8. Housing Affordable—Accommodation SupplementPHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister for Social HousingHousing Affordable—Accommodation Supplement8. PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister for Social Housing: Does she believe an increase in the accommodation supplement will help to reduce the rate of rent or house price increases?Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for Social Housing): The accommodation supplement has never been about trying to set or reduce market rents or house prices; it is about assisting people in need with housing costs. What I do think the boost we announced last week will do is make life a little bit easier for the 136000 families who will receive on average an increase of $36 a week leaving them with more in their pockets after they pay their rent. This along with the Family Incomes Package—which every party in this House apart from Labour supported last week—will make a significant difference to millions of New Zealanders because we are a Government that not only cares about these families but does something about it.Phil Twyford: Does she accept that while the accommodation supplement provides some relief from rising rents $1.5 billion a year on rent subsidies is fiscally unsustainable; should the real solution not be actually building affordable homes—or did the courier research focus groups not show that one up?Hon AMY ADAMS: Well thanks to the sensible fiscal management of this Government we have the resources to support New Zealanders in need and now that we are back in surplus that is the first thing we are doing—we are supporting New Zealanders who need an increase in their accommodation supplement as part of a wider Family Incomes Package. For the party that voted against it to lecture us on better support when this Government not only has a sustainable funded credible housebuilding programme—we are the ones who are helping 1.5 million New Zealand families while Labour voted against it.Phil Twyford: Does she accept that a half-billion-dollar annual increase in accommodation supplement spending over 9 years in office represents the final capitulation of her failed housing policy?Hon AMY ADAMS: First of all the member should look at the total net figure of the package which is actually closer to about $295 million in accommodation supplement. Secondly we are very happy to be in a position fiscally to help New Zealanders in need with their housing cost. Thirdly if only we had not had to spend the last 8 years fixing the fiscal mess we were left we might have been able to do it sooner.Phil Twyford: Why is she happy to give out rental subsidies that ultimately benefit landlords but she refuses to build anything like the number of affordable homes that are needed she refuses to ban foreign buyers and she refuses to reform the planning rules that stop our cities from growing?Hon AMY ADAMS: Well first of all I as an individual do not do any of those things as Parliament does and actually this is the Government that has reformed the planning rules while Labour voted against them. This is the Government that is legislating for developments like the Point England reserve bill Three Kings and the Riccarton Racecourse and that party voted against them. What I think the House can take from this line of questioning is that Labour is opposing putting up accommodation supplements and that Kiwi families who rely on them should not expect to get a red cent if Labour ever gets into power.Phil Twyford: What has changed since 2015 when the Government accepted official advice not to boost the accommodation supplement because of fears that landlords could pocket the extra money and rents could be pushed up?Hon AMY ADAMS: Since then we have had a piece of research from the Ministry of Social Development that has looked at this very carefully and looked at whether there is any evidence that the last round of accommodation supplement increases did lead to rent increases. It found no such evidence and as a consequence we were happy to take that advice and give a little bit of money to the New Zealanders who need it—something that they clearly should not expect from Labour. I just ask Labour members to be honest and tell us that they will reverse them. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! That particular question has now been asked and answered. We move to question No. 9. [Interruption] Order! I do not want to have to ask the Minister to stop interjecting again.