Nat housing announcement – far too little far too late

83 comments on “Nat housing announcement – far too little far too late ”

• Comments are now closed

1. WILD KATIPO 1

   16 May 2017 at 1:44 pm

   You know that sinking feeling you get when you’ve been held up getting to the airport and you see that jet plane taxiing into position ready for take off just as you start the lengthy process of checking in , – knowing you’ll never make it ?

   Well that’s the feeling that will be filling the lower regions of many core National party MP’s as they start to ponder other areas of employment after 9 long years riding on the pigs back…

   And the feeling all the rest of us have about National and its ‘ housing policy’ is that you had 9 long years to do something about it and you didn’t. You didn’t even plan for it. Why?… because you didn’t give a damn about homeless New Zealanders and family’s sleeping in cars and garages and because it lined your speculative voters pockets and that’s all you cared about. Staying in power , and appeasing your filthy rich corporate mates.

   Auf Wiedersehen , National.
2. michelle 2

   16 May 2017 at 1:49 pm

   +100 Wild Katipo
3. Ed 3

   16 May 2017 at 1:54 pm

   Bill English’s National Party doesn’t react when kids sleep in vans and families live on the street. It reacts only when it might lose some votes.
   • indiana 3.1

     16 May 2017 at 3:54 pm

     Is this any different to Labour reacting when they can’t get any votes?
     • WILD KATIPO 3.1.1

       16 May 2017 at 4:15 pm

       Then the questions become ;

       ‘ Why has National issued this latest limp policy of building houses when for years they’ve denied there IS a problem ? , furthermore ,- why did John Key campaign TEN YEARS AGO about there being a housing shortage – yet nothing adequate has EVER been done about it ?

       Is it because they know they have been caught out trying to string the voters along but now that they cannot conceal it any longer , – its election year and they are panicking ?
       • indiana 3.1.1.1

         16 May 2017 at 4:42 pm

         From http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11856473

         “CoreLogic’s estimates also show that the property’s value rose at a greater rate under Labour than under National.

         Under Labour, it rose by $255,000, or 81 per cent. Since 2008, when National came to power, it has risen by 48 per cent, or $273,000.

         Little wouldn’t comment, but his office said the story highlighted the current problem and the need for a solution.”

         Trying to frame that there was a housing crisis under National is really trying to pull the wool over voters eyes. I brought my first home in the late 1990’s and even then there was not any major housing developments going on. Land was never being freed up for housing. In my view if you want more development allow more people to split up their sections or if people want to knock down and rebuild, they have to build a townhouse not a single dwelling.
         • WILD KATIPO 3.1.1.1.1

           16 May 2017 at 4:59 pm

           Load of poppycock.

           Yes there may have been a greater percentage of price increase under Labours term , but we ALL KNOW that AFFORDABILITY has gone beyond the reach of first home buyers under National – particularly gaining momentum over the last half decade.. The news is full of it day after day.

           And you know as well as I do that quoting percentages of price increase is completely different to actual current affordability based on debt servicing . You can play with statistics all you like but if peoples wages and debt servicing ability cannot keep pace with housing affordability you have a problem. Especially when you are a govt that has a reckless immigration policy such as National does.

           The figures do not add up on so many fronts. One obvious fact is there is a ceiling of affordability based on real time earning capacity. Go beyond that , – you lock out people from purchasing a house – particularly first home buyers.

           You cannot keep sustaining over 50,000 + new arrivals per year if the housing stock isn’t adequate in keeping pace.. So why did National keep on doing it? Look further down the thread and you will find out. I’m not going to keep repeating what you and everybody else already knows.
         • greywarshark 3.1.1.1.2

           16 May 2017 at 5:08 pm

           indiana usa or jones
           National calls itself the good financial party and disses Labour as not. So
           then why has it not produced a good business model catering for the obvious demand for housing BY NZs?

