Govt leaves house builders & CHPs in limbo until 2025 after delaying Kāinga Ora decisions on building plan & rent subsidies; Voters against tax cuts paid for by public spending cuts
I was pleased about Luxon making a repeated general statement just now supporting ICC and Intl Law when asked about ICC statement about arrest warrants and clearly not criticising it, particularly given Biden response describing it as outrageous.
How nice if Luxon just came out plainly and condemned the genocide of Palestinians, called the Zionists out for the heinous crimes they are committing!
Israel apologists will always find something to mock. 35,000 dead, 7000 missing, but we manage to dig up a (presumably now extinct) luxury car dealership. Of course a prison of more than 2 million people will have its layer of wealthy exploiters. Two of the three Hamas leaders for whom arrest warrants are sought are hiding in Gaza, by the way: only one is 'living in luxury in exile'.
Luxon would have been unwise not to express 'general' support for the ICC and international law. Ignore Biden's feigned indignation: the ICC prosecutor's case has illustrious backing.
'Why we support ICC prosecutions for crimes in Israel and Gaza'
From Lord Justice Fulford, Judge Theodor Meron CMG, Amal Clooney, Danny Friedman KC, Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, Elizabeth Wilmshurst CMG KC
No one is talking about the quality of the homes, KO is building homes with a 6* rating which makes them far more energy efficient and healthy. This does cost a little more up front but will save us all much in the coming years. The healthier homes reduce the cost on our health system. The energy efficiency takes pressure off our electrical grid.
A direct comparison to private buildings is not realistic
Please note that MHUD has a design guide that all new homes that want to attract government funding via the Public Housing Fund have to follow. So quality is basically an even playing field for any new homes that house families or individuals from the Housing Register - CHP or KO.
The horror! The horror! Read all about it! Kainga Ora state housing disaster, according to the chair of the inquiry, Bill English.
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he. Because Bill English has been trying to demolish the state's involvement in rental housing for years.
There may be much that is wrong with the state housing agency, regardless of whatever fancy name it is called.
But what is fundamentally wrong with it is the notion that its job is grudgingly to provide homes for the poorest decile of society.
We need a government that will building at least 100,000 homes for secure, lifetime, income-moderated rent not only for the poorest of the poor, but for all who want them.
State houses are state houses. A public house is where you walk in uninvited for a beer. In 2017 the Ardern government decided to abolish the cancel the word 'state' (too commie-sounding?) and replace it with 'public'. Every journalist in the land tamely went along with it (just as they tamely adopt 'Indo-Pacific' in place of 'Asia-Pacific' despite Asia stretching to Istanbul). But 'public' is an inaccurate substitute for 'state'.
I'll happily agree with 270,000 state rental homes needed: 100,000 is my lazy bigroundfiguritis.
Meanwhile, here's Martyn Bradbury with a colourful view of Bill English's involvement in the state housing review:
Just thinking out loud... Could we solving the housing crisis if we let everyone build anything anywhere. I'm talking sleepouts, tiny houses, US style trailer homes as well as kitset homes and everything up to full size houses. No rules for single storey dwellings (realise it could get a bit dodgy if people were building DIY apartments). This could crash the housing market so obviously would be politically difficult. And yes, some people would live in shit boxes but let's face it, they already do. I see houses in Welly every day that deserve a bulldozer. Without rules there would be an abundance of housing. Everyone struggling to afford their mortgage could put a cheap sleep out on their property to help meet their payments. Parents could add units to their property to house the kids who might otherwise struggle to get on the property ladder. And the sheer abundance of choice would mean the unhealthiest homes would remain empty, incentivising their owners to lift their game. I'm running out of patience for the government to fix any of the big problems we face. We also need abundance of housing to deal with climate change and all those refugees, domestic and overseas that will be coming our way. I foresee the NIMBY's clutching their pearls at such a lawless suggestion but our current policy settings are impossible. I have friends who planned an apartment above a garage and were quoted 1m to get it done. There has to be a better way.Thoughts anyone?
There is such a shortage of houses that your plan wouldn't work in that even sub-standard housing would be occupied. The only answer is to bite the bullet, build more houses and pay for them also.
