Ngaro AlfredHon ALFRED NGARO (National): It's an honour to be able to speak on this bill the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2) in its third reading and especially to speak after the Hon Shane Jones who I do agree has building skills and experience. The best advice I remember him giving me in this regard was to always pay with cash and not with credit. And that was the best thing to do whenever purchasing whenever out there whatever construction whatever advice and you're standing around scoping taking the extracurricular activities around building and construction.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Excuse me. Do I have to remind this member we are talking about the bill at hand?Hon ALFRED NGARO: Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. But it is quite interesting. I would have to say that with the previous speaker the Hon Shane Jones he should also too remind himself of the whakapapa of which he was a part in the Labour Government in previous times because while they can turn around and talk and have the high road of being able to say this is what we will do for the poor people for the cold people and for the people in our communities with our healthy homes bill" they need to look a little bit further past the nine years of a National Government and look a bit further at the nine years under a Labour Government and previously. When you do that it gets a bit of a dim reading. That's right; the lights turn down a little bit low because that's actually what happens when you see the record there.I have to say I'm probably one of the few people that's in Parliament that was actually part of a—I was an electrician by trade a tradie and I did my apprenticeship with Jim Cato Electrical who used to have the contract for Housing New Zealand. I had the privilege in many cases of being able to go both in the building of new Housing New Zealand homes but more importantly around the repairs and maintenance. So I've seen homes that have been cold. I've seen Housing New Zealand homes that really have been run down where there hasn't been the investment to ensure that they've been warm dry and healthy. And I can say to this House as a person who was a tradesman delivering a service at a time in which the people of that community needed it in those homes that it was under a Labour Government where the investment was not made. I can hand on heart state in this House that I've seen that firsthand.I can also say that being in Glen Innes for 20 years and working in the community there we had the largest State housing stock in the whole of New Zealand with roughly approximately around 2800 homes. They had the worst State housing stock in the whole of the New Zealand. [Bell rung]The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I'm so sorry. I apologise.Hon ALFRED NGARO: Sorry Madam Assistant Speaker; Am I OK to continue?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise. Carry on.Hon ALFRED NGARO: And I have to say it was there that I saw—and I can name the streets: it's Farringdon it's Rōpata. These are streets that are well known in Glen Innes because they were streets in which in those homes where I visited as a family worker as a community worker and even as a youth worker they were cold they were damp they were run down and there was no investment. I can remember lobbying our local member of Parliament. I can remember lobbying the local council. We needed to do something about it.So I can say with hand on heart—firsthand experience where I've seen the under-investment; where I've seen where the so-called rhetoric of wanting to care for those in need has not been met. And yet when I look back and I think about this bill and the healthy homes and all that it promises there are elements of it that I would agree with. I would stand in this House and say insulation is absolutely important. The ability to be able to have that warm and dry home is absolutely important and then I look back again over our nine years. What was it that we achieved in that period of time? Well we invested into the State housing stock: 30000 houses retrofitted so they were warm and dry; 290000 subsidies that were given out into the general public so that houses were warm and dry. I would have to say that the record of the National Government in its time of nine years stands up very clearly against the record of the previous Labour Government so I look forward to seeing what achievements will be made in this bill.I want to raise an issue that was raised by the Minister in regards to insulation because I remember the debates that we had in the House. In fact I remember there was the green bit of insulation that was brought in. So we are talking about insulation. The rhetoric on this side when they were in Opposition was the fact that you cannot—and I think I heard in the House the Minister asked: why should we let 39-year-old insulation stay as it is? Well if he had read the full reports when we were looking at the thermal activity of those points of insulation—so the insulation from the 1978 standard right up to 2001—the R rating which is the thermo-rating is 1.9. So when you factor the difference between the new rating from the 2008 standard it's 2.9. What we were told by officials is this: the increase in thermal activity is only a 2.5 percent gain—that is all you would have. So they said that really by doubling the insulation you weren't getting any difference—only 2.5 percent. That's from the experts themselves. So while we talk about the increase in insulation we also need to talk about the increase in costs.So I have to say that when I look at this bill there are elements that are missing. We know their colleagues have talked about the fact that there is the delay in the time period. Yes there's going to come into force the aspect of smoke alarms and insulation in 2019 but it's the five-year period that we get concerned about. It's the imposition of the costs that will be imposed upon those landlords and as my fellow colleague the Hon Michael Woodhouse said we're talking about 80 percent. I was at the submissions and the hearings when they would come into the select committee and talk about the fact that we knew at a time when loss attributing qualifying companies were in place where the investment for your future and your super was actually in a rental property that's what many New Zealanders did. So we need to be thinking about the imposition and the cost. As my colleague said we're looking at an extra $6000 per house—$2.4 billion—that will be added to their cost and we know the imposition and the challenge that that will have.I have to say that while we agree with the importance of having healthier homes for our whānau and our family the record of a previous Labour Government doesn't stack up. The record of a previous National Government does stack up. That's the record that it has. So I look forward because this bill will go through because they have the numbers to holding this coalition Government to account right across the House to see what record they can ensure that they have that will prove that they are making a difference. Actions speak louder than words. We oppose this bill the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill (No 2)."