           And trying to make a case for something quoting some figures showing how fast prices rose in Labour and National terms just shows your pathetic lack of interest in the problem, and your need to suck-up to National which apparently is your safe haven dummy. Poor little person, afraid to think and care for other people, and scared a change will leave you missing out on something. Not fair daddy!
         • michelle 3.1.1.1.3

           17 May 2017 at 8:39 am

           Are you upset Indiana cause people have finally seen through the lies and deceit after 9 years of the nasty gnats and now its bye bye
     • Ed 3.1.2

       16 May 2017 at 5:50 pm

       Defend psychopathic behaviour if you so wish…
4. Sacha 4

   16 May 2017 at 2:04 pm

   Apparently $650k is ‘affordable’ now.

   And as usual, they’re counting some already-planned and announced housing in the Tamaki, Hobsonville and Northcote SHAs: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/92623598/next-steps-for-aucklands-social-housing-programme-announced
   • Ed 4.1

     16 May 2017 at 2:10 pm

     What’s a mortgage at 5.5% of $ 530 000 ?
     Interest payments of $ 29 150 – alone.

     It’s a joke.
     • Tamati Tautuhi 4.1.1

       17 May 2017 at 5:06 am

       If you are on a minimum wage you won’t even cover the interest payments.
   • Wayne 4.2

     16 May 2017 at 2:17 pm

     Sacha,

     For Labour, in Auckland $600,000 is affordable (stated on the Labour website) and that is from a few months ago.

     In truth no real difference in what the two parties think is affordable.

     Also Labour says 100,000 houses over ten years for the whole country. National says 34,000 in Auckland over ten years. So again not such a big difference.
     • WILD KATIPO 4.2.1

       16 May 2017 at 2:27 pm

       The difference is , however ,… ‘ Wayne ‘ ,… that this govt has had almost a DECADE to foresee the results of their policy’s , – and don’t try to tell me or anybody else they didn’t know what the social fallout was going to be because of it.

       Trying to deflect the issue away to one of ‘similarity to Labour ‘ to excuse Nationals bullshit social policy’s aint gonna cut it. And don’t try and say that National haven’t been busy denying report after report after report from social agencies year after year.

       And they are still in denial. If you have a govt that is so arrogant that at the very last stroke before midnight they submit some queasy anemic looking ‘ housing policy’ simply to try and bolster up the vote count , – then that tells us all we need to know about how much they ever gave a damn about New Zealanders.

       Which is bloody Jack shit.
       • Johan 4.2.1.1

         16 May 2017 at 3:12 pm

         Anything coming out of Amy Adam’s mouth needs to be treated with great care.
         Her figures on social housing for needy New Zealanders included privately owned motels as a form of accommodation. One sick puppy!
     • ankerawshark 4.2.2

       16 May 2017 at 2:29 pm

       What do you think about the fact that had Labour of won the 2014 this build programme would be well underway already Wayne.

       Why are Nats going to build all these houses if there is no housing crisis.

       We need a govt that is proactive, not reactive only when they think they will lose votes.
       • WILD KATIPO 4.2.2.1

         16 May 2017 at 2:47 pm

         A decade.

         Remember when John Key ranted about housing and criticized a street in Auckland called Mcgehan close IN Mt Albert ?

         TEN YEARS AGO !!! .

         And do you remember what caused his apology ? , – that he compared that street to the sort of streets he wanted to see gone? And that the mother of Aroha Ireland objected because it slighted the community she loved?

         Aroha of McGehan Close flees NZ | Stuff.co.nz
         http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10468960/Aroha-of-McGehan-Close-flees-NZ

         TEN BLOODY YEARS AGO !!!!

         And National has done bugger all of anything to improve the lot of working people since . Except that now , – we have 3 family’s living in a house designed for one , family’s living out of cars and large numbers of homeless !!!

         AND A BLOODY HOUSING CRISIS FFS!!!

         National need to be voted out on sheer principle !!!
         • Wayne 4.2.2.1.1

           16 May 2017 at 3:00 pm

           It is not as if nothing has happened in the last few years. There has been a massive house build programme in Christchurch since 2011 which has largely solved the problem thee..

