Davidson Marama: Housing Amendment Bill Housing Corporation (Social Housing Reform) Amendment Bill (No 2) Housing Restructuring and Tenancy Matters (Social Housing Reform) Amendment Bill (NO 2) — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavidson Marama: Housing Amendment Bill Housing Corporation (Social Housing Reform) Amendment Bill (No 2) Housing Restructuring and Tenancy Matters (Social Housing Reform) Amendment Bill (NO 2) — Third Readings[Sitting date: 18 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9178. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): Tēnā koutou katoa Mr Assistant Speaker and the House. I stand to take the third reading speech for the Green Party today for this legislation arising from the Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill which is most definitely legislation to privatise State housing. It is legislation that is shamefully exploiting the current housing crisis to do so under a guise and under an excuse of the provision of social housing. This legislation is an absolute travesty of good governance and I am proud as the spokesperson for social housing in the Green Party to strongly oppose this legislation. We have already seen—as many members have pointed out—exactly how this Government treats our lower-income people and we have already seen how this Government favours the upper 1 percent. We do know and we do have good cause to understand that this legislation will again favour public and private companies and private developers.I want to raise one of the things that one of the previous Government members talked about which was partnership. Partnership with whom? This legislation will strengthen partnership with offshore corporations and with private corporations. Where is the partnership with communities? Where is the real partnership with the people of New Zealand? For example in Glen Innes the lower-income people have been displaced from their communities under this Government to free up land—nice land next to water—that now has houses costing upwards of $600000 with most being much more expensive. That is what has happened to Glen Innes and those people absolutely do not feel that this Government has worked in partnership with them at all. I also want to acknowledge many of the elderly and sick from the Glen Innes community who have been at the forefront—who have been at the forefront—of their community’s campaign to have a voice and their community’s voice says they have not been part of any partnership process under this Government. So why do we need any other reason to understand that this legislation is absolutely a flog-off of State housing in favour of private ownership and in favour of the upper 1 percent? This is not at all a solution to the current housing crisis and because the Green Party proudly upholds our core values including social responsibility and appropriate decision-making it makes me even more proud to say that we strongly oppose this legislation which goes directly against those founding kaupapa of the Green Party.I do want to turn also as the spokesperson for Māori affairs to concentrate in terms of the impact on Māori. Māori have never collectively benefited from privatisation of State assets. We operate—traditionally and proudly and to this day—as a collective and Māori have never collectively benefited from privatisation of public and State assets.Carmel Sepuloni: Kia ora.MARAMA DAVIDSON: Yes I will say it again. So I too ask why the Māori Party is supporting this unprecedented transfer of public ownership assets into private ownership. I would have liked to see those members take a call. I do understand that some of their excuses for supporting this legislation include the very tiny possibility that some State housing land and assets may be taken by iwi. That is the tiniest possibility. That is not enough of a justification to support this legislation in terms of the trade-off of giving so much unprecedented power to Ministers for privatisation.In my role as Māori affairs spokesperson I will say that that is not enough—not enoughby far—justification for the Māori Party to support this legislation because we know that privatisation has never collectively benefited Māori. We also know that the houses are in such a terrible state that iwi might not want them but they are not getting them returned to them for free. They will have to buy them and they do not have first right of refusal to buy them under this legislation. Also they will be up against competing offshore larger megacorporations that have resources beyond what we can imagine. So I highlight that there is such minimal justification for anybody who thinks they are supporting Māori aspirations to be supporting this legislation. The trade-off is far too huge for Māori people collectively and collectively Māori have always traditionally been held strong because of the way we operate together. So I want to be very clear and I ask whether that is what the Māori think this legislation will enable iwi to do. Have those members actually read this legislation?I did want to come here and make those very clear statements on behalf of the Green Party. We absolutely oppose this unprecedented extraordinary transfer of power to two Ministers to be able to do what they wish with our public legacy with our public State homes. That absolutely—as I mentioned yesterday—does open this Government up to allegations of corruption. So not only are we flogging off a legacy—a proud generations’ worth foundation legacy—of ensuring that families have a good safe home to live in but we are also flogging off a legacy of good governance. We are also flogging off a legacy of New Zealand doing the right thing for our people. So absolutely we are opposed to this legislation. Then I did want to highlight again and be very clear as the spokesperson for Māori affairs in the Green Party that I say that this legislation absolutely does not support collective Māori aspirations. So I ask the Māori Party why it is supporting this legislation. Thank you.