Auckland: Stop Niki’s Eviction!

Written By: - Date published: 8:00 am, February 15th, 2017 - 82 comments
Categories: class war, housing, human rights, poverty - Tags: , ,

The Tāmaki Redevelopment Company is going back to court to evict Niki Rauti from her home of over 20 years. Time to take action against the destruction of communities and privatisation of social housing.

Here’s what’s happening and what you can do:

  • 18 February: attend the community meeting at Glen Innes School and hold TRC to account
  • 19 February: Meet at Niki’s house, bring some kai and your tent
  • 21 February: Niki’s court date

Get full details and sign up to the occupation on the Facebook page.

Niki is 62. She has a heart condition. She was promised a home for life and now she’s being offered unsafe properties away from her family and community with no security of tenancy. That’s not right. That’s not Kiwi. This home is occupied!

82 comments on “Auckland: Stop Niki’s Eviction!”

  1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

    The sign in the photo is quite right: let them get away with human rights abuses? Why would we do that?

    Surely the most appropriate place for public meetings is inside the TRC offices. A “spontaneous unannounced drop-in-for-a-chat” sort of meeting. With loudhailers and lengths of chain and padlocks.

    And cameras.

    Perhaps serve a few extraordinary eviction notices. Take the solution to where the problem lives.

  2. jcuknz 2

    It is ridiculous that somebody is permitted to occupy a three bedroom house when there are families waiting months to be housed. On the other hand it shows the incompetence of the housing authorities they let it happen in the first place and have not organised a one bedroom place in close proximity to friends and family. Such as a self contained granny flat adjacent to family etc.

    • grumpystilskin 2.1

      She has been offered several other options but they didn’t suit for some reason.

      • jcuknz 2.1.1

        And she is right to reject them bearing in mind her health etc.
        But OAB’s stance is as ridiculous as any I’ve read recently.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.1

          Human rights abuses are crimes. “I was just following orders” isn’t a defence. “I was just taking advantage of the government’s human rights abuse policy” isn’t either.

          Do you support human rights and the rule of law or not?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2

      the incompetence

      I suggest you acquaint yourself with the list of recent (over the last eight years, say) appointments to the HNZ board, and ask yourself who is responsible.

    • HDCAFriendlyTroll 2.3

      I bet she wouldn’t be getting this attention if she was white and male.

      Zing.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 2.3.1

        It wouldn’t surprise me if there were demonstrable gender and ethnic biases in HNZ’s approach to its tenants, so you might be right.

      • greywarshark 2.3.2

        HD…………..
        That’s right, switch the attention from the travesty of human rights and neglect of the human need for housing, community and support for all.

        Referring to males and being white, shows that you don’t care about looking at either this case and the regular practice. And the eternal self-centredness of many males, white and any other shade, continues. Not ever putting others first, all left until ‘I’ get my desserts, and most of everyone else’s as well. Pure selfish RW, with the careless sweaty acidic pungent male pheromone over all.

    • Red Hand 2.4

      Tell that to the decile 10 couples and singles whose children have left home. Some will have inherited the right to occupy their three bedroom plus house directly or as beneficiaries of a private trust. Nicki Rauti is in a similar position as a beneficiary, in her case, of a house and income provided, not by a private trust but by the state in the interests of social wellbeing.

  3. Bob 3

    I notice that nowhere in this post does it mention that she is holding up the addition of 104 houses to the Auckland housing market (154 being developed into 260). Nor does it mention that the funds raised from sale of properties in this development, are being used to increase the overall number of state houses in Auckland, with new houses, not the old, cold damp houses like the ones currently available:
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tdGug3V66YgJ:www.hnzc.co.nz/about-our-properties/our-developments/auckland/northern-glen-innes-redevelopment/faqs-about-the-glen-innes-redevelopment/+&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=nz

    Isn’t this exactly what so many of you are asking to have happen? Increase social housing numbers, get rid of cold damp social houses, increase housing density…just don’t put anyone out while you are doing it???

    • weka 3.1

      Don’t destroy communities.

      And fuck off with commercial profit-driven models that are designed to treat humans as stock units.

      How’s that for a summary of what we want?

      • Antoine 3.1.1

        To be clear, Weka, you are saying that social housing should not be profit-driven – rather than talking about housing more generally or the economy at large?

        A.

      • Bob 3.1.2

        “Don’t destroy communities.”
        Fuck off with your emotive bullshit, this is creating a community! Removing massive wastes of space, such as individuals living on 1/4 acre sections, and replacing these with townhouses and parks where communities gather and share the space, rather than hide in their own backyards.

        “And fuck off with commercial profit-driven models that are designed to treat humans as stock units.”
        You mean like the one your beloved Green Party is proposing? https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/fairer-society/homes-not-cars
        Or is it different when they do it?

        • Antoine 3.1.2.1

          Not necessarily disagreeing with you Bob, but How is the proposed Green Party approach profit-driven?

          When they allow Housing NZ to retain its dividend, that seems to me to be moving to a non-profit basis.

          A.

          • weka 3.1.2.1.1

            The profit-driven model from National is in them selling state houses and selling some of them to private organisations that will require a dividend.

