Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities Bill

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I move, That the Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities Bill be now read a second time.

Kāinga Ora reflects a new approach to housing and urban development, and it reflects our Government’s commitment to take a hands-on approach to tackling homelessness and unaffordable housing. I want to take this opportunity to thank the Environment Committee for its work on the bill and acknowledge their quick work. I also want to thank members of the public who made written and oral submissions on the bill. The committee received 94 submissions, and those submitters represented groups and individuals with an interest in housing and urban development in local government, Māori and iwi organisations, industry groups, community housing providers, and district health boards, and advocacy groups for housing, health, and disabled people.

Of those who expressed a clear position on the bill, two-thirds of submitters supported the bill’s direction. Some raised concerns about how the bill’s provisions will operate in practice, and I’m pleased to see that the committee has taken these issues on board and made several useful changes to the bill. Before I highlight some of those key changes that the committee’s made, I want to reflect on a few of our Government’s commitments in this area. Public and affordable housing are at the heart of our agenda. They are places where generations of young families can get a start in life and put down roots in their community, and that’s the way it’s been in this country for a long time, and we want it to continue. In this bill, we are strengthening that promise. We believe that Government should be an enabler of urban development, partnering with the private sector, with local government, and iwi, and investors, and developers, to build vibrant communities.

Rather than crowding out, or replacing the private sector, my message to developers is that we want you to grow, we want you to build more. We understand the constraints on you right now, and we want to work together to find solutions. We want to implement good urban design and develop well-connected communities with great transport connections, vibrant town centres, and the infrastructure and amenities that strong communities need. Mana whenua are at the heart of these developments, as landowners, investors, developers, builders, housing providers, and partners. The first key change the committee’s made to the bill is to emphasise the importance of partnership in Kāinga Ora’s functions.

This change reinforces that Kāinga Ora will need to work in genuine partnership with others to achieve its goals, and there was concern, as I said, from some submitters that Kāinga Ora would crowd out the private sector. The intention is the contrary. The fact is that second-generation growth in our cities, urban development projects, and brownfield and greenfield sites are often too complex for the private sector to do on their own. They require a lot of work on amalgamation of title and on the provision of network infrastructure and dealing with parks and reserves and transport networks, and often that creates too much risk and uncertainty for the private sector to do on its own.

The intention is for Kāinga Ora to enable and complement, rather than compete with, the private sector, and it’s set up so that it can be a joint venture vehicle for Government to work alongside large developers, iwi, and local government so that they can benefit from the streamlined powers that will follow in the second bill, while making sure that those powers are exercised appropriately and in an accountable way. Kāinga Ora will, obviously, need to flexible and outwardly focused, and I reiterate to the private sector organisations who submitted on this bill that we want to help you grow and do more.

I want to comment on the operating principles contained in the bill. Some submitters were particularly interested, and although there was a high degree of support for the principles, some expressed concern that their effect was ambiguous. The committee’s helpful changes clarify that the operating principles are a matter for the board to embed in the new organisation and that the board is accountable to the responsible Minister for doing so.

Submitters were keen to see the operating principles encompass the importance of community engagement. Capturing local views and aspirations early in a project and ensuring that those concerns are heard and addressed will be essential, and, to address these concerns, a new operating principle has been added that requires Kāinga Ora to carry out early and meaningful engagement with communities that may be affected by proposed development projects. The committee has also expanded the scope of the focus on climate change in the operating principles by requiring Kāinga Ora to consider climate change adaptation in addition to mitigation.

I turn now to the provisions on the Government policy statement (GPS) in the bill. Anyone listening to this debate who follows transport policy will know that the transport sector is guided by a three-yearly Government policy statement. It’s a statutory policy instrument that requires the Government of the day to set out a direction of its policy for the transport system, its values, and its strategies and actions, and how it will work with others, and it provides high-level policy direction for the entire transport system, including local government. We’ve decided that’s such a useful instrument, we’ve incorporated it in this bill, so that Kāinga Ora will be required to set out a Government policy statement on housing and urban development, with the overall goal of providing direction and alignment amongst all the players: the community, the private sector, local government, and, of course, the many agencies of central government. The GPS will be an important tool for setting expectations and highlighting priorities for the housing and urban development sector as a whole, and I’m gratified to see that submitters overwhelmingly supported its introduction.

