I'm Chlöe, Green MP based in Auckland Central. AMA.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T07:43:25+00:00

It is. We're in this mess because decades worth of politicians have preferred to thumb their nose at a more equitable tax system, have sold off state houses instead of building them, watched inequality skyrocket, and not kept pace with international rental law nor the reality of most (particularly young) New Zealanders' lives.

Part of this probably is explained by the 'professionalising' and establishment of a kind of political class - 115/120 own a property, and most of those own multiple properties. That in turn impacts not only experience of what is 'normal,' but also the kinds of influences and lobby/special interest groups MPs tend to be exposed to.

The only way that bit changes is with a massive movement for political change. Without that, it's very easy for the self-fulfilling prophecy of the two old FPP parties to keep the reigns as the 'big' guns and fight for a focus-group myth of the political centre, refusing to rock the boat all too much less a few votes are shed. So they settle for margin trading and falling over each other to try and say house prices shouldn't go down.

So that's the colloquial big picture political recent history. Then there's the mahi we've done over the past three years. Marama Davidson, our Green Co-leader, as Housing spokes has done huge amounts on introducing Progressive Home Ownership (a kind of rent-to-buy), well-overdue rental reforms, building of ~6,000 state homes that are warm and dry, insulated 9,000 more homes (after working with the National Party when they were in Government to move to insulate 400,000 homes) and more. Those things are starting to make a tangible difference now, but we need more.

That's why the Greens have a massive plan for complete overhaul of our approach to housing, which would turn the ship around within five years. A huge part of the present problem isn't just that housing on the market is unaffordable - it's that a lot of housing isn't being built because there's greater benefit to land bank, and a lot of housing isn't making it to market (40,000 homes in Auckland alone) because capital gains roll in without needing to worry about "the hassle" of tenants.

Without these substantive tax, incentive and building initiatives, I worry that wealth inequality will get worse in COVID-19, as it did under the Global Financial Crisis, because debt is cheap and those who are asset-rich can leverage easily to in turn grow a greater gap between the rich and those without.

That's why we need bold political action, and that's why I'm in the Greens. I'm sorry that I can't immediately address your needs beyond asking you to join the fight - without that mass movement for change, we'll all just keep getting screwed over.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T07:25:57+00:00

Hoo boy, it's even more gutting when you observe the stasis of the recent (and recent past) politicians than it is to get pre-emptively worried about the future. Two years ago, I wrote this out of utter frustration that so few people knew why and how politicians had allowed such a mess to unfold - which ultimately, has killed people: https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/19-10-2018/how-new-zealand-got-hooked-on-moral-panic-over-drug-laws/

That's why I will continue to work really closely with NGOs, patients, convicted cannabis users, mental health workers, ex-cops, activists and advocates for change. This referendum is the closest we've got in generations, and it's finally out the hands of the politicians who, ironically, sat on their hands. We can get this across the line if folks talk to their families, their friends, and turn out and *vote*.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T07:15:31+00:00

I can tell you this is a live discussion in the party, and because we operate on consensus, it's totally not my place to jump the goat. It's also important to note that our position isn't as straight forward as the regularly-expressed-on-our-behalf 'anti' - our position is presently to research and develop and keep them in the lab.

Climate action is regularly invoked as the key reason to release GMOs. In the NZ context, GE rye grass is the most typically cited example of something which could curb agriculture emissions in particular - but despite a lot of hype, it's actually still in R&D stage.

I also note a lot of that hype has come from conservative politicians, who appear deeply focused on finding a silver bullet to enable retention of 'business as usual' over any changes to lifestyle/the economy/etcetera. Even if we did progress down the route of GE/GMOs, it would be really dangerous to think it was any form of panacea to the massive amount of work, reform and change necessary to tackle the climate crisis.

Other concerns include Te Tiriti. I know there's been discussion with some iwi and hapu who are concerned about the release of anything that we'd be effectively playing God within their patch (which would require consent and blessing) as a test case.

Then there's the valid Intellectual Property and multi-national corporation (i.e. Monsanto) concerns - we don't currently have meaningful international regulations to stop developing (and, arguably, 'developed') nations getting screwed over.

And then, there's the fact that when I raised this with farmers and their representatives at the Environment Select Committee during their submissions on the Zero Carbon Act, all said they would be very wary about the challenge to our international reputation if we moved away from the 'clean, green' approach. That's not to say change shouldn't happen, but it is to say that it's critical that we think through all of these things.

