But to answer it at Question Time in Parliament yesterday, Christopher Luxon would have to say that either he had got his Government’s policy intentions wrong – or his Housing Minister had.
Labour Leader Chris Hipkins put him on the spot by asking:
Who actually speaks for the Government: the Prime Minister, who says that he wants “modest, consistent house price increases”, or the Housing Minister, Chris Bishop, who says the Government is “trying to drive house prices down”?
The PM reiterated his version of the government’s housing objectives.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what this Government doesn’t want is a 30 percent growth in house prices in a single year as we experienced under the last Government. House prices have come down, I think about 13 percent on average. What we want to see is gradual, moderate, consistent house price growth, while we want to see wage growth obviously growing faster than house price appreciation.
That exposed Bishop to becoming the obvious focus for the next question.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was Chris Bishop wrong when he said only recently that the Government was “trying to drive house prices down”?
The PM succeeded in being both loquacious and infuriatingly uninformative.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what this Government is doing is we are radically increasing the supply of land available for housing, and I would just say to that member, I would put our record on housing up against his any day of the week because housing is more affordable for purchase; rentals [Interruption]—just remember, house prices went up 30 percent in a single year under Labour. Rents went up $180 a week. There is 5,000 fewer people now on social housing wait-lists under this Government; kids are out of motel rooms, and, actually, this Government’s record on housing beats his record any day of the week.
But hey! Let’s bring Finance Minister into considerations.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: When Nicola Willis said, “I agree with him that house prices need to fall; I’m with him.”, was she admitting that her alignment on housing policy is with Chris Bishop and not the Prime Minister?
Hipkins might have hoped for candour but he got bluster spiced with an expression of Luxonian pride in the product of his prime ministership.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this is a country that has been experiencing a housing crisis for many, many years, and it’s a function of having not enough supply in the market. It is not a demand-side problem, it’s a supply-side problem, and that’s why I’m very proud of what this Government is doing, launching its new RMA reforms today to make sure that we can actually get more houses built for New Zealanders. I think that member should be thankful that we have actually done a good job of making sure house price affordability is down—that’s a good thing. Rentals are down—that’s a good thing—not up $180 a week; we’ve got 5,000 fewer families on the social housing wait-list now in housing; we’ve got 3,000 kids and families out of emergency housing. I’m proud of our record on housing.
Deputy PM David Seymour chipped in with a question which invited Luxon to further burnish his economic management credentials.
Hon David Seymour: Is it the Government’s desire that wages grow faster than house prices, and that requires sound economic management from this Government?
This time we got a straight answer.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely. That’s what I was saying in answer to the first question, which is that we want to see wage growth, income growth, be faster and higher than house price growth so it becomes more affordable.
But Hipkins hadn’t finished with trying to find which Minister’s statement best gelled with the Government’s intentions.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So what is the Government’s policy position: his position that the Government wants “modest, consistent house price increases”; Chris Bishop’s position where he says the Government is “trying to drive house prices down”; or Nicola Willis’ position where she says that she agrees with Chris Bishop that house prices need to fall?
They couldn’t all be right.
But the PM wasn’t identifying which one (or two) of those three names was out of line.
Rather, he harked back to something that had gone awfully wrong when Hipkins had been a Minister.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Our position is to unlock growth in this country, to open up more land available for housing so it becomes more affordable. We’re not interested in KiwiBuild—remember that one? It didn’t go so good. What we’re interested in doing is systemic reform of our planning laws so that we can get more houses built so they become more affordable for people.
Hipkins was persistent.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is his reluctance to answer the question on whether he speaks for the Government on house prices, or Chris Bishop or Nicola Willis speak for the Government on house prices, because he’s not sure whether they do actually support his position?
Luxon parried that without addressing it.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think the bigger question the member should be concerned about is: what’s happening with house prices? They are more affordable under this Government in two years than they were under his Government in six years. What’s the situation with rentals? They went up $180 a week under his Government; they’ve come down under this Government. When you think about the position on social housing, we actually have 5,000 fewer families now on a social housing wait-list, and that is a good thing. We’ve got 3,200 families out of emergency hotels, where they were sitting, now in houses, and we’re also supporting the homeless as well. I line up our record on every dimension, every component, any day of the week. [Interruption]
The Speaker settled the House and Hipkins had a final thrust:
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is he not calling out Chris Bishop for contradicting him on falling house prices and not calling out Nicola Willis for saying that she’s with Chris Bishop on falling house prices because he’s worried that Nicola Willis is also going to end up with Chris Bishop when he tries to replace him as Prime Minister?
This time Hipkins got a straight answer – it was “no” – along with some embellishment.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No. Look, I’ll just say, I think the member should worry less about the National Party and worry about his mates in the Greens and Te Pāti Māori, don’t you think? I think that’s what you should be worrying about, son
As you can see, it was a patronising embellishment.
It had nothing to do with housing.
But by then the PM would have been keen to sit down and listen to Bishop comfortably deal with the next bunch of questions.
These were patsy questions initiated by the dutiful National MP for Tukituki, Catherine Wedd, who asked what announcement had been made about replacing the Resource Management Act 1991.
Presumably she had been absent when Bishop (as Minister responsible for RMA Reform) announced a new planning system to replace the RMA to make it easier to build the homes and infrastructure our country needs, give farmers and growers the freedom to get on with producing world-class food and fibre, and strengthen our primary sector while protecting the environment.