The committee has made a number of changes to the GPS provisions in the bill in response to submissions. These include adding a purpose clause to clarify the intent of the Government policy statement, and a requirement that it should take a multi-decade outlook. Shorter-term priorities will be included, but these will need to be tied to a long-term vision for the sector.

The committee also added a requirement that the Government policy statement outline how the Government expects Kāinga Ora to contribute to climate change mitigation and adaption. This reflects the need for clear direction to the agency on such a crucial issue.

The final change to the GPS provisions is to extend the deadline for the first GPS by a year, so that it must now be issued within two years of Kāinga Ora being established. I think that is a helpful and practical suggestion so that we ensure that the first Government policy statement produced by Kāinga Ora is sufficiently substantial in order to set the benchmark for the instrument.

Overall, the changes recommended by the committee improve the bill and support its aims. I want to conclude by reiterating my thanks to members of the committee and to submitters for their contribution to the Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities Bill. The bill is stronger for their work.

I also want to add a few comments about why the Government is establishing Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities. It’s our view that we can achieve more faster by maximising scale and integrating the full Government build programme, and this bill will enable us to consolidate our development efforts. Be they State housing, other public housing, KiwiBuild, or market homes, we are bringing together the development capacity that currently exists within HLC—the people that brought us Hobsonville Point—the KiwiBuild procurement programme, and Housing New Zealand’s extremely successful development operation. This will reduce complexity and simplify processes for builders and improve coordination across the programme. It almost beggars belief, but those three Government development entities have at times been, essentially, competing with each other in the development market, and that is not in the interests of the Government build programme.

Kāinga Ora will also help with the Government move to long-term agreements with builders, where we contract a large number of homes a year across the full Government build programme, and members of this House will be well aware that the Government build programme is currently responsible for more homes being built by Government agencies than at any time since the mid-1970s. That is only going to increase. It will also help the Government to move to long-term agreements with builders where we contract a large number of homes a year across the full Government build programme, giving builders the certainty and the scale to reduce cost and improve productivity. On this basis, I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The motion is not agreed to, and National continues to oppose this bill. This bill glosses over one mess and is going to be an attempt, I would suggest, to create a new mess. In fact, as the Minister who resumed his seat was speaking, particularly at the end, about scale and building and addressing all the needs, I thought—and maybe my mind drifted—we were discussing KiwiBuild once again. But no, it’s now a new bill, this one around Kāinga Ora.

What was interesting—and one of the reasons why we, on this side, oppose the bill—is an element that the Minister barely touched on. In all around the rhetoric of what this will do and all these wonderful partnerships, no details are given, and nor is that clearly in the bill. In fact, huge responsibilities are handed over. But the Minister barely touched on the fact that Housing New Zealand is, effectively, going to be disestablished in name, along with HLC and KiwiBuild. These three substantial entities—well, two of them, at least, are substantial. KiwiBuild’s dead, retreated, gone. But to pull these three entities together and to rename them Kāinga Ora, this is really just shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic. It’s in many ways, to this side of the House, just a very quick attempt to get hold of the balance sheet of Housing New Zealand and to trade off, if you will, the benefits of HLC, formerly known as the Hobsonville Land Co., or, now, Homes. Land. Community.

One of the great things about HLC is they’re a very good performer; so much so, actually, there was I think around about 27,000 homes which National had engaged with them to start developing. There’s a pipeline of work—

💬 Hon Andrew Little: It started under Labour—it started under the last Government.

Oh, where it started is not so relevant, Mr Little. It’s where the current 27,000 are—where the current 27,000 are is relevant. So what we’re seeing here is a grab for the money of Housing New Zealand and for the pipeline of National-driven success through HLC, and all, I would suggest—all, I would suggest—to cover up the glaring, horrible failure that is KiwiBuild.

So come 1 October, they’ll be all blended together under a nice, fresh new name, as I say: the money of Housing New Zealand, KiwiBuild to be forgotten, and the Government, all of a sudden, able to say, “Oh, look at all this great work we have done.”

