Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:646;Page:15188] 
12.  
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
 to the  
Minister of Housing 
: Does she have confidence in Housing New Zealand Corporation; if so why? 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 Yes; because it works hard to house some of New Zealand’s most vulnerable families. 
Phil Heatley 
: How long has the corporation been actively referring low-income families to the Mangere boarding facility described in the  
Listener  
as a place where “rats infest the rubbish that spills across the grounds” where “Toilets are blocked to overflowing.” and where “Light fittings are broken and exposed wires hang from walls”? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: The Housing New Zealand Corporation does not refer clients to those lodges. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: What are this Labour-led Government and the Housing New Zealand Corporation doing to help house some of New Zealand’s most needy families? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: This Government has reintroduced income-related rents and through the Housing New Zealand Corporation it provides affordable homes for almost 200000 people. We have transformed the Housing New Zealand Corporation from being the real estate agency it was under National to being a vital social service working across the country to house needy families and help Kiwi families into their first homes. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Minister saying that the  
Listener  
is wrong in its report that the corporation does send beneficiaries “to live in squalid crowded lodges” that social worker Vaima’aMemea is lying about corporation staff actually escorting new tenants there and that the corporation’s own confession in writing that it places some people in boarding houses is in fact not true; or is she saying she can ignore the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust’s warning to the corporation about that practice that it does “need to be careful about what they refer people to”? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: The Kiwiana Lodge has never been on the South Auckland region’s list of alternative accommodation providers. The Abiru Lodge the other of the two named in the  
Listener 
 article was removed from the South Auckland region’s list of alternative accommodation providers on 9 October 2007. Can I just tell the House that in light of the  
Listener 
 article appearing I paid a visit to those lodges unannounced and there is no doubt that they are squalid and we should not have people living in those conditions. The Housing New Zealand Corporation does not refer people to live in those conditions. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Minister saying that the Housing New Zealand Corporation has never ever referred families to those lodges; if so why did she after the  
Listener  
article came out take the time to change her very busy schedule and make a rush visit there? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: I repeat what I said before: the Kiwiana Lodge formerly the Kotuku Lodge has never been on the list of places that the Housing New Zealand Corporation refers people to. The Abiru Lodge used to be but there was a complaint about it and we took it off our list. I made a trip to those lodges because I had a scheduled appointment at the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust. I had a meeting—in fact two meetings—at Monte Cecilia and I took the opportunity to put staff from Monte Cecilia in the car I was being driven in and take them to visit those lodges so that I could see what they were talking about. I went inside the lodges to see what conditions people were living in. I am pleased to tell that member that one of the families named in the article was housed by the corporation last Friday before the article even appeared. 
Phil Heatley 
: Why do two separate social workers from Monte Cecilia say in the  
Listener 
 article that they have witnessed Housing New Zealand Corporation staff escorting potential tenants to this boarding facility; surely the fact that the Minister actually took Monte Cecilia people to the facility indicates that their claims were true? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: The Monte Cecilia staff took me to those lodges to show me the living conditions of some of the most needy and difficult-to-house clients who are likely to appear before the Housing New Zealand Corporation. I have to say that many of those people have never approached the corporation for assistance. It is true that the corporation has referred people to lodges in the past and may have to do so in the future but not to those ones. 
Hon Paul Swain 
: Has the Minister seen any reports of the difficulty of housing people because of the policy of the National Government to sell off State houses in the 1990s? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: It is an old song to sing but it is nevertheless true that if we had not been minus 13000 houses from the end of the 1990s we would be able to house the people now on the waiting list. We have 10000 families on the waiting list but we are 13000 houses short—do the arithmetic. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Minister telling the House today that the  
Listener 
 is lying when it reports that the corporation sends beneficiaries “to live in squalid crowded lodges”; that social worker Vaima’aMemea from the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust is lying about corporation staff actually escorting potential tenants there; that the corporation’s own confession is in fact a lie when it says it places some people in boarding houses; and that the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust’s warning to the corporation that it needs to be careful about where it refers people was never given? Are all those four groups lying? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: I have not for a moment accused anybody of lying. What I have said is the truth of the matter: there are some boarding houses to which the Housing New Zealand Corporation has had to—in extremis—refer people but not those two and not Abiru Lodge since October of last year. Where there has been a complaint the corporation has gone in to inspect those lodges. In fact it goes in on a regular basis to inspect these lodges. If they are not tolerable—and the two described in the article are clearly not—then the corporation desists from referring anybody to them. Those are the facts of the matter and I absolutely stand by what the Monte Cecilia Housing Trust people said to me when they took me to see those houses; they told me that I needed to see them because some people are living in extreme circumstances. Now that we know of that situation we can work to address it. 
Phil Heatley 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I would like you to look at the transcript of the Minister’s answer or perhaps you can recall it because I need to work out how I deal with it going forward. On the one hand she said that the Housing New Zealand Corporation had never referred people to these places and on the other hand she said that the Housing New Zealand Corporation actively visited these places to inspect them and that when it found they were crap it discontinued referring people to them. How can both answers be right? Why is the Housing New Zealand Corporation visiting them? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I understand the member’s point. I have listened extremely carefully. I am happy to look at the transcript but I understand perfectly what the Minister said in response to the member’s question. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Labour Government’s record not bad enough with plummeting homeownership statistics forests of red tape and rising mortgage interest rates without it adding renters’ woes to its 8-year watch—quickly rising rents serious overcrowding and the Government’s own agency recommending rat-infested boarding houses to the most vulnerable? 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: The member opposite is I presume trying to understand the complexity of the housing affordability issue but it continues to escape him. Can I say just one thing: if for example that member’s party had supported a proposed amendment to the Residential Tenancies Act when the Government introduced a bill in 2001 such boarding houses as that member purports to be anxious about now could have been addressed. Let us hope that that party can absolutely see its way clear to supporting the Residential Tenancies Act amendment when we introduce it again in the wake of the review. That member needs to look at his own record and at his own party’s record. 
Phil Heatley 
: I seek leave to table a threat to change the Residential Tenancies Act that was given 4 years ago 3 years ago 2 years ago and 1 year ago. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is. 
Phil Heatley 
: I seek leave to table an article that refers to beneficiaries being sent “to live in squalid crowded lodges” from the  
Listener 
 of 5 April. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? Yes there is objection.