Bishop stripping Kāinga Ora back to being landlord of stagnant stock of 78,000 state homes; Govt to sell around 900 homes per year in leafier areas to fund renewals & eyes sale of bare land blocks
Where is the opposition? Please, come out, come out, wherever you are. Oh, and some advice from Jim Malone (aka Sean Connery) in ‘The Untouchables’, don’t bring a knife to a gunfight.
You need to follow them on their socials, the media aren't giving them airtime. (I don't entirely blame the mainstream media - the government actually has too much power in that area).
The MSM isn't where the population are anymore, so it probably doesn't matter. As long as the opposition is where the people are: in communities, workplaces, etc.
The media are deliberately starving the opposition of counterpoint airtime. People are playing into NACTs hands by criticising the opposition, when it’s the media who’ve put the opposition on mute.
Kianga ora paying dividends? When did that become a thing? And who to? Market rents going up steadily but not incomes for those in less well paid jobs. At least the Remuera-ites will be pleased to have bottom feeders out of sight.
Have we all forgotten the establishment in 1991 by the 4th National government of the Housing Corporation as a profit making org with a dividend for the government. In 2015 this divi was $115 mill. They raised rents to market rates and of course needed to make an accommodation supplement available so that people could afford these market rents. labour and national have oscillated on this issue for years now. Who pays for accommodation benefit - the tax payer, and who benefits - the landlord!
The accommodation supplement was a 2.1 billion dollar subsidy to property investors, paid for by the taxpayer. In a macro sense it means total rents in NZ were 2.1 billion dollars higher than the market would otherwise support.
the accommodation supplement paid for the year ending 31 January 2024 was 2.34 BILLION dollars (most to residential rental property owners and a small percentage to mortgaged owners in their own homes)
I have not been able to find the amount/sum paid for the year ending 31 January 2025.
the accommodation supplement must be phased out because it is increasing/pushing up the price of residential property in New Zealand.
the 2.34 BILLION dollars accommodation supplement paid to residential rental property owners in the year to 31 January 2024, which is a MASSIVE subsidy to the residential rental property owners
or
the phasing out of that MASSIVE subsidy to residential rental property owners?
Question: What investment in New Zealand gives you the greatest ROI?
Is it .....
a)Property investment
b)Nvidia Shares
c) Gold
d) Buying a business
The correct answer is none of the above ......It's actually giving National, ACT or NZ First a very large political donation.
See the great returns from those who have donated from those in the Mining, property development and fishing sectors and a nice quick payback of only about 18 months. The slightly longer-term returns from getting distressed govt SOE's, privatising health sector assets & insurance, PPPs, state sector housing etc will have to wait maybe another year or so to get their donation paybacks but will be well worth the wait.
If you are looking for a silver lining, less density in places like Remuera means redistribution of electorates and the end of the Epsom / ACT Boondoggle. Because the increasing density will be slotted into the Tamaki electorate with the redevelopment of GI ;-) two birds one stone as they say.
oh wow, it's all ok, don't worry everyone. Luxon realised his assets not so long ago, he can snap up some of that land in Remueral. I'm sure he's a great landlord.
I have to do further pondering, but I am troubled by tripping Kāinga Ora being required to generate sustained cash surpluses. For me, this falls into the same scenario as prisons being run for profit (and, perhaps, universities having to make a return to central government). I keep thinking that any financial surplus generated by a public housing agency should be put back into the provision of public housing - not allocated to another area of central government activity. It seems to me some sort of contradiction to require public good agencies and activities to generate 'profit'.
Agree any rental profit from State Housing should be re invested on upgrade & increased stock. Selling expensive land makes no sense, it should be used to rebuild making 1 house into 3 or 5 homes for rental.
Just what does Bishop want apart from cutting state housing, As everyone with a mortgage understands, borrowing to build new houses is understandable. This is especially so as the government can borrow money at negligible rates.
Please open it up Bernard. This is absolutely dire & most of the country are in the dark about the ramifications of this. This Govt truly seems to detest the people! There is nothing more important than having a home & food on a table in that home!
Ideology triumphs over evidence once again. Can’t find a job? You’re not trying hard enough. Living in your car? Just need to go out and search harder for a private rental.
The insidious thing here is “capping at 78k for 30 years”. Given any “growth” has been achieved by population increases, the only mathematical outcome from this is a decreasing share of state-supplied social housing.
