Moroney Sue: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Moroney Sue: Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:664;Page:12195] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 I will make a contribution on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill. Although I am not on the Social Services Committee and have not had the opportunity to hear what sounds like some very fine submissions on the bill the issue of letting fees is an important one in every single community in our country none more so than in the community of Hamilton. 
Even though we are in the Chamber debating once again legislation that started out as good robust Labour Government legislation it is legislation that yet again is being watered down by the Government. Even though we are debating such watered-down legislation at least some progress is starting to be made on this issue although Labour would like to see much more progress than is possible in the bill before us. 
My colleague Moana Mackey spoke in very fine detail about letting fees. This is a classic issue of trying to balance the difference between the haves and the have-nots. Generally the people who are landlords have the financial capability and therefore the power in this relationship. They not only own their own home that they live in but also have enough financial assets to own other homes that other people can live in. They are the haves. 
Then we have the have-nots. They are the people who for many many reasons—whether financial or a deliberate decision not to own property—are not in a position of owning and holding property. Therefore they heavily rely on some form of regulation to protect their interests. As we have heard those protections are currently not strong enough. However I would argue that the bill before us does not make them strong enough. It does make some improvements and I acknowledge the Minister of Housing for his work on that but we need to go an awful lot further. The Minister has picked up a previous Minister’s work and good on him for doing that. 
I will dispel a myth in relation to what I will call the Rugby World Cup amendment so that people understand what I am talking about. Labour members are proposing giving tenants some certainty in the situation where a major event comes along and landlords see an opportunity to make a lot of money because accommodation needs will be very high in their city. I want to dispel the myth that this is an Auckland-only issue. We are talking about the Rugby World Cup and the city I live in Hamilton will have exactly this issue as well. On behalf of tenants in Hamilton I support Labour’s amendment to make sure there are some protections so that people cannot be thrown out of their accommodation in order to make space for landlords to bring in people who are prepared to pay more because of a lack of accommodation in our city. And it will not just be for the Hamilton-based games of the Rugby World Cup because there is a very good proposal for Hamilton to have a passenger train service during the course of the Rugby World Cup. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Where to? 
SUE MORONEY 
: From Hamilton to Auckland. People with foresight and vision can see why that would make a big difference. If that proposal goes ahead Hamilton will take the overload from Auckland and lots of people will stay in Hamilton. 
It is my view that I do not want to see one family or one child put out of the place they call home because some landlord in Hamilton Auckland Christchurch or wherever wants to exploit their ability to make a bigger profit over the period of the Rugby World Cup or any other event for that matter. I think it says a lot about our country if we are prepared in that circumstance to allow people with low incomes or people with children to be turfed out of their homes in order that their landlords can make a greater profit than they need to. They would be turfing people out who are paying enough rent to cover the landlords’ costs so the only reason that it would occur was that the landlords wanted to make a profit.