Of course, this side of the House won’t forget it really isn’t the Government that’s done anything other than talk, but, in fact, it’s the work of the HLC. That’s the glossing if you will—glossing over the mess.

This Government did nothing!

And someone says, “This Government did nothing.” It’s probably not clear, but someone on the Government side is saying, “This Government did nothing.” He’s acknowledged it. It’s quite stunning. I didn’t realise my speech was that persuasive that a Government member is admitting that his Government’s done nothing.

So the first problem is they’ve glossed over the mess. The second, I predict, is this bill will just create a new mess. The rhetoric we heard from Minister Twyford is exactly the same rhetoric and high-flying ideas that introduced KiwiBuild into this Parliament. He’s the same Minister who looked after KiwiBuild. The very same failures and problematic thinking which led to the failure and the massive retreat of KiwiBuild, I predict, will come through here in Kāinga Ora.

Just one small hint of it already: constituents in my fine electorate of Tamaki received, a couple of days ago, letters from Housing New Zealand advising them that Housing New Zealand would be no more, and would be replaced by Kāinga Ora from 1 October. Excuse the French, but that was one hell of a fright to those constituents. They’re all upset, confused, and worried; trying to understand why Housing New Zealand has disappeared. It’s a small thing—it’s a small thing, if you will. However, that letter and the way it’s already been handled indicate that the people at the heart of what this bill is designed to do are being forgotten. We have many now stressed locals and constituents confused in a way I’d suggest that the Government too is confused. It’s already a bad start, and I’d like the next member from the Government to apologise, not just for the bill but certainly to my fine constituents in Tamaki for upsetting them.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. It’s a pleasure to be speaking on my favourite subject area, and that is, of course, housing; also just to replace Dr Duncan Webb, who’s busy as the very busy chair of the Environment Committee, who I want to thank for leading this vital and critical piece of work through the House.

Look, there certainly won’t be an apology. In fact, we gave them an apology because of the last nine years of neglect from that side of the House to every State housing tenant, because we said “We’ve got no agenda, secret or otherwise, to sell you off.” We know that the real agenda of the other team, the other side was to—as they did with other Crown assets—sell off the biggest balance sheet, and that is our housing stock. Thankfully the public of New Zealand saw sense and thought this is a Government that’s tackling the big, long-term issues facing Aotearoa New Zealand and ensuring that everyone has a warm, dry roof over their head; that’s why this is a real flagship policy of the coalition Government.

I’m really, really saddened to hear that they’re opposing this bill. Really, what they’re saying is that they are opposing a Government role in housing. We saw that by there being no housing Minister in the previous Government—none, no one. There was no excuse for it. It was quite arrogant that there wasn’t a Minister of Housing. On this side of the House, there is a strong housing team, and that team incorporates everything from housing itself, urban development, building and construction, and we’ve got public housing recognised there too in a Cabinet role. That’s a very strong team to lead this transformation and to really—the tenants living in the Tamaki electorate will be very sound and proud to hear that they have a Government who is looking after them and holding their hand and saying, “We’re looking after you.” There’s no apology needed.

The other thing is that by opposing this they’re also opposing building and construction and development. That’s surprising. That won’t be going down well with the development community who have been crying out for a pipeline of activity. Funnily enough, HLC that was mentioned—Hobsonville Land Company, now Homes. Land. Community—is, I understand, a Housing New Zealand Corporation subsidiary company. So it was fully Government-owned anyway. I think, again, there was a little bit of disingenuous behaviour there, because they were hoping to set that up and maybe to flick that off to the private—always seeking to flick things off, share risks.

We know that by sharing risk it’s been high-risk. That’s why we’ve had construction and development companies go under, because that side of the House shoved it all across on to them, and they went under. The market was meant to stand up and build all these houses: no more Ministry of Works, no more tradespeople working under the old Department of Housing and Construction to actually do anything. So without the workers, you’ve put all the risk over there and nothing gets done. But I think that was always part of the plan.

