Housing reset: KiwiBuild eligibility broadened for buyers and developers; Developers to shoulder more risk; $400m of KiwiBuild funding to go towards new progressive home ownership schemes; Existing schemes supporting first-home-buyers bolstered

Housing reset: KiwiBuild eligibility broadened for buyers and developers; Developers to shoulder more risk; $400m of KiwiBuild funding to go towards new progressive home ownership schemes; Existing schemes supporting first-home-buyers bolstered
Illustration of Northcote development that includes KiwiBuild homes

The Government has, after nine months, revealed its “housing reset”.

KiwiBuild is staying, but the numerical targets around the number of houses built under the programme are going.

The Government is also reducing the amount of taxpayer money put on the line to pay developers if they don’t sell properties they’ve tagged as “KiwiBuild”.

Put another way, the Government is watering down the sweetener (by an unspecified amount) offered to encourage developers to build houses that meet the KiwiBuild criteria.

But to developers’ benefits, it is giving them the option of selling some more expensive, larger houses to KiwiBuild buyers.

On the buyers’ side, the Government is trying to broaden the pool of people eligible to buy KiwiBuild houses.

It's making it easier for people who have owned houses in the past to qualify and is reducing the amount of time owners of one-bedroom studio apartments need to live in their properties for from three years to one year. 

Further to the Labour/Green Party’s Confidence and Supply Agreement, the Government is allocating $400 million of the $2 billion-recyclable fund put aside for KiwiBuild to support progressive home ownership schemes.

It hasn’t detailed the nuts and bolts of the programme, but has said progressive home ownerships schemes could include shared equity and rent-to-buy set-ups. Schemes already offered by community organisations could be scaled-up and included in the Government's programme. 

Furthermore, as of October 1, the Government is providing more support for first-home-buyers by letting those eligible for KiwiSaver HomeStart Grants combine their grants if they’d like to buy a home together.

It is also reducing the deposit required for a government-backed mortgage from 10% to 5%.

In summary, the “housing reset” is seeing the KiwiBuild eligibility criteria broadened for both buyers and developers. 

Some taxpayer money is being shifted from KiwiBuild to yet-to-be-detailed progressive home ownerships schemes.

Developers of KiwiBuild homes won't be able to share as much of the risk with taxpayers. 

And more taxpayer money is being allocated to existing schemes aimed at supporting first-home-buyers.

Here are the details:

KIWIBUILD

- Numerical targets to go.

The focus, according to Housing Minister Megan Woods, will be on “building as many homes as we can, as fast as we can in the right places”. A dashboard of statistics will be published each month.

Woods said KiwiBuild's targets were "part of the problem". She said a fixation on quantity was driving perverse outcomes - IE the Government underwriting developments in areas where there wasn't demand.

Woods said the Government would be "proactive" in turning down deals where there wasn't a clear market case.

- Government to provide less support to developers who can’t sell KiwiBuild houses.

Woods said the amount made available as a part of the Government underwrite would be reduced “so developers are incentivised to sell to KiwiBuild first-home-buyers instead of triggering the underwrite".

She said the extent to which this underwrite would be reduced/the amount of risk developers would need to shoulder, would vary contract to contract. She said it was a matter of putting "enough tension" in those contracts.

- Developers can build some more expensive, larger homes.

Currently all houses have to be under set price caps. Looking ahead, up to 10% of KiwiBuild homes in a development can be over-cap if they are four-bedrooms or larger.

-  Criteria loosened for buyers.

Buyers of one-bedroom studios will only have to commit to living in their properties for a year, rather than three years, as remains the case for other KiwiBuild houses.

The asset test for “second chancers” or people who have previously owned homes is going. Currently second chancers can’t have assets worth more than 20% of the relevant First Home Grant price cap for an existing home. Looking ahead there will be no asset limit. They’ll still have to not currently own a home and meet other criteria including an income test.

Furthermore, Woods said: “Homes in Te Kauwhata, Canterbury and Wanaka that haven’t sold will be released to the open market allowing us to reuse the government capital to get more developments underway where there is clear demand.”

To date, there are 169 KiwiBuild homeowners. 258 KiwiBuild homes have been completed and the building of 10,356 homes has been contracted.

The programme was meant to deliver 100,000 houses over 10 years.

EXTENDED HOME OWNERSHIP SUPPORT

- First Home Grant cap on multiple buyers removed.

Currently the First Home Grant is capped at twice the individual cap for each property bought by three or more buyers. This cap will be removed.

- First Home Loan and First Home Grant deposit requirement lowered.

The deposit required for the above will fall from 10% to 5%.

PROGRESSIVE HOME OWNERSHIP

- $400 million to be made available to increase government support for progressive home ownership schemes.

Details around how this funding would be used haven’t been revealed, however Green Party Co-Leader Marama Davidson indicated the Government would be “rolling out progressive home ownership schemes” and “supporting community housing providers and iwi to deliver progressive home ownership”.

The Government said the number of households supported will depend on how it targets funding, but it expected 2500 to 4000 homes to benefit over four years. 

Woods expected to take a paper to Cabinet before the end of the year with a policy proposal. 

She was unapologetic for not having any concrete policy to announce, despite progressive home ownership schemes being on the cards for some time, saying time was needed to get it right.  

Other housing affordability-related work underway

The Government is working on major structural reforms aimed at improving housing affordability:

- Establishing Kāinga Ora-Homes and Communities on October 1 - an entity that will pull together Housing New Zealand, its subsidiary HLC and the KiwiBuild Unit, to lead urban development projects and be a public landlord.

