP OF THEM AND THEY CAME RIGHT. BUT DID YOU FEEL LIKE GETTING OUT A CATTLE PROD WITH SOME OF THEM? WELL, ACTUALLY, I THINK I MIGHT HAVE. YEAH, THERE WERE THOSE WHO WERE JUST TOO TIRED. WHAT ABOUT FOR YOU GOING INTO THE FUTURE? WHAT ARE YOU THINKING SHORT-TERM AT THE MOMENT? I'LL GET MYSELF WALKING AGAIN. I'VE GOT SOME WRITING TO DO. I'VE STILL GOT A COUPLE OF BOOKS IN ME. MAYBE THIS ONE WILL BE READ. BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL IN HOT DEMAND. THAT'S THE THING. WELL, THAT'S NICE TO SAY. BUT I'M IN HOT DEMAND BECAUSE I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING. I BELIEVE IN THE LABOUR PARTY. I BELIEVE IN THE PRINCIPLES OF THE PARTY, THE LEADERSHIP, AND I WISH THEM WELL. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL. That was before the FBI reopen its investigation into Hillary Clinton. the landscape may have changed. What was your big take, Deborah? I was fascinated for the huge amount of ground it covered. He said you need people with you, but on the other hand, the elite pushing the TPP aren't taking people with them. People don't understand what's going on with that. That was a contradiction in what he had to say between his feeling that you need to take people with you and the pro trade where he didn't. He raised the TPP, which the Labour Party voted againstin the first reading. I guess the real question for them comes when he says what is the party believe in? If Labour form the next government, would they be withdrawing from these kinds of international agreements? Would they withdraw from these an appeal any domestic legislation? Charles, he was at the coal face of the TPP, but unwilling to say it was a goner. I'm glad he's looking better. I'm not writing of the TPP either. I think there's a chance to go through in the lame-duck period. I think Clinton will seek to look at it. On the Hillary Clinton thing, you are snorting derisively a couple of times, Deborah. When she was Secretary of State, her popularity went skyhigh. There's popularity with woman campaigning. Women who are campaigning get a whole lot of negativity against them. She is not a great campaigner, but she is great in the job she has it. I get really cross with the 'if you can get a shout loud, you are a great leader.' There have been no other woman US leader. There is nothing to compare with. We are not prepared to allow different ways of leadership to come through. That's a change that Mrs Clinton will push through for us. The many ways, he is Swimming against the tide. Some would say he is behind the times. All the stories have this kind of Near liberal connection. The government incentivises kinds of behaviours. international students are 11%. It's a huge market. There will be pressure there. The pressure in the international student sector also come from other places. If there were 10 years ago and his health were 100%, where and how would Mike Moore fit to Labour Party of 2016? He is very clearly pro-free trade and globalisation. We believe that a good thing. That economics 101. Trade as a whole increases wealth. What we are not so pro is the extent to which too many people are left behind. We also know that we have in New Zealand people living in cars. That's too big a price to pay. We have too many people who are homeless, insecure, cannot be citizens participate in our society because they have no place to live we have to pull back some of those neoliberal types of things. What you think about what he said about Andrew Little? I think he was being very careful and very polite. I have the same concerns about Andrew Little on TPP. That was a very bad call from Labour. We have to focus on the way to negotiate these deals. In New Zealand, the trade policy has been about secrecy. Very different from other countries. The people sleeping cars are not there because of trade policy. YOUR FEEDBACK AFTER THE BREAK, AND THEN WE LOOK BACK AT ONE OF MIKE MOORE'S FINEST MOMENTS, THAT STORY FROM 1983. PLUS, WHO IS THE REPORTER WITH THAT MAGNIFICENT MOUSTACHE? YOUR FEEDBACK NOW, AND MOST OF THAT ABOUT OUR INTERVIEW WITH INDIAN IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT MUNISH SEHKRI. FRANK MACSKSAY SAYS... LORNA JOHNSON ON TWITTER AGREES. SHE SAYS... OUR POLITICAL HISTORY NOW, AND WHILE MIKE MOORE IS WELL KNOWN FOR HIS HIGH PROFILE ROLES AS NZ PRIME MINISTER, WTO DIRECTOR GENERAL AND AS AMBASSADOR TO THE US, THE POLITICIAN PASSIONATE ABOUT TRADE IS ALSO REMEMBERED FOR ONE BIG IDEA ` THE KIWI LAMB BURGER. HERE'S BILL RALSTON'S REPORT FOR THE 6.30 NEWS BACK IN 1983. MIKE MOORE WAS SO ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT HIS PLAN FOR AN INTERNATIONAL LAMB BURGER CHAIN, A FEW DAYS AGO, HE EVEN SAMPLED RECIPES FOR THE DISHES. NOW HE CLAIMS LOCAL BUSINESSMAN APPROACHED AND WITH A SORRY LAMB BURGER TALE OF EXPORT OPPORTUNITIES LOST. IN NORTH AMERICA, THE DEVCO COMPANY HAS A GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY TO SELL NZ LAMB. ACCORDING TO MR MOORE, DEVCO HAS BLOCKED ATTEMPTS BY LOCAL ENTREPRENEURS TO SET UP LAMB BURGER DEALS IN THE STATES. HE SAYS ONE BUSINESSMAN EVEN DID MARKET RESEARCH AND ESTABLISHED A BUYER FOR THE LAMB BURGER HERE, BUT DEVCO WOULD NOT SUPPLY HIM WITH MEAT. I BELIEVE THESE PEOPLE HAVE GOT A VERY SOFT POSITION IN THE MARKET. THEY WANT TO PROTECT THEIR MONOPOLY; I DON'T BLAME THEM. I JUST SAY WHEN A NEW FELLOW WANTS TO BREAK IN AND BECOME AT THE COMPANY IN THE LONG RUN, LET THEM HAVE A GO. DEVCO DENIES THE CLAIMS. THE GENERAL MANAGER SAID HE IS HAPPY TO TALK TO ANYONE WITH SUCH A PROPOSITION. IN FACT, THEY ALREADY SUPPLY MEAT FOR LAMB BURGERS IN NORTH AMERICA. ONE TORONTO FAST FOOD CHAIN ALREADY SELLS 50,000 LAMB BURGERS A MONTH, AND DEVCO SAVE THE REASON FOR THE MONOPOLY ON THE NORTH-AMERICAN MARKET IS SIMPLE IT IS THEIR WAY OF KEEPING THE QUALITY OF NZ MEAT HIGH AND AVOIDING ANYTHING LIKE THE GREAT AUSTRALIAN KANGAROO MEAT SCANDAL. WAKA HUIA IS NEXT. REMEMBER, Q+A REPEATS TOMORROW AT 1.15AM. THANKS FOR WATCHING AND THANKS FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS. THOSE WERE THE QUESTIONS AND THOSE WERE THE ANSWERS, THAT'S Q+A. SEE YOU NEXT SUNDAY MORNING AT 9. CAPTIONS BY ALANA DRAYTON AND JUNE YEOW CAPTIONS WERE MADE POSSIBLE WITH FUNDING FROM NZ ON AIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2016