MORENA, GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M CORIN DANN. NATIONAL'S ANNOUNCED THAT IT WANTS TO PUT POLITICS ASIDE TO WORK WITH THE GOVERNMENT ON TACKLING CLIMATE CHANGE. SO WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN? I'LL BE ASKING NATIONAL LEADER SIMON BRIDGES, MY LEAD INTERVIEW THIS MORNING. WHENA OWEN'S BEEN VISITING THE LAB TO LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF SYNTHETIC AND PLANT BASED MEAT PRODUCTS. ARE NEW ZEALAND FOOD PRODUCERS READY FOR THE REVOLUTION? THAT'LL BE IN AROUND IN 10 TO 15 YEARS. OUR FOOD SYSTEM WILL BE REMARKABLY DIFFERENT. I'VE BEEN TALKING TO MATT PETERSEN, CEO OF LA BASED CLEANTECH INCUBATOR. HE'S HERE NEXT WEEK TO TALK ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD BE BUILDING HOMES THAT ARE AFFORDABLE AND GREEN. I ALSO ASKED HIM WHAT IT'S LIKE BEING GREEN UNDER A PRESIDENT WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE. WE HAVE CITIES AND MAYORS ACROSS THE COUNTRY RISING UP. OVER 400 MAYORS WE ARE GOING TO ADOPT THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT IN OUR OWN CITY, NO MATTER WHAT TRUMP DOES. AND WE'LL HAVE ANALYSIS FROM OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, PETER DUNNE AND FRAN O'SULLIVAN. CAPTIONS WERE MADE WITH THE SUPPORT OF NZ ON AIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2018. BUT FIRST TO SOME QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS OF THE POLITICAL WEEK. QUESTION ` WHY DID GREEN MINISTER OF LAND INFORMATION, EUGENIE SAGE, AGREE TO A CHINESE WATER BOTTLING COMPANY BEING ALLOWED TO EXPAND AND DID SHE REALISE THERE WOULD BE A STORM OF CRITICISM FROM HER OWN PEOPLE? ANSWER ` THE MINISTER SAYS THE LAW IS CLEAR ABOUT WHAT MINISTERS CAN AND CAN'T DO, AND SHE HAD TO DO IT. BUT THAT DOESN'T PLACATE THE GREEN MEMBERSHIP, OF COURSE. IT'S A TRICKY BUSINESS BEING IN GOVERNMENT. QUESTION ` AFTER THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY SUMMIT IN SINGAPORE BETWEEN PRESIDENT TRUMP AND NORTH KOREAN DICTATOR KIM JUNG-UN IS THE WORLD A SAFER PLACE? ANSWER ` WELL, IT WILL BE FOR A WHILE AT LEAST. AND IT'S WORTH GIVING BOTH LEADERS A CHANCE TO DELIVER, BUT IF KIM FAILS TO COME THROUGH, HOW WILL THE VOLATILE TRUMP REACT? HE'S GOT A LOT INVESTED IN THIS NOW. IT'S A WORRYING THOUGHT. QUESTION ` WAS IT REASONABLE FOR SHANE JONES TO LASH OUT AT FONTERRA AND ITS BOARD? AND IS HE DOING IT TO CONNECT WITH THE NZ FIRST VOTERS? ANSWER ` THAT'S A TOUGH ONE. JONES IS NOT THE ONLY ONE TO RAISE ISSUES ABOUT FONTERRA'S STRUCTURE AND MANAGEMENT OF LATE. BUT IN MY VIEW, THIS READS MORE LIKE A WARNING SHOT TO THE DAIRY GIANT NOT TO EXPECT AN EASY RIDE AHEAD OF A GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF DAIRY REGULATIONS. AND, YES, THAT WILL, I SUSPECT, GO DOWN WELL WITH NZ FIRST VOTERS. SIMON BRIDGES, NATIONAL PARTY LEADER. Leader of the opposition. Thank you for joining us. Good to see you. It is been an interesting week for National watching from afar. Law and order, climate change. You have made interesting shift on climate change. Why? It is about demonstrating leadership even from opposition and doing what we think is a right and responsible thing and providing certainty. There is not a lot of certainty about of bunch of issues for businesses and New Zealanders. I look at the now government and the then opposition and how they played us on trade and the TPP and then they did what was the right thing to do and government around signing the CP TPP and I don't want to be in that space and climate change. As climate change the nuclear free issue of our generation? I would not go that far. It is an important long-term issue and we need to deal with it seriously and provide certainty on. So what is it that you have agreed to here? When the rubber hits the road around the emissions trading scheme and the incentives that will get New Zealand to carbon zero have you agreed to a toughening up of those things? What we have agreed to is very important. It is important for the government and for certainty long-term. An enduring, bipartisan, nonpolitical framework for climate change. An independent climate commission that will give advice and provide the advice to every government over the next 30 or 40 years. It has been removed from government? We are saying this is important. Simon Upton made it clear when he looked at this issue, a former National party minister, there has been a lack of bite over climate change ahead not continue. We have a habit of developing sophisticated tools but not using them. It is tinkering with that incentive for people to stop polluting. Why should we trust National in the future? Even James Shaw would acknowledge this, over the last eight or nine years we have done a fair bit. We signed upNew Zealand to the Paris climate accord. I did that with Tim Groser. We are stepping up on the framework- but not the hard decisions. There will be many hard decisions. They will go to that climate commission and provide advice to the government. Simon Upton acknowledges this in the report and in conversations I had with him, on the day-to-day policies and politics, it is right that there is a legitimate confrontation. Do you want New Zealand to be carbon 0 by 2050? Just what that means is up for the debate. We set a target for fewer emissions by 2050. That is the middle option of the three. But it is not carbon zero. Broadly speaking it is carbon zero on CO2, but it is acknowledging emerging consensus about methane and the like are short lived gases. What is the point of us having legislation that effectively means that every piece of legislation we have is working towards carbon 0 x 20 50 if you don't actually agree to that target? I am not saying that. James Shaw could not tell you either, we will get the advice from the climate commission. It is an aspirational goal. Is it your goal? He can't say what it means. My point is this there is a difference in politics, and there still is today. On our side we need to be practical and sensible For environmental solutions. We don't want to see disruption and damage to the economy. And we don't want to see real costs imposed on hard-working Kiwi households overnight. But what we will do, just like this government actually is as well, we will take the advice in the climate commission and be accountable on how we decide. You are not committing to that massive target. 