You are here:
NZLII >>
Databases >>
New Zealand Human Rights Commission Submissions >>
2020 >>
[2020] NZHRCSub 5
Database Search
| Name Search
| Recent Documents
| Noteup
| LawCite
| Download
| Help
Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill - Submission to the Social Services and Community Committee [2020] NZHRCSub 5 (21 April 2020)
Last Updated: 14 June 2020
Submission of the Human Rights Commission on the Residential Tenancies
Amendment Bill 2020
![2020_500.png](2020_500.png)
![2020_501.png](2020_501.png)
Submission on Residential Tenancies
Amendment Bill 2020
Submission to the Social Services and Community
Committee
from the New Zealand Human Rights Commission – Te Kāhui Tika
Tangata
1
Contact:
infoline@hrc.co.nz
The Human Rights Commission
1. The Human Rights Commission is New Zealand’s National
Human Rights Institution, with international A-status accreditation.
One of our
primary functions is “to advocate and promote respect for, and an
understanding and appreciation of, human rights
in New Zealand society.”1
In this submission we advocate for increased respect for the right to a decent
home.
- Our
key recommendation is that the Act should specifically reference the right to a
decent home.2
We support reform of the Residential Tenancies Act
- The
Human Rights Commission supports reform of the Residential Tenancies Act to
better promote renters’ right to a decent home.
- As
set out in our 2018 submission to MBIE during consultation on reform of the
Act,3 renting law is particularly important to children,4
disabled people, Pacific peoples, low income New Zealanders, Māori, and
single parent families (typically women and children)5 because these
are the New Zealanders most likely to be living in rented homes.
- Modernised
renting law would promote not only the right to a decent home but also a range
of human rights correlated to good, stable
housing – for example health
and education rights. Stable housing can also support social inclusion, by
enabling ongoing membership
of a community.
- Our
earlier submission emphasised the importance of increased security of tenure as
a foundation for other housing rights. We support
the measures in the Bill to
improve security of tenure.
- Our
submission to MBIE also provided as an annexure the full text of the UN Office
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’
Committee on Economic Social
and Cultural Rights’ General Comment on the Right to Adequate Housing
(Art. 11 (1) of the Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). We
provide that submission, including its annexure, again for the Committee’s
information.
A decent home is a human right
- A
decent home is a human right and a foundational aspect of human dignity. Too
many New Zealand renters do not have a decent home.
“[T]he right to adequate housing should not be interpreted narrowly, as a
right to mere physical shelter or to housing conceived
as a commodity. Rather,
the right to housing must be understood in relation to the inherent dignity of
the human person.”6
1 H uman Rights Act 1993 section 5(1)(a)
2 See below recommendation 2 on page 4.
3 Available on our website here:
h ttps://www.hrc.co.nz/files/9315/4352/5201/Human_Rights_Commission_Submission_on_Consultation_-
_
Reform_of_the_Residential_Tenancies_Act_1986 19_Oct_2018.pdf.
4 C hild Poverty Action Group, Our children, our choice:
priorities for policy. The report found 40-41% of children are now living in
rented accommodation...this is problematic because this form of housing tenure
is more likely to be overcrowded and less likely to be well maintained. 2014, p.
87.
5 A
Stocktake of New Zealand’s Housing, Security of tenure in rental
housing, pp. 38-42. The report found home
ownership is not evenly distributed through the population, either by age or
ethnicity. Data show that Europeans/Pākehā
have enjoyed higher
homeownership rates than other ethnicities; in 2013 this rate was 57% compared
with Māori at 28% and Pacific
Island peoples at 19%. February 2018, pp.
5,14.
6 Guidelines for the Implementation of the Right to Adequate Housing:
Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component
of the right
to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to nondiscrimination in this
context, 26 December 2019, A/HRC/43/43,
paragraph 15
h ttp://www.unhousingrapp.org/user/pages/04.resources/A_HRC_43_43_E-2.pdf.
9. Many of the key debates about the types of issues raised
around this Bill arise from the financialisation of the right to a decent
home.