I’ve had similar thoughts. This could be done with a bunch of pre-approved designs paid for by government and some weekend building courses. Could also have an online forum where people could ask each other advice and professionals could be hired to also respond. The harder stuff would still need trades (like electrical and plumbing). But as long as the land was zoned for residential in some capacity, it could be possible. Councils would still need to ensure the land is suitable and foundation engineering is adequate. But pre-approved designs would save so much time. Also building inspectors would either need to be skipped or reduced to spot checks (there’s no building inspections in Western Australian single dwelling construction for example. But there can be spot checks randomly.)
Also materials would need to be available, otherwise you hit another bottleneck.
Why wouldn’t this happen? It’d piss the building industry off. Or perhaps it would get them more work. Who knows.
Just to add as well. There’s some amazing modular, factory built homes shipped worldwide from Germany. A friend in Oz got one shipped over, the council freaked out and the Australian engineers didn’t understand it haha. It’s finally being built and the photos look amazing.
There are free house designs from the Australian government - 6 plus star, different insulation etc specs for each design in different parts of Australia https://www.yourhome.gov.au/house-designs
I like your thinking! I really just desperately want people properly housed but the current situation has us tied up in knots. We need to be bold and disruptive like those Silicon Valley tech bros. Something that empowers people to do it themselves, that doesn't have a finger wagging bureaucracy slowing everything down. I know it all sounds a bit bonkers but trust me, I am no libertarian trying to crush the public service into the ground. It just seems that anything requiring govt investment is screwed for the next few years at least.
Yeah I’m certainly not a libertarian at all either. I believe people are more capable of building their own house than we give them credit for, and we’ve been disempowered over decades. Building certainly isn’t for everyone, but for those that can, they should be empowered and mentored to do so.
Ironically enough, sustainability reasons. Even with the international shipping the German designed and made kits came in with a lower carbon footprint and better building star rating. That's as much as I know.
With all the wood we produce, it seems a shame we can't figure out how to do the same here... and possibly then ship to Australia, as well as providing more and better housing in NZ.
This idea coupled with KO makes me think of the British post-war and 1970s housing estates.
Sure they ended up with streets of near-identical homes - maybe 10 different designs, many times over across the country - but they were simple to consent, materials came on bulk, tradies could build them with their eyes shut, and project managers had a far simpler job than usual. Efficient land use too, given that most dwellings were 2-storey.
Compare this to today in NZ, where even off-plan homes can be tweaked to the max - far more character-laden, but also slow and cumbersome.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Simply to end zoning and building inspections. Trouble is a lot of people need finance, which banks won't give without assurance on consenting and insurance. But it is possible to build without finance if the costs are low enough and you don't have to buy land.
Building inspections certainly slow things down, unless councils hire a whole heap more inspectors to keep up with demand. I think self builders would be less likely to cut corners than professionals too, because they simply don't have the confidence to cut corners. Although I'm sure there will be a few idiots.
That verges on what I've been thinking too. A good place to call home has turned into a rigid ?vulture capitalist way of taunting ordinary people. How joyful for some - a product for which demand will not disappear!
I'm a bit ancient and have other memories. We had neighbours who lived across the paddock when i was 5-10 . They had built a pretty good cosy garage that they lived in for a couple of years while they bit by bit built their house. That was post war when men had been at war instead of at home to build houses. Even in the 1970's when we could buy really old houses and live in them while we 'did them up' it all felt more doable and there were some super books starting coming in from the US with plans to bit by bit build your own home.
what happened since? We all know what happened since - the top of the ladder folks stealing from the further down the ladder folks. No need to be dismissive of Russia etc and their propaganda, we are equally captured by our own version.
When I was a teen in the early 90's my parents bought a newly subdivided lifestyle block. We built a double car garage in it and lived in that for four months while we helped a builder put together a Signature home. There was a concrete slab and then we clicked all the pine boards together like Lego. It was a fun and empowering to do, even for a sullen teenage girl.
yes, for decades New Zealand governments have failed to meet the housing needs of New Zealanders. It is something that causes me to rage with anger (a few years ago my blood pressure was 220/110 (yes, that is the truth. some of my mates said it should have killed me. but the truth is that now the deficiency/lack of housing is killing people in NZ. NZ politicians have a lot of "blood on their hands")
Wow, I'm 'shocked' that Bill English has come to that conclusion given how when he was Finance minister they flogged off more social houses than they built. A completely pointless political exercise to pay a former National Party minister huge fees to produce a report that allows National to proceed with the privatisation of public housing
Unfortunately both LAB and NAT are firmly in the "lets keep things rolling" camp as they both have MPs that largely also own property.. They're both engineers of our current situation, and appear to want to keep it this way (although I like what Bishop is proposing, albeit the fact he is kicking it to touch to the future when he probably won't be in power).
