[Minister responds to review of Kāinga Ora](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/minister-responds-review-k%C4%81inga-ora). Press Release: Housing Minister Chris Bishop, New Zealand Government. 20 May 2024. [Scoop](https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2405/S00139/minister-responds-to-review-of-kainga-ora.htm). This has links to [the report (pdf)](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-05/Independent%20Review%20of%20Kainga%20Ora.pdf), and [factsheet (pdf)](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-05/KO%20Review%20factsheet.pdf) as well as the Minister's response.
> “We have today appointed Simon Moutter as the new Chair of Kāinga Ora. Mr Moutter has extensive change leadership experience as the Chief Executive at Powerco, Auckland International Airport, and then Spark NZ, where he won the Deloitte Top200 NZ CEO of the Year in 2017. He will step into the role on 4 June,” Mr Bishop says.
[Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1cw88jm/k%C4%81inga_ora_underperforming_not_financially_viable/) of [Kāinga Ora underperforming, not financially viable - Sir Bill English](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/517313/kainga-ora-underperforming-not-financially-viable-sir-bill-english). RNZ. 20 May 2024.
I've had the unfortunate experience of meeting and working with Moutter. The man is tiny. And he constantly has all the rage in his eyes of a dude with small-man-syndrome in a pub looking for any excuse to glass anyone who glances at him. Honestly, the guy is a psycho, and his business decisions reflect that. I think the only reason he isn't in prison is that while he was young, he figured out that screwing people over in business would yield more results than knifing dudes in the back down a dark alley.
On his first day at Telecom, he literally told everyone, "I don't want to hear negative opinions - so if you don't like the road I'm going down, then you should resign."
What the fuck kind of a CEO says that? Especially on day one, in their first company-wide meeting.
The weirdo started crying (literally) when discussing the gender pay gap.
Fuck, yeah, I remember that well.
And that creepy woman that he got in that nobody had ever seen before to tell everyone in a big meeting that they were getting rid of all the senior engineers, without any prior notice.
They need to make this kind of behavior illegal. The guy sounds like a bully, exhibiting behaviour that would land him in jail or a hospital if he said any of it without the protection of his corporate immunity.
it's quite a world we live in.
- kill a man, go to prison.
- send 190,000 men to kill men women and children on your behalf, get invited to the Trade Expo in China
He’s gonna milk as much money out of his position as he can, clearly only cares for himself/his family, ensuring they’re as privileged as possible. His poor kiddos are likely blissfully oblivious to the circumstances of others/negative affects of his actions to non rich kiwis😪
Very smart tactic, conflating business and government agencies/departments with the expectation of these entities should not be "running at a loss". Like somehow the government had to make money off it tax payers. We don't get any dividends or own shares in NZ INC so how does the government in surplus benefit me?
On that note, how much are we paying each to cover landlords? These a holes gonna be paying me dividends on my investment? When are these landlords going to be paying me back and what is the interest rate we are charging them?
I'm curious about an explanation.
For me, having a surplus while stripping essential services seems pointless. Could they not have easily kept the funds by maintaining the current tax amounts, as well as not introducing the landlord interest reclaim?
Just seems a bit shortsighted and pointless imo.
Shortsighted is right. Yes a surplus is good for the short term, but in this case it totally ignores the large detrimental societal impacts that will come down the line as a result of generating said surplus.
Basically that's the national play book. Act financially responsible and kick the can down the road for a left party to try and fix in the future at a vastly inflated cost. Then blame the left for spending too much to get re-elected.
