Twyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 30 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5510. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū) to the Minister for Building and Housing: Does he stand by his statement that non-resident foreign buyers in the Auckland housing market are a non-event; if so on what empirical data does he base that?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing): My full statement was: “We know from the IRD data that the number of non-resident taxpayers with income or losses from rental properties has not changed in 5 years and is a non-event.” The actual number is 25000 as compared with the 1.75 million homes in New Zealand or about 2 percent. This number also includes a large number of New Zealand citizens and residents who live offshore but own a home in New Zealand. I do not share the member’s view that people with Chinese-sounding names are the root cause of our housing problem.Phil Twyford: What are the advantages to New Zealanders if any of allowing non-resident foreigners to trade our houses for capital—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am going to invite the member to ask that question again. There was a lot of interjection here. I did not hear the tail end of the question.Phil Twyford: What are the advantages to New Zealanders if any of allowing non-resident foreigners to trade our houses for capital gain?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The consistent advice that I have had from the Productivity Commission Treasury and my own ministry is that overseas buyers are not having a significant effect on house prices. I also note that in Sydney they have had greater house price inflation than in Auckland despite controls of the sort that the member proposes. I do not think a policy of allowing foreign property speculation from Australia but banning it from China as Labour proposes is a principled policy. I think it is something a lot less.Phil Twyford: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was a very straight question—Mr SPEAKER: The question was about the advantages. I will invite Phil Twyford to ask the question again so that it is absolutely clear to the Minister.Phil Twyford: What are the advantages to New Zealanders if any of allowing non-resident foreigners to trade our houses for capital gain?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I was in Auckland last night and actually met with a number of overseas interests that are buying and building a significant number of new homes for Auckland and given the supply challenge that we have actually that investment helps us to address those supply issues.Alfred Ngaro: E te Mana i te Whakawā. What reports has the Minister seen on the claim that the Auckland housing problem is the fault of people with Chinese-sounding names?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I have seen many reports disputing that people with Chinese-sounding names are to blame for housing affordability and the 30-year decline in homeownership. The Race Relations Commissioner called it shameful scapegoating. The Listener said it was demonising one ethnic group on highly questionable data and said that it was different only in scale from that which occurred in Nazi Germany. [Interruption] That is what the Listener said.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just bring the answer to a conclusion.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: We also saw Labour Party members resigning as a consequence. We saw others who were very disappointed that Andrew Little has become the Pauline Hanson of New Zealand politics.Phil Twyford: Why will he not back the vast majority of New Zealanders including the majority of National Party voters who want a ban on foreign buyers or is he right and they are all wrong?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member himself does not support a ban on all foreign buyers. He has said that he actually supports Australians being able to speculate on the New Zealand market which shows how shallow and opportunist the policy of members opposite is.Phil Twyford: Does he take responsibility after 7 years in Government for the fact that banks approved three times as many mortgages for investors as they did for first-home buyers?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: What that data showed was that 33 percent of new mortgages were granted to people who were investing in property. That is not surprising given that 35 percent of homes in New Zealand are rented. What I do take responsibility for is doubling—doubling—the rate of house builds. I draw attention to the pipeline report yesterday that shows that with this Government’s policies 80000 new homes are to be built in Auckland over the next 6 years. That is where this Government sees the solution lying.Phil Twyford: Is he concerned that a couple who according to the New Zealand Herald are listed on the electoral roll as students amassed Auckland property worth $26 million and gave $370000 to the National Party?Mr SPEAKER: Order! That last part of that question makes it entirely out of order. [Interruption] Order! I am inviting the member—I was quite happy to rule the question right out but the Minister obviously wants to answer the first part. [Interruption] Then the question is out of order. [Interruption] Order! I have a point of order.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On what basis is that question ruled out of order under the Standing Orders?Mr SPEAKER: I would have—[Interruption] Order! I am happy to explain. The Minister for Building and Housing is not responsible for any donations to a political party.Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: I just want to be clear with the member. If this is a fresh point of order I am happy to hear it.Chris Hipkins: It is a fresh point of order. It may be something that you want to consider and come back to the House on. Members often ask Ministers questions with reference to matters that they are not directly responsible for but that have a relevance on their responsibility. A donation to a party although the Minister may not be responsible for it can actually have relevance to the Minister’s portfolio.Mr SPEAKER: The member is now skating on very thin ice.Chris Hipkins: I’m not.Mr SPEAKER: Well I assure the member he is. We are relitigating a point. Political donations occur—we all know they do—but a Minister of the Crown is not responsible for political donations to a political party. [Interruption] Order! I am on my feet. There are many Speakers’ rulings confirming that.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: A further point of order? Again I just want to be clear because I have got to treat everybody in this House absolutely fairly. Is it a fresh point of order?Hon David Parker: It is. I accept your ruling. I accept your ruling and I would ask that the same level of sitting down of Ministers is applied when the Ministers refer to things that they have no responsibility for which is Labour Party policy. It is the same rule.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will do my best to do so when I see—[Interruption] Order! I have a very good mind to be asking Kris Faafoi to leave the Chamber on that basis; a very good mind indeed. [Interruption] Order! In answer to the point raised by the Hon David Parker I attempt to do my best. I may fail—miss—on the odd occasion but I will certainly do my best. When a Minister blatantly brings in an Opposition’s political policies I will do my best to shut that down. I call question No. 5 Paul Foster-Bell—[Interruption] Order! Again I have had to put up with another interjection from the Hon Annette King. I have given one warning. Because of the seniority of the member I will give a final warning. If it happens again in this question time the member will be leaving the Chamber.