Cross-Party Inquiry into Homelessness releases report – Government must act

Written By: - Date published: 12:11 pm, October 10th, 2016 - 82 comments
Categories: cost of living, greens, labour, maori party - Tags: , ,

homeless-inquiry

Press release from the Labour Party website.

Labour, the Green Party and the Māori Party are calling on the Government to immediately adopt the 20 recommendations set out in today’s Ending Homelessness in New Zealand report.

This morning, the Cross-Party Inquiry into Homelessness has released its final report. Over the last several months the Inquiry has received hundreds of written and oral submissions from around New Zealand, which have been brought together into one report along with a set of 20 recommendations.

Notable recommendations include:

  • Rolling out Housing First as the primary response to severe homelessness.
  • Increasing the state housing stock.
  • Introducing systemic fix to the housing crisis: Build more affordable houses, reduce the cost of building a home, and tackle speculation in the property market.
  • Creating a national strategy to end homelessness.

“It is unacceptable that over 40,000 New Zealanders are homeless today. Labour believes that New Zealand is a stronger country, a better country, when everyone has a decent place to live,” said Labour Party Leader Andrew Little.

“Labour, the Greens, and the Māori Party have come together to present a solid plan to tackle homelessness. We need to build more affordable homes and more state houses. We need a Housing First approach to get a roof over people’s heads and then help with other issues they may have.

“We know how to fix this problem. The ball is now in National’s court. Will they act or will they continue to bury their heads in the sand?” said Mr Little.

“We’ve got people living on the street, in cars and garages, who need a proper roof over their heads. Our state housing stock has got to increase if we’re going to help people,” said Green Party Co-leader Metiria Turei.

“Homelessness in New Zealand has built up to a crisis point because of our broken housing sector. The Government must build more affordable houses, reduce the cost of building a home, and tackle property speculation if we are to end homelessness,” said Mrs Turei.

“To end homelessness we need a clear national strategy, which includes all sectors and sets out the action that Government will take,” said Māori Party Co-leader Marama Fox.

“Throughout this inquiry, whānau have told us how they live day to day, balancing money between food, shelter, bills and other necessities. This report is the result of their generosity in sharing their stories and solutions with us,” said Ms Fox.

82 comments on “Cross-Party Inquiry into Homelessness releases report – Government must act ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tc 1
    10 October 2016 at 12:27 pm

    Marama fox is on the problem not the solution side as her party voted to sell off state houses.

    Political opportunism and hypocrisy from the maori party, what they seem to do best.

  2. Michelle 2
    10 October 2016 at 3:22 pm

    Agree they can’t have it both ways sell and them cry wolf its one or the other Maori party

  3. Guerilla Surgeon 3
    10 October 2016 at 4:29 pm

    I don’t think they actually care. There are a lot of people on that side who believe that the poor deserve what they get. Or what they don’t get actually I guess. I’m sure they do in an academic sort of way, and I sure they’d probably be on very quickly if they look like losing votes, but the country as a whole has gotten much mean spirited since my day. We can thank Roger Douglas’s social engineering for that.

  4. right on 4
    10 October 2016 at 5:13 pm

    20 recommendations from left lacks credibility homelessness can be fixed over night get a job. people are homeless because they want to be its a life style choice or there on drugs there is no housing problem it all been made up by the labour party to make john key look bad it wont work because we can see through the spin

    [to comment on The Standard you need to use a consistent name and email address. You’re on the radar now as a troll. Read the site Policy on this and the general rules. Only warning. I’ll put you in moderation so we can see if you take notice, there will be a delay unit your comments appear – weka]

    • Macro 4.1
      10 October 2016 at 6:33 pm

      ” homelessness can be fixed over night get a job”
      🙄
      I would think you were saying this in jest if it was not so offensive.

    • Cinny 4.3
      10 October 2016 at 10:22 pm

      “there is no housing problem it all been made up by the labour party to make john key look bad”

      LMFAO !!!!!!!!!!! I guess that’s why the outgoing PM and co are furiously building houses… wait… it’s a housing challenge..

