A tale of two housing policies – Steven Joyce writing National’s on Twitter

Written By: - Date published: 7:01 am, July 11th, 2016 - 105 comments
Categories: housing, labour, national, Steven Joyce - Tags: , , ,

Housing and homelessness has been top of the public agenda this year. Over the weekend Labour rolled out a genuinely comprehensive response:

Build more affordable houses
Create an Affordable Housing Authority to fast-track development in our cities
Build 100,000 affordable homes across the country
Growing the building workforce
Remove barriers that are stopping Auckland growing up and out

Crack down on speculators
Ban foreign speculators from buying existing homes
Tax property speculators who flick houses within five years
Consult on rules around negative gearing to prevent abuse by speculators ….

Support for those in need
Focus Housing New Zealand on helping people, not making a profit
Help 5,100 more Kiwis into emergency housing every year
Require all rental homes to be warm, dry, and healthy.

See Labour’s page for details under all these headings, and there’s plenty of media discussion. In contrast to the dithering Nats, Labour is promising to actually build houses – to fix the problem.

National are going to have to do better in response than Steven Joyce managed yesterday. His panicked series of tweets was unhinged.

Really no.

You’re selling houses. Labour wants to build them. Spot the difference much?

Let’s hope Joyce is just lying there, because if he genuinely doesn’t understand he’s an idiot. It works like this: build a batch of houses, sell them, use the proceeds to build the next batch of houses. Repeat. The $2bn is just to get you started.

joyce hnz panic tweet

That’s a beauty! Steven Joyce is now writing Nat policy on Twitter. The promise to forego 2 years of HNZ dividend has just been made up on the fly.

Extraordinary.

And all Key can manage is to try and pass the buck to the Reserve Bank, then get all pissy when they pass it back.

National are unable to take the actions required to actually address the crisis. They are ideologically opposed to some (significant curbs on speculators, capital gains tax) and appear to be simply incapable of others (build some damn houses!).

We need a Labour / Green government.


105 comments on “A tale of two housing policies – Steven Joyce writing National’s on Twitter”

  1. Gangnam Style 1

    HNZ is forgoing dividends next 2 years! Well done Labour & Greens!

    • leftie 1.1

      Lol yeah, Joyce really put his big foot in it with that one, didn’t he?

      • dukeofurl 1.1.1

        he really means ‘ordinary dividends’ they would still take ‘special dividends’ they would get from selling off the state houses’

        “Phil Twyford to the Minister Responsible for HNZC (14 Nov 2014): Will the proceeds of Housing New Zealand house sales be required to be paid out to the Government as a special dividend?
        Hon Bill English (Minister Responsible for HNZC) replied: No decisions have been made.”

        • Michelle 1.1.1.1

          No decision has been made on such a contentious issue ( HNZ proceeds) shows how they make policy up, ad hoc policy from an ad hoc government who just make it up as they go along after 8 years of this bull shert surely NZers have woken up to this lazy , shall be right attitude.

    • Kevin 1.2

      Wait till Bill finds out…

      • Michelle 1.2.1

        Bill is use to this kind of behavior he just makes it all up as he goes along and rolls with everything. And when Labour or someone else comes up with a good policy he swings into defensive mode and becomes all of a sudden an expert on finances yet he has us in 120 billion in debt 13 times more than what we owed the WB under Labour.

  2. John 2

    And Joyce wonders why people throw dildos at him. Bloody muppet.

  3. leftie 3

    Thanks Anthony Robins, great post. Joyce has really shown himself up. The Nats have NOTHING.

    Yes we do need a Labour/Green government, it’s EXACTLY what this country needs, and it’s worth voting for.

    • TC 3.1

      They dont intend to do anything as the land bankers and speculators that back them have probably been assured the status quo will remain as long as they do.

      • leftie 3.1.1

        You’re confused. Land bankers and speculators support National. You didn’t read Little’s speech and Labour’s announcements did you?

  4. Stuart Munro 4

    Joyce is probably the smartest and most competent of the Gnats – a tragic indictment of the other shambling morons who make up this pathetic caricature of a government.