Worth listening to Kieran McAnulty on BHN. As much as Labpur fell short of what I'd liked them to do the fundamental difference to National is that Labour believes it's the responsibility of the state to house people.
Agree. In the 9 years that English was deputy/PM, National built a net 43 new state houses, allowing for the thousands that they privatised. They also required KO to pay the government an annual dividend of $80M. $80m x 9 years =$720M- you can build a hell of a lot of new houses for $720M. In contrast, the last government built 14,000 new houses in 6 years.
Bishop, being a former tobacco lobbyist, can't read a balance sheet. KO has $45B in assets & only $23B in debt - that's a ratio of assets to debt of 2:1 - another manufactured 'crisis' by the ignorant rabble currently in power.
Bill English's finding against Kainga Ora is hardly surprising. Here he is back in 2015, nine years ago, working on the demolition of the state housing agency, by whatever name it was then known.
Re Fast Track yet another own goal with the revelation this morning that National MP (and person who has been chairing the Environment Committee) David MacLeod failed to declare 19 donations worth $178,000. He's "disappointed in himself".
Implicit in this whole concentrate-power-in-the-hands-of-a-few approach is the idea that the decision makers can be trusted to do the right thing.
Shane Jones doesn't declare meetings with mining company executives - we're starting the slide with our international reputation for corruption, also environmental regulation (which will cost us financially, ironically, as this bunch care so much about money).
Another 3 degrees of separation, who hasn't worked for Simon Moutter?
Some interesting narrative on the housing numbers last night from Kieran McAnulty on Big Hairy News, hopefully Pat spins that section up into a shorter take/video
Thanks for updates, have had minor surgery & out of loop for few days. It is plain need more homes built, there is not enough for the population in NZ.
Build more, get them sold or rented & economy of everyone improves. Move forward, stop the negative speak & putting down of folk who do rent or live in Kaingaro Ora homes.
(1) The objective of Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities is to contribute to sustainable, inclusive, and thriving communities that—
(a) provide people with good quality, affordable housing choices that meet diverse needs; and
(b) support good access to jobs, amenities, and services; and
(c) otherwise sustain or enhance the overall economic, social, environmental, and cultural well-being of current and future generations.
(2) When performing its functions or exercising powers under any other legislation, Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities must act in a way that furthers any relevant objectives or purposes stated in that legislation.
Is its performance against that objective and the adequacy of the funding it had to meet that objective the matters on which Kainga Ora should be assessed? Did the English report assess Kainga Ora on that basis or some other?
By the way National talks about KO you would think they would advise all of us to not take a mortgage to buy a house because it will put us into debt. I thought that they are running the country like a household. They fail even in this simple comparison.
Started reading this "Independent Review of Kāinga Ora Homes and Communities.
It starts with the Panel setting out their view of what should be the purpose of the government's social and affordable housing and seem to use that as a ruler to judge Kāinga Ora.
It does not assess all Kāinga Ora's duties under its legal objective which I have quoted elsewhere in the comments, just the providing rentals subset of those duties.
A wider mandate is under the urban development function of Kāinga Ora where much more than rental houses is to be provided - "development of housing, including public housing and community housing, affordable housing, homes for first-home buyers, and market housing: (s13(1)(f)(i) of Kāinga Ora Act 2019)
Nowhere does the Panel seem to ask the question of whether Kāinga Ora is underfunded, but lots of handwringing about increased debt (which might even get to 50% of its total asset value!). It does state that Kāinga Ora is financially unsustainable though, but that is said to be as a result of poor finance management not underfunding.
By page 11 (the last page of the Introduction) it states in bold blue type "A social investment approach to the housing system will lift performance of the whole system".
I damn near fell out of chair at this totally unexpected assertion from this Independent Review :-).