           It is now very difficult to get builders in Auckland. There has been a big ramp up of building in Auckland in the last three years. There is no doubt that current levels of immigration into Auckland (50,000 people in Auckland last year) has also rapidly pushed up demand. A lot of the builders are in fact immigrants.

           The 34,000 will largely deal with the lower end of the market, both in state houses and first homes.
           • Ad 4.2.2.1.1.1

             16 May 2017 at 3:06 pm

             Since you can’t, English will figure it out when he heads under 40%.

             Time’s up.
           • Ed 4.2.2.1.1.2

             16 May 2017 at 3:12 pm

             Excuses….excuses……….
           • lprent 4.2.2.1.1.3

             16 May 2017 at 3:17 pm

             At present 34k would probably deal with the backlog in a decade. But it is effectively useless right now.

             It is a pity that this campaign wasn’t started a decade ago BEFORE National opened the inwards migration floodgates. It was clear back in 2008/9 that there was a flood of kiwis returning from Europe, that there might be one from Aussie, and that we were still running then with relatively high immigration. Moreover more than half of them all settled in Auckland.

             FFS: the National government came in promising to deal with housing. They (and you) sat on your hands, gave yourselves an undeserved taxcut, and did absolutely frigging NOTHING about housing up until the ChCh earthquakes. Then belatedly started gearing up for ChCh after the first and second earthquakes. Meanwhile the building and infrastructure problem in Auckland just kept getting worse.

             About the only thing that our National layouts did was to waste more time by putting in an expensive, time consuming, and completely unnecessarily excessive city reorganization that further delayed infrastructure and consent processes.

             At this point, National needs to cut all immigration until Auckland catches up. After all Auckland doesn’t set those policies. National needs to do something that they appear to be incompetent at and plan. Thye need to get off their fat lazy arses and pay for the infrastrucure updates to allow more people to be housed and work in Auckland before they send them here.

             Better still, the useless idiots in National would do better to get out of the way and let some competent people do the required work. Just like they did after 1999.
           • WILD KATIPO 4.2.2.1.1.4

             16 May 2017 at 3:17 pm

             ” There has been a massive house build programme in Christchurch since 2011 which has largely solved the problem thee..”

             There also was a bloody massive earthquake that caused there to be a rebuild as well , mate.

             But what about Auckland ?

             There hasn’t been a volcanic cone erupting to the best of my knowledge out there somewhere in the Waitemata harbour recently .

             So while we are talking ‘ current levels of immigration into Auckland (50,000 people in Auckland last year) ‘ , – are National THAT inept and incompetent that they COULD NOT foresee the inevitable end results of having such an irresponsible immigration policy ???

             Pull the other one , mate.

             They did that to pander to bogus private education providers and create a boon for property speculators , both foreign and domestic , – and many of the domestic speculators they knew would be National voters or could be bribed to vote National . With the side bonus of importing cheap labour and driving down wages.

             National are as deceitful and crooked as a dogs hind leg.

             Stop the bullshit.
           • Robert Guyton 4.2.2.1.1.5

             16 May 2017 at 3:22 pm

             Jeeze, Wayne!
           • ankerawshark 4.2.2.1.1.6

             16 May 2017 at 3:47 pm

             Umm………….wasn’t the house build in Chch cause of the bloody EQ????

             National were elected in 2008 with JK claiming there was a housing crisis then. What was the plan back then? How did they work around that plan
             when the CHCh EQ happened?????

             Why wasn’t there a plan back in 2008 to train more builders????? If there had of been maybe we wouldn’t have had to import so many builders from overseas.

             The Govt’s only plan is to look after the rich and stay in power so they can continue to look after the rich. It is shameful.