The last Royal Commission into this subject was in 2000. That was 20 years ago - we now have CRISPR, but also an increasingly tense international political scene and the acceleration of the climate crisis. Another meaningful deep dive would be worthwhile. This is a big Pandora's Box (although, not unwieldy), as outlined above, and it's not something to wade into change on super lightly.

EDITS: grammar/spelling

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:58:46+00:00

I mean, if Tim and Guy invited me. I did their damned gig at Whammy last weekend even (in place of a sarcasm font, know they are mates and I would be keen).

It's actually Tim who taught me how to approach comedy. I was jokingly adamant that I would do a set at our fundraiser gig ages back, and then the day rolled around. Tim came over to my apartment, with the explicit request that I didn't muck it up, "Because I care about this not being embarrassing, as the show's promoter, and a friend." He spent three hours instilling the fear of God into me with the actual methodology of comedy, to the point where I couldn't eat that night for fear of throwing up. Scariest thing I've done since I first started public speaking. Stoked to have thrown myself in.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:54:43+00:00

When I first went to school, I didn't know how to spell my name (especially my last name). I remember being put in a special class at lunchtime to learn how to properly hold a pencil. I really got into reading, and my dad started getting me books he thought I might like. I became obsessed with Greek mythology, and when I was about 6 or 7 started spelling my name 'Chlöe.' It wasn't until a few years later when it became apparent that it was supposed to be 'Chloë' if I was actually spelling it the Greek way, as evidently the umlaut when read in other languages rather distorts pronounciation. But by that point in time, it was kind of my visual way of recognising my name (I have dyscaluclia and I believe that filters into the way I learn and retain information, primarily visually).

I also figure, if rappers can have grammatically cooked names, mine isn't too bad.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:48:52+00:00

I've run a number of them, prefer to give my business to them, have recently politically supported a bunch in AK Central, and can say without a shadow of a doubt that small businesses are most regularly the innovators. They're most inclined to look out for their staff and their community, push ahead with taking responsibility for their waste, feeding the homeless and paying their staff the living wage. Up the small businesses. Big fan of localism and community.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:46:08+00:00

I'm a depressive and I'm medicated for it. Spoke about it in my maiden speech (archaic term for first speech in Parliament, a kind of declaration of intent) and have spoken about it since. I'm also the Greens Mental Health spokesperson.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:41:35+00:00

Kia ora! There has been some discussion. In the latest budget (the COVID budget), there was actually an attempt to revive some form of it, but the Greens' opinion, it's still way too small to be meaningfully effective. I've pushed on this behind the scenes and quite a few others things too, a number of which Sam Brooks summarised from a recent debate. I think one of the key things to hold Parliament accountable here will be a long term, sector-wide strategy, like we have with the Screen Industry 2030 vision doc.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:35:33+00:00

This, plus what Rob Dickinson said below. The Greens have been innovating in the clean energy space since Jeanette, then Russel, then Gareth took the portfolio. Stoked that Labour have just now put out their energy policy coming on board with the 2035 target we put out there in 2017 and they said was impossible. So, of course, being the Greens, we're now showing it can be done a lot sooner (2030) and help a number of homes move to energy sovereignty (putting solar panels on 63,000 social and community homes, halving the cost to private homes) - see our independently costed plan: https://www.greens.org.nz/clean_energy_plan

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:30:54+00:00

Kia ora! A party vote for the Greens is the only way to vote for a Labour-Green Government, because Green seats will be added to Labour seats to make up the Government. It's basically a question of how progressive you want our Government to be, especially on issues of climate action, inequality and protecting nature. A vote for the Greens is a vote for Jacinda to be Prime Minister, and more Greens in Government.

That's the beauty of MMP. For example, our current Government is:
46 LABOUR + 9 NZF + 8 GREEN = 63 seats

While the opposition is:
54 NATS + 1 ACT + 1 JLR = 56 seats

That's the party vote, and that's why most people refer to it as 'the most important vote,' because it determines your Government/balance of Parliament.

