The Greens are looking to introduce changes to the rental market to “give everyone in New Zealand a healthy home to live in”.
oooo so close Greens, so close.
This still does nothing to curb speculation on the housing market which is driving out of control prices and inflation.
The costs for housing improvements will be easily carried by the conglomerates owning tens or hundreds of houses, but small investors with one or two properties may be forced to sell because they won’t be able to afford to be compliant, thus providing more stock for the large whales to buy, completing the straight line of more wealth to the already wealthy.
I see it’s been offset by the basic income there, so you’re appealing to the desperate lower class, while screwing over the middle to feed the top.
Should we have healthy homes? Yes. But shouldn’t the goal be to have less people renting and more people owning?
One policy can’t do everything, and this is at least better than other platforms. At least it incentives improving housing stock, which the current system does not. Of course we still desperately need a capitol gains/wealth tax and a reform of our tax brackets to being them out of the 90s.
But shouldn’t the goal be to have less people renting and more people owning?
Should it? If housing was structured a little different so owning a house wasn’t partaking in speculation but the house was simply a place live, and rental laws allowed reasonable use of that property by tenants, and there was ample housing supply, then is there a compelling reason for us to push for everyone to own a house? What wellbeing measurement would this help?
Owning a house (or having a significant piece of the mortgage paid off) gives you a safety net. It’s dormant capital, something you can use to borrow against for much cheaper loans, something you can hand down to your kids, and something you can rely on during retirement years.
The measurement might be called ‘financial stability’ or financial freedom etc.
Having access to low interest loans is something that renters don’t have.
If we had ample housing then there would be more supply than demand, and houses would cost closer to what it costs to provide rather that a race of who can pay the most. But the downside is there would be less to borrow against, because the “value” would increase at around inflation instead of based on speculation.
In that situation, you could rent, and put the money in a low fee broad based investment fund. The capital would grow (over a long time period) much more than inflation, offsetting loan interest to give a similar benefit. And at the end you can give your kids the stocks instead of the house, and in your retirement years you’d have more income from the stocks than what you’d be paying in rent.
I’m just propositing something that could be an alternative to buying. Even if not for everyone, I think we should be able to have a system that doesn’t rely on young people buying houses from old people for much more than it cost them.
This all seems pretty cool to me. When we came to NZ from The Netherlands ten years ago we were very worried to see how the rental market works. Luckily we could buy something quickly. In NL it works so much better.
Can you provide some insights on the differences? I’m curious to hear what else we could improve.
Quality of houses was the first one. Double glazing and insulation have been standard since 1980. So weird to come here to see houses without insulation or double glazing.
Tenants have way more rights, e.g. as a landlord, you can’t just decide to sell the house when you have tenants. And there are just more houses available. Density of housing is high, not like NZ where most houses are detached.
Quality of housing is a big issue, definitely. I’ve wintered in Canada in very cold conditions, and houses never felt cold or damp. That being said, the standards for new house builds are a lot higher. We built some years ago, and we need to open windows during the day in winter if it’s sunny as it just gets too warm in living room.
Housing density is the other big one for me. I’ve lived in cities overseas with fewer people than Akl. They were always more compact, easier for transport, and more convenient. This is, in large part, due to high density housing.
Thanks, yes things have definitely improved here, but the bare minimum here is still not very good. We’ve got a 7 year old house but still get condensation on our alu window frames as they are not thermally broken. Also the insulation is not superb.
Opening your windows is a very good idea by the way. Modern houses need to be ventilated as they are very tight.
I’ve wintered in Canada in very cold conditions, and houses never felt cold or damp.
This actually makes it easier for houses to not be damp! Very cold air can barely hold any water. The comparatively warmer winters in our subtropical climate leave a lot of moisture in rhe air.
Though, and I’ve said this before, the comparatively warmer winters probably let us get away with a lower standard of housing, and now we have grown used to that.
Yes, good point. It didn’t snow for about a month, due to the low humidity. I should have just pointed out the warmth of the houses only.
I wonder if there are companies in NZ that build houses to a standard that people coming from overseas expect?
I know heatpump powered central heating is becoming more common, but it seems only for those who know to ask for it. I’d be interested in knowing what other things make warmer houses, so I know to look out for them.
When we built, we went with a smaller local contractor. We came from a cold, damp, house, so specified we wanted it WARM. Something that helped is we have polystyrene backed cladding. This isn’t included in the R-value calcs for Code, but definitely helps. We also went with thermally broken frames, which wasn’t worth the money I don’t think.
At this point I feel like there’s nothing I need to know about the green party. There’s no way I could vote for them.
I have issues with the Green’s leadership and naive infighting, but this policy could improve our housing stock, help kerb the cost of living crisis, and potentially stabilise our insanely overinflated housing market. All sorely necessary.
What impresses me the most is the Greens are not just tinkering around the edges, but proposing serious changes.
About time someone acted (or at least, talked about it!)
Because of this proposal or other reasons?
Nah not this proposal since I haven’t read it. I don’t like the greens because they are awful people, awful politicians and so incredibly out of touch.
My only exception to that is chole. Even though I don’t agree with her on much I think she’s respectable and doing what she thinks is best.
awful people, awful politicians and so incredibly out of touch.
Say what you will about the Greens and their policies, but I never thought I’d see that description of them.
Can you give some examples why? We’re voting greens as our main concerns are climate change and income inequality. The greens seems to be the best choice then.
The greens are the best choice at the moment, despite the (not unexpected) push for more electric cars and their anti-nuclear stance.
They are at least pushing the most for climate policy targeting ‘industrial decarbonisation’ and public transport infrastructure.
Haha nothing I could say is going to convince you. We are operating on two very different lists of issur priority.
Fair enough…
Do you mind sharing what issues are important to you?
Sorry, didn’t realize I was sorting by new and got something 3 months old - am the doofus!
