Red Alert

Archive for the ‘housing’ Category

Help with home insulation

Posted by Chris Hipkins on March 10th, 2010

I’ve been a pretty vocal critic of aspects of the National government’s home insulation programme, but I’m willing to give credit where it is due. The Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) have announced a new scheme that lets people spread their share of home insulation costs over 9 years as part of their rates. If the home owner sells up, the next owner picks up the extra rates bill. This is a good idea.

Under the government’s current deal, someone can get up to a third of the cost of home insulation paid for through a subsidy but they have to stump up the other two thirds (those on lower incomes can get up to 60% subsidy). If the GWRC scheme helps people to cover their part of the cost then that’s good.

I think there are huge benefits in having kiwi homes properly insulated. My critiscism of the Nats scheme isn’t because I think the goal is a bad one. I’m concerned they’ve cut too many corners and are jeopardising quality and fairness. There is more capacity in the market to insulate more homes, but because of the way the government have set up the existing scheme people are missing out unnecessarily, are getting a sub-standard job, or they’re missing out on the full value of the subsidy. If they fix those problems up, then the scheme would be well worth backing.


Why don’t Nats want question time ?

Posted by Trevor Mallard on February 24th, 2010

It is not good form to go into details of discussions that happen “behind the speakers chair” between leaders of the house and their shadow or between whips.

But what is very obvious is that the Nats are very very scared of having a question time today. We are under urgency debating ACC legislation. We know that in the end we will lose and all we can do in debate and delay.  But that has its limits and what normally happens is that a deal is done – questions in and a limit to the length of the debate.

There was a fair deal on the table for the Nats but they have run away from it.

So what are they scared of.  Key or English on the differing views on GST. The housing question to credit card Heatley which goes to his priorities for government expenditure. Or Anne Tolley showing her ignorance of her own standards policy again.

But whatever it is they make chickens look courageous.


Whanau Ora another issue

Posted by Trevor Mallard on February 20th, 2010

Most of the focus on Whanau Ora has been on ethnicity of those who will  run and and use Whanau Ora.

Isn’t the bigger issue going to be those who can’t get access to their current provider (eg doctor), or are charged more because a contract has been cut to fund Tariana’s family’s programme.


Household income makes tax cuts fair..? Ahh no.

Posted by Stuart Nash on February 16th, 2010

Yesterday David Farrar put up an interesting post at Kiwiblog titled ‘all theory no reality’ ‘(http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/02/all_theory_no_reality.html).  He critiqued a post by No Right Turn on income distribution on the basis that it “gives us a great example of the difference between an academic theoretical analysis, and understanding the real word.”

David wrote: “You see in New Zealand, we have these things called families and households. What No Right Turn sees as a mass of poor people who will be unaffected by tax cuts, are spouses, older children, many students and even parents of those who do earn more than $23,000 a year, or even $48,000 a year.” 

“If a family has one parent earning $60,000 a year, and one on $15,000 part-time, they both benefit from a change to the 33% tax rate. Because they are a family!! …. So ignore the stupid stats and graphs about individual incomes. They are relevant to academic theory, rather than the real world. Household Family income is what affects most people. Now as of June 2009, the median household income was around $64,000. 30% of households have income over $93,000.” 

The medium household income is actually closer to $60k David.  This means that over 800,000 kiwi families are living on a combined household income of $60k or less; out of which has to come food, rent/mortgage, clothing, school uniform and books, telephone, petrol, rates, repairs, doctors etc etc (which will all increase due to GST rising). 

The tax cuts floated by the National govt with give PM Key an extra $500/wk in-the-hand and the CEO of Telecom an extra $2,500/wk in the hand.!!!  I suspect those families surviving on $60k household income will see the inequity and unfairness of the proposed tax cuts, even if Mr Farrar can’t. 

Household income deciles Number of households Percentage on or below this income
1 – 10K 20,300

1.26%

10 – 20K 149,200

10.53%

20 – 30K 188,400

22.24%

30 – 40K 163,500

32.40%

40 – 50K 146,500

41.51%

50 – 60K 138,900

50.14%

60 – 70K 111,300

57.06%

70 – 80K 104,200

63.53%

80 – 90K 93,900

69.37%

90 – 100K 72,100

73.85%

100 – 110K 61,300

77.66%

110 – 120K 60,900

81.44%

Total Number of Households 1,609,100  

I also love this line from David in the same blog: ”..But if you are retired and earning just $25,000 a year, that doesn’t mean you are against tax cuts, because you are happy that your adult children will benefit from them.”  Of course, that’s right David – mum and dad can shiver through winter (powerbills have GST, and we know how high they go), but if the kids are lucky enough to be one of the 9% in the top tax bracket, then all will be fine because they can now afford that winter holiday in Fiji…!  What about the parents whose children are one of the 800,000+ kiwi families struggling on $60k household income.?  Suspect they also will see the gross inequity and unfairness in the govt’s proposed tax changes…

So perhaps Mr Farrar should take his own advice.  Stop worrying about the theory, and focus on the real world.