             I would recomend you read Simon Wilson’s article on the The Spinoff about how National are trying to clone Labour and LYING to do so to stay in power.
             • Wayne …

               16 May 2017 at 5:35 pm

               Indeed it was, which is why I mentioned it. Basically for a few years a large number of all the builders in NZ were in Christchurch. Now they are in Auckland, which is why house building is powering ahead. But perhaps not keeping up with immigration of 40,000 just in Auckland.
               • WILD KATIPO …

                 16 May 2017 at 6:03 pm

                 ” Now they are in Auckland, which is why house building is powering ahead ”

                 Much like the housing un – affordability issue , with so many builders building McMansions and disregarding more modest accommodation for first home buyers. And that is the issue. That and irresponsible immigration settings.

                 But then , we don’t have a housing crisis do we….

                 Or is it election year again…

                 Blam Blam Blam – No Depression in New Zealand (1981) original …
                 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HVogejKx_c
               • mac1 …

                 16 May 2017 at 6:13 pm

                 “Perhaps”, Wayne?

                 I love spin. I read a TV scrolling message that said that Bill English responded to John Oliver’s response to his critique by saying the publicity would be good for New Zealand.

                 You should have heard the guffaws from my fellow watchers at that silly sally.
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 16 May 2017 at 6:39 pm

                 Only someone whose vision is confined to what the market can provide would make that statement.

                 Anticipating and planning for the market forces you describe are a small step for government, but a giant leap for a Tory.

                 Take off the ideological blindfold or get out of the way.
         • michelle 4.2.2.1.2

           17 May 2017 at 8:48 am

           I see miss know it all Adams has said we don’t want to create social housing areas but they were instrumental in creating ghettos and so was Labour and they put our Maori people in these ghettos the same ghettos they knocked down and built 500 k houses for who not us ? I see a lot of foreigners brought these.
       • Patricia 4.2.2.2

         16 May 2017 at 8:47 pm

         When are they going to build on the empty sections out in Glen Innes and Panmure ? A good start should have been made there already.
         Where will the 8500 plus families go when they are moved out of the HNZ houses that are going to be demolished ? Hopefully some of those houses will go up North and be used for another 50 odd years.
     • weka 4.2.3

       16 May 2017 at 2:56 pm

       “For Labour, in Auckland $600,000 is affordable (stated on the Labour website) and that is from a few months ago.

       In truth no real difference in what the two parties think is affordable.”

       The difference is that at the same time Labour intends to build state housing and make HZN a govt department again instead of a profit making machine. So it is also looking at lower cost housing.

       “Also Labour says 100,000 houses over ten years for the whole country. National says 34,000 in Auckland over ten years. So again not such a big difference.”

       FFS, NZ has a housing crisis. Not only is the Ak number not enough, if the rest of the country isn’t sorted out the problems will continue to increase for everyone.
       • Sacha 4.2.3.1

         16 May 2017 at 3:19 pm

         And I agree both parties have bastardised the word ‘affordable’.
         • weka 4.2.3.1.1

           16 May 2017 at 4:40 pm

           true. But then I know people that live happily in housebuses and yurts, so my idea of affordable is going to be different again 🙂 Plus the whole affordable thing looks really different on a benefit. IMO housing isn’t affordable across the board. So I don’t have too much of a problem if Labour build $600,000 dollar houses for first home middle class couples, because that frees up some rental accommodation for people that can never buy a home. Then the issue is tenancy rights. I’m less interested in helping lower income people get into the housing market because it’s the getting into the housing market that caused all the problems in the first place and assisting more people to do that will create more problems. Time we stopped treating homes as capital.

           Beyond that, the whole building industry in NZ is rort, it’s not just the land that is too expensive.
           • WILD KATIPO 4.2.3.1.1.1

             16 May 2017 at 5:16 pm

             ”I know people that live happily in housebuses and yurts, so my idea of affordable is going to be different again ”

             Yep ,… it actually is like that , I lived in a 100 year old stone miners shack in the back country near Queenstown for over a year when I was gold mining in the rivers ( floating dredge system ) , – and two years in a mountain tent when I was vagabonding around the South Island before that.

             But that’s OK for a born and bred hillbilly like this kid.

