Bradford Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Bradford Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1702] 
8.  
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Housing 
: Does he see any opportunity to simultaneously deal with the job losses in the housing construction sector and assist the nearly 10000 people on the Housing New Zealand Corporation waiting list? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 Yes. That is why over the current full financial year we will see an increase of roughly 540 State houses—150 under Labour and 390 under our watch. Of those 390 under our watch 69 came from the recent cash injection. On top of this we are putting an extra $104 million into State house upgrades as we are concerned about the squalor that tenants have been living in. So those on the waiting list will be helped those State house tenants currently living in squalor will be helped and the building industry will be helped. 
Sue Bradford 
: Why is the Government aiming to build only a pitiful 69 extra State houses over the next few months when for example Australia is investing $6.4 billion in social housing for some 20000 households? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Perhaps the member did not hear. We are actually providing 390 extra houses under our watch—69 of them from the cash injection. We are also upgrading the State housing stock that was left in squalor when the then Minister of Housing used money set aside to address State house depreciation for acquisitions instead. Interestingly the same Minister who fiddled the books in State housing fiddled the books at the Accident Compensation Corporation. 
Hon Maryan Street 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I consider that reference to be unparliamentary. I take offence to it and I ask that you ask that member to withdraw and apologise. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think that is a fair point because of the implication of that allegation. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
Todd McClay 
: Why is the Minister injecting an extra $104.5 million into State house upgrades over and above his already scheduled upgrade programme? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The report to the incoming Minister showed that the previous Labour Government had been taking money that was set aside for State house depreciation and spending it on acquisitions letting State houses fall into a disgusting state of repair. The National Government has addressed this problem. This policy will see builders in work. I am very interested as to why the Green Party is criticising National for increasing State house numbers doing up the State housing stock so that we cannot be accused of being a slum landlord like the previous Government and providing jobs for the construction industry. Why are Green members supporting slum landlords— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: An answer is not time for a speech. 
Sue Bradford 
: Why is the Minister heading down a path of job destruction in the community housing sector with changes to funding that are likely to wipe out a number of organisations when instead he could much more productively be part of leading a “Green New Deal” that would see a much-needed acceleration of house building in both the State and community housing sectors? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: It is true that the previous Government spent many millions of dollars on capacity building. When in Opposition I asked the Government what that meant in terms of the community housing sector and was told that no houses had been built with that money. Under this Government capital funding for the community housing sector has been increased from $12 million to $20 million. We are proud that houses will actually be built. We are not interested in capacity building which builds nothing. 
Hon George Hawkins 
: Will the Minister admit that he was wrong to suggest scrapping the $1 billion retrofit of New Zealand homes which would have injected much-needed investment into a building industry that is facing job losses; if not why not? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: There was a dream and promise of $1 billion. There was no money. I cannot believe that George Hawkins says that he supports putting $1 billion into housing upgrades when his Government left the State housing stock in serious disrepair and was a slum landlord.