This certainly isn’t a shuffling of the deckchairs; absolutely not. What this is doing is taking the very best and putting our housing service delivery in one new entity. I’m really proud—apart from being Māori Language Week, having a Māori name for it also: Kāinga Ora, healthy homes, is a fantastic name. It also sends a signal to this country that we are serious about housing and that we are getting back into building homes—

💬 Kiritapu Allan: Doing the mahi.

Doing the mahi—doing the hard work: a hands-on approach in tackling everything from homelessness through to affordable housing. It’s less about identities. On that side of the House they were more concerned about—certainly, I don’t know—just competitive stuff to try and make these different entities compete against each other. That doesn’t work. We know that—we know that that doesn’t work. So what we’ve done here is said, “Not only are we joining the very best expertise from the different entities, but we are just getting those synergies right and putting them into one entity.” So I’m really happy. I know staff from the three different entities. They are looking forward to coming together. There’s duplication; there’s overlaps. Really, what they are simply wanting to do is build homes for Kiwis. That’s a simple mission that doesn’t need clutter and competition; it just needs focus and the can-do attitude that I know people who work in these entities are looking for.

💬 Kiritapu Allan: We’re driving real change.

We are driving change. Look, it will take time, but what I want to say is we’re taking a balanced approach, and I know that we’ll also, with the strength of our Ministry of Housing and Urban Development—look, I just couldn’t believe that after a lengthy crisis that we had no policy arm, no research, nothing coming through to even have a conversation about what type of housing do we need? Who’s doing what? There’s no pipeline. There’s nothing. I want to congratulate Minister Phil Twyford, who’s here, on his work, because he has got the nuts and bolts sorted. Whilst that can take time, this is a great platform for moving forward and building homes.

The other aspect of this bill is the Urban Development Authority. It’s been around since—look, dear I mention her—the former Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark. It’s been talked about; now it’s a reality. On that side of the House they talked about it too. They just didn’t do anything because they thought, “Well, we don’t actually want to do anything in housing. We want the market to fulfil it.”

I know here in Wellington that the local authorities—for example, iwi are looking forward to partnering with an entity, both to share risk, but also to allow Government into their plans for building a great Wellington region. For example, there are projects ready to go. I know Ginny Andersen in Hutt South—there’s hundreds and hundreds of State houses that were shut, boarded up with plywood by that side of the House. We’re taking the wood off the windows and ensuring that people are not only going to get homes but neighbourhoods too. That’s a collaborative approach with local government, and the outcome of this entity’s work will be transformational.

I know here in Wellington City, in my humble electorate of Rongotai, that there is plenty of work coming through the Let’s Get Wellington Moving project, where I’m looking forward to the uplift of Adelaide Road through the best suburb in New Zealand—finally a Government who’s doing something. I mean, have you seen Adelaide Road? It’s crying out for help, ignored by that side of the House.

This side of the House was saying, “Here’s a strip of land by the Basin Reserve, past McDonalds”—my second favourite fast food restaurant—“and up there into Newtown”. But that’s an example already where KiwiBuild is under way. There you go, under way with a Wellington developer who’s doing a fantastic job—embraced, on time, on track. Once this entity’s in place, you’ll see the uplift not only in a physical sense of enhancing that heritage part of this great city but also the transport component that the transport Minister was talking about, and that’s the difference. We will make a transformational difference. We’ll look back and that side of the House, by then, will say, “I only wish we did that. I only wish we did that.”—but they didn’t. So I’m looking forward to seeing the signage up saying: this is proudly co-developed by, for example, say, the Wellington City Council and the New Zealand Government—that being this side of the House—and the Urban Development Authority in Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities.

I know that this has been decades too long in the making; it’s finally here. It’s the first of two bills, the powers are coming, and when they do you will see development all over Aotearoa New Zealand in ways that that side of the House will be thinking: “Why didn’t we do this? Bugger, dammit.” They’ll be saying all sorts of expletives; we’ll be celebrating on this side. I know that the Ministers of Housing, our housing team of Ministers and transport, will be there cutting ribbons, enhancing communities, and making them very, very happy. I commend this bill to the House.

Just to remind all members that people do listen to Parliament and it’s really important that the words we say are words that might be gentle on the ears—some of those may not have been.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’m pleased to be following that member because I do know Paul Eagle is a man that comes to this Parliament with a sense of passion and vigour—but to hear him speak on this bill in such a disengaged, flat, uninteresting way is actually very sad for a man who had such potential when he came into this Parliament just two years ago. He was, originally, going to be a strong voice, but we heard nothing really but an apologetic voice—for a lack of vision and a lack of action on an important area.

This bill is essentially one that does very little apart from establish a framework for an Urban Development Authority, but it does so in a way that brings together three Crown entities—one of them a busted flush—the KiwiBuild unit, and then the HLC, and, of course, Housing New Zealand’s entity and operations as well. We’re opposing the bill on this side of the House, not because we’re averse to setting up an Urban Development Authority, but because, actually, setting one up without addressing the fundamental problems that exist surrounding the Resource Management Act mean that there’s little point in doing so until that process has been completed. Now, two years into this administration—as they get to the point where they’re entering into their last year of office—nothing has happened in that area apart from talk. There actually needs to be a fundamental overhaul of the Resource Management Act and the planning rules that have developed around it that are the roadblocks that preclude the kind of development that is required to achieve the objectives that this bill seeks to achieve. That simply hasn’t happened so far.

So just merging three entities together doesn’t achieve anything of itself; it doesn’t achieve the lofty goals that the Minister spoke so flatly about. In fact, the Minister came to the Chamber and really didn’t show much passion or interest in the bill either.

💬 Brett Hudson: Crushed.

Crushed, defeated, humiliated, I guess. But it’s a reflection of this Government—just hoping for better outcomes. Actually, just hoping for better outcomes is futile in itself, but just hoping for better outcomes has actually become a metaphor for this Government in office. The bill simply ignores the fact that the vast majority of homes built in New Zealand are built by the private sector. So we oppose this bill simply because it doesn’t really achieve anything other than a hope.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, it’s a real pleasure. Very sad that the National Party doesn’t support this bill, and somewhat surprised given the fact that throughout the bill it sets out the ability to partner. This is a bill which is an enabling bill; not only enabling local bodies and community organisations but, importantly, the private sector as well.

I must say, it was great to be on the Environment Committee and sit in there and listen to the support that was given to this bill and the very thoughtful suggestions that were made in respect of it from across the board—whether it be from local government or from the private sector, and, also, from a number of community organisations.

I want to specially mention the Wesley Community Action group who came along, and—I must say, it was an unsophisticated but heartfelt submission; they are some of the submissions that I enjoy listening to most. I want to let them know here that by them coming and talking about the need for engagement—and the fact that in their own community they didn’t feel that they had been engaged in the regeneration of the Porirua area—that they have had a real impact on this piece of legislation, and that the need for community engagement has been particularly recognised. So I think that’s a real example of democracy and the fact that people who had never been into the precinct, had never been in to a select committee before—didn’t come in a polished way but came with a genuine concern. We could then have an amendment to clause 14(1) which talks, then, about community engagement and the need for it being meaningful and early—so a great improvement from some great people who are doing good work in their own community.

And Habitat for Humanity—I also want to mention their submission—who came along and, again, gave some real suggestions about making sure that we capture all of the possibilities for assisting in the housing debacle that this Government has inherited through nine years of sitting around and building no houses. So what we have is, in respect of Habitat for Humanity, an explicit recognition of not only getting people into homes but explicit recognition that that might be through co-ownership, shared equity, and any other kind of scheme.

So that’s what I mean when I say that this is enabling legislation. It’s not, simply, setting out some single structure or track but it’s saying, “Here we have an organisation which has a brief—a brief to give assistance, to give direction, to enter into partnerships, and to facilitate partnerships.” And in doing that there aren’t a lot more constraints around it. So we know that there’s going to be more legislation to come, which will have some significant powers and some significant operational matters. But what we have here is a really good structure; a structure which will see this Government continue to address the issue of housing and communities—and the two can’t be separated. That’s the other important thing about this piece of legislation: it isn’t just about houses; it’s about the communities themselves. And I think sometimes we forget that if we’re going to have people in genuine homes, then we have to look after the people and the communities around them. So we’ll now be able to not just simply say “Let’s build a house.”, but to say “Let’s build a community, including the infrastructure, the parks, dealing with the reserves issues, the drainage, and all of those wider issues, so that we’ve got a proper, comprehensive, joined-up plan.”

So it’s a really fantastic initiative by the Minister; a fantastic Minister. The complaint time and again—and I can understand it over the last nine years—is that business and industry don’t know what’s coming next. This Government is absolutely committed to giving long-term certainty so that businesses can plan ahead. And this is just one example of that.

Only the other day, we were debating the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission/Te Waihanga Bill—another example of the Government taking a long-term approach and giving certainty to many sectors so that we can say “Look, here’s what’s coming; here is the Government’s view of what development should look like.”; whether that be infrastructure, rail transport, or in this case, homes and communities.

So I’m very pleased to be able to bring this report back to the House and identify that we will now have a great planning framework so that builders, developers, and property owners out there will be able to make their plans knowing exactly what is needed and exactly where it’s going to be going.

I also just want to mention—because I think it’s important, especially this week—the considerable debate we had over Te Tiriti clauses. The fact is that this bill, really, puts Māori interests front and centre in a number of ways. Clause 4 of the bill, essentially, summarises that. In particular, and this is worth noting, section 11(1)(b) sets out that Kīnga Ora has to have the capability and capacity “(i) to uphold the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti …) and its principles;”. That’s actually quite important, because, whilst in many operational pieces of legislation the principles of the Treaty are referred to, here we’ve got a statement of upholding the Treaty of Waitangi. That, I think, for New Zealand is a step forward to say “Well, we’ve taken account of the Treaty through its principles, now we’re going to look at the Treaty itself.” So I want to recognise that and recognise the hard work that was done around that by our officials in Parliamentary Counsel. Even though it wasn’t actually changed, I just wanted to identify the significance of that in the bill.

And, of course, we know that, in terms of housing, our Māori communities are the communities that are the least well-off, the least likely to own their own home, the most likely to be paying a large portion of their income in rent, and, sadly, the most likely to have precarious housing or no housing at all. Again, it is identified here that one of the functions is to support and enable the aspirations of Māori in relation to urban development. It’s really important to recognise that this isn’t about home ownership alone; this is about creating homes for people to live in, in the way which is best for them given their life circumstances and given the time where they are in their lives—whether that be in a rental or in some other shared accommodation arrangement, which we haven’t really discussed but we absolutely need to explore, or whether it be through home ownership of one kind or another.

Also recognising the empowerment and the recognition that Kāinga Ora will be able to partner with others, including local bodies. So in clause 13, the “Functions of Kāinga Ora”, there were some changes made in there just to expand on the ability of Kāinga Ora to enter into those relationships, including entering into financing relationships—for example, with local authorities, which we know happens on occasion already, and other entities. “Other entities” is a broad brush indeed; whether it be a commercial provider who wants to get into the social housing area or even, conceivably, other housing, or simply a commercial development that needs some additional assistance. Well, if they’re providing houses for New Zealand, I’m sure the Minister would listen carefully to them.

So financing is one of the things, but also partnerships. It’s important to recognise the, again, vast and undefined array of partnerships that we could have here. A fantastic idea that ownership across the board, whether it be public-private, public-community, whatever it might be—it’s all here.

So this is yet again a fantastic example of the Government taking one of those truly tough problems, getting it, and getting on and solving the problem; not solving it for the next election, because we know there’s still going to be need for houses in a year’s time, but solving it for three, 10, and 30 years. It is a framework where we can get on and put people in homes—homes that are right for them, homes that are good for New Zealanders, and I am very proud to commend this bill to the House.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, and I rise to take a short call—

💬 Kiritapu Allan: Oh, Sarah will be in favour of this bill.

—on this bill in opposition. I take a short call because I am mindful that the whip is dutifully whipping and also because this bill simply doesn’t warrant filibustering or any great discussion, the reason being because it is a shell of a bill and it is a waste of time.

But the one thing that I will say—the one positive thing that I will say—is that it is a pleasure to follow after Mr Duncan Webb, who has recently acquired the chairmanship of the Environment Committee and he has been a very good chair, of course. But I will pull him up on a couple of things in his contribution. The first thing he said was that the submitters were not polished. Well, I disagree. I think that the submitters were very, very passionate about providing houses for those in need and providing affordable housing. But the one thing that I noticed about the submitters was that their submissions actually went wider than the brief of the bill, because they were so passionate.

And therein lies the problem, because this bill is merely shifting the deckchairs on the Titanic. It is simply about merging Housing New Zealand, HLC, and the failed KiwiBuild—the gift that kept on giving to us, of course—into one without a proper structure around it, without delving into the nitty-gritty about how this Government is going to provide affordable houses for those in need. I mean, this is a product of this Government: very good at the high level, very good at the expectations, very good at manoeuvring around targets and then dropping them altogether. It’s all very well to talk about Government policy statements but there was never any effort—and there still is no effort in this—to drill down to the nitty-gritty about how the provision of houses is going to work.

Now, there is mention of a sister bill, a follow-up bill, as to how that will be brought about, but again we have seen one effort in KiwiBuild fail—the goal was 10,000 houses within 10 years; admitted by the Government that that was overly ambitious—and we come back to the problem, which is the Resource Management Act. There is a failure by that Government to admit that it needs some real work. Again, we’ve got a working group that’s going to look at it but no real, clear detail about how that Government will fix it.

There are housing issues across this country now and it is because councils have failed to look strategically at land, to rezone, and then provide incentives for developers—developers who know how to provide housing properly and at low cost—to go in and build houses and provide more choice for people on the ground. And of course more houses means the prices are forced down and it is more of a competitive market.

I am getting the nod from “Mr Whip” and I have been told to finish up and sit down. But all I can say is that this bill is woeful. It is woeful. We need action and we’re not getting it and hence I oppose this bill.

Well, I’m going to try and avert my eyes from being whipped! I’ve got 10 minutes. I’m pleased to even hear the Opposition—although, I don’t know; have we managed to bring them to actually use the words “housing crisis” yet? They didn’t last term. I think they’re saying “issues”. We got them to “issues”. I’m pleased to hear at least some collective acknowledgment across the House of the mass, profound problem and crisis that we are facing.

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: That’s right.

Yeah. Well, we haven’t quite got to “crisis” for all of us in this House, but we’ll get there. Yeah, we’ll get there—“issues” is a step. It is dire and profound and we need to do all we can. It is wicked, it is dynamic, and we need to do all we can to try and fix this.

This, the Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities Bill, is working to mainstream, to pull together, the development capacity of Government and to work in partnership to try and have a coordinated and streamlined approach, to be able to have an overview of where we need to be building, how, what kind of homes and communities, how we will do it with the community—that’s key; that’s absolutely key—and a range of issues.

Let me just begin by acknowledging very briefly what the bill is trying to do. As I said, it pulls together urban development authority into a work stream. In effect, it is setting up the housing and urban development agency, pulling together Housing New Zealand, HLC, and most of the KiwiBuild unit, as I said, to try and get this overview and coordinated strategic approach.

So it’s clear we need to do things differently, and we absolutely need to set some certainty and sense of security for community, for community housing providers, for iwi housing providers, for the construction industry, and for contractors—industry-wide, actually. We need to set this security and certainty and also be clear with just ordinary folk, actually, that we’re on this, that we admit and acknowledge that this is a huge issue—

💬 Kiritapu Allan: Hear, hear!

—and we are—ha, ha! The member Kiritapu Allan is motivating me to no end! It’s fabulous—it’s fabulous. A few of us did not see the House for only a few hours between last night and this morning.

So, the challenges: industry capacity and certainty, climate change, environmental degradation. How do we build in a way that maximises how we want to protect our environment but also understands that we’ve got to build more and we have got to do it in a way that is sustainable? We are facing challenges of affordability not just of homes—whether it’s mortgages, whether it’s buying a home or renting a home—but also the affordability of the types of homes our people live in and whether they can afford to heat them or maintain them or stay healthy in them. We are facing challenges of security of tenure, and that is not just if people are renting or leasing; that is also people who are on precarious employment conditions and salaries and/or wages and incomes, including benefit incomes, who are not sure for how long they are going to afford living in their homes.

