McClay Todd: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
McClay Todd: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:12379] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 It gives me pleasure to rise and speak on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill this evening. The bill changes legislation that has been in force since 1986. Since that time we find that one-third of New Zealand households now live in rental accommodation. Indeed private rental housing is having a bigger impact on New Zealand’s social and economic outcomes than it did in 1986 when the Residential Tenancies Act came into force. 
I have an appreciation of both sides of this debate. Last weekend I was a tenant but with my family I have moved into homeownership. I am reliably informed that my wife is at home at the moment unpacking boxes—at least if the programme  
Desperate Housewives 
 is no longer on she will be unpacking them. I appreciate the need— 
Stuart Nash 
: You’re in trouble mate. I would stay in Wellington for the week. 
Dr Rajen Prasad 
: Too much information! 
TODD McCLAY 
:  
Hansard 
 will note that members opposite are interjecting. I know that those members tune in to  
Desperate Housewives 
 in their offices most nights of the week. 
I therefore have an appreciation of the challenges that tenants face and the uncertainty there can be if one has an unscrupulous landlord. But at the same time I believe that those who own properties view them in many cases not as a business but as their own homes and they too have rights as well as obligations. 
The reforms that this bill brings to the House tonight are long overdue. I believe that the Social Services Committee worked very well on this bill. We sought to balance the rights and obligations of the tenant with the rights and obligations of the landlord. I thank the very hard-working Minister of Housing Phil Heatley for the work that he has done in this term of Parliament in bringing this bill to the stage that it is. I also recognise that the previous Government introduced this legislation to the House and that it is to be completed in this term of Parliament. 
To my colleagues on this side of the House and to members opposite I say that I believe that the Social Services Committee members worked very well together. We shared concern in most areas that have been raised in the debate so far and certainly the concerns that many submitters had particularly tenants and their advocates. I think where we differed sometimes was only in the approach by which we would fix some of these issues and concerns. Generally the committee worked very well together and we had a lot of very good submissions that I think all members learnt from. 
The bill does a number of things; I will touch on them just briefly and then go into one area in a little more detail. This bill extends the coverage of the Residential Tenancies Act quite substantially. It clarifies a number of issues that submitters were concerned with particularly the responsibility of outgoings such as rates and water and exactly who should be responsible for those and in what conditions their responsibilities should be met. It also provides for new processes for terminating or renewing tenancy agreements. That is very important because—as I think a previous speaker opposite said—when somebody lives in a home whether or not they own it they want a certain amount of security. The bill goes a long way to providing that security for tenants. It encourages landlords and tenants to comply more fully with their obligations. It provides for the majority of tenancy disputes to be resolved more quickly fairly and cost-effectively. I think that is important for tenants but also for landlords. The bill improves the enforceability of Tenancy Tribunal orders. It enables steps to be taken in the case of unclaimed or uncollected bonds and for them to be refunded. It also deals with the issue of abandoned goods. 
The select committee received a number of submissions both from landlords and from tenants on this issue. The law as it stands states that if a tenant leaves a property and leaves behind goods depending upon the value of those goods the landlord has an obligation to store them at his or her own cost in some cases for an extended period of time. We realised in the committee that we needed to be very careful as goods are not abandoned in all cases yet the current law does not distinguish between those that are left to be collected and those that are merely abandoned when a tenant leaves under whatever circumstance. So what the committee did and certainly what this bill does is to continue the obligation upon landlords to act responsibly but to reduce some of the burden upon them and the extent of the periods of time when they might need to store those goods. That means that the storage of those goods would not always be at their cost. I think that that is a more balanced approach that means that landlords will need to act more responsibly but not at their full cost. 
I mention one submitter Richard Evans of Rotorua Rentals. He submitted and appeared before the committee. Mr Evans travelled to Wellington to provide information to us. Rotorua Rentals manages 800 properties in Rotorua. It is an extremely professional company. The experience that Mr Evans brought to the committee was extremely useful I believe. 
That just leaves me to thank the committee staff for their work the officials the experts from the Ministry of Housing and all submitters on this bill. They made it easier for the whole select committee to get to the position where the legislation before us now will do a great deal of good will provide greater protection to tenants but most important will provide a greater certainty to landlords and homeowners. I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.