             HOWEVER,.. I go into bat for those with young family’s who need to be near facility’s , jobs and a secure place to live. A decent warm place. Same for the older ones. And its a govt’s job to ensure speculative racketeering is regulated to minimize its harmful effects. And this govt has not only NOT done that , – it has actively encouraged the process of speculation .
             Were on the same page anyways. Though I wouldn’t mind checking out a yurt tbh … just having a power socket for a cup of tea and the internet might be a wee problem …
             • weka …

               16 May 2017 at 6:37 pm

               Plenty of people living in tiny homes with kids. And you can run power into a yurt pretty easily 🙂

               I agree it’s not for everyone. But tiny housing is a really good option for some people and that frees up conventional housing for others. The best that Labour can do won’t be enough. Compare benefit rates with mortgages and tell me how people on low incomes can ever afford to buy again. Yes, beneficiaries in NZ used to buy homes. Unless the housing market collapses back to the prices of the early 90s, housing will remain unaffordable for many.
               • WILD KATIPO …

                 16 May 2017 at 7:01 pm

                 Second paragraph , – very true. Unfortunately.

                 The best that can be done is to mitigate the negative effects created by wholesale lending by banks for purchasing speculative property’s and push ahead with Labours plan of build , sell , build … and providing good safe rental accommodation for those who cannot realistically raise a deposit.

                 Then again , if we got rid of the Employment Contracts Act and reintroduced collective bargaining , award rates and a living wage… I’m sure the banks would be happy to be able to lend even more for those newly endowed with a realistic way of servicing their mortgages…

                 But we devour the elephant one mouthful at a time , don’t we now…
               • Sacha …

                 16 May 2017 at 10:44 pm

                 “beneficiaries in NZ used to buy homes”

                 Like our current deputy PM, yes.

                 And not all of us yearn to own a home, no. Better rental regulations are important. Thank you to the Greens for proposing that for years now.
               • greg …

                 17 May 2017 at 3:55 am

                 these high prices can only be held up with mass immigration and record low interest rates and massive tax payer subsidizes sooner or latter reality kicks in .
     • michelle 4.2.4

       17 May 2017 at 8:44 am

       The gnats have had 9 years and in that 9 years they have maintained there isn’t a housing crisis it has been manufactured. Now they want to buid houses and how come none of our media have asked properly and directly why , when , how and who because they are sacred and gutless as they might not get funded just like Mr bully bags ngaro said.
5. Ad 5

   16 May 2017 at 2:09 pm

   New Zealand is the most likely country in the world to undergo a real estate PRICE collapse within two years:

   https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-15/new-zealand-housing-market-most-at-risk-of-bust-goldman-says

   “New Zealand’s housing market is the most over-valued among the so-called G-10 economies and the most at risk of a correction, according to Goldman Sachs.

   In research published this week, the investment bank said there is about a 40 percent chance of a housing “bust” in New Zealand over the next two years, which it defines as house prices falling five percent or more after adjustment for inflation.
   The report looks at housing markets in the G-10 countries — those with the 10 most-traded currencies in the world — and finds they are most elevated in small, open economies such as New Zealand, where house prices have rocketed in recent years. In Auckland, the nation’s largest city, the average price has surged 91 percent since 2007 to more than NZ$1 million ($688,000).”
   • Ed 5.1

     16 May 2017 at 2:12 pm

     English must be praying it happens after September.
     • Ad 5.1.1

       16 May 2017 at 2:31 pm

       The rest of us are praying for a gradual deceleration and decine to stability.
     • Sacha 5.1.2

       16 May 2017 at 10:51 pm

       Heck, why do you think Joyce brought the election forward as much as he thought he could get away with.
   • Johan 5.2

     16 May 2017 at 3:18 pm

     To Ad,
     Wow, a drop of 5%, investors must be shaking in their boots, considering how little they have been making in the last 10 years;-))))))
     sarc.
     • Ad 5.2.1

       16 May 2017 at 4:22 pm

       The ones I know are outraged and terrified.
       • WILD KATIPO 5.2.1.1

         16 May 2017 at 4:30 pm

         So now they are getting a taste of what it feels like to be evicted / homeless / living in a car / garage / or have a child die in a cold damp shitty moldy crap hole that passes as an excuse for a ‘ home ‘.