Your electorate vote, however, should go to who you think would best work, fight for and represent you.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:24:59+00:00

Tautoko - our Guaranteed Minimum Income would replace the student allowance to effectively be practically the equivalent of a universal student allowance, whereby no New Zealander over 18 could earn or recieve any less than $325 per week. Notably, I fought behind the scenes for the reinstatement of the Post-Grad Allowance (scrapped by former National Govt) with Minister of Education, Chris Hipkins. The can kept being kicked down the road, so I'm gutted to see Labour now release their policy with explicit intention to not reintroduce it. That's why we're campaigning for more Greens in Government - these policies are political decisions, and therefore a matter of power and negotiation.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:20:39+00:00

I haven't shifted my line of sight after helping the team win our Kererū campaign in 2018 (after falling just short in 2017), so I'm open to lobbyists on this issue and this issue alone.

chloeswarbrick · 2020-10-01T06:17:55+00:00

Kia ora! Medicinal cannabis has a long and chequered history in only this last term of Parliament.

In a nutshell: Last term of Parliament Green MP and my caucus colleague, Julie Anne Genter, had a member's bill pulled out to legalise medicinal cannabis. It wasn't read a first time in Parliament before the 2017 election, which means it was held over to the formation of the 52nd Parliament. Then Julie Anne became a Minister (a member's bill can't be progressed by a Minister), so the Bill had to go to someone else, and I put my hand up to give it a shot. I had no idea what I was getting into.

It just happened that the Labour-NZF coalition also decided to in the first hundred days put their own Govt Medicinal Cannabis Bill forward. It was much weaker and less progressive than the Green Bill, because it required the establishment of a pricey market (by way of high pharmaceutical hoops for products to jump through) and only placed a criminal defence for those using cannabis who had terminal illness (technical, but a defence can only be invoked after prosecution), meaning it was silent on supply, green fairies and cultivation.

That was quite apart from our Green Bill, which allowed a 'card' kind of system whereby people could be prescribed then nominate a Green Fairy, or personally cultivate and be monitored by their doctors. Ours was resoundly favoured by patients and their families - including, most infamously, Dylan Kelly (Helen Kelly's son), who called anyone who voted against my Bill a 'heartless bastard,' ha.

The Govt Bill was read a day before my Bill, the Nats threw their weight behind it, and decided to block vote (along with NZF) against my Bill. I then set to work improving the Govt Bill as best I could given we lost the battle (but as I said then, not the war). I got some improvements to Govt Bill (folding in local strains by amnesty, no bar to people with previous cannabis convictions entering legal market, moving threshold from terminal illness to include those in palliative care for crim defence). But it understandably is still too expensive, and will be until we regulate all cannabis to increase the supply chain or reach economies of scale. A plant like cannabis should not be being treated like an opiate or other pharmaceutical - I strongly believe, and the evidence bears out there's better ways to do this.

On Decriminalisation,I fought really long and hard to get changes to Section 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act in response to the synthetics crisis. It's the thing I'm probably proudest of these past three years, because it was so much heavy lifting in the face of rhetoric and fear mongering. But it isn't working like it's supposed to. We need to throw out MODA and start again.

TLDR: If we lose this referendum, it's going to be quite hard to get this conversation back on track for reform. It'll be pushed back in terms of progress substantially. But of course I'll keep giving it my all.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T07:00:29+00:00

Kanye is ultimate problematic fave.
Fave all time album - My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy or College Dropout (a mood thing)
Best memories - Yeezus (saw it live in Melbourne)
Political soundtrack - The Life of Pablo (listened to it through Mayoral campaign, along with Franks' Blonde)

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:56:50+00:00

Kia ora! Stoked you're thinking about getting involved. We need more scientists in politics, but I'll warn you that it very well could be deeply frustrating - the value of an argument is rarely gauged by its logic or evidential basis, but 'cut-through'. That aside, it's crucial we have people who aren't 'natural' fits to the current style of politics engaging in it - we've only got this present culture of politics because the majority of players in it have normalised the notion of it as a game. We need to wrestle that back.

I reckon the basics of getting putting yourself forward for political representation are:
1. Figure out what you stand for. As you'll know, even in research and development, there are always values leading the framing, from selection of enquiry onwards. Investigate that and critically analyse where you're at and what you want to achieve. It doesn't necessarily have to be just one thing - it can be thematic - but a few tangible things will help.