Lots of concern about Kāinga Ora debt. Nothing about why Kāinga Ora is forced to borrow to provide housing and urban development. Or why the alternative of the government just issuing sufficient interest-free capital money to Kāinga Ora didn't happen in the first place (something we can easily do as a sovereign currency issuer).
I was pleased about Luxon making a repeated general statement just now supporting ICC and Intl Law when asked about ICC statement about arrest warrants and clearly not criticising it, particularly given Biden response describing it as outrageous.
How nice if Luxon just came out plainly and condemned the genocide of Palestinians, called the Zionists out for the heinous crimes they are committing!
I'm glad the ICC has issued warrants for the Hamas leadership living in luxury in exile as well as Netanyahu
https://open.substack.com/pub/jonathancook/p/indeed-there-is-no-comparison-israels?r=d56cc&utm_medium=ios
Some good points by Cook but this?
Israel has kept the Palestinians of Gaza caged into a concentration camp for the past 17 years
A concentration camp that had luxury car dealerships among other things:
https://www.facebook.com/GazaBenzMotors21/
Israel apologists will always find something to mock. 35,000 dead, 7000 missing, but we manage to dig up a (presumably now extinct) luxury car dealership. Of course a prison of more than 2 million people will have its layer of wealthy exploiters. Two of the three Hamas leaders for whom arrest warrants are sought are hiding in Gaza, by the way: only one is 'living in luxury in exile'.
Luxon would have been unwise not to express 'general' support for the ICC and international law. Ignore Biden's feigned indignation: the ICC prosecutor's case has illustrious backing.
'Why we support ICC prosecutions for crimes in Israel and Gaza'
From Lord Justice Fulford, Judge Theodor Meron CMG, Amal Clooney, Danny Friedman KC, Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, Elizabeth Wilmshurst CMG KC
https://www.ft.com/content/aa2089c5-6388-437d-bf5c-9268f3a788ce
https://archive.ph/Wlrrp
https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/240520-panel-report-eng.pdf
The bird song was spectacular. Sorry, might have to listen again to concentrate on what you were saying 😂
Thanks Sonya! There's some tradeoffs to the birdsong, as an economist might say...
No one is talking about the quality of the homes, KO is building homes with a 6* rating which makes them far more energy efficient and healthy. This does cost a little more up front but will save us all much in the coming years. The healthier homes reduce the cost on our health system. The energy efficiency takes pressure off our electrical grid.
A direct comparison to private buildings is not realistic
Thanks Elaine. That's useful.
Please note that MHUD has a design guide that all new homes that want to attract government funding via the Public Housing Fund have to follow. So quality is basically an even playing field for any new homes that house families or individuals from the Housing Register - CHP or KO.
https://www.hud.govt.nz/news/public-housing-design-guidance-for-community-housing-providers-and-developers-update
Kainga Ora has produced a detailed design guideline for state housing. I am using it to help with my extensive renovation of our home.
https://kaingaora.govt.nz/assets/Publications/Design-Guidelines/Design-Requirements.pdf
thankyou very much for that link :-)
The horror! The horror! Read all about it! Kainga Ora state housing disaster, according to the chair of the inquiry, Bill English.
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he. Because Bill English has been trying to demolish the state's involvement in rental housing for years.
There may be much that is wrong with the state housing agency, regardless of whatever fancy name it is called.
But what is fundamentally wrong with it is the notion that its job is grudgingly to provide homes for the poorest decile of society.
We need a government that will building at least 100,000 homes for secure, lifetime, income-moderated rent not only for the poorest of the poor, but for all who want them.
Make rental housing popular for everyone!
I believe that currently 270,000 public/state homes are required to be built/constructed in the places they are needed/required.
and in safe places (eg not susceptible to flooding or slips)
State houses are state houses. A public house is where you walk in uninvited for a beer. In 2017 the Ardern government decided to abolish the cancel the word 'state' (too commie-sounding?) and replace it with 'public'. Every journalist in the land tamely went along with it (just as they tamely adopt 'Indo-Pacific' in place of 'Asia-Pacific' despite Asia stretching to Istanbul). But 'public' is an inaccurate substitute for 'state'.
I'll happily agree with 270,000 state rental homes needed: 100,000 is my lazy bigroundfiguritis.
