By Bernard Hickey
Prime Minister John Key has signalled reforms to Local Government legislation designed to restrict development contributions have been put on hold until after the September 20 election.
Key told his weekly post-cabinet news conference the Government no longer had the numbers or the time to get its Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill No 3 (2013) through a third reading and passed into law.
The bill is designed to limit the ability for councils to charge development contributions for infrastructure not directly limited to residential development and to give developers a right of appeal. It had already passed its second reading and only needed one more reading to pass into law before Parliament rises for the election campaign on July 31. There are nine sitting days left.
Key was asked about reports showing a deterioration in housing affordability in recent months as interest rates rose.
Key said the Government was focused on boosting housing supply and had already had to park its proposed reforms to the Resource Management Act (RMA) after opposition from Labour, the Greens, Peter Dunne and the Maori Party. National was also forced to park employment law reform after the loss of John Banks earlier this month.
"There's more we'd like to do, but we currently can't get the support of other parties for the RMA reforms which would help in that area," Key said.
"We've also got some issues in terms of getting through the Local Government legislation in the short term for Parliament breaks up that would help in terms of development contributions," he said.
"I don't think that legislation is going to pass before the election. It's a combination of time and support. It's one of those ones that is locked at 60 all," he said.
Local Government Association Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-liga told Interest.co.nz the Maori Party opposed the changes and the loss of Banks had made the vote too tight. He said it was unlikely to pass before the election.
NZ dollar a 'fickle beast'
Meanwhile, Key was asked if the rise in the New Zealand dollar to a post-float TWI high on Friday threatened the Government's strategy of lifting exports and the economy.
Key said exporters should be congratulated for dealing with the high New Zealand dollar, which has remained elevated despite a 20-30% fall in dairy and log prices this year.
"Generally speaking when you see commodity prices coming back, generally that's reflected in movements in the exchange rate over time," Key said.
"I accept there's a bit of a lag with these things, but I suspect if commodity prices continue to come back you'll see a reduction in the Kiwi/US rate," he said, agreeing he expected it to fall.
Key said the New Zealand dollar had also risen and fallen in line with interest rates in the past, but not always.
"It's a fickle beast," he said.
13 Comments
This is shockingly bad from Key. He has been promising policies to bring in affordable housing since 2008. Now he is saying he has run out of time. What a useless...... Worse he thinks he can hold us poor sheeple to ransom, efffectively saying 'if you don't vote for me you will never get those affordable housing policies....'
Did I mention that John Key is better at manipulating voters.....
You can't pass something without the numbers Brendon......the useless sods on the opposition benches are the one's holding the people to ransom !!!
I get really frustrated when opposition party pollies tow the party line rather than do what is right for the people - however you can always tell the calibre of a person by his/her actions.
The opposition parties remind me of Chairman Mao when he decided that the sparrows were eating to much grain so the people had to kill the sparrows......and everyone knows what happened after that.......it astounds me that the watermelons still don't understand crop failure to this day.
That's a very one sided view of the world. It should equally apply to both sides. Those in opposition that believe they are correct woudl say the same about useless govt trying to pass dumb laws.
I believe there was an option on the RMA put forward by opposition that was rejected by Key becasue he wants the whole bill not just a part.
It is easy say that National have had 6 years to deal with the issue but firstly National took over at the time of the GFC which actually saw house prices decline. I'm assuming that decline took some of the initial heat out of making urgent decisions.
It was in March 2011 that the Productivity Commission published their brief. So it appears National had been looking at house prices in NZ prior to the Canterbury earthquakes.
Given the timeframe of the Canterbury eathquakes and the loss of houses I think National were fairly well out of the start-gates on the affordabilty issue. They didn't jump the gun they waited until the Productivity Commission report was released. They would have also known the extent of damaged homes in Chch by the time the Prod Comm released their report.
Prod Comm report on afforable housing did not get released until April 2012? (from memory) and then the wheels had to be put in motion as to the best way forward.
Personally I think it is the reponsibility of all Polticians in Parliament to get this issue sorted ASAP. As far as I'm concerned they all have a fiduciary duty to the people. So those people sitting on opposition benches getting paid a Pollies salary should be ensuring that they are acting in the best interests of all NZ'ers and not acting on their personal interests of Political party policy.
The changes that National want are not going to damage the Environment in anyway so why are the Greens being so opposed? Or are they looking after an unseen interest but using the Environment as the excuse?
