Foster-Bell Paul: Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFoster-Bell Paul: Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2421. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Contrary to what we have heard from some of the other speakers so far in this debate we on this side of the House do believe that New Zealanders should live in warm and cosy homes whether they are in a cottage or a villa in town or an apartment or whether they are Green or New Zealand First Party supporters and live in an igloo a yurt a tepee or a mud hut. They deserve to have a warm and healthy home to live in.This member Mr Twyford starts from a reasonably sensible position; I will concede that. Unfortunately the bill soon degenerates into an absolute mess and will achieve in some cases quite the opposite I think of what that member sets out to achieve. This is typical of a smug know-it-all and Stalinist heavy-handed approach insisting that landlords meet standards that are actually beyond their control. It is one thing to require a level of insulation; it is quite another to determine what the interior temperature of a home must be given that a number of things that tenants themselves do from opening the window to switching a heater on will regulate that temperature. So I think that is an example of the confused and muddled drafting that Mr Twyford has unfortunately fallen victim to here in this bill.A point that he raised was that this will not actually come into force immediately for existing tenancies—well that is all very well and good but there are 1400 new tenancies signed every week. So from day one of this bill taking effect as it is currently drafted landlords would be required to meet the new conditions as set by Mr Twyford with no time in order to install insulation.As the bill is currently drafted there is also a huge degree of unintended consequences that we just do not know about. We have heard comments from some of the parties opposite about notes being drafted by our research unit. Well unlike the Opposition as a Government we also have the advantage of having officials hard-working public servants here in Wellington at ministries such as the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment who do give good advice—far better-considered advice than clearly Opposition parties have access to. If significant upgrades are required there is only one logical consequence that will flow from that and that is rent increases often for the most vulnerable in society. So this bill coming with good intentions as it does still manages to achieve quite the opposite I think of Mr Twyford’s original intentions.This Government is focused on providing good quality housing for New Zealanders. An example of this is the Tāmaki Redevelopment Co. in Auckland which is aiming to build 6000 new homes—social housing with integrated community facilities. This is an excellent example of the direction that we are heading in working and partnering with community groups and not taking a statist and Stalinist approach as members opposite seem to want to do. I will not be supporting this bill past this reading.