Meanwhile, here's Martyn Bradbury with a colourful view of Bill English's involvement in the state housing review:
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2024/05/22/here-they-come-for-state-housing-how-compromised-is-bill-english/
pub = public house, yes
but here in NZ public house is also equivalent to state house.
many thanks for the link.
Just thinking out loud... Could we solving the housing crisis if we let everyone build anything anywhere. I'm talking sleepouts, tiny houses, US style trailer homes as well as kitset homes and everything up to full size houses. No rules for single storey dwellings (realise it could get a bit dodgy if people were building DIY apartments). This could crash the housing market so obviously would be politically difficult. And yes, some people would live in shit boxes but let's face it, they already do. I see houses in Welly every day that deserve a bulldozer. Without rules there would be an abundance of housing. Everyone struggling to afford their mortgage could put a cheap sleep out on their property to help meet their payments. Parents could add units to their property to house the kids who might otherwise struggle to get on the property ladder. And the sheer abundance of choice would mean the unhealthiest homes would remain empty, incentivising their owners to lift their game. I'm running out of patience for the government to fix any of the big problems we face. We also need abundance of housing to deal with climate change and all those refugees, domestic and overseas that will be coming our way. I foresee the NIMBY's clutching their pearls at such a lawless suggestion but our current policy settings are impossible. I have friends who planned an apartment above a garage and were quoted 1m to get it done. There has to be a better way.Thoughts anyone?
Sounds almost libertarian…
There is such a shortage of houses that your plan wouldn't work in that even sub-standard housing would be occupied. The only answer is to bite the bullet, build more houses and pay for them also.
Are you saying only no planning controls? Or do you mean no Building Act controls also.
Two big issues are how is sufficient infrastructure provided and how to ensure houses are healthy and dry.
I’ve had similar thoughts. This could be done with a bunch of pre-approved designs paid for by government and some weekend building courses. Could also have an online forum where people could ask each other advice and professionals could be hired to also respond. The harder stuff would still need trades (like electrical and plumbing). But as long as the land was zoned for residential in some capacity, it could be possible. Councils would still need to ensure the land is suitable and foundation engineering is adequate. But pre-approved designs would save so much time. Also building inspectors would either need to be skipped or reduced to spot checks (there’s no building inspections in Western Australian single dwelling construction for example. But there can be spot checks randomly.)
Also materials would need to be available, otherwise you hit another bottleneck.
Why wouldn’t this happen? It’d piss the building industry off. Or perhaps it would get them more work. Who knows.
Just to add as well. There’s some amazing modular, factory built homes shipped worldwide from Germany. A friend in Oz got one shipped over, the council freaked out and the Australian engineers didn’t understand it haha. It’s finally being built and the photos look amazing.
Public anywhere? I'm curious.
There are free house designs from the Australian government - 6 plus star, different insulation etc specs for each design in different parts of Australia https://www.yourhome.gov.au/house-designs
This is cool, didn't know about this. Wonder if they'll bump up to 7 stars now, as of last year 7 stars is the minimum across Oz.
Is this what you’re referring to? From the link: achieve a minimum energy rating of 7 stars under the Nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme
I'll ask my friend and get back to you :D
I like your thinking! I really just desperately want people properly housed but the current situation has us tied up in knots. We need to be bold and disruptive like those Silicon Valley tech bros. Something that empowers people to do it themselves, that doesn't have a finger wagging bureaucracy slowing everything down. I know it all sounds a bit bonkers but trust me, I am no libertarian trying to crush the public service into the ground. It just seems that anything requiring govt investment is screwed for the next few years at least.
Yeah I’m certainly not a libertarian at all either. I believe people are more capable of building their own house than we give them credit for, and we’ve been disempowered over decades. Building certainly isn’t for everyone, but for those that can, they should be empowered and mentored to do so.
But why, apart from the design which they liked, would they import fa house from Germany. There are plenty of modular homes to buy in Australia.
Ironically enough, sustainability reasons. Even with the international shipping the German designed and made kits came in with a lower carbon footprint and better building star rating. That's as much as I know.
With all the wood we produce, it seems a shame we can't figure out how to do the same here... and possibly then ship to Australia, as well as providing more and better housing in NZ.
This idea coupled with KO makes me think of the British post-war and 1970s housing estates.
