Archive for the ‘Social Issues’ Category

Wellingtonians say; “Everyone deserves a home – no more homelessness!”

28 November 2015 Leave a comment




“Housing is a basic human need and access to decent quality, affordable and safe housing should be seen a human right. This means that our society and more specifically the State has an obligation to ensure that everyone living in New Zealand always has access to adequate and secure housing. We further believe that this obligation means that housing needs to be considered as more than a commodity whose allocation is decided entirely by markets and the profit motive.” – Hikoi for Homes/Child Poverty Action Group

Wellington, NZ, 21 November – Around two hundred people gathered in Cuba Mall, central Wellington, as part of a nationwide day of protest at growing homelessness; poor standards of housing; state house privatisation, and lack of long-term stability in rental accomodation;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (42)


After safety instructions were issued by Ian Harcourt, one of CPAG’s march organisers, the protesters set off through the streets of Wellington, headed to the Civic Square;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (13)


Throughout the entire event, there was only a brief, sole police presence as one lone police car halted traffic to allow marchers to cross a busy intersection;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (14)


Greeting the marchers at Civic Square, Nigel Parry and Ruth Prentice,  sang a song dedicated to Emma-Lita Bourne, who perished  in August 2014 whilst living in a damp, cold house infected with toxic mould. Nigel and Ruth page tribute to Emma-Lita, and to the coroner, who had the guts to speak the truth as to why Emma-Lita died needlessly;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (15)



The number of protesters had swelled to around 300 people and constituted  a wide cross representation from the community, including many families with children. These were citizens concerned at the direction New Zealand was heading toward;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (20)



Banners flew from the various groups involved with the day’s event, including UNICEF, one of the  organisers;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (43)


Labour’s Grant Robertson was present;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (16)


The first speaker, Dr Nikki Turner, from Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), addressed the crowd;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (21)


Dr Turner reminded people that twenty years ago, New Zealand signed the UN covenant on the rights of children. She said this included a duty of care to ensure safe, decent housing for children. She asked, “so why are we here today?

She said that this is a national shame that New Zealand are not providing basic human rights for families in need.

Dr Turner said that as a General Practitioner she was seeing people turning up at her clinic daily, sick, from unsafe houses. They were “sick and recurrently sick, because the houses were not adequate“.

Dr Turner listed poverty-related diseases that were common to people living in damp, cold houses; asthma, colds, chest infections, pneumonia, rheumatic fever, chronic lung diseases, saying that  “our housing makes our children sick“. She said cold affects our immune systems, making people more vulnerable to moulds  and diseases shared through over-crowding.

If we fix our housing, we’re going to go a long way to improving our health in New Zealand,” said Dr Turner.

Dr Turner then listed seven issues necessary for government to implement, saying they were achievable;

  1. To stop the sale of all state and council houses,
  2. A one billion dollar provision to build more public and social housing,
  3. Minimum standards for all rental houses,
  4. Greater tenure protection for all tenants,
  5. A rent freeze for five years,
  6. A statutory right to be housed, as a human right,
  7. State subsidies for modest income-earners for home-ownership, as New Zealanders had a right to a home.

Dr Turner said that the current situation was unfair; costly; and affecting our children. She said that many of the medical problems caused by inadequate housing led to permanent, on-going crippling that would last throughout their lives.  “We need to fix this for the future of our community.”

Dr Turner was followed by Dr Philipa Howden-Chapman, from Otago University’s Department of Public Health;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (27)


Dr Howden-Chapman pointed out that about a third of New Zealanders lived in rental accomodation. She said that many rental homes were cold and damp, far colder than what was recommended by the UN. She said “they were built in another age, when someone was home most of the time, ventilating the house, and keeping the fires going“.

Dr Howden-Chapman said many homes were between 12 to 16 degrees, making them no warmer inside than outside. She said babies were particularly susceptible, being unable to shiver, and losing heat much faster than an adult. Older people also got colder faster than fit, younger people.

Dr Howden-Chapman said that around a third of houses had mould growing in them. She said that mould at certain times of the year release spores and toxins, some of which were the most dangerous substances known.

According to Dr Howden-Chapman, New Zealand spends $3 billion per annum maintaining the roading network.  But there were no equivalent regulations  required to maintain rentals at a set standard or provide adequate heating or ventilation. She said Emma-Lita Bourne‘s family had an insulated house, but could not afford heating. By contrast, Europe had solar-heating on houses that constantly prevented  homes from dropping below 18 degrees.

“But we don’t do any of that.”

Dr Howden-Chapman asked why we have Health officials going around coffee-bars to check on hygiene or WoF mechanics to check the brakes on our cars, but no one is responsible to check on the quality of rental housing.

It was pointed out that a third of housing-related ACC costs could be saved if unsafe steps and other parts of houses were fixed.

She asked  “does this government care”?

Dr Howden-Chapman said it was disgraceful that Bill English admitted that the National government was the biggest slumlord in the country and could “dismiss the whole housing stock”.

She said that a small country of 4.4 million people should be able to work together, with government, local bodies, and NGOs co-operating so  that everyone had access to warm, dry, safe housing.

Dr Howden-Chapman decried New Zealand in the 21st century where children were found to be living in cars, camping grounds, homeless in the streets, or containers, or crowded houses. She said it was no accident that children regularly  miss school and fall behind in their studies, or end up in hospital Intensive Care, where many die.

She said “we can do better, we must do better“.

Dr Howden-Chapman demanded security of tenure for tenants so that the problem of transient families could be reduced. She said families in Housing NZ homes should be able to stay in one house for as long as their children were at school. Dr Howden-Chapman said it was vital that families moved from a state house be re-housed in the same neighbourhood so that their community links with other people could be maintained, as well as allowing children to remain in the same school.

She acknowledged that many New Zealanders cared about this pressing social problem and asked the government, “do you care?

Ian Harcourt introduced a musical group, ‘Choir, Choir, Pants On Fire‘. He said that while this protest was about speaking truth to power, that they the singers he was introducing were here to “sing truth to power”;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (30)


One of the group’s “novel” acts was to engage the audience with participation; to ask us to raise our hands; extend two fingers; and wave it in the direction of Parliament;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (33)


Choir, Choir, Pants On Fire‘ was followed by Ariana, from the State Housing Action Network;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (34)


Ariana spoke of the formation of the State Housing Action Network as a response to Bill English’s announcement that National was looking at selling up to eight thousand state houses. She called the move despicable, given that there was a critical shortage of state  housing in New Zealand.

Ariana announced a petition calling for a halt to forced evictions from state houses, calling it a form of social cleansing. She described the privatisation of state housing as National’s determination to make a profit from the sales. Ariana warned that if National had their way, they would sell the entire housing stock, worth around $15 billion.

Ariana described National’s rationale for the sale, based on the properties being “run down” as just an excuse and nothing more. She said that National had a “track record of selling state houses”. She also pointed out that lack of maintenance of state housing had been caused by successive governments.

Ariana said that it was important that not only new state houses were built, but that the current stock should be brought up to standard.

Ariana congratulated the good work done by CPAG and UNICEF, as well as political parties like Labour, Greens, and Mana giving support. She said we have to work together on this problem by forming a strong coalition to oppose the neo-liberal agenda.

Ariana further stated that when market rents for state houses were introduced in the 1990s, it was predicted that it would be the single biggest cause of poverty increasing. She said that current policies by National were an extension of  the 1990s.

She condemned taking money from those at the bottom of the socio-economic heap, and transferred to those who were already wealthy.

Ariana called for an introduction of a capital gain tax instead of taking money from those who could least afford it. She said National agenda would eventually lead to charities taking over the role of providing for the poor, as in Victorian times.

Ariana said that the State Housing Action Network strongly endorsed the seven points put forward by Dr Nikki Turner (see above).

Ariana then led a chant,

“Everybody deserves a home!”

Following Ariana, was Martin, a state house tenant, with Kyrie in his arms (who seemed totally fascinated by the microphone in front of him);


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (36)


Martin described  a state house with nine people living in it’s three bedrooms. He said there was now seven people living in that house, including five adults. Of those people, Kyrie, the little boy in his arms, had athsma. He said such over-crowding was not conducive to good health.