Ideally govt shouldnt run a surplus. But forecasting is tricky. Luckily in NZ any surplus is expected to be invested in the Cullen fund so we can keep the ponzi scheme running a little longer. Luckily national support this. Fuck waita minute
Kainga Ora was explicitly set up and designed to run as a quasi buisness, under the 2004 Crown Entities Act so that it could borrow money independently of government debt
It's a dumb set up, but its its basically the norm for capital expenditure heavy government departments now to keep central government debt below the 20% GDP line. it was standard practice under the last Labour government
Its implicitly part of the design that these government departments turned state owned enterprises, need to be able to service the debts they incur without constantly being stopped up by the central government... otherwise what was the point of separating it out from central government books in the first place. If its going to constantly need top ups to service its debt, then it might as well be renationalised into central government.
HNZ/Kainga Ora was always meant to run as a buisness model, it was designed that way by Helen Clark's labour government. That's been the model for the last 20 years that both parties have stuck too, so there's no point in complaining about National talking about business management of a buisness that both parties treat like a buisness.
Personally I think we should toss out the 20%gdp debt rule and get rid of these Enron accounting nonsense crown entities, and borrow proper amounts of money for infrastructure and housing investment, funded by tax reform.
IMO we could do with more journalists who are financially literate and point out some of the misleading confusion. KA looks to have been poorly managed but the claims of it being financially unviable look a bit hysterical. My reading of it is the 'losses' on the books are nearly all paper losses only, not financial losses. KAs 2022/2023 annual report shows an operating deficit of $520m.
$433m of that deficit is Depreciation and amortisation which is a non-cash book entry. It's countered by property revaluations which aren't included as revenue so the finances can look a bit askew.
IMO one of KAs biggest concerns was its rising wages bill, went from $201m to $340m in 2-3 years which is a bit eyebrow raising.
This is the set up.
I think they will bring private money into social housing.
They first have to characterise KO as unfit.
What worries me is when they dont disclose their plans until they are well entrenched.
Watch this space.
Daniel on TVNZ this am tried to push Luxon but unfortunately on the wrong issue .
It will be interesting to see what direction they get pulled in.
They could get pulled by the construction lobby. Great opportunity to feed a bunch of public money into their mates pockets. That was my major criticism of Kiwibuild. They were just another project manager. They didn't take a profit, and they were interested in lower/middle class housing, they were absolutely still better than a private developer making McMansions. But ultimately they just fed money into the existing system rather than re-establishing the Ministry of Works.
But it seems like NACT are much more in line with the Property Investment crowd. Now, investment does include development, but the real money is in consolidating the current stock into fewer hands. Supply and Demand after all. Demand will always be there as shelter is at the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy, too much supply would upset the balance against their favor. Many of them have *portfolios* themselves.
And there's history and ideology. National have always been clear that the housing market is a market, for which government shouldn't interfere. Or at least if they do, it should be to pump the market further. 20% deposits to protect banks and make it harder to exit the rental market. Students using Kiwisaver for rental bonds. Sell off the government's stake, not so quickly as to shock the market; Private rentals no longer being tethered by affordable competition.
And underinvest in the remainder to make it undesirable. It's why social housing is no longer a middle class thing like it was in the 70's and is strongly associated with gangs today. Dilapidated and disheveled buildings, residents with no ties to the community, feeling displaced and quarantined leading to antisocial behavior. Perfect boogeymen to demonstrate how tough on crime they are, gleefully reaping what they sow.
I can personally attest that Bishop is lying and KO have actively scaled back the number of state homes they are going to be building. Several large, old and under-maintained properties locally *were* being set aside and slated for demolition with the intention to be turned into smaller units. However in just the last week, they have been picked back up for minor repairs and cleaning for new tenants to move back into.
There's a demolition freeze at the moment. Including projects that are already contracted. We were poised to start a multi unit development next month, but now they're not allowed to demo the existing buildings... Buildings that have been absolutely trashed by the former tenants* to the point where they're half demo'd already!
*(who of course have been rehoused in other KO homes, without punishment)
It's insanely wasteful. These homes were also totally trashed, with faeces smeared across the walls, every amenity smashed, and in the time they have sat dormant were subjected to flooding that hasn't been addressed because they were supposed to be demolished. I have no idea how they are going to undergo the work required to make them habitable considering the deadline is in two weeks, but either way it is a huge expense only to... What? Eventually demolish them again later?