Dale Smith has made some interesting comments below and I would fully agree with him, both pieces of legislation need to go through together for there to be any affect. And also that National should have used those powers for a better end.
There is not one opposition party with policies that will build afforadble housing.....so it might be go slow but at least it will happen and if National get in on a majority it will help to speed up the process as they will simply have the numbers to push things through.
Notaneconomist that reads like something that John Key would say. So reasonable, considered and of course delivered with a little dig at the Greens to drive a wedge between the two big left wing parties. But ultimately it is just a series of excuses.
Nobody forgives Helen Clark's government for not doing something about housing affordability between 2002 and 2008. I'm sure all sorts of excuses could be made for them. Why should we not judge Key's government by the same standards for their lack of action between 2008 and 2014?
Key came into power in 2008 promising to bring in affordable housing. I know Hugh Pavletich was expecting new policies to be introduced in the first year. But Key kicked the issue into touch with a productivity commissions and so on. Then he ignored the outcomes in 2011 when he continued to do nothing. People including some here like Matt-in-Akl buggered off to places like Adelaide because they got so disillusioned about waiting for affordable housing.
The optimism of Key's early years has degenerated into a cynical smarmy attitude to the best interest of New Zealander's.
With the RMA reform bill, we had not just the opposition but National's own allies saying "We think the bill goes to far, but would be willing to pass part of it" I said at the time I thought National's best response would be to say "We are always will to work to make building easier, but we don't think this goes far enough, so if you want a proper solution vote for us in the election" but they decided they would rather not give Labour the opportunity to be involved in passing (or indeed claiming some credit for) some building friendly legislation in election year.
Brendon, I can think of only one thing worse than a politician not doing what they should and that is doing what they shouldn’t.
Remember that EVERY local council in NZ voted unanimously to reject any changes to the LGA. The local battle they lost but are now taking it (through their Central Govt. ties) through to the general election platform, knowing that if they can stop the changes to the RMA then they can still regain control via the four ‘well beings’.
As slow as they are, I think National are on a long winded right track to make housing truly affordable ie on a like for like basis without subsidy.
They did blow a great opportunity, with the war time like powers that they were able to give themselves due to the earthquake, to really sort out affordable housing in and around Christchurch. And the best they have come up with is CERA and the CBD fiasco and a ‘Housing Accord’ to build some social housing, so it’s back to the MMP solution.
And yet, look at Labour and the Greens response – would you really want to put your faith in any political party to help you in times of a real emergency, let alone provide affordable housing. Most of them only get political oxygen when there is a looming crisis, and yet when it does happen, they are all found wanting.
When the rescuers’ need rescuing then you know you are in real trouble.
You missed my point, which may be because I didn’t explain it that well.
The LGA needed changed in particular as it has been used as an empire building revenue generator by council, full of non-value added costs, the partial result being non affordable housing, unless you agree to council to taking some of that revenue and using to subsidise ‘affordable’ housing.
And National got the support for these changes, however the RMA is a more Central Govt. beast so does not have the same support for change across the parties, and councils being politically aligned know this. The affordable housing issue cannot be solved without the reform of both acts, which some do not want as is not in their own best interests.
Dale I think LG is very much influenced by a range of local pressure groups, coming from both sides of the political spectrum. Property owing Nimby's, rich land bankers, compact city ideologues, pretty much everyone involved in the FIRE industries and so on.
I think it is right to add a National Policy Statement into the RMA so that the wider interest of stable housing costs is considered. Labour has offered to do this now along with regulations limiting development contributions. It is National who is declining this opportunity to implement legislation that would help housing affordability.
Journalists need to be question why. Does National not agree with these measures? If National do agree with these measures when will they be implemented? How much of a priority is it? So far housing has not been a high priority for this government. If it was a priority they would have passed the legislation in discussion years ago.
I think more questions need to be asked about National's policies towards housing. They have been in government. They have the ability and responsibility to act. What went wrong?
Labour are not in government and haven't been in government since 2008. They shoulder some blame for the period before that but they are not responsible for the current situation.
I know Labour's plans regarding housing are unclear. I have been saying this for a long time. In particular what happens to the 20,000 private sector new builds that are needed and will not come from KiwiBuild. I think Phil Twyford is coming up to speed on the issue. Let's see what this election campaign brings....
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.