1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:01,800 Speaker 1: Jason Wall's political leaders is with us now. 2 00:00:02,000 --> 00:00:04,640 Speaker 2: Jason, good afternoon, and happy Friday. 3 00:00:05,800 --> 00:00:07,400 Speaker 1: It's been a week, hasn't it. 4 00:00:07,400 --> 00:00:08,119 Speaker 2: It's been a week? 5 00:00:08,200 --> 00:00:09,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, hey, listen, So what do you make of this 6 00:00:09,880 --> 00:00:11,720 Speaker 1: money that we're throwing at the film subsidies. 7 00:00:12,080 --> 00:00:14,720 Speaker 2: It's an interesting one, isn't it, Because it is quite 8 00:00:14,760 --> 00:00:17,640 Speaker 2: a large sum of money, five hundred and seventy five 9 00:00:17,680 --> 00:00:20,319 Speaker 2: million dollars over four years, taking the total sum to 10 00:00:20,520 --> 00:00:24,480 Speaker 2: just over a billion dollars. So this is where eligible 11 00:00:24,560 --> 00:00:27,800 Speaker 2: productions can access about twenty They can access twenty percent 12 00:00:27,800 --> 00:00:31,200 Speaker 2: of her cash rebate on production expenditure when that production 13 00:00:31,400 --> 00:00:34,760 Speaker 2: costs more than fifteen million dollars for feature films, and 14 00:00:34,840 --> 00:00:37,600 Speaker 2: it's four million dollars when it's TV productions. If it 15 00:00:37,640 --> 00:00:40,600 Speaker 2: costs over thirty mil chuck another five percent on there, 16 00:00:40,720 --> 00:00:44,040 Speaker 2: says the government. Now. Willis argues that this scheme has 17 00:00:44,120 --> 00:00:47,800 Speaker 2: been very has been very successful in the past. Inbound 18 00:00:47,840 --> 00:00:51,279 Speaker 2: Productions invested nearly seven point five billion dollars in New 19 00:00:51,360 --> 00:00:54,480 Speaker 2: Zealand over the past ten years, she said, supported by 20 00:00:54,680 --> 00:00:57,680 Speaker 2: one point five billion through these rebates, So she argues 21 00:00:57,720 --> 00:01:00,320 Speaker 2: that's a pretty good payoff. And she says that you 22 00:01:00,360 --> 00:01:03,280 Speaker 2: know ten large international productions have come to New Zealand 23 00:01:03,280 --> 00:01:07,240 Speaker 2: after twenty twenty three twenty twenty three review of this scheme. 24 00:01:07,480 --> 00:01:10,120 Speaker 2: These include, for example, the Minecraft movie, which I know 25 00:01:10,360 --> 00:01:12,480 Speaker 2: you as the mother of a toddler has probably gone 26 00:01:12,560 --> 00:01:15,720 Speaker 2: to see three or four times now. So Nicholas actually 27 00:01:15,760 --> 00:01:18,399 Speaker 2: sat up front that she's not really a fan of 28 00:01:18,760 --> 00:01:21,480 Speaker 2: governments essentially shelling out to big businesses. 29 00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:24,399 Speaker 3: I'm going to be candid with you. Generally I'm not 30 00:01:24,440 --> 00:01:28,640 Speaker 3: a big fan of industry incentives. But the reality for 31 00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:32,320 Speaker 3: this sector is that we simply won't get offshore investment 32 00:01:32,840 --> 00:01:35,199 Speaker 3: without continuing the rebate scheme. 33 00:01:35,280 --> 00:01:37,959 Speaker 2: Now, despite this, the Taxpayers Union says this is just 34 00:01:38,000 --> 00:01:40,679 Speaker 2: another dose of corporate welfare at a time when the 35 00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:44,080 Speaker 2: public services are under pressure and the nation's books are 36 00:01:44,120 --> 00:01:46,640 Speaker 2: deep in the red. Now, I was while we were 37 00:01:46,680 --> 00:01:49,120 Speaker 2: at this stay, So it was it was in sort 38 00:01:49,160 --> 00:01:51,720 Speaker 2: of the wetter area of Mirima this morning, and it 39 00:01:51,760 --> 00:01:53,640 Speaker 2: was in a big film studio, and I was looking 40 00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:57,040 Speaker 2: around thinking didn't David Seymour have a real big problem 41 00:01:57,040 --> 00:01:59,080 Speaker 2: with these