Treating homes as a “service” like a gym membership, or as an
“investment” like gold, wood pulp, or
any other commodity, leads to
different conversations from those we would have if housing were properly
recognised as the human right
that it is.
- There
is a great depth of international and local work and knowledge about the
components and operationalisation of the right to
housing.7
The right to a decent home in New Zealand
- Most
recently, in February of this year, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to
Housing visited New Zealand and reported on New
Zealand’s housing crisis,
which she described as a “human rights crisis demand[ing] a human rights
response.”8
- Her
report describes our country’s housing crisis as a human rights crisis
(emphasis added): 9
“[I]t is widely recognized [...] that there is a housing crisis in
New Zealand and that it is being experienced most acutely by particular
groups including: Māori, Pacific Peoples and other ethnic communities,
persons with disabilities, single-parents (particularly single
mothers), youth
and children, and those living in poverty.
What is less recognized is that the housing crisis in Aotearoa New Zealand
is, in fact, a human rights crisis. The housing conditions – high
rates of homelessness, inaccessible housing stock, unaffordability and
escalating rents, substandard
conditions including overcrowding, a lack of
security of tenure for tenants, [...] - are all inconsistent with the enjoyment
of the
right to housing.
While New Zealand has ratified various
international human rights treaties obliging all bodies exercising government
authority to
respect, protect and fulfil the right to adequate housing, there is
insufficient expression of this right in law, in related policy
and programmes,
and in their implementation. These conditions would never have arisen to this
extent had housing been fully understood, recognized and implemented by
Governments
as a human right and a social good rather than as an asset for
wealth accumulation and growth over the last decades.”
13. The Special Rapporteur’s report also clearly
identifies the financialisation of housing as at the root of the housing
crisis:10
“[T]he crisis has its roots in a historic
nearly exclusive focus on homeownership which, in more recent years and
particularly since the Global Financial Crisis, has translated into housing
having lost its function as a place to live, and instead it has become a
speculative asset. [...] Low interest rates, coupled with an under-developed
rental housing system with weak tenant protections, have allowed housing
speculation to continue in a relatively unbridled fashion.”
14. This Bill as drafted will go some way towards improving
access to the right to a decent home in New Zealand, but in order to
meaningfully
address the above concerns, the Bill must also address this
fundamental issue of how the right to a home is conceptualised in New
Zealand.
- Therefore,
the Human Rights Commission urges the Committee to view this Bill through a
human rights lens, namely how this legislation
can ensure that the right to a
decent home is placed at the centre of policy and practices that will emerge
under it. This should
include considering how to shift the
current
7 For example the work described in Chief Human Rights Commissioner
Paul Hunt’s July 2019 address to the Shift Aotearoa Conference
on new
knowledge for housing action: h ttps://www.hrc.co.nz/news/paul-hunt-human-
r ight-decent-home/
8 “New Zealand: housing crisis requires bold human rights
response, says UN expert” 19 Feb 2020 p ress
s tatement from UN Special Rapporteur on the right to housing at
the end of her 10-day visit to New Zealand.
9 End of Mission Statement: Visit of the Special Rapporteur on the
right to adequate housing to New Zealand. Leilani Farha, Wellington,
19 February
2020, paragraphs 11-13, attached as an appendix to this submission and at
h ttps://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25574&LangID=E
10 Above, at paragraph 25 and following. Emphais added.
weighting of market forces away from incentivising housing
speculation and back toward a primary focus on the provision of a decent
standard of living for all New Zealanders.
- With
this in mind, the Human Rights Commission considers that a provision should be
inserted into the Bill that explicitly recognises
and affirms the human right to
housing and its various elements. These elements were identified by the
Committee on Economic and
Social Rights in their General Comment No 4 on the
Right to Adequate Housing. The elements are: security of tenure; habitability;
accessibility; affordability; availability of services, materials, facilities
and infrastructure; location; and cultural
adequacy.11
Recommendation 1: When recommending
any amendments to the Bill, ensure that they are consistent with, and promote,
the human right to a decent home.
