Davidson Marama: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavidson Marama: Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:9004. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): E Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnā koe huri rauna i Te Whare tēna koutou katoa.[Greetings to you Mr Assistant Speaker and to you all throughout it.]It is with some frustration that I rise to speak on behalf of the Green Party. We oppose this second reading of the Social Housing Reform (Transaction Mandate) Bill. This bill is purely to enable a flog off of public housing assets and at a time when we need more. Over the time of this Government the State housing stock has shrunk indeed. In New Zealand in 2016 we have a severe housing crisis and this bill is not driving to fix it. It is not. It is important to call this Government out in not wanting to address the severe housing crisis. Although we often hear of the crisis of housing affordability in Auckland with prices blowing out every day that is not the extent of our problems. There is also a crisis in the quality of housing and certainly the Government has not been a responsible landlord.As spokesperson for social housing I can say that my office receives far too many messages from whānau and I literally mean whānau—my whānau—across the country living in both Housing New Zealand and private rental housing who are desperately trying to get action on warming up and fixing their homes so that their whānau can live safely.We also know that there is a crisis in the levels of severe housing deprivation also known as homelessness and I do want to take the time to enforce that this bill is not driving to fix homelessness. I think now of women with children particularly Māori women who in just the past year or maybe 6 months are having to crowd into friends’ garages—also Māori women with children—because they are unable to find a home most definitely in the rental market both public or State provided and private. I am thinking of them right now as I am in this House as a Māori woman and understanding very clearly that this bill is not even wanting to pretend to want to help those very people.I have learnt about homelessness that it is very difficult to get any information any solid information or any information at all in fact about what the Government is doing and the Government refuses to measure and get data on it. However we know from those working on this issue in the community that it is getting worse by the day. There is no national policy framework to address homelessness no Government agency or ministry responsible and accountable for homelessness no welfare response and no housing response let alone the whole-of-Government approach that is required. The mind boggles as to how the Government can simply ignore the disgraceful reality that increasing numbers of New Zealanders including in my home community of South Auckland are living in streets in cars in garages and in charity shelters. It is a moral disgrace and a governance disgrace and this bill certainly is not aiming to help that.So when we know that there is a crisis in housing affordability a crisis in the quality of rental homes and a crisis in the levels of severe housing deprivation and homelessness then we know that the scale of our housing issues is massive. They require the urgent attention and commitment of this House—and this bill is not it—but instead we have this bill. The lack of ambition and concrete solutions in it is striking because it is not even trying to do that. More than that this bill has the potential to substantially undermine the provision of public housing in this country. What this bill is about is the Government extending its pervasive privatisation agenda into the area of social housing and abdicating its responsibility to ensure New Zealanders have secure and healthy housing.The bill also puts extraordinary powers in the hands of Ministers cutting across the due process and accountabilities of the Housing New Zealand Corporation board. Extraordinarily the Government sees its own Ministers rather than Housing New Zealand as being the most qualified to manage the ownership of our $18 billion State housing assets. There are no constraints on whom or what these assets are transferred to. They can and probably will be sold to overseas interests.The Government claims it wants to transfer these homes to New Zealand community housing organisations but we know that the Salvation Army and other organisations have made it clear that they are not in a position to buy these rundown homes which have been badly badly managed by Housing New Zealand and renovating them is too big a cost for those community organisations. So we want to see more support for community housing organisations yes but not at the expense of State housing. The driver for community housing should not be that the Government simply wants to shirk off a core Government responsibility. So yes the Green Party understands that good community housing where organisations are able to step up is vital and that this must sit alongside State housing as a core and vital infrastructure.I myself have longstanding experience in the real impacts of this privatisation agenda on our community. I have tried to stay connected to the residents’ campaign in the Glen Innes community which resisted the sell-off of its State homes to the Tāmaki Redevelopment Company. Property developers are the group that will benefit from this bill. The residents of Glen Inness have indeed been vindicated in their fight and their arguments. Newly developed housing in Glen Innes is being sold for between $600000 and $800000. That is not affordable. Since this sell-off began land values in Glen Innes have increased from $400000 to over $800000—$800000. This is gentrification pure and simple. I am proud that the Green Party opposes this bill. Kia ora.