Minister vs Chief Executive – who’s right?

Posted by Moana Mackey on December 18th, 2009

After Clare’s lovely Xmas-y post I feel like a bit of a geek getting all serious again but I’m sure you’ll forgive me….

I had a question to Phil Heatley this week about housing affordability initiatives.  I asked about a statement he made back in August about extending Labour’s Welcome Home Loan scheme to Maori multiply owned land.  In that statement the Minister announced he’d “solved” the problem after only 9 months in Government and gave himself a big pat on the back.

(Actually Labour had the papakainga lending policy which also enabled people to borrow money to build or buy housing on Maori land in multiple ownership but why let facts get in the way of a patsy question.)

So last week at the financial review of Housing New Zealand I asked Chief Executive Lesley McTurk and board Chair Pat Sneddon what the criteria were for this policy announced with great fanfare some months ago.  Following is the transcript of that exchange: (more…)


State House tenants need not apply

Posted by Moana Mackey on December 14th, 2009

Aplace01

This is the front page of a swishy new publication from the Hobsonville Land Company (which is a wholly owned subsidary of Housing New Zealand) which was being distributed at a housing conference last week (obviously the by-line is my own addition).

The Hobsonville site is situated in the upper Waitemata harbour and covers 167 hectares and presents a rare opportunity for green fields urban development.  Here is a real chance to build a mixed community – private, affordable, and state housing as well as all the amenities, public transport links, and business development to provide local jobs.  By ‘pepper-potting’ state houses throughout, we achieve better outcomes for the entire community, and avoid the situation we have in many parts of New Zealand where entire neighbourhoods of state houses were built in the past.

Labour started this work, and our approach was to include 15% state and 15% affordable housing. Thats about 500 of each in a develpoment of 3000 homes.  National has decided there will be no state housing built at Hobsonville because it’s in the Prime Minister’s electorate and he says that locals dont want state house tenants in their neck of the woods. He also says that inclusion of state houses at Hobsonville would be “economic vandalism”.

John Key has milked his state house upbringing for all its worth, yet he is now denying 500 more Auckland families that same opportunity.  Seem contradictory? Not really. I’ve long thought that whereas Labour believes John Key did well because he grew up in a state house,  he believes he did well despite growing up in a state house.

What a wasted opportunity.


Rent rises hit lower income earners

Posted by Chris Hipkins on November 29th, 2009

Figures released by Statistics New Zealand last week highlight the plight of some of our lowest income households. While those with mortgages are enjoying a bit of interest rate relief, those who are renting have seen their rental costs increase by 8.1 percent. Average total household income from all sources has increased by 5.6 percent during the same period.

Just under a third of Kiwi families rent the house they live in. Those on lower incomes are far more likely to rent rather than own the property that they live in, so they are the ones most likely to be feeling the pinch.

About 65 percent of those households earning $43,900 or less rated the adequacy of their income as ‘just enough’ or ‘not enough’. Around half our Kiwis households fit into this demographic. Over 70 percent of those households with an income of $86,700 or above rated their incomes as ‘enough’ or ‘more than enough’.

It’s been a tough year for those at the bottom of the economic ladder. The very first thing the new National-led government did was take away tax cuts for the lowest income earners so that they could give that money to those on the highest incomes. As unemployment has continued to rise, the Nats have been asleep at the wheel. Let’s hope they wake up next year!


Homelessness inquiry on a knife edge

Posted by Moana Mackey on November 24th, 2009

As my colleague Grant Robertson posted earlier, Labour is hoping to establish an inquiry into homelessness at the social services select committee meeting tomorrow.  The Government holds the majority on this committee so it’s entirely up to them whether or not this goes ahead. I’m open on the terms of reference so that the select committee can complement any work the Government may be doing, but all indications are that it will be voted down.

I’ve been doing many visits across all aspects of the housing portfolio since picking it up earlier this year.  I wish I was one of those politicians who could just fire on all cylinders without gathering information but I’m not. I like to see things for myself, talk to as many people as possible, and read as much research as possible. In doing so, I think it’s fair to say that in this area of homelessness I’ve been haunted by what I’ve seen. I’ve spoken to people sleeping rough, visited emergency accomodation, and been given a rare insight into some of the most squalid boarding houses you could imagine.  I’m struggling to find a description, but without being flippant I think the university flat in the TV series ’The Young Ones’ is the closest parallel I can find and even that doesn’t fully describe it.

I suspect the Minister’s response will be the response he gives to everything – “well why didnt Labour fix it?” Well I’m proud of Labour’s record in Housing, but thats not to say more can’t be done. If we’d won another term we wouldn’t have downed tools because we thought we’d already fixed every problem.  And the bottom line is that he is the Minister and in a position to endorse this inquiry or to reject it, regardless of what Labour may or may not have done in Government.

This isn’t a trap or an attempt to embarrass the Minister of Housing.  If his political advisers are reading this, please make sure he understands that.  I honestly believe a select committee inquiry could be of great benefit to him and Labour members would be more than happy to discuss terms of reference to ensure maximum value possible to the Minister.

Also, the social services select committee is looking for inquiry topics, so it’s not a case of the committee not having the time to do it.

My hopes arent high, but I also wont be giving up.  The sector is calling for such an inquiry and I believe there is real potential for doing so in a non-partisan cross-party way.  National members on the committee were originally quite keen on the idea and now seem less so. Clearly I need to work on the Minister.

Filed under: housing

The shadows of life

Posted by Grant Robertson on November 24th, 2009

It was American politician Hubert Humphrey who said

It was once said that the moral test of Government is how that Government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick and the needy

I have long felt that this summed up a key aspect of my own political philosophy. The first two categories (children and the elderly) are the focus of much government action, and rightly so. While political parties might disagree on the nature and extent of the work with the very young and old it takes up much of the time of government.

Those who live in the shadows of life are not always so fortunate. People who fall outside the system are often not given the attention they need. This is one reason why I am very pleased to see that my colleague Moana Mackey is leading a call for a parliamentary inquiry into homelessness.

This is a much misunderstood issue. It starts with the definition. It is not just people living under bridges (though there are many of those who need support and assistance). It is people who with a variety of health and social problems find themselves unable to hold down permanant accomodation. They might  be alcoholics who”couch surf” from one risky situation to another, they might be mental health consumers who spend time in sub-standard boarding houses or night shelters. They are almost certainly not getting the help they need to address the issues that have driven them to this situation. There is a huge human cost here- but also an economic one, with cost borne by the health sector, police courts and correctional systems and social service agencies.

As a society we do not always want to know about these problems. If we see people living on the street we feel an urge to look away. The recent response to the proposed Wet House in Island Bay in Wellington is a case in point. While the specific proposal may have had some shortcomings, the attitude of many in the community is to want to wish the problem away.

We can’t do that if we want to live in a caring and humane society. We can’t do that if we don’t want to throw millions of dollars at the consequences rather than the causes of issues like homelessness. Last night I attended the 40th anniversary of the Downtown Community Ministry in Wellington.  For 40 years they have looked after those who live in the shadows of life. Their work is inspiring and often under the radar. As a wider society we need to acknowledge it, and take steps to ensure we all play a part in responding to the social needs of the most vulnerable in our community.


Gizza house*

Posted by Phil Twyford on November 2nd, 2009

We have a housing affordability crisis in this country. Close to one in three New Zealanders are in strife – spending 30% or more of their disposable income on housing. The 30% is an internationally agreed benchmark for housing affordability. Pay any more than that, if you are on a low income, and you’re likely to be in trouble.

The numbers of New Zealanders paying more than 30% have been high for years. But they just got higher. To record levels.

Housing costs this high can mean there just isn’t enough left over at the end of the week for food, clothing, transport, medical care or all the other expenses of raising a family.

If you’re heavily mortgaged it can mean your family is one job loss away from a mortgagee sale.

Our houses are amongst the most expensive in the OECD in relation to incomes. It is driving more and more Kiwi families into poverty. And it is a major driver of income inequality.

We all know house prices have gone up. But according to a paper produced last year by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet they have gone up a whopping 80% since 2002.

If you got into the market in the 70s or 80s you might be sitting pretty. Skyrocketing prices have effectively transferred huge amounts of wealth to home owners through capital gain. Net wealth per capita doubled between 1980 and 2001. And doubled again 2001-6 as a result of the housing bubble.

But for the growing number of Kiwis who cannot afford to get into the market that dream of home ownership is disappearing into the distance. A big wealth gap has opened up between homeowners and renters. It is yet another way that the babyboomers have grabbed the best cuts, leaving Generations X and Y to fight over the scraps. By 2006 only 29% of renting couples and 2% of renting individuals could afford to buy a cheap house in their region (spending 30% of income on mortgage payments).

Scarily, the long term trend is heading in the wrong direction.  In 1988 only 11% were spending 30% or more of their income on housing. By 1997 it was up to 25%. It dropped 2001-4 but has been rising rapidly since and is now up to 29%. The recession is bound to have slowed the trend with house prices stabilising but there are already signs the market is picking up again.

According to the 2009 Social Report lower income families have been particularly hard hit by the increases. The proportion of households in the lowest 20% of income spending more than the benchmark 30% on housing trebled between 1988 and 1994 (rising from 16% to 48%). It dipped and then levelled off for a while but has been rising steeply for the past couple of years, going from 33% in 2007 to 39% in 2008.

That increase in the last couple of years ate up much of the benefit from Working for Families tax credits. And without doubt is a big factor behind the rise in poverty levels in 2008.

As you’d expect, rates of home ownership are now plummeting too. Owning a home has been one of the main factors keeping older people’s heads above water financially. As things stand Gen X and Y won’t have mortgage-free homes to get them through their twilight years. Add that to the question mark over superannuation caused by National’s suspension of pre-funding and it is not a pretty picture.

Something has to be done.

* Borrowed from “Gizza job, I can do that” the immortal line of Yosser Hughes a character in Alan Bleasdale’s 1980s TV drama The Boys from the Blackstuff.