Recommendation 2: Add a purpose or principles section, or amend the
long title of the Act, to ensure the implementation and interpretation of the
Act
is consistent with the human right to a decent home and its various
elements.
While human rights can aid statutory interpretation, whether or not they are
specifically referenced in the Bill, an explicit reference requires that
those interpreting and applying the legislation do so in a manner consistent
with human rights principles.
In essence, it embeds the basis for a human rights
approach to housing into the implementation of the legislation.
Landlords have human rights obligations
- Everybody
has human rights duties as well as human rights.12 Under the current
policy settings, provision of rental housing in New Zealand is largely left to
the private market. The associated
human rights obligations also fall to the
private market.13 In this regard the United Nations Guiding
Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) apply. The UNGPs are a global
standard
of expected conduct for all business enterprises wherever they
operate.14 The UNGPs call for businesses to respect human rights.
This means that they should avoid infringing on the human rights of others
and
should address adverse impacts with which they are involved and ensure victims
have access to adequate and effective remedies.
- The
government has committed to developing and adopting a national plan of action to
implement the UNGPs in response to a recommendation
made to New Zealand during
the 2019 UN Universal Periodic Review.15 A provision requiring
interpretation of the Act to be informed by the right to a decent home would be
consistent with these obligations.
11 For a summarised explanation of these elements see “The
human right to adequate housing in New Zealand”, Human Rights
Commission:
h ttps://www.hrc.co.nz/files/4215/1363/5639/2017_07_25_-
_ Right_to_housing_flyer_-_updated.pdf.
12 The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises that
“Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and
full
development of his personality is possible” (Article 29),and that
“every organ of society” has human rights
responsibilities –
not just government, but business and other actors. (The Preamble refers to
“every organ of society”,
and more recent developments in this area
include Professor John Ruggie’s work as Special Representative of the
Secretary General
of the United Nations, developing the UNGPs.)
13 See the Special Rapporteur’s report attached as an appendix,
and this news item relating to her visit:
“H omelessness: Housing a human right, make evictions illegal,
UN visitor says” NZ Herald 19 February 2020.
14 U nited Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human
rights.
15 Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review - New
Zealand: Addendum - Views on conclusions and/or recommendations,
voluntary
commitments and replies presented by New Zealand
A /HRC/44/4/Add.1, 17 June 2019, paragraph 20, p 3-4
A human rights-based housing strategy for Aotearoa New
Zealand
20. The Committee has heard from a range of other submitters
that this Bill, although it is a significant step forward, cannot by
itself
address New Zealand’s housing crisis (and it does not claim to).
- The
Human Rights Commission supports calls for a human-rights based housing strategy
for Aotearoa New Zealand, to address this crisis
holistically.
Recommendations about specific provisions
- The
Committee will have received a range of well-considered submissions from
entities very familiar with the operation of the current
Act in
practice.16 The Committee will have also received a range of
submissions from entities representing some of the groups most likely to rent
and
most likely to be negatively affected by weak protections of the right to a
decent home, and from public health advocates.17
- The
following is a non-comprehensive list of suggested improvements to the draft
Bill to better protect the rights of particular groups
of people who are more
likely to rent and who need targeted protections of their right to a decent
home, and to improve the operation
of the Act.
Freedom from
discrimination for assistance dog users
Recommendation 3: Add clauses to specifically prevent discrimination
against tenants who use assistance dogs.
In late 2018 the Human Rights Review Tribunal heard a matter in which a woman
who uses a guide dog was discriminated against and when
seeking a
tenancy.18 While this discrimination is already unlawful under the
Human Rights Act, the Bill could specifically reduce the chances of such
an
incident recurring by providing that a landlord may not refuse to allow a
disability assist dog (as defined under the Dog Control
Act) unless it is not
reasonable for the dog to be on the premises. Any amendment should not limit
existing protections under the
Human Rights Act.
Allow certain modifications without requiring consent process
- We
support the intention of the clauses designed to allow tenants to make minor
modifications more easily. In practice, however, the
process is more onerous
than necessary.