Sure they ended up with streets of near-identical homes - maybe 10 different designs, many times over across the country - but they were simple to consent, materials came on bulk, tradies could build them with their eyes shut, and project managers had a far simpler job than usual. Efficient land use too, given that most dwellings were 2-storey.
Compare this to today in NZ, where even off-plan homes can be tweaked to the max - far more character-laden, but also slow and cumbersome.
State house developments in Aotearoa after WW2 had the same limited designs approach, albeit often with proper urban design of the neighbourhood.
You'd want to avoid a situation like this:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/indonesian-overstayers-found-living-in-a-plywood-shed-and-dilapidated-caravan-at-new-windsor-auckland-property/PJHIBPRSHBCTDPTJ5X6XZYKB6E/
Of course, that is dreadful.
I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Simply to end zoning and building inspections. Trouble is a lot of people need finance, which banks won't give without assurance on consenting and insurance. But it is possible to build without finance if the costs are low enough and you don't have to buy land.
End building inspections = even more cowboy builders.
End zoning and how do infrastructure providers have any idea what to provide where?
Building inspections certainly slow things down, unless councils hire a whole heap more inspectors to keep up with demand. I think self builders would be less likely to cut corners than professionals too, because they simply don't have the confidence to cut corners. Although I'm sure there will be a few idiots.
My experience is building inspections aren't a great hold-up if you book your inspections ahead.
And follow the plans you got consent on.
That verges on what I've been thinking too. A good place to call home has turned into a rigid ?vulture capitalist way of taunting ordinary people. How joyful for some - a product for which demand will not disappear!
I'm a bit ancient and have other memories. We had neighbours who lived across the paddock when i was 5-10 . They had built a pretty good cosy garage that they lived in for a couple of years while they bit by bit built their house. That was post war when men had been at war instead of at home to build houses. Even in the 1970's when we could buy really old houses and live in them while we 'did them up' it all felt more doable and there were some super books starting coming in from the US with plans to bit by bit build your own home.
what happened since? We all know what happened since - the top of the ladder folks stealing from the further down the ladder folks. No need to be dismissive of Russia etc and their propaganda, we are equally captured by our own version.
When I was a teen in the early 90's my parents bought a newly subdivided lifestyle block. We built a double car garage in it and lived in that for four months while we helped a builder put together a Signature home. There was a concrete slab and then we clicked all the pine boards together like Lego. It was a fun and empowering to do, even for a sullen teenage girl.
yes, for decades New Zealand governments have failed to meet the housing needs of New Zealanders. It is something that causes me to rage with anger (a few years ago my blood pressure was 220/110 (yes, that is the truth. some of my mates said it should have killed me. but the truth is that now the deficiency/lack of housing is killing people in NZ. NZ politicians have a lot of "blood on their hands")
100%
Wow, I'm 'shocked' that Bill English has come to that conclusion given how when he was Finance minister they flogged off more social houses than they built. A completely pointless political exercise to pay a former National Party minister huge fees to produce a report that allows National to proceed with the privatisation of public housing
Labour could take the lesson by actually doing the things their panels recommend.
Unfortunately both LAB and NAT are firmly in the "lets keep things rolling" camp as they both have MPs that largely also own property.. They're both engineers of our current situation, and appear to want to keep it this way (although I like what Bishop is proposing, albeit the fact he is kicking it to touch to the future when he probably won't be in power).
Worth listening to Kieran McAnulty on BHN. As much as Labpur fell short of what I'd liked them to do the fundamental difference to National is that Labour believes it's the responsibility of the state to house people.
That, and they at least give the appearance (via policies etc) that they genuinely care about people - especially those less fortunate than others.
Agree. In the 9 years that English was deputy/PM, National built a net 43 new state houses, allowing for the thousands that they privatised. They also required KO to pay the government an annual dividend of $80M. $80m x 9 years =$720M- you can build a hell of a lot of new houses for $720M. In contrast, the last government built 14,000 new houses in 6 years.
Bishop, being a former tobacco lobbyist, can't read a balance sheet. KO has $45B in assets & only $23B in debt - that's a ratio of assets to debt of 2:1 - another manufactured 'crisis' by the ignorant rabble currently in power.
