Logie Jan: Social Housing Reform (Flexible Purchasing and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLogie Jan: Social Housing Reform (Flexible Purchasing and Remedial Matters) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 21 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3542. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAN LOGIE (Green): After what may have been the shortest speech of the night—I am not even sure whether that last speech made 20 seconds—I rise to take a call—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! I am sorry but I will ask the member to start again. I could not hear the beginning of her speech.JAN LOGIE: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I was just commenting on the brevity of the last speech possibly under 20 seconds and possibly even the shortest speech of the evening. Well done National Party! Your enthusiasm and commitment to the detail is absolutely impressive! I am sure we are all feeling far more enlightened on this side of the House about the details of this bill that has just been presented to us so recently.As my colleague has also mentioned normally we come to the second reading after having been through the select committee process where we would have heard submissions from the public who have raised concerns around the detail or the concept of the bill. We have been able to ask questions and we have had their responses back. We have had ministerial advice from the departments to be able to consider what the implications are and what this wording is conveying. In my experience even legislation that has been one page in length incredibly short has resulted in change. That is the usual process that we go through. We are here in this situation with a bill relating to housing which is an absolute core issue for this country at the moment. We know we have a housing crisis even if some members of that Government seem a bit shy about using that word. I have heard someone on that side use it occasionally slipping up and I am sure they got told off afterwards. But here we are on a major issue for this country having legislation passed under urgency.It is legislation—as we have heard several members on this side say—the detail of which is a little opaque. We are looking at the documents that have been given to us; I am looking at the departmental disclosure statement. What this bill is doing from what I can make out is that it is not going to affect a tenant’s experience directly. The actual bill itself though the context that it is sitting in is in relation to the passing over of State assets to other private property developers or community organisations.The actual bill itself will enable the Minister to have flexibility to tailor the contracts. We have been hearing a lot about flexibility. What they are saying specifically is that with tenants’ needs resulting in higher or lower tenancy management costs they can vary the terms of the contract make payments for vacant properties to guarantee a provider’s income stream and make offers for long-term fixed-price tenancies at prices that diverge from the market rent but benefit the Crown the provider and the tenant.We see mention of the tenant in there a couple of times but not that often despite the fact that we have been told this is all about the tenants; it is not about anybody else—it is not about the Government and it is not about the providers; it is about the tenants. Actually there is not much mention of the tenants from what I can see in this. There has been no consultation with any State housing tenants in the documents here. From what I am hearing from State house tenants in the community this is very unsettling. Communities are being destroyed at the moment and that is what people are telling us. Communities that have existed in Maraenui in Porirua in Glen Innes and around the country—longstanding communities are being destroyed. Yet we hear from the National Government that apparently it is the Government for big community. [Interruption] Well communities of constant transition and movement—that is actually not community Mr Doocey might I say.We are being told that this is about lower payments for providers in places where there is little ongoing demand. I really think that there is enough detail and complexity in there that deserves consideration and I do have some questions for the Minister We are being told that this bill will allow community organisations to get more money to meet the needs of clients. It is not necessarily even about the sale of houses but about leasing arrangements. I know Women’s Refuge gets houses through Housing New Zealand at the moment and the needs of women and children going into refuge are dealt with through separate contracts not through the housing-related contracts. So I am struggling to see where this fits and why those specific needs of tenants cannot be dealt with through existing contracting systems. I am also struggling to understand why Housing New Zealand would need more flexibility. There are questions to be answered and I really hope that at least at some stage in this debate we get some answers.