<description>&lt;p&gt;Hosted by &lt;strong&gt;Phil Goff&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;Chris Finlayson &lt;/strong&gt;with&lt;strong&gt; Sam Collins&lt;/strong&gt;, &lt;em&gt;Cross Party Lines&lt;/em&gt; returns with an episode that moves from minor party positioning to the power of inquiries, and ends with a timely reflection on civility in public life.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Recorded against the backdrop of severe storms in the lower North Island, the episode opens with a renewed call for cross-party cooperation on climate adaptation — before turning to the politics shaping 2026.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;In this week’s episode:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;strong&gt;Minor party signals for 2026&lt;/strong&gt; — New Zealand First’s proposed referendum on Māori seats and ACT’s plan to cap ministers and slash departments. Is this substantive reform, symbolic positioning, or electoral dog-whistling? Phil and Chris unpack the history, the precedent, and the political math behind both announcements.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;strong&gt;The politics of inquiries&lt;/strong&gt; — With investigations announced into Moa Point, Bay of Plenty landslides, COVID policy, and Reserve Bank decisions, the panel explores when inquiries strengthen democracy — and when they risk looking like election-year theatre. What makes an inquiry credible? Independence, integrity, and timing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;* &lt;strong&gt;Civility in an attention economy&lt;/strong&gt; — From Shane Jones’ inflammatory rhetoric to Pam Bondi’s combative congressional performance in the US, the episode closes on a broader question: how does democratic debate survive in a media landscape that rewards outrage over substance? The answer, according to Phil and Chris, lies in precision, discipline, and the quiet power of asking better questions.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Cross Party Lines&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt; exists to lift political literacy and create space for thoughtful, good-faith political conversation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;New episodes every Tuesday.&lt;/strong&gt; If you value calmer politics, follow the podcast and share it with someone who might too.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit &lt;a href="https://crosspartylines.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&amp;#38;utm_campaign=CTA_1"&gt;crosspartylines.substack.com&lt;/a&gt;</description>

Cross Party Lines

Cross Party Lines

Māori Seats, Ministry Cuts and Election-Year Inquiries

FEB 16, 202646 MIN
Cross Party Lines

Māori Seats, Ministry Cuts and Election-Year Inquiries

FEB 16, 202646 MIN

Description

<p>Hosted by <strong>Phil Goff</strong> and <strong>Chris Finlayson </strong>with<strong> Sam Collins</strong>, <em>Cross Party Lines</em> returns with an episode that moves from minor party positioning to the power of inquiries, and ends with a timely reflection on civility in public life.</p><p>Recorded against the backdrop of severe storms in the lower North Island, the episode opens with a renewed call for cross-party cooperation on climate adaptation — before turning to the politics shaping 2026.</p><p><strong>In this week’s episode:</strong></p><p>* <strong>Minor party signals for 2026</strong> — New Zealand First’s proposed referendum on Māori seats and ACT’s plan to cap ministers and slash departments. Is this substantive reform, symbolic positioning, or electoral dog-whistling? Phil and Chris unpack the history, the precedent, and the political math behind both announcements.</p><p>* <strong>The politics of inquiries</strong> — With investigations announced into Moa Point, Bay of Plenty landslides, COVID policy, and Reserve Bank decisions, the panel explores when inquiries strengthen democracy — and when they risk looking like election-year theatre. What makes an inquiry credible? Independence, integrity, and timing.</p><p>* <strong>Civility in an attention economy</strong> — From Shane Jones’ inflammatory rhetoric to Pam Bondi’s combative congressional performance in the US, the episode closes on a broader question: how does democratic debate survive in a media landscape that rewards outrage over substance? The answer, according to Phil and Chris, lies in precision, discipline, and the quiet power of asking better questions.</p><p></p><p><strong><em>Cross Party Lines</em></strong> exists to lift political literacy and create space for thoughtful, good-faith political conversation.</p><p><strong>New episodes every Tuesday.</strong> If you value calmer politics, follow the podcast and share it with someone who might too.</p> <br/><br/>This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit <a href="https://crosspartylines.substack.com?utm_medium=podcast&#38;utm_campaign=CTA_1">crosspartylines.substack.com</a>