sorts of things when he was in opposition 42 00:01:59,400 --> 00:02:02,000 Speaker 2: and he's been relatively quiet today. So I asked Nikola, 43 00:02:02,080 --> 00:02:05,680 Speaker 2: willis you know how did you get libertarian David Seymour 44 00:02:05,680 --> 00:02:07,600 Speaker 2: and the act MP's on board with this? 45 00:02:07,880 --> 00:02:10,400 Speaker 3: Look, I persuaded him and the same way that I 46 00:02:10,560 --> 00:02:13,720 Speaker 3: presented the case to you, which is, how can we 47 00:02:13,919 --> 00:02:18,120 Speaker 3: be a government for economic growth if we allow a 48 00:02:18,200 --> 00:02:21,720 Speaker 3: major industry to die? And you know what, I'm very 49 00:02:21,760 --> 00:02:25,920 Speaker 3: persuasive with my cabinet colleagues from time to so you know. 50 00:02:25,919 --> 00:02:28,120 Speaker 2: I'm sure there's more to it than that. But apparently 51 00:02:28,160 --> 00:02:31,239 Speaker 2: she got him over the line with her good persuasion skills. 52 00:02:31,280 --> 00:02:33,240 Speaker 1: Now we're actually talking to David Cmore at ten person, 53 00:02:33,320 --> 00:02:36,000 Speaker 1: I might ask him a little bit about that. Look, 54 00:02:36,160 --> 00:02:39,960 Speaker 1: this business with the ACC Minister flagging that ACC might 55 00:02:40,000 --> 00:02:42,519 Speaker 1: not be the right outfit for people who want compo 56 00:02:42,639 --> 00:02:45,160 Speaker 1: for sexual abuse suggests to me that he's softening us 57 00:02:45,240 --> 00:02:47,600 Speaker 1: up for exactly that they're not going to accept this claim, 58 00:02:47,600 --> 00:02:47,959 Speaker 1: are they. 59 00:02:48,320 --> 00:02:50,320 Speaker 2: Well, I don't know how to read this. There's not 60 00:02:50,360 --> 00:02:53,120 Speaker 2: a ton of detail in the story from the post. 61 00:02:53,160 --> 00:02:54,880 Speaker 2: I mean, there's a good story in terms of getting 62 00:02:54,919 --> 00:02:57,840 Speaker 2: Scott Simpson's thoughts on this, but you know this is 63 00:02:58,080 --> 00:03:00,280 Speaker 2: it comes down to this. There's judgment in twenty twenty 64 00:03:00,320 --> 00:03:02,639 Speaker 2: three called the TN Case, where the Court of appeal 65 00:03:02,720 --> 00:03:06,440 Speaker 2: ruled that sexual abuse survivors were entitled to compensation for 66 00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:09,080 Speaker 2: the loss of potential earnings from the time that they 67 00:03:09,080 --> 00:03:11,960 Speaker 2: were from the time when they were abused, and ACC 68 00:03:12,240 --> 00:03:15,040 Speaker 2: advised that this was expected to cost them three point 69 00:03:15,160 --> 00:03:17,600 Speaker 2: six billion dollars and that's the liability on their book. 70 00:03:17,760 --> 00:03:19,960 Speaker 2: But Scott Simpson told The Post that this was a 71 00:03:20,040 --> 00:03:24,040 Speaker 2: live and current question whereas where the government might make 72 00:03:24,160 --> 00:03:27,239 Speaker 2: changes that meant the claims that arose from this appeal 73 00:03:27,320 --> 00:03:31,520 Speaker 2: ruling weren't funded through a CC quote. When the scheme 74 00:03:31,600 --> 00:03:34,680 Speaker 2: was originally set up, the foundational setting up of ACC, 75 00:03:34,880 --> 00:03:38,480 Speaker 2: I don't think they contemplated an outcome of this sort 76 00:03:38,720 --> 00:03:42,000 Speaker 2: reflected by the judicial outcome in this case. Perhaps we 77 00:03:42,080 --> 00:03:44,600 Speaker 2: need to have a conversation as a nation about what 78 00:03:44,720 --> 00:03:48,120 Speaker 2: the best vehicle to provide that care, support and assistance 79 00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:51,040 Speaker 2: is and whether that's ACC. So it kind of almost 80 00:03:51,040 --> 00:03:53,440 Speaker 2: sounds to me as if he's looking to shift this 81 00:03:53,560 --> 00:03:56,920 Speaker 2: liability to another section of government, and at the end 82 00:03:56,960 --> 00:03:59,800 Speaker 2: of the day, you know this is Nikola Willis created 83 00:03:59,840 --> 00:04:03,960 Speaker 2: an entirely new way of measuring government surplus and deficits. 