- Passing legislation to give Kāinga Ora the power to override local planning laws to speed up development of large scale projects in designated areas.

- Reforming the Resource Management Act, however changes aren’t expected to be made before the 2020 election.

- Introducing a new National Policy Statement on Urban Development that will direct local councils to provide for more intensification under the RMA.

- Reforming the Building Act to make way for prefabrication and better regulate building products.

- Introducing legislation to introduce new infrastructure funding mechanisms like the one used in Milldale north of Auckland that sees homeowners help fund local infrastructure via a levy added to their rates.

The Government has already made the following policy changes to curb demand for housing, with the aim of improving affordability:

- Extending the bright-line test from two to five years. This means if you sell a residential property that isn’t your family home within five years of buying it, you’ll have to pay tax on the capital gain.

- Ringfencing of rental losses. So rental losses can no longer be offset against an investor’s other income.  

- Introducing a ban preventing non-residents from buying residential property in New Zealand.

National's response

Here's statement by National Housing Spokesperson Judith Collins in response to the reset:

The long-awaited KiwiBuild reset has proven to be a damp squib, with all the elements that made the policy unique now consigned to the rubbish bin, National’s Housing spokesperson Judith Collins says.

“It’s pretty easy to achieve targets when there aren’t any, which appears to be the Government’s strategy on housing. This shouldn’t surprise given how averse it is to setting measurable targets in other areas like health and education.

“New Zealanders who dream of home ownership will feel justifiably let down by the KiwiBuild reset. The three key elements are gone – there’s no 100,000 homes target, price caps have been loosened and the asset test for ‘second chancers’ is no more.

“There were no new initiatives to speed up the delivery of houses. All we got from the new Housing Minister was a commitment to try harder. What are prospective first-home buyers supposed to do with that? It’s meant to be KiwiBuild, not KiwiHope.

“This is a massive retreat from the flashy promises that Labour fooled the public with for so many years. If they had taken this watered-down policy to the last election they would have been laughed out of town.

“More details are needed around the Government’s progressive ownership schemes. There may be some merit in this approach, but the devil is always in the detail – and Labour’s policies have a habit of being light on detail.

“For months I questioned whether the Government had robust processes in place to ensure houses were being built where there was need. Megan Woods now admits that wasn’t the case and the taxpayer has underwritten $200 million worth of houses that can’t be sold.

“At least, after two years in Government, Labour has finally figured out it should be building houses where people want them, not just wherever developers have spare land.

“Real change on housing will require RMA reform to eliminate red tape and bring down the cost of building for everyone. National invited Labour to work bipartisanly on this, but instead they set up a working group that won’t report back until it is too late to make changes in this term of government.

“Labour talked a big game on housing but has failed to deliver meaningful change. The only KiwiBuild target still standing is the one on the Government’s back if it doesn’t get this right.”

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

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.

173 Comments

Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).
31
up

... that's more like it .. no target .. we'll all hold hands and feel good if some houses get built ...

Wishy washy as ever , this government . Completely clueless . ..

20
up

Now that the big election lie has been revealed we have to rid ourselves of this hopeless Government .

As I said on this forum during the election campaign , it cannot work , so I can say without any shame ...............I told you so !

15
up

Maybe the 100,000 target will be re-introduced a few weeks before the next General Election?

TTP

10
up

@ttp true ..........maybe they will , the voting population in NZ has to be the most gullible fools on the planet to believe the nonsense in the first place

17
up

"the voting population in NZ has to be the most gullible fools on the planet"

I agree! National had 3 terms in office...

National has several 100,000 targets as well. Getting immigration back to 100k per year, and getting 100k of property sales to overseas owners back on track. Im more afraid the that happening that Labour driving the bus for another term.

And who should we elect next? And more importantly, why?

17
up

'completely clueless' sums it up. Muppets.

That is very unfair, completely unjustified in fact, on Miss Piggy!

ha!

This is all about keeping the momentum going until the next election.

I don't think they had a choice. Collapsing housing markets and reduced employment don't go well around election time.

Not sure a 5% deposit is that smart. That equity will evaporate quickly with any sort of correction, but that's politics.

They still have to be careful with guaranteed purchases. The smarter move should have been a share of profit, but government advisors aren't smart enough to think of that.

Brownsfield intensity should be encouraged, so land costs are more transparent.

Does anyone know what happened to the prev govt "Gateway" plan? They were completely clueless. Talk about bait and switch. Muppets. The voting population in NZ has to be the most gullible fools on the planet to believe the key nonsense on housing for 9 years.Lets get the SFO in....etc
Seems neither of the major parties can be trusted on housing then.
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/10/14/housing-broken-promises-families-i...

There seems to be a dogma that National is *THE EXPERTS* on everything. If they are indeed so knowledgeable, how come NZ ended up with a housing crisis? One that has been going on for at least 4 years before the COL got voted in.

According to John Key, in 2007 there was a housing crisis but from 2008 to 2017 there was no such housing crisis. Not sure what you're referring to.

Muppets a go go? Pretty sure I can work out Fozzie, Miss Piggy & at the back Kermit. But who/where are Statler & Waldorf & the rest of the gang?

Seems neither of the major parties can be trusted on housing then.

More like neither of the two main parties are prepared to shake off the neoliberal shackles and regulate the low income housing rental market. In the US, their version of our Accommodation Supplement is a voucher system;
https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/710

If as a landlord, you want to qualify to accept such vouchers as part payment for rental accommodation - you have to meet certain regulatory criteria - one being no rent reviews for the term of the tenancy, among other things.