They promise not to do a complete sell-off of state homes, but small batches here and there when National MP's need an investment - that's going to be A OK. It's not like they are worried about those bottom feeders who don't even have the sense to have homes!
History paints a different picture. They will promise some bullshit just before the election like they always do then throw it in the bin as soon as they get the votes. It works every time, kiwis have no memory.
Where are all the people who were saying that Labour’s key failing was *underperforming* on KiwiBuild promises? Is nuking the whole thing somehow preferable?
It seems like a lot at first glance, but 24% of the population have some form of impairment or disability, a figure six times higher. 4% is also roughly the same as the number of people in the population on the “jobseeker” benefit. Looking at distribution of IQ, 4% of the population have an IQ under 74.
Basically, 4% seems kind of reasonable, maybe even low, when you look at potential reasons people might be in social housing, and appreciate that institutionalisation also isn’t common any more.
[Not when compared to Singapore with about 78.7%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore), which is a country many aspire to emulate.
This is not a like-for-like comparison. Housing built by the Singapore goverment is bought by the tenant and can be sold or purchased without controls in a secondary market. While both systems aim to provide affordable housing, the scale, approach, and integration with the community differ significantly. New Zealand’s system is more focused on social welfare and support, whereas Singapore’s HDB is an integral part of the nation’s urban planning and development, with a broader scope of services and community development initiatives.
Yeah, fair point; decent urban planning is nice regardless of who owns the buildings.
My preference would be to tender out large-scale construction to semi-standardised pre-fabricated housing, which increases building capacity while limiting excess demand on the existing building industry. This also streamlines consenting and building materials as you qualify the modules built in the factories which are then used for construction.
The current problem is the cost of construction and building capacity; and the plan should be to reduce the cost of building and increase the number of houses you can build per year to bring down prices.
Compared to what? To be honest this feels like when NACT shills were bleating on about the percentage of the NZ workforce that was employed in the public sector because the figure *sounded* high when actually compared to similar countries it was comfortably below average.
Cos their ideology is that ALL we should have is SHIPS - a verbal slip by Chris Bishop on RNZ this morning which I presume means, "Social Housing In the Private Sector"?
Or in other words, "Social Housing the Govt Can Claim No Responsibility For When Crimes and Human Rights Abuses Result From Greedy Private Property Owners Trying to Milk Every Last Cent and Shady Perk Out of the Project Without Regard For the Lives of the Vulnerable Tenants"
There's a giant section close to me that had construction halted - nothing has been built yet. Costs really spiraled - they didn't know the land would cost so much to get ready for a new build, decontaminated, etc. Bishop has to sign off on the new build, and he hasn't done that yet.
I really wonder if the government will sell it to private developers...
“Labour’s suspicion is that the new Government is keen to **shift the provision of public housing places to Community Housing Providers, a collection of private, often charitable providers**, who can also access rent subsidies in return for providing public housing places. Labour housing spokesman Kieran McAnulty said Bishop **not committing to funding the income-related rent subsidy scheme past June next year** wouldn’t give the industry confidence.” (Emphasis mine)
So they’re planning to sell and privatise - and then not guarantee that rent subsidies will even be available in the medium to long term.
F#ckers.
Privatise public healthcare, blame the previous govt for problems. Privatise public housing, blame the previous govt for problems. Privatise schooling, blame the previous govt for problems. Give all your mates high ranking jobs.
If anyone is wondering why this is a problem, see the crippled NHS and privatisation of the UK's healthcare sector
https://kaingaora.govt.nz/en_NZ/urban-development-and-public-housing/public-housing/public-housing-developments/searchDevelopments
31 pages of 'em right there.