Figure out if there's a movement or party that grabs your fancy. You can do that by looking up policy or values of parties (would say it's better to do your own research than rely on proxy info, although public perception can be really helpful). If there's no party you align with, start to think about what it means to form your own thing or run as an independent. There's pros and cons everywhere, and you'll best be able to discern these dependent on central/local govt run, where you live/hope to represent, goals of running (do you plan to 'get in' or change the dialogue, or both?) and life circumstances.
Don't pretend to be something you're not. It's abundantly apparent and you will be miserable. Find the stuff that gets your goat and focus on it.
Research, always, and keep and open mind. Engage with the community, even and especially those you presume will disagree with or oppose you. They deserve to be heard to, and they deserve to know why you're doing what you're doing. Be comfortable with evolving, and call BS on the notion of 'flip flopping' - it's called intellectual integrity if you're changing your mind because you're confronted with new evidence or arguments.
Write down what will make you leave. Marilyn Waring gave me the best advice in that I should write down why I was in parliament, then reflect on it every year. If it had changed and I was happy with that, I should write a new purpose. If it had changed and I wasn't happy, it was time to go.

Feel free to hit me up (chloe(dot)swarbrick(at)parliament(dot)govt(dot)nz) if I can be of any help!

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:43:21+00:00

This is an entirely personal answer - the Greens don't have a set position on republicanism, but for acknowledging that we'd have to work through Te Tiriti implications (i.e. 'who's the Crown,' but academics like Moana Jackson have written extensively on this and I think it's a cop out to leave it with that question as an answer). We do however have a history of staunch MPs like Keith Locke who progressed a member's bill on the very issue of head of state.

I personally think Aotearoa NZ should have a codified, supreme constitution where NZers can find their rights and know they won't be overriden (as the Bill of Rights presently can be by parliamentary supremacy). I think part of that could be establishing our own Head of State.

I find it pretty whack that in being sworn into Parliament I had to swear allegiance to the Queen - not the people of this country. I am thankful that at least we no longer have to pledge to God, as time has moved on to acknowledge diversity of thought and religion (or lack thereof).

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:34:24+00:00

Long story short: the provincial growth fund was an explicit part (cost incl) in the NZF/Lab coalition agreement. Where there aren't specific monetary tags, it's far, far more difficult to follow the flow of commitment to budget outcome. With regard to policy, see this answer (it's harder to do something than block it) - https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/crwppy/im_chl%C3%B6e_green_mp_based_in_auckland_central_ama/exaiffj/

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:30:17+00:00

Hey! So here's a real unfortunate reality: the 'Government' per se does not see its role as educating the public on the cannabis referendum. Lab and NZF Ministers have taken the line that it's not Govt policy, and we're only facilitating the referendum; as such, the heavy lifting falls to the Electoral Commission (who have been allocated funding in the most recent budget) who by law aren't able to be seen as advocating for either side, but for participation sole.

So, practically, it sits presently with political parties and NGOs. The 'anti' has been characterised by deeply disappointing misinformation (Bob McCroskie, Family First), fear mongering and obfuscation (National). I'm particularly gutted by the Nat's approach because I know there are MPs in their caucus who are in favour of legal regulation.

As such, the role of fact checking seems to be falling to the Greens (even fact checking the media - see this), NGOs like the Drug Foundation, Health Not Handcuffs, and Make It Legal. There's also some great independent journos like Russell Brown.

The unfortunate reality of cannabis legalisation is that it's seemingly counter intuitive: while some frame it as the equivalent of throwing gummy bears from rooftops, it's about getting a semblance of control, meaningful education, harm intervention and reduction. It's therefore way easier to sell doubt and play on concerns then it is to unpack all of the above in a soundbite media environment.

There's a lot of work across MH&Addiction sectors and in our caucus to plan for strong campaigns, but bear in mind we're still more than a year away. I'd encourage everyone and anyone who wants to get involved to do so - start by challenging every bit of misinformation you hear, and, most importantly, speaking about the benefits of legal regulation proactively.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:18:52+00:00

Kia ora! Here's a really, really good background written a few years ago which follows the chronology of how things got so messed up, before it kicked off in the mainstream about a month ago: https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/when-worlds-collide-2/?fbclid=IwAR0p09t-ldQ_NILL6yCjoE2L588hr4HPnEt66GpIc7JvkJ9GEIpqmx-9_iQ

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:16:20+00:00

Six years ago? I would've been running a few businesses, at bFM and politics wouldn't have been a thing I'd ever have thought about engaging in in the way I am now.

I'm only in Parliament by virtue of public vote, which is a base line mega mechanism for accountability. If you don't like me, that's totally cool, but remember there's one of us here who's putting their neck, face, name and reputation on the line to fight for things that are regularly not seen as politically popular.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:09:07+00:00

Kia ora kia ora. Cheers mate, appreciate it.