Regulate the low income rental market and there would be far less need for social housing and far less need for market intervention in the new house build market. Can the A/S (i.e., cash handout) and implement a voucher system.

The KiwiBuild scheme was first announced way back in 2012. The practicality around building affordable housing was more realistic back then and policy should change as the times have - Particularly after the last housing boom.

25
up

Behold, the greatest bait-and-switch in NZ political history. Promised for multiple election campaigns, repeatedly challenged on the grounds of being totally unrealistic, with multiple leaders insisting it was possible and would succeed.

If ever there was a precedent for the SFO being able to press charges for misleading conduct in politics, this would be it.

24
up

I agree! But if we're talking about setting precedents here, how much has a 2.5% increase in GST cost everyone over the past 10 years? One that was completely ruled out from a party that want's to "Cut taxes, not increase them".

What about campaigning on solving the housing crisis, doing nothing about it, then ditching your post early to take up a position as the CEO of the biggest beneficiary of house price inflation in the country? Some serious conflicts of interest could be implied in that arrangement.

It could be, but this isn't actually about National at all, and no amount of whatabbouttery will make this about National.

And let's not forget the years spent in opposition lashing National's response on the basis of this fantasy of a policy platform, which they ultimately couldn't deliver even a fraction of what they promised once actually in power. Labour acolytes crying about National 'denying the housing crisis existed' comes across as pretty pathetic when you can now look back and safely say Labour came up with precisely no credible plans in nine years of opposition to actually do anything about it themselves.

I think you forgot to read this part....

The Government has already made the following policy changes to curb demand for housing, with the aim of improving affordability:

- Extending the bright-line test from two to five years. This means if you sell a residential property that isn’t your family home within five years of buying it, you’ll have to pay tax on the capital gain.

- Ringfencing of rental losses. So rental losses can no longer be offset against an investor’s other income.

- Introducing a ban preventing non-residents from buying residential property in New Zealand.

Indeed - they failed in everything they promised - other than increasing taxes and banning things ; rather easier than actually getting anything done.

You're playing politics.

The horse had well and truly left the stables. Legalisation there for the next cycle at least.

You must be naïve to think Jonkey was working for NZ inc. Constant denial the Chinese money hadn't influenced the market, when as a margin trader he knew exactly what he was doing. That's right, creating more business for his mates at ANZ.

There's no coincide he sold he bach to the former CEO, or that he sits at the head of their table now. Its disgusting, but people like him have no conscience, and would sell their grandma if they had to. Then organises a get out of jail free card.

No coincidence he like Fay live on an island.

21
up

...you gott be kidding me? Just who lead the charge for 9 years, increasing the population by close to a mill thus creating this housing deficit?

11
up

I think you'll find that was the Clark Govt of 1999 to 2008, who were only bailed out of rising house price pressure by cheap credit and the eventual GFC. National carried on their fine tradition of doing nothing. BTW, do yourself a favour, don't check the recent migration stats compared to what you were promised during the election campaign. You might find avoiding any scrutiny of Labour increasingly difficult.

@ rastus ............ so you would prefer NZ to remain a backwater then ?

Yes please

What can be done about the past Rastus?
This coalition could have done something about it in the last two years but that was a fail. Looking ahead, can the corner be turned and something be done in the next year is all we can hope for.
I had hoped for some real leadership and cracking of heads but sadly Jacinda isnt the type.

And Simon is??????????????????

The next person to have a crack if Jacinda continues not delivering.
Or have you got some one else in mind?
Leaders are thin on the ground at present.

Right on GV.
Too much chatter about the past and not enough about the future.
Forward momentum is where it's at, now we wait and see.
Can they deliver??? Not holding my breath on that one.

Deliver on what??? there's no aim or target anymore so they can't deliver but on the upside, they can't fail either

It's not whataboutanybody, but if you're talking about setting precedents I've provided you with a couple of examples which clearly take the cake. But no, you're not partisan at all.

But I do agree, Labour have failed big time on their flagship policy. But like I said, to get emotional and call it a precedent setting bait and switch is drawing a bit of a long bow.

And you seem incapable of accepting that Labour repeatedly over-promised something they could never deliver. I'm not partisan, I'm exactly who Kiwisaver was meant to work for. I recently had to bite the bullet and buy a more expensive first home because the promised Kiwibuild houses were not eventuating. Sorry, but I take exception to being used a political pawn. No partisanship here, just fed up with watching everyone trying to pretend their favourite party can't be blamed for anything when this stuff has a real impact on real people.

10
up

Like don't get me wrong, the Nats are unelectable garbage at this point, but if you plan to make the government better by making excuses for them, you're contributing to the sort of electoral echo-chamber that made this swindle possible in the first place. We shouldn't accept it from either party.

Like don't get me wrong, the Nats are unelectable garbage at this point, but if you plan to make the government better by making excuses for them, you're contributing to the sort of electoral echo-chamber that made this swindle possible in the first place. We shouldn't accept it from either party.

I will borrow from the Hosk here and call this a real expression of common sense (not that the Hosk will entirely agree).

Amen to all that!!
There is nothing worse than blind political partisanship.

National are absolute garbage at the moment, but if your reaction to Kiwibuild being an unmitigated failure is "but, but, but National & GST" then take a good hard look at yourself.

18
up

I'm fed up with both parties, I voted for National for 2 terms based on their election promises. When I saw them fail to do anything on what they campaigned on, I switched to Labour. Now Labour has attempted, and failed miserably, on their promise.

Both parties have failed miserably, but only one of the parties has actually made an attempt. A horrific attempt, but an attempt.