         The poor wee bastards , – my heart bloody bleeds for them.
         • Ad 5.2.1.1.1

           16 May 2017 at 8:21 pm

           They’ll lose a percentage.

           Don’t compare the 1% to the homeless.
           • WILD KATIPO 5.2.1.1.1.1

             16 May 2017 at 8:37 pm

             Nay Harrogat, … I’m not. And I’m not putting down the good landlords either but the other bunch who give the rest a bad name. But I’m sure even you can admit its time for regulations for renters rights and landlords rights. Because as it is, it is one sided.
6. Keith 6

   16 May 2017 at 2:10 pm

   Being National, it should be relatively easy to pick apart.

   How many state houses are/were they planning either to sell or condemn in the same period?

   How many of the total package was planned anyway well before the announcement in some other announcement or budget?

   And why use tax payer money to build houses for speculators?

   This will yet again be National Party deception!
7. roy cartland 7

   16 May 2017 at 2:22 pm

   “Gov’t promises to” blah blah blah.

   Haven’t they promised to build houses already? And once again, they’ll do such-and-such way in the future.

   Would they really bother to, if they got elected? They’d have proved they could just say they’ll do it while doing nothing.

   Utterly pathetic.
8. Keith 8

   16 May 2017 at 2:24 pm

   Its quite ironic that a property speculator like Amy Adams is announcing this.
   • WILD KATIPO 8.1

     16 May 2017 at 2:35 pm

     Lets hope the builders and contractors don’t have a barney with the govt or else they might have their funding and contracts cut…
   • Ed 8.2

     16 May 2017 at 3:11 pm

     Farm property (owned by trust), Aylesbury
     Bare land (owned by trust), Darfield
     Bare land (owned by trust), Te Kauwhata
     Commercial property (owned by trust), Templeton
     Commercial property (owned by trust), Temuka
     Residential property (owned by trust), Cromwell
     Residential property (owned by trust), West Melton
     Residential apartment (owned by trust), Wellington

     http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/92409698/the-many-houses-of-our-mps–which-mps-have-a-stake-in-multiple-properties?cid=facebook.post.92409698
9. Andrew 9

   16 May 2017 at 2:29 pm

   “National’s ‘bold new housing plan’ builds 10% as many houses as Labour will”

   Is Labour promising to build 340,000 houses?
   #mathsfail
   • Sacha 9.1

     16 May 2017 at 3:22 pm

     Subsequent tweet from Richard Hills correcting it to 1/3 of, not 1/10 of: https://twitter.com/michaelwoodnz/status/864290583816187904
     • Wayne 9.1.1

       16 May 2017 at 5:37 pm

       You are comparing oranges with apples. The National announcement is about Auckland. Labours is about all of NZ.
       • rhinocrates 9.1.1.1

         16 May 2017 at 8:16 pm

         That inadvertently sums up National vs Labour. A Freudian slip?
       • Sacha 9.1.1.2

         16 May 2017 at 9:01 pm

         Fair point. What is National offering the rest of NZ?
         • Muttonbird 9.1.1.2.1

           16 May 2017 at 9:03 pm

           Zero as far as Northland bridges are concerned. Northland didn’t vote for the Nats, so they don’t get the infrastructure.
           • Sacha 9.1.1.2.1.1

             16 May 2017 at 10:42 pm

             Funny, I was thinking of those bridges. Any visible investment up north to cope with the swarms of logging trucks?
             • Tamati Tautuhi …

               17 May 2017 at 5:13 am

               Bridges was going to build 10 x bridges, any progress ?
               • michelle …

                 17 May 2017 at 8:53 am

                 Yeah someone needs to say where are the bridges the ones you promised us and this needs to be highlighted up north I am sure Willow Jean Prime will raise this issue this is an issue of integrity here and the gnats don’t have any
   • lprent 9.2

