The build-to-rent tax break; National security threats via 'Fire and Fury'; Christopher Luxon's gets tough on the disabled; Bupa selling NZ care homes; Spookies, profundities etc; The Craic
" The Government will introduce the following build-to-rent asset class definition:
o tenants must be offered a fixed-term tenancy of at least 10 years with the ability to give 56 days’ notice of termination, but they may agree to or request other tenancy offers. Note that in order to qualify as build-to-rent, a tenant does not have to accept a 10-year tenancy offer. A build-to-rent development will satisfy this requirement as long as a 10-year tenancy term is offered.
o at least 20 dwellings in one or more buildings that comprise a single development, on either a single parcel of land or multiple contiguous parcels
o the dwellings and any common land or facilities for those dwellings have a single owner
o dwellings can be held in one or more titles
o the building that a build-to-rent dwelling is in can include other dwellings or commercial premises that do not form part of the build-to-rent development (for example, an apartment block that has shops on the ground floor)
o the dwellings are used or available for rent under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986
o explicit personalisation policies must be offered, over and above the Residential Tenancies Act 1986"
I can see a lot of loopholes in this as described above.
Given the demand Developer-landlords could "offer" but choose to rent to short term renters.
It would have been better to require a rent to own option which could be optioned at any time by the renters during the rental period, where the renters could get a mortgage & buy the residence outright for a amount set over and above development/maintenance costs rather than market rates.
Rumour has it that the entire New Plymouth City water engineering department voted Labour at the last election to try to ensure that 3 Waters would come into being and take their stress away.
Regarding the pending potential loss of journalist jobs when the Public Interest Journalism fund runs out - this is such a common aspect across crucial sectors today. It's exactly the problem that has been facing the research and science sector for decades. If a researcher wins government funding for a research programme, early career researchers are hired to do the work. But when the funds run out after 3-5 years, they are out of a job. You could argue about the relative value of journalism and research in different subjects, and the level of ongoing public funding that is warranted, but this short-term, contestable funding mechanism hollows out every area it touches. We must change to a system that supports journalists, researchers, and every other vital aspect of our democracy and society without making it so these highly trained people need to waste their time reapplying for a job every few years, until they give up and leave the profession.
I’m still in the side of not allowing any state to require a vaccine for existing trained and qualified workers without compensation. It is a heavy thing to expect compliance on medical procedures or force them on people, staff or anyone and use coercion to achieve. I really felt for those women which this has happened to. Obviously I would have preferred they had held the line not had the Aussie bubble and introduced the virus to NZ. It was always going to cause chaos and deaths and great distress to everyone. I’m just hoping it’s being properly monitored and stopped from spreading at the border. Particularly new variants. Because it changes it is not like other diseases. They can do it for animal and plant diseases so I’d hope this capacity to screen for imported virus’ and disease for humans too has been ramped up permanently also as a precaution. A crisis either decades (like our child and women abuse and neglect of laws ) or a quickly emerging one like a pandemic, which HAD been warned about has exposed successive Governments as having had their pants down (along with the GFC, Housing, climate crisis etc) so it’s not irrational to mistrust authority here. I agree with Chris Finlayson on most being libertarian in nature but wanting to believe our QOL and institutions and politicians are able to pull the country out of the fire, which isn’t going anywhere and only going to get worse. People can only tolerate being exploited and extracted from abused and neglected so much before they will rebel or become violently angry. This is just a historical fact that needs to be faced. To refuse to support the poorest and most vulnerable and mess with their children, lives, property and income and fail in a duty of care is repulsive.
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2208/S00127/tax-break-to-boost-long-term-rental-supply.htm
" The Government will introduce the following build-to-rent asset class definition:
o tenants must be offered a fixed-term tenancy of at least 10 years with the ability to give 56 days’ notice of termination, but they may agree to or request other tenancy offers. Note that in order to qualify as build-to-rent, a tenant does not have to accept a 10-year tenancy offer. A build-to-rent development will satisfy this requirement as long as a 10-year tenancy term is offered.
o at least 20 dwellings in one or more buildings that comprise a single development, on either a single parcel of land or multiple contiguous parcels
o the dwellings and any common land or facilities for those dwellings have a single owner
o dwellings can be held in one or more titles
o the building that a build-to-rent dwelling is in can include other dwellings or commercial premises that do not form part of the build-to-rent development (for example, an apartment block that has shops on the ground floor)
o the dwellings are used or available for rent under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986
o explicit personalisation policies must be offered, over and above the Residential Tenancies Act 1986"
I can see a lot of loopholes in this as described above.
Given the demand Developer-landlords could "offer" but choose to rent to short term renters.
It would have been better to require a rent to own option which could be optioned at any time by the renters during the rental period, where the renters could get a mortgage & buy the residence outright for a amount set over and above development/maintenance costs rather than market rates.
Thanks David. Interesting idea on rent-to-buy. I've got a call in with the minister's office for an interview...
Rumour has it that the entire New Plymouth City water engineering department voted Labour at the last election to try to ensure that 3 Waters would come into being and take their stress away.
or maybe some of their senior staff were looking for jobs in the new bureaucracy!
having been involved in this area of policy for a couple of decades you might find more in truth that comment than can be stated in a public forum
Regarding the pending potential loss of journalist jobs when the Public Interest Journalism fund runs out - this is such a common aspect across crucial sectors today. It's exactly the problem that has been facing the research and science sector for decades. If a researcher wins government funding for a research programme, early career researchers are hired to do the work. But when the funds run out after 3-5 years, they are out of a job. You could argue about the relative value of journalism and research in different subjects, and the level of ongoing public funding that is warranted, but this short-term, contestable funding mechanism hollows out every area it touches. We must change to a system that supports journalists, researchers, and every other vital aspect of our democracy and society without making it so these highly trained people need to waste their time reapplying for a job every few years, until they give up and leave the profession.
Excellent points Simon G. Can't imagine a bank or a supermarket chain or an electricity retailer only hiring key people on short term contracts.
I’m still in the side of not allowing any state to require a vaccine for existing trained and qualified workers without compensation. It is a heavy thing to expect compliance on medical procedures or force them on people, staff or anyone and use coercion to achieve. I really felt for those women which this has happened to. Obviously I would have preferred they had held the line not had the Aussie bubble and introduced the virus to NZ. It was always going to cause chaos and deaths and great distress to everyone. I’m just hoping it’s being properly monitored and stopped from spreading at the border. Particularly new variants. Because it changes it is not like other diseases. They can do it for animal and plant diseases so I’d hope this capacity to screen for imported virus’ and disease for humans too has been ramped up permanently also as a precaution. A crisis either decades (like our child and women abuse and neglect of laws ) or a quickly emerging one like a pandemic, which HAD been warned about has exposed successive Governments as having had their pants down (along with the GFC, Housing, climate crisis etc) so it’s not irrational to mistrust authority here. I agree with Chris Finlayson on most being libertarian in nature but wanting to believe our QOL and institutions and politicians are able to pull the country out of the fire, which isn’t going anywhere and only going to get worse. People can only tolerate being exploited and extracted from abused and neglected so much before they will rebel or become violently angry. This is just a historical fact that needs to be faced. To refuse to support the poorest and most vulnerable and mess with their children, lives, property and income and fail in a duty of care is repulsive.