  5. Gangnam Style 5

    Claire Trevett “The ski slopes are open. Pokemon Go! is distracting the nation. That could mean nobody is listening to politicians playing show and tell with comprehensive housing plans either.” – shows her priorities. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11672095 I think she had to have a sit down in the shade after giving Little kudos. (& wait til Key was out of the country).

  6. Greg 6

    Joyce is one of the three who appear most with Key,
    I call them the, Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

    It wont help a majority of the poorer workers in the wealth divide,
    but at least its framing some policy.,.for those who can get up.

  7. mary_a 7

    Hmm … National in usual cheating form when it’s running out of policies. Leaving it to Labour/Greens to set the housing plans now it seems, then make up similar policies on the hoof, claiming them as being Nat’s policy all along!

    Steven Joyce needs to continue to this, because he’s sounding desperate now, making more of a fool of this government than it already is!

    With an idiot mouthpiece like Joyce, it’s looking more positive for a change of government coming up.

    Bring on the election!

    BTW where is Key? In Hawaii for the next month, the time Parliament is in recess? Avoiding the hard questions yet again!

  8. dv 8

    A lot of misunderstanding about this policy release.

    It is actually the Natz releasing their policy to test it in the echo chamber.

    Oops sorry Mary you got there first.

  9. Jenny Kirk 9

    Really good stuff – thanks rOb for putting up Joyce’s silly twitters – makes for a smile on a gloomy (weather-wise) Monday morning.

  10. Incognito 10

    So @nzlabour “big housing announcement” turns out to be an endorsement of the current govt’s programme w a few minor tweaks

    Excellent! Joyce is essentially endorsing Labour’s plans (imitation – flattery) and he’s made it impossible to now ‘destroy’ these down to the ground without taking National’s ‘plans’ down at the same time. Still, the Nats can self-destruct like any other so nothing would surprise me.

    I must say that Joyce has Twitter ‘charisma’ in spades.

    • Stuart Munro 10.1

      Yes – it’s brilliant for Labour – they should release a bunch of new ‘National’ policies while Joyce is on the ropes. Lord knows the country has enough problems, Labour & Greens can govern from the opposition benches since the Key kleptocracy is too lazy to do its job.

  11. jcuknz 11

    I am sure John Key is working hard o’seas for NZ interests [sarc]

  12. ianmac 12

    Perception is everything.
    Labour has a plan? Tick.
    Labour has passion? Tick.
    Labour has a Leader? Tick.
    National are petulant? Tick.
    National mislead? Tick.
    National are tired? Tick.

    • AmaKiwi 12.1

      @ ianmac

      “Perception is everything.”

      Absolutely, which is why the Smiling Assassin has survived so long. Smiling lies no longer convince when I see it everyday in my life:

      – the insane rent I am paying on my landlord’s mortgage,
      – the impossibility of me ever being able to buy my own house,
      – the people sleeping in vans on my street,
      – the obscene wealth flaunted in the Assassin’s neighborhood.

      • Gangnam Style 12.1.1

        “the obscene wealth flaunted in the Assassin’s neighborhood.” Soon to be on Bravo TV4. They took off free after school programming for it.

    • leftie 12.2

      +1000 Ianmac

    • Redelusion 12.3

      Labours latest big game changer ✅

  13. Pat 13

    Joyce is well named as Dildo Baggins and National care not that housing is unaffordable for the great unwashed and will not become actively involved in construction BUT….

    ….Labour has missed an opportunity to change the publics perception of politics with this release.
    They have made some moderate moves on their previous Kiwibuild policy but still appear to wish to be all things to all people. having had 8 years to develop a comprehensive housing policy (or even nearly 2 since the last election loss) this has the appearance of something cobbled together in the past few weeks. There is a lack of detail on the funding model, who and how the work will be undertaken by and importantly a continuation of the denial that all this can be achieved without an impact on current house values.

    If the likes of Brexit have taught us anything it should be that many voters are seeking some honesty in politics and that politicians need to start being upfront and stop hiding behind obfuscation.

    Labour …better on housing than National but not so different on politics sadly.