He said he contacted Social Housing Minister, Paula Bennett, to complain of an open drain that was outside the property; the rotting windows inside; and the general state of disrepair. He said Paula Bennett passed him on to Building and Housing Minister, Nick Smith. Martin said Nick Smith advised him to take his case back to Paula Bennett.

Martin invited Paula Bennett to visit Kyrie’s delapidated state house to look at the problems herself. Martin said she refused. (Though this blogger can report that Bennett is not averse to visiting state or social housing when there is a photo-op involving a “good news” story.)

Martin said he had to phone his local MP, Annette King, to try resolve the problem. He said that remedial work was undertaken, but that it was “cheap and shoddy, and they’ve done repairs that are of no fit standard for people to live in“.

He said this was happening all over New Zealand and would be our future. He said Kyrie deserves better.

He encouraged people to stand together; stand strong, and to hold this government to account.

Following Martin, ‘The Ruths‘, entertained  the crowd with some beautiful singing. The songs were delightful, as well as political in flavour, in the best tradition of 1960s singer-activists such as Joan Baez. Ruth Mundy on guitar, with Ruth Prentice on violin;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (38)


Following ‘The Two Ruths‘, Paul Barton, from the Christian Council of Social Services addressed the crowd;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (39)


Paul spoke on behalf on the Living Wage movement, describing it as a response to the growing gap in our society between the rich and the poor. He spoke of the top 10% over the last thirty years having enriched themselves at the expense of the rest of us who have been told “we can’t afford higher wages“.

He said that the wealth gap is shown in the  housing crisis where “literally, this hits home”.

Paul said that the Kiwi dream of home ownership is fast evaporating with house prices rising and a growing number of the population resorting to renting. He pointed out that half the population now lives in rented housing. He said renters tended to be younger, poorer, and families.

It was pointed  out that the housing and wealth inequality problem was not due to “mysterious forces beyond our control”.  He said it has been a direct result of decisions our society has made how we share the bountiful wealth we have in this country. He said we needed to find ways to do things differently.

Otherwise, Paul said, we run the risk of a generation left behind in sub-standard housing.

Paul said the living wage was one response to this problem, where employers paid an income to live, not just “get by”. He said a Living Wage would not only allow people to pay their rent, but also save to buy their own home.

“And that way, paying a living wage overcomes part of the housing affordability problem.”

Paul congratulated the Wellington City Council for having the courage to pay it’s staff and security contractors the Living Wage. He said over 500 workers had had their wages increased from just above the minimum wage, to the Living Wage. He hoped that soon cleaning and recycling-collection contractors would also soon be covered by the Living Wage.

Paul related how workers and their families who had their wages lifted to a Living Wage were motivated to persist to make their lives better.

He added that the Living Wage has not happened “by chance” and that it was the result of a building movement for change. He pointed to the “wonderful support from you people here in Wellington” and said,

“We can achieve change but we need to work together.”

Paul said that people and organisations can work together to make a difference and reduce inequality, and that we did not need to wait for a change of  government or change the law.

He said that local authorities like the Wellington City Council played a major part in the Living Wage movement, and were an important part of our daily lives.  Paul said that Wellington City Council had a role in the kind of housing that we live in. He said that at the last 2013 local body election it was the Living Wage and building warrant of fitness that were the main political issues.

Paul encouraged Wellingtonians that next year’s local body elections also made housing, warrant of fitness, and social housing a major political issue. He encourage people to  get involved in “overcoming this awful housing problem“.

“Don’t say we can’t do something, because we know we’ve already proved we can make a difference.”

Deborah Morris-Travers from UNICEF and ‘Make our Future Fair‘ was the last speaker;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (40)


The former Parliamentarian and currently National Advocacy Manager at UNICEF NZ, told the crowd that, as part of the United Nations, her organisation was mandated to stand up for children’s rights all around the world

Deborah stated that New Zealand Aotearoa was currently breaching the rights of its children by not providing an adequate standard of living, of which housing playing a major part.

She said that we all have a part to play in creating a nation that grants all New Zealanders safe and adequate housing, that lays the foundation for our communities and our society. She encouraged people to keep working together on these issues.

Deborah revealed that “the government is madly polling and running focus groups. They’re sensitive to the mood of the public.”

She said we have to keep building the public mood to ensure that our families are kept safe.

Deborah announced that UNICEF was launching the Fair Future Campaign and said that Radio NZ would be airing a story on children’s rights. She said that UNICEF would be working hard on this issue as National was about to start work on it’s next Budget.

“We have got to keep the message upfront in the news media, in social media, in our families, in our communities, that we will not tolerate our children being left behind.”

She said that every year $10 billion was spent on  “picking up the cost of child maltreatment and child poverty.” Deborah said this was unsustainable as well as being unjust.

Deborah asked, “What do we value in Aotearoa-New Zealand? What do we stand for? Surely it is be a fairer future.”

She said, “Housing is a fundamental human right. This about rights, not favours!”


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (19)


As the event concluded, a reporter from Radio NZ interviewed one of the  participants;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (41)


As far as could be determined, Radio NZ was the only msm that sent a reporter to cover the event. Apparently TV1, TV3, print media, commercial radio, et al, were too busy still dealing with the global fall-out from Ritchie McCaw’s resignation from the All Blacks.

As the protest event came to it’s conclusion, this blogger turned to look up at the sky which had darkened with ominous grey clouds. Fluttering atop the Wellington Civic Building were the five flag-options for the present Flag Referendum;


homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (37)


It was a sobering moment when one considered the symbolism of those five flags.

Notably the $26 million price tag that went with the Referendum.



homelessness - housing - state housing - child poverty (35)





Fairfax media: Toddler’s death in damp state house a ‘broken promise’, says Labour

Fairfax media: Damp state house played part in toddler’s death Finance Minister English says govt… wants to reform state’s role as ‘biggest slum landlord’

Fairfax media: Social housing rollout opens doors for the disabled

UNICEF: UNICEF NZ calls on PM to make good on promise to children

Radio NZ: Hundreds march to demand action on housing

Radio NZ: Insight for 22 November 2015 – What More Can be Done for Children?


Radio NZ: Community interest sought for state housing

Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG)

State Housing Action Network

Living Wage Movement

NZ Herald: New bill to give Government control over state houses

NZ Herald: Editorial – Housing hikoi sign of rising social unrest

Other blogs

The Standard: Hikoi for Homes

Previous related blogposts

Can we do it? Bloody oath we can!

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Tahi)

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Rua)

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Toru)

The cupboard is bare, says Dear Leader

Government Minister sees history repeat – responsible for death

Housing Minister Paula Bennett continues National’s spin on rundown State Houses

Letter to the Editor – How many more children must die, Mr Key?!

National under attack – defaults to Deflection #1

National’s blatant lies on Housing NZ dividends – The truth uncovered!

Copyright (c) Notice

All images stamped ‘’ are freely available to be used, with following provisos,

» Use must be for non-commercial purposes.
» Where purpose of use is commercial, a donation to Child Poverty Action Group is requested.
» At all times, images must be used only in context, and not to denigrate individuals or groups.
» Acknowledgement of source is requested.




Salvation army - bill english - sale o=f state housing


This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 23 November 2015.



= fs =

Andrew Little: if you want to send a really strong message to New Zealanders…

14 November 2015 4 comments





Palmerston North, 8 November 2015 – E nga mana

E nga tapu

E Te whanau o te roopu reipa

Tena koutou katoa

Talofa lava

Kia orana

Malo e lelei

Nǐ hǎo


Thank you so much for that welcome.

Can I acknowledge party president Nigel Haworth, our new senior vice president Virginia Andersen, our Māori vice president Nanaia Mahuta and all of our hard working New Zealand Councilors.

I also want to acknowledge our outgoing General Secretary Tim Barnett. Tim, thank you so much for everything you’ve done for this party and the huge effort you have made.

Thank you to everyone in our caucus, especially my Deputy Annette King and our Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson.

And can I also acknowledge and say thank you for your patience to the two most important people in the world to me: my wife Leigh and my son Cam.

Why We Fight

Over 100 years ago, a group of miners gathered in a small union hall in Waihi and voted to take a stand against a company that was exploiting them.