84 00:04:04,080 --> 00:04:07,560 Speaker 2: Because of the large deficit that ACC had because of 85 00:04:07,600 --> 00:04:10,720 Speaker 2: this case, you remember she called it Obergail X. It 86 00:04:10,800 --> 00:04:14,680 Speaker 2: sounded like some sort of Tesla remake. But it really 87 00:04:14,720 --> 00:04:17,120 Speaker 2: remains unclear as to how this is going to be, 88 00:04:17,960 --> 00:04:19,720 Speaker 2: where this money is going to go, Who's going to 89 00:04:19,800 --> 00:04:22,400 Speaker 2: have this liability. We asked Nicola Willis about it today 90 00:04:22,920 --> 00:04:24,560 Speaker 2: she was giving us practically nothing. 91 00:04:24,760 --> 00:04:27,880 Speaker 3: As I said, Kebnet needs to consider that matter, as 92 00:04:28,160 --> 00:04:30,520 Speaker 3: you'll have to put the question to the Minister for ACC. 93 00:04:31,120 --> 00:04:33,320 Speaker 3: But that is a measure for Kebnet to consider it. 94 00:04:33,400 --> 00:04:36,039 Speaker 2: So it remains to be seen what actually happens here, 95 00:04:36,080 --> 00:04:37,480 Speaker 2: because it's a head scratcher for sure. 96 00:04:37,520 --> 00:04:40,200 Speaker 4: I mean it sounds like because with ACC it's very clear, right, 97 00:04:40,200 --> 00:04:43,000 Speaker 4: ACC is a delivery vehicle for basically paying your money, right, 98 00:04:43,000 --> 00:04:45,240 Speaker 4: but another agency may deal with the differently, like they 99 00:04:45,279 --> 00:04:47,440 Speaker 4: may just provide you with some counseling or something like 100 00:04:47,440 --> 00:04:50,000 Speaker 4: that and may bring the cost down quite a lot. 101 00:04:50,360 --> 00:04:53,080 Speaker 4: So perhaps that's the I mean, that's obviously the thinking here, 102 00:04:53,160 --> 00:04:54,400 Speaker 4: right is to try and get rid of some of 103 00:04:54,400 --> 00:04:55,440 Speaker 4: this cost, isn't it. 104 00:04:55,720 --> 00:04:58,279 Speaker 2: Well, I mean, it was ACC the right vehicle in 105 00:04:58,320 --> 00:05:01,159 Speaker 2: the first place to be the one handling this and 106 00:05:01,200 --> 00:05:03,479 Speaker 2: I hate to use the word, but it is this liability. So, 107 00:05:03,680 --> 00:05:05,800 Speaker 2: I mean, you're absolutely right. It could be somewhere else 108 00:05:05,880 --> 00:05:08,520 Speaker 2: within government that's better handled and better suited to this. 109 00:05:08,600 --> 00:05:10,359 Speaker 2: So it's not a bad idea. But the money's not 110 00:05:10,400 --> 00:05:12,560 Speaker 2: going to go away. The government still will owe the 111 00:05:12,600 --> 00:05:14,000 Speaker 2: people because of this judgment. 112 00:05:14,120 --> 00:05:18,440 Speaker 1: Are you sure well, I mean because I reckon, not 113 00:05:18,680 --> 00:05:21,200 Speaker 1: I reckon, You shift it, you take it to another agency, 114 00:05:21,240 --> 00:05:22,080 Speaker 1: and then it's different. 115 00:05:22,279 --> 00:05:26,400 Speaker 2: So if the government thought they got bad pushback from 116 00:05:26,440 --> 00:05:29,760 Speaker 2: the pay equity issue, imagine the pushback they would get 117 00:05:29,800 --> 00:05:31,680 Speaker 2: if they tried to wiggle out of a judgment like this. 118 00:05:31,760 --> 00:05:32,720 Speaker 2: I mean, there would be the end. 119 00:05:32,640 --> 00:05:35,640 Speaker 1: Of them maybe, But they've softened us up so it 120 00:05:35,640 --> 00:05:37,360 Speaker 1: wouldn't be as much of a shock. Jason, I really 121 00:05:37,400 --> 00:05:38,880 Speaker 1: appreciate it. We'll talk to you later. We'll wrap the 122 00:05:38,880 --> 00:05:41,080 Speaker 1: political week that was at about quarter pass likes that 123 00:05:41,240 --> 00:05:45,599 Speaker 1: Jason Wall's political editat For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, 124 00:05:45,800 --> 00:05:49,200 Speaker 1: listen live to news Talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, 125 00:05:49,320 --> 00:05:51,520 Speaker 1: or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.