- We
submit that there should be a presumption that certain specified modifications
are acceptable when carried out in with reasonable
care. That list could specify
particular very minor modifications (such as picture hooks), particular
accessibility modifications
(such as handrails beside toilets), and particular
healthy home modifications (such as vegetable gardens and
curtains).
Recommendation 4: Specify a list of modifications
which tenants may make without landlord consent.
Do not require reversal of modifications increasing accessible and healthy
housing stock
Recommendation 5: Amend proposed section 42B to not require
remediation of modifications which improve accessibility or promote healthy
homes.
New Zealand’s housing stock is acknowledged to be inadequately
accessible, and unhealthy homes are a known issue. We suggest
that reversal of
accessibility and healthy homes improvements should not be required.
Improve Bill’s impact for those experiencing family violence
- The
Committee will have received a number of submissions which discuss the impact of
residential tenancies law on family violence
survivors. Our overall impression
is that the Bill could better support safety and recovery for family violence
survivors. For example,
the privacy provisions could be
16 For example, Community Law Centres o Aotearoa and Consumer NZ.
17 For example, the Disabled Persons Assembly and the N
ational Collective of Independent Women’s
Refuges.
18 G odfrey v Harvey
[2019] NZHRRT 6 (22 January 2019)
strengthened, and processes for removing one tenant from a
tenancy in instances of family violence could be simplified.
Recommendation 6: Systematically consider how
the Act can be amended to better support safety and recovery for family violence
survivors.
We suggest that the Bill as drafted and any proposed amendments at Committee
stage are audited for their impact on people experiencing
family violence.
Enhance privacy provisions to allow tenants to pursue their rights without
fear
- We
would like to see stronger provisions to protect the privacy of tenants and
allow them to confidently assert their rights without
fear of blacklisting.
- The
Tenancy Tribunal name suppression clauses in the Bill are helpful, but risk
being minimally effective because they do not address
the significant issue of
private databases, and the chilling effect those databases have on
tenants’ advocacy for their own
rights. In response to this known problem,
Australia has regulated private databases.19
- We
suggest that the draft clauses are strengthened, to suppress the names of
successful tenants by default without requiring an
application.
Recommendation 7: Amend suppression order
clauses to suppress successful parties’ names in published Tenancy
Tribunal decisions by default, unless
the party agrees otherwise or the Tribunal
considers that it is in the public interest to publish in full.
Recommendation 8: Add clauses to regulate private tenancy
databases.
We also suggest addition of clauses to regulate private tenant databases.
Enhance effectiveness of rental bidding provisions
- The
Committee will have heard various suggestions about how to more effectively get
rid of the problem of rental bidding. The current
draft provision will
importantly stop the developing practice of
b idding
apps and similar, but it could much more effectively prevent the
continuation of rental bidding.
Recommendation 9: Amend rental bidding clauses to introduce a
mechanism to effectively prevent bidding.
A legislative mechanism to prevent the practice might be, for example, a
prohibition on landlords accepting rent above the advertised
rate until the
first allowable annual rent increase. Rent accepted above the initially
advertised rate could be refundable to tenants
on application to the
Tribunal.
Enhance effectiveness of security of tenure provisions
Recommendation 9: Enhance effectiveness of security of tenure
provisions.
Similarly, the Committee will have heard various suggestions about how to
ensure that the security of tenure provisions are effective.
The clause 32
criteria for giving notice if “the premises are to be put on the
market”, or a broadly defined family member
“requires” to live
in the house for just 90 days, could be tightened to achieve their intent more
effectively.
19 As described in this Choice article " Tenant screening and
blacklists - what can they list and what can they ask?": h
ttps://www.choice.com.au/money/property/renting/articles/tenancy-databases-and-screening
Appendix:
E nd of Mission Statement: Visit of the Special
Rapporteur on the right t o adequate housing to New Zealand.
Leilani Farha, Wellington, 19 February 2020
Introduction
“We are a people in our own
land, having to look for somewhere to stay. It’s as though they pulled us
from the roots of
our whenua and plonked us in town, upside down. People,
children, feet in the air. Who am I? Where am I from? Mental health, suicide.