    • red-blooded 13.1

      “….Labour has missed an opportunity to change the publics perception of politics with this release.
      They have made some moderate moves on their previous Kiwibuild policy but still appear to wish to be all things to all people. having had 8 years to develop a comprehensive housing policy (or even nearly 2 since the last election loss) this has the appearance of something cobbled together in the past few weeks.”

      So, what WOULD be a comprehensive housing policy, in your eyes, Pat?

      An let’s remember that the Nats (with all the advantages conferred by control of ministries, access to ministry researchers and other personnel…etc) have comprehensively failed in this area. They blame others, Labour are past all that and want to get on with things. We could see “being all things to all people” as one of the fundamental aims of a government (of the people, for the people, by the people). So,
      Labour are thinking about first home buyers, those who need State houses and those in private rentals, with those who are currently shut out of all those options as their motivating concern. Good on them; I hope they get a chance to roll up their sleeves and get on with it.

      • leftie 13.1.1

        Spot on Red-Blooded !!

      • Pat 13.1.2

        Changing the perception of politics and being comprehensive isn’t served by pretending a near doubling of output (if possible) and a capping of price will merely restrict price growth to single digits into the future, nor brushing off the source of the required skill base to achieve the goal and it certainly isn’t served by point scoring language by shadow ministers that suggest the motivation is to get one over the government rather than solve a problem…..we’ve had 8 years of that BS already.

        Comprehensive?

        http://www.labour.org.nz/housing

        “increased house-building will require a larger workforce. Labour’s Dole for Apprenticeships policy will subsidise employers to take on around 4,000 young people for on the job training in fields including building and construction. Labour’s policy of three years free post-school education will see tens of thousands more people study in all fields, including building and construction. KiwiBuild is projected to create 5,000 new jobs at its peak.”

        It is a tweaking of existing policy with no real linkage to other areas of policy that will be required to support it….finance, immigration, training and employment.

        As said it is infinitely superior to Nationals ongoing attempts to make the most noise while doing as little as possible but it is an opportunity missed and to me at least suggests a lack of real vision and more a case off something needs to be done, and this is something.

    • leftie 13.2

      But have Labour had 8 years to develop this plan? It’s only been since Andrew Little became leader that Labour have pulled themselves together and started working as a team. I didn’t think Andrew Little’s speech outlining Labour’s housing plan at the party’s centenary celebrations was being dishonest and not upfront or hiding behind obfuscation. Don’t see how you came up with that.

      How would you have changed the public’s perception of politics with this release? And how much detail do you think a speech like that should have had?

      IMO, quite the contrary, I thought the plan was well thought out, just enough detail at this stage not to drown it. I felt that Labour had listened and taken on board what they had heard, and I see nothing wrong in that.

      “Labour …better on housing than National but not so different on politics sadly.”
      Surely that’s an understatement.

  14. Michelle 14

    Joyce needs to clean up his own mess in his own port folios

    • GregJ 14.1

      My port tends to come in bottles but I’ve been known to hide some in my folios! 😉

      (Just joshing!)

  15. Kevin 15

    Steven Joyce is the ‘mad Father Jack’ of the Nacts. Whenever alternative policy is put forward he comes out with his own version of tits, arse or feck.

  16. Patrick 16

    I heard Bill English argue this morning that the big problem with Labour’s initiative is the capacity to achieve it (builders etc). But if Steven Joyce claims National’s policy is virtually the same then how are they solving it? Can’t have it both ways Bill and Stephen. No coherence in your policies or arguments!!!

    • leftie 16.1

      The fact is, it is achievable, Labour have done it before.

    • Redelusion 16.2

      Dufuss the arguement is labour trying to add on top what is already stretched building capacity,

      • ropata 16.2.1

        Deliberately stretched by Gnats leaky homes debacle and the inefficiencies of a market controlled by property speculators and foreign interests and NIMBYs

  17. fender 17

    On RNZ yesterday Joyce called Labours housing policy “underwhelming”, he then said it was basically the same as their own!

    • dv 17.1

      Joyce was saying te NATZ policy was underwhelming!!!

      • Sabine 17.1.1

        well for once Joyce is correct. the housing policy put forward by the National Party led Government is underwhelming. We can’t do it is the best one can put their policy, the worst is “We won’t do it cause it would cut Profits and undermine Investors and Speculators”.