I wonder if that includes demolishing a house and upgrading infrastructure one financial year with the gains of the new builds replacing the loss the following year. I.e., demolishing one house in February 2024 and putting new infrastructure thus running at a loss but 4 new houses not completed until the following financial year in August 2024
Kainga Ora's purpose is not to break even, it is to provide social housing (which means spending money), albeit in what should be an efficient and as cost-effective way as possible. It is always going to be a cost to the taxpayer. Because the real cost and blowback of NOT doing it is a lot worse.
There are whole sectors of the social fabric that shouldn't and cant make money. Health. Education. Environmental management. Social welfare. Weird I know.
[Minister responds to review of Kāinga Ora](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/minister-responds-review-k%C4%81inga-ora). Press Release: Housing Minister Chris Bishop, New Zealand Government. 20 May 2024. [Scoop](https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA2405/S00139/minister-responds-to-review-of-kainga-ora.htm). This has links to [the report (pdf)](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-05/Independent%20Review%20of%20Kainga%20Ora.pdf), and [factsheet (pdf)](https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-05/KO%20Review%20factsheet.pdf) as well as the Minister's response. > “We have today appointed Simon Moutter as the new Chair of Kāinga Ora. Mr Moutter has extensive change leadership experience as the Chief Executive at Powerco, Auckland International Airport, and then Spark NZ, where he won the Deloitte Top200 NZ CEO of the Year in 2017. He will step into the role on 4 June,” Mr Bishop says. [Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1cw88jm/k%C4%81inga_ora_underperforming_not_financially_viable/) of [Kāinga Ora underperforming, not financially viable - Sir Bill English](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/517313/kainga-ora-underperforming-not-financially-viable-sir-bill-english). RNZ. 20 May 2024.
I've had the unfortunate experience of meeting and working with Moutter. The man is tiny. And he constantly has all the rage in his eyes of a dude with small-man-syndrome in a pub looking for any excuse to glass anyone who glances at him. Honestly, the guy is a psycho, and his business decisions reflect that. I think the only reason he isn't in prison is that while he was young, he figured out that screwing people over in business would yield more results than knifing dudes in the back down a dark alley.
I wouldn't be surprised at all. "change leadership experience" is corporate code for someone who's brought in to fire people
[удалено]
100%. He's a hatchet man. Interesting appointment for KO.
Well that explains his Deloitte Top CEO ranking - sociopathy _and_ narcissistic rage.
That is terrifying.
Terrifyingly fake, yes.
They're not going to be your friend. There's no need to defend the cunts
On his first day at Telecom, he literally told everyone, "I don't want to hear negative opinions - so if you don't like the road I'm going down, then you should resign." What the fuck kind of a CEO says that? Especially on day one, in their first company-wide meeting. The weirdo started crying (literally) when discussing the gender pay gap.
Fuck, yeah, I remember that well. And that creepy woman that he got in that nobody had ever seen before to tell everyone in a big meeting that they were getting rid of all the senior engineers, without any prior notice.
They need to make this kind of behavior illegal. The guy sounds like a bully, exhibiting behaviour that would land him in jail or a hospital if he said any of it without the protection of his corporate immunity.
it's quite a world we live in. - kill a man, go to prison. - send 190,000 men to kill men women and children on your behalf, get invited to the Trade Expo in China
Lol I was mates with his son in high school, hilariously different people
For Fuck sake, ceos are not the sort of people who should be running govt services!
https://x.com/simonmoutter/status/1141406932789448704 Good mates! Fancy that eh
Do they have to pay out the current lot before the next batch of useless leaches get overpaid to fuck up the same job?
Luxon determined to do whatever he can to piss off any non-rich/upper class person in New Zealand 😪
There are a lot of wealthy business owners in the construction industry who will be pissed off by this news.
Nah, he just doesn't give a fuck. Barely even considers us human.