Bill English's finding against Kainga Ora is hardly surprising. Here he is back in 2015, nine years ago, working on the demolition of the state housing agency, by whatever name it was then known.
https://www.nzpif.org.nz/news/view/57093
I like the shadow pic.
Re Fast Track yet another own goal with the revelation this morning that National MP (and person who has been chairing the Environment Committee) David MacLeod failed to declare 19 donations worth $178,000. He's "disappointed in himself".
Implicit in this whole concentrate-power-in-the-hands-of-a-few approach is the idea that the decision makers can be trusted to do the right thing.
Clearly, they can't.
Shane Jones doesn't declare meetings with mining company executives - we're starting the slide with our international reputation for corruption, also environmental regulation (which will cost us financially, ironically, as this bunch care so much about money).
I'm disappointed in him as well. But more than that, I think he's a liar, and that's a much bigger problem for him.
Another 3 degrees of separation, who hasn't worked for Simon Moutter?
Some interesting narrative on the housing numbers last night from Kieran McAnulty on Big Hairy News, hopefully Pat spins that section up into a shorter take/video
Re Bishop's scorpion analogy it's a sign of how benign our wildlife is that he has to use a foreign creature to make his point
Shows they don’t have the depth of thinking to anticipate the results of thier actions…
Or to do the research while in opposition .....
And don’t care
Yes there can be a sting in the tail if you don't think ahead
Ha! Yep. Huhu grubs and wetas aren't quite so scary!
Buying an existing dwelling, renting g it out, and forcing first home buyers (renters) out of the market does nothing to address the housing shortage.
Nor does transferring state houses to private providers.
Building more units is the only solution.
It’s hard to believe that your statements aren’t obvious to everyone. It must be wilful ignorance for those who don’t.
Thanks for updates, have had minor surgery & out of loop for few days. It is plain need more homes built, there is not enough for the population in NZ.
Build more, get them sold or rented & economy of everyone improves. Move forward, stop the negative speak & putting down of folk who do rent or live in Kaingaro Ora homes.
Kainga Ora was given a very broad objective.
12 Objective of Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities
(1) The objective of Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities is to contribute to sustainable, inclusive, and thriving communities that—
(a) provide people with good quality, affordable housing choices that meet diverse needs; and
(b) support good access to jobs, amenities, and services; and
(c) otherwise sustain or enhance the overall economic, social, environmental, and cultural well-being of current and future generations.
(2) When performing its functions or exercising powers under any other legislation, Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities must act in a way that furthers any relevant objectives or purposes stated in that legislation.
Is its performance against that objective and the adequacy of the funding it had to meet that objective the matters on which Kainga Ora should be assessed? Did the English report assess Kainga Ora on that basis or some other?
By the way National talks about KO you would think they would advise all of us to not take a mortgage to buy a house because it will put us into debt. I thought that they are running the country like a household. They fail even in this simple comparison.
Started reading this "Independent Review of Kāinga Ora Homes and Communities.
It starts with the Panel setting out their view of what should be the purpose of the government's social and affordable housing and seem to use that as a ruler to judge Kāinga Ora.
It does not assess all Kāinga Ora's duties under its legal objective which I have quoted elsewhere in the comments, just the providing rentals subset of those duties.
A wider mandate is under the urban development function of Kāinga Ora where much more than rental houses is to be provided - "development of housing, including public housing and community housing, affordable housing, homes for first-home buyers, and market housing: (s13(1)(f)(i) of Kāinga Ora Act 2019)
Nowhere does the Panel seem to ask the question of whether Kāinga Ora is underfunded, but lots of handwringing about increased debt (which might even get to 50% of its total asset value!). It does state that Kāinga Ora is financially unsustainable though, but that is said to be as a result of poor finance management not underfunding.
By page 11 (the last page of the Introduction) it states in bold blue type "A social investment approach to the housing system will lift performance of the whole system".
I damn near fell out of chair at this totally unexpected assertion from this Independent Review :-).
Lots of concern about Kāinga Ora debt. Nothing about why Kāinga Ora is forced to borrow to provide housing and urban development. Or why the alternative of the government just issuing sufficient interest-free capital money to Kāinga Ora didn't happen in the first place (something we can easily do as a sovereign currency issuer).
Wow! Thanks to everyone. We go over 100 again. So I've opened it up for full public consumption and sharing. Nga mihi nui.