The team discuss who's making nice with whom, the return of Shane Jones, a Greens apology, Todd Barclay implications and Māori Party-Labour fisticuffs.

Watch the video version of the episode here

Why is New Zealand First assumed to be the king maker? Is everyone a bit over-excited about the second coming of Shane Jones? And can the party mobilise the regions to push their vote ahead of the Greens?

On the weekend, Jones made soothing noises towards the Greens, at odds with what NZ First leader Winston Peters typically says about them. Is that significant? The Greens have said publicly they can work with New Zealand First - and it's expected they will say more at their election year conference this coming weekend - but could Winston do a deal that involves them?

Shane Jones announcing he is standing for New Zealand First in Whangarei.

This week on Morning Report, Labour Party leader Andrew Little reached out to Jones, calling him "a friend of Labour". But there are questions as to whether Jones' any more friendly with Labour that he would be with National.

Then there's Green Party co-leader James Shaw's apology for his party's immigration policy. Last year he floated the idea of keeping it at about 1 percent of the overall population as a way to manage it without the peaks and troughs, but met with resistance from immigrant advocates. He said last weekend he was "mortified" by the reaction and walked back that policy. But is that apology a sign of strength or does it further muddy the waters?

How has Prime Minister Bill English rallied from the Todd Barclay debacle and what's the opening opposition parties see in how he handled that? And then there's the roiling spat between Labour and the Māori Party. This week the Māori Party announced a partnership with One Pacific and president Tukoroirangi Morgan said Māori were sick of being "oppressed" by people like Andrew Little. Could those parties ever work together?

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

We talk about Barry Coates being "nuanced when he should have been unequivocal" on coalition agreements, as well as the battle over National and Labour's families packages.

By Tim Watkin

In today's episode, Green MP Barry Coates' ill-considered suggestion that the Greens might prefer a second election to a Labour-New Zealand First coalition, which could keep his party on the sidelines, pushed coalition politics to the top of the hosts' agenda.

Coates is the Greens' newest MP, having entered Parliament on the list in October last year when Kevin Hague resigned. He told Newshub this week that Labour and New Zealand First could not take Green Party support for granted if they tried to keep them out of any coalition talks.

Picking up on comments by Greens co-leader Metiria Turei at the weekend, he said a Labour-New Zealand First government would be unacceptable to the Greens, then went even further, suggesting that if numbers allowed, they could force another election.

Greens co-leader James Shaw promptly shot down Coates' comments, telling Morning Report Coates was wrong and he was "essentially being nuanced when he should have been unequivocal and I have spoken to him about it".

So, after Turei's accusations that New Zealand First practised "racist and divisive" politics, what are the Greens up to?

Meanwhile, with the release of Labour's families package this week, we now have the big two parties fighting for the family vote. The promise of a baby bonus and winter fuel payments stood out, but the package also faced accusations of being over-complex.

So who has the edge? What do voters get from each? And what do their positions reveal about the parties' wider strategies?

Finally, National allocated its $1 billion infrastructure fund this week. Did it all go to plan? That's this week's Caucus.

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Labour's fiscals, Winston's growing spending tab, who wants the Māori seats, what a Green Party voter looks like and whether it's OK for Metiria Turei to have deceived WINZ (oh, and the Greens' actual family policy!).

By Tim Watkin

Labour and National are doubling down on the budgetary hands they have dealt themselves after the release of Labour's fiscal plan this week. The gap between the two isn't huge - both are promising to spend some of the surplus on families while committing to debt levels that are low by international standards. But you wouldn't know it from the rhetoric.

If you listened to Labour, you would believe the heartless National government is letting social services rot. Its fiscals this week promised $8 billion more in health, $4 billion more in education and $5 billion more in its family package, over four years. By "more", they mean on top of National's promised spending in Budget 2017. Its rationale? That services have been ground down and need to be refreshed.

National says that will mean more borrowing and it's typical of Labour 'tax and spend'.

It reckons people would rather have some of that money in their own pocket, some (but significantly less) spent on those services, and more fiscal discipline, where money is not spent at all.

National warns of a rainy day and wants Crown debt down below 20 percent of GDP. Labour's happy to let it stay a couple of percent higher. In fours years National wants debt at 18 percent of GDP and falling, while Labour wants it at 20 percent. The difference is around $7 billion in borrowing.

But for context, either of those debt levels is conservative by international standards. Australia's government debt is almost double that; Britain, America and Canada's are 3-4 times those numbers. So there's not much between the two parties.New Zealand First, on the other hand, has a growing shopping list of policies, including a referendum on the Māori seats. But we don't know what they think they'll cost and in the case of the referendum, the party even had some wobbles over whether all its MPs are on board with what Winston wants. Is it time to take New Zealand First more seriously?

At the same time, the Greens have this week stepped out on their own with a family package that outbids even Labour. The Greens want to increase main benefits by 20 percent, increase the minimum wage significantly and cut sanctions on beneficiaries.

On top of that, Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei confessed that as a solo mum and student in the 1990s, she had deceived WINZ over her living arrangements so that she got a higher benefit. So why did she do that and what impact might it have on voters' choices?…

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Guyon Espiner, Lisa Owen and Tim Watkin discuss Bill English's Epsom and Ohariu urges, whether the Greens are losing control, the link between New Zealand First's vote and immigration, plus the Perry incomes report.

By Tim Watkin

This time there's no cup of tea and little intrigue. Bill English has simply and directly told National Party supporters to give their electorate vote to United Future in Ohariu and to ACT in Epsom. Even though he seemed to almost forget the name of Peter Dunne's party, the message was clear. More of the same, please.

National is running this 'pre-campaign' campaign very quietly, letting the minor parties make the running and headlines, trying to look above it all and, well, governmental. Its goal will be to minimise its almost inevitable loss of vote at the end of a third term and to defy the nine year rule (that says it's almost impossible for New Zealand governments to win a fourth term) by making as little fuss as possible.

One of the potential road bumps along that path was announcing what have often been called its "dirty deals" with coalition partners. But yesterday, simply standing in the lobby at parliament, English frankly said he'd like to keep governing with the same parties that have been part of the National-led government since 2008: ACT, United Future and the Maori Party.

To help that long, he said, National Party supporters should back another party, in their electorate vote. In previous years that has opened the party to ridicule. It seems dodgy for a party not to back itself and endorse its own MPs wherever possible. If they aren't trying to maximise their own vote, there must be something up.

And of course there is. They are gaming the system, trying to add what could be a couple of crucial bolt on parties to create a majority in parliament and keep Winston Peters out of government. Again. The code word here is: stability. English, perhaps with worrying echoes of Theresa May, is pushing a message of 'strong and stable' government and this announcement was consistent with that.

There was no media event at a cafe, no joint statement with United Future's Peter Dunne or ACT's David Seymour. It was all played down. But let's not pretend, this could be significant. A couple of seats bolted onto National (Dunne and Seymour have both ruled out Labour) could yet be crucial, depending on results…

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

It's all about Jacinda. Labour's late leadership change has turned Election 17 on its head. But can Labour seize the moment and how will other parties respond?

By Tim Watkin

What had been looking like a campaign that was being driven by the minor parties, has now pivoted back to focus on the two majors. Jacinda Ardern has created a spurt of - to use her words - "relentless positivity" that has put the phone back on the hook for Labour. Or as Guyon Espiner puts it, has brought them back into coverage.

Voters who had given up on Labour, because they didn't have the look of government and success about them, will give them another look. While the fundamental policy platform won't change - and Labour's weaknesses aren't suddenly magicked away - they will be seeing the party through a new lens.

As Lisa Owen points out, Andrew Little had kept Labour's poll numbers around 30 percent until quite recently, but the party's dive in fortunes since the interns fiasco and Metiria Turei's confession that she lied to Work & Income looked impossible to turn around without a radical change. And so Little fell on his sword.

Guyon says this could be "a moment" for Labour and expects an immediate and significant bump in the polls. It was a moment in part created by her exchange with Mark Richardson on the AM Show, where she showed courage under fire and a certainty that has been lacking from Labour for some years.

As a woman who has herself been asked if she's "forgotten to have children", Lisa says the question about whether Ardern is planning a family was completely out of line. But it shows National how NOT to approach Ardern. While I argue the fact she would be New Zealand's youngest ever Prime Minister (and the country's youngest leader since Edward Stafford in 1855) means questions about her age are acceptable, Guyon reckons that could be a positive, not a weakness. National have lost control of the ball for now and will have to get smarter.

Ardern's "relentless positivity" is in stark contrast to solid and sensible Bill English and it's hard to imagine the relentlessly positive response to her leadership in the first 48 hours won't help Labour regain some ground. …

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

In this week's Caucus, the team discuss the Green Party strategy that may have (inadvertently) saved Labour. Was it OK to put Metiria Turei under such scrutiny? What next for the Greens?

By Tim Watkin

Three weeks ago, Metiria Turei rolled the dice with nothing less at stake than all the gains the Greens had made in recent elections - from a 5-6 percent party to a 10-12 percent party.

Frustration at their inability to get into government and Labour's stumbling performance over the last three years saw the Greens opt for the high-risk high-reward strategy. But was it a naive strategy, and how well was it implemented?

Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei resigned as co-leader after weeks of pressure over her admission of lying to Work and Income in the 1990s so her benefit would not be cut.

First, Turei attacked Winston Peters as racist. Then, in the second act on 16 July, she revealed that she had lied to Work and Income about her living circumstances when she was a solo mum in the 1990s. She admitted then that the confession put her own career and the party at risk. It turned out to be a prophetic statement, not that it played out that way at first.

Her revelation, along with Labour's messed-up intern scheme, saw the Greens leap in the polls, and Labour slump.

The Greens were delighted; although taking votes off Labour was doing nothing to change the government, as per the party's mission statement, it was maximising its votes and strengthening its hand.

But the dice hasn't stopped rolling. Labour's slump prompted a leadership spill and ushered in the Jacinda Effect. Worse for the Greens, Turei's story of having to lie to support her child was found to have new fish hooks - such as that she had, in a fit of youthful hijinks, committed what could be called electoral fraud.

Then it became clear some Green MPs - Kennedy Graham and Dave Clendon - didn't like Turei's refusal to condemn other beneficiaries today for doing what she did herself in the past. The stench of disunity was coming off the party, and new polls yesterday and today showed the party's support plummet back into single digits, while Labour roared into the mid-30s - the minimum of where they need to be to lead a new government.

Inadvertently, ironically, and at the cost of her own political career and her party's reputation for taking the high moral ground, Turei has breathed new life into Labour and done more to change the government than she probably dared hope. It's just not happened the way she would have wanted to.

In this week's episode - with me, Guyon Espiner and Lisa Owen - we discuss this intense week in New Zealand politics, which climaxed in Turei's resignation as co-leader…

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

National starts its fight back as Bill English goes to boot camp, Jacinda Ardern negotiates her first international stoush and Grant Robertson opens the door to a Capital Gains Tax.

By Tim Watkin

It's been an in-between week in New Zealand politics - between the fall of both Andrew Little and Metiria Turei and before the final pre-election fiscal update and the rise of the 'big policies'. But there's still been plenty going on. And a bit of argy-bargy.

Next Wednesday, what's known as the PREFU is released by Treasury. That's the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update, to give it its proper name. Labour won't reveal its big policy - widely picked to involve education - until it knows the state of the nation's books. While they'll have it all ready to go, they need to be seen to be waiting so as to look like responsible managers of the economy. Equally, National has kept its campaign launch back until 27 August - four days after the PREFU - when we expect to see its big policy bid for a fourth term.

But has everyone been in hibernation while we wait? Heck no. Some have even come out of hiding.

While we've seen a lot of reheated policy announced - such as Labour again promising driving lessons for high school students and National re-announcing the $100m for mental health it first announced in Budget 2017 - battle lines have been drawn.

In this week's Caucus podcast, Guyon Espiner says National has kept its powder dry for a week or so after Ardern's rise to the leadership, but has now started to roll out attacks against Labour. First amongst those, #letstaxthis and the well-worn line that Labour is the party of new taxes.

Labour opened the door to that attack, when finance spokesman Grant Robertson revealed that a capital gains tax was back on the table in Labour's first term. In 2015, Andrew Little as leader ruled out significant tax reform in a first term, promising to seek a mandate at the next election. Robertson, then Ardern, said if Labour's tax review suggested a capital gains tax (which politics observers assume it will), they no longer feel the need to seek that mandate before implementing it.

Cue Steven Joyce calling Labour "dodgy on tax" and cries that Ardern will introduce new taxes on water, Auckland transport and now property. Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy even starred in a campaign video as the worried farmer having to find money for water royalties on top of all his other many bills…

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Lisa, Tim and Guyon discuss how PREFU has changed the campaign, how Dunne's departure may signal a changing of the generations, and how the minor parties want to change the conversation.

By Tim Watkin

Put the clubs down and back away. That's what Labour and National tried to do after the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update (PREFU) was released yesterday.

The first moves by both major parties were defensive. Labour ruled out an increase to the top tax rate, trying to diminish National's attack line that they are the party of taxes, taxes and more taxes. At the same time, National took tax cuts off the table, undermining Labour's attack line that Joyce & Co are willing to starve essential public services, such as health and education.

And yet. And yet. Labour's standing by its decision to set up a tax working group should it become government and take advice from it on how to reform the tax system. Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson claim the current tax system isn't fair, but won't openly campaign on what they think a fair system looks like. While it's widely assumed Labour is inclined towards introducing a Capital Gains Tax (they campaigned on one in 2011 and 2014), Ardern insists she won't make up her mind until she's seen the tax group's recommendations.

Yet as Guyon and Lisa point out in the podcast, she has confirmed that she and Robertson will appoint the members of the group, so can more or less ensure the result she wants.

So National will keep using the 'Let's tax this' club from now until 23 September as they try to convince voters that change is too risky and more of the same is in their interests.

Labour, in its turn, will keep looking to bash National for its lack of commitment to improving public services, that have now been run under the Bill English 'do more with less' mantra for nine years. Notably, while the headlines shouted that Steve Joyce had taken tax cuts off the table as a result of the slightly worse than expected PREFU numbers, the fact is Joyce did actually promise tax cuts yesterday. He just suspended them.

At his press conference, Joyce ruled out tax cuts in this campaign, but added he would look at the possibility of raising tax thresholds as part of another 'families income package' in 2020, should fiscal conditions allow. Then, later in the day, he released a press statement that was much stronger than those initial words. The statement committed National to another package in 2020, essentially on the condition that his government gets to do what it's already promised to do in Budget 2017…

Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details