Proportionally we can expect an increase in the absolute number of state social housing based on existing criteria. (As the population increases the demand must proportionally increase).
So caping at a fixed number for 30 years means:
- criteria must be tightened to limit those who can access the decreasing per capita supply of state social housing; and
- privately funded social housing supply must increase. In other words: privatisation of social housing.
This assumes social stress is static. And, with austerity and the economic collapse that emerges from it, there is every chance needs and demand for social housing will increase.
It’s likely that state-funding will be provided (politically there will be no other choice), so in effect we are seeing the architecting of further cash to landlords being made from the central purse.
I don't think this government is interested in helping to solve the housing crisis, it's hardly interesting in pretending to look like they are tryin to solve it.
Another key aspect in all of this is the labour needed to build these houses. Most of those apprenticeship schemes have been chopped & because of market uncertainty, businesses have no incentive for taking on that risk of hiring apprentices. We've also lost so much industry knowledge to overseas markets especially in the last 9 months.
Seems like ages ago that anyone last wanted to build housing. Seems politically compulsory to pontificate about it, but no one actually wants to pick up a hammer and nails and actually do it. Too stupidly impractical. Words don't keep the rain out.
Where is the opposition? Please, come out, come out, wherever you are. Oh, and some advice from Jim Malone (aka Sean Connery) in ‘The Untouchables’, don’t bring a knife to a gunfight.
Did you hear Chippy on Breakfast this morning?
At Waitangi, on the NZ Labour page?
You need to follow them on their socials, the media aren't giving them airtime. (I don't entirely blame the mainstream media - the government actually has too much power in that area).
The MSM isn't where the population are anymore, so it probably doesn't matter. As long as the opposition is where the people are: in communities, workplaces, etc.
Enough of the (mostly older) generations still rely on the evening news as a major news source.
It's also predominantly older generations who have the highest vote participation rates.
True, but really, doesn't the opposition need to engage the younger, and non-voters... urgently?
Yes, but I was responding to the previous point.
The media are deliberately starving the opposition of counterpoint airtime. People are playing into NACTs hands by criticising the opposition, when it’s the media who’ve put the opposition on mute.
So add fuel to the inequality fire but cap state housing at 78,000?
and it keeps the housing market where they want it, prices up (ex Wellington), rents high.
Great point Tracy⭐️
Kianga ora paying dividends? When did that become a thing? And who to? Market rents going up steadily but not incomes for those in less well paid jobs. At least the Remuera-ites will be pleased to have bottom feeders out of sight.
Hi Jane. I too saw the dividends point and was completely shocked. Who knew that state housing is a profit making endeavor!!!
State Housing is not a profit making endeavor unless we believe this. State Housing is what governments are elected to do. House our people.
Why would anyone want to live in Remuera? People who think their f*rts don't smell are incapable of community.
Have we all forgotten the establishment in 1991 by the 4th National government of the Housing Corporation as a profit making org with a dividend for the government. In 2015 this divi was $115 mill. They raised rents to market rates and of course needed to make an accommodation supplement available so that people could afford these market rents. labour and national have oscillated on this issue for years now. Who pays for accommodation benefit - the tax payer, and who benefits - the landlord!
The accommodation supplement was a 2.1 billion dollar subsidy to property investors, paid for by the taxpayer. In a macro sense it means total rents in NZ were 2.1 billion dollars higher than the market would otherwise support.
the accommodation supplement paid for the year ending 31 January 2024 was 2.34 BILLION dollars (most to residential rental property owners and a small percentage to mortgaged owners in their own homes)
I have not been able to find the amount/sum paid for the year ending 31 January 2025.
the accommodation supplement must be phased out because it is increasing/pushing up the price of residential property in New Zealand.
This makes me so so angry
the 2.34 BILLION dollars accommodation supplement paid to residential rental property owners in the year to 31 January 2024, which is a MASSIVE subsidy to the residential rental property owners
or
the phasing out of that MASSIVE subsidy to residential rental property owners?
The paying out of it. It's outrageous. Moving public coppers into private pockets
Hmmmm, I wonder who is wealthy and sorted enough to scoop up a bunch of land in Remuera?
Question: What investment in New Zealand gives you the greatest ROI?
Is it .....
a)Property investment
b)Nvidia Shares
c) Gold
d) Buying a business
The correct answer is none of the above ......It's actually giving National, ACT or NZ First a very large political donation.
