8. PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) Link to this
to the Minister of Housing
Why did Housing New Zealand Corporation dispose of 420 houses, including 149 by sale, in the 2002-03 financial year, 563 in 2003-04 and 510 in 2004-05; and what is the Government’s policy on the sale and disposal of State houses?
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Housing) Link to this
As part of normal business, Housing New Zealand Corporation disposes of properties which become vacant in areas of low demand, when leasing arrangements with private owners expire, or when houses are demolished or shifted for redevelopment. Some were also destroyed by fire. Throughout the last 7 years under Labour, the total number of State houses has significantly increased. Unlike the National Party, this Government does not have a policy of selling State houses while we have families in urgent need of secure accommodation.
What are the Minister’s plans for the $520,000 State house in Invercargill, the $690,000 State house in Christchurch, and the State house in Auckland worth $2 million, so that we get more State houses in those cities for the same investment?
The value of those State houses is in the land they sit on, not the homes themselves. The Government has asked the Housing New Zealand Corporation, as a prudent landlord, to actively look at each of those high-value properties when they become vacant to determine whether the property should be sold, with the proceeds reinvested in new houses elsewhere; whether the site has redevelopment potential and can accommodate more houses on it; or whether we should rent the house to a new tenant.
H V Ross Robertson Link to this
What steps has the Government taken to increase the number of State homes?
Since the change of Government in 1999 we have added more than 6,000 homes to the State housing stock, and 827 homes since the last election. We still have a long way to go to recover the 13,000 houses that National sold during the 1990s—13,000 houses sold mostly to speculators.
Barbara StewartDoes the Minister agree with the assessment contained in New Zealand’s History Online that sales of State houses “skyrocketed during the 1990s, fuelled by National’s desire to reduce the state housing stock”?
Why are thousands of needy Auckland families allowed to languish on the waiting list while three lucky Auckland families enjoy State houses worth well over $1.4 million, and one very lucky tenant lives under a $2 million roof?
Gordon CopelandI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am afraid that it is a predictable point of order, it is just to say that I could not hear the latter part of the Minister’s answer.
Madam SPEAKERH V Ross Robertson Link to this
How was the Government’s policy on the sale of State houses developed?
The Government worked with community organisations and churches to develop our housing policy because we were forced to pick up the pieces for shattered families locked out of State houses by market rents and an aggressive sell-off of State houses. I can only speculate as to how much influence property speculators had in the development of National’s housing policy—perhaps it was more “cash for policy”!
With the Minister having been in Government for 7 years now and the waiting list at 14,000, why does he not better arrange the housing stock and get more houses for his bucks if he really cares about low-income people?
We would have 13,000 of those families or individuals off the list if National had not sold off the houses.
Does not the idea of trading in grossly high-value houses for higher numbers of respectable but average-priced houses fit in with what the Minister is already doing, given that the Minister disposes of 400 State houses year in, year out for all sorts of reasons, and why does he not trade up the $2 million one?
The member clearly was not listening to my earlier answers when I said that we would look at it as those houses become vacant. I remind the member that the 400 houses he refers to could be many, many hundreds of kilometres from Auckland. Some of them have burnt down, and some of them were leases we have terminated because they were owned by private landlords. Once again the member does not have his facts right.
What confidence should needy families on the waiting list have in this Minister’s conscience, when he accepts State house tenants who are earning $95,000-plus after tax, tenants who are running boarding houses with five, six, and seven boarders, tenants who vandalise State property, and now other tenants who are enjoying the comfort of million-dollar homes?
What an astonishingly short memory that member has. Market renters entered State houses under the period of the National Government. The $2 million house that the member quoted a few minutes ago was tenanted 8 years ago, under a National Government.
I seek leave to table question for written answer No. 11513, which shows the valuation of State housing across the country.
I seek leave to table the three last annual reports of the Housing New Zealand Corporation, which show it sells 500 houses year in and year out.
I seek leave to table a press release from my office, which illustrates that National sold 13,000 houses during its period in office.