Ditto

Ditto.
It's high time we elected a CEO that has qualifications in running a big ship. Scratch elected... Appointed a CEO...
The present candidates to run this ship arent up to scratch.if Bridges said ' we're bringing the ex CEO of Air NZ in and he is going to be my right hand man for one term and if he delivers after that term I will step down and he can call the shots'. That would certinally get my attention quick smart!

Not a Currency Trader, a Fish and Chip Shop attendant, a Woodwork Teacher or a Litigation Lawyer?

Spoilt for choice then.

Theo Spierings has some time on his hands, a top CEO for you. He could do wonders.

All that brilliant real world business experience.

Is it really fair or accurate, to say both have failed miserably?

I'd agree National have, but to suggest Labour have does fly in the face of available data.

And sure, 100,000 house target missed (not even surprised), but at least they have started a building programme which has resulted in more house construction that at any time since the 1970's. That's not my definition of miserable failure, just a missed target.

"but at least they have started a building programme which has resulted in more house construction that at any time since the 1970's."

Just to be clear. Which labour initiatives in particular are you giving credit for this? Kiwibuild is 258(?) homes so far. (subtract the ones that were already going to be built and just got a kiwibuild label slapped on them (eg, all the Auckland Housing accord stuff (AHA signed in 2013 by Nick Smith, a national MP) https://www.interest.co.nz/sites/default/files/aucklandhousingaccord.pdf

"Both parties have failed miserably, but only one of the parties has actually made an attempt. A horrific attempt, but an attempt."

Amen. Didn't vote for either in the last election, and not seeing any reason to vote for either in the next. Trying to find a niche to hide in when this whole thing collapses under it own bloated weight, then come out and scavenge amongst the rubble.

Err, you're the one who tried to call it the greatest bait and switch. Others are simply pointing out that John Key likely has that sewn up already.

LOL NZ DAN ........... REMINDER !!!!!!............. It was Labour who introduced Grab , Snatch and Take TAX ON 1 OCTOBER 1986 .

And National increased it by 2,5% but brought down income tax by a huge %

The past has happened, can we go back and fix it? No we can't so let's look at the future.

Can Labour take decisive action and implement is the start and the finish of the story.

That's not the point, we're talking about Bait and Switches. Yes, income tax was brought down which was nice because you know bracket creep and all that.

Feel free to share the link to the Youtube video of David Lange promising not to Introduce GST, I've included the video of John Key ruling out that 2.5% increase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3-RYMwJiWA

House prices didn't rise in Auckland from 2008 till 2012, and in rest of country from 2008-2014. Is that the housing crisis you are talking about?
After 2012 there was a speculative bubble in Auckland that rapidly got out of hand driven by historically low interest rates, and far outpaced rapid growth in building numbers. Curious as to what you (and anyone else) thinks should have done to slow or stop that.

Reminiscent of, in fact quite picturesquely , of that old side show trickster. You know the one with the five or so, coconut half shells, and spot the one under which is the pea. Except there never is any pea is there.

They would clame insanity and get off.

Bravo.

what point in particular are you so happy about?
Overall seems like a complete flop, with the rma reforms being the only positive, except thats not for a few more years.

Its a flop alright , they offerred something that any person with Grade 1 arithmetic would have been able to point out , could not be done ........... like planting a billion trees .

These fools know that many voters are just plain stupid and a whole lot are gullible , and will believe any BS ..........

... theres a plan : "Plant and Build "

We'll get a billion trees planted , subsidised at the taxpayers expense .. and in 25 years time harvest 999 million trees , to build tree houses in the remaining million ...

Firstly .. . we need a working group to look into it .. and an expert in things as thick as two short planks to head it up .. ??? ... Sir Mickey Cullen !

I liked the part where they admitted failure. I thought it was big of them.

For what it's worth, the kiwibuild experiment at least demonstrates the futility of the current operating environment. Pity it's taken so long to realise the pragmatic approach: bail out the people at the bottom.

. . except that the rest of us admitted the failure of their plan before they started on it ..

Build more state houses , numpties ! ... get genuine needy families into homes via HNZ ...

.. it really truly is that simple ..

Is that simple though? Where? Next door to you? We already have our fair share near us...

Luckily Housing NZ already has huge lists of people looking for housing, and they know where they are/want to live, so the where is a matter of finding available land (including buying privately owned properties if necessary and the right price can be negotiated), bulldozing them clear, then building them back at higher density (eg.like those on the corner of Playfair and Richardson Road) 3 crappy old state houses become 11 new state houses. https://mtroskillsouthdevelopment.co.nz/assets/Uploads/536-538-Richardso...

I’m sure they wouldn’t mind living in remuera or ponsonby! I think adding even more state houses to areas that already have too many state houses would be a mistake that would haunt us for years to come. The Mt roskill example, I think they are one third state, one third kiwibuild and one third free market, that model I am happy with.

I have no objection to building state houses in Remuera.. except that it's going to to be yours and mine taxes that will have to buy the land... Seems rather a waste to buy 3 million dollars of land to plonk 4 state houses on when you can get 3 or 4 times as much land elsewhere in Auckland for the same money... Or just use the land HCNZ already owns for no capital outlay.

But your NIMBYism is noted.

This is exactly the problem with state houses - you either pack them in somewhere where land is cheap and create a slum, or you put them somewhere where land is expensive and waste money and create the unfair scenario where only the poor and rich can live in those suburbs. Mt roskill, glen innes, Otahuhu, etc are good examples- I know lots of hard working young couples that would love to be able to live there instead of further out because it is closer to city and work, but instead that land is wasted on people who don’t work and could live anywhere. I think private rental works much better, the only problem is that house prices have got out of hand due to low supply and that has created high rents.
My nimbyism is relative - don’t put all the problems in my back yard and expect yours to be kept squeaky clean.