We have challenges of social licence, where any developments that we face come under, as they should, scrutiny from communities, and we are looking for a way to have those conversations so that two, three, five years into the plans, we don’t come across some blocks—that we have cleared the way with our communities, with our ordinary folk, to get a sense of taking us all together in building more homes. We have got the challenge of health, of homes not being up to scratch today to be able to keep kids out of hospital, to be able to keep our elderly safe and well. We are facing the challenge of accessible homes, so that we universally can access our homes and they are appropriate—we can get into the bathroom and the shower, depending on what level of mobility we have—

💬 Angie Warren-Clark: What age we are.

—or whether we—absolutely—can move between levels in multilevel homes.

We are facing the challenge of being able to appropriately respond to diverse needs. That includes multigenerational—I’ve got four generations in my whare at the moment. We are facing the challenge of multigenerational and diverse needs, and the responses and the types of homes—well, not just the types of homes; the types of communities that we are needing to think about with a modern, future type of joined-up thinking to be able to set this country on the right path. We have not been on the right path yet. We have plonked buildings on pieces of land ad hoc. That’s as far as the strategic planning went: let’s plonk a house there, let’s plonk a house there.

We need to connect our communities with linked-up, affordable, efficient public transport routes. We need to, and this is why the bill addresses it, make sure we are building with social licence—building with social licence. I see the select committee wanted to make explicit the community engagement mention—that’s great. Social licence includes Māori interests and the Treaty of Waitangi being upheld. When we work with communities, including with Māori, the results are fantastic, and this Government understands that there—oh, look, I’ve done well—are actually groups who have been doing this well, who have been able to build affordable, healthy, well-designed homes and communities, and we recognise that we can work with their expertise and their experience.

We need to understand that part of the construction industry and building industry barriers were about building the wrong sizes and types of homes, and so that’s why Government has to take a role, because the Government will be able to lead—with community providers, with not-for-profits—to build those right types and sizes of homes that the market simply wasn’t able to. That’s where we ran into some trouble, as well: contractors were undercutting themselves and ended up flourishing quite a bit from that. That’s why a Government-backed—well, what is that? That’s where a public-good focus has to come in, and that’s how we will get the ball rolling to provide the right sized homes and the right designed communities.

So the Greens support this, and we look forward to continuing to contribute the principles, the criteria, the guidelines that we all need so that we don’t have to face this in another, what, 30, 40 years and go, “Whoops, we weren’t thinking long enough. We weren’t thinking far out enough.” So the Greens absolutely look forward to—and continuing to work with our Ministers across the House to help give us the most enduring and sustainable plans that we can come up with. Thank you. I got there.

[Clears throat] Excuse me; I haven’t spoken for a while. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’m pleased to take a relatively short call on the Kāinga Ora—Homes and Communities Bill. The previous speaker, Marama Davidson, was a really good example of why MPs need a decent sleep and not to finish at 1 o’clock in the morning. The first point she made was that all we need to do on this side of the House is admit there’s been a crisis and that’ll fix everything—because that’s what this Government tends to think, is that as long as we admit there’s a crisis, that’s doing something about it. Well, where did that get us, admitting that there was a crisis, with this Government? It got us KiwiBuild: the biggest failure of public policy in the history of New Zealand, most likely. That’s what happens when we get words like “crisis” out of this Government. Admitting that there is a problem isn’t a fix of a problem, and we get ridiculous ploys like KiwiBuild.

Now we get this bill, which is just, as two previous speakers have said—and I’ll say it again, because it gets a good rise out of the other side of the House—rearranging the deck chairs, because all we have is a bill that is very, very light on detail, and some of the submitters that we had in committee made that point. So all we can do is, really, speak quite broadly rather than in great detail, because there is really a lack of detail. The bill seeks to establish Kāinga Ora as a Crown public-housing landlord to lead and coordinate housing and urban—

I’m very sorry to interrupt the member, but this debate is interrupted and is set down for resumption next sitting day. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 17 September 2019. Have a good four days away.

Debate interrupted.

The House adjourned at 6 p.m.