Yep. Building homes was included in that lot.
But cheaper homes – or more expensive ones?
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
The PM reiterated his version of the government’s housing objectives.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what this Government doesn’t want is a 30 percent growth in house prices in a single year as we experienced under the last Government. House prices have come down, I think about 13 percent on average. What we want to see is gradual, moderate, consistent house price growth, while we want to see wage growth obviously growing faster than house price appreciation.
That exposed Bishop to becoming the obvious focus for the next question.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Was Chris Bishop wrong when he said only recently that the Government was “trying to drive house prices down”?
The PM succeeded in being both loquacious and infuriatingly uninformative.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, what this Government is doing is we are radically increasing the supply of land available for housing, and I would just say to that member, I would put our record on housing up against his any day of the week because housing is more affordable for purchase; rentals [Interruption]—just remember, house prices went up 30 percent in a single year under Labour. Rents went up $180 a week. There is 5,000 fewer people now on social housing wait-lists under this Government; kids are out of motel rooms, and, actually, this Government’s record on housing beats his record any day of the week.
But hey! Let’s bring Finance Minister into considerations.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: When Nicola Willis said, “I agree with him that house prices need to fall; I’m with him.”, was she admitting that her alignment on housing policy is with Chris Bishop and not the Prime Minister?
Hipkins might have hoped for candour but he got bluster spiced with an expression of Luxonian pride in the product of his prime ministership.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, this is a country that has been experiencing a housing crisis for many, many years, and it’s a function of having not enough supply in the market. It is not a demand-side problem, it’s a supply-side problem, and that’s why I’m very proud of what this Government is doing, launching its new RMA reforms today to make sure that we can actually get more houses built for New Zealanders. I think that member should be thankful that we have actually done a good job of making sure house price affordability is down—that’s a good thing. Rentals are down—that’s a good thing—not up $180 a week; we’ve got 5,000 fewer families on the social housing wait-list now in housing; we’ve got 3,000 kids and families out of emergency housing. I’m proud of our record on housing.
Deputy PM David Seymour chipped in with a question which invited Luxon to further burnish his economic management credentials.
Hon David Seymour: Is it the Government’s desire that wages grow faster than house prices, and that requires sound economic management from this Government?
This time we got a straight answer.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Absolutely. That’s what I was saying in answer to the first question, which is that we want to see wage growth, income growth, be faster and higher than house price growth so it becomes more affordable.
But Hipkins hadn’t finished with trying to find which Minister’s statement best gelled with the Government’s intentions.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: So what is the Government’s policy position: his position that the Government wants “modest, consistent house price increases”; Chris Bishop’s position where he says the Government is “trying to drive house prices down”; or Nicola Willis’ position where she says that she agrees with Chris Bishop that house prices need to fall?
They couldn’t all be right.
But the PM wasn’t identifying which one (or two) of those three names was out of line.
Rather, he harked back to something that had gone awfully wrong when Hipkins had been a Minister.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Our position is to unlock growth in this country, to open up more land available for housing so it becomes more affordable. We’re not interested in KiwiBuild—remember that one? It didn’t go so good. What we’re interested in doing is systemic reform of our planning laws so that we can get more houses built so they become more affordable for people.
Hipkins was persistent.
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is his reluctance to answer the question on whether he speaks for the Government on house prices, or Chris Bishop or Nicola Willis speak for the Government on house prices, because he’s not sure whether they do actually support his position?
Luxon parried that without addressing it.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I think the bigger question the member should be concerned about is: what’s happening with house prices? They are more affordable under this Government in two years than they were under his Government in six years. What’s the situation with rentals? They went up $180 a week under his Government; they’ve come down under this Government. When you think about the position on social housing, we actually have 5,000 fewer families now on a social housing wait-list, and that is a good thing. We’ve got 3,200 families out of emergency hotels, where they were sitting, now in houses, and we’re also supporting the homeless as well. I line up our record on every dimension, every component, any day of the week. [Interruption]
The Speaker settled the House and Hipkins had a final thrust:
Rt Hon Chris Hipkins: Is he not calling out Chris Bishop for contradicting him on falling house prices and not calling out Nicola Willis for saying that she’s with Chris Bishop on falling house prices because he’s worried that Nicola Willis is also going to end up with Chris Bishop when he tries to replace him as Prime Minister?
This time Hipkins got a straight answer – it was “no” – along with some embellishment.
Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: No. Look, I’ll just say, I think the member should worry less about the National Party and worry about his mates in the Greens and Te Pāti Māori, don’t you think? I think that’s what you should be worrying about, son
As you can see, it was a patronising embellishment.
It had nothing to do with housing.
But by then the PM would have been keen to sit down and listen to Bishop comfortably deal with the next bunch of questions.
These were patsy questions initiated by the dutiful National MP for Tukituki, Catherine Wedd, who asked what announcement had been made about replacing the Resource Management Act 1991.
Presumably she had been absent when Bishop (as Minister responsible for RMA Reform) announced a new planning system to replace the RMA to make it easier to build the homes and infrastructure our country needs, give farmers and growers the freedom to get on with producing world-class food and fibre, and strengthen our primary sector while protecting the environment.
Yep. Building homes was included in that lot.
But cheaper homes – or more expensive ones?
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.