Assimilation doesn’t work for indigenous people. They're taking lives.
We're not living the life we were created for.”
Resident of Kaitaia, February 2020
- Any
attempt to understand whether the right to housing is enjoyed in Aotearoa New
Zealand and whether governments are meeting their
human rights obligations in
this regard, requires recognition and understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi
(Te Tiriti o Waitangi)
as a source of rights and expectations for all New
Zealanders.
- It
necessitates an exploration of New Zealand’s ongoing history of
colonization, land dispossession, forced assimilation, and
racism and the
contemporary consequences of these forces on and for Māori. It also
requires the development of an understanding
of how these inform and shape a
wider range of contemporary dynamics across New Zealand society tied up in
issues of cross- and bi-cultural
exchange, or in the division of labour in the
economic system and of authority in public governance, for example.
- Throughout
my visit, I heard beautiful articulations by Māori of their deep physical
and spiritual connection to their lands
as home. I learned of their ongoing
state of homelessness that is integrally linked to the existential and actual
disruption of this
connection as a result of colonial governance.
- This
is a dark shadow that hangs over the country – a shadow which I consider
mostly shared between Māori and non-Māori
which cannot be lifted
without a significant shift in relations between the Crown and Māori. Such
a shift may already be underway,
but it must be led by Māori in accordance
with the principle of free, prior, informed consent as a baseline, and it must
be
rooted in kaupapa Māori and Māori understandings and
interpretations of Te Tiriti.
- I
believe that the current government in Aotearoa New Zealand is taking steps in
this direction. Given that the Māori language
and Māori principles are
finding their way into housing policies and programmes, coupled with the
assurances I received during
my visit, it seems to me that the central
government understands that Te Tiriti should form the basis of any housing
related policy
or program.
- Many
of these policies and the commitment of resources to support them are in their
initial stages – how they are implemented
will be determinative of whether
the Crown is ready to cede power, resources, and leadership to Māori,
allowing for their true
self-determination.
Positive Steps Toward the Progressive Realization of the
Right to Housing
- I
was warmly welcomed by government officials, residents, researchers and civil
society organizations who were generous in their sharing
of information and are
clearly concerned with the housing crisis in Aotearoa New Zealand. I had the
pleasure to visit Auckland, Christchurch,
Kaitaia and Wellington. What follows
are my preliminary observations and recommendations. A more comprehensive report
will be presented
to the Human Rights Council in early 2021.
- The
Government of Aotearoa New Zealand has recognized that there is a housing and
homelessness crisis in the country and is actively
engaging with civil society,
experts, community housing providers, homeowners, tenants and Māori to
address this crisis. Several
positive steps include:
- The
recent announcement of the A otearoa New Zealand Homeless Action Plan
2020-2023.
- The
planned reform of the Residential Tenancies Act that aims to increase
security of tenure for
people in rental accommodation.
- The
phasing in of H ealthy Homes Standards, targeting the approximate
200,000 rental households living in unhealthy or substandard
accommodations.
- The
development of Kāinga Ora’s Accessibility Policy, which has committed
to ensuring that at least 15% of new houses meet
universal design standards, and
that the rest meet as many universal design standards as possible.
- I
recognise that many of these Government initiatives may not be perfect and may
ultimately be insufficient in ensuring the right
to housing is enjoyed and
respected by all in Aotearoa New Zealand. However, they represent important
measures in the right direction,
and I want to commend the Government of
Aotearoa New Zealand for taking the courage to begin to address the homelessness
and housing
crisis. From my interactions with many stakeholders in this country,
it is clear that ending homelessness and resolving the housing
crisis is a
commitment that is less about the government of the day, and more about the
health of the nation. This must remain a
priority regardless of political
agendas.
- In
addition to these Government initiatives, the Waitangi Tribunal’s
1 housing and social policy inquiry will hear claims and grievances
on behalf of various whānau, hapū and iwi from across
the nation.