The dispute had gone on for months already.

The miners’ hopes were simple.

They wanted to be treated well at work, to be paid fairly, and they wanted to know that when they went to work they would come home safely.

So the miners went on strike to press their case.

The response was immediate and devastating.

The full power of a corrupt and cosy establishment was unleashed against them.

The Prime Minister of the day branded them “enemies of order.”

One miner was beaten to death.

A young union organiser, a recent immigrant from Scotland, was helping the miners with their cause, travelling the country to raise money and give speeches in support.

He saw first hand the lengths that the powerful would go to in order to cling on to their position.

He saw that if the dreams of ordinary people were going to be possible, they needed more than a voice — they needed to have their hands on the law-making power of Parliament.

That young man’s name was Peter Fraser.

The party that he helped found, our party, has been on the job for nearly 100 years.

  • 100 years of fighting for a more just New Zealand.
  • 100 years of standing up to the smug and the self-contented.
  • 100 years of making life better for all New Zealanders;

All the people who organised together and campaigned together over the last century, people like you and me; they’ve left us an awesome legacy.

Just think of what our party has achieved:

  • Think of Joe Savage, who built our modern social safety net, our health care, our pensions, and who carried the furniture into the very first state house.
  • Think of Peter Fraser fighting for a state education system at home, and a lasting peace abroad.
  • Think of Walter Nash and his fight for affordable home loans.
  • Think of Norman Kirk walking onto the grounds at Waitangi hand in hand with a young Māori boy, sending the powerful message that it was time to restore mana to the Treaty of Waitangi.
  • Think of David Lange and the courage it took to stand up to a superpower. To assert what he called the power of humanity, the power of decision, over the madness of nuclear war.
  • And, just a few years ago, think of all the good Helen Clark did to lift New Zealand families through the Cullen Fund, KiwiSaver and Working for Families.

Our party has never been afraid to take on the big fights:

  • To lift New Zealanders up.
  • To restore opportunity.
  • To help us live our dreams.

You know, as New Zealanders, we don’t ask for the world. We have some simple aspirations.

Owning a home; having security for the people we love; a chance to enjoy the outdoors and the environment we love; and a job that gives us the time and the money to lead a fulfilling life.

These are the aspirations that we all share.

Together, they’re the Kiwi Dream, a dream that’s central to our country’s identity.

We’ve always been a progressive, big hearted people.

We believe in looking out for each other and doing the right thing.

We believe everyone should have the same opportunities to make the most of this life.

Our forebears in this great party put these values at the heart of the Labour project.

Whenever the Kiwi dream has been threatened, Labour championed it.

Whenever the rights of New Zealanders needed defending, Labour defended them.

That’s what previous generations did.

Now it’s our turn. Now it’s our turn.

We’ve come together this weekend to begin the work of rebuilding the Kiwi Dream.

I came to this party because Labour has always stood up for a fair go — for opportunity for everyone.

It’s an enormous honour to have been elected your Leader — I don’t underestimate the responsibility I hold.

But I’m not one of those people who can say I was born to Labour.

In fact, it was quite the opposite.

The first time my Mum voted for a Labour candidate was when she voted for me.

My Dad was another story altogether. He was a staunch National supporter.

He used to yell at the TV whenever political opponents came on the telly.

The people who most got under his skin? Union leaders, and pretty much everyone in the Labour Party.

So, “Andrew Little, Leader of the Labour Party and former union leader” probably isn’t the ambition he had for his son.

He’s probably up there right now going “god, look at my boy, where did I go wrong?”

But the truth is, he did a great job.

He and mum taught me some basic values.

Think for yourself. Make up your own mind. Stand up for other people and never be afraid to lend a helping hand to someone who needs it.

So Dad, you did the right thing, you were just in the wrong party.

My own political views were forged in the era of the Springbok Tour, and of the controversies over justice for Arthur Allan Thomas and justice in the Erebus Disaster.

I watched these events unfold and discovered in myself an intolerance for injustice.

When I see injustice, it sticks in my craw and I am compelled to stand up to it, and fight it.

The injustice I speak of is when the powerful and the privileged abuse their position to take advantage of the weak.

Here’s what I believe:

  • I believe in dignity. The dignity of the person matters most; and every person must have the opportunity to realise their full potential;
  • I believe in equality. A system that shuts people out because of where they live, or who they are, or who they love, or who their parents are is unjust and cannot stand;
  • I believe in the great freedoms that make us who we are. Freedom of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association.

I know that the freedom I cherish cannot come at the expense of other people’s freedom. And I am very clear: there is no freedom in poverty and deprivation.

And I believe in fair rewards, too. Everyone who works to make this country great should share in the rewards.

It’s those values that I have carried with me my entire life.

The experiences I’ve had in my working life have taught me the type of leadership you need if you want to fight and win for progressive causes.

I learnt that it isn’t about making everyone happy or trying to avoid confrontation and disagreement.

Instead it’s about taking a stand because it’s the right thing to do.

I learned that real change — lasting change — change that’s worth fighting for takes patience, and resolve and determination.

It takes a long term view, keeping your eyes on the prize, not being drawn into every battle and skirmish and never giving up on what matters.

It’s these values and a lifetime of fighting for them that’s led me to believe we need to change the direction of our country.

Because right now this government isn’t living up to our values.

We aren’t being true to who we are, and that means more people are being shut out of the Kiwi Dream.

Most Kiwis believe that hard work should bring fair rewards.

But our economy is increasingly weighted in favour of those already doing well, while putting up barriers that stop other people getting ahead.

That’s why the incomes of the top 10 percent of New Zealanders are now ten times the income of the bottom 10 per cent. Ten times.

Most New Zealanders used to grow up believing they would be able to own their own home if they worked hard and saved hard.

But our houses have become playthings for speculators, many of whom live offshore — putting home ownership out of reach of ordinary New Zealanders.

That’s why in Auckland last year, the average house made more than three times as much as the average worker.

That’s right, the average Aucklander made $58,000 last year, but the average house price went up by more than $180,000.

That’s just crazy.

And now home ownership rates have hit their lowest level in 64 years.

We have to turn that around.

Most Kiwis also expect New Zealand to be a force for good on the world stage.

But this government is ducking its obligations and turning us into a lightweight in the international community.

We enlisted the support of many countries to get onto the UN Security Council.

We promised we would be the conscience of the world — that we would provide moral leadership.

But when we were faced with a real question of moral leadership: a humanitarian crisis engulfing millions of Syrian refugees, New Zealanders looked on in horror as the government dithered and prevaricated because they were waiting for a poll.

This is not the legacy of our great internationalist leaders: Fraser, Kirk, Clark.

And what about health?

Most Kiwis believe when you get sick, the public health system will be there to help you get well.

But our health system is stretched to breaking point, slashing services and denying Kiwis the care they need.

That’s why when Graham Higgins from Northland needed a procedure to diagnose his cancer, he had to wait over 6 months — by which time his cancer had become terminal.

I’ve battled cancer myself.

I know what it’s like to wait for the results of that test that could change your life.

So I’m making this commitment right now: when I’m Prime Minister I’ll make sure Kiwis get the care they need when they need it and I’ll give our doctors and nurses and health workers the funding they need to do their jobs.

But these aren’t the only values we’ve lost in the last few years.

Most Kiwis believe we owe it to our kids to give them a better life than we had.

But this government has turned a blind eye to appalling rates of poverty in this country.

That’s why the children’s wards of our hospitals are seeing Kiwi kids sick with third world diseases.

It’s why Emma-Lita Bourne died in a state house because her home was mouldy and unhealthy and no one was willing to help.

We must never let anything like that happen again.

New Zealand, we are a better country than that.

We’ve got to turn the page on the last seven years;

We’ve got to turn the page on rising inequality, on child poverty, on the housing crisis and on cuts to our health system,

If we want to restore the Kiwi Dream then we have to change the government.

And, once we’ve done that, we have to change the way we govern, too.

Right now, it seems the government is more interested in slapstick and personal sledging than in genuine leadership;

It’s more interested in flags and pandas than in serious issues.

It seems like the latest political sideshow is often more important than what is happening to you or your family.

