Hughes Gareth: Housing Corporation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Gareth: Housing Corporation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17927] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I rise to take a call on the Housing Corporation Amendment Bill. The Green Party is disappointed that we are discussing this bill so soon after its introduction with such a poor regulatory impact statement with no evidence given by the Minister with such short calls and now under urgency. It is disappointing to have legislation going through this Chamber in such a fashion. 
The bill amends the Housing Corporation Act 1974 to consolidate housing policy advice to Ministers within the Department of Building and Housing. As the Minister of Housing said the Housing New Zealand Corporation will retain its operational policy capability in order to support its business activities but it will no longer be required to ensure that the Minister of Housing receives the appropriate advice or any other advice on information with regard to housing or to services related to housing. The Green Party is yet to see any evidence from the Minister or from other speakers that this is desirable—no evidence whatsoever—so we will be opposing this bill in its first reading. We will be entering the select committee process with an open mind because ultimately we want better State house services for Kiwis but we do not think that this bill goes anywhere near delivering that. The Green Party believes that this bill is a diversion away from the key issue facing New Zealand: the dire shortage of housing and the Government’s dismal failure to build more State houses on its watch. The Government seems intent to divest itself of its responsibility as a housing provider and this bill in that context furthers that by limiting the Housing New Zealand Corporation’s policy advisory role. 
Housing is a basic need for all New Zealanders and it is vital that the Government plays a leading role in ensuring that everybody is guaranteed this basic essential human right. I did not grow up in a State house but one of our most prominent parliamentarians did—the Prime Minister. For thousands of Kiwis a State house has meant that they have been able to grow up with opportunities in a decent house. The Housing New Zealand Corporation website for Ms Mackey’s knowledge points all the way back to 1905 to Seddon’s Workers’ Dwelling Act which was potentially the start of the State housing sector in New Zealand. The website goes through the railway department’s workers’ dwellings and the housing factories that were built through to the lenient State lending programmes of the 1920s and all the way through to the 1930s. Providing State housing and social housing has a much longer history—in fact 106 years’ worth of history—but this vital role of Government seems to be lacking from the Minister’s attention. He seems to be focusing on minutiae—on tiny bills like this one which is only 4 pages long—without looking at the big picture and without looking at the actual need that is out there in our communities. 
Today the Housing New Zealand Corporation manages—I looked it up—69489 State houses but unfortunately it has more than 8800 Kiwis on the waiting list. I think it is an indictment on the Government’s role as the State housing provider that so many Kiwis are on that waiting list when there is so much need and when builders out there are dying for work. They are looking for work yet we have so many people on the State house waiting list. 
I have been touring the country looking at some of our coldest dampest worst rental properties in my bid to promote my Energy Efficiency Conservation (Warm Healthy Rentals) Amendment Bill. What I have discovered in talking to the different sector groups is that we have 1 million substandard homes in New Zealand which every day lead to 50 people being hospitalised at a cost of $3000 a night and more than 780 people do not attend school or are not at work as a result of their poor housing standards. The economic benefits of addressing this issue are significant and I acknowledge our ability to work with the Government through a memorandum of understanding to deliver as I understand it more than 90000 warm healthy retrofits. For every $1 we are investing as a nation we are seeing $2 in economic benefits. Research from the New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development shows that if we look after those 1 million substandard homes by insulating and retrofitting them productivity improvements will be in the order of potentially $17 million there will be $54 million worth of health savings and there will be smaller energy bills at an amazing saving worth $425 million. 
The 69000 State houses that the State manages make the State the nation’s biggest landlord. The State plays an important role in making sure housing affordability and standards do not slip precariously as may happen if we leave it up to the market with no State provision. The fundamental issue facing us in 2011 is widespread housing deprivation and this Government simply is not investing enough of its money in State housing or the housing sector. 
