Lees-Galloway IainIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): My question for the Minister for Building and Housing is: why is it that he is opposing Metiria Turei's amendment to add new clause 4A as set out in Supplementary Order Paper 210? I assume he is opposing it because I heard some of his interjections that it would not work or words to that effect.The only contribution we have had from the Government side on Metiria Turei's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) is from David Seymour who seemed to take the view that having affordable housing requiring developers to build affordable housing was somehow a tax on developers and that it would stifle development of these special housing areas. He expressed that as the Government's view—that there should be no room for putting requirements in place that affordable housing should be built on special housing areas.I want to explore that a little bit because if we look at Metiria Turei's actual Supplementary Order Paper it is to amend section 14(1)(d). Section 14(1)(d) in the principal legislation says that a 'qualifying development' in a special housing area is a development— … (d) that will contain not less than the prescribed percentage (if any) of affordable dwellings." So the legislation as it stands actually already allows for affordable homes to be prescribed in a special housing area. What does "prescribed" mean? Well section 14(3) says that the word "'prescribed'—(a) in subsection (1)(b) and (c) means prescribed for qualifying developments in special housing areas by an Order in Council made under section 15(1) …". Section 15(1) lists the criteria that the Governor-General may by Order in Council include in the criteria for a special housing area. Section 15(4) says: "The affordability criteria that may be specified are not limited by section 9(3)(a) but may include without limitation criteria defined by reference to median house prices median household income individual income the median multiple (as referred to in section 9(3)(a)(ii)) or any other matter relevant to affordability as it applies to the district in which the special housing area falls".So the legislation actually already takes a small step towards doing what Metiria Turei's Supplementary Order Paper would require. The difference is of course that it enables affordable housing to be a requirement in a special housing area. Metiria Turei's Supplementary Order Paper would require affordable housing to be built in special housing areas and has a definition of what affordable housing is. If that is so evil if that is going to stop developers building in special housing areas then why was it included in the original legislation? If it was included in the original legislation what does the Government have against (a) making it a requirement and (b) setting some definition of what affordable housing is?If the Government and the Minister disagree with the definition which is that it should be no more than four times the median household income in that area then what is the Government's definition of affordable? What does the Government actually believe is an affordable home? What is the point of setting aside special housing areas if not to make housing more affordable? If the point is to make housing more affordable then what is the Government's definition? If it is not the definition that Metiria Turei has offered then what is it? We have not heard that from Government members. We have not heard that from the Minister.So I would appreciate answers to all of those questions. Why not make it a requirement? Why is having affordable housing so much of an issue if it was already included in the principal legislation? Why not have a definition? What is the definition? So there are four questions there and I would very much appreciate an answer from the Minister to those questions because it would certainly enlighten me as to the Government's position on Metiria Turei's SOP."