Māori face a much higher risk of living in inadequate housing or
homelessness than many others and continue to experience
the long term-impact of
forced displacement leading to social and community disintegration. I welcome
the Tribunal’s inquiry
as an opportunity to ensure justice, restoration
and compensation for past and ongoing injustices under the Treaty.
The Housing Crisis is a Human Rights Crisis
- As
noted, it is widely recognized including within government that there is a
housing crisis in New Zealand and that it is being experienced
most acutely by
particular groups including: Māori, Pacific Peoples and other ethnic
communities, persons with disabilities,
single-parents (particularly single
mothers), youth and children, and those living in poverty.
- What
is less recognized is that the housing crisis in Aotearoa New Zealand is, in
fact, a human rights crisis. The housing conditions
– high rates of
homelessness, inaccessible housing stock, unaffordability and escalating rents,
substandard conditions including
overcrowding, a lack of security of tenure for
tenants, and lack of social, affordable, and community housing for those in
need,
alongside an abundance of unaffordable family dwellings available for
homeownership - are all inconsistent with the enjoyment of
the right to
housing.
- While
New Zealand has ratified various international human rights treaties obliging
all bodies exercising government authority to
respect, protect and fulfill the
right to adequate housing, there is insufficient expression of this right in
law, in related policy
and programmes, and in their implementation. These
conditions would never have arisen to this extent had housing been fully
understood,
recognized and implemented by Governments as a human right and a
social good rather than as an asset for wealth accumulation and
growth over the
last decades.
The Right to Housing and International Human Rights
Law
- Under
international human rights law, the right to housing means much more than four
walls and a roof. It is the right to live in
peace, security and dignity, and to
equality and non-discrimination with respect to housing.
- According
to the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – the UN body
responsible for monitoring State compliance
with economic, social and cultural
rights, including the right to housing – the characteristics of housing
adequacy include:
security of tenure, affordability, access to services and
infrastructure, habitability, accessibility, location and cultural adequacy.
Homelessness is a prima facie violation of the right to housing, and
inconsistent with States commitments under Target 11.1 of the
Sustainable
Development Goals, which require States to ensure access for all to adequate,
secure and affordable housing within the
next decade. Forced eviction –
the permanent or temporary removal of individuals and households from their
homes and lands
against their will – is considered a gross violation of
human rights and evictions into homelessness are also a violation of
the right
to housing.
- If
successive Governments of New Zealand had ensured over the last several decades
that every housing
related legislative and policy decision had as its aim the promotion of the
right to housing, it is clear that the country would
not be confronting a
housing crisis.
The Treaty of Waitangi and the right to housing
- The
right to adequate housing in New Zealand cannot be fully understood without
considering its roots in the Treaty (Te Tiriti) which
creates rights,
obligations, and expectations for all New Zealanders. This persists in
particular in the relationship between Māori
and the Crown but additionally
in recognising the role of the Treaty in founding the New Zealand State and the
rights of inhabitants.
- The
right to housing is also seen as interdependent with and indivisible from the
rights and legal principles set out in the United
Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the rights to self-determination, to
freely determined political
status, to pursue economic, social and cultural
development, and to free, prior and informed consent.
- The
right to adequate housing is extremely important in targeting improved housing
outcomes for Māori. While the Treaty offers
a promise of shared prosperity
for inhabitants, and a promise of equal outcomes for Māori as citizens, the
human right to adequate
housing provides a new set of measures and expectations
speaking to what that prosperity and equality should look like.
- Outcomes
flowing from the Treaty are poor in many respects. In addition to the above, the
Treaty promises the retention of all assets
and treasures in Māori hands.
These parts of the Treaty have been breached in significant ways, especially
historically, have
apparent causal links to modern housing experiences and
outcomes for Māori.
- Māori
suffer some of the worst housing outcomes in the country. The Maori, who
represent 16.5 per cent of the national population
according to the 2018 census,
are disproportionately represented amongst homeless populations, experience a
higher rate of disability
than non-Māori (32 per cent of the total
population when adjusted for age),2 they have some of the lowest
median weekly incomes, they represent 60% of those who receive Emergency Housing
and Special Needs Grants
for short term emergency accommodation, and they make
up 36 per cent of social housing tenants. Māori are four times more likely
to live in overcrowded housing conditions than people of European heritage.