I will look at just a couple of parts of the bill. I guess there is not much to it so it will be brief. Firstly we will look to evidence presented to the Social Services Committee that the streamlining of housing policy advice into one ministry will actually achieve better outcomes but we have not seen that evidence today. This bill has just been chucked on the table. The bill states that the Housing New Zealand Corporation will no longer be expected to undertake research and monitoring activities for the purpose of advising the Minister of Housing on housing and services related to housing. I acknowledge the concern from the community housing sector and the argument that it is good to have policy advice separate from the functions that are delivered bureaucratically. If one agency provides both the policy advice could be seen to be self-serving to the bureaucracy of the agency rather than directed to the people to whom the agency is meant to be delivering. 
This bill could also be seen as simply an excuse to reduce that capacity for good policy advice on State housing. I am concerned about the Minister because the risk is that he will potentially be worse off and receive less diverse advice from which to make his decisions. The Housing New Zealand Corporation is currently the primary provider of policy advice. Although the bill makes provisions for the transfer of staff to the Department of Building and Housing I and the Parliamentary Library cannot find the actual number of staff in the policy advice section which is currently not available. I understand that the policy advice section sits within the governance and assurance business groups. The library contacted them directly on my behalf and was told that the numbers would not be released because the Minister had directed them not to. As a result of the transfer of duties they are in the process of a consultation with the affected staff and will not release that information until the final number of staff is known. I imagine there is considerable nervousness amongst the staff at the moment and I want to acknowledge that in the Chamber tonight. I ask the Minister for an assurance that there will not be policy adviser redundancies factored into the transition of the policy advice functions to the Department of Building and Housing. 
Secondly this bill is part of the National Government’s ideological trend to simply merge departments much like the legislative takeover of the National Library and Archives New Zealand by the Department of Internal Affairs or the Ministry of Fisheries being taken into the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry—for no good reason. It seems to be an ideological slogan of efficiencies and streamlining shouted out by the Government benches. I heard a few more slogans in the Minister’s speech. No doubt Labour will demerge those departments in the ongoing cycle we have seen over the last couple of decades. 
Divesting responsibilities seems to be the key aim of this bill and the Government’s whole approach to State housing. The Government needs to retain its key role in State housing. The bill does not exist in isolation and in a context where the Government is divesting its responsibilities as a State housing provider I repeat that the Government needs to retain its role in State housing. The  
Home and Housed: A Vision for Social Housing in New Zealand  
report released by the Government shows that the current social housing model is struggling to meet demand. It identified that we have between 8500 to 20000 Kiwi households living in extreme housing need. The task force found that there was a shortage of 70000 homes in New Zealand. That was needless to say before the earthquake in Canterbury. Clearly we are facing a housing crisis in New Zealand yet the Government seems intent to be divesting its responsibilities and the Green Party believes that the Government needs to retain its key role as a State housing provider and considerably increase the State housing stock. 
The Government’s housing plans are inadequate in relation to discussing renewable tenancies potentially selling State houses and leaving more up to the community sector. Rather than investing in our struggling building sector at the moment and using the housing crisis as an opportunity to boost our employment the budget for improving and buying State houses was cut by more than 80 percent by the Minister from $120 million to $18 million in the last Budget. Rather than building more State houses the Government has announced that it will potentially sell off 40000 houses or two-thirds of the State housing stock. Rather than building more State houses the Government is simply passing the buck. It is great that the Government recognises the need to build up the role of the community sector—and the Green Party wholeheartedly supports that—but support for the community sector needs to be alongside investment in State housing not despite it or instead of it. John Key’s Government needs to invest in State housing not divest its role as the most important player in the New Zealand housing market. The Government should be focused on building. Everyone in New Zealand deserves a warm dry affordable house. Decent housing is a human right. 
Earlier this year the Green Party released its Mind the Gap package which would provide investment in State and community housing. The Mind the Gap package would create 6000 new State homes over 3 years creating more than 28000 jobs and healthy warm homes for people who need those most. We would also invest $200 million in community housing to build 500 homes and create 3500 jobs. Housing deprivation drives inequality and the evidence shows that inequality is bad for everyone in society not just the most vulnerable people directly affected by poverty. In conclusion the Green Party will be voting against this bill.