I didn’t become an MP to play parliamentary parlour games.

I came into politics to help people.

To change lives for the better.

To take this country forward.

I ran for the leadership of our party because I want to lead a Government that makes a genuine difference.

Today, I want to give New Zealanders a clear idea of the shape and character of the sixth Labour Government.

I want to show you how we’ll put Kiwi values back to work in our government, so everyone can live the Kiwi Dream.

The Economy

It starts with restoring the values that should underpin how we run our economy.

We need to remember who we run the economy for.

People. New Zealanders. Their families.

This government’s forgotten that.

They’ve been rewarding property speculators, tax dodgers and big corporates at the expense of Kiwi families.

And here’s the truth: it’s not working.

The economy is slowing.

Just when we should be soaring, we’re stalling again.

Just this week we’ve learned the economy lost 11,000 jobs in the last three months.

Unemployment has hit 6% and is expected to reach 7% by the end of next year.

That’s the highest level since the height of the GFC.

The economy is actually going backwards in half of our regions.

If we’re going to restore the Kiwi Dream of opportunity for everyone, we need a stronger economy

That starts with getting more New Zealanders into higher skilled, better paid jobs.

Ask me my three priorities as Labour Leader?

Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.

You can ask me my top ten as well but I think you get the gist.

A job is about more than just a pay packet, it’s about the dignity of work. It’s about a place and a purpose in your community.

Every Kiwi who can work should be able to work.

Every business that needs a skilled worker should be able to find one.

And where people can’t work, the government should support them because we won’t allow Kiwis to be thrown on the scrap heap.

From day one, we’ll kick-start the economy.

  • We’ll bring forward major infrastructure projects like the City Rail Link in Auckland and passenger rail in Canterbury.
  • We’ll build better schools so every Kiwi kid can learn in a modern, high quality building.
  • We’ll set up a Regional Infrastructure Fund for major development projects to create jobs and boost our regions.

We will be relentlessly focussed on the future. That’s why I’m proud of Grant Robertson’s Future of Work Commission, which is showing us how to build a better economy for the future.

We’ll create thousands of new jobs in new industries by restoring research and development tax credits — giving our businesses a tax break on every dollar they spend on innovation.

We’ll modernise our education system so our kids are better prepared for jobs that haven’t even been invented yet.

And we’ll tackle climate change, because the only way our economy has a future is if our planet has a future.

That means aiming higher on renewable energy — we should be bold enough to say we want to see 100% renewable energy in New Zealand.

That also means doing better on reducing emissions. I want us to reach across the political divide, bring parties together and agree on ways to make New Zealand a leader on climate change. We don’t want to be a shirker on this issue.

Labour’s proposal for the Paris conference is a 40% CO2 reduction below 1990 levels. That’s the kind of ambition we need on this issue.

We also need to improve our social safety net so it works better in a world where people change their careers more often.

And today, I want to add the next element of Labour’s economic plan.

As you might have guessed, it’s about jobs.

It’s about the government lifting its game and living its values.

There are 151,000 New Zealanders out of work already and that number is increasing. 151,000.

On top of that, there’s 90,000 underemployed New Zealanders, and another 200,000 who can only find temporary work.

For everyone to have a fair shot at the Kiwi Dream, everyone needs a chance at a decent, secure job, and the government should be doing its bit to make that happen.

But it isn’t.

Not even on the most basic decisions.

The government spends $40 billion a year purchasing goods and services.

That’s huge buying power but, currently, government bodies only consider their own bottom line when they make purchasing decisions. Not the country’s bottom line, just their own.

They buy ‘cheaper’ options, often from overseas, regardless of the impact on New Zealand, even if it means Kiwis will lose work.

That’s the kind of dangerously short sighted thinking that has been behind some of the biggest government botch ups in the last few years.

  • the Hillside workshop closure in Dunedin and asbestos in imported rail wagons;
  • The Novopay debacle
  • Kiwi businesses shut out of the $1.9 billion IRD computer system contract.

At a time when our economy is stalled and our regions are struggling, there is a better way.

So today I’m announcing the first part of our jobs plan.

We’ll use the government’s buying power to create jobs here at home instead of sending them off overseas.

We will make job creation and the overall benefit to New Zealand a priority in how the government chooses its suppliers.

No more shipping tax-payers’ money offshore and starving our own companies of opportunities.

No more sending jobs overseas when we could be supporting a stronger economy here at home.

That’s billions of dollars that we will focus on creating jobs here in New Zealand.

And because we are putting existing money to better use, this policy has little to no fiscal cost.

Our plan, which we’re calling “Our Work, Our Future,” will put people to work, boost our businesses and it won’t break the bank.

Rebuilding the Kiwi Dream also means restoring opportunity to the thousands of New Zealand kids who are missing out — robbed of their future by the circumstances of their birth.

It means shining a light into dark corners of our country where people are trapped.

We still have 305,000 children living in poverty. 305,000.

2 out of 5 of those children have a parent who is working.

This can’t continue. It is unjust and it’s not who we are.

We all know this, but we’ve turned our backs for far too long.

Well, that ends today.

I’m committing our party to a new principle:

We will not tolerate poverty in New Zealand in the 21st century.

We won’t tolerate the poverty of the human spirit that means we choose to leave hundreds of thousands of children languishing in deprivation.

We won’t tolerate the poverty of imagination that means we stop thinking of creative ways to bring that poverty to an end.

Because I know that when this speech is over we will hear the usual chorus of jaded and cynical voices. They’ll say:

“It can’t be done. It’s too ambitious. You’re dreaming.”

To the cynics I say this:

Even if you’ve given up, I haven’t. I won’t. Ever. It’s not who I am.

New Zealanders are sick and tired of a politics that’s defined by cynicism and devoid of ambition.

It’s time to do better.

New Zealand, I’m asking you to join with me in a concerted effort to eradicate poverty in our country.

In government, we will put action on poverty at the heart of everything we do.

We’ll increase the number of hours people can work without having their benefit cut — to give more people a pathway back into full time work.

We’ll work towards 100% qualified teachers in ECE centers so every kid can get the best start in life.

We’ll feed hungry kids with our food in schools programme and we’ll make sure every child grows up in a warm, safe, dry home with our Healthy Homes Guarantee.

And we will get serious about lifting wages by working with unions and employers on modern and progressive workplace relations that boosts wages and lifts productivity and shares the gains fairly.

Every decision my government makes will be checked against its impact on child poverty.

So, every Budget, every year, we won’t just report on GDP growth or how much money we’ve spent, we’ll front up and tell the country how many children a Labour government has lifted out of poverty.

Standing up for Kiwis

The final part of rebuilding the Kiwi Dream is having a government that stands up for Kiwis again.

For many of us in this room, I know the TPPA is very important.

There are many things we still don’t know about what’s in the agreement.

But there is one thing we do know.

The National Government has signed us up to a clause that says we will not be able to make laws restricting the sale of land or housing to non-resident foreigners.

That’s what they’ve done.

They’ve signed us up to a commitment to other governments, and other people who don’t live in New Zealand, who don’t want to live in New Zealand, who don’t care about New Zealand.

That commitment limits what our democratically elected representatives in parliament can do.

And it’s wrong.

It’s wrong.

It’s an attack on democracy.

It’s selling out our democratic right to make our own laws.

And this matters to me because I’ve had some fights for New Zealanders under some very bad laws.

I started my law career under the Employment Contracts Act — a terrible law that cut the wages of thousands of New Zealanders.

The reason I came to Parliament was to make sure that we had laws that were good for New Zealand.

And I’m not giving that away to anybody.

But I’m not the only one with that view.

Remember Peter Fraser — one of the founding voices of our party. He saw what was happening to the Waihi Miners and he saw that for ordinary people to have a shot at their dreams they needed a democratic government on their side.

That’s what is at stake here.

Can we hold on to our democratic rights? Not if we let National trade them away.

So, I’m telling you, when it comes to undermining our democracy and our sovereignty in the TPPA, I am totally opposed and I will fight with every fibre in my body to stop it, to resist it, to make sure it never happens in New Zealand.

Our party has always backed the Kiwi Dream.

