Nat state house selloff in tatters

Written By: - Date published: 7:18 am, November 23rd, 2016 - 24 comments
Categories: housing, national, Privatisation - Tags: , , ,

Another fail in National’s plan to sell off state houses is good news for those of us who believe that it is the government’s responsibility to take care of society’s most vulnerable. From RNZ:

Govt backs away from Horowhenua state house sale

The proposed sale of 249 state houses to a community housing provider in the lower North Island has fallen through.

The government, together with the district council, investigated selling the Horowhenua state houses and 115 council-owned pensioner units as a package.

However, Housing New Zealand Minister Bill English said consultation with local iwi identified complications. The government had decided not to proceed.
…
Labour’s housing spokesperson Phil Twyford said it was time the government stopped selling state houses.

Mr Twyford said it was the second sale to fail, after the government could not find a buyer for 348 state houses in Invercargill.

“It is untenable for National to be flogging off hundreds of state houses when the country is in the grip of a housing crisis and communities are struggling to cope with rising homelessness.” …

24 comments on “Nat state house selloff in tatters ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    23 November 2016 at 7:37 am

    Scum rises to the top.
    And that is what is leading NZ today.

  2. Muttonbird 2
    23 November 2016 at 8:14 am

    This is going real well for Blinglish, isn’t it? Being used to failure, he’ll shrug as if it means nothing, which begs the question – why do it in the first place?

    I wonder how many millions have been spent on this pet project so far.

    • s y d 2.1
      23 November 2016 at 8:44 am

      follow the money, it ends up in Tauranga…..

    • Draco T Bastard 2.2
      23 November 2016 at 9:35 am

      Two sales have failed but how many have already been sold at far below market value?

      • Muttonbird 2.2.1
        23 November 2016 at 9:42 am

        A decent journalist needs to get onto this.

        • tc 2.2.1.1
          23 November 2016 at 9:47 am

          Good luck with that !
          None of them bothered following the plunder that went on in akl over the GI/point england flog off so why would they bother now.

          Twyford’s pissweak, this is a red hot issue and he is way too polite and bland. Get some fire inya belly or is that safe seat too comfy now phil.

          • Muttonbird 2.2.1.1.1
            23 November 2016 at 10:42 am

            On Twyford, reckon he’d probably like to go harder but has his hands tied somewhat by the ‘don’t be too negative because it turns the voters off’ brigade which seems to have a position of strength at the moment, mostly backed by Farrar and co*.

            * wellstupidweta was gushing over the politeness of the questions and answers in parliament yesterday on the most recent EQs in parliament.

            I’d say the opposition needs to ask this government more forcefully why they have next to zero airlift capability in the face of increasing seismic risk, and have absolutely no idea what is going on in Wellington and even less desire to find out.

        • Cinny 2.2.1.2
          23 November 2016 at 11:00 am

          For sures and also combine it with the bogus P testing on state houses, I’m really fucked off about that. How many homeless and labelled as P users due to bullshit testing? How many taxpayer dollars wasted while potential revenue gathering state housing sits empty due to the crap testing?
          How much have we paid the p testers, and associated costs with refurbishing a state house from a false P contamination claim. How many private landlords have also been taken for a ride?

          115 pension units they were going to sell? WTF? That’s the oldies FFS.

          Sorries but I’m all meows over this

          • The New Student 2.2.1.2.1
            23 November 2016 at 5:50 pm

            +1 Don’t be sorry Cinny

          • gnomic 2.2.1.2.2
            24 November 2016 at 1:49 am

            Good onya but have you had direct personal experience of the P people right next door? I can’t recommend it. Once you have heard two blowhards on P raving about violence against both men and women late at night as they puffed away, it doesn’t seem that great. The thieving and violence were also negative experiences.

            True the P thing is being exploited by alarmists and DrugTestsRUS, but perhaps the providers of state housing have the right to specify no use of P in housing provided by the taxpayers? It is a very nasty illegal drug, perhaps the worst of all.

            Or are you like saying P is good, or at least not extra wicked? A very dubious claim surely.

            There seems to be some dispute about how much P residue is bad enough to require extensive rebuilding, but how about none at all as a criterion?

            What about your dwelling? Had a test for meth done?

            • Cinny 2.2.1.2.2.1
              24 November 2016 at 7:44 am

              Hiyas Gnomic. No sorry I don’t have any P users living nextdoor, 3 out of my 4 neighbours are elderly. We brought our house 3 years ago. Sometimes the people down the road have a punch up, mostly alcohol related. Havent had the other properties in our portfolio tested either, because there is no way I’d waste money on a test that isn’t reliable. Happy to pay for things like an engineering report etc because I know it is accurate.

