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

Just to bring everyone in the Chamber up to speed with what is currently happening in Christchurch around housing, I just want to kind of set the scene for those of us in Canterbury who are experiencing some pressure around housing issues at the moment and the Government’s response to that. There is an overwhelming need to get vulnerable people into homes that are warm and dry. We have got huge pressures on our housing stock. As people are leaving their homes for them to be repaired and rebuilt, it puts pressure on the rental stock. Insurance money is coming into play as well, which is adding pressure to the rates being charged on rental properties. People are getting payouts that are insufficient to rebuild their homes, which means that they are putting more pressure on the rental market as well. People are being put in difficult financial positions. We have got pressures on our resources. We have got pressures on our land, pressures on our construction workers, and pressures on materials that have pushed up the costs of construction. We are pushing people who are unable to afford housing out of the market.

Homeownership in Canterbury, which was one of the highest in the country, is now slipping way down. Canterbury needs 12,000 to 15,000 new homes to meet its pre-quake levels. We have had 1,000 built—1,000—according to Deloitte’s estimates. The Minister of Housing has stated quite clearly that it will take until 2016 to return to pre-quake levels and until 2018 for the housing market to cease being under pressure. Given the Minister’s overpromising and under delivery, these deadlines are at risk of being viewed as ridiculous. Frankly, they are ambitious. But let us look at the social housing component to this, because we have divested social housing in the guise of adding more social housing providers to the mix, with minimal addition to the housing stock. So we have a Social Housing Unit where we are looking not just to the Government but to other people to provide housing as well. We have looked quite clearly to the Canterbury Community Trust to partner with social housing providers and the Government to do that. That is not a bad thing.

However, I believe that it is the Government’s responsibility to take a firm hold of the social housing crisis in Canterbury, and in this regard it appears that we are failing. Resources from the community are already woefully underfunded and stretched. Housing New Zealand stopped providing social support some years ago. There are benefits to having property managers closely connected with the tenants in more ways than just social support. Your housing stock is being viewed often. You have got a relationship with your tenants, which is important to the overall look and cost of maintenance, because you are there visiting your folk and because you are there more than just to check the property; you are there to have a relationship with the people who are ultimately going to care for that property.

Housing New Zealand’s priority waiting list has also become a bit of disgrace. Let me just quote you some of the latest figures on the waiting list. In March Housing New Zealand had a record 5,204 priority applicants on the waiting list. This is 1,049 higher than when National took office in December 2008. In Canterbury, it is particularly bad, with 495 priority applicants on the waiting list, up from 288 in December 2008 when National took office. So there is no market lever that you can pull that will change this situation. It requires intervention. Examples from our particular office in Christchurch East show that in one week the number of people who had come to us to request emergency accommodation went up from 48 to 63. We are also providing hats and scarves and sending them to the blanket bank so that they are warm when they are sleeping in their cars.

At the same time, the regions have been pillaged of their housing stock. Let us just have a look at what has been happening in our regions. In almost every town and city in regional New Zealand there are dozens of empty State houses—

I very much appreciate the opportunity to take a call and knock back on a couple of statements made by the previous speaker, Poto Williams. The work that is being done in Christchurch on behalf of Housing New Zealand has been outstanding.

Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.

I am happy to close out this debate. It is actually quite appropriate that we do it on this particular area of the Government’s business, because if we look at the housing stock that this Government took over, it pretty much personifies what we saw from the Labour Government, which was not a lot of investment, not a lot of effort, and a derelict State house stock, essentially, that needed a whole lot of work and a whole lot of investment. There has been some significant work that has gone on in the course of the last 12 months. I will just rattle over a few points of interest. There were 6,960 applicants, of which 96 were of high priority. There were 18,000 needs assessments and over 1.4 million calls through the customer service centre. There were 282 properties freed up for investigations where tenants had been behaving in a fraudulent manner. It actually dovetails into many other areas of work that this Government has done to reflect to people who deserve the support of the State that if they are receiving that, they have certain obligations. Certainly the taxpayer does not expect to be ripped off by people whom the State is happy to support in a time of their need. In this portfolio we have seen some good work carried on there, and that obviously frees up houses for people who are in genuine need and are not there simply to rip off their fellow taxpayer.

There has been some significant work in improving the turn-round time from a house becoming vacant. Certainly in a previous life I saw some Housing New Zealand homes that were left in a disgraceful state, to be quite honest, and the amount of repair that was required to bring them up to standard was significant. But what we do know is that if we take a Broken Windows approach, to coin a phrase from Rudi Giuliani—if we maintain a good standard and we have expectations that that standard is maintained—then in the main that is exactly what we get. I think we can be very proud of the work that has gone on from the chief executive of Housing New Zealand in terms of his leadership and the way in which areas that have needed improvement have shown improvement. The turn-round times are actually above target in terms of reoccupying houses that have been vacated. Some 390,000 maintenance actions have been completed, which is a substantial investment. In fact, this Government’s investment in that housing stock has been substantial, but it is to meet need—it is to meet need.

The time for the debate has expired. The debate on the performance in the 2012/13 and current operations of Crown entities, public organisations, and State enterprises has therefore concluded. I will report the debate to the House presently.

Debate to be reported presently.