2050 is a long way the future. It is very clear from the Parliamentary Commissioner and the productivity Commissioner, organisation set up by your government, there would have to be significant change in the way we farm in this country. You are telling farmers that we will not do anything that hurts you. On a target I am not saying that we will not sign up to 1. Broadly where we were at was the middle one out of three. Let's evaluate that, and will consider the economic impact on the like. On agriculture, we are not saying today it should face additional costs bbecause of the reasons I said. I think there is some scientific questions about CO2 versus methane. There is effective ability to mitigate when we are the efficient most efficient producers in the world. I tell you what you do it now, it is because it is about incentives. Incentivising the farming industry to make the change to more Green, efficient energy use. Otherwise it will not make the changes. Incentives are important. I'm not saying it won't be in for all time. I do not think that is true. But you go through the science and the other factors. At the moment all we would be doing if we are piling on the costs there is sending the most efficient production in the world offshore. Even if they are subsidised by 95% you still think that is too much? National played an important role in climate change. Oil and gas should have gone to a climate commission. The homework should have been done and the consultation. We could have had a long-range plan. The government said they do not want Rogernomics shock and awe.' Would you return to the formula used by the last National government of more intensive dairy farming, big irrigation, driving maul production. Would you return to that if your prime minister? That is simplistic. That is not where we were. I do want to prioritise the environment but I also understand there are tricky trade-offs and balances here. The reality is food production` Damien O'Connor says that we have reached peak cow. I think we would not want to see significantly more cows. We have to invest a lot more in science and innovation and technology to get those solutions. Then you might start to be able to do some of the things that we're talking about, Which is have an ETS that begins to bite. Would you bring back the big irrigation to be able to do the intensive dairy farming? Yes in the right context. When there is sensitive consideration of the land I would. It is good farming practice and good environmental practice. Changing the effects of climate change on the east coast of New Zealand. This government says there needs to be more horticulture and less dairy. Would you say it is fine to do whatever? I know the value of horticulture. I come from the Bay of Plenty. Kiwifruit is phenomenal. I want to see more of that. But we get into uncertain frameworks that effectively mean the culling of our herds overnight, or over a small number of years. Let's look at justice. The Justice Minister is saying we need to have a public debate about this issue, the prison system is not working, we have to build one every two or three years. You are hammering them. Is that constructive? He is already preconceived where he wants to be on this. They have very significant emerging problems that are all of their own making and criminal justice. They don't want to do the more prison beds that they need to, and so they are saying they going to soften up. You are the one that left them a system with the prison system that does not look good internationally. It has a large increase in the number of people on remand. You change the bail laws and you live in that system. It is not a system where low-level offenders are going to jail for long periods of time. It is serious criminals. Andrew Little says those who get on remand 41% do not get a custodial sentence. So that as of the 3000 or so that are there. They can't be doing serious crime. 98% of people are present have done category three or four. The bail laws have change and more people are held in remand. It suggests a large number of those people going into remand maybe don't need to. As a former ground prosecutor, bail is the real battleground in criminal law. For a serious drug dealing case, the defendant gets bail, the witnesses go missing. They do not turn up. Our changes I think were reasonable and proportionate. I am sorry. There are trade-offs here and difficult questions. I'm not try to say that the are not. But I want to make sure New Zealand is safe. These are the perfect storm here. It's fewer beds than we were doing and more police, which means more Prison beds will be needed. What I would do as I would build a bigger Waikeria Prison. And then I think you have to do the things, we had a social investment plan. I feel very passionate that education. Give me a child for the first seven years and I show you the adult. It is that Jesuit saying. If you don't build the prisons you won't have the effect of rehabilitation or integration. So on one hand you agree with Sir Peter Gluckman that says early investment and intervention is good. But he says let's debate the data not the dogma. But Mark Mitchell your spokesman has been very tough and so have you to play the politics. Lock them up. Law and order. How is that constructive? I want to be about the data. I have looked carefully at what Sir Peter Gluckman has said. Let's take three strikes, I know the Minister discounts this. But apples for apples, we are seeing fewer graduate to those second and third strikes because it does work. It is deterring them from going on. But the case that has been talked about the man in prison for aggravated robbery and pinch the bottom of the prison guard and the judge wanted to give him one year in prison but he had to give him seven years. Do you think that was fair? If you look at the totality of that guys offending, he is a very serious offender. That was serious offending. I don't think we should downplay it. Law Society can say all manner of things. I'm not pretending this is easy. But I think the first priority of a government should be keeping New Zealanders safe. I stand on the side of having a few victims. More prison beds mean fewer victims and better rehabilitation and reintegration. And I think we will see real incidents on this government's watch of prisons and prison guards being less safe. As we finish, where are you at in terms of the cycle? Will we see a significantly changed National party under you or will it be a real election of the one that lost? Not will not be a real election of the one that lost. If you talk to Bill English or John Key or myself, our values are there. But I do want to modernise it. You have seen this with the environmental stance we have been talked about today. Have you modernise your stance on housing Westmark I don't think we got everything perfect. It is also incumbent on us to develop really exciting positive plans for 2020 and if we don't do that we don't deserve to be the government. SEND US YOUR THOUGHTS. WE'RE ON TWITTER AT @NZQANDA. YOU CAN EMAIL US AT Q+A@TVNZ.CO.NZ. WE DO READ EVERY MESSAGE. THE PANEL'S HERE, AFTER THE BREAK. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, FORMER LABOUR CANDIDATE, DIRECTOR OF THE COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; PETER DUNNE, FORMER UNITED FUTURE LEADER; FRAN O'SULLIVAN, HEAD OF BUSINESS FOR NZME. Josie, it is difficult for opposition leaders. Tough job. They have to criticise and also provide some vision. Did he get that balance right this morning? He comes across a very likeable. The unpublished polling I have seen is that his positives are going up. Where he is failing to get cut through is in the focus groups. Why is that? The focus there on crime, climate change, agreeing to go on this a political climate change commission. All good politics. But is it enough? Is it defining the problem that National is the solution to? They have not got that yet. They do not have the nanny state line they had under the Helen Clark government. They have not captured the sense of what people are irritated about about this government. There are opportunities there. Labour, always in government, a smaller coalition party, they morph into one party. They looked a bit like Labour-Green. You have MPs sharing a panel And senior Green staff in the Prime Minister's office. They have an opportunity there to inhabit that moderate, middle ground. But moderate can't be bland. He should have come on here today was something tangible To announce to lead the news. Peter, it is an interesting dynamic. You are working with the government on climate change but they are hammering them on law and order. On the climate change, they have no option. This is bigger than any political party in New Zealand and elsewhere. In Britain the target is set by Parliament not by the government of the day because of endurance. In New Zealand we have had a group of MPs under the leadership of Kennedy Graham starting to make progress. That has been renewed under the new Parliament. Stuart Smith a National MP chairs that now. There is a lot of movement internally. Reading comments on some right-wing blogs, lots of people and National are very disappointed they have made this decision. You made the comment in the interview about the nuclear issue. This is a sidestep that John Key performed on the nuclear ships issue. Get out of the way. But it is one step further than that. It is get engaged in the process because we have to. National be the government at some point in the next 50 years. A has to have some sense of what it wants to do. Increasingly, as this issue bites deeply, the question of continuity and certainty, it is not a political game. It is bigger than all of us. Fran, how will this go down with business? They will get certainty. I don't think there was any certainty conveyed today. Everyone of those directional questions put to him I think he did that on. He couldn't give us an answer on water and dairy and the targets. They need to really dig down and come upwere some concrete pathways. They can meet the government some of the way but also provide room for differentiation. I was quite disappointed. The way this goes, they get the overarching legislation and the ETS comes over the top. That is where the big debate will come. Maybe it is anlabours interest to get in quick so they can see how committed National really is. If you are talking about a bipartisan and pro New Zealand framework, you need to have a sense of where you are going. You need to have a constituency andanswers around the oil and gas industry and irrigation. Not maybe we will, maybe we won't. Have Labour actually accepted the office. I don't think they have. I think James Shaw well absolutely. I don't think if Bridges had come on here today and said we are in this and here is what we want and this is where we are going, it would work. I think it is too early for him to stake early positions. He needs the commitment from Labour and the Greens to work together on this and then you start to make progress and that is limited by the extent to which you get everyone on side. If you start putting your bottom line is out there first Then the risk is that this becomes a political stunt. The problem they have as they don't have a coalition partner. They have to try to win votes over from Labour. There are two ways of doing that. Find a coalition partner fast or you start to really fish in that soft Labour middle zone. I am not sure that climate change or focusing on three strikes and tough on crime is really going to do it. They need to give an answer to dairy intensification. But that is not a political strategy. The National party have a massive dairy farming constituency. Within the farming community there is a view that we have reached peak cow and we need to be clear about environmental trade-offs. This is what we need to wrap your head around for National, the gold rushes long gone. If the climate change commission says it bring agriculture into the ETS and zero emissions by 2050, if they are going to take the data and science from the climate change commission, it will be a problem for them. But classically, something like oil and gas, and it has been a contentious issue, National have the ability to go after the working class vote. It is not just the oil and gas business that don't like the ban on oil and gas. It is working class people working on the regs in Taranaki. They can also take the high ground. They actually had the productivity Commissioner, and they can say why did you not jumpstart and do consultation. They reduce it to a populist game. Both with this issue and law and order. It will win them points in the short term but it is not going to sustain a momentum for change in the longer term. They can't be seen as a series of cheap shots. They need to capture something really positive he is good at that. He is trying to do the John Key and Jacinda Ardern thing, not doing politics as usual and be constructive. But you have to capture something that excites people. You can't just be bland. Is Andrew Little and Labour taking a massive risk with the law and order stuff? It is very hard to win that even if they are right in the popular opinion. They have handled it appallingly. They are fundamentally correct. But the problem at the core is that since the mid-1980s our murder rate has halved and our crime rate has fallen. It's all coming down the amount of people convicted. So how come against that backdrop we have a prison population that has more than doubled? That is the issue. It is remand. Where little came in was to say we will get rid of three strikes. Which I agree with. But he needs to say how the system is failing. And people are not sitting at home worrying about three strikes legislation or worrying about crime. They still have not found the line about what the problem is that National is the solution to. Until they find that politically, they can take positions on climate change and take positions on law and order, but they have not nailed it yet. BEFORE WE GO TO THE BREAK, MY LATEST BUSINESS PODCAST FEATURES REBECCA STEWART, THE FOUNDER OF THE POMEGRANATE KITCHEN IN WELLINGTON. IT'S A CATERING BUSINESS AND A SOCIAL ENTERPRISE THAT EMPLOYS FORMER REFUGEES AS COOKS. SHE TOLD ME THAT MANY OF THEIR CUSTOMERS LIKE SEEING THEIR DOLLAR GO FURTHER. NOT ONLY DO THEY GET DELICIOUS FOOD, BUT THEY'RE ALSO HELPING SOMEONE FROM A REFUGEE BACKGROUND. BUT I THINK WE'RE SEEING THAT ACROSS THE BOARD ` YOU KNOW, FREE-RANGE EGGS, THERE'S A BIG CONVERSATION GOING ON IN FASHION AT THE MOMENT ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE'S CLOTHES COME FROM. SO I THINK IN THE CONSUMER SPACE AT THE MOMENT, PEOPLE REALLY ARE WANTING TO BUY ETHICALLY AND REALLY LIVE THEIR VALUES IN THE MONEY THAT THEY SPEND, SO WE'RE JUST ONE PART OF THAT. YOU CAN LISTEN TO THAT INTERVIEW ON YOUR FAVOURITE PODCAST APP. AND WE'VE POSTED THE VIDEO ON FACEBOOK AND OUR WEBSITE ` TVNZ.CO.NZ/SHOWS/QANDA. AFTER THE BREAK ` THE FUTURE IS FAKE WHEN IT COMES TO EATING MEAT, ACCORDING SOME FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR OUR AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY? WHENA OWEN INVESTIGATES, NEXT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO MAKE A QUICK BILLION OR SO, THEN THE HIGH TECH FOOD REVOLUTION IS WHERE YOU SHOULD INVEST, ACCORDING TO SOME FUTURISTS. IT'S PREDICTED THAT WE'LL SOON HAVE AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT FOOD SYSTEM CENTRED AROUND PROTEIN ` MAINLY PLANT BASED OR EVEN LAB GROWN. AND THE RACE IS ON TO GET MEAT ALTERNATIVES TO MARKET. SO WHAT DO YOU NEED TO KNOW AND HOW WILL IT AFFECT OUR FOOD INDUSTRY? HERE'S WHENA OWEN. HERE, IN A REMOTE PART OF THE WAIRARAPA, THERE'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT ABOUT THE SURROUNDING FARMLAND ` THERE ARE NO ANIMALS. WHEN THE FARMER BOUGHT THE LAND SIX YEARS AGO, HE DESTOCKED IT. AND THAT FARMER, THE OWNER OF ALL THIS LAND, IS HOLLYWOOD DIRECTOR JAMES CAMERON. I ALWAYS KNEW I WAS GONNA COME AND LIVE IN NZ SOME DAY. THE DEVOUTLY VEGAN CAMERONS WANT TO INSPIRE OTHER FARMERS TO CHANGE THEIR LAND USE. AND THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHO HAVE A VISION OF WHAT OUR PASTURES COULD LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM DESTOCKED. (UPBEAT MUSIC) THAT'S DR ROSIE BOSWORTH'S IDEAL NZ. SHE'S A FOOD FUTURIST. IN A PERFECT WORLD, I'D SEE A LOT OF TRANSITION FROM AGRICULTURAL, PASTORAL FARMING TO HIGH-VALUE CROPPING AND HORTICULTURAL SYSTEMS. AND ALSO, IF WE ARE TO CONTINUE ANIMAL FARMING, LET'S MAKE THIS A VERY, VERY SMALL SLICE OF THE PIE. (BLUESY GUITAR MUSIC) A DECADE AGO, 95% OF NZERS WERE MEAT EATERS. NOW THAT FIGURE IS 89% AND FALLING. ALONG WITH THAT DECREASE IN DEMAND, BEEF + LAMB NZ IS PREPARING ITSELF FOR THE NON-MEAT, HIGH-TECH FOOD REVOLUTION. IN AS MUCH AS WE SEE IT AS A THREAT, YOU KNOW ` FROM A GLOBAL MEAT PERSPECTIVE, IT LOOKS LIKE A THREAT ` IT'S LIKE OUR DAY HAS ACTUALLY COME FOR THE NZ MEAT INDUSTRY. AND SO AS MUCH AS WE SEE IT AS A THREAT, WE SEE IT AS A TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY. NOW, THE UNIQUE THING ABOUT THESE SUNFLOWERS, OR THE DIFFERENT THING ABOUT THEM, IS THAT THEY'RE HIGH OLEIC ACID. OUTSTANDING IN HIS SUNFLOWER FIELD, NICK PYKE FROM THE FOUNDATION FOR ARABLE RESEARCH IS CONVINCED THE COMING FOOD REVOLUTION WILL BE GOOD FOR NZ. INSTEAD OF US LOOKING AT HOW WE DO THINGS AND SAY WE'VE GOT TO BE EITHER MEAT, DAIRY OR PLANT, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AND SAYING, 'WHAT IS OUR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE? HOW CAN WE USE THE STRENGTH OF OUR 'PLANT PROTEINS WITH OUR MEAT PROTEINS OR OUR MILK PROTEINS 'TO COME UP WITH SOME FOODS THAT ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT?' WOMAN: SO, THOSE AROMAS, AGAIN, IS WHAT CREATES THE FLAVOUR OF MEAT. THINGS ARE MOVING FAST IN THE ALTERNATIVE PROTEIN SPACE. BUT IF IT BLEEDS, IT LEADS, AND THE 'IMPOSSIBLE BURGER' IS NOW THE BIGGEST PLAYER AND ON THE MARKET IN THE STATES AND ASIA. IT'S ALL PLANT-BASED, WITH A G.M. COMPONENT AND TARGETED AT CONSUMERS WHO WANT TO TASTE AND SMELL MEAT. IT'S ALSO HOPED MEAT EATERS WILL GO FOR LABORATORY-GROWN MEAT ` THE SUBJECT OF SEVERAL PHDs IN NZ RIGHT NOW. VERY MUCH A LEGITIMATE ALTERNATIVE FOR THE CONSUMER, JUST WITHOUT ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL, SUSTAINABLE AND ETHICAL BAGGAGE THAT COMES WITH ANIMAL FARMING AT THE MOMENT. WOULD YOU EAT LAB-GROWN MEAT, SYNTHETIC MEAT? YEAH, I PROBABLY WOULD. HMM, PROBABLY NOT. IF I FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY, LIKE, MORE EFFICIENT TO GROW MEAT THAT WAY, YEAH, I'D PROBABLY EAT THAT. BUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IS A LOW PRIORITY FOR NZERS GIVING UP MEAT, ACCORDING TO OTAGO UNIVERSITY RESEARCH RELEASED THIS WEEK. THE RESEARCH IS AIMED AT POLICY MAKERS AND CONSUMERS AND CANVASSED THE CASE FOR A MEAT TAX. BASICALLY, WHATEVER PRODUCTS PRODUCE THE MOST ENVIRONMENTAL HARM ARE GOING TO HAVE THE GREATEST ENVIRONMENTAL TAX. WOMAN: BEYOND MEAT ` THE BEYOND BURGER. THE IMPOSSIBLE BURGER'S RIVAL, BEYOND BURGER, IS NOW SOLD HERE. BUT THE PLANT-BASED SUNFED CHICKEN IS THE ONLY LOCALLY DEVELOPED IMITATION MEAT ON THE MARKET. MOST PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT HERE IS IN ITS INITIAL STAGES ` AND TOP SECRET. DR BOSWORTH HAS HER OWN RESEARCH START-UP. NOTHING ON THE MARKET YET. WE CAN TALK ABOUT PUBLICLY. SO, HE'S COMING UP BEHIND YOU... AND LAST YEAR, PETER JACKSON AND JAMES CAMERON STARTED PBT NZ, WHICH STANDS FOR PLANT-BASED TECHNOLOGY. ON HIS WAIRARAPA PROPERTY, CAMERON'S EXPERIMENTING WITH PROTEIN-RICH CROPS AND JUST HAD THESE GRAIN SILOS BUILT. HE'S WORKING WITH NICK PYKE. SO WHAT CAN NICK TELL US ABOUT PBT? NOTHING. NOTHING TO SEE HERE ` YET. BEEF + LAMB NZ IS SCEPTICAL ABOUT CONSUMER UPTAKE OF PLANT ALTERNATIVES ` WHETHER THEY'RE REALLY GO FOR THE TASTE OR THE LONG LIST OF INGREDIENTS, IN SOME CASES. FRANKLY, THE STORY THAT SITS BEHIND IT IS NOT THAT EXCITING COMPARED TO A FREE-RANGE ANIMAL THAT'S CARED FOR BY A FARMER IN A DISTANT LAND OR WHATEVER ELSE. I MEAN, IT DOESN'T QUITE HAVE THE ROMANCE. BUT THE AGRITECH INNOVATORS AND INVESTORS INSIST THE FUTURE OF FOOD IS ALREADY HERE. IT'LL BE AROUND THE 10, 15-YEAR MARK AWAY THAT OUR FOOD SYSTEM WILL BE REMARKABLY DIFFERENT. Where do we begin with that? I was just thinking that I would either burger but it would have to be a gluten-free barn. That is the problem. It is environmentally friendly and does not have hormones or antibiotics. It does not have poo from the networks on it. I do not want to eat it still. Our young consumers more conscious of the environmental factors and the footprint that is involved in making food? I think there is a demand there. There is a reality to. I think most of the demand will come globally from developing countries from milk and meat. That is a way of life and developing countries. A petri dish does not provide the night and does not pull a plough. I was just saying to Josie during the break that some years ago in Taiwan I went to a 10 course banquet. At the taxpayers expense? Know at the Taiwan government's. At the time I thought it was fantastic. It turned out the wholemeal, the vegetables everything was all laboratory regrown. It was all authentic and it looks good. I think it can be sustained here and the price is good for the consumer. If it is a bit like sacrum versus sugar, although sorts of similarities, I think people would run a mile from it. There are opportunities here that we keep pushing towards the premium side full meet that we do. Identify group ready much with Peter. All the other factors, the hormones and antibiotics. I think really for New Zealand to thrive, particularly in the export market and retain those export industries, it will have to be premium. It will have to use technologies like Frontera for instance are starting to do with block train. To capture that premium position, if you look at millennial's and future generations, particularly in the high consumer markets that we export to, they want those things and they want to know that the food is safe. We have got to occupy that niche. At the same time, don't put ourselves in the position that New Zealand wool market found itself in. I was going to say that the wool industry is a really good parallel. They have caught up and found a niche market. Before, when they were on the back foot with synthetics, I think that is the model. It is the model for the New Zealand economy. We have to moved for that high-value product. Eat less meat but eat better meet. It is a slight irony. I think the thing it does show how much the argument has moved. We still have very restricted GMO laws in this country. We'll miss this motive when careful. As you will experience, if that food in Taiwan can be produced at half the cost, that is going to be a huge market. It might also be something that the world in total needs with so many population exposure and is. People want their men prepared a certain way. The opportunity to target those markets with quality items I think is higher but it is also a challenge. When you think about it, meet and lamb has gone through a huge adjustment in the last 20 to 30 years. The data is not clear that this is actually better for the environment. I don't know, but I have read two bits of data. It could be bad for the environment. It is never quite as simple as it looks. AFTER THE BREAK ` MY INTERVIEW WITH CLEANTECH INCUBATOR CEO MATT PETERSEN FROM LA, WHERE SOLAR PANELS HAVE BECOME COMPULSORY ON ALL NEW BUILDS. HE'S COMING TO NZ TO TALK ABOUT THE NEED TO BUILD AFFORDABLE AND GREEN HOMES. THAT'S NEXT. THE CITY OF LA DOESN'T BRING TO MIND THE WORDS 'CLEAN' AND 'GREEN', BUT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS IN THE MIDDLE OF A GREEN BUILDING BOOM. IT'S NOW COMPULSORY FOR ALL NEW BUILDS TO HAVE SOLAR PANELS, AND THE STATE HAS MUCH HIGHER STANDARDS FOR THINGS LIKE INSULATION AND WINDOW GLAZING. YES, IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE UPFRONT, BUT MATT PETERSEN, FROM LA'S CLEANTECH INCUBATOR, SAYS THE SAVINGS OVER THE LIFECYCLE OF A HOUSE MAKE IT WORTH IT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND FOR THOSE LIVING THERE. HE'S IN AUCKLAND NEXT WEEK TO ATTEND THE NZ GREEN BUILDING COUNCIL'S HOUSING SUMMIT. I CAUGHT UP WITH HIM LAST WEEK, AND BEGAN BY ASKING WHETHER THERE WAS PUSHBACK AT FIRST AGAINST THE EXTRA COST. ONCE YOU INTRODUCE IT IN THE MARKET, THE FIRST MOVERS ARE WILLING TO PAY MORE, AND THAT'S REALLY NEEDED TO BUILD THE EXPERTISE, THE SUPPLY CHAIN, THE PRODUCTS, THE ABILITY FOR THE SUBCONTRACTORS TO KNOW HOW TO WORK WITH MORE ENERGY EFFICIENT MATERIALS, PUTTING SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF. NOW TO THE DEGREE THAT SOLAR HAS DROPPED SO MUCH IN COST FROM WHEN I WAS FIRST PUSHING FOR SOLAR ON ROOFTOPS, THAT IT WAS $8 A WATT, AND NOW IT'S UNDER 60c A WATT. PER WATT OF SOLAR, IT'S AN ENORMOUS COST DISRUPTION IN LOWERING THAT PRICE. SO WE KNOW THAT BY PUTTING IN INCENTIVES AND THEN YOU BUILD THE MARKET OVER TIME, YOU MAKE PEOPLE MORE FAMILIAR WITH IT, AND THEN YOU DRIVE DOWN THE COST. SAME FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY. SAME FOR LOW-E WINDOWS, ENERGY-EFFICIENT WINDOWS AND ALL THOSE GREEN-BUILDING STRATEGIES AND MATERIALS THAT WE NEED TO INTEGRATE INTO THE HOUSING MARKET IN PLACES LIKE NZ THAT STRUGGLE WITH SUCH A SEVERE CLIMATE AT ONE END TO THE OTHER. SHOULD NZ THEN LOOK TO SIMILAR SORTS OF RULES ` GO FOR SOLAR, FOR EXAMPLE, AS A COMPULSORY ON NEW BUILDS. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU THINK WILL BECOME STANDARDISED ACROSS THE WORLD? I THINK SO. I MEAN, PLACES LIKE GERMANY, CALIFORNIA HAVE REALLY LED THE WAY ON SOLAR AS WELL AS IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY. YOU HAVE THE PASSIVE HOME DESIGN THAT REALLY HAS BEEN PIONEERED IN GERMANY AND IN THE UNITED STATES IN DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES. AND SO THERE'S REALLY THIS NOTION. AND WHEN I WAS IN NEW ORLEANS AFTER HURRICANE KATRINA, THE ORGANISATION I RAN AT THE TIME, BUILT THE FIRST LEED PLATINUM HOMES, THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF GREEN BUILDING. AND THOSE HOMES, IN THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS THAT'S GOT EXTREMELY HOT AND HUMID SUMMERS, THOSE ENERGY BILLS AND THOSE HOMES WE BUILD ARE US$24 A MONTH. SO WE KNOW THAT THE PAYBACK IS THERE. SO HOW DO WE REALLY MOVE FROM INCENTIVES TO COMPULSORY MEASURES TO BE ABLE TO BAKE IT IN? SO, WE START WITH THE CARROT AND THEN MOVE TO THE STICK OVER TIME SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THOSE HOMES ARE NOT JUST MORE COMFORTABLE AND ENERGY EFFICIENT, BUT THEY'RE ALSO MORE RESILIENT, BECAUSE YOU BEGIN TO BUILD DISASTER-RESISTANT BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE CRITICAL. WHETHER IT'S THE NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE IN 1994 OR THE CHRISTCHURCH EARTHQUAKE MORE RECENTLY, WE KNOW WE NEED TO REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. AND THOSE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND GREEN BUILDING MEASURES CAN GO HAND IN HAND WITH THE RESILIENT BUILDING AS WELL. THERE'S, PERHAPS, A FEEL THAT A LOT OF NZERS ARE STRUGGLING WITH, FOR EXAMPLE, COLD, DAMP HOUSES, YET THEY LACK THE RESOURCES TO BE PUTTING ANY MONEY UP FRONT FOR THINGS LIKE SOLAR-LEASED DOUBLE-GLAZED WINDOWS. HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH SOME OF THOSE ISSUES? YOU REALLY HAVE TO START WITH OUR LOWEST INCOME RESIDENTS, AND THAT'S SOMETHING I'VE GIVEN MUCH OF MY LIFE TO IS HOW DO WE GREEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING? HOW DO WE IMPROVE SCHOOLS WHERE LOWER INCOME COMMUNITIES ARE LOCATED? AND GIVE THEM THE BENEFITS OF BETTER DAYLIGHT, BETTER AIR QUALITY. OFTEN, AIR QUALITY IN LOW-INCOME NEIGHBOURHOODS IS THE WORST. HERE IN LOS ANGELES, THAT'S THE CASE. IT MAY NOT BE AS BIG OF AN ISSUE IN NZ. BUT THAT INDOOR AIR QUALITY ` WHEN YOU HAVE A DAMP HOME, WHEN YOU'VE GOT CHEAPER MATERIALS IN THE HOME THAT OFFSET REALLY THE THINGS THAT GIVE KIDS ASTHMA AND UPPER RESPIRATORY PROBLEMS FOR SENIORS, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW DO WE MOBILISE CAPITAL FROM THE PUBLIC SECTOR TO LEVERAGE PRIVATE CAPITAL TO INVEST INTO IMPROVING THOSE HOMES AND BUILD BETTER ONES GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE COMMUNITIES THAT BENEFIT THE MOST. THOSE THAT THE ENERGY BILL IS THAT THEY HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN PAYING THEIR ENERGY BILL, THEIR HEALTHCARE COSTS, THEIR RENT OR THEIR MORTGAGE ` THOSE ARE THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO TO REDUCE THOSE BURDENS UPON THOSE FAMILIES, BECAUSE THE HEALTHCARE COSTS THAT COME FROM LIVING IN A DAMP, UNHEALTHY AIR-QUALITY HOME MEANS THAT THEY MAY HAVE TO TAKE TIME OFF FROM WORK, THEY MAY LOSE WAGES, THEY MAY SUFFER IN OTHER WAYS ` TIME WITH LOVED ONES THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF. DOES THAT NEED TO BE SEEN, THEN, AS A SOCIAL GOOD WHICH THE GOVERNMENT OR A CENTRAL AGENCY MUST FUND, IN TERMS OF BUILDING THOSE GREEN HOUSES FOR LOWER-INCOME NZERS? YEAH, I THINK IT'S A MIX OF THOSE INCENTIVES AND SOME SUBSIDY FROM THE PUBLIC SECTOR, IF POSSIBLE, ALONG WITH INCENTIVES THAT SEND THE SIGNAL FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR, IF THEY'RE GONNA BUILD THE HOUSING THAT'S TARGETING THE LOWER-INCOME FAMILIES, THAT THEY BUILD IN THOSE MEASURES UP FRONT. AND SO IN CALIFORNIA, MY ORGANISATION WAS REALLY LEADING THE WAY IN HELPING FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT THOSE INCENTIVES IN PLACE, THAT IT ALMOST MADE COMPLETE FINANCIAL SENSE TO PUT THE SOLAR IN FROM THE BEGINNING, NOT ADD IT IN LATER, SO THAT THEY REALLY WERE MOTIVATED FINANCIALLY TO BUILD AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT, WATER-EFFICIENT HEALTHY HOME THAT ALSO HAD SOLAR. YOU WANT TO START WITH ENERGY AND WATER EFFICIENCY, IN OUR CASE, BUT ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND COMFORT IS SO IMPORTANT FOR LOW-INCOME CUSTOMERS IN RESIDENTS OF NEIGHBOURHOODS. JUST FINALLY, HOW MUCH OF A PROBLEM IS IT IN TERMS OF THE POLITICS, BIPARTISAN POLITICS? HAS THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY SLOWED DOWN THE GROWTH IN GREEN BUILDING? GIVEN HE SEEMS TO HAVE WEAKENED THE EPA AND HAS BEEN SORT OF PRO-COAL AND SOME OF THE OLDER FOSSIL FUELS. GREAT QUESTION. SO, HERE IN CALIFORNIA, WE ARE A BIT OF THE GREEN RESISTANCE, IF YOU WILL. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES HAS LED THE WAY FOR A LONG TIME IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY, GREEN BUILDING, SOLAR AND RENEWABLE ENERGY OVERALL. AND WHILE TRUMP IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS TRYING TO ROLL BACK SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS, ROLL BACK STANDARDS THAT ALLOW MORE POLLUTION, PULLING OUT OF THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT, IT'S PEOPLE LIKE MAYOR ERIC GARCETTI HERE IN LOS ANGELES WHO HAS A TRIPARTITE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE AUCKLAND MAYOR AND THE GUANGZHOU MAYOR IN CHINA, AND WE JUST HOSTED THE DEPUTY MAYOR OF AUCKLAND IN MY OFFICE AT THE LA CLEANTECH INCUBATOR RECENTLY WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT THESE VERY ISSUES. WE HAVE CITIES AND MAYORS ACROSS A COUNTRY RISING UP ` OVER 400 MAYORS SAYING, 'WE'RE GONNA ADOPT THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT IN OUR OWN CITY 'NO MATTER WHAT TRUMP DOES,' AND THAT'S THE KIND OF LEADERSHIP THAT'S NOT JUST HAPPENING IN CALIFORNIA AND 47 STATES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES. AND THAT'S THE KIND OF LEADERSHIP WE NEED TO SEE AT THIS TIME TO COUNTER THIS ERRATIC LEADERSHIP IN THE WHITE HOUSE THAT IS MOSTLY HEADING DOWN A TRAJECTORY OF TRYING TO DRAW BACK, ROLL BACK MEASURES AROUND THE ENVIRONMENT. MATT PETERSEN, CEO OF LA'S CLEANTECH INCUBATOR. THE PANEL'S BACK AFTER THE BREAK AND OUR LOOK BACK IN POLITICS. SOME EARLY TV PICTURES OF A FUTURE NATIONAL PARTY LEADER. THAT'S NEXT. LET'S TAKE SOME OF YOUR FEEDBACK. COREY HEBBERED HAS TWEETED THAT SIMON BRIDGES IS CONDEMNING MORE AND MORE NEW ZEALANDERS TO THE SCRAP HEAP. HE SAYS MORE JAILS IS NOT THE ANSWER AND THAT IT'S TIME FOR AN APPROACH FOCUSED ON REHABILITATION. CHARLES GOODWIN ALSO TWEETING SAYS SIMON BRIDGES SAYS THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD KEEP KIWIS SAFE, BUT THAT INCLUDES STUFF NATIONAL FAILED ON, LIKE HELPING HOMELESS, PROVIDING HOUSES, AS WELL AS LAW AND ORDER. TY HAS EMAILED THAT SIMON BRIDGES IS GETTING HIS MOJO AND THAT HIS EXPERIENCE IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SHOWS HE KNOWS WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT WITH HIS STRONG STANCE ON LAW AND ORDER. AND ON OUR FAKE MEAT INVESTIGATION, MURRAY ISN'T SO SURE ABOUT SYNTHETIC FOOD. 'YEAH, WE CAN REALLY TRUST FACTORY FOODS, 'LIKE ALL THOSE "HEALTHY" BREAKFAST CEREALS, 'PREMADE COOKING SAUCES ETC. 'ALL CHOCK FULL OF CHEMICALS AND GOD KNOWS WHAT ELSE.' Let's kick it off with Trump and Kim Jong-Un. At the end of the day, the economists headline I thought said it all. It was Kim Jong Won. In domestic politics in America, I don't think so. He has got an invitation to the White House. He is now suddenly this global leader. No mention of human rights, so that indicates to him that America is indifferent to the human rights record, which is hideous in North Korea. Trump ones no matter what. I think they both won. What Trump does is open the door to a conversation. If you go back to where we were earlier this year on the brink of a nuclear war. It is a massive position taken by both sides. To get to the table is a plus it is the first time it is happened. It doesn't go as far as what Christopher Hill and others achieved in the six party talks. It will be up to someone on both sides to, with the agenda. The one thing I really liked to come out of it was the propaganda video. It was screened on North Korean television when Kim got back. Essentially, it showed the whole thing. What it showed also was that Kim enjoyed the big lights of Singapore. All those conversations that took place. Remember when Trump was saying that he basically said that you could put a property development here and do this and that? North Koreans would have seen that and they would have seen that there is a world that is quite different. I think if they can bring it along and it will have lots of ups and downs, I say hats off to both of them. To allow him to have been seen by his own people. I was quite surprised. That relief through me. I think three things. Firstly, Trump one with the Americans. He has shown that he can be tough. Kim wins with his own people for the reasons just stated. I think the third thing is that at the international level, the door has been opened now. For further negotiation and discussion. Trump will need to have the visit to the White House to prove that it wasn't all again. Campbell desperately want to still be in the club, CORRECTION: Kim. The question will be in a couple of years time, what progress have they made? I think it actually looks really bad for Trump coming on the back of G7. He promised North Korea a security guarantee, which is what you usually give your allies. Meanwhile, you have said to Canada that we are having a trade war with you because you are a security risk. That is like being nasty to a cardigan. He is playing a wedge. If you look at how he got to power in the United States, it was I am going to bring the troops home and we are not going to spend all of our taxpayers cash looking after NATO. There is a big message about that. One of the messages out of that in some of the comments that he did make about security is that the rest of us including New Zealand and Australia, I think that we are going to have to shoulder much for the security issue. I hear that America is withdrawing from its role. What is America's role? In the 30s, you had the same thing where America withdrew from the role. Secure financial system. The issue is what is the response of Europe? Young Americans now who have had a decade where they have been in Iran and Afghanistan and Iraq. They have had a longer period of engagement in World War II or even Vietnam. I think the interesting question is what will Europe do? Europe, I think, if you put Brexit to one side... in terms of the global trades surpluses... to me, the Emporia's with the China stuff. China has used its state and press media organs to make that point. They have been very blatant over the weekend on that score. It is concerning. It is something that is going to get going. Time. That has ramifications, but we also have to think about what we have to do to try We have to think about it. All of the things that Trump has railed against, of course now find themselves in this position of having to deal with the consequences of his actions. Meanwhile he is waging war on a golden retriever, Canada, and being friends with North Korea. I will just do one that stands out to me. There is all this discussion about Winston Peters and his court case. Regardless of politics, it is a very bad thing in a democracy when you have civil service servants that are looking at personal information and sharing it with the Minister. Those officials in leadership roles should have said, Peter Hughes and Brenda Boyle should have said I do not want to see this. In a democracy, you must have trust that your personal information is safe and not going to be used politically. I think he is right to do it. Stuart Nash, Shane Jones, David Clark, Andrew Little. For example is in one week alone of ministers failing the basic scripts of talking to your colleagues before you make surprise announcements. I think this government really needs to have a tutorial on how to operate before it starts to really look as though it is completely falling apart. Jacinda Ardern, I think she missed an opportunity to actually stakeout the nonsense of shame owns claiming his comments about Montero were personal. He was invited to feel days of the cabinet minister. You cannot do that. They are in cabin, it is a collective response to. Thank you very much to the panel. FINALLY, A LOOK BACK TO 1997. WE DUG INTO THE TVNZ ARCHIVES TO FIND THE EARLIEST MENTION OF SIMON BRIDGES AND HIS POLITICAL CAREER, AND HERE HE IS ` ALONG WITH A FEW OTHER FAMILIAR FACES ` AT A MEETING OF THE YOUNG NATS. THE YOUNG FACE OF THE NATIONAL PARTY. AT THE LAST ELECTION, THE PARTY ATTRACTED ABOUT 40% OF UNDER-35 VOTERS, MOST OF WHOM HAD LITTLE OR NO MEMORY OR ROB MULDOON'S NATIONAL PARTY. THIS GENERATION IS MORE... I THINK WE'VE BEEN BROUGHT UP MORE IN LINE WITH TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR OURSELVES, NOT EXPECTING THE STATE TO DO IT. THE MAIN THING IS I BELIEVE THAT IF YOU WORK HARD AND THAT SORT OF THING, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET THE BENEFITS OF THE MONEY, AND I AGREE WITH USER PAYS. THEY DO SEEM TO SUPPORT ME AND MY LEADERSHIP, AND THAT'S INTERESTING, BECAUSE YOU COULD SAY, 'HEY, THERE'S A BIG AGE DIFFERENTIAL.' BUT DESPITE SUPPORT FROM THE YOUNG, INTEREST IN IN THE YOUNG NATIONALS IS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW. FROM A MEMBERSHIP OF 10,000, IT NOW HAS LESS THAN 50 ACTIVE MEMBERS. SOME UNSUCCESSFULLY WANTED A NAME CHANGE, BELIEVING IT WOULD IMPROVE ITS IMAGE AND ITS SUPPORT. ESSENTIALLY, YOUNG NATIONALS IS REGARDED AS BEING FULL OF RICH, SNOBBY-NOSED KIDS, AND THAT'S NOT THE IMAGE WE REALLY WANT TO PORTRAY. ANY SORT OF YOUTH SECTION OF A TORY PARTY IS ALWAYS GONNA BE LABELLED AS YOUNG RICH BOYS. SUPPORTERS OF THE YOUNG NATS' NAME BELIEVE THEIR HISTORY AND TRADITIONS CAN ATTRACT YOUNG VOTERS TO JOIN UP. MARAE IS NEXT. REMEMBER Q+A REPEATS TONIGHT AT 11.30 TONIGHT. 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 INGRID LAUDER AND JULIE TAYLOR. CAPTIONS WERE MADE WITH THE SUPPORT OF NZ ON AIR. COPYRIGHT ABLE 2018