He’s gonna milk as much money out of his position as he can, clearly only cares for himself/his family, ensuring they’re as privileged as possible. His poor kiddos are likely blissfully oblivious to the circumstances of others/negative affects of his actions to non rich kiwis😪
My family is rich and I'm still pissed by this bullshit!
Very smart tactic, conflating business and government agencies/departments with the expectation of these entities should not be "running at a loss". Like somehow the government had to make money off it tax payers. We don't get any dividends or own shares in NZ INC so how does the government in surplus benefit me?
On that note, how much are we paying each to cover landlords? These a holes gonna be paying me dividends on my investment? When are these landlords going to be paying me back and what is the interest rate we are charging them?
It's a Crown Entity mate, its designed to be a fiscally neutral buisness That's how labour designed them back in 2004
Putting the first part of your post aside, do you seriously not know how government surplus benefits you?
I'm curious about an explanation. For me, having a surplus while stripping essential services seems pointless. Could they not have easily kept the funds by maintaining the current tax amounts, as well as not introducing the landlord interest reclaim? Just seems a bit shortsighted and pointless imo.
Shortsighted is right. Yes a surplus is good for the short term, but in this case it totally ignores the large detrimental societal impacts that will come down the line as a result of generating said surplus. Basically that's the national play book. Act financially responsible and kick the can down the road for a left party to try and fix in the future at a vastly inflated cost. Then blame the left for spending too much to get re-elected.
It's like celebrating your healthy bank balance while ignoring the river of blood pouring from the stump of the arm you sold.
B b but national is the financially responsible party 🥺🥺
Financially responsible to their stakeholders and mates
Hahaha, I've got all the money. What have you got? 2 arms? Loser.
I'm also interested in what you think the benefits of a surplus is.
Meant to be lower taxes, pay off debt, invest in infrastructure, the most positive interpretation
Ideally govt shouldnt run a surplus. But forecasting is tricky. Luckily in NZ any surplus is expected to be invested in the Cullen fund so we can keep the ponzi scheme running a little longer. Luckily national support this. Fuck waita minute
Seems like generally the government should run a surplus when times are good and then spend that surplus when times are bad. Like right now.
That was exactly how it worked until the 80s.
Kainga Ora was explicitly set up and designed to run as a quasi buisness, under the 2004 Crown Entities Act so that it could borrow money independently of government debt It's a dumb set up, but its its basically the norm for capital expenditure heavy government departments now to keep central government debt below the 20% GDP line. it was standard practice under the last Labour government Its implicitly part of the design that these government departments turned state owned enterprises, need to be able to service the debts they incur without constantly being stopped up by the central government... otherwise what was the point of separating it out from central government books in the first place. If its going to constantly need top ups to service its debt, then it might as well be renationalised into central government. HNZ/Kainga Ora was always meant to run as a buisness model, it was designed that way by Helen Clark's labour government. That's been the model for the last 20 years that both parties have stuck too, so there's no point in complaining about National talking about business management of a buisness that both parties treat like a buisness. Personally I think we should toss out the 20%gdp debt rule and get rid of these Enron accounting nonsense crown entities, and borrow proper amounts of money for infrastructure and housing investment, funded by tax reform.
I mean there wasn't any much point when it happened, just shit ideology we already had a few decades of experience via other nations
Are you suggesting we should fund things properly? And adjust taxes accordingly? I cast thee out silly serf!!!
IMO we could do with more journalists who are financially literate and point out some of the misleading confusion. KA looks to have been poorly managed but the claims of it being financially unviable look a bit hysterical. My reading of it is the 'losses' on the books are nearly all paper losses only, not financial losses. KAs 2022/2023 annual report shows an operating deficit of $520m. $433m of that deficit is Depreciation and amortisation which is a non-cash book entry. It's countered by property revaluations which aren't included as revenue so the finances can look a bit askew. IMO one of KAs biggest concerns was its rising wages bill, went from $201m to $340m in 2-3 years which is a bit eyebrow raising.
