Smith Nick: Building Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Smith Nick: Building Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:645;Page:14729] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 In beginning the debate on clauses 1 2 and 3 I want to draw attention to the statement made by the Governor of the Reserve Bank Dr Alan Bollard this morning. In saying that New Zealanders would not see any decline in their interest rates he said that cost increases in the non-tradable sector are providing inflationary pressures which means that there can be no room for relaxing the cash rate. One may ask what that has to do with this bill. It has everything to do with this bill because we have seen that the Government’s Building Act is adding to those exact same inflationary pressures in the non-tradable sector—basically Government charges—that are resulting in high inflation which is impacting on ordinary New Zealanders. 
How will it impact? There are 230000 New Zealanders whose mortgages come up for renewal this year. The Reserve Bank governor’s message today means that those families will face increases in their interest rates as the banks roll those mortgages over. Those 230000 families will be facing the second-highest interest rates in the developed world because this incompetent Government keeps driving up the regulatory costs on areas like building. I say to the Government members opposite that it is time they did something for those mortgage-belt families. It is time that the Government recognised that its Building Act 2004 is a major problem. It has resulted in huge increases in cost. It has resulted in huge increases in bureaucracy. 
Let me just go through some of the areas where the Building Act is driving up costs. Firstly let us look at consent costs. Today in the House I have outlined all of the councils that have had to increase their building consent fees because of the provisions in this bill. The Nelson City Council has increased its fees by 50 percent the Tasman District Council has increased them by 35 percent and the Dunedin City Council has increased them by 67 percent. Those increases have been made in 1 year. How can a Government that is driving a strategy around housing affordability then pass a Building Act that is driving up costs to that sort of order? 
That is just one area. The development levies which were driven through on to the councils have trebled under this Government. They have gone from an average level of $8000 per section to $25000 per section. When the Government introduced them it said that it would sock the big rich fat developers with a development levy. Well only the fools on the other side of the Chamber would believe that it is actually the developer who pays the development levies. The levies are just passed on to the price of the section or the house and that is one of the reasons why section prices have more than doubled over the last 5 years. Can members believe that it costs more to buy a section today than it did to buy a house when Labour came into Government? A section today costs more than a house cost when Labour came into Government. 
National’s frustration with this Building Amendment Bill is that there is absolutely nothing in it at all to address the crisis in house affordability—nothing at all. When we see the crocodile tears from the Minister of Housing Maryan Street and when we hear the words from the Prime Minister— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: The next member for Nelson. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Oh Darren Hughes is saying that somehow Maryan Street will be the next member for Nelson. Well I will tell the Minister why she will not be. A week after she came to Nelson and talked about home affordability the council had to lift building fees by 50 percent. In the Tasman District we have had a 35 percent increase in building fees. Then we have Maryan Street’s Affordable Housing: Enabling Territorial Authorities Bill. Do members know what the Nelson City Council says about it in today’s newspaper? It says it is the worst bill—the worst bill—to address housing affordability. My council the Nelson City Council is apolitical. It is apolitical. And here is my own council saying that Maryan Street’s bill is a dog—a dog! [ 
Interruption 
] I say to Darren Hughes that the words of the Nelson City Council are mild compared with what the Tasman District Council is saying about that bill. That council is referring to it as a joke—a sick cynical trick on the people of New Zealand. I am pleased Darren Hughes is waving goodbye because we in this Chamber all know that Nathan Guy will clean him up in that electorate because of the sorts of dopey policies we see in this Building Amendment Bill.