Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing): I welcome the opportunity to debate Part 3 which has been put forward by the Labour Opposition in a proposed amendment in the name of Phil Twyford on this bill because it exposes for everybody to see what a bunch of flakes those members are when it comes to housing policy. What this bill says is that if we just simply pass a bill that says that 10000 affordable houses will be built each year whammo! Magically it is going to happen! That is all you need to do. It is sort of like you know we could pass a bill through the House and say: Let's pass a bill that says everybody has a job. Let's pass another bill: everybody be cured and everybody be healthy." That is the sum total intellectual grunt of the Labour Opposition—a magical one-page amendment that is suddenly going to get 10000 houses a year built. It is laughable.What is so contradictory is that when we had the first part of this bill which would actually have provided some land to build houses—oh they are all opposed to that. They do not want us fast tracking the land planning process to get the houses built. Then when we come to say "Well actually we think we should use some vacant Crown land to build the houses"—oh no no no no. The Labour Party says you cannot do that. All you have got to do is magically pass this proposed Part 3 and you will get 10000 homes built.Here is some news for the Opposition: the number of new homes that are being built is growing at the fastest rate on record since 1922—Andrew Little: Half the rate of 1974.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —since 1922. No no let me just take Mr Little through it. In each of the last 4 years Mr Little—each of the last 4 years—residential investment has grown by more than 20 percent per year. It grew by 20 percent in 2012 another 20 percent on top of that in 2013 another 20 percent in 2014 and then again in 2015. Here is a challenge for Mr Little: tell me 4 straight years ever in the last century that you have had more than 20 percent compound growth in residential construction. Tell me when ever.Andrew Little: 1974 to 1978.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: He says 1974. Let us get the data—I have got it in front of me. In 1974 under the Kirk-Rowling Government when inflation was running at 15 percent and they offered mortgages at 3 percent you had one year in which house building boomed and then the country was paying the bills for it for the next 10 years. If Mr Little's model is that of a failed Government the 1972-75 Government man I want to be telling the electorate that because the financial damage that was done at that time was a debacle. It was a 1-year boom and it bust the following year.What is different is that this is a sustainable housing programme. This is a programme that has seen growth year after year 4 years in a row. Independent programmes show that in the next 3 years there will be record levels of building in Auckland to the point that a city the size of Whangarei is being built in this term of Parliament and in the next term of Parliament there will be another. Here is the problem: when it comes to Resource Management Act reform the Labour Party is opposed. When it comes to offering first-home buyers the help in getting a deposit with HomeStart they are opposed. When it comes to fast tracking a new unitary plan for Auckland—Phil Twyford: We voted for your HomeStart.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —they are opposed. When it comes to reform of the social housing sector I actually do not know whether they are for or against because one minute Mr Twyford is in favour and the next minute he is against. Actually every member of this Committee knows that Parts 1 and 2 of this bill will get more roofs over people's heads. They will get more houses built. Actually will I ask Sir Noel Robinson? Sir Noel Robinson says this bill is the difference between 500 houses being built in Papakura or not—500 houses in Papakura.Phil Twyford: We voted for that one Nick. We voted for that part of it.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No actually you voted against urgency and you voted against the introduction of this bill. Let it be plainly on the record that you blocked those. I say to members opposite that you cannot have a Wailing Wall of concern about people who are under stress on housing and then come down to this Parliament and oppose every practical measure that we bring to get houses built; every practical measure Mr Little you have opposed. Mr Little and Mr Twyford are not interested in solutions. They are interested in playing the politics getting the Wailing Wall of their inquiry but when it actually comes to the measures that will get homes built they are opposed. When you want to do things that will get houses built they are opposed.So I ask them this on this bill: why is it that the Auckland Council supports this bill but the Labour Opposition does not? I hear from Labour all the time that we should be listening to local government. Why is it that Local Government New Zealand supports the extension of the special housing areas but Labour and the Opposition parties do not—do not?Actually it is really strange—over the adjournment Labour said "We are going to declare a state of emergency over housing." and then we come to the House and we say "Actually there's a really practical thing we can do to get 8000 houses built and we need to go into urgency to make sure those 8000 houses are built." and what does it do? It opposes urgency. So can the next member speaking for Labour explain why they want a state of emergency declared on housing but why they will not sit down and do the hard work in this Parliament and pass the bills that are necessary to get the houses built."