      You really need to inform all the media in NZ ‘right on’ we can’t have the newspapers and tv networks telling lies can we? Hey give talkback a ring, and tell them all about it.

      Toodles.

    • georgecom 4.4
      10 October 2016 at 10:43 pm

      that is exactly the spin the right would use. Spot on. Excellent piss take man. As if anyone should believe the type of rubbish. Thanks for the laugh as well, appreciate your tongue in cheek humour.

  5. alwyn 5
    10 October 2016 at 5:22 pm

    Your heading “Cross-Party Inquiry” seems most appropriate when one of the parties is headed by someone who is called by his detractors “Angry Andy”.
    Are the other parties equally at cross-purposes?

    • Macro 5.1
      10 October 2016 at 6:35 pm

      hahahaha…
      Get a life!

    • reason 5.2
      11 October 2016 at 10:44 am

      Key can get pretty angry and stupid after a boozy lunch as we’ve seen in parliament alwyn …..

      Here he’s acting like a happy drunk with who might be his lunchtime drinking Pal

      ” David Seymour: In what century did the wine-box inquiry take place?

      Rt Hon JOHN KEY: One so far back I can hardly remember it.”

      Keys Lawyer … “The PM asked me to contact you to arrange a meeting at your convenience with a small group of industry leaders who are keen to engage to explain how the regime works and the benefits to NZ of an industry which has been painstakingly built up over the last 25 years or so.”

  6. johnm 6
    10 October 2016 at 5:25 pm

    This government couldn’t act to anything remotely positive for ordinary kiwis: they are total incompetent layabouts except to feather their mates’ nest. And the kiwi sheep will vote them in another term! These web blogs are a waste of breath.

  7. Groundhog 7
    10 October 2016 at 7:20 pm

    There is no point in increasing the state housing stock when we currently have state houses of wrong configuration in the wrong areas. That is why social housing is the future, because private landlords take the capital risk, not the tax payer. The authors of this report clearly have little or no knowledge of what is really happening on the ground.

    • mauī 7.1
      10 October 2016 at 8:11 pm

      You mean they’re mostly in urban areas where land prices have risen substantially and the government and the real estate industry can cash in through selling.

      • Groundhog 7.1.1
        11 October 2016 at 9:48 am

        No, I mean private capital will move to where there is a return… in this case they will build houses in the places and configurations driven by the market, ie the tenants.

        • mauī 7.1.1.1
          11 October 2016 at 10:00 am

          Exactly, there’s no return in social housing that’s why state housing has been bulldozed. The state tenants wanted to stay put, that’s the market deciding for you.

          • Groundhog 7.1.1.1.1
            11 October 2016 at 10:21 pm

            State tenants don’t get to decide where they live, and neither should they. When you get a free house you have no right to live in a three bedroom house when you only have one child. Likewise if the house is located where there is no work, you should be required to move. That is the way people have lived for ever, there should be no special privilege for people in free housing.

            As to social housing, off course there is a return. What a silly suggestion. The private investor saves the taxpayer the investment capital, and so should always receive a return.

    • Brendon Harre 7.2
      10 October 2016 at 10:57 pm

      Your argument Groundhog doesn’t follow because the private sector are massively overbuilding 4-5 bedroom homes even though the big increase in households is for 1-2 people. So it is a false argument to say that the private sector is better at allocating resources in the housing sector.

      • Groundhog 7.2.1
        11 October 2016 at 9:46 am

        You’re wrong. There is huge growth in the 1-2 bedroom home sector, mainly for what are called ‘ancillary buildings’. The fact is no sector can respond immediately to rapid change, it just so happens that the private sector does it better.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 7.3
      10 October 2016 at 11:30 pm

      “…because private landlords take the capital risk and will act to take the maximum profit possible, not the tax payer”

      FIFY

      Not just the Future of social housing, but The Brighter Future of social housing…

      • Groundhog 7.3.1
        11 October 2016 at 9:43 am

        That’s right. Risk and reward. That’s not the governments business, so they should get out of it completely. Besides, is you are advocating the government never sells state housing, there will never be a profit for the government anyway, so your argument collapses.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 7.3.1.1
          11 October 2016 at 10:41 am

          The government’s business should be to seek good social outcomes.

          I am not advocating government profit here. My point is – keeping profit out of this completely, is a good idea. Why introduce another cost (private profit) into the equation?

          • Groundhog 7.3.1.1.1
            11 October 2016 at 10:25 pm

            Social housing IS a good social outcome. Keeping profit out of housing provision is a bad idea. Private sector profit is the price of not having to have the government invest in the risk of housing stock that potentially ends up the wrong size and the in the wrong location. It is a price well worth paying.

            • UncookedSelachimorpha 7.3.1.1.1.1
              11 October 2016 at 11:46 pm

              Without adding the burden of private profit, we can build more houses.

              The government can borrow at lower cost than private investors – so we can build more houses.

              People seeking profit do not necessarily seek the best social outcome (e.g. think Serco) – they seek…profit.

              • Groundhog …
                13 October 2016 at 7:11 pm

                With the profit element, the private sector can build houses cheaper, as they do roads, hospitals, schools etc etc.

                Profit is only a burden for the envious.

                • UncookedSelachimorpha …
                  13 October 2016 at 10:16 pm

                  Sloganeering I see.

                  Profit is a burden for everyone who pays it, envious or not.

                  Healthcare in the USA is predominately private and is one of the costliest and least efficient systems in the world, e.g.
                  http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/oct/us-health-care-from-a-global-perspective

                  There is no evidence private roads are more efficient, better for tax payers or nations – in fact the opposite may well be true, e.g.
                  http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/private-roads-public-costs

                  • Groundhog …
                    16 October 2016 at 1:05 pm

                    Profit is not a burden to anyone. It is part of the price of a good or service. Only those with an entitlement mentality want something for nothing.

                    As to your examples, good cherrypicking. NZ’s healthcare system is one of the best in the world, becasue it combines private and public provision. And you’re welcome to advocate for the removal of private capital from all provision of public services, but first you’ll need to find the money to fund all the schools, hospitals etc etc currently funded by private enterprise. Good luck with that.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 7.4
      11 October 2016 at 10:12 am

      “Risk”.

      Government (the biggest player in the NZ market economy) invests in social housing because not doing so increases the risk to citizens – the associated long-term costs far outweigh the investment.

      On the one hand we get fewer dead children, and on the other we save money long term.

      Or so the numerate people say.

      • Macro 7.4.1
        11 October 2016 at 10:28 am

        I don’t know why we indulge the idiot…
        Like the Chump he has no answers – just repeats dogma learned from Yr 10 Economics.

      • Groundhog 7.4.2
        11 October 2016 at 10:25 pm

        We have tens of thousands of government owned houses, and we have dead children. Dead children are not the governments problem, they are the parents.

      • Groundhog 7.4.3
        13 October 2016 at 7:13 pm

        There is absolutely no evidence that government increasing spending on housing means less dead children. The government doesn’t kill children, parents and caregivers do. Back in your box.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 7.4.3.1
          13 October 2016 at 7:41 pm

          Yawn. Treasury calls it “morbidity with a social gradient”, and all you can do is whinge and wail your denial on a blog.

          • Groundhog 7.4.3.1.1
            16 October 2016 at 1:07 pm

            Cite the evidence. Or back in your box.

            Meanwhile, educate yourself with this…http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/85332788/This-is-how-you-fix-child-poverty-in-NZ?cid=app-iPhone

            • One Anonymous Bloke 7.4.3.1.1.1
              16 October 2016 at 1:08 pm

              Whingy whiny whinger wails denial on a blog, gets laughed at.