     16 May 2017 at 3:23 pm

     You are the one failing the maths. National are counting stuff that they have already announced (and not built yet). Managing not to remove the houses they are knocking over from their total. And ignoring that most of those houses are being donated to speculators to ratchet up the prices on. If there are 1000 affordable new houses in this announcement I’d be surprised.

     https://thestandard.org.nz/nat-housing-announcement-far-too-little-far-too-late/#comment-1330093

     I guess you are too stupid to look at the maths behind the spin doctors eh?
10. mickysavage 10

    16 May 2017 at 2:48 pm

    Sounds like the numbers are rubbery. Be good to see an analysis of what has already been promised and what are new houses.
    • roy cartland 10.1

      16 May 2017 at 2:58 pm

      NRT sheds some light on it:

      http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2017/05/the-usual-story.html

      “Firstly, those houses are being built by demolishing 8,300 existing homes, so the total is only 26,000. Secondly, it includes already announced and underway (and in some cases, built) projects in Tamaki, Northcote and Point England – so they’re back to re-announcing old news to get a new headline. Thirdly, two thirds of those houses will be sold to speculators rather than being state houses.”
      • WILD KATIPO 10.1.1

        16 May 2017 at 3:06 pm

        ” Thirdly, two thirds of those houses will be sold to speculators rather than being state houses.”

        Jeez Wayne.
        • Robert Guyton 10.1.1.1

          16 May 2017 at 3:23 pm

          snap!
        • wayne 10.1.1.2

          16 May 2017 at 8:14 pm

          Wild Katipo

          You are wrong. The two thirds will be sold to homeowners, almost certainly all will be first homeowners. Unless you think all homeowners are speculators.

          Labours policy is also a mix of state houses and first home owner homes.

          Stick to the facts, not the prejudice.
          • WILD KATIPO 10.1.1.2.1

            16 May 2017 at 8:49 pm

            Well , then , – you’d better take that up with NO RIGHT TURN , hadn’t you now…

            But as I recall, it was the last sentence that caused your response, so tell me then , – what proof have you got that those houses will be given preference to first home buyers rather than speculators with such an open ended policy ?

            So I’ll stick to the facts as we currently know it until you can prove it otherwise.

            Until then , unless specifically stated by National policy , the burden of proof is on you , not me.
      • Keith 10.1.2

        16 May 2017 at 3:22 pm

        All National can come up with is trickery, so bereft of ideas are these clueless liars.
        • WILD KATIPO 10.1.2.1

          16 May 2017 at 3:46 pm

          In some ways they are quite a sad bunch.

          Slaves to their free market neo liberalism , they effectively paint themselves into a corner and cut off any lateral movement. I cannot think of a more straight jacketed approach to governance than this . And that’s the root cause of their appearance of being so incredibly clueless , their inertia and being void of any workable ideas.

          And ideologues such as Bill English encapsulate this sad state of affairs perfectly.
      • greg 10.1.3

        16 May 2017 at 7:24 pm

        typical national thanks roy
11. UncookedSelachimorpha 11

    16 May 2017 at 3:44 pm

    I’m waiting for the NActs to announce a great new policy to solve the housing crisis by 2075.

    When they said a “Brighter Future” – they meant it. A crap now, and tomorrow, and maybe the next few centuries – but after that – the Future will be Magic!
    • greg 11.1

      16 May 2017 at 7:27 pm

      what crises 9 years of denialism then to days bull shit numbers
    • Tamati Tautuhi 11.2

      17 May 2017 at 5:17 am

      The “Brighter Future” goalposts have moved out to 2035, I have heard through the grapevine ?
12. The decrypter 12

    16 May 2017 at 4:05 pm

    Going to be a skinny budget, Mainly just to reinforce –As announced-bla bla As announced –bla bla As announced— on and on for ever,–bit of sniping at the left -then on and on,—-As announced —-“Beam me up scotty”
13. Draco T Bastard 13

    16 May 2017 at 4:38 pm

    The Government is promising to build 34,000 homes in Auckland over 10 years

    3400 houses per year and we’re 20,000 per year short…

    ..Yeah, that’s not going to work.
14. Cinny 14

    16 May 2017 at 6:28 pm

    Hey Nick Smith, haven’t you already done this? Or did the outgoing government decide it might be more believable coming via Amy… hey Nickoff is that because she owns more real estate than you do? Turns out she has one more property than this time last year, crikey maybe that’s why she got the job.