For nearly 100 years Labour has been fighting for New Zealand.

And today, it’s our turn to continue that fight.

Today, too many people feel like their dreams are slipping away.

And this government isn’t standing up for Kiwis or for what we believe.

It’s our job to turn this around.

In just two years, we can change the government and we can change this country.

We can restore opportunity.

We can create jobs.

We can end poverty and help Kiwis get ahead again.

Together, we can rise to the challenge of a new era, and chart a better course of our country.

I’m asking all of you today to make your voice heard.

I’m asking you to join our campaign, to talk to your neighbours and your friends and your family, to show them there is a better way.

Let’s send the message out from this hall today that the days of doing the easy thing are over.

It’s time to do the right thing.

The days of cowering to powerful vested interests are over.

It’s time to stand up for New Zealand.

The days of shrugging our shoulders and tolerating poverty and inequality are over.

It’s time to aim higher and do better.

It’s time to raise our sights.

We can do this.

We must do this, and we will do this.

New Zealand, together, it’s time for us to rebuild the Kiwi dream.


[Re-published verbatim via the Labour Party website]

Comment: Andrew Little said;

Most Kiwis believe we owe it to our kids to give them a better life than we had.

But this government has turned a blind eye to appalling rates of poverty in this country.

That’s why the children’s wards of our hospitals are seeing Kiwi kids sick with third world diseases.

It’s why Emma-Lita Bourne died in a state house because her home was mouldy and unhealthy and no one was willing to help.

We must never let anything like that happen again.

New Zealand, we are a better country than that.

We’ve got to turn the page on the last seven years;

We’ve got to turn the page on rising inequality, on child poverty, on the housing crisis and on cuts to our health system…


We still have 305,000 children living in poverty. 305,000.

2 out of 5 of those children have a parent who is working.

This can’t continue. It is unjust and it’s not who we are.

We all know this, but we’ve turned our backs for far too long.

Well, that ends today.

I’m committing our party to a new principle:

We will not tolerate poverty in New Zealand in the 21st century...


We’ll work towards 100% qualified teachers in ECE centers so every kid can get the best start in life.

We’ll feed hungry kids with our food in schools programme and we’ll make sure every child grows up in a warm, safe, dry home with our Healthy Homes Guarantee.

Fine words. Words conveying a strong message.

Now Andrew Little needs to follow up those words of hope by doing something simple and at little cost to the tax-system; announce a new role of Minister for Children, and take on the position himself.

John Key has allocated the portfolio of Minister for Tourism to himself, and takes his role ‘seriously’ by regularly holidaying on the sun-drenched, warm-sands, of a Hawaiian beach. Nice for him. He gets a very nice tan out of it.

Andrew Little should do the polar opposite; take on the role of Minister for Children, and show the people of New Zealand where the priorities of a real Prime Minister should be.

Come the day after the next election, the plaque on the Ninth Floor PM’s office should read;

Rt. Hon. Andrew Little
Prime Minister
Minister for Children

He’ll miss out on the suntan, but his reward will be true legacy-making stuff.

And better than a new flag, any day.




What's Done to children they will do to society



This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 9 November 2015.



= fs =

A picture sheds a thousand tears…

11 November 2015 1 comment


asylum at last - fazel chegeni



= fs =

Categories: Global, Social Issues Tags:

A Tale of Two Head Coverings – a personal-essay

11 November 2015 1 comment


break the chains of racism


A recent incident in Auckland highlighted that racism is still very much alive in our country. The case of Fatima Mohammadi being denied employment because she wore a piece of fabric on her head is indicative how far New Zealand has yet to go on being the tolerant society we would like to think we are.

According to some in our society, this is acceptable;


fashion headscarf


The garb of two internationally-recognised women below is very acceptable, and the wearers held in high regard by many throughout the West;




This is not acceptable, and elicits fear, prejudice, and intolerance;





One of the four women above was denied employment at a job interview, because she wore a head-scarf.

Can you guess which?

Clue: she’s not caucasian.

By any measure, this is a form of racism. Those who mask their racism by insisting that employers have a “right” to base their employment decisions on race, religion, ethnicity, etc, are trying to hide their prejudice behind the mask of “free choice”.

“Free choice” ends where racism begins.

Otherwise, we end up with “free choice” being expressed like this in cafes, buses, and other public places;



















“Freedom of  choice” to be racist has a corollary – it denies another human being the right to participate on an equal footing, based solely on religion, race, etc.

Do we really want to see signs like this springing up around New Zealand;




Perhaps the most bizarre way  racism is couched  is the proposition that forcing muslim women to abandon their headscarves is a “feminist” stance. Like the “freedom of choice” excuse, the “feminist” excuse is pseudo-progressiveness which masks the real ugliness that is racism.

Forcing a woman not to wear a certain style of clothing is no more feminist than telling her what she must wear. It is another  Orwellian concept which most of us are already familiar with;




Anyone who thinks that it is ok for Ms Mohammadi to be discriminated against has obviously never been discriminated against. Otherwise they would know the intense feeling of humiliation such discrimination creates.

The feeling of humiliation was one of my first lessons in the nastier side of human behaviour. As a child, I witnessed first-hand racist abuse meted out to my mother by local half-witted young men at an A&P Show. Two or three louts (I can’t recall the actual number) overheard her telling me and my siblings to stay close and not get lost in the crowd.

They obviously over-heard her talking to us in her native language. Being from Eastern Europe, her different language and accent was obvious.

They surrounded my mother and told her to speak English. They told her to go back home. They shouted menacingly at us. Powerless, we clung to her, until they got tired of their racist ranting and walked off.

Not the best experience for a six year old.

I’ve never forgotten the experience. That kind of thing sticks with you for the rest of your life.

There are those – usually privileged white, English-speakers – who will maintain that was simply “freedom of speech” when they publically harangued, intimidated, and frightened us.

It didn’t feel like “free speech”.

Quite simply, this is not the Kiwi Way. In 1981, this country fought apartheid in a far-away country and there were mass protests in the streets as many New Zealanders resisted  state racism in South Africa.

Aotearoa’s stand on South Africa’s apartheid system was instrumental in that country’s democratic reformation.

If business-owners can discriminate on grounds on a headscarf, what is the next grounds for discrimination? As history shows, the human capacity for bigotry can start small and seemingly insignificant, and end up with a holocaust that forever impacts on the collective human psyche.

It seems that we have much work left here in Aotearoa to address our own attitudes.





NZ Herald: Editorial – Clashes of culture call for tolerance

Other Bloggers

The Daily Blog: Cottonsocks – Response to NZH editorial

Previous related blogposts

A taste of racism

Random Thoughts on Random Things #1




special exemption


This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 7 November 2015.



= fs =

Categories: Social Issues Tags: ,

2015 – Ongoing jobless tally

7 November 2015 1 comment


Unemployment logo


Continued from: 2014 – Ongoing jobless tally

So by the numbers, for this year;


















unemployment quarter ending September 2015 - new zealand



*NB: actual rate for Dec 2014/Jan 2015 Quarter should be 5.7%, not 5.8% as depicted in above column. See Stats NZ data here.

June 2015 quarter – Employment & Unemployment


statistic nz - june 2015 quarter - unemployment


Commentary from Statistics New Zealand:

The unemployment rate increased to 5.9 percent in the June 2015 quarter (up from 5.8 percent), Statistics New Zealand said today. At the same time, there were 7,000 more people employed over the quarter (up 0.3 percent).

“Even though employment grew over the quarter, population growth was greater, which resulted in a lower overall employment rate for New Zealand,” labour market and household statistics manager Diane Ramsay said.

“Despite lower quarterly growth, this is still the 11th consecutive quarter of employment growth, making it the second-longest period of growth since the period between 1992 and 1996,” Ms Ramsay said.

Over the year to June 2015, employment growth was still fairly strong (at 3 percent) with 69,000 more people employed. The manufacturing industry showed the strongest annual employment growth.

“This is the first time since the December 2013 quarter that the construction industry has not been the largest contributor to annual growth in employment,” Ms Ramsay said.

The vast majority of growth was in Auckland (29,600 people), where the annual employment growth was driven by retail trade and accommodation, followed by construction. Bay of Plenty had the second-highest employment growth, with 11,000 more people being employed over the year.