        So I must give Joyce a head up or maybe throw a dildo at him, cause he is right. The National Party Policy on housing is underwhelming. 🙂

  18. TC 18

    Dont hold our breath for a journo to ask Bill the impact of the dividend being foregone on his rubbery budget.

    If labour were in they’d be screaming about this and demanding updated forecasts so c’mon Bill save them the trouble and do a dildo baggins projection.

    • Nic the NZer 18.1

      Yes thats because the surplus is entirely a meaningless political game. It has less meaning than the exchange rate which is also frequently a political game (where we celebrate parity with Australia which undermines our exporters success).

      Demanding the govt be consistent with its (in reality) meaningless games seems foolish.

      • TC 18.1.1

        Who cares I just want to see Blinglush front the impact of Joyce making shit up about the finance ministers area.

  19. Nic the NZer 19

    This is Nationals birthday present to Labour! As a gift they are (in part) allowing the opposition to make govt policy. Happy birthday Labour party!

  20. fisiani 20

    This is such a brilliant policy from Labour that surely they will poll 40% in the next poll. 38%? 36% 34%? 32? do I hear 30%?

  21. ianmac 21

    I think I heard on National Radio News at about 11am today, (I was travelling) that they were showing that Joyce’s claim that “National was not taking a dividend from Housing Corp” was just wrong. Robertson showed that Joyce was panicking and making up policy on the hoof.

  22. Ffloyd 22

    I love Stephen Joyce. He’s my favourite comedy show at the moment. Do hope they don’t stop interviewing him. He’s gold!!!

  23. Greg 23

    latest out of the herald rag, interest rates are the problem.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11672222

    The RB wont drop the IR because Key needs the Aussie banks to keep extending credit to kiwi farmers.

    Notice no mention of Chinese hot money.

    • Muttonbird 23.1

      Notice no mention of Chinese hot money.

      All Chinese money is stained as far as I’m concerned. It has been made under a non-democratic regime in a country with a very poor human rights record, and very weak protections for workers.

      • Colonial Viper 23.1.1

        Oh don’t get so fussy, your Fisher and Paykel appliances are made with Chinese money by Chinese workers in Chinese factories.

        While the NZ middle class fails, the Chinese middle class rockets ahead. In fact, Chinese wages are predicted to match western countries sometime in the 2020s.

        (That’s them going up and ours going down).

        In 1990 Asia accounted for 26.5% of global manufacturing output. By 2013 this had reached 46.5%. China accounts for half of Asia’s output today. The region’s share of the global trade in intermediate inputs—the goods that are eventually pieced together into final products—rose from 14% in 2000 to 50% in 2012.

        The China price is under pressure, though. Since 2001, hourly manufacturing wages in China have risen by an average of 12% a year.

        http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21646180-rising-chinese-wages-will-only-strengthen-asias-hold-manufacturing-tightening-grip

    • Nic the NZer 23.2

      The question there would be why is the RB raising rates if its causing waves of defaults by borrowers?

      What commercial banks want out of rates is harder to say but the definitely dont want rates so high their borrowers are defaulting.

  24. Anne 24

    According to Radio NZ:

    The government is dismissing Labour’s plan to bring down soaring house prices as “underwhelming”, saying it is basically what it itself intends to do.

    Oh dear. So, National is “underwhelmed” by it’s own Housing policy.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/308371/govt-not-sold-on-labour's-housing-plan

    • Enough is Enough 24.1

      Don’t underestimate the National machine.

      If Labour does get any traction on this, National will gobble up the policy. They swallow dead rats whenever they need to.

      Think Working for Families, think Interest Free Student loans, think Kiwi saver, think paid parental leave…

      All policies they opposed and still do at a grassroots level, but they have adopted them to cling to power.

      They can take the wind out of the debate and Labour by simply by agreeing.

      • NZJester 24.1.1

        They don’t really adopt the Labour policies, more borrow the name and retool them to claim to be doing what people want. While in reality making most of the policies they then implement very weak so they give little real benefit at all to those in need of them the most.