See the great returns from those who have donated from those in the Mining, property development and fishing sectors and a nice quick payback of only about 18 months. The slightly longer-term returns from getting distressed govt SOE's, privatising health sector assets & insurance, PPPs, state sector housing etc will have to wait maybe another year or so to get their donation paybacks but will be well worth the wait.
If you are looking for a silver lining, less density in places like Remuera means redistribution of electorates and the end of the Epsom / ACT Boondoggle. Because the increasing density will be slotted into the Tamaki electorate with the redevelopment of GI ;-) two birds one stone as they say.
I think electoral boundaries are pretty irrelevant in MMP once a party is consistently above the threshold.
ha yes good point, just looking for the positives. It is hard work through!!
Open it up
Hi Bernard, why can I not listen to this? It says “ cannot load video file”
Is there a cut off time for availability?
shouldn't be.
If you haven't already, try restarting your device then give it another shot.
Hope that helps
Thanks Leonie. I’ve checked at my end and should be ok. Only audio today.
oh wow, it's all ok, don't worry everyone. Luxon realised his assets not so long ago, he can snap up some of that land in Remueral. I'm sure he's a great landlord.
I have to do further pondering, but I am troubled by tripping Kāinga Ora being required to generate sustained cash surpluses. For me, this falls into the same scenario as prisons being run for profit (and, perhaps, universities having to make a return to central government). I keep thinking that any financial surplus generated by a public housing agency should be put back into the provision of public housing - not allocated to another area of central government activity. It seems to me some sort of contradiction to require public good agencies and activities to generate 'profit'.
Abso-bally-lutely
Amen!
I totally totally agree with everything you’ve said: Colin!
Agree any rental profit from State Housing should be re invested on upgrade & increased stock. Selling expensive land makes no sense, it should be used to rebuild making 1 house into 3 or 5 homes for rental.
A form of profit taking is endemic through the government departments via Treasury inspired capital charges - about $500 million by Te Whatu Ora IIRC.
Just what does Bishop want apart from cutting state housing, As everyone with a mortgage understands, borrowing to build new houses is understandable. This is especially so as the government can borrow money at negligible rates.
Another of the economically and financially illiterate cabinet ministers.
Please open it up Bernard. This is absolutely dire & most of the country are in the dark about the ramifications of this. This Govt truly seems to detest the people! There is nothing more important than having a home & food on a table in that home!
Ideology triumphs over evidence once again. Can’t find a job? You’re not trying hard enough. Living in your car? Just need to go out and search harder for a private rental.
The insidious thing here is “capping at 78k for 30 years”. Given any “growth” has been achieved by population increases, the only mathematical outcome from this is a decreasing share of state-supplied social housing.
Proportionally we can expect an increase in the absolute number of state social housing based on existing criteria. (As the population increases the demand must proportionally increase).
So caping at a fixed number for 30 years means:
- criteria must be tightened to limit those who can access the decreasing per capita supply of state social housing; and
- privately funded social housing supply must increase. In other words: privatisation of social housing.
This assumes social stress is static. And, with austerity and the economic collapse that emerges from it, there is every chance needs and demand for social housing will increase.
It’s likely that state-funding will be provided (politically there will be no other choice), so in effect we are seeing the architecting of further cash to landlords being made from the central purse.
You’re right Geoff. Ever falling social housing share.
Are they fixing the amount for accommodation supplement as well? Is only logical…
100%
Did anyone else go "nawwwww!" when they saw the sleeping kitty cat.
Very cleansing photos :-)
I did go nawwwww at the Extinction Rebellion kitty cat stopping that vehicle moving. Kia kaha Kitty, kia manawanui
Ha! Indeed. Luckily for us, there’s an electric car parked behind that one. A neighbour’s car we’re keeping an eye on.
Ha! Love it. Made my day!
Darn, I missed the opportunity to say that Kitty looks "TIRED".
;-)
I don't think this government is interested in helping to solve the housing crisis, it's hardly interesting in pretending to look like they are tryin to solve it.
Another key aspect in all of this is the labour needed to build these houses. Most of those apprenticeship schemes have been chopped & because of market uncertainty, businesses have no incentive for taking on that risk of hiring apprentices. We've also lost so much industry knowledge to overseas markets especially in the last 9 months.
Seems like ages ago that anyone last wanted to build housing. Seems politically compulsory to pontificate about it, but no one actually wants to pick up a hammer and nails and actually do it. Too stupidly impractical. Words don't keep the rain out.