Robertson GrantGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): Can I just start my contribution by doing something that I have not done yet in this debate. There has been some acrimony during the debate—it has been quite heated—so I want to take the opportunity to thank the Minister for Building and Housing for giving us the chance today to debate proposed Part 3 of this bill. Without him we would not have had this chance today to debate this excellent proposed Part 3 put forward by my colleague Phil Twyford. We have not had the opportunity to debate a policy of this depth and one that will make this much difference to the supply and affordability of housing in New Zealand until today so I want to thank the Minister for Building and Housing for bringing this omnibus bill to the House so that we can have this debate today.I want to pick up my colleague Phil Twyford's comments about what the Minister said yesterday because the Minister did give an acknowledgment yesterday that the Auckland housing market was out of control on the one hand—Hon Dr Nick Smith: Did not.GRANT ROBERTSON: —that's exactly what it said—and then on the other hand that he had no plans to change his approach. They were the two options: yep it is out of control but the Minister has no plans to change his approach—a continuation of his head being placed deeply in the sand unable to see that he might have an alternative. So today in proposed Part 3 we have that alternative for the Minister. We are answering his question and it is the implementation of a measure that will actually build affordable housing. The Minister when he came to the House yesterday said that this bill was about improving the supply of housing and improving affordable housing. We reluctantly supported Part 1 as having a minuscule impact on that point of increasing supply and increasing affordable housing. Now here we are in proposed Part 3 where we are really doing it with 10000 affordable houses per year—10000 affordable houses per year. Is this needed Mr Chair you may well ask? Well it most certainly is because we know that we are thousands of houses short of what is needed in Auckland and around the rest of the country.A lot of the debate on this bill so far has focused on Auckland. I want to make the point that proposed Part 3 does not specify Auckland and for a very good reason: there are other areas of New Zealand facing housing stress right now when it comes to affordable housing. This could apply in areas like Wellington Tauranga and Queenstown—the places that are really under stress at the moment in terms of whether or not there is affordable housing. So this is needed. We are around 40000 houses short since National came into office in terms of what is needed in Auckland for the pipeline of affordable housing. In this proposed Part 3 somebody is finally stepping up in this House and saying: We're going to put a number on it—10000 houses per year."No doubt should those members get off their chuffs and get up we will hear the negativity from National telling us that it cannot do this and that we do not have the labour force. That party used to be ambitious for New Zealand but that is all gone. It is all negativity. Well here is the chance. They can recapture some of that ambition and back proposed Part 3—10000 affordable houses.But there is more. There is more in this proposed Part 3 because Phil Twyford has put this up not just with a pipedream of 10000 houses but with a plan to do it. "Within six months of the completion of the plan required under subsection (1)" to build those 10000 affordable houses that copy will come back to this House. That is about democracy. That is about making sure that this House knows that this will happen. This is not just a Government coming here saying: "We're going to have a special housing area and there might be some houses here and there might be some houses there." This is an actual plan that will come before this Parliament. And then the Minister for Building and Housing—now this might be a stretch for the current Minister but we will see—"must ensure that all targets set out within the plan are met and report to the House of Representatives annually on its progress."So rather than the Minister's current approach which is to deny and divert—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Are you on Part 3?GRANT ROBERTSON: I am on Part 3. I am reading it out Gerry actually.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Part 3?GRANT ROBERTSON: Yeah yeah yeah. Part 3—right here.Hon Gerry Brownlee: We're reading your proposal. You're mixed up.GRANT ROBERTSON: No no no. Part 3—right here.Hon Gerry Brownlee: A little confused.GRANT ROBERTSON: No no. Part 3—right here mate.Hon Gerry Brownlee: Someone give him the right bit of paper.GRANT ROBERTSON: Part 3—right here. It is all good Gerry. It is all on the amendment.This is the problem with the Government: it does not understand. It does not understand that it actually takes Government leadership to get affordable housing. That is what Part 3 will deliver. The Government should back it. It has not done anything else that is useful in terms of affordable housing."