Twyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 30 April 2015. Volume:704;Page:3075. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]4.PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū)to the Minister responsible for HNZC: Does he stand by his statement: “The Government owns 1 in 16 houses in Auckland and we need to do a better job with them for the sake of tenants and aspiring homeowners as well as for the neighbourhoods they live in and the wider city”; if so what experience does the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company have that will allow them to do a better job for tenants than Housing New Zealand?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for Building and Housing)on behalf of theMinister responsible for HNZC: Yes we need to address the 1 in 16 homes owned by the Government in Auckland particularly those close to the city where the homes are old and cold the wrong size and on big sections that can be better utilised. The job at Tāmaki can be better done by the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company for three reasons. Firstly the company is in partnership with Auckland Council and the redevelopment involves changes to roads to reserves to recreational facilities and to infrastructure. Secondly it is better connected to the Tāmaki community through extensive consultation over the last 2 years. Thirdly the tenancies of existing houses need to be carefully managed during the redevelopment and it makes sense to have one agency doing the whole job. The people leading the company like Brian Donnelly and John Holyoake have the extensive experience to deliver the goods.Phil Twyford: How will forcing the fledgling Tāmaki Redevelopment Company which has no experience of being a landlord to become one of the biggest landlords in the country help it to deliver on a large and complex urban renewal project to get aspiring homeowners into their first home?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I think anybody in this House who has met Brian Donnelly the chair of the New Zealand Housing Foundation would have huge confidence in him his board and its new chief executive John Holyoake who has extensive housing development experience. But here is the real point: does it make sense to have one organisation doing the redevelopment and another managing the tenancies in a complex project involving the redevelopment of existing houses? The key driver for the Government is that you need to have one agency both doing the redevelopment and managing the tenants as they move from those older houses into the newer warmer drier and more intensive housing that we are building.Phil Twyford: What is the market value of the 2800 Housing New Zealand properties he is transferring to the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company and does he think it is risky to hand over a massive taxpayer-owned asset like this to an embryonic organisation with a budget of $4 million and fewer than 20 staff?Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Dr Nick Smith can answer either of those questions.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The book value of the assets is $1.2 billion. The member in his comments this morning was out by more than twofold. Do we have confidence in people like Brian Donnelly and the board to be able to manage those assets? Absolutely we do and I would challenge the member on this: what happened to the houses these same houses in Tāmaki for the 9 years of the last Labour Government? They were left uninsulated unmaintained and in a disgrace and I have got far more confidence in the Brian Donnellys and the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company to look after these houses properly and to redevelop them.Joanne Hayes: What is the latest data on housing in Auckland particularly the new build data and how does it compare with when National first became Government?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The building consent data for March which has come out today shows new consents for Auckland of 756 homes the best for the month of March in 10 years. This is more than treble the number of 209 that were issued in Auckland in the last month of the previous Government. The annual data is equally positive with 7940 homes consented in Auckland in the last year compared with 4400 before we had the Auckland accord. The national data shows that over 25000 new homes are being built the best data in 8 years showing the progress this Government is making.Phil Twyford: Does he agree with the Minister for Building and Housing that today’s building consent figures—7900 in Auckland in the last year—are encouraging given that Auckland needs 13000 per year just to keep up with population growth as well as the 20000 shortfall built up under his watch?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I would remind the member that during the course of the previous Government new house builds in Auckland dropped to just 200 a month—just 200 a month—and the figures for the last month are not 200 but 756 homes in the last month. Since we have had the housing accord building consents in Auckland have gone from 4000 a year to 8000 a year. It is true that with the vast numbers of New Zealanders not leaving for Aussie we need still more and that is why we have announced initiatives like the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company which like every other positive initiative members opposite oppose.Phil Twyford: Is he aware that BNZ economist Tony Alexander calculates that if the level of household overcrowding in Auckland is to be reduced to the level found in the rest of the country the city would need to build an additional 76000 houses on top of the 13000 needed just to keep up with population growth when the current build rate on the Minister’s 6-year watch is only a pathetic 7900 a year; and how many of his 100000 homes shortfall will his latest scheme in Tāmaki provide?Mr SPEAKER: Again any one of those numerous questions—the Hon Dr Nick Smith.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No I do not accept the analysis. Let me tell you very simply why. We have quite low occupancy of houses in for instance some parts of provincial New Zealand like Invercargill and like the West Coast. That is because house prices in those areas are quite low and people have quite low numbers of occupancy of bedrooms. That is perfectly logical in those areas. What Mr Alexander does is say that if we have the same occupancy rate as those areas then you need those massive numbers.Phil Twyford: So it’s OK for Auckland to be overcrowded? That’s OK?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No actually the truth shows that there are a large number of vacant bedrooms in many of those communities and that is quite reasonable in those communities. If the member opposite is saying that he thinks there is a deficit of that size I simply think his analysis is flawed.Phil Twyford: Why is he transferring 2800 houses to the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company when it never asked for them and has not expressed any desire to become a landlord in its annual report its constitution any of its documents on its website or when it appeared before the Local Government and Environment Committee last month; and is he concerned that being one of the country’s largest landlords will distract it from the challenging task of leading the Tāmaki redevelopment?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: It is absolutely professional for the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company to not disclose at the select committee or in other documents the Government’s announcement today. That is how we do it on this side of the House. We do it professionally. We do it as a team. The team at the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company is excited about the fact that it is very difficult for it to do the redevelopment when it does not ask for the property.Phil Twyford: They never asked for it.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well I simply challenge—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I have heard enough of the answer and I would be grateful if we did not have that level of interjection.