Debate on Crown Entities, Public Organisations, and State Enterprises — Housing New Zealand Corporation

I am pleased to be speaking on the review from the Social Services Committee of Housing New Zealand, because we are embarking as a Government on the most exciting and positive changes in social housing in a generation. I want to just briefly talk about both the review and what those changes mean. The long-term assumption about Housing New Zealand is that it is the sole provider of social housing. In 2010 the Government received the vision on social housing, which is all about expanding the provision of social housing to beyond just the State. We have seen, with the Budget announcements this year, this ambition to expand the community provision of social housing up to 20 percent.

I know that in Australia—actually, I would ask members opposite to talk to their Labor colleagues in Australia about the success of expanding social housing beyond being just a State entity, because the programme that the Government is embarking on is mirrored in Australia.

💬 Grant Robertson: Who began third-sector housing funding? We did.

Well, Mr Robertson interjects and says: “Oh, these reforms all started with Labour.” Well, let us just look for a moment and say: “Well, what percentage of housing—after 9 years of a Labour administration, how much community social housing was there?”. It was less than a teeny-weeny 1 percent. The second challenge I have got for the deputy leader of the Labour Party is that if he really believes in the report of the expansion of community social housing, why did his party vote against the bill in the Budget that enables community social housing providers to be able to have access to the income-related rent subsidy? Why did you vote against it? If you are so committed to the community social housing sector, why would you say that the State subsidy is available only to Housing New Zealand?

Equally, I would draw the Committee’s attention to the huge boost that this Government is giving to improving the quality of our social housing with Housing New Zealand and others, and to making sure that houses are in the right place and are the right size. I reflect, Mr Robertson, on the decisions of the previous Labour Government, which robbed the funding for actually maintaining State houses and saw them deteriorate to an appalling quality simply because Labour played a cynical game of just making a count of the number of State houses.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: Ha!

I say to this Committee quite straight, and I say to Mr Prasad, who is interjecting, that this Government is committed to the quality of those houses not just the quantity. Actually, having tens of thousands of State houses that are uninsulated and are the wrong size is not the best way in which we can get the right social dividend for New Zealand from its $15 billion investment in Housing New Zealand.

💬 Dr Rajen Prasad: When did that start, Nick?

I ask the member whether he supports the Government’s exciting initiative announced in the Budget called Project 324&5, where we are going to take thousands of portable bedrooms and add them on to houses. We are going to change them from being three-bedroom houses into four or five-bedroom houses and reduce the over-crowding for those needy families. We will reduce the incidence of diseases like tuberculosis and rheumatic fever, which we know are connected to over-crowding, and yet we have not heard a squeak from Labour members in support of that initiative from the Government.

The last point I want to make is this. Over the next 3 years this Government is going to invest $2.9 billion into the improvement of Housing New Zealand.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: $2.9 billion?

Yes, $2.9 billion. That is almost a billion dollars a year, for the benefit of my colleague from the West Coast. What was the average during the affluent years when money came easy prior to the global financial crisis? The previous Labour Government committed less than a third of that—less than a third of that. That speaks louder than words and shows the level of commitment this Government has to a better housing outcome.

Report noted.

Environmental Protection Authority