              • Groundhog …
                16 October 2016 at 4:43 pm

                No-ones laughing. Back in your box.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  16 October 2016 at 6:31 pm

                  It’s a tragedy that your argument is an opinion, and Treasury have more credibility for you. No, wait, it’s comedy 😆

                  • Groundhog …
                    18 October 2016 at 7:14 pm

                    There is ample evidence that what your claiming is not causation. Back in your box.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      24 October 2016 at 10:52 am

                      🙄

                      In fact, The Lancet, Treasury, UNICEF, the WHO, the World Bank, the IMF, have drawn specific links between housing and morbidity: they are the ones paying attention to facts, and you are the one wailing your ignorance and denial on a blog 😆

                    • Groundhog …
                      24 October 2016 at 12:29 pm

                      Who argued there are no links? Do you do thick as a stand up? My argument is simply that this is a matter of personal responsibility. NZ has one of the most generous welfare systems in the world, near full employment, and near free education and healthcare. There is no excuse for children dying in NZ. None.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      24 October 2016 at 12:48 pm

                      You can’t have blame without excuses. I suggest you learn to live without either of them: facts and understanding are far more useful.

                      Wail some more denial, and I’ll laugh at you some more.

                    • Groundhog …
                      24 October 2016 at 1:10 pm

                      ” I suggest you learn to live without either of them: facts and understanding are far more useful.”

                      I agree. The facts are as I stated. That’s how I understand the extent of the issue we face breaking the cycles of some peoples lives.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      24 October 2016 at 1:56 pm

                      That is indeed the extent of your understanding.

                      Asthma, Bronchiolitis, Pneumonia, Rheumatic fever. All are directly linked to poor quality housing; prevention is better than cure.

                      Or we can leave it to the market and add cholera to the mix.

                    • Groundhog …
                      25 October 2016 at 10:39 am

                      “All are directly linked to poor quality housing; prevention is better than cure.”

                      You may be right. So why aren’t parents deploying the prevention? Too many cigarettes? Too much alcohol? Who knows, but the help is certainly there if they ask and have the desire to make it work.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      25 October 2016 at 2:53 pm

                      Meanwhile, on Earth, an illiterate innumerate is flailing and failing to shift the goalposts away from the quality of housing stock, then in his twisted hatred, blaming the victims.

                      Or so it might seem at first sight. In reality, it may simply be that this handicap is brain damage caused by repeating lies.

                      Sympathy is a more charitable response. Still, brain damage, eh.

                    • Groundhog …
                      25 October 2016 at 3:40 pm

                      “… blaming the victims.”

                      What victims? In NZ we are rewarded for our own endeavour. We also provide those less well of with substantial subsidies towards their living. That’s fair enough, but are you suggesting poor economic outcomes just randomly happen to people without any culpability? I know you’re thick, but surely not that thick.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      25 October 2016 at 3:54 pm

                      poor economic outcomes just randomly happen to people

                      For example, whether you are born with a silver or plastic spoon in your mouth, or no spoon at all (beware!). All of these starts in life are random; only a fool would declare they have no impact on economic outcomes.

                      It’s a touchy subject among “business” people: the role of chance. The self-attribution fallacy is so seductive.

                      You really need to drop this blame-excuse model you’re lugging around if you want to be free of that handicap.

                    • Groundhog …
                      25 October 2016 at 4:06 pm

                      “For example, whether you are born with a silver or plastic spoon in your mouth, or no spoon at all (beware!). ”

                      So basically you are a determinist. Born poor, always poor. John Key does’t exist. Nor does Michael Campbell. Nor Jamie Beaton. How long a list do you want? it’s the same pathetic handwringing that denies Maori economic potential and relegates non-white progress in a wave of racism.

                      “You really need to drop this blame-excuse model you’re lugging around if you want to be free of that handicap.”

                      I live in the real world. It’s tough, but at least I acknowledge it. You live in a parallel universe where reality is not within your grasp.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      25 October 2016 at 4:10 pm

                      Meanwhile, on Earth, mentioning the random chances that affect economic outcomes does not equal “once poor, always poor”.

                      Only a fool would think it did.

                      Is that pathetic strawman the limit of your imagination?

                    • Groundhog …
                      25 October 2016 at 4:13 pm

                      “…mentioning the random chances that affect economic outcomes…”

                      …is a chardonnay socialists veiled attempt at excusing a lack of initiative. Hiding behind your beamer?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      25 October 2016 at 4:17 pm

                      There you go on about excuses again. Boring. Already covered. Asked and answered. Are you a goldfish, or do you just mimic their attention span?

                    • Groundhog …
                      25 October 2016 at 8:27 pm

                      “Already covered. ”

                      The day you claim to have ‘covered’ anything with your irrational diatribes is a day to laugh out loud.

  8. marty mars 8
    10 October 2016 at 8:04 pm

    “Labour, the Green Party and the Māori Party are calling on the Government to immediately adopt the 20 recommendations set out in today’s Ending Homelessness in New Zealand report.”

    This is good. I hope they can work together to make a difference for our growing numbers of homelessness.

  9. Cinny 9
    10 October 2016 at 10:42 pm

    Looking forward to Parliament in the morrow.

    Would be fantastic to end homelessness in NZ, an admirable goal for any country to have. Only a selfish person would disagree, everyone should have a home to live in.

    Landlords are making a fortune via us the taxpayer’s from government funded accommodation supplements, due to the high cost of housing; meanwhile people are suffering, and where are the houses?

    Thankful to these parties for going out and talking to the people, creating recommendations to solve this snowballing issue.

    How different are the recommendations compared to the governments investigation of the same?

    Governments plan is not working, it’s failing. Time for a change.

  10. jcuknz 10
    11 October 2016 at 8:41 am

    I thought Bennet’s comment “We are already doing these suggestions” to be quite true…. the problems and solutions are obvious to anybody BUT … like most things this government is doing too little rather too late in the piece.

    • Stuart Munro 10.1
      11 October 2016 at 8:57 am

      Tell the truth – the government is basically doing nothing.

      Nothing is the only thing they’re good at.

  11. Dhirendra Singh 11
    11 October 2016 at 8:48 am

    The cross-party report blows the issue of homelessness out of proportion and ignores looking into the causes. Lack of education, poor parenting, high alcohol consumption and drugs, broken families, family violence, lack of interest in looking for and finding jobs are the basis causes. No landlord wants to have their properties rented out to people who are into drugs and cannot afford to make regular rent payments. So education and jobs are the key. The National Government is not only working very hard on increasing social housing supply but also doing its best to address the basics which will in the long term prevent people getting into the homeless situation in the first place. No government can do everything on its own as its resources cannot be stretched beyond limits. Community organisations and other non-governmental must also play a part. To conclude, there is no housing crisis in New Zealand. Labour, Greens and Maori Party are just blowing it up to score some political points.

  12. reason 12
    11 October 2016 at 3:39 pm

    Lynch mob sterotypes from Mike Sabin, paula bennet and tolley are used to demonize and evict tenants from ‘toxic’ state houses, which are non-toxic…..

    As an example if a child were prescribed the prescription medicine Desoxyn http://www.healthyplace.com/other-info/psychiatric-medications/methamphetamine-desoxyn-full-prescribing-information/ …..

    and if we dissolved their daily dosage of 25mg into enough liters of water ….we could make a solution to spray and contaminate the surface area for approximatly 50,000 ‘ failed meth tests…. and up to $600,000,000 of ‘decontamination’ costs if we had sprayed this incredibly diluted childs dose of prescription medicine onto interior new zealand house walls ….$600 million worth of ‘cleanup’ from a small amount of childs prescription medicine .

    For even more stupid numbers consider that a 400mg or 500 mg overdose of Desoxyn may not be a fatal dose and kill a child ……. but at current testing levels its enough to contaminate 1 million homes ……….. do we have that many homes in NZ?

    Its a shame they have created and funded a scam industry to waste millions and millions on …

    I guess it serves Bennett and the nats purposes …………………Housing is for speculators

    There is no such thing as debt in john keys book ………… only leveage

Links to post