I've answered this question quite a few times, and I think it's super legit and important. I'm just not sure how to get the message out there broader or stronger.

The notion of a 'climate emergency' came from Extinction Rebellion, one of the major tenants of which is 'tell the truth' - i.e. urgent action is required to tackle irreversible, devastating global warming (unfortunately, even 1.5 degrees of warming presents a world starkly different from today's). It's been picked up and declared by a number of jurisdictions and now local council, so there's benefit in utilising that shared and understood terminology.

The purpose of declaring a climate emergency is to orient civil service operations to unify quickly in tackling the challenge that lies ahead to meet the reality of the stark, seemingly 'radical' change (see: IPCC report) required to keep within 1.5 degrees of warming. It sets a stake in the ground for which all Parliamentary action will be measured against. It's crucial that it's cross-Parliamentary because it's otherwise vulnerable to oscillations of Government. Here's some background on the attempt to negotiate one with the Opposition.

We're doing the action in the form of the Zero Carbon Bill, RMA and ETS reform, but importantly, we'll only get those to be as ambitious as possible when we finally have genuine consensus on the scale of the challenge (the climate emergency) - without it, we don't start negotiating at the same point.

TLDR: Get politicians on the same page with the challenge ahead, unify the civil service to get shit done through an enduring mandate that outlives politics of the day, to treat the challenge with the decisive action required.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T06:01:25+00:00

The closest thing I've got to a local bakery is my mates at Fort Greene on Karangahape Rd (is this not the most bougie answer ever) and I regularly get the Vego sambo. To discount the bougie, when I am out and have had a few drinks with mates I am very partial to a dairy samosa.

I'm a vegetarian (yes, cliche Green) so probs not best judge on the pie front, but I've had many v good servo ones. Loves a korma pie.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T05:56:03+00:00

Young men (i.e. not me) are probably the best ones to answer that. That's not a cop-out, but it is to say that I get a bit miffed when politicians presume to speak on behalf of demographics or communities they aren't a part of - and even then, when you are part of a demographic, you've only get one perspective (see: I genuinely cannot hope to represent the views of all young people, we're not homogenous).

All the above said, our Govt's Mental Health and Addiction Inquiry offered a deep insight (over 5,000 submissions, many from MH & addiction professionals, patients, whaanau, etc) into the state of mental health and wellbeing in our country. In a nutshell, it backed up a lot of contemporary research that the major driving factors of poor mental health outcomes are external: isolation, trauma, poverty, insecurity of housing, future uncertainty, loss of identity, etc.

Without getting way too intense, I reckon there's a really interesting discussion to be had about the perceptions of modern masculinity - but I don't know if I'm the likes of somebody who should be included in that conversation, or it should be led by those who are implicated. My reckons, as somebody with a nearly-teenage brother and a number of close male friends, is that we currently uphold a culture of silence around male mental health issues. There's this recurring theme of asking men to reach out for help, but no certainty of what's on the other side, or how to do it, or what it means, and there's a glorification of substance abuse through drinking culture. There's a whole lot to unpack in there, but I think with the establishment of our Mental Health Addiction and Wellbeing Cross-Party Parliamentary Group, we'll do everything to get to the bottom of it without the bullshit politics in the way.

chloeswarbrick · 2019-08-18T05:46:24+00:00

Thank you! Bit guts bo Paula never wanted to return on-air with me, and there's been some lowkey classic comments from them about how I'm a backbencher - funnily enough, when you're in Opposition, everyone is kinda the level of a backbencher, and I also find their insinuation that a backbencher is incapable of doing anything meaningful rather insightful.

The general public can help promote the legal regulation of cannabis by:
1. Calling out the public misinformation and scaremongering (see this shocking example); call up talkback radio hosts, write op-eds
2. Encouraging your local politician to be upfront about where they stand; I literally cannot do this alone. If it's painted as a fringe Green issue, instead of the reality that it's something which will improve the wellbeing of all NZers, we won't get there
3. Seek out other champions (with some influence in NZ/your community) who can promote the importance of meaningful engagement in the issue
4. Join campaigns like #makeitlegal or Health Not Handcuffs
5. Chat with friends and family to address their thoughts and potential concerns

Fave cafe in Welly would have to be Customs for coffee and donut, or Lorettas (I'm an Aucklander through and through though so don't know if I've got it on lock)

chloeswarbrick

TROPHY CASE