10. PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) Link to this
to the Minister of Housing
Is her definition of “affordable housing” the same as that which appears in the general policy statement of the Affordable Housing: Enabling Territorial Authorities Bill that refers to “housing affordable to low and moderate income earners”?
Hon MARYAN STREET (Minister of Housing) Link to this
My definition is that, and much more besides. Affordability is a function of house prices, incomes, and interest rates and varies from region to region.
Why, according to the Housing New Zealand Corporation chairman, will first home buyers need an income of $70,000-plus to buy any of the 500 “affordable houses” on offer in the Minister’s flagship Hobsonville development?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
Affordability can be made possible by a Government that chooses to intervene actively to assist first home buyers, not by an Opposition whose only solution is the self-appointed housing spokesperson, Bob Clarkson. Affordability is actually created through a whole range of solutions, including greater supply of houses, the application of KiwiSaver contributions, Welcome Home Loans, shared equity proposals, and a whole range of issues.
Hon Harry Duynhoven Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Today you have repeatedly asked for people to be quiet when answers are given. I think it is pretty rude for someone to ask a question and then to have a barrage of interjection on the Minister when she is trying to answer it.
Madam SPEAKERIs the Minister confirming the chairman of Housing New Zealand Corporation’s statement that young Aucklanders will need $70,000-plus per annum to buy one of the Minister’s affordable homes; if so, how can she say they are affordable when the average household income is not even $70,000?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
The member clearly did not listen to my previous answer. Clearly the solution here is about creating affordability and being able to provide some application—some products that are able to bridge a gap between income and house price.
Why does the Minister use Hobsonville, Weymouth, and Tāmaki as flagship housing affordability solutions, when most Aucklanders do not work in those places and will not choose to live there—in fact, 3 million Kiwis do not, and will not—and even if they did the houses on offer are for higher-income earners or one has to enter into some joint ownership scheme with Housing New Zealand Corporation?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
Let me just give the member an example of some of the support that a project like Hobsonville is getting from everybody, except the local member until recently. Can I just say that in a statement made by the Deputy Mayor of Waitakere City, she states that the city of the future—she is referring to the city of Waitakere—encourages affordable housing as part of its housing mix in order to get to this place. It takes the stability of local and central government to make affordable housing and local high-end jobs happen together. This city council sees Hobsonville as a way of progressing economic development and increasing jobs and opportunity in its area. That is progress.
Gerry BrownleeI raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Three times now Mr Heatley has asked the Minister a relatively simple question. He has tried to help her by asking the question with different emphasis. I do not think it is acceptable for anyone to say that the Minister is addressing the question by reading a press release from a local council. This is a nationwide issue.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
Does the Minister intend to recommend to some of her clientele who get into trouble with constructions the sharper point of the National Party spokesperson Bob Clarkson’s solution, that the moment one gets into trouble with a project and it starts making losses one should get the ratepayers to pay for it?
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would ask you to reflect whether that is a reasonable and legitimate question. We know that Mr Peters is in some political trouble looking for a seat, but bringing his local fight into this House in that way is quite despicable.
Rt Hon Winston Peters Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. That is precisely what happened in Tauranga, and Mr Clarkson knows it. I am just wondering whether that, as a sound precedent in the past, could now be narrowed down to some Housing New Zealand Corporation clients.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. There are two things here. Perhaps you might reflect, firstly, that it has been very difficult for Mr Heatley to get an answer to a question he wants. Now you have ruled that the Minister can give a general answer to a question that Mr Peters asked that frankly should not be allowed to stand.
The question had a general policy intent behind it. It was not asking about a specific issue. Would the Minister please—
I am sorry I have ruled on this point, Mr Brownlee. If the member wants to raise a totally different point of order please feel free to do so.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. If I reached for the Standing Orders I would go to Standing Order 372, which deals with questions. Questions are to be of a specific nature. In this case, with all due respect to your ruling, you are saying that a specific example can then be taken as an example of something that would apply to a question of national interest. If that is the case then the Hon Maryan Street should have been required firstly to answer each of the questions that Mr Heatley asked, but if that is not the case then Mr Peters’ question should not stand.
I ruled that Mr Peters’ question stands. It was a perfectly acceptable question in terms of asking whether a policy matter could be applied. The Minister will now address the question.
Hon Dr Nick Smith Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My colleague Phil Heatley has three times asked questions about whether the Minister agrees with the chair of Housing New Zealand Corporation, an organisation for which she has ministerial responsibility, and she has not answered. She has now been asked a question from Mr Peters about an issue that is outside her portfolio. It was about private builders and it relates to the portfolio of the Minister for Building and Construction, not the Minister of Housing. The issue that Mr Peters has raised is the responsibility of Shane Jones because it is related to who pays for the cost of fixing houses that have been built by private developers and are not up to standard. I simply ask why it is that we cannot get answers for things the Minister is responsible for, but you are happy to allow her to answer questions for which she has no responsibility.
As the member knows perfectly well, no member can require a yes or no answer to a specific question. If members want that I invite them wholeheartedly to change the Standing Orders, for which I would be truly appreciative. But they do not read like that at the moment.
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
The member’s question does actually relate to issues under my portfolio, because this Government is keen to ensure that private developers, amongst others, contribute to providing greater supply of affordable houses into the market, but they have to be quality, sustainable, affordable houses. That is what we are looking for.
In light of that answer, how does she think forcing developers to provide cheap housing through the affordable housing legislation will work when Housing New Zealand Corporation itself cannot even provide cheap housing at Hobsonville when it has the economies of scale of Hobsonville; and how does she expect private developers to do it when Housing New Zealand Corporation is not doing it unless one is on $70,000 a year?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
Private developers are welcome to join us in this effort to provide affordable houses. In fact, a number of developers have indicated an interest in doing so, because there is a market for quality, sustainable, affordable houses. Those are the houses that will be available to low to modest to moderate income level households, so that people can afford to get into their first homes. That is what we want.
Why, under Labour, is someone considered to be a high-income earner by the Inland Revenue Department when he or she is on $60,000, but a low-income earner by Housing New Zealand Corporation when that person is on $70,000 and wants to buy one of its houses?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
The member refers to the household income, which is the standard level for accessing a Welcome Home Loan. That is two people earning $35,000 each. They are not high-paid workers. Their household income is the threshold at which a Welcome Home Loan kicks in.
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Minister started that answer by saying: “The member refers to …”, then told us what I referred to. I referred to the fact that the Inland Revenue Department considers someone to be on a high income when that person is on $60,000, yet Housing New Zealand Corporation considers someone to be on a low income when that person is on $70,000. She did not answer the question, and she misinterpreted me. Could she please answer the question.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
The situation is absolutely clear. What Housing New Zealand Corporation refers to and what the member is referring to is a household income of $70,000. What the member is referring to with the Inland Revenue Department is individual income of $60,000. Indeed, the National Party cannot have it both ways. It cannot argue one day that $60,000 is indeed a very low income and $70,000 is actually terribly, terribly high.
I seek leave to table a document that shows that $68,000 is the average household income according to Statistics New Zealand.
I seek leave to table the statement of the chair of Housing New Zealand Corporation that one will need a household income of $70,000 to buy one of these—
I seek leave to table “Affordable homes still too expensive”, from the New Zealand Herald.
Hon Dr Michael Cullen Link to this
Does the Minister consider it contributes to affordable housing if people buy an expensive and very good house next door in order to knock it down to build a tennis court; if not, will she be inviting Mr Heatley to take it up with Mr Key and advise him to start walking the walk, not just talking the talk?
Hon MARYAN STREET Link to this
I absolutely concur with that member’s point. Further to that, I would welcome any lifting of ambition on the part of the National Party to address the issues of housing affordability.