    1. Where will the people go who current reside it state houses that have now been ear marked for demolition? Motels? Dang that’s already costing us $100,000 a week. Motel owners profiting from via our taxes due to the negligence of the outgoing government.

    2. Will state houses sit vacant for years prior to demolition? And once the state houses have been demolished how long will it take to build the new state houses? Or will land sit vacant for years while more people suffer from lack of housing.
    As well will the materials from the old state housing be reused, those houses are often full of rimu, maybe it will be left to rot, wasted in a landfill .

    3. I’m sure they announced last year they were building more houses, and I’m sure this new announcement is part of the initial number of houses promised to be built. With that in mind… are they behind in their building schedule?

    4. What’s happening with all the other vacant state houses in NZ? Nada ? Or are they still working out who owns the houses, which remain empty while families sleep in cars, winter is coming.

    5. Will one large company be building all these houses or will the work be carried out by a number of seperate entities? Will the building supply monopoly issue be addressed, would be rather timely to do so, or will large coporations carry on exploition the situation?
    Have all cost effective ways been considered for building, utilising new technology, kitset housing etc etc?

    6. Will these new houses be energy efficient? Will they have solar hot water etc?

    7. As the housing crisis has now spread to the regions, how will this annoucement help families currently residing in sheds and cars outside of Auckland?

    8. Are there enough tradies in Auckland to build the houses? Or will the outgoing government continue to charge NZer’s who wish to learn a trade in a sector suffering a skill shortage? Tertiary students are now struggling to afford food, is that helping them learn? Maybe they should live in a car in order to have enough to eat?

    What I do know is there are plenty of people who would love to learn a trade, but they just can’t afford to do so, and the vicious cycle carries on. Not enough builders… I wonder why.

    9. Does the outgoing government currently have the land to build these houses on, or is it yet to be acquired? If it is yet to be purchased, how much has the value of said land increased in the eight long years since the national party came into office ?

    10. Have the outgoing government considered the infrastructure required to support the build, after all they have been responsible for ensuring NZ infrastructure has kept up with population growth.

    11. Finally.. why did Amy Adam not front up on Radio Live this afternoon when asked to be interviewed by Ali re this annoucement? Alpha Andy fronted up, Ali Mau even commented that Andrew Little always fronts up when asked to be interviewed on her show. And after listening to the next PM of NZ and leader of the Labour Party, Andrew addressed many of the questions I have on this issue.

    One thing is for sure.. NATIONAL IS NOT MY FUTURE
15. simonm 15

    16 May 2017 at 7:30 pm

    More election year waffle from the Gnats. Amy Adams is just Nick Smith in drag.
    • Duncan 15.1

      16 May 2017 at 8:06 pm

      I’m sure Nick and Ami could both be cured if someone held them down and administered a full syringe of vexpex in each ear.
16. Muttonbird 16

    16 May 2017 at 8:45 pm

    To me, the policy is symbolic. It’s a way to show Labour is on the side of renters wanting to own and get away from the self interested decisions of their landlords. Is a way to show Labour is on the side of young families who want to buy their first home. And it’s a way to show that dallying in the ‘investment’ property market and rental services market as amateurs is not what we want in NZ if you are only in it for yourselves and your own retirement but not in it for the tenants.

    The money, $150M, is not relevant economically but it was a nice touch to say it will be put straight into insulation.
17. David Mac 17

    16 May 2017 at 11:23 pm

    Imitation is the sincerest form of vote stealing.

    The fundamental difference remains. Kiwibuild is about people, Natbuild is about money.

    We need houses, not more Fletchers anointed knights.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS