Little Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLittle Andrew: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 18 February 2015. Volume:703;Page:1675. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.ANDREW LITTLE (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that the Government is planning to sell state houses to “encourage and develop more diverse ownership of social housing”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes and I think the Government’s approach going back over a number of years is well summarised in a speech to community housing providers which says: “Our vision for that is to have Housing [New Zealand] local authorities and a bigger stronger community housing sector working in partnership to deliver more social housing more diverse types of housing and a broad range of services. We are committed to your members having access to the Income Related Rent Subsidy to capital grants and”—interestingly enough—“stock transfer.” which would be the selling of houses. Funnily enough that speech which could have been given by me was in fact given by Phil Twyford in July of last year.Andrew Little: What does it say about his programme when the Salvation Army says that it does not have the capital to buy these houses and the Bay Community Housing Trust says that the only price that it will pay for them is “free”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: We all know that some people want things for free. Some people want consulting services for free until it is pointed out.Andrew Little: What does it say about his programme when the Salvation Army says it cannot manage these properties any better than Housing New Zealand without a large Government subsidy?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The way I would summarise it would be that I would say to community housing providers that they “have real strengths in supported affordable first-home ownership and also in providing specialised supported living.” like the Salvation Army; that “Tenants with high and complex needs may be better off being transferred to a community housing provider” and I agree with that; that “Diversity competition and collaboration can stimulate innovation”; that “You can leverage private sector investment”; and that you can “combine housing with social services that support high-needs tenants” when you use community housing providers. I have quoted for you verbatim from Phil Twyford’s speech to the Community Housing Aotearoa conference.Mr SPEAKER: Order! That will be sufficient.Andrew Little: Just waiting for the walrus to quieten down over there. Does he stand by his statement—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition was only responding to an unsatisfactory interjection from my right.Andrew Little: Does he stand by his statement on Radio New Zealand that some proposals to onsell ex-State houses to private developers “might be agreeable” to the Government; if so why did he guarantee over and over again that these homes would not end up in developers’ hands?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: What the Government has made quite clear is that if it sells social housing to community housing providers the expectation is that they would keep those and maybe further develop those. That would be part of the contract. But of course it is quite possible that the Government could sell some social houses to a community housing provider who then says that they are going to develop that area have three or four times as many houses and a few might be sold off as affordable housing. There would still be more housing available and more people through. This is a Government that cares about the most vulnerable and is doing something about it. I strongly suggest that the member reads Phil Twyford’s speech—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order!Andrew Little: Was Paula Bennett correct to refuse Official Information Act requests “for analysis on the benefits or disadvantages of social housing being provided by NGOs rather than Housing New Zealand” because “the information does not exist”; if so why does that information not exist?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member would need to direct that question to Paula Bennett. I do not have those details.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Referring to the Prime Minister’s unchecked comment “consultancy services for free” is he aware of a member of Parliament from his own caucus who owes large sums of money far higher than Mr Little’s piffling amount—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member needs to know that a supplementary question must relate to the text of the primary question.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order is that when he put that into contention—not relevant to the subject put up by Mr Little—he put it into contention and I related it to that. You did not check him; he talked about consultancy services for free—Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! When I am on my feet the member must resume his seat. I will listen very carefully to the question. If it relates to a supplementary answer that we heard the Prime Minister give that will be acceptable provided that there is equally ministerial responsibility.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Is he aware regarding his unchecked comment “consultancy services for free” ofanother member of Parliament from his own caucus who owes large sums of money far greater than Mr Little’s and why is he in a glasshouse throwing stones?Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no ministerial responsibility for a caucus member.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The issue we have—I am sorry it is so tiring—is that the answer that Mr Key gave you allowed to stand. Had you said that the Minister is not responsible for that and ruled it out then perhaps that would be an even state of affairs. But Mr Peters was merely asking a question about a matter that the Prime Minister had somehow or other claimed responsibility for by using it in his answer.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member needs to understand that any question raised in this House to a Minister must be related to ministerial responsibility. There is no ministerial responsibility that the Prime Minister holds for members of his caucus.Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I accept that ruling. The question then is what is the status of answers where the Prime Minister gives an answer for which he has absolutely no responsibility? At that point he opens himself up for supplementary questions about those answers.Mr SPEAKER: And I accepted that. I said in the first instance to the Rt Hon Winston Peters that I would not accept his question. Then when I reconsidered and he rephrased his question I accepted that it related to the answer that had been given by the Prime Minister. So we accept that point. Then it was asking about a matter on which I ruled that there was no ministerial responsibility.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Having regard to the Prime Minister’s comment and the Speaker’s ruling has the Prime Minister been briefed on an amount of debt owing; if so why is he in a glasshouse throwing stones?Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. No ministerial—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! A point of order has been called. The Hon Simon Bridges.Hon Simon Bridges: Again there is no ministerial responsibility for that.Mr SPEAKER: And I accept that point.Andrew Little: So is this where we now stand: the buyers say they cannot afford to buy the managers say they cannot do a better job the Government has not done its homework and the social housing programme does not create one new social house? Is this good policy or just ideology?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: To summarise the position I share a vision “to have Housing [New Zealand] local authorities [having] a bigger stronger community housing sector working in partnership to deliver more social housing more diverse types of housing and a broad range of services.”Grant Robertson: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would the Prime Minister resume his seat. Again I have a point of order and I expect to hear this in silence.Grant Robertson: I am just wondering whether or not you consider that the Prime Minister has ministerial responsibility for Phil Twyford’s excellent speech.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! No I do not need assistance from the Prime Minister. The question was “Is this where we stand?”—that is the way the Leader of the Opposition started his question. The Prime Minister is certainly at liberty to then read from a speech regardless of whom that is from if he thinks that explains the position. [Interruption] Order! I have ruled on that matter. Is it a fresh point of order?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I was just finishing my answer—Mr SPEAKER: No I think we have heard enough from the Prime Minister.Andrew Little: Given the statement that the houses he plans to sell are the wrong size and in the wrong place for New Zealand’s social housing needs how many of them will become better sized or better located for social housing when they are sold to someone else?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: On the advice I have about 9 percent of Housing New Zealand homes are one bedroom and the demand is about 30 percent. So I find it interesting that the member is essentially saying that we should keep the same housing stock that we should not look to bring more people into the market and that we should not reconfigure it. But it summarises the absolute shambles we ended up with when Labour was running the show and the only definition of whether there was a community house or not was whether there was an absolute number not the condition it was in or whether it was fit for purpose. The member needs to read Phil Twyford’s speech. He sums it up well.Andrew Little: I seek leave to table a letter from the office of the Hon Paula Bennett that has the quote I alluded to in my earlier question about not having—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The date of that letter please.Andrew Little: It was received on 15 December in an office. It is undated by—Mr SPEAKER: Order! That will do. I will put the leave on a letter from Paula Bennett’s office received on 15 December. Leave is sought to table that particular letter. Is there any objection? There is none. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.