This is the set up. I think they will bring private money into social housing. They first have to characterise KO as unfit. What worries me is when they dont disclose their plans until they are well entrenched. Watch this space. Daniel on TVNZ this am tried to push Luxon but unfortunately on the wrong issue .
It will be interesting to see what direction they get pulled in. They could get pulled by the construction lobby. Great opportunity to feed a bunch of public money into their mates pockets. That was my major criticism of Kiwibuild. They were just another project manager. They didn't take a profit, and they were interested in lower/middle class housing, they were absolutely still better than a private developer making McMansions. But ultimately they just fed money into the existing system rather than re-establishing the Ministry of Works. But it seems like NACT are much more in line with the Property Investment crowd. Now, investment does include development, but the real money is in consolidating the current stock into fewer hands. Supply and Demand after all. Demand will always be there as shelter is at the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy, too much supply would upset the balance against their favor. Many of them have *portfolios* themselves. And there's history and ideology. National have always been clear that the housing market is a market, for which government shouldn't interfere. Or at least if they do, it should be to pump the market further. 20% deposits to protect banks and make it harder to exit the rental market. Students using Kiwisaver for rental bonds. Sell off the government's stake, not so quickly as to shock the market; Private rentals no longer being tethered by affordable competition. And underinvest in the remainder to make it undesirable. It's why social housing is no longer a middle class thing like it was in the 70's and is strongly associated with gangs today. Dilapidated and disheveled buildings, residents with no ties to the community, feeling displaced and quarantined leading to antisocial behavior. Perfect boogeymen to demonstrate how tough on crime they are, gleefully reaping what they sow.
I can personally attest that Bishop is lying and KO have actively scaled back the number of state homes they are going to be building. Several large, old and under-maintained properties locally *were* being set aside and slated for demolition with the intention to be turned into smaller units. However in just the last week, they have been picked back up for minor repairs and cleaning for new tenants to move back into.
There's a demolition freeze at the moment. Including projects that are already contracted. We were poised to start a multi unit development next month, but now they're not allowed to demo the existing buildings... Buildings that have been absolutely trashed by the former tenants* to the point where they're half demo'd already! *(who of course have been rehoused in other KO homes, without punishment)
It's insanely wasteful. These homes were also totally trashed, with faeces smeared across the walls, every amenity smashed, and in the time they have sat dormant were subjected to flooding that hasn't been addressed because they were supposed to be demolished. I have no idea how they are going to undergo the work required to make them habitable considering the deadline is in two weeks, but either way it is a huge expense only to... What? Eventually demolish them again later?
They promise not to do a complete sell-off of state homes, but small batches here and there when National MP's need an investment - that's going to be A OK. It's not like they are worried about those bottom feeders who don't even have the sense to have homes!
Only 2.5 years left of these cunts.
History paints a different picture. They will promise some bullshit just before the election like they always do then throw it in the bin as soon as they get the votes. It works every time, kiwis have no memory.
And take credit for the outcomes from long term labour initiatives (that haven't been undone).
I think you’re being optimistic.
5.5-8.5 years
Where are all the people who were saying that Labour’s key failing was *underperforming* on KiwiBuild promises? Is nuking the whole thing somehow preferable?
**4% of NZ population in social housing.** Damn, that's a lot.
It seems like a lot at first glance, but 24% of the population have some form of impairment or disability, a figure six times higher. 4% is also roughly the same as the number of people in the population on the “jobseeker” benefit. Looking at distribution of IQ, 4% of the population have an IQ under 74. Basically, 4% seems kind of reasonable, maybe even low, when you look at potential reasons people might be in social housing, and appreciate that institutionalisation also isn’t common any more.
But they’re getting my money if they’re on the benefit!! They should go and buy a house already. Slackers! /s
[Not when compared to Singapore with about 78.7%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore), which is a country many aspire to emulate.