Annual wage inflation, as measured by the labour cost index, was 1.6 percent, compared with annual consumer price inflation of 0.3 percent.


September 2015 quarter – Employment & Unemployment


statistic nz - september 2015 quarter - unemployment


Labour market at a glance

  • Number employed fell for the first time in three years.
  • Unemployment rate increased to 6.0 percent.
  • Labour force participation rate falls further from record high in March 2015 quarter.
  • Annual wage inflation remained at 1.6 percent.


Additional analysis;

  1. The Employment Rate fell 0.5%
  2. According to the HLFS, Total actual weekly hours worked increased over the last Quarter by  +0.4, and  Annually, by +1.5

Which means few people are working longer hours to sustain economic growth.


Other Economic Info


ANZ Economic Outlook

The New Zealand economy has clearly entered a more challenging period. Growth averaged just a 0.3% quarterly pace over the first six months of the year vis-à-vis a 0.9% quarterly pace over the second half of 2014.

Annual growth slowed to 2.4% in Q2 (the slowest since December 2013) and timelier indicators suggest a pace tracking perhaps a tad below 2% at present; not dire – nor a downturn – but certainly sluggish and consistent with deceleration.

In per-capita terms, activity is treading water and slowing labour demand (but still-strong labour supply growth) has seen the unemployment rate tick up to close to 6% Consumer and business confidence have fallen, and where the expansion was previously relatively broad-based, a more divergent regional performance is now evident.

Full Report here.

CTU Economic Bulletin 173 – Oct 2015

Despite economic growth in production per hour worked which peaked at 4.7 percent in dollar terms in the year to June 2014, wage rises have been subdued. Even the Reserve Bank is commenting on it. What are some of the reasons for wage rises being low?

We have a poorly performing economy. Most of the recent growth has been because more people have been brought into the labour force or people are working longer hours, rather than because people are producing more in each hour they work. Over the supposed “rock star” period of June 2013 to June 2015, the economy’s production per hour worked increased only 0.1 percent. Yet companies’ profit rates are rising quickly – so wages could.

Even the Minister of Finance concedes that current strong net immigration is holding down wages. It could be much better controlled so that, while taking humanitarian concerns into account, it focuses on skills that New Zealand residents genuinely do not have or couldn’t be trained to do, and in numbers that the country can absorb.

The Government has been open about suppressing pay increases for people employed in the state sector. Its tight funding of contractors such as in aged care also holds down wages. By doing this, the Government is reducing pressure on private sector employers for pay increases.

Full Report here.

Building Consents – Statistics NZ


  • 24 September: Fonterra Co-operative Group lifted its forecast total available for payout for the 2015/16 season to $5.00 − $5.10 kgMS due to an increase in the forecast Farmgate Milk Price of 75 cents
  • 14 October: Standard and Poor’s  downgraded Fonterra’s  credit rating from A to A-

Westpac Economic Overview – November 2015

Brewing El Niño conditions are likely to cause dry weather and knock the economy. And there will be further challenges from a global economic slowdown, the levelling off of the Canterbury rebuild, and the possibility of a housing market slowdown in Auckland.

Full Report here.




Addendum1: Under-employment

The  under-employment stats;

People who are underemployed are those who work part-time, would prefer to work more hours, and are available to do so. In unadjusted terms, the number of underemployed grew by 12 percent over the year. While the number of part-time workers increased over the year, the ratio of people underemployed to employed part-time also rose – from 17.1 percent in June 2013 to 18.7 percent this quarter.

Official under-employment: up


Jobless: people who are either officially unemployed, available but not seeking work, or actively seeking but not available for work. The ‘available but not seeking work’ category is made up of the ‘seeking through newspaper only’, ‘discouraged’, and ‘other’ categories.

Under-employment: employed people who work part time (ie usually work less than 30 hours in all jobs) and are willing and available to work more hours than they usually do.

Employed: people in the working-age population who, during the reference week, did one of the following:

  • worked for one hour or more for pay or profit in the context of an employee/employer relationship or self-employment 

  • worked without pay for one hour or more in work which contributed directly to the operation of a farm, business, or professional practice owned or operated by a relative 

  • had a job but were not at work due to: own illness or injury, personal or family responsibilities, bad weather or mechanical breakdown, direct involvement in an industrial dispute, or leave or holiday.


Addendum2: Other Sources

Statistics NZ:  Household Labour Force Survey



[To  be periodically up-dated]



= fs =

State houses – “wrong place, wrong size”?

6 November 2015 2 comments


1949 state house in Taita


Information released under the Official Information Act (OIA) suggests that National’s oft-repeated claim that around “one third” ( or 22,000)  of  state houses are in the “wrong place and wrong size” is not supported by Housing NZ’s own figures.

Various ministers, including our esteemed Dear Leader,  have indicated that up to “a third” of state houses are “in the wrong place or wrong size (or ‘type’)“.

The “wrong size/wrong place” claim is the argument being used by National to advance a major sell-off of Housing NZ properties.

On 1 November, 2014, Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett said on TV3’s ‘The Nation’,

“It’s about being smart in what we’re doing. So you just look at us having the wrong houses, in the wrong place, of the wrong size..”

On 2 December, 2014, the Minister responsible for Housing NZ, Bill English expressed his agreement with the proposition of one third of Housing NZ homes being in the “wrong size/wrong place” ;

“Yes. As recently as just last month Housing New Zealand issued a press release that said: ‘around one third of our housing stock is in the wrong place, wrong configuration or is mismatched with future demand’.


… in fact, a third of them are the wrong size, in the wrong place, and in poor condition.”

On 28 January this year, John Key announced in his “state of the nation” speech;

 “Around a third of Housing New Zealand properties are in the wrong place, or are the wrong type to meet existing and future demand.”

Housing NZ currently  “manages 67,245 homes” (as at 30 June 2015). When Key, and other National ministers refer to “around a third of Housing NZ properties”, simple arithmetic translates that fraction into 22,190 homes being the “wrong size/wrong place” .

On 17 September I lodged OIA requests to Ministers Nick Smith, Paula Bennet, and Bill English. Only English was prepared to answer – and even that took  42 days (30 working days) to eventuate after a reminder was emailed to the Minister’s office.

In a response eventually received on  29 October,  information in the form of a  chart -“Stock reconciliation taking into account impaired properties as at 31 January 2013” – was attached;


minister english oia response 29 october 2015 - HNZ housing stock - wrong place wrong size


In two columns headed “Right Place, wrong home” and “Wrong Place“, the respective figures add up to 13,560. This constitutes a little over half of the “22,000” that is being bandied about by National.

I  specifically asked Bill English;  “How many [state houses] are the “wrong size and in what manner are they the “wrong size“? “Do they have too many rooms; too few rooms?

English replied;

“In general terms, Housing New Zealand has a shortage of smaller two bedroom homes and
larger family homes and a surplus of three bedroom homes, with the exception of Auckland
where there is a demand for homes of all sizes. The type or configuration of particular
properties may also affect demand making them difficult to let.”

English totally ignored the direct question “How many [state houses] are the “wrong size“. He either does not know, or is unwilling to admit the number. “In General terms” is not a specific quantity.

Furthermore, English says that “Housing New Zealand has a shortage of smaller two bedroom homes and larger family homes and a surplus of three bedroom homes, with the exception of Auckland where there is a demand for homes of all sizes.”

Unsurprisingly, the 2014/15 Housing NZ Annual Report confirms the high demand for housing in Auckland;

“Across the country we also have too many three-
bedroom properties, while demand has grown for smaller
one- or two-bedroom homes or for much bigger homes.
Demand for homes in the Auckland region is high and
more Housing New Zealand homes are needed.” (p22)

Yet, the chart referred above (“Stock reconciliation taking into account impaired properties as at 31 January 2013“) states that there are 8,180 houses in the Auckland region that are supposedly “Right Place, wrong home”  and a further 420 that are in the “Wrong Place” – 8,600 in total.

This would appear to contradict the Minister’s assertion that “there is a demand for homes of all sizes” throughout Auckland.  Both cannot be right.

