Ngaro AlfredRESIDENTIAL TENANCIES (PROHIBITING LETTING FEES) AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteeDebate resumed.Part 1 Substantive provisions (continued)Hon ALFRED NGARO (National): Thank you Madam Chair. Yes Madam Chair after that event my colleagues did say to me that it's one way to rock the House and bring the House down. But it's an honour to continue to speak on this bill. I was concerned because I looked across and then I felt that maybe my speech wasn't relevant maybe I was on the wrong part—I don't know what it was. You were both just looking—and I was stunned but I realised it wasn't that at all. So obviously there is an opportunity to continue on.In light of the quake that we've just had—and at the march that was outside they were actually talking about a Māori proverb and a whakataukī that comes from Psalm 127 which is actually appropriate right now. It declares this: Except the Lord build the house they labour in vain that build it:"—excuse the pun. But it just seems that the fact that this is there—what we are doing here in one sense in this Residential Tenancies (Prohibiting Letting Fees) Amendment Bill is it does feels like we're labouring in vain in a sense. Are we making a difference that is to the cost and the burden of that cost for those who are currently in a tenancy agreement arrangement? We believe that that won't; that the conditions that are there—it's already been stated.It's quite clear here. In order to be able to give some substance to those points that I've made if I was to read through the Act the current national average as far as weekly rentals are is $452. When it was worked out in regards to the cost that was spread over a period of time in regards to the average letting fee for a tenant it'd be roughly around about $10 to $12 if that was added on. The concern though is that while that may be added on—and tenants have said in their submissions "Look this would be good. It spreads the burden of the cost over a longer period of time." However once that has been set in place there is no provision there in the bill—and the Minister of Housing and Urban Development may want to respond to this—to remove that current increase for the letting fee itself.So in actual fact once a landlord has decided they're going to increase the letting fee by an extra $10 to $12 that can be for perpetuity for as long as the landlord decides to do that. So therefore it's an increase—Chlöe Swarbrick: Are you advocating for rent control?Hon ALFRED NGARO: —I know there's a bit of noise on the other side—that is going to be happening that's $10 to $12. Now for average people who are out there paying $450 that's now $462 added extra on to their costs. What that is telling us is the fact that this is already not going to work.Now let's hear from some of the people actually out there who are working with those to provide tenants. We know their security of tenure is critically important as well. So we think about the New Zealand Property Investors Federation—most people out there in the public may not know that almost 60 to 75 percent of those who actually own a rental property are mum and dad investors. These are people who are good people genuine people who have bought this on the premise of being able to provide for some form of super some form of security in their later days and when they retire and so therefore these are not the so-called landlords that are out there that are not doing their part to ensure they provide a decent form of accommodation that's warm and dry.The New Zealand Property Investors Federation chief executive officer Andrew King said the law change was unnecessary and could have reignited rental auctions where tenants try to outbid each other by offering higher rents to secure places—prohibiting letting fees was removing choice from those tenants prepared to pay and get a step ahead of some other tenants.It's quite clear again that these are those who work at the coalface who are wanting to make a difference. What they are saying is that number one the costs will be shifted on and number two it removes the opportunity for choice where in actual fact when you have property managers who work hard to ensure that actually they have the appropriate place of residence for a tenant for a family that are looking for residency—that's the role of the property manager as well.I also too again want to talk about some other comments that came up as we were listening to the submissions that were coming through. "By paying the letting fee they have a wider choice of property and less competition from tenants unwilling or unable to pay"—these are some of the comments and I'm reading them from those who made submissions. So I'll be keen to hear from the Minister in the chair Phil Twyford. My number one question is in regards to the lack of consultation and why there wasn't a broader perspective and opportunity for that. Why was it not then held over to the two previous bills that we talked about at the moment which the Minister and his ministry is conducting—in other words a reform to the Residential Tenancies Act itself? Then at the same time question two in regards to the concerns that were raised by those with property management roles of responsibility and for those that are tenanting—the concern that this will increase their current rates in the average rental market and then at that time put an extra burden upon those people as well. So I put those questions to the Minister. I hope that he will be able to respond to them in the appropriate way. That's important for us and we look forward to more debate through this committee stage."