Great Debate sees unabashed election bribes and bad tidings for Wellington

ANALYSIS: Debate season has kicked off, with the first of the major election debates offering unashamed election-season bribery, and plenty of jibes at Wellington.

At the ASB Great Debate, a finance and economic debate in Queenstown, ACT leader David Seymour and Green co-leader James Shaw delivered the most memorable performances – although not always for the right reasons.

Labour finance spokesperson Grant Robertson seemed to enjoy the ride, laughing and clapping loudly for his opponents, while National’s Nicola Willis found no repreive as her tax plan continues to be scrutinised.

Over the past few weeks, Willis has faced questions about the legality of her plan, the accuracy of its costings, and the timeframes she has proposed.

In Queenstown, attention turned to the impact reopening New Zealand to foreign home buyers – for houses worth more than $2 million – would have on property prices. She was also questioned about reinstating interest deductibility for landlords, and reversing changes to the brightline test, would increase the price of houses.

“I don’t know what it will do to house prices. I don’t think the interest deductibility changes are a key thing for house prices,” Willis said.

Speaking to reporters after the debate, Willis was asked what evidence she had to show that these policies wouldn’t raise house prices. She replied: “We don’t think it will.”

She said housing supply was the main issue – something every party appeared to agree on.

Seymour backed Willis up. During the debate he said those changes wouldn’t impact house prices and vowed to stop “the law on landlords”.

Robertson was most energised when he waved National’s tax policy, asking Willis to show her workings for how she could afford the promised tax cuts.

“Show us the data!” he shouted.

Willis started to go into details, noting previously released estimates: “We think will sell between 1600 and 1700 [houses], at average price of $2.9 million. This is an economics lecture. It’s boring.”

Shaw said he reckoned National’s plan was “full of holes”, but didn’t dwell on those.

“People just don’t care that Nicola’s numbers don’t add up. They just want the tax cut,” Shaw said, while offering his own tax cut to the Queenstown crowd.

He promised his tax cut would be bigger than the National Party tax cut. That promise dulled the loud booing Shaw received after he promised a wealth tax.

While the National Party was promising to inflation adjust the income tax brackets, the Greens wanted to focus on the lower income brackets and deliver a tax-free first $10,000.

The Green Party wealth tax was the least popular policy of the night, judging by audience reaction. Shaw said he expected a rough reception: “This particular crowd here are people who have got assets over $4 million, so that doesn’t surprise me.”

Seymour got the most laughs from the crowd.

He claimed ACT was very popular in Wellington, after saying he wanted 15,000 full-time jobs restructured out of the public service “as fast as possible”.

He claimed to have received this feedback from the capital: “I’m voting ACT because I hope you fire that guy in the next cubicle.”

National was also promising to downsize the public service – but at a far smaller rate than ACT.

While Shaw, despite criticising Seymour for “dehumanising” the public service, agreed efficiencies should be made. He hit out at “mega ministries”, saying the likes of MBIE were too big for their own good.

But Seymour’s jokery didn’t stop there. He returned to some old material, remarking at the topsy turvy world where him and Robertson agreed on something.

“I’m astonished we’re in a debate where the National Party is now arguing that they will tax more, and Labour is arguing against,” he said.

And then he returned to comment on the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, which he ran into a bit of strife with the last time he drew on it for comedic material. Moderator Jack Tame asked Willis what budget the ministry could expect if she was finance minister, “provided David doesn’t have anything to do with it”.

Seymour chipped in: “Increase their security budget”.

As Parliament wrapped up in August, Seymour faced criticism from across Parliament for joking about his “fantasy” of sending Guy Fawkes to the Ministry of Pacific Peoples.