Modkova said Act was proud of how New Zealand \u201chas redressed the wrongs of the past\u201d through land settlements, but opposed continuing forward \u201cwith two sets of people having two sets of rights, based on when their ancestors arrived\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s racist bulls***,\u201d an audience member shouted in response.<\/p>\n
Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick and Act candidate Antonia Modkova at St Kevin\u2019s Arcade basement venue Double Whammy for the Auckland Central debate. Photo \/ Alyse Wright<\/p>\n
Swarbrick then jested: \u201cAct Party said land back!\u201d<\/p>\n
Opportunity candidate Johan Chang said, in his view, New Zealand was technically in a legally \u201cbinding, contractual agreement\u201d between the Crown and M\u0101ori under Te Tiriti, and that constitutional reform needed both parties at the table.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe pretend that we\u2019re an independent country, but technically, by definition, we\u2019re all British subjects,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we are to do, let\u2019s say constitutional reform, it should not be a government-led exercise, because if it\u2019s led by a party that got in at 8%, I think that\u2019s pretty much the definition of authoritarianism.\u201d<\/p>\n
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party candidate Christopher Manaia eased the tension with some humour before echoing the need for a two-party negotiation and supporting M\u0101ori self-governance.<\/p>\n
The spat was the sharpest moment in a night otherwise heavily focused on the immediate problems facing central Auckland, including homelessness, housing and the survival of small businesses following years of disruption from the City Rail Link (CRL).<\/p>\n
Modkova agreed with Labour that Auckland needs more homes, but not on \u201chow we\u2019re going to get there\u201d, pointing to consenting and the recent Resource Management Act reform as key to increasing supply.<\/p>\n
\u201cDevelopers don\u2019t want to build low-cost housing,\u201d another audience member interjected.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s not profitable.\u201d<\/p>\n
Swarbrick believed emergency housing was necessary but not sufficient, saying the state dually needed to build a pipeline of transitional and permanent housing.<\/p>\n
There was more agreement on the need for a night shelter in central Auckland<\/a>, with all five candidates backing one\u2019s establishment.<\/p>\n All five also supported having more police on the beat.<\/p>\n The debate then turned to the future of K Rd\u2019s small businesses, with one person asking how each party aimed to \u201craise the profile of all businesses rather than just the glamorous ones\u201d.<\/p>\n Swarbrick pointed to the CRL hardship fund and the Greens\u2019 proposal to change commercial rental rules and fill vacant storefronts<\/a>, adding current tenants need an economy that allows them to \u201cprosper and become more vibrant\u201d.<\/p>\n Modkova focused on reducing regulatory barriers, while Chen proposed measures like lifting rebate thresholds and ensuring greater access to government procurement for small businesses.<\/p>\n Chang focused on reducing electricity costs, improving financial capability and addressing merchant surcharges, which he said couldn\u2019t just fall back onto businesses themselves if banned.<\/p>\n Notably, National candidate Candace Kinser<\/a> was absent from the debate, with a statement read on her behalf saying she was visiting Aotea Great Barrier for a prior commitment.<\/p>\n New Zealand First has not announced a candidate for Auckland Central, while Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori is pursuing a strategic \u201ccandidate vote only\u201d campaign<\/a> to take back all seven M\u0101ori seats.<\/p>\n