This contradiction is further compounded by the fact that, as of 30 June, there were 2,267 people on the waiting list in the Auckland City area;


auckland city housing nz waiting list 30 june 2015.

Even where houses have been the wrong size, Housing NZ has been undertaking a programme to add extensions, or entire new, smaller dwellings on larger sections;

Overcrowding is an issue that affects many of our
tenants’ health and wellbeing, especially in Auckland,
where there is high demand for larger homes. Our
bedroom extensions programme is helping to meet
demand from the social housing register in Auckland
by converting three-bedroom homes into four- and
five-bedroom homes. Adding an extra one or two
bedrooms (and another bathroom where necessary)
means more of our tenants are living in appropriately
sized and healthier homes. During 2014/15 we
completed bedroom extensions to 247 homes.

Our existing land in Auckland will also house more small
families, couples and single people in need. We are
building new two-bedroom homes on Auckland sections
that are big enough to have another dwelling. During
2014/15 we built an additional 107 two-bedroom units
on existing Housing New Zealand sections, which also
included making improvements to the existing homes
where these were required.“(p23)

If we substract the 8,600 homes in the Auckland region, from Housing NZ’s original estimate of 13,560 (see above chart), this leaves 4,960 houses “wrong place/wrong size”.

Nearly five thousand homes supposedly in the “wrong place/wrong size” category in Auckland – and there are still 2,267 people on Housing NZ’s waiting list in Auckland City. How is that feasible?

I further enquired from English; “Could you please explain what the term “wrong size, in the wrong place” actually refers to? Where are they situated that are considered the “wrong place“?”

English replied;

In 2011 Housing NZ carried out an assessment of it’s future projected stock
requirements for the purpose of forward planning, based on its future use of intention of its
properties and informed by demand forecasting. This assessment was not intended to reflect
current demand at a point in time…


The analysis identifies some properties as being the wrong home, not specifically the wrong

It is worthwhile noting English’s comment that “Housing NZ carried out an assessment of it’s future projected stock  requirements for the purpose of forward planning,  [but] this assessment was not intended to reflect current demand at a point in time”.

The apparent purpose? According to English’s 29 October statement to me;

This relates to the number of bedrooms that a property has and also includes
properties that are wrongly configured to meet demand for social housing.

“Social housing” is National’s code for provide providers.

The 2011 Housing NZ  assessment of it’s “future projected stock” appears to have been designed to meet the needs of “social housing”, aka private providers.

In respect to answering my question “Where are they situated that are considered the “wrong place”?”, English’s response was vague and lacked any informative value (as did many of his answers);

“A property being in the wrong place refers to the location of the property in relation
to demand. On a regional basis, there are areas of general low demand. However, some of
Housing New Zealand’s properties may be in locations with high concentrations of state
housing or existing social issues that may contribute to them being difficult to let or
result in a high turnover of tenants.”

There were no geographical locations; no cities or towns; no suburbs given. The statement in itself is meaningless twaddle with a vague reference to “some of  Housing New Zealand’s properties may be in locations with high concentrations of state housing or existing social issues”.

Where these “wrong places” might be is anyone’s guess.

My follow-up question – “How many areas have been designated “wrong places”?” – was ignored entirely.

In an effort to drill down and assess where houses might be in the “wrong place”, I asked English; “where houses are in a particular “wrong place”, how many people are on HNZ waiting lists in those same “wrong places”?

The purpose of this question was straight-forward. Where demand for housing is high in a given region, it seems inconceivable that any properties in that same region would be in the “wrong place”. Auckland being a prime example.

I wanted to know how many other regions had high numbers on their waiting lists – whilst also having houses in the “wrong place”.

According to the above chart, the following regions designated as having houses in the “wrong places” have the following numbers of houses attached to them;

Auckland: 420

South Island: 740

Central North Island: 870

Lower North Island: 1,740

“Community Group Housing”: 100

Total: 3,870

Because of the (deliberate?) vagueness of English’s response, we have no way of knowing where, for example, the South Island’s supposed 740 houses are located in the “wrong place”.

It is difficult to understand why the Minister could not be more precise.

If the “wrong size/wrong place” issue is real, then National must have hard data, with supporting numbers, identifying where state houses are located  in the “wrong place”. This information should be on-file; readily accessible; and easily released to interested parties.  Then again, my OIA lodgement to Minister English took 30 working days (including one “request” for an extension) to complete.

Perhaps such data does not exist.

According to Housing NZ itself, every district within it’s authority has people on their waiting list;


Housing NZ waiting list - by region - by bedrooms needed




There is no district recording zero-need.

I asked English; “What replacement houses are being built to replace those that are the “wrong size”, and how many rooms will they have? More? Less?” andWhere Housing NZ houses are in the “wrong place” – will new State houses be built in exactly the same place?”.

The Minister responded;

Housing New Zealand’s Asset Management Strategy provides for the redevelopment of its
land holdings in order to align the typology, location and size of its portfolio with demand.
As a result, it is building more two, four and five bedroom properties. Where there is low
demand, Housing New Zealand will look to sell surplus properties and reinvest the proceeds
into providing homes in areas of high demand.

As outlined above, Housing NZ has a current programme of adding bedrooms to existing three bedroomed houses, and, where the land is big enough, adding two bedroom houses onto an existing built-up section.

English’s reference to selling “surplus properties” is troubling, as we are still none-the-wiser where such properties exist. Especially when all Housing NZ districts have people on waiting lists.

As for English’s assertion that “Housing New Zealand will look to sell surplus properties and reinvest the proceeds  into providing homes in areas of high demand” – Paula Bennett was not willing to give that assurance on 1 November last year, speaking on Q+A.

Which leads on to the last question I put to the Minister; “If HNZ houses that are in the “wrong place” are sold/given away to community organisations – what will make those houses suddenly become in the “right place”?”

Because if it’s in the “wrong place” when owned by Housing NZ – why would it suddenly be in the “right place” owned by someone else?

The Minister’s response was baffling;

The Government has no plans to offer Housing New Zealand properties that have been
identified as being in the ‘wrong place’ to community housing providers. In Tauranga and
Invercargill for example, the areas identified for initial potential transfers of social
housing properties from Housing New Zealand to community housing providers, MSD’s purchasing
intentions anticipate stable demand. Following a transfer, any new provider would receive
both the properties and a contract with MSD to continue to provide social housing.”

That statement appears to be at complete variance with this undated Beehive document, headed “Social Housing Reform Programme – Media Qs and As“;


“Around one third of the $18.7 billion Housing New Zealand portfolio is in
the wrong place or of the wrong type to meet this need.”


“To help community housing providers grow, there will be sales of
Housing New Zealand properties and we will involve these providers
in the redevelopment of Crown land…”


“Details will be determined after national engagement, including
with community housing providers and iwi,over coming months.
Providing we can achieve better services for tenants and fair
and reasonable value for taxpayers, we will look to sell
between 1,000 and 2,000 Housing New Zealand properties over
the next year.”


“15. Will properties being sold be tenanted, and if so what
happens to the tenants?

In most cases where houses transfer to a community housing
provider, the properties will have tenants. The new owners
will continue providing social housing with the income-
related rent subsidy.”


“Look at selling between 1,000 and 2,000 Housing New Zealand
properties for continued use as social housing, run by approved
community housing providers. These providers might buy
properties on their own or go into partnership with other
organisations lending them money, contributing equity, or
providing other services.”

The document specifically refers to the sale of state housing, that are “the wrong place or of the wrong type“,  to community service providers.

And in Parliament, on 24 March, Bill English himself made reference to the sale of “wrong place” Housing NZ properties to Community providers;

“In the first place, Housing New Zealand has an ongoing sales
policy, and often it is selling houses that we do not need or
that are in the wrong place, or some of them have just become
unsuitable to be lived in and cannot be upgraded at reasonable
cost. In respect of the transactions that are coming up over
the next 6 months or so, there is a process of testing what
the real values of those houses are. For instance, many
community providers believe those houses are not up to date
on maintenance, and therefore are overvalued when they are
valued as if they can be sold for the best price on the day
in the location that they are in. Those are exactly the things
we are having discussions about over the next few months.”


“Neither property developers nor community housing providers
are compelled to buy houses off the Government. If they do
not want to do that—if they do not want to manage the tenants
or own the stock, which may be the wrong size in the wrong
place—then they certainly do not have to do that.”

Which creates doubt over English’s assertion that  “the Government has no plans to offer Housing New Zealand properties that have been
identified as being in the ‘wrong place’ to community housing providers”.

So if Housing NZ properties that are in the “wrong place” are sold to community housing providers – as confirmed by Minister English on at least two occassions – what will transform those “wrong place” houses into “right place” houses?

Very little of National’s “wrong size/wrong place” proposition makes sense – unless viewed through the lens of raising revenue by way of partial asset-sales.

That is the only thing that makes any sense of this issue.

The only reason that the “wrong size/wrong place” meme has worked for National thus far is that very few (if anyone) has delved behind the phrase to check it’s validity.

Perhaps it is time this issue was scrutinised more carefully?

The apparent fudging of Bill English’s response to my OIA request, in itself, speaks volumes.


On 29 October, I wrote to Bill English expressing my dissatisfaction with his response to my OIA lodgement;

from: Frank Macskasy <>
to: “B English (MIN)” <>
date: Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 8:01 PM
subject: Re: State houses – wrong place, wrong size


Thank you for your letter dated 29 October.

I refer you to two questions which you have not answered in my OIA request;

4. Where are they situated that are considered the “wrong place”?

5. How many areas have been designated “wrong places”?

Please advise if you do not intend to answer those questions, and I will lodge a formal complaint with the Office of the OImbudsman.


-Frank Macskasy


In 2014/15 Housing NZ “returned” $321 million to the government’s Consolidated Fund. This comprised of $118 million in tax; $96 million in interest costs, and $107 million as a dividend. (2014/15 Annual Report, p24)





TV3: The Nation – Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett

Parliament: 6. State Housing—Suitability of Housing Stock

Fairfax media: John Key Speech – Next steps in social housing

Housing NZ: 2014/15 Annual Report

Housing NZ: Register by priority and Auckland local board – 30 June 2015 Social Housing Reform Programme – Media Qs and As

Parliament Today: Social Housing Reform — Objectives

Other Blogs

The Jackal: More homelessness under National

Previous related blogposts

Government Minister sees history repeat – responsible for death

Housing Minister Paula Bennett continues National’s spin on rundown State Houses

Letter to the Editor – How many more children must die, Mr Key?!

National under attack – defaults to Deflection #1

Another ‘Claytons’ Solution to our Housing Problem? When will NZers ever learn?

National’s blatant lies on Housing NZ dividends – The truth uncovered!

National recycles Housing Policy and produces good manure!

Our growing housing problem

National Housing propaganda – McGehan Close Revisited

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Tahi)

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Rua)

Housing; broken promises, families in cars, and ideological idiocy (Part Toru)




Housing NZ - state housing - over crowding


This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 1 November 2015.



= fs =

Weekend Revelations #3 – Greg O’Connor and criminal statistics


national government-recorded-crime-down-20-per-cent


On TVNZ’s Q+A, on 25 October, Michael Parkin interviewed outgoing Police Association President, Greg O’Conner.


TVNZ Q+A - Greg O'Conner - Police Association - crime statistics


In a rare moment of candid speaking, O’Conner had some eyebrow-raising revelations to make about National’s portrayal of crime statistics and budgetary decisions.

On statistics,  Parkin referred  to  National and Police  trumpeting a 30% drop in crime. O’Conner responded wryly;


“Well, it’s uh, lies, damned lies, and statistics. If you look at the crime stats, um, which is those recorded stats, you’ll say the government and police administration are right. If you look at the stats around calls for service, they’re the phone calls that police receive in communications centes, etc, and just an example, family violence, domestic disputes; up by 10% a year pretty much, and across the board, 20% increase. So it’s the calls for service, to the extent that the communications centres couldn’t manage last summer. There’s a fear, and we’re obviously we’re trying to make sure it doesn’t happen this year. So the two are going in completely different directions.”

Parkin pointedly asked if the statistics are being manipulated. O’Conner’s response  was startling in it’s honesty;


“Of course they are. Every government department – I mean, what happens is that, the stats themselves are fair, but I mean I see it as a debate [like] about health, y’know, medical – the waitings lists have going down, but people get kicked of waiting lists and so it’s, you achieve – Put it this way, with crime stats, what we’ve set out to do is the way to cut crime stats is to hit your bulk crime. So if you have any success there, of course, that’s going to be big numbers down. And what you ignore is your small  numbers. You ignore, in fact, interestingly enough you ignore drugs. You ignore a lot of your serious stuff that you only find if you go looking. And in the past that’s got us into real trouble. Got us into trouble with the child abuse files, in particular, and you remember, that they were put aside. Because they weren’t politically known. They were business as usual. All of a sudden we were concentrating on the crime and crash reduction, um, and we ignored that stuff. And so you’ve got to be careful. And this is where the politicisation of policing is really dangerous. It’s not done by the Minister saying ‘you gotta do this and you gotta do that’, it’s done by funding.”

O’Conner’s scorn is confirmed by an event last year where one police district was caught out, red-handed, falsifying crime statistics. Seven hundred burglary offences “disappeared”;


Police made burglaries vanish - greg o'conner - national - crime statistics


Herald journalist, Eugene Bingham, reported;

” It transpired others knew about the allegations around the same time, including the local MP and then-Minister of Justice, Judith Collins.”


Two-year search for 'ghost crimes' truth - greg o'conner - national - crime statistics


A police report “raised questions over pressures to meet crime reduction targets”, but Police were quick to assure that the fudged stats were “isolated“;


Police deny being caught out by false review claims - greg o'conner - national - crime statistics


National is in fear of statistics that show their policies are either not making any appreciable difference or, are worsening problems. A prime example is Paula Bennett’s adamant refusal to measure poverty in New Zealand;


Measuring poverty line not a priority - Bennett


Any claims to “reducing crime” should therefore be viewed with extreme scepticism in the light of Greg O’Connor’s disclosures on fudged crime statistics which confirm National’s active policy of discretely hiding statistics it finds embarrassing. Or not measuring them at all.

Interestingly, O’Conner’s comments on National’s policing budget is also true.

Firstly, “Vote Police” is broken down into several sections, where monies are allocated to different areas. This allows plenty of scope for political manipulation as to where money will be put.

On top of which, using the Reserve Bank inflation calculator, it is fairly simple to determine that the Police budget has not kept pace with inflation.

Research going back to 2008 shows that Vote Police has  dropped in dollar-terms (using 2008 Dollars as the base), and in 2015/16, the Police will be allocated $1.422 billion (in 2008 dollars) – compared to the $1.445 billion in 2008.

‘Vote Police’ – Budgets 2008-2015 – Total Annual and Permanent Appropriations


vote police 2008 - 2016


* Using Reserve Bank NZ Inflation Adjuster from Budget Month/Year Q2 dollars into 2008 Q2 dollars. (


reserve bank inflation calculator



(Field parameters above: calculating 2015 budgetted $1,609,173 into 2008 dollars.)

Inflation, coupled with a National government, have not been kind to our Police.

National is far from being the “Law and Order” party it makes out to be.  Any “success” it claims to have achieved, has been done with smoke, mirrors, and falsified reporting of statistics.

The question is; do burglars know they are supposed to be committing 30% less break-ins to peoples’ homes? Let’s hope they got the  memo from the Minister’s office.





TVNZ: Q+A – Police Association president steps down

NZ Herald:  Police made burglaries vanish

NZ Herald:  Two-year search for ‘ghost crimes’ truth

NZ Herald:  Police deny being caught out by false review claims

NZ Herald: Measuring poverty line not a priority – Bennett

Treasury: Budget 2008

Treasury: Budget 2014

Treasury: Budget 2015

Previous related blogposts

National, on Law and Order

Purchasing “justice” on the New Zealand open market

Other Blogs

The Daily Blog: National’s ghost crime stats

The Daily Blog: So Judith Collins was aware of Police ghost stats? What if David Cunliffe had done the same?






This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 30 October 2015.



= fs =






Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,118 other followers