    • Sabine 24.2

      i did like the part where the comment was no dividends to be paid for this and next year, despite the dividends are a nice part of Bill Englishes Income to Government in his budget.

      These fuckers are cant even be bothered anymore to talk to each others. They are now just flinging shit at each others like a band of rabid baboons.

  25. NZJester 25

    I believe I can tell when it became policy for National to forgo the next two years of dividends from Housing New Zealand. It was right after Labour released their policy and they realised it was getting good word of mouth outside of their tame MSM.
    If they get in again they very likely will forgo those dividends, but you can be certain they will drain that lost dividend and any extra money they can out of Housing NZ in some other way that they can claim is not a dividend.

  26. Sabine 26

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/308371/hnz-confirms-it-will-not-pay-govt-dividend

    13 min ago
    Economic Development Steven Joyce backed that assertion while responding to a Labour Party announcement at the weekend.

    This year’s Budget shows forecast dividend payments of $38 million this year and $54 million next year.

    Housing New Zealand said it has signalled to the government there was no surplus forecast to be paid for the 2016/2017 year.

    It said it has budgeted $1.8 billion over the next three years to build new houses.

    The Green Party said it was pleased to see the government adopt its policy on Housing New Zealand dividends but said the ministers’ comments may have been a bit premature.

    “If Steven Joyce has jumped the gun and announced this then that’s a sign that the government’s housing policy is in disarray,” co-leader James Shaw said.

    “Having said that, if he’s correct and they’ve decided not to extract a dividend from Housing New Zealand then the Green Party is obviously delighted that he’s adopted our policy.”

    Mr Shaw said the Crown agency should not have to pay the government any money.

    “We’ve been saying for some time now that it is insane to be requiring a dividend from Housing New Zealand at a time when people are living in cars and garages, and multiple families under a single roof,” he said.

    “Every dollar they make should be reinvested into building more houses.”

    United Future leader and government minister Peter Dunne said he would be surprised if Housing New Zealand suddenly did not have return a dividend, as that was not his understanding from the Budget documents.

    as I said, they don’t even talk to each other anymore.

  27. Muttonbird 27

    Mr Joyce says Housing New Zealand has told the Government in its latest statement of performance expectations it doesn’t intend to pay the money.

    Fascinating, isn’t it? Now the civil servants are telling the government what to do!!!

    I can’t wait until all other govt departments tell Joyce to take a hike.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/government-wont-take-hnz-dividend-2016071116#axzz4DshmYFOq

    • Greg 27.1

      It could be a loss of any authority with govt agencies.
      if your backs up against a wall people push back,
      the IRD are currently under attack by MSN.
      Key regulary dismissed its official advice.

      The Reserve Bank is pushing back against housing policy.

      And with Key in Hawaii sunning himself, expect more policy on the hoof from his three horsemen
      i

  28. Sabine 28

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/81991274/Governments-92m-dividend-snafu-raises-more-questions-than-ministers-will-answer
    “Significantly, it was only after the explanation emerged from English’s office that Joyce returned to Twitter to feed his tormenters, saying that “HNZ forward financial plan includes nil dividend 16/17. Also no surplus expected 17/18 and no dividend expected.”

    Well we know that now.

    But there are some remaining questions. When exactly did the Government accept and approve a nil dividend? And why is it being fudged?

    The closest so far to an answer has been “after the Budget forecasts were finalised on April 29″, but when?

    Before the Budget day proper? When the transfer of state houses in Invercargill fell over – revealed the day after the May 26 Budget?

    When homelessness became a headline issue?

    When housing affordability worsened as Auckland prices renewed their climb?

    When Opposition parties said they would forgo dividends?

    When the media pointed to big motel bills for people in urgent need of shelter?

    Or was it really at Monday’s Cabinet meeting to square away Joyce cock-up?”

    Pass the popcorn.

  29. Sacha 29

    Fairfax’s Vernon Small aint buying it either:

    “But there are some remaining questions. When exactly did the Government accept and approve a nil dividend? And why is it being fudged?

    The closest so far to an answer has been “after the Budget forecasts were finalised on April 29″, but when?

    Before the Budget day proper? When the transfer of state houses in Invercargill fell over – revealed the day after the May 26 Budget?

    When homelessness became a headline issue?

    When housing affordability worsened as Auckland prices renewed their climb?

    When Opposition parties said they would forgo dividends?

    When the media pointed to big motel bills for people in urgent need of shelter?

    Or was it really at Monday’s Cabinet meeting to square away Joyce cock-up?”

    Joyce </a href="https://twitter.com/stevenljoyce/status/752389803929317378
    "is unamused at that:
    “put away your tinfoil hat @VernonSmall Crown agencies provide new forecasts at this time every year.”

  30. georgecom 30

    heard English on the news today essentially saying Labour is promising pretty much what National is doing. I thought to myself, no, they are promising to do much more Bill. They are promising to get serious on the issue and be proactive to solve a housing crisis.

    A housing crisis National knew was coming or should have known was coming. A very forseeable housing crisis. The one that was building whilst the PM was trying to change the flag. One that is with us right now as the government focuses it’s attention on such crucial matters as reintroducing Bulk Funding back into education.

    Rather than simply reacting and only doing something when forced to, or taking hands off and hoping things may, somehow, at some point in the future come right. Labour is saying it will be proactive and actively manage things to do what it can to resolve the crisis. Very big difference in approach.

  31. tsmithfield 32

    Perhaps someone here could help me. I am trying to get my head around the maths of this.

    I get the concept that houses are sold and the funds reinvested into building more houses.

    So, making some generous assumptions (excluding the cost of infrastructure for all these houses that I assume will be met from more taxpayer funds):

    Funds injected: Two billion
    Average cost of build and land: $400000
    Average time to develop infrastructure, build and sell all the houses: 1 year.
    Average appreciation of house value 10%

    On that basis, 5000 houses will be built in the first year. To get back on track to 100000 houses in ten years, 15000 houses would need to be built in year two. The cost of 15000 houses will be 15000 x 400000 = 6 billion dollars (excluding inflation).

    However, 5000 houses sold at 10% appreciation in one year will only net $2.2 billion, well short of the 6 billion (excluding inflation) required.

    Even on these very generous assumptions, it looks to me that the two billion input is simply not enough. Also, it appears that there is no costing included for developing infrastructure. So, it seems to me that two billion simply won’t do it.

    Perhaps I am missing something. I would be happy to have it pointed out.

    • Muttonbird 32.1

      You are missing something.

      A soul.

      • tsmithfield 32.1.1

        You are missing something.

        A brain.

        • Muttonbird 32.1.1.1

          I suspect you just don’t want to see anything like this attempted.

          • tsmithfield 32.1.1.1.1

            All I have done is shown that the maths suggests it can’t work.

            All you want to do is carp and whine because I have pointed this out.

            If you disagree, fine. Show me the maths that shows it can work.

            All you are doing at the moment is attacking the messenger rather than the message, hence my acidic reply above.

    • DH 32.2

      “Perhaps I am missing something. ”

      The Crown already owns a lot of the land they’ll build the houses on. Also.. building a house isn’t a 100% cost up front business but they can sell in advance so they can start building a lot more than the sum of their cost.

      • tsmithfield 32.2.1

        “The Crown already owns a lot of the land they’ll build the houses on.”

        Even by Labour’s own estimates my assumption of $400000 per house is quite generous:

        https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/labours-house-building-plan-wouldnt-deliver-says-joyce

        “Also.. building a house isn’t a 100% cost up front business but they can sell in advance so they can start building a lot more than the sum of their cost.”

        I haven’t seen many house deals where the purchaser pays 100% up front. When I had my house built several years ago, I had to put up a 10% deposit. However, its all rats and mice, and not going to bridge the funding gap I pointed to above.

        And the cost of the infrastructure? How is that funded, and how much?

        • Pat 32.2.1.1

          its a rolling stake…not static that is only realized on an anniversary, provided the sales are there in good time there is no issue, it could however be problematic should demand be low early on in the piece which is not likely in current environment….and as i understand it there is margin for the gov on sales so that stake will not only roll over but potentially grow.

          • tsmithfield 32.2.1.1.1

            Don’t just talk in generalities. Do some calculations as I have done to show how it can (or can’t) work.

            • Stuart Munro 32.2.1.1.1.1

              It can work because a government can fund it at the level required to make it work even if there were some truth in your model. The government gets its investment back – so it can fund pretty much whatever the front end happens to be. It simply isn’t a problem.

            • Pat 32.2.1.1.1.2

              good grief….do you really have that much difficulty understanding such a simple concept?

            • DH 32.2.1.1.1.3

              tsmithfield. You can’t do the calculations until you know how they intend to proceed. You can get some ideas from known costings though….

              From this link;

              http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=11513315

              WHERE THE MONEY GOES ON A NEW HOUSE

              Clear site………………………………………..$1818.15
              Building work……………………………..$338,458.88
              Drains and external works………………$26,619.05
              Whiteware ……………………………………..$6686.10
              Fencing………………………………………..$21,456.70
              Sundry…………………………………………….$1541.00
              Builders Margin & Profit…………………$47,589.59
              Consent………………………………………..$18,559.15
              Design………………………………………….$27,840.70
              Development contribution………………$23,000.00
              Water connection………………………….$13,800.00
              Subtotal……………………………………..$527,369.32
              Total ex section…………………………..$527,369.32
              Section…………………………………………..$250,000
              Total including section…………………$777.369.32

              We know a 3brm house can be built for $188, 000 and a new house for the price conscious can dispense with $28k designs, flash fences and other extravagances which can be added later when the budget allows. A big development would cost less for the infrastructure and the Crown can work in with the councils to pay the various development costs when the house is sold.

              We don’t know what their plans are but a Labour Govt could simply provide the infrastructure, the plans, the opportunity and the rules and let people choose their own builder who would self-fund the actual construction. The Govt’s outlay per house would be quite low and likely could work within the stated budget.

  32. Incognito 33

    At first glance it appears that National has two big problems:

    1) It has been pussy-footing and allowed this to grow into a full-blown crisis while supposedly (!) waiting for the market to self-correct;

    2) It’ll now have to fix the mess or will they?

    However, I think these apparent problems merge into one issue that reads a little different:

    National deliberately, willingly & knowingly created this billion-dollar Ponzi scheme without breaking one single law. Now the late-comers have joined the scheme in a desperate bid for fear of missing out it will do a little tinkering here & there because it is crystal-clear that it has absolutely no intention to go all the way and sort this out.

    In any case, as with all well-designed Ponzi schemes, the ones at the top never stand to lose; only the hapless people at the bottom will pay the ultimate price (somebody always does).

    I believe Labour knows full-well that our FIRE economy is a house-of-cards and that it has to tread very carefully to avoid bringing down the house but it is at least truly committed to doing something about it unlike National, which just makes a token effort (e.g. $1 billion, which is enough for just one pipe and which has to be borrowed (again) so that nothing else has to be sacrificed).

    I’m starting to believe that Steven Joyce’s ‘cock-up’ is just a side-show.

  33. Pat 34

    “I believe Labour knows full-well that our FIRE economy is a house-of-cards and that it has to tread very carefully to avoid bringing down the house but it is at least truly committed to doing something about it unlike National, which just makes a token effort (e.g. $1 billion, which is enough for just one pipe and which has to be borrowed (again) so that nothing else has to be sacrificed).”

    except fixing the problem must bring the house of cards down (at least to some extent) despite Labour tying itself into knots trying to pretend otherwise. You can’t have one without the other.

    • Incognito 34.1

      Yes, you’re probably right but as with all demolition jobs it has to be managed carefully.

      I think this is the dilemma that we’re now facing and Labour knows it but cannot publically announce this as it would be immediate & guaranteed political suicide.

      I also don’t think that it’ll serve any purpose to implode the economy AKA house-of-cards.

      He is a brave man who dares to look this monster in the eyes or very foolhardy …

      • Pat 34.1.1

        “I also don’t think that it’ll serve any purpose to implode the economy AKA house-of-cards.”

        then you accept unaffordable housing for an ever increasing portion of the population…..until it collapses anyway.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago