Flavell Te Ururoa: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services AMENDMENT Bill — Second Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Weathertight Homes Resolution Services AMENDMENT Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:7164] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Kia ora ano tatou katoa. A couple of years ago a Labour Minister Dover Samuels spoke out about the lack of progress in addressing housing in Northland Eastern Bay of Plenty and on the East Coast. I absolutely agree with that member. His comments came following the tragic blaze at Herekino which claimed the lives of three children. The comments sat in the context of local general practitioners telling of cases where infections such as meningococcal disease were being spread because of sub-standard housing. This was a time when people were living with no flushing toilets no bathrooms and no septic tanks. In some homes toilet waste was being poured straight into the ground inviting hepatitis A. His comments were based on Labour’s promise to fix 2500 houses but over a year later work had started on only about 250. This was and still remains today the situation for too many Maori families. 
I know how real these issues are throughout my electorate of Waiariki. Indeed just last month I visited Ruatoki. I visited houses in poor condition reflecting low-quality workmanship. Many of them were rotten and leaking. When one house was removed last month it was evident that raw sewage remained. The houses are in a state of disrepair. They have been described as polyurethane Weet-Bix. These are not isolated cases. I am also aware that the community of Waitahanui in Taupo located in papakainga housing has suffered much the same plight as the result of housing being planted on swampland and the impacts of the low water-table. I know of one family forced to live in their sitting room due to the mould and the damp in the other rooms. 
What does this have to do with the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service? Everything and nothing. The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill has everything to do with addressing the leaky buildings crisis. It has everything to do with considering the wider scope of claims for weathertight deficiencies—deficiencies that cause real damage but as yet there have not been leaks. Sadly it has nothing to do with the deficiencies and damage that are still very much a part of the lot of those involved in the Maori housing story. 
 For evidence of that one need only turn to a report released in August of this year from Charles Waldegrave Peter King Tangihaere Walker and Eljon Fitzgerald. This was a joint collaboration between the Family Centre and Massey University. The report  
Maori Housing Experiences: Emerging Trends and Issues 
 outlines in some 218 pages the following conclusions: “Homeownership rates for Maori are lower than for the general population and have been falling since the 1950s … Overcrowding substandard housing causing health risks and inadequate heating have been identified as issues in need of attention for Maori. Economic conditions and family structure have affected the ability of households to afford adequate accommodation.” 
I come to this bill aware of Standing Order 107 and the need for all debate to be relevant to the question before the House and I ask this House how any member could possibly ignore the realities of lower-grade housing for Maori when we are considering a raft of proposals to enhance the assessment and resolution of leaky building claims for other New Zealanders. 
Let me be quite clear: the Maori Party supports absolutely the objectives of this bill to ensure that departments responsible for administering the legislation will be helpful to claimants. We believe that the public service is honour-bound to provide a service to the public that is efficient respectful and responsive. We welcome the specificity of providing guidance and assistance to claimants to help them to understand their assessment reports and to be aware of the advantages of early negotiation and to make the process faster and less costly. Surely these are the hallmarks of a transparent and accountable public service—that every effort is made to improve processes and to enhance case management. 
We are also pleased that the bill actually tries to do something about the recommendations from the 2002 Hunn report and the 2003 Government Administration Committee inquiry. The Hunn report identified the factors that contributed to leaky buildings and issued 25 recommendations to address the systemic failures within the building industry. The Government Administration Committee inquiry resulted in some 63 recommendations notably the significance of the development of consumer protection measures. So all up 88 recommendations later we have a substantial body of evidence about the need for speedy flexible and cost-effective procedures for the assessment and resolution of claims. 
Who could possibly argue with initiatives that try to improve protection for customers such as is envisaged by placing notices of Weathertight Homes Resolution Service claims on land information memorandum reports or the fact that the service will provide free assessments to determine the extent of water damage to affected homes and will provide access to mediation and adjudication services to help resolve disputes? Certainly not the Maori Party anyway. 
We support the establishment of a new Weathertight Homes Tribunal to provide strengthened adjudication services for consumers and we support the intention for the model of dispute resolution to be based on a more investigative approach. We believe that the proposals seem comprehensive and will do much to clean up the deregulation of the building industry. 
But I return to the concerns raised by Mr Samuels—the report I outlined earlier. To put the call—when will one standard of law also apply in the case of Maori housing? The study of housing experiences I referred to earlier builds on four crucial elements: literature review; analysis of census data; analysis of data from the Te Hoe Nuku Roa a longitudinal study of Maori households; and qualitative field study. The qualitative sample included six regions involving 70 people and eight focus groups. It was a very strong source of support to provide a basis on which to develop housing options for Maori from now on. 
The question we would ask is how this Government can justify spending $76 million on the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service since 2002 yet turn a blind eye to the fact that New Zealanders are squatting in shacks and caravans that families are squeezed into pensioner flats and that there are over 2250 run-down homes on the sub-standard list. The Maori Party housing policy makes an explicit commitment to ensuring that Maori housing experiences and realities are adequately researched and addressed. The study I have referred to in the House makes a significant contribution we think towards this goal. We believe that we must engage and encourage Maori participation in order to produce enduring housing solutions. We support the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Amendment Bill but we also place on record the urgent and ongoing need to make sure that the issues associated with Maori housing are given the due and serious consideration that they deserve. Kia ora tatou.