              No I don’t condone P at all, it causes huge suffering, so please don’t twist my words. And I’ve a very open mind.

              What I am saying is the Ministry of Health have come out saying the P tests are wrong, and this I feel needs proper investigating.

              See how do they know if the current residents have used P or the prior residents? They don’t.

              Some people will do anything to make a dollar from exploiting others paranoia.

              You say… “There seems to be some dispute about how much P residue is bad enough to require extensive rebuilding, but how about none at all as a criterion?”

              How about an accurate testing method? Don’t take my word for it, how about listening to the ministry of health? Or Fair Go whom did an investigation on how bogus the tests are?

              For example someone could have handled money with a trace of P on it while working at the local dairy, they come home and those traces are then transferred to the light switch as they turn on the light, P testing company comes in the next day to test the house and boom the test is positive. See how easy it is? Person gets kicked out of the house and they have never ever even taken P. Now that would suck yes?

              https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/p-properties-fair-go-investigates-nzs-toxic-homes

              The out going government won’t be making a big deal about it, because obviously they would either be embarrassed for wasting so much money on bogus testing and clean ups. Either that or they have friends whom own the testing companies.

              Do you think the tests are accurate? If so please provide evidence to back it up.

  3. save nz 3
    23 November 2016 at 9:12 am

    Good news – but is anybody following how many the Natz have already sold, and more importantly who is benefiting (name and shame) from the ‘consultation fees” and the “sales and transfers’?

    • shorts 3.1
      23 November 2016 at 11:00 am

      there were a number of stories around this earlier in the year or last year… it didn’t look good – i.e. cronyism seemed rife or at least open to allegations of… but that was a long long time ago

      • save nz 3.1.1
        23 November 2016 at 12:09 pm

        It’s a good set of stats to have around come election debate time. I’m sure Key would love to answer how they spent $4 million on consultants to sell state houses and who actually bought them if they actually got sold.

        It would be a good set of statistics to have on hand for the opposition.

  4. DH 4
    23 November 2016 at 10:22 am

    I’d like to know more about the sales that have gone through or will go through.

    The price of houses has skyrocketed in Tauranga since they started negotiating the sale of state houses there. Cheaper housing has probably more than doubled, the market value of the 1000 Tauranga state houses has likely gone up by hundred of millions of dollars. Who is making out of the deal, who gets that capital gain?

  5. mary_a 5
    23 November 2016 at 2:28 pm

    Another fail for golden boy, along with his (treasonable) expensive failed flag change referendum and now his dead TPP. Not a good year so far for Johnny.

    He’s become an expensive liability for the country!

    Get him out!

  6. Treetop 6
    23 November 2016 at 4:42 pm

    249 homes could have tenants in them in no time, were these homes to be returned to HNZ where they belong.

    Do the right thing National and return all the taken HNZ homes.

  7. Rae 7
    24 November 2016 at 8:25 am

    I expect that a number of these houses will have reached their use by date and have little real worth other than the land under them. If they are unoccupied and unlikely to be occupied because of location, no-one is going to want them. We probably have to suck up the loss on the buildings themselves and sell them for land value only – BUT only to first home buyers and with few or no covenants so that small, very affordable houses can be built on them. I’d put a restriction on them that they could only be rented as holiday homes or if you are away for a period of time, they could not become parts of portfolios.
    What money comes from the sale, which would be comparatively small, would have to go in its entirety, to new social houses where they are needed.
    Public purse is going to have to be seriously tapped for the true amount of social housing that is required in this country. I reckon the best part of 30% of the population could really do with housing that is not crazily overpriced.

    • Treetop 7.1
      26 November 2016 at 9:00 am

      These state homes are still habital, were they not habital they would not be sold. The criteria to live in a state home is the main problem.

  8. UpandComer 8
    24 November 2016 at 5:28 pm

    I agree.

    What we really need is a situation like HNZ’s own admission in it’s 2010-11 Annual Report.

    Lets do a Labour job, and have one third of NZ’s largest asset class unliveable – rotten and eroded, uninsulated, the wrong size, in places no one wants to live. Because $5billion worth of asset wastage is fantastic. Especially when Labour had complete control – no nasty developers, or assertive Maori, or evil bankers to deal with, after all the caring intellectual Labour government was in charge.

    Lets keep state houses state owned no matter how ludicrous it is in the circumstances, because what matters is that the state owns all the houses. Even if no one is ever going to live in the house, lets keep it for the rats and the rot because in Labour, that’s what we do, and we do it well.

    National do understand it’s the government’s job to take care of the most vulnerable. They’re just one thousand times better at it then Labour.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 8.1
      24 November 2016 at 8:03 pm

      As someone who remembers your first effluent on this forum, I’d just like to say that it’s nice that you’ve finally decided to be honest about your opinion.