            • Bob 3.1.2.1.1.1

              Again, you miss the part where they are using the profit from the sales to increase state housing across Auckland “This will mean a reduction in the number of state houses in the project area, however Housing New Zealand has plans to increase the total number of state houses across Auckland over the next five years to meet demand for housing from those in greatest need.”, ” based on current demand forecasts across the broader Auckland area, we anticipate an overall increase of the number of state homes across the city by around 1400 over the next five years to meet demand.”

              Of course that doesn’t fit your narrative so…

              • lprent

                The problem is that I haven’t seen any sign of it happening. What I see is housing being sold off and very little new stuff going in. Now of course there is a lag time. However they have been selling for nearly 8 years now and as far as I can see the housing corp housing stock is still falling.

                Now the ‘story’ from National has shifted to ‘social housing is coming from sources other than housing corp’. The problem is that doesn’t appear to be happening. Few reliable organisations have taken up the social housing, and the ones who have appear to have insufficient resources to do anything.

                For example the housing corp houses that were shifted to Northland from Glen Innes are (as far as I am aware) simply rotting away because the trust that took them doesn’t have the money to either site them or furbish them.

                So I simply think that National are lying. If they want to show some evidence that there is actually social housing going in, then they need to show some verifiable facts and statistics rather than just telling fools like you what lies that want you to repeat today.

          • Bob 3.1.2.1.2

            That dividend is derived from profit, so no profit no increase in funding.
            That seems pretty profit driven to me.

            • Antoine 3.1.2.1.2.1

              Well I suppose so, in the trivial sense that HNZ is still required to be self funding

            • weka 3.1.2.1.2.2

              “That dividend is derived from profit, so no profit no increase in funding.
              That seems pretty profit driven to me.”

              There are two commonly understood meanings of profit. One is the amount of money left over after overheads are paid. This money can be put back into the business. The other is money that is inherently taken out of the system for other reasons e.g. to pay dividends or make someone rich. It is money over and above what is needed to run the system.

              National want the second. The Greens want the first, at least for a while. It’s pretty obvious from my original point that I was referring to the second when I criticised a profit-driven model at the expense of humans. As I’m sure you know full well.

              • Bob

                Either way, there is no dividend without profit, that profit is taken directly from the pockets of the HNZ tenants. You do realise that National don’t pocket that money themselves don’t you??? The “rich” that you speak of (emotively…again) above are the likes of Teachers, Doctors, Nurses, Police etc. who get paid out of taxes and dividends paid to the Government.
                They are both exactly the same thing with the money going to different Government funded programs, the only difference is in your own mind.

                • weka

                  Mate, you’re the one putting scare quotes around words, might want to check your own emotion.

                  You’ve basically sidestepped my point. Yes, HNZ tenants pay rent. And yes, they pay enough that HNZ makes more money than it needs to run the department and services. But there is still a difference between taking that extra money and putting it back into the services for vulnerable NZers, and taking that money and using it to fund other parts of govt.

                  If a progressive govt wanted to address rent rates and the whole HNZ set up, I’d support that, but it’s not something I wold expect a first term govt to do. It would be something that would have to be done over the long term and taking into account a much bigger picture. So I don’t have a problem with the GP policy as such, and I will just point out again that in the context of my original point there are obvious differences between the GP and National. You implied there wasn’t. You’re wrong.

                  “The “rich” that you speak of (emotively…again) above are the likes of Teachers, Doctors, Nurses, Police etc. who get paid out of taxes and dividends paid to the Government.”

                  Nope. The rich I literally spoke of were people working in the private sector who expect a business to generate increasing capital for them personally. I gave that example to show the difference between the two kinds of profit. If you want to apply it to govt, it’s not teachers etc, it’s the irrigation companies, or the private companies running home help services, where the directors/CEOs are getting paid big bucks to do what the govt should be doing for much less cost. It’s not really my field, but the govt does try and run govt as a business and that includes money going into private hands i.e. profit-driven.

                  If the govt can’t run the country, including paying teachers, without fucking over poor communities, then it’s incompetent and needs to hand over the reins to someone who can.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    the directors/CEOs are getting paid big bucks to do what the govt should be doing for much less cost.

                    ^^^this.

                    Public service is not an enterprise.

        • weka 3.1.2.2

          Communities aren’t made of infrastructure, they’re made of the relationships between people. We can see that in some of the most functional communities in the world that have third world infrastructure. You idea is treating humans as stock units. You can think they can just be shifted around so long as they’re fed, watered, and sheltered.

          “Or is it different when they do it?”

          Of course. Because they start from an ideological base that is ethical not monetarily driven. The reason why there is a state house housing crisis in Auckland is because the National govt is incompetent at running its own departments. Or it deliberately monkey wrenched HNZ. Probably both. The Greens want to do it substantially differently from what National are doing.

          I suggest you read the whole policy. What the Greens want to do is create state housing for people, not sell off state housing to private organisations to make money from. They’re also suggesting that the HNZ dividend goes into building more state houses instead of National’s the govt’s coffers.

          If the Greens also suggest evicting people from their communities so that money can be made, I’d like to see evidence of that, and then I will speak out against that too.

          • Antoine 3.1.2.2.1

            You appreciate that foregoing the HNZ dividend will require higher taxes, more public debt, or less spending somewhere else?

            Also that stopping the sale of some social housing will remove one of the main funding sources for construction of new social housing?

            Further, if “the National govt is incompetent at running its own departments”, then how can we have confidence that the housing Minister under a Labour-Green government would be more competent? Like, who would it be?

            A.

            • Bob 3.1.2.2.1.1

              Exactly, thank you Antoine.

            • weka 3.1.2.2.1.2

              I have no problem with higher taxation on the top level incomes. Or a FTT. Or whatever. We don’t actually have a shortage of wealth in NZ.

              I also don’t have a problem with spending less in some other areas. Haven’t looked a where but subsidising diary farmers would probably be my first stop.

              I don’t support increasing public debt.

              “Also that stopping the sale of some social housing will remove one of the main funding sources for construction of new social housing?”

              Is that because the houses/land are worth so much now that it’s better to sell them and build somewhere cheaper? If so, that’s fucked up because it’s throwing petrol on the housing market fire.

              If it’s because the houses are run down, I still don’t buy it. Better to repair. Or is there a reason that existing communities can’t have their housing replace in situ?

              Further, if “the National govt is incompetent at running its own departments”, then how can we have confidence that the housing Minister under a Labour-Green government would be more competent? Like, who would it be?

              Which Minister? No idea. Personally I’d put the Greens in charge of everything, because they are the most competent at bringing in new people, and because their ideology is most based in ethics. HNZ should be the experts in this, so I would guess that restoring the culture there would be important. No idea how possible that is tbh, and it’s not just HNZ, many govt departments need substantial fixing.

              • Antoine

                > I have no problem with higher taxation on the top level incomes.

                Fair enough, that’s a straight answer

                >> “Also that stopping the sale of some social housing will remove one of the main funding sources for construction of new social housing?”
                > Is that because the houses/land are worth so much now that it’s better to sell them and build somewhere cheaper? If so, that’s fucked up because it’s throwing petrol on the housing market fire.
                > If it’s because the houses are run down, I still don’t buy it. Better to repair. Or is there a reason that existing communities can’t have their housing replace in situ?

                OK, so now you are coming to grips with the underlying approach of ‘selling some social housing to build new social housing’. At the end of the day you may not agree with it, but if we want to have an informed discussion I think we need to understand it.

                By the way, I think you are saying that selling state houses in expensive areas (like Auckland) will tend to raise house prices in those areas (your “throwing petrol on the housing market fire”). One would expect, if anything, that increasing the amount of properties available for sale would drive the price down. More supply -> lower price.

                > Personally I’d put the Greens in charge of everything

                Aha, yes, I think Andrew Little may have a different approach in mind.

                > because they are the most competent at bringing in new people

                wut? Please explain

                A.

                • weka

                  “OK, so now you are coming to grips with the underlying approach of ‘selling some social housing to build new social housing’. At the end of the day you may not agree with it, but if we want to have an informed discussion I think we need to understand it.”

                  I agree. I don’t fully understand what National are trying to do, every time I look at it it just seems daft and falls into a predictable pattern of profit-driven ethics that we’ve seen in so many other parts of govt that end up failing the people that need the actual help. But see Lynn’s point below. If you believe that line that Niki’s house has to be sold in order to build other houses elsewhere, please show how that is working.

                  “By the way, I think you are saying that selling state houses in expensive areas (like Auckland) will tend to raise house prices in those areas (your “throwing petrol on the housing market fire”). One would expect, if anything, that increasing the amount of properties available for sale would drive the price down. More supply -> lower price.”

                  Yeah, that’s someone’s theory. More supply equalling lower price only works in a situation where you have actual more supply. That’s never going to be the case in Auckland. Me, I think the housing market crisis in NZ is a runaway train and the only thing that will stop it is a major GFC, or substantial government intervention. In the meantime, the govt selling houses at the highest price they can get is the petrol. Sorry for the mangled metaphors there.

                  “> Personally I’d put the Greens in charge of everything

                  Aha, yes, I think Andrew Little may have a different approach in mind.”

                  True, but you did ask me what I thought would work 🙂 (I actually think we should hand the whole country over to the kuia to run).

                  “> because they are the most competent at bringing in new people

                  wut? Please explain”

                  There’s a commonly held belief that the Greens have some of the most competent MPs in parliament. Even some on the right think this. They seem to be very good at bringing through the best people. They don’t have to rely on a Willie Jackson or Greg O’Connor for instance. Have a look at their selection process currently.

                  This is because they’re so clear in their ethics and values, but I think it’s also because the culture within the Greens is around valuing people. When you want change not power, things play out differently. So I *would trust them to know how to bring in the right people to say remedy the monkey wrenching of HNZ.

                  • Antoine

                    > If you believe that line that Niki’s house has to be sold in order to build other houses elsewhere, please show how that is working.

                    Well, hold on, if you’re going to personalise it to Niki’s specific situation, then it’s more about progressing the Glen Innes redevelopment project (see Bob’s link above) than about needing money.

                    (Disclaimer, I have never lived in Auckland and have no idea where Glen Innes is)

                    > More supply equalling lower price only works in a situation where you have actual more supply

                    Right, so when you take a house that is not on the market, and you put it on the market, then you increase the amount of supply _on the market_ which should lower prices.

                    (However I don’t know enough about the HNZ sale process to know whether this is the case. If HNZ stock is being sold in bulk through a tender process then it may not really affect the price of the normal market at all)

                    > I think the housing market crisis in NZ is a runaway train and the only thing that will stop it is a major GFC, or substantial government intervention

                    We don’t have a housing market crisis in NZ, we have a crisis in Auckland. When you say “stop the crisis”, do you mean “lower the price of houses”? If so my observation would be that bubbles are quite capable of bursting themselves from time to time.

                    > There’s a commonly held belief that the Greens have some of the most competent MPs in parliament. Even some on the right think this.

                    To whom do you refer?

                    I think JA Genter is pretty good on the transport side for example

                    A.

                    • weka

                      “> If you believe that line that Niki’s house has to be sold in order to build other houses elsewhere, please show how that is working.

                      Well, hold on, if you’re going to personalise it to Niki’s specific situation, then it’s more about progressing the Glen Innes redevelopment project (see Bob’s link above) than about needing money.”

                      Not sure what you are trying to say there. All state houses that have people in living in them have people with names. If it’s not Niki, it will be someone else. Not all people being moved will be harmed by the eviction but some will be. Of course it’s personal, that’s the point. We shouldn’t be treated tenants as stock units.

                      > More supply equalling lower price only works in a situation where you have actual more supply

                      Right, so when you take a house that is not on the market, and you put it on the market, then you increase the amount of supply _on the market_ which should lower prices.

                      (However I don’t know enough about the HNZ sale process to know whether this is the case. If HNZ stock is being sold in bulk through a tender process then it may not really affect the price of the normal market at all)

                      Can you give some examples in NZ of where house prices have lowered? Supply is only increased if it outstrips demand. That’s not what’s happening. There are people in Auckland being advised to leave second houses empty, wait a year or so and then sell them, because the money made on the increase in value is more than they would get any other way. Your theory is far too abstract for what is actually happening on the ground.

                      > I think the housing market crisis in NZ is a runaway train and the only thing that will stop it is a major GFC, or substantial government intervention

                      We don’t have a housing market crisis in NZ, we have a crisis in Auckland. When you say “stop the crisis”, do you mean “lower the price of houses”? If so my observation would be that bubbles are quite capable of bursting themselves from time to time

                      In the South Island there is a housing crisis in Nelson, Queenstown Lakes and Chch. I would expect it’s happening on other places too. A beneficiary could buy a house in NZ in the 80s and early 90s. Much more difficult now except in a few places where prices are still low. That’s a crisis in the market, across the country.

                      Again, when in NZ have house prices dropped?

                      > There’s a commonly held belief that the Greens have some of the most competent MPs in parliament. Even some on the right think this.

                      To whom do you refer?

                      I think JA Genter is pretty good on the transport side for example

                      Across the board (with a few exceptions). Myself I rate Genter too, Davidson, Turei, Shaw, Logie, Delahunty.

                    • McFlock

                      Purely on the face of it I have difficulty understanding why or how a quarter acre section can stop 104 extra dwellings.

                      Unless they’re planning a tower block, it’s not like everything needs to be built at once. From a purely development perspective, wait another ten or twenty years and she’ll be in a home or dead. Exercising a little patience and humanity isn’t going to be the difference between an end to the auckland housing crisis and its continuation.

                    • Antoine

                      > In the South Island there is a housing crisis in Nelson, Queenstown Lakes and Chch. I would expect it’s happening on other places too.

                      Uh yeah, I don’t mean to make light of the ChCh situation and of course the Queenstown area is going through a lot of change.

                      > A beneficiary could buy a house in NZ in the 80s and early 90s.

                      Are you sure that is right? (I wasn’t a beneficiary in NZ in the early 90s so don’t know)

                      A.

                    • Antoine

                      > Purely on the face of it I have difficulty understanding why or how a quarter acre section can stop 104 extra dwellings.

                      I don’t know anything about the planned development so can’t comment, perhaps someone who knows more can chip in

                      A.

                    • weka

                      Yes. I bought a house in the early 90s, couldn’t do that now. I also know many beneficiaries that bought houses in the 80s and early 90s. The govt even had a scheme in the 80s where if you had kids you could capitalise your family benefit to help with the deposit.

                    • mac1

                      To Antoine about beneficiaries being able to buy a house.

                      A woman I knew in the Seventies was able to buy a small and modest house as a solo mother with two childen, deserted by her husband. She was the first to take up the 72-75 Labour governments’ capitalisation of the family benefit, with Roger Douglas as Minister. The amount she had to find was contributed by her MP, who gave her the money under what terms I do not know, but without having met her in person!

                      She was then able to live in her own house and find her way into the work force as a teacher after studying and contribute back as a tax payer.

                      That was a compassionate and caring government, with policies that worked, and with one MP, still alive, who has had my hugest respect since then.

                  • Antoine

                    Huh interesting.

                    Presumably the reduction in benefits hasn’t helped?

                    Would a bank even agree to make a home loan to a beneficiary in this day and age?

                    A.

                • Antoine

                  > Personally I’d put the Greens in charge of everything

                  Afterthought, is there any Labour MP (or candidate) who you think would make a good Minister in a left-leaning Government? Who do you rate?

                  A.

                  • weka

                    I like Little, and think he will make a good PM. Carmel Sepuloni and Kelvin Davis seem good in their areas. I don’t follow Labour MPs that much so don’t know about potential Ministerial competence.

                • weka

                  I wasn’t pitting one party against another, I was saying that in an ideal world the Greens would be government.

                  • Antoine

                    With Labour as a coalition partner? Do you think that would add value? What about other parties, Mana, MP etc?

                    A.

                    • weka

                      I was talking ideally. In the real world, I think L/G or G/L is good for now. I had hoped that the Mp would support a left govt, no idea if that’s possible now. I rate Harawira and wish that Sykes was in parliament. As a party I suspect that Mana have had their day, but am open to being wrong. I hope lefties don’t waste their party vote there this election though.

                      In principle I support more diversity of parties not less.

            • lprent 3.1.2.2.1.3

              Ok. Show me the thousands of new social housing that should have come over the last 8 years since National started selling it off again.

              Until you can point to some substantive details, I will assume that both you and National are simply lying. Because I know of only a teeny fraction of replacement social housing stock that is in use as social housing.

              • Antoine

                ‘Lying’ is a harsh word dude, I’m just a seeker for truth like the rest of us.

                I’m looking at http://www.hnzc.co.nz/assets/Uploads/Annual-Report-2016.pdf now and it shows 871 new HNZ homes in the year to 2016 as well as a large expenditure on maintaining and repairing homes (much of this in Canterbury). It also refers to “the rapidly accelerating pace
                of our redevelopment activity” which suggests more in the pipeline…

                A.

                • Siobhan

                  871? Do you not realise what a ridiculously small number that is.
                  For some perspective..

                  there are around 4000+ house sales a month in NZ.

                  A flat in Wellington received almost 100 inquiries within hours of being listed, and 350 inquiries in a week

                  You can fit 800 houses on a 18 hectare block of land. http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11628888

                  Dr Smith ” noted that Housing New Zealand sold between 100 and 200 state houses on the open market every year.”

                  • Antoine

                    Yeah we need to see some of that fabled acceleration fairly soon huh?

                    A.

                  • Antoine

                    That 871 number, I wonder what it would have been with (a) no bulk sales of HNZ stock and (b) no HNZ dividend? More or less? Interesting to speculate…

                    A.

              • beatie

                In 1984 myself, hubbie and baby were able to get a WCC bedsitter. when baby was 1 we got a HC unit in Tawa. Then we got A HC Homestart loan which paid for the deposit on a (very) modest house in Porirua. Many years later after a marriage break-up, I had enough to buy a cheap (with a fabulous view) on the West Coast. If I had been renting all these years i would be totally impoverished. As a disabled person with limited means, having my own house is GOLD. Despite the maintenance, I can have pets, grow a long-term garden and be a part of my community. I am so sorry for my kids who have to live is crappy. cold, damp rentals.

      • Brutus Iscariot 3.1.3

        What about need-driven?

      • JamieB 3.1.4

        Do you also agree with the sentiment of don’t destroy the community of Auckland’s leafy suburbs with higher intensity and apartment buildings?

        NIMBYism comes in many forms it seems.

    • Molly 3.2

      If you honestly believe that is what the result will be then you having been watching. Regardless of what they say they will do – the sale of state housing, does not usually result in the provision of more housing in that area for those communities. If ever.

      State tenants are entitled to security of tenancy, as are we all.

      This kind of “re-development” changes whole communities, and disrupts existsing support systems – many of which reduce the reliance on other state services.

      I believe that security of affordable, healthy homes in connected communities must be a priority for any NZers.

      Unless this is achieved, transience in communities and fear of loss of the same impact in many negative ways in our society, and cost us not only in lost opportunities but in quantifiable social and environmental costs as well.

    • jcuknz 3.3

      Sorry Bob [3] but there is an alternative way …. by building extra stock along side existing houses THEN demolishing the older house …. but of course that requires extra capital. I gather this is what is being urged for existing homes of large Auckland properties. I have done this twice now, first the family house and my current place and dotted around you will find others doing it as they redevelop older parts of the city.

  4. jcuknz 4

    I come back to my original point that this is grossly inefficient use of OUR resources. remembering that state houses do not belong to some nebulous entity but rather all NZders and funded by us, even though some are paying for the less fortunate or self reliant while building and/or owning their own property.

    A basic point I made here months ago of my belief that everybody who wants a state house should have one meeting their own needs …. hence my suggestion above for a granny flat within the persons social group. Not a three bedroom family home. I also noted from the photo that access is by steps, not ideal for somebody with a heart condition. Even a ramp can be a problem as we get older as I know from personal experience.

    To me this is a common sense meld of responsibility to the community and social justice. sadly missing by both sides of this dispute.

    .

    • weka 4.1

      Pretty hard to argue for community responsibility when you are about to be evicted. I agree with your general points, but I think the onus is on the govt to manage HNZ in a social justice context, not for those of us that support Niki not being evicted to find impossible solutions for her.

      btw, I don’t know if a granny flat is the best solution for her. Maybe she needs a spare room or two for family to stay in? I get where you are coming from, and I would add that each situation needs to be judged individually and according to compassion as much as rationalisation.

      • Brutus Iscariot 4.1.1

        And I need a swimming pool and garage workshop…

        What you’re basically doing is granting her extra rights over and above those enjoyed by the rest of us, simply due to the fact that she can’t support herself.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.1

          No. She has the same human rights to housing as everyone else. You cannot support yourself either:

          Your education was paid for before you were born. Since you’ve been earning you’ve contributed to physical and (well before you were earning) social infrastructure. Thanks for that. Be proud of it rather than whining.

          And stop pretending that you are an island. Support comes in many forms.

      • jcuknz 4.1.2

        I hope that Nicki is not in the hotel business at our expense …. I remember this was the excuse of another state tenant ‘needing’ three bedrooms awhile back.

        Living in a small house my way of repaying previous hospitality by family visitors was to organize and pay for a motel for them …. previously I had given up my bed and slept on a home made thing upstairs but with age [for comfort] I gave that away a couple of years ago.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2

      What’s missing from this situation is compassion. The sort of compassion that comes from public service, as opposed to being an employee of a “state-owned-enterprise“.

      Words matter. The SOE model is broken and killing it would be an act of mercy.

      • jcuknz 4.2.1

        What is missing is also responsibility in return for a responsible society providing housing for you. One person one bedroom is answering ‘need’ but friends/family is beyond need.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2.1.1

          Of course, the absence of compassion isn’t enough for some; they need judgement and blame to feel good about themselves, seemingly oblivious to the extra contempt they earn thereby.

  5. Siobhan 5

    “Eigentum verpflichtet. Sein Gebrauch soll zugleich dem Wohle der Allgemeinheit dienen.”

    “Property comes bound with duty. It must also be used to serve the public good.”

    I wonder if ‘public good’ is even a ‘thing’ with National? Or is it just about serving the immediate perception of ‘good’ of their voters??

    • jcuknz 5.1

      Bearing in mind that both left and right wing folk own houses that is a pretty pointless comment Siobhan. It just shows the tax system is skewed and proper super levels along with tax on gains from property would be a better solution. but perhaps I am biased since when I was in position to join the multiple property owning clique I choose not to feed bank profits. [ not the reason at the time]
      Viewing the video I see I was wrong about ‘the step access’ but better is to have house closer to surrounding ground level. I would struggle with that ramp.

      • Siobhan 5.1.1

        Actually I was going to include Labour in my comment…but I’ve been banging on about Labours being basically hijacked by the home owning and Landlord classes for so long I thought I better give it a rest.

        The comment was aimed at landlords (in this case the Government as Landlord…but private as well), not home owners.
        So, nope, not a pointless comment. And certainly not considered pointless in Germany, which could teach us a thing or two about how to arrange the laws around Rental accommodation.

  6. McFlock 6

    Actually, by Bob’s link she’s “holding up” development of one house in addition to her own, if hers is one of the houses marked for subdivision.

    what a pointless exercise in dickish behaviour by HNZ.

    • Bob 6.1

      Is her property on the very outskirt of the development? No proposed roads / water / power / fibre needs to be run through that property?
      Thanks for clearing that up McFlock, I hadn’t seen the full subdivision plans.

      I hope she won’t be too put out by having heavy machinery working right up to her boundary?

      As for you comment above “from a purely development perspective, wait another ten or twenty years and she’ll be in a home or dead”
      So your solution is to hold back the development of land that could hold 260 houses for 20 years so you can wait for one person to pass away?
      I really do wonder about your logic some times McFlock, you do realise that there is a housing shortage and no-one (apart from Ports of Auckland) is making new land!
      Would you have 259 families sleep in cars for 20 years, or would you do a half arsed development around existing stock rather than relocate one person and do the whole development properly?

      • McFlock 6.1.1

        Where we dun drew the lines for the yoo-tilli-teez, we dun drew it, and we don’t ownz no erazers, eh?

        “We’d have to change the plumbing” is a stupid excuse for stupidly refusing to adapt to change that stupid idiots have been using for at least the last hundred years. For a few grand in architects’ fees HNZ could save themselves all sorts of ongoing bullshit and bad publicity. Not to mention that HNZ still have right of access to install their utilities across the property, anyway.

        Only 154 houses are being redeveloped, according to your link: 80-odd houses are being modernised or left untouched. Claiming that this one site will hold up the entire project is just plain fucked in the head.

        And if she agrees to move when the building starts, fair enough. Deal with it.

        Take your bullshit and shove it.

        • Bob 6.1.1.1

          According to my link “The project proposes the redevelopment of 156 properties to create at least 260 new homes”
          Comprehension obviously not a strong point.

          “Not to mention that HNZ still have right of access to install their utilities across the property, anyway.”
          So stairs are out of the question, but go hard ripping the shit out of my land?

          • McFlock 6.1.1.1.1

            lol, fair call on the numbers. The sheer enormity of your bullshit can be distracting: we’re still talking going from 1 to 1.6 residences on average per lot.

            Just to be clear, your premise that failing to evict her will “hold back the development of land that could hold 260 houses” is based on the concept that the utilities for all those homes must go through a ditch on her property, and the utilities and the road cannot possibly rerouted around it?

    • jcuknz 6.2

      There is or was a funny shaped building in Otago University as a result of a house owner refusing to move and Varsity built around it [ library building opposite Poppa’s pizza]…. likewise in Sydney I remember from years ago where the ‘new’ built around and OVER.

  7. jcuknz 7

    I note that many are talking about HNZ when is it? or the organisation with a fancy Maori name [ TRC ] putting her out without proper and compassionate consideration for her needs.
    It simply illustrates the barreness of thinking on the subject which imagines that only a couple with children deserve a state house … a mentality which has sickened me ever since I was a tenant in the early sixties.
    The young and old NEED good housing and the government, if not staffed by dimwits, needs to look after them …Tempered by their NEEDS and pensioner flats, rather than granny-flats are needed by those who have not been fortunate, by good luck and endeavor, to own their own property …. while more youngsters would be able to make a start if not subject to rack renting extorting a large proportion of their income.

    Another subject but which impinges on this discussion and Siobhan’s comments about SOEs is a firm belief I have that if there where fewer bean-counters watching expenditure and more folk able to say “Fuck It! it is not my money, lets do something good for a change” the resulting wastage would be quite small and manageable. But then the reverse of that is what do all the sacked B-Cs do.
    Come in Soloman please …it is beyond me.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • More proof National not delivering for New Zealanders
    The Ministry of Social Development’s latest Household Incomes Report is more hard evidence of the growing poverty in New Zealand, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. “National claims to be delivering for New Zealanders. This report puts the lie ...
    15 hours ago
  • Strong support from medical community for Healthy Homes Bill
    More than a thousand medical professionals, medical students, and other New Zealanders have shown their support for Labour’s Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. ...
    17 hours ago
  • Labour will fund Buller Health Centre
    A Labour Government will fully fund the Buller Integrated Family Health Centre in Westport, confirming its commitment to the people of the West Coast and the role of central government to fund essential public services, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David ...
    18 hours ago
  • National’s affordable promise for Auckland more smoke and mirrors
    The 26,000 additional houses National plans to build in Auckland on public land over the next decade include fewer than 5,000 affordable homes, while more than 60 per cent will be available for speculators to buy, says Leader of the ...
    23 hours ago
  • National out of touch over immigration
    National’s abrupt backflip on their recently-announced changes to immigration shows they never understood the problem and just came up with a confused knee jerk response, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. “Regional communities and businesses were quite right to ...
    2 days ago
  • English out of touch on homelessness
    Bill English’s comments that he doesn’t know why people are complaining about the blowout in the number of homeless families the government is putting up in motels just shows how tired and out of touch National is after nine years, ...
    2 days ago
  • All Kiwis to have same standard of cancer care
    Labour is promising that all New Zealanders will have access to the same level of cancer care no matter where they live in the country, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little.   “As someone who has survived cancer I ...
    3 days ago
  • Infrastructure announcement too long coming
    “What took you so long?” is Labour’s response to the Government’s announcement of a new infrastructure investment vehicle. Labour’s Auckland Issues spokesperson Phil Twyford says Labour announced its policy in 2015 to debt-finance infrastructure and service that debt with targeted ...
    3 days ago
  • Time for a breather on immigration
    National has no idea how to house the record number of people entering New Zealand, let alone cope with the pressure on health, education, and transport from this record population growth, says Labour’s Immigration spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway. ...
    5 days ago
  • Labour to invest $4 billion in education
    Labour’s Education Manifesto will bring positive change across the education sector and is backed by a massive investment, says Labour’s Education Spokesperson Chris Hipkins.  “Labour’s plan will see an extra $4 billion invested over the next four years. It’s organised ...
    5 days ago
  • National’s shame: worst homelessness in the OECD
    National’s legacy is a housing crisis that has given New Zealand the worst homeless rate in the developed world, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    5 days ago
  • Labour taking action on school donations
    Labour will end so-called voluntary school donations for the majority of parents across the country under its $4 billion plan to revitalise the education sector, says Labour Leader Andrew Little. “Labour has always been committed to a world-class free education ...
    5 days ago
  • Labour to work with Queenstown to build more houses
    Labour will work with Queenstown-Lakes District Council, iwi, and the Community Housing Trust to build the modern, affordable housing Queenstown desperately needs, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. ...
    6 days ago
  • Nats blow the Budget on motels after bowling state houses
    National is spending $140,000 a day putting homeless families in motels, the legacy of nine years of selling off and knocking down state houses, says Labour Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    6 days ago
  • New revelations in Joanne Harrison report
    The State Services Commission’s report into the treatment of whistle-blowers by Joanne Harrison has revealed new accusations against the convicted fraudster, says Labour MP Sue Moroney.  “The report found that four staff inside the Ministry of Transport who had raised ...
    6 days ago
  • Snafu at Princess Margaret
    Jonathan Coleman has to stop the stalling over a new building for mental health services in Christchurch to replace the quake damaged Princess Margaret Hospital, says Labour’s Health spokesperson David Clark. “The Government must accept that Christchurch is still recovering ...
    6 days ago
  • Labour’s fiscal plan to build a fairer New Zealand
    Labour will re-build our housing, health and education while responsibly managing New Zealand’s finances, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little.  “Under Labour’s Fiscal Plan we will deliver big investments in the services we all need and care about, invest ...
    7 days ago
  • Nats show they’re the tax dodgers’ best friends
    The government is taking the knife to IRD at a time when we need a highly skilled department to ensure that multinationals and speculators don’t get away with dodging tax, says Labour’s Revenue spokesperson Michael Wood. ...
    7 days ago
  • Labour secures the future for NZ Super
    A Labour Government will secure the future for New Zealand Superannuation so we can continue to provide superannuation to those retiring at age 65, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. “One of the first things a Labour-led Government will ...
    1 week ago
  • Multinationals must pay fair share of tax
    A Labour Government will crack down on multinational companies that are dodging paying their fair share of tax, says Labour Leader Andrew Little. “New Zealanders are missing out by hundreds of millions according to the IRD because multinational companies can ...
    1 week ago
  • ACT’s approach to children backward and ill informed
    Act’s new deputy leader’s claim that Labour’s support for families could “extend the misery of child poverty and even child abuse” is ill informed and offensive, says Labour’s Deputy Leader Jacinda Ardern. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Canterbury hatchet job a disgrace
    The Government’s glib acceptance of advice that the Canterbury District Health Board doesn’t need more money is a hatchet job and a disgrace, says Labour’s Health Spokesperson David Clark. “To claim that the DHB was using tactics to leverage more ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Quality for Kiwi kids at ECE
    After more than a decade of rapid growth in the number of children participating in Early Childhood Education (ECE), it’s time to take stock and map out a clear plan for the future, says Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour to boost ECE quality
    Labour will ensure kids get the best start in life by boosting funding for Early Childhood Centres to employ 100 per cent qualified and registered teachers, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour will stump up a million dollars for Maniototo Hospital
    A Labour led Government will make a million dollars available to rebuild the Maniototo Base hospital in Ranfurly, says the Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little.  “This will be a much needed boost for a long overdue rebuild that has ...
    2 weeks ago
  • No vision for the West Coast
    The West Coast welcomes any Government investment in our region but the lack of any real alternative vision for the West Coast’s economy is disappointing, says Damien O’Connor Labour’s West Coast-Tasman MP.  “The establishment of a Mining Research Unit will ...
    2 weeks ago
  • National’s youth work scheme too little too late
    After nine years, National’s belated attempt to provide work opportunities for unemployed youth should be seen for what it is, a half-hearted, election gimmick from a party that’s ignored the problem till now, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Kiwis won’t fall for Joyce’s spin
    Steven Joyce’s embarrassingly obvious spin on Labour’s Families Package won’t fool anyone, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour prioritises families and public services
    Labour’s Families Package delivers a bigger income boost to more than 70 per cent of families with children than Budget 2017. By not spending $1.5 billion a year on tax cuts, Labour is able to do more for lower and ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Kiwis can’t sleep in your ghost houses, Nick
    The Government’s housing infrastructure announcement is another Nick Smith special – over-promising with no detail on delivery, says Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Labour helps older New Zealanders and low income families with winter heating bills
    Labour will further boost its commitment to warm, healthy housing with a Winter Energy Payment for superannuitants and people receiving main benefits, says Leader of the Opposition Andrew Little. “Everyone deserves a warm, healthy home to live in. But that’s ...
    2 weeks ago
  • National must rule out retrospective override for Ruataniwha
    National must categorically rule out using retrospective legislation to override the Supreme Court’s decision that the land swap of conservation land flooded by the proposed Ruataniwha Dam was illegal, says Labour’s Shadow Attorney General David Parker. “Having not got their ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Flavell’s failure a win for Māori landowners
    The Māori Development Minister’s admission that his unpopular Ture Whenua Māori Bill won’t pass into law prior to the election is a victory for Māori landowners, but only a change of government will keep the Bill gone for good, says ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Stats confirm growing housing shortfall
    National’s failure to fix the housing shortage has been starkly illustrated by new statistics, says Labour Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Systemic abuse of kids in state care
    After admitting there was systemic abuse of children in State care the Government must do the right thing and launch an independent inquiry, says Labour’s Deputy Leader Jacinda Ardern. ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Migrant worker exploitation needs sharper focus
    The astonishing number of employers found guilty of exploiting migrants shows that migrant exploitation is a serious problem in New Zealand, says Labour Workplace Relations and Safety spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway. “A total of 53 companies have been banned from recruiting ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Minister faces questions over dam debacle
    Today’s Supreme Court ruling dismissing an appeal to allow a land swap for the controversial Ruataniwha Dam is a victory for our conservation estate and Hawke’s Bay ratepayers, but leaves the Conservation Minister with serious questions to answer, says Ikaroa-Rāwhiti ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Too little too late on Wellington housing
    The announcement today on social housing in Wellington by the National Government is a pitiful and cynical election ploy, says Labour’s Wellington Central MP Grant Robertson. “In 2012 Housing New Zealand emptied out the Gordon Wilson Flats, taking 130 places ...
    3 weeks ago