��һ�ǿ�����

Potential governing partners Winston Peters and David Seymour have clashed over whether they trust each other, highlighting possible tensions in any governing arrangement between them and the National Party.��

The leaders of NZ First and Act featured prominently in the TVNZ minor parties’ debate last night, which comprised Peters, Seymour, Green Party co-leader James Shaw and Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi.��

It followed a poll by Talbot Mills Research that had National on 38 per cent, Labour on 27 per cent, the Greens on 13 per cent and NZ First on 6.4 per cent and in the kingmaker position - the second poll showing NZ First in this position in two days.��

STORY RESUMES AFTER LIVEBLOG��

STORY RESUMES��

On the potential governing arrangement between National, Act and NZ First, the issue of trust led to a fiery exchange.��

Seymour said he didn’t trust Peters because he didn’t know where he stood on any issue, pointing out Peters’ support for the Zero Carbon Act despite its impact on farmers, his apparent statements for and against vaccine mandates, and for opposing co-governance dispute being in the Cabinet committee that signed off on commissioning what would become He Puapua.��

Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi (left) and New Zealand First leader Winston Peters during the 1��һ�ǿ����� Multi-Party Debate. Photo / TVNZ��

Peters dismissed Seymour’s comments, and started to say how Minister Willie Jackson kept the He Puapua report from him, but Seymour retorted “you never asked”.��

“It’s not my job to trust David Seymour,” Peters said when asked the same question on trust.��

“You’ve got to establish trust, and this is not a very good start now.”��

Seymour: “Unfortunately I’m just telling the truth.”��

Peters: “Grow up.”��

Shaw then gestured to them both and said: “If you’re voting for the National Party, this is what you’re voting for.”��

None of the four leaders raised their hands when asked who thought National’s tax policy was credible. The same resulted from a question about the credibility of Labour’s GST-free fresh and frozen fruit and vegetables.��

It was a rare moment of unanimity which had evaporated by the end, when Waititi and Peters squabbled over race.��

Asked how each leader was lowering the temperature given the alleged threats and intimidation during the campaign, Peters opted for calling out co-governance.��

”We’re not putting up with this separatism, we’re not putting up with this racism,” he said, adding that Waititi had endorsed comments about Māori having superior genes.��

Waititi replied there was nothing wrong with being proud of one’s whakapapa, and Peters’ use of inflammatory words including “separatism” and “racism” was triggering and emboldening dangerous behaviour.��

“These are the words coming out from these jokers,” he said, referring to Peters and Seymour.��

Peters had used the same words - “a racist separatist approach” - when talking about Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which prompted Waititi to say: “He’s been race-baiting our people.”��

It follows a dispute between police and Te Pāti Māori, which had claimed there were four recent attacks, including a home invasion, on its candidate and number four on the party list Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke.��

The party claimed the attacks were politically- and racially-motivated, and called out right-leaning parties for emboldening such behaviour. National and Act rejected this, while Peters said there had been no home invasion and it was a publicity stunt.��

Last night police said there was no home invasion, nor any criminality established, “although inquiries are ongoing”, but Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere doubled down, saying the police investigation was a “whitewash”.��

Green Party co-leader James Shaw speaks during the 1��һ�ǿ����� Multi-Party Debate. Photo / TVNZ��

Asked during the debate about how to reduce inequitable outcomes for Māori, Shaw and Waititi said it wasn’t divisive to allow Māori a seat at the decision-making table to help reduce inequitable outcomes.��

Waititi added that a referendum on co-governance, which Seymour wants, would leave the fate of a minority to the “tyranny of the majority”.��

Seymour said the constitutional arrangements of the country had been decided “largely” decided behind closed doors by the judiciary and academics. “What we need instead is a clear statement by Parliament.”��

He talked about the “same rights and duties” in article three, prompting Waititi to ask him about article two, which is about self-determination.��

Waititi said Seymour was in a “fairytale” and trampling over Te Tiriti rights. Shaw agreed, saying Seymour was appropriating the language about democracy and unity to push what was essentially an assimilation policy where the majoirty overrode the rights of a minority.��

There were further fiery moments on climate change, when Seymour questioned how much of a role New Zealand should play given the size of the country relative to the rest of the world.��

Shaw said the rationale was wrong, and it amounted to saying New Zealand shouldn’t have participated in World War II because New Zealand couldn’t defeat the Nazis.��

Seymour interjected, prompting Shaw to say he couldn’t remember asking Seymour for his opinion, triggering a tense talk-off before host Jack Tame stepped in.��

Later Seymour said Shaw should be called “offshore” because of the time he spent overseas talking about climate change. Shaw replied that he accepted Seymour would say some stupid things but he was “abusing the privilege”.��

Seymour: “You can have all the wisecracks you like, James, but you have failed on climate change.”��

Act Party leader David Seymour speaks during last night's 1��һ�ǿ����� Multi-Party Debate. Photo / TVNZ��

On crime, both Shaw and Waititi said poverty was the main driver, while Seymour said the Government had been “kind to criminals hoping they’ll be kind back”.��

Peters said “criminal intent” was the main driver, adding he grew up with others in poverty who never committed crimes because they had a sense of citizenry.��

Shaw said the previous 200 years of history showed that the “lock’em up and throw away the key macho approach does not work”. He said people needed a stake in the community so they would feel accountable to that community.��

When Seymour tried to interrupt again, Shaw said: “I’m starting to realise that the people who can tolerate you are the real heroes.”��

Seymour wanted to turn prisons from “universities for crime” into primary schools for literacy, while Peters talked up the need for more police.��

Seymour then tried to interrupt Peters, who said he might get away with that with Shaw, but not him and he needed to put some “long trousers on and behave”.��

When he said Luxon would expect that of Seymour too, Seymour said: “We’ll send you a card.”��

Seymour said cutting 15,000 jobs in the public service wouldn’t affect frontline services, prompting incredulity from the other three leaders.��

Peters, who pitched himself as a handbrake on a “hard lurch to the right”, said: “$35 billion is what he’s [Seymour] going to take out of the economy and we’re going straight to a massive recession.”��