We have the same backyard.. I also live in Mt Roskill..

You thought it was big of them? To not deny the elephant in the room. Okay....

I like the rent to own option, many many people will never get the deposit together but over time paying that little bit more rent is a way of getting there.
the hardest part for most people is getting the deposit together

They lack basic discipline to save , and do really dumb things like give 10% of their wages to the "church ' and borrow money from loan sharks

And pay their take home wages to a landlord who already owns 3 houses..

And who gets subsidised by governments of both stripes.

Spoken like a true banker

So basically just watering down what is already very weak sauce. Sure to be a great success.

Whats that sound i hear... sounds like a complete fizzer..

It took how many months to come up with this fluff....

The green's progressive home ownership really gets me angry: If your poor enough, you can get a morguage with a repayments (not just interest) a quarter less than market rates with interest rates fixed to inflation for the full 30 years.
https://www.greens.org.nz/home-for-life

My understanding of the document is they are doing this by borrowing at rates close to the OCR by providing a government guarantee to the lone to people who would be sub prime borrowers.

At least its limited to new builds in small numbers, otherwise this would push the housing market higher and that would just be icing on the cake.

I like that it is restricted to new supply, now they just need to mass produce whole suburbs like the old days to get the cost of the houses down

@tim52 ..........So according to Davidson , IWI are going to provide housing ? Thats got to be a good thing right ?

Why does it make you angry? It seems like reasonable policy, are you just angry about the fact the Green party have good ideas or something?

As noted, this creates new supply, but also offers a level of certainty you don't get get from private lending institutions. This is exactly the type of thing Treasury bonds should be issued for: state development.

Also your analysis that low price points introduced to a market push prices higher, is laughable.

Its pretty much a 1.5% (possibly 1% after the ocr cut) loan fixed for 30 years for a 30 year morguage (repayments are also inflation indexed, but the government pays the rates proportional to their remaining equity). If you lose your income you can have a repayment holiday. It's handing out hundreds of thousands in savings and increasing purchasing power by a third to every participant. One of the requirements for getting this rate is not having saved up a deposit, its a vote bribe for greens voters. How can you consider this fair or a good investment? (If this was purely income tested and at current normal retail rates I would be far more accepting of it.)

If this was a good idea, why does the tax payer not guarantee everyone's loans so we can get cheep rates. This would really get the market moving again.

As for increasing prices, if you increase a demographics credit availability by a third or allow them to get a lone in the first place it will push prices up.

18
up

IT WAS A SCAM from the start , and during the election campaign many of us called it for what it was , a combination of Monastic delusion and wishful thinking .........

A policy that wasn't ment to be implemented as they didn't think they would get a shot at being in power.
The sad thing is that no one stood up and said it. That would have taken a real leader that would have taken the hit then and there but produced in the long run.

So are you saying its impossible to build 100,00 homes in 10 years? The Chinese probably build that in a week...
I think the election promise was great, its the execution that has been abysmal. You have to wonder if it is deliberately so (to avoid a house price crash)

@Jimbojones ............... unlike China we dont have 2,000,000,000 (2 Billion ) people , we dont even have 1% of that population , and 96.5% of those Kiwis able and willing to work are already working.

We dont have an army of unemployed to embark on a mass housing program , nor are we able to increase the money supply as China can, to pay for it.

Nor do we have central planning ............a feature of communism .

20
up

LAME.

I voted for the, ahem....COL, to meaningfully address:
- housing; and
- immigration.

They have done neither.
I will not vote for them next election.

16
up

And vote for the opposition that promises to overturn what little has been done on these two fronts?

I don't carry the flag for either side but seems like the options we have put us starkly between a rock and a hard place.

13
up

True, if National is set to do away with the Foreign Buyers Ban then young Kiwis will be voting away their chances of home ownership if they vote for National.

Well Advisor , absolutely NOTHING has been done on either front , there are more migrants than ever , and no more houses being built than before

12
up

I hope you aren't expecting your precious National Party to sort it

I did not vote for National , but will be next time , Winston has been a bloody disaster

17
up

You were one of those seeking lowered immigration, now you want to vote for more. Haha

@Pocket Aces , I actually dont have a problem with immigration , we just need to get our ducks in a row before we open the doors again .........Winston called it the "PAUSE " button .

He has failed dismally

Do you think National will be able to get their "ducks in a row"? Hardly. The political landscape in this country is abysmal

My sympathy. Like you I voted for WP, for the first time ever, because I foresaw the change in government. So WP was the handbrake on offer, and if you are not to be too hard on yourself, it has been better to have NZF there for that purpose. But about the next election. That is the quandary to be sure. If Mr Key at his popular peak could not get National over the line on their own, there is less than a faint hope of the present National lot doing any better. So where then is their viable and necessary coalition going to come from?

The Wife of Brian party

.. if you can find a rock or a hard place . . SIGN UP ! ... sign the rental agreement and move in ..

Ugh

I wouldn't vote for National either. Both are mediocre, at best, and both have been disgraceful in addressing the housing crisis.

Can you let us know who you will vote for on those two criteria, as there may be a few people still want that sorted who don't know who. We do know it won't be National though

I quite possibly won't vote.
I've given up on them all!

I'm thinking of setting up the 'No Confidence' party.
As long as voters think it's just a box to tick on the ballot form to voice your no confidence vote, rather than a real party, I might just have a chance.

I wish there was on the ballot a no confidence option - may just make both sides sit up and listen (but the cynic in me is doubtful).

Do it!
I miss the nonsense of the Mac serious party. Sure I voted for them once.

Just a load of old cods .............. big on fancy language and platitudes with absolutely NO DETAIL WHATSOEVER

Gee, just about every comment here makes me laugh. At least Labour gave it a go, which is much, much, much more than the Gnats ever did.
After years of neo-liberal policies and economy, I can see how anyone wanting to do a bit of a reset would try to tread a bit cautiously where working outside of the "free" market might go.
Yeah, they should have gone full noise social housing and the whole rent to own from the start, but imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth if they had. Now, a few years into it, people are starting to see that there is not much of an alternative than the state being heavily involved in any reset.
I am prepared to stick with it for a while, even though I really want to see immigration rates much lower, because, there isn't an alternative.

@ PocketAces , you are delusional mate . Labour have done absolutely nothing other than prevent investors from providing rental stock to a market already short of such rental stock .

They have not changed any of what you refer to as 'neo-liberal policies " its been 2 years of more of the same .

And what could they do ?

Our variuos Governments have basically not built a single house since demobilisation in 1946 to 1950 , when we had tens of thousands of men returning from war , and a massive labour pool to do the work .

I know 100% for sure the Gnats won't do a complete reset, I don't know for sure Labour will, but I do know who is more likely to.

I expect more than 'giving it a go'.
I would agree they've done some good things - FBB, extension of bright line etc. And unlike the Nats, at least their intent is good....

I wouldn't be so mad if they'd at least built a few thousand KB homes. The target was aspirational. But the effort and execution has been so pathetic. Two years after being elected, and we've seen a coupe of hundred KB homes?????

I would actually prefer if they hadn't built a single home, and instead worked on building a factory capable of building 10,000 homes a year. If it took 5 years to build that factory, well at least it would have been progress. The tinkering we have seen instead has been pathetic.

Someone said a day or two ago that we might see an announcement including that. We didn't.
Hopeless.

I will tell you what scuttled Kiwibuild from the outset (even I admit it wasn't the greatest idea, but) and it was the Chinese govt putting the mockers on capital flight. Had foreign (aka Chinese) buyers remained as active and as influencing in the market, it would have worked as prices in general would have carried on going gangbusters and the prices of kiwibuild houses in comparison would have looked good. They should have ditched it the instant it started to become clear that house price rises had had their day, especially in Auckland

The only reason Kiwibuild prices "looked good" is because the media looked the other way when Labour's supposedly rock-solid costings had to be revised upwards immediately after the election. They were at no stage a viable reality.

Labour could still do good if they would just focus on regulatory reform to make it cheaper to build houses - save $1-200k if they really took an axe to it. But they won't as that goes against their big govt ideals.

Yes I like rent to own scheme. Then claim you can't afford it. Government will give you accommodation allowance and then hay pesto you have a house with no deposit or rent paid

Except that right now , you cannot find a family home to rent on the North Shore unless you earn $100 k per annnum ......... the lack of supply is simply reacting to the laws of economics and the free market ,and prices are going up

Not entirely sure one can make Pesto outta Hay...

As predicted it's been a failure. Would be interesting to know the real cost of the 169 Kiwibuild homeowners dwellings (govt departments can't be cheap to run). The 'reset' doesn't look any better: $400M subsidy for a few peoples homes, less assistance to developers (who already weren't that interested). No caps on 4 bed houses - a product no developer wants to build anyway, etc.

The Unitary Plan has done way more for housing supply than Kiwibuild ever will.

Very disappointing. Looks like they have gone from the best solution (building houses) to the worst solution (subsidies for unaffordable houses => increasing house prices).
Why not just build a lot of prefabs in a big factory? If they threw enough money at it (and surely its a problem worth major spending on), prefab would have to work.

Good point that's often forgotten. The Nats were instrumental in driving the unitary plan.

And just as Phil T lead the opening of Kiwibuild with Dave Dobbin singing 'Welcome Home', Woods has employed the more appropriately named 'Crowded House.'

This time we get a whole album re-release aptly named - Woodface

So many housing hits for us to sing:

Don't Dream. It's over.
Six years in a leaky house.
Better own a Home soon, aka Better be homeless soon
Four seasons inside in one day
Whispers and Moans
Hole in the House
She (Woods) goes on, and on, and on....
Weather with you.
Can't carry on.
Don't. Stop now.
Locked out.
Silent House.
Recurring Bad Dream
Transit Lounge
Tombstone

Dale, what's happened to PT's promise to 'bust the RUB'?
Another failure? Another broken promise?

I'm sad to say, they didn't disappoint.

They have completely lost it, and I can see the Greens sticky fingers on this as well, re this quote in the above article 'Introducing a new National Policy Statement on Urban Development that will direct local councils to provide for more intensification under the RMA.'

They have imploded from expanding up and out, to just in and up. If intensification was the only answer, Hong Kong would be the most affordable city, not the most unaffordable.

There are so many things about what they are saying that just logically cannot work. The most obvious question to ask is, 'are we adding non value added cost into the system?" The answer is clearly yes and thus by definition houses cannot become more affordable.

As simple as the solutions are, it's like talking year 5 maths to a year 1, whatever ever level you simplify it for them, it is still way over their head.

And how much faith would you have in the Nats to sort out the RMA after failing last time?
I have none.
They are all muppets.
Apologies to Miss Piggy and Kermit.

Took them 9 years and they achieved absolutely nothing.

None.

National wasted a perfectly good recession when they could have reset near the bottom of a cycle that would have stabilised prices at lower median multiples going forward. Imagine where we would be today if they had.

Labour must be praying for an GFC and/or an earthquake to give them the reset and mandate for emergency action that needs to be taken for events 'outside their control.' They will be wondering how come National has all the luck.

Why have they got rid of the 100,000 houses target when it should’ve been very achievable as Winston said that 200,000 was achievable???
Just a load of bollacks.
$400m for some schemes that they have no details yet about! You what? Why 400m if you don’t have any details about anything??
Rent To Buy is impossible to work in Auckland anyway, and that is why there are no details!!!!!
Shared Equity? Who is going to put money into houses for someone else, when they can get all the equity themselves?
They are absolutely out of their depth and Megan Woods, Davidson And Twyford are going to continue to look stupid!!

... going out on a limb here , but I reckon that Labour has lost The Man 2's vote in the 2020 General Election ..

" Can't see the Woods for the Twyfords " , as they say ...

See, that's why I enjoy your comments Gummy, keep it up :-)

Awww cute. GBH and Yvil should exchange telephone numbers.

Have another piece of chocolate cake

Just a question ............. has anyone EVER seen an actual detailed strategy document for Kiwibuild ?

And by this I mean the Strategic Plan, as in the mechanics of it.......... detailed statistics of the problem how , where , when , who , operations , measurement and funding, clearly defined outcomes , timelines ans timeframes , accountability , and KPI's ?

They still dont know how many houses are actually required to sort out the backlog

"They still dont know how many houses are actually required to sort out the backlog"

Do they really need to worry about when to hit the brakes when the train is only just inching away from the platform at the first station?

Easy peasy. Just reduce the target from 100,000 to 100. Meanwhile those on the bottom rungs still won't get anywhere to live. I guess we won't see a reset of the homelessness policy, which hasn't gone anywhere too. But Labour doesn't really like to talk about homeless people anymore.

Meanwhile with a recession quite likely on the way: "It is also reducing the deposit required for a government-backed mortgage from 10% to 5%" What could possibly go wrong?

.. the first people to get a Kiwibuild home were a graduate doctor and his wife , a software programmer

Not exactly a poor needy couple... but no one else could afford a Jacinda home . . Ha haaaa de harrrrr ...

This is my beef with the whole thing. The people who truly need houses are those who are on the street or progressively being forced on the street. I don't see why social housing should be such an anathema, as it in turn relieves rental pressures and that in turn relieves demand on residential housing overall. If we want affordable homes then there's more than one way of adjusting the supply vs demand equation.....and defusing the generational social issues this country seems to insist on snowballing every decade

"There is no silver bullet to housing" - agree, but Labour pitched the building of 100,000 homes as a silver bullet

"We will now target those homes to areas where there is clearly identified demand and need" - this is a pretty funny admission... you mean you were building houses where no one wanted them? No wonder almost half of the houses built remain unsold.

The only thing surprising about this 'reset' is that it wasn't announced on a Friday.. when Labour typically eat humble pie with the hope all is forgotten by Monday.

Where did this silly figure of 100,000 ( a thumbsuck maybe ) come from in the first place along with the promise of a house in Auckland for $300,000 , which was half the cost of a section in Auckland ?

I suspect someone in the Labour party stuck his or her finger or thumb into a wet orifice pulled it out and held it up and conjured a magic sounding number .

The technical term for this is PDOOMA....

. . that explains it , right from the get go I thought Kiwibuild was a plan that stunk .

Popped in for a look. 'Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose' sums it up. BTW: Home is at 95.6% of CV as at 1/9/19.

As all rational persons predicted Kiwibuild would fail; I was called a tory-troll for pointing that out. Good intentions do not make policies - remember that at the next election when the parties make "feel-good" statements.

The issue has been and will always be supply; supply cannot keep up with demand. So the question is why can't it? There are a few hints in the announcement around the new Urban Development Ministry - local councils restrict supply and then wonder why land prices increases. It's like basic economics goes out the window when it comes to housing. Of course this government still does not understand that as most of their policies are actually to increase demand with a subsidy.

Landbanking will soon be a thing of the past and it will open up development zones or entire estates at once not simple half dozen street subdivisions that you get currently. Get ready to see some serious construction activity. I have seen how its done in the USA and I have a sneaking suspicion that one of the big housebuilding companies from the UK might get involved here now that theres more work than just dripfeeding of sections a couple at a time...

The_4th_estate - as I have commented here before I think the Urban Development Ministry is the most exciting prospect and one that will actually deliver results. Might take a few years to get fully going. I hope we so see some serious construction activity.

Agreed. In fact I go so far as to say the former Ministry of Works will shortly rise from the mists of time to implement the nation building projects this country has been sorely lacking since neo liberalism landed on our shores in 84. Everything is utterly disintegrated in this country because its been left to the private sector to deliver public sector requirements. Privatisation only works for the merchant bankers who do the deals, the rest is utterly counter productive.

As all rational persons predicted Kiwibuild would fail; I was called a tory-troll for pointing that out.

Yes, but the modern-day, suburban Kiwi 'non-socialist' would have predicted Singapore and Japan housing policies would have failed if they were sent back to the 60s in a time machine.

So you're still likely a Tory troll.

J.C. - I can't tell if you are been satirical or not? Hiding behind an impossible to prove counter-factual is rather poor thinking. A bit like the PM; "A" for effort but an "F" for delivery

Partly satirical. Those who consider themselves "Tories" in countries like NZ don't actually realize the extent to how "socialist" their existences are. The Hosk would be a shining example. Secondly, without a doubt, S'pore and Japan followed "socialist" housing policies as a pillar of their economic development and goals. I think it's hard to argue that both countries haven't shown that they can excel at "capitalism".

So any kind of Tory nonsense about the "market delivering" needs to be put in its place when it's quite clear that the market hasn't and can't deliver.

If there's homes unsold in Wanaka, then it's a demand side issue more than lack of supply of KB houses. I guess there aren't that many FHB's in Wanaka then, or you'd naturally buy one at that price.

You'd still need a 10% deposit generally, so $50-60k which if you're in hospo, is going to be hard. But KB isn't a house handing out scheme. You're talking 3bdrm standalone on 350sqm section type thing for $640k. In Wanaka. There's either KB buyers or there's not, the open market will take them if not.

5% deposit.. FannieMay/FreddieMac anyone?

Some quite smart policy development there and while it didn't work first time at least they tried SOMETHING. Mr Bridges lot did nothing. I like how this will enable a lot of angry kiwis to tell the tinpot private rental sector to SHOVE IT! I think LVRs need repealing, they just tilted the advantage even further in landlords favour courtesy of National no less. I bought my home on 10% never missed a payment. Well done COL!

Oh wait, Nats did turn a blind eye to us selling out our sovereignty to overseas interests.

Underwhelming reset, in 9 months the changes are:
- no more targets (so no accountability and no chance of failing)
- widening the appeal to more buyers (some who may not be in real need of a home)
- some other vague scheme but, I quote: "It hasn’t detailed the nuts and bolts of the programme,"

"$400m has been allocated for a progressive home ownership scheme that could include rent-to-buy and shared equity plans for between 2500 and 4000 families."
Creating $100-130k lotto winners using our tax. (But only equivalent to about 2 months worth of immigration.) Farcical and seriously unsound policy. It is not govt's job to pick winners and hand out thick wads of cash.
FIX. THE. REGULATORY. COSTS. OF. BUILDING. That is what govt is for, no one else can do it.

Exactly...

I'm still angry. And so are several peers who expected so much more

Interesting, what were you expecting that hasn't been addressed? I like the short sale time on studios and one bedders, will make it safer than buying into apartments that have hidden leaks, horrible body corporates and ground lease surprises...another thing Nats never sorted properly.

No accountability. Am I and others scrapping it out over 200 KB houses per year?
The previous target was ridiculous. But it would have been good if they came out with a recalibrated target.
Also some expectation that they might have announced plans to help support more off site manufacturing to lower building costs.

This article nails it

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/on-the-inside/398124/government-should-be-hel...

So disappointing. I really doubt I will bother to vote next year.

A few years back I thought NZ was quite well served by our politicians...

I think you're over egging it. This will take us back to the days of the state advances mechanism for housing, there is going to be so much building work going begging I might even dig out my apron, hire an offsider and get back on site again!

What should have been announced is sacking all of the idiots at the top of the worthless housing ministry. Hiring a bunch of pompous career government employees is a bad idea at the best of times. Actually expecting them to deliver is comical.

Clear out the rot instead of diverting attention. I watched the video press release and there's a lot of pointing at other promises that have been met rather than highlighting this high profile failure. Useless smoke and mirrors, and the arrogance of not listening to anyone that advised them otherwise right at the start.

This is the most critical election promise that they have failed on.

Good points. I had some contact with Twyfod and the bureaucracy and the arrogance was just incredible.

The government are fulfilling their pre-election promises perfectly.

You will recall they absolutely promised to act on the housing crisis without lowering property prices in any way.

This highly complicated Rube Goldberg machine is the only way to square that circle.

So to sum up, KiwiBuild houses now look more like any other houses, less affordable and now more people can buy them. In a moment with an *affordable* housing shortage adding more of the same stock that nobody wants anyway is just going to help sustaining a bubble for a bit longer and solve none of the problems.

I think we can conclude that, whether left or right, none of them have any genuine interest in properly addressing the housing issue.
It's futile hoping any of them do.
So we might as well all join the whole ponzi merry go round.
I type this as I sit on the train having just walked past the beds of about 10 homeless people in central Auckland.
So sad

A Reset Policy needs a New Logo:

I modestly propose (and yes, it's abbreviation is probably trademarked but that shouldn't stop this sorry crew)..

Drum-roll.....

Kiwi Fuster Cluck

KFC... classic
I will from now on refer to KB as KFC, Kiwi Fuster Cluck, care of Waymad
Time to have fun with this debacle. Better to laugh than cry.

@ Fritz , YES and KFC have launched a new KFC Mealbox to commemorate the reset of the Kiwibuild .............. its called the:-

KFC JACINDA BOX ............. it consists of three left wings and an arsehole with some mash and two pieces of greens ( lettuce or brocolli)

Love the work you young guns do.
I have a request, though. Could you please do some digging on that Unitec development that Fordtwy announced early in his inglorious rain?
It was announced with fanfare and was going to comprise thousands of apartments. Have heard next to nothing in recent times.

When the coalition theme song is Kum Ba Yah , you probably don't have to be a genius to deduce that 100k houses was as likely as a bacon sandwich at a barmitzvah!! Meanwhile Winnie circles the melee and wonders whether to start humming Eminem "(pretty legal) " themed election songs.
The real problem that even given endless ammunition the opposition still struggle to gain traction not because of a lack of rubber more a lack of a driver who can handle the jandal.

I think it is a good idea to let tenants buy their government supplied homes. But is this great idea of the labour greens any different than nationals. Hardly a day goes by with someone moaning about national selling a few HNZ houses to their tenants.