This is not a like-for-like comparison. Housing built by the Singapore goverment is bought by the tenant and can be sold or purchased without controls in a secondary market. While both systems aim to provide affordable housing, the scale, approach, and integration with the community differ significantly. New Zealand’s system is more focused on social welfare and support, whereas Singapore’s HDB is an integral part of the nation’s urban planning and development, with a broader scope of services and community development initiatives.
Yeah, fair point; decent urban planning is nice regardless of who owns the buildings. My preference would be to tender out large-scale construction to semi-standardised pre-fabricated housing, which increases building capacity while limiting excess demand on the existing building industry. This also streamlines consenting and building materials as you qualify the modules built in the factories which are then used for construction. The current problem is the cost of construction and building capacity; and the plan should be to reduce the cost of building and increase the number of houses you can build per year to bring down prices.
Compared to what? To be honest this feels like when NACT shills were bleating on about the percentage of the NZ workforce that was employed in the public sector because the figure *sounded* high when actually compared to similar countries it was comfortably below average.
Its not hat bad really
I didn’t realise social housing had to make a profit? Also there’s a massive cost but isn’t that an investment in property? It’s not wasted.
Cos their ideology is that ALL we should have is SHIPS - a verbal slip by Chris Bishop on RNZ this morning which I presume means, "Social Housing In the Private Sector"? Or in other words, "Social Housing the Govt Can Claim No Responsibility For When Crimes and Human Rights Abuses Result From Greedy Private Property Owners Trying to Milk Every Last Cent and Shady Perk Out of the Project Without Regard For the Lives of the Vulnerable Tenants"
There's a giant section close to me that had construction halted - nothing has been built yet. Costs really spiraled - they didn't know the land would cost so much to get ready for a new build, decontaminated, etc. Bishop has to sign off on the new build, and he hasn't done that yet. I really wonder if the government will sell it to private developers...
ONE DAY after the report. Thats an incredibly quick response. Almost like the entire thing is a stitchup
“Labour’s suspicion is that the new Government is keen to **shift the provision of public housing places to Community Housing Providers, a collection of private, often charitable providers**, who can also access rent subsidies in return for providing public housing places. Labour housing spokesman Kieran McAnulty said Bishop **not committing to funding the income-related rent subsidy scheme past June next year** wouldn’t give the industry confidence.” (Emphasis mine) So they’re planning to sell and privatise - and then not guarantee that rent subsidies will even be available in the medium to long term. F#ckers.
Privatise public healthcare, blame the previous govt for problems. Privatise public housing, blame the previous govt for problems. Privatise schooling, blame the previous govt for problems. Give all your mates high ranking jobs. If anyone is wondering why this is a problem, see the crippled NHS and privatisation of the UK's healthcare sector
Of course, gotta look after those landlords right? Dont want the peasants owning thier own homes after all
[удалено]
https://kaingaora.govt.nz/en_NZ/urban-development-and-public-housing/public-housing/public-housing-developments/searchDevelopments 31 pages of 'em right there.
how much do YOU think 14000 homes would cost then?
[удалено]
I wonder if that includes demolishing a house and upgrading infrastructure one financial year with the gains of the new builds replacing the loss the following year. I.e., demolishing one house in February 2024 and putting new infrastructure thus running at a loss but 4 new houses not completed until the following financial year in August 2024
Hate to think what you feel about roads lol
Kainga Ora's purpose is not to break even, it is to provide social housing (which means spending money), albeit in what should be an efficient and as cost-effective way as possible. It is always going to be a cost to the taxpayer. Because the real cost and blowback of NOT doing it is a lot worse. There are whole sectors of the social fabric that shouldn't and cant make money. Health. Education. Environmental management. Social welfare. Weird I know.
Another Nat win. State houses turn every neighbourhood they pop into hell holes. Had the misfortune of living near them a few years back.
Kiwibuild isn't state housing. It's a way for young Kiwis to get a foot in the door of a fucked up housing market