Turei Metiria: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTurei Metiria: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 31 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11522. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): The Green Party is opposing this legislation. We really wish that it did what Nick Smith described. We really wish that it did adequately insulate New Zealand’s rental homes that it would keep families warmer and drier particularly over this winter but also for the winters to come and that it would actually save people’s lives but it is not going to. The standard in this bill is so low the provisions in this bill are so poor that the legislation is not going to do any of those things. Nick Smith has spent a great deal of time while this bill has been before the House telling myth after myth after myth about it and I just want to deal with three of those myths.One of those myths that Nick Smith is perpetuating is that there are existing legal protections for tenants that mean that they are entitled to live in warm dry homes that do not have mould and so forth. But we know from quite recent research done through Otago University that the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act fail. There is not an adequate standard set for New Zealand homes. Tenants are not able to hold landlords to account for those basic standards and as a result tenants are paying in some places—because of the acute supply problem for affordable housing—top dollar for homes that are making them and their kids sick. What we are seeing then as a result is that there are lots of families who cannot even afford to live in those kinds of shoddy homes—those kinds of homes that cause their kids to get ill—and they are having to live in their cars. We are seeing more and more New Zealand families ordinary New Zealand families some of them working—they have jobs but they still cannot afford a house even a miserable cold one and are having to live in their cars.I was amazed that Nick Smith stood up earlier and talked about cars—some kind of weird reference about a warrant of fitness in cars and in houses. Warrants of fitness for cars that families live in have a much higher standard for those cars than is in place for the houses that so many other families are barely managing to live in. The warrant of fitness system for the cars that families live in is much much better and to a much much higher standard than even this miserable bill would put in place for the homes—the cold damp homes—that too many families are forced to live in. How unbelievable that Nick Smith would come into this House knowing the acute shortage of decent homes we have knowing there are families tonight who are living in their cars in Auckland and in Christchurch and all over the country and make that comparison here. It is a disgraceful display of how out of touch Nick Smith and this National Government are from the realities that New Zealand faces.Richard Prosser: They don’t care.METIRIA TUREI: My colleague from New Zealand First says they do not care. I agree with him. The Government does not care. It cannot see these families. No matter how often they come forward bravely to tell their stories to the New Zealand public and ask for help this Government still refuses to see them.Another of Nick Smith’s myths is that requiring a decent warrant of fitness standard for rental homes would be prohibitively costly for landlords and therefore for tenants. I want to just go back a few years to the home insulation programme—the one that the Green Party negotiated first with Labour. The one that we negotiated with Labour—[Interruption] Let us just be really clear about the history of this it was a $1 billion programme over 10-plus years to insulate a million New Zealand homes. That was the original programme—Chris Bishop: It was never budgeted. What rubbish.METIRIA TUREI: —that was negotiated between—well this little man over here was not there of course. So he has got no idea what was going on in those times. [Interruption] So let us just set aside the youngsters for a moment and listen to those who were actually there and were part of the discussions and negotiations. The original agreement—[Interruption]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Calm down a little bit. Calm down. Take a call if you want to yell.METIRIA TUREI: The original programme was a $1 billion programme over a decade-and-a-bit to insulate a million homes in this country because that was what was needed. That was the investment that was needed. It was a commitment—a long-term commitment—to significant funding to fix the housing problem that we had and that we still have of too many cold damp homes that make kids and families sick. As a result of the 2008 election we were able to negotiate a much smaller programme with National of around $300 million over a 4-year period. That was good; it was not as good as the one with Labour but it was at least a start.That programme was able to run for a number of years. It was assessed as having a nearly $1 billion value to the country—to the public purse of New Zealand and the savings to health and employment for those families who had their homes insulated. So for that $300 million that we were able to set aside for the home insulation programme with National there was a nearly $1 billion return to New Zealand in just financial value and an uncountable value when it came to saving the lives of children and particularly older people as well.But what do we see in Budget 2016 when it comes to the financial support that the Government can provide to landlords and tenants who want to have their homes insulated? How far has this Government fallen in support for those landlords and tenants who need to get their homes insulated? Well Budget 2016 set aside $18 million over just 2 years—that is 20000 homes. For those homes that is great. Out of the 180000 homes that still need to be at leastinsulated in this country—at minimum—only 20000 have been budgeted for and only for 2 years because this Government is killing off the home insulation scheme that would give landlords and tenants the support that they need to properly insulate their homes. So while Nick Smith and National Party people are standing up here tonight and proclaiming how fantastic this legislation will be in saving lives because it will insulate homes—they are removing the financial support to the families and the landlords who will need it to make sure that those homes are genuinely and properly insulated.This is a Government that does not care to support landlords and tenants whose homes are cold and wet and damp and cause people to get sick. There is a clear opportunity here for National to put its money where its mouth is and actually make it possible for people to get the financial support to insulate their home. What has it done? Budget 2016 crashes that budget and it slams closed the door to the funding support for home insulation. It is due to finish at the end of June this year for the existing scheme and there is money for only a tiny fraction of the homes that are left to be insulated. In 2 years’ time this scheme will be gone. This is yet another reason why we need to change this Government.Let us be really clear about this: if we want New Zealand homes to be warm and dry if we want families to be safe in their homes from diseases like rheumatic fever that can kill children then we need to change the Government. This National Government will not make it possible for families to live safely in their homes. What a disgraceful legacy and this bill is part of that disgraceful legacy National. You strip away the ability for people to live safely in their homes—little children and older New Zealanders. What a terrible day for National. Thank you.