Homeownership rates for Māori in 2018 were 43% as
compared to 63% for the
general population. Importantly, these are known and accepted figures
representing common characteristics
of New Zealand society and as such they
demand renewed attention and urgent action.
- The
right to housing extends to all in New Zealand and there are inherent risks in
separating out data on housing rights into ethnic
or racial groups. However, the
figures above forcefully lead to the conclusion that significant targeted action
is in fact required
urgently to meet the current housing needs of Māori as
a means to both promote human rights and restore Te Tiriti rights.
- It
is also true that meeting the housing needs of the most disadvantaged is a
meaningful way to approach the right to housing and
wellbeing more broadly. An
over-arching strategic approach through a human rights-based strategy would
imply a taking up of these
challenges at a level above policy.
- New
Zealand has a separate housing strategy for Māori housing (He Whare Ahuru),
which covers the period 2014-2025. This strategy
references the human right to
housing but does not encompass the broader spectrum of necessary elements
required of a human rights-based
housing strategy.3 Also, the
Ministry of Housing and Urban Development has issued its ‘strategic
intentions’ for 2019-2023, which also covers
some normative content of the
right, but is not comprehensive enough to qualify as a rights- based housing
strategy.4 The Kāinga Strategic Action Plan in Auckland is also
noted as an existing strategy referencing the human right to housing, but
it is
more focused on elevating the rights outlined in the Treaty of Waitangi, than
human rights.
Housing as an investment and Speculation
- In
Aotearoa New Zealand, many reasons have been given for the housing crisis
including a lack of supply of affordable and accessible
housing, a limited
supply of public housing, and foreign speculative investment in residential real
estate. While these factors have
played a role, the crisis has its roots in a
historic nearly exclusive focus on homeownership which, in more recent years and
particularly
since the Global Financial Crisis, has translated into housing
having lost its function as a place to live, and instead it has become
a
speculative asset. Housing finance has morphed into consumer finance. Low
interest rates,
coupled with an under-developed rental housing system with weak tenant
protections, have allowed housing speculation to continue
in a relatively
unbridled fashion.
- In
mid-2019, the total wealth of New Zealand households was almost $1.6 trillion.
Of this wealth more than 53% or nearly $850 billion
was wealth held in land and
housing. Over the previous 10 years the value of wealth held in housing and land
grew 91% or by more
than $400 billion, 80 per cent of which was from the
appreciate in house values.5 As it stands, close to 50% of banking
system assets were residential property related loans.6 Because there
is no capital gains tax in the country, and because income earned from
properties is taxed at a lower rate than income
earned from other assets,
property owners have reaped ‘large, tax-free, windfall gains’
creating inequality.7
- Successive
governments have sought to introduce greater controls aimed at reducing real
estate speculation and curbing the effects
of financialization. For example, in
2015, the previous Government introduced legislation, under the Taxation
(Bright-Line Test for
Residential Land) Act. The aim of this act was to deter
property investors from engaging in housing speculation and/or
‘flipping’
houses. It requires anyone who purchases a residential
property and sells it on within five years8 to pay income tax on any
gains they make9 (family homes are exempt).1
0 This has curbed speculation to some extent. More recently, the
Overseas Investment Amendment Act (2018) was introduced. The Act bars
non-
residents from purchasing residential properties in New Zealand. There are some
exemptions to this prohibition, in so far as
overseas investors can apply for
consent from the Overseas Investment Office to purchase land or housing for
specific purposes. They
must sell the houses on immediately, unless they are
building 20 or more homes and intend to provide a shared equity, rent to buy
or
rental arrangement.1 1 The Overseas Investment
Amendment Act has been criticized as overreaching. In June 2018 only 3 per cent
of residential properties
in New Zealand were sold to foreigners,12
and government
officials have indicated that it has been difficult to assess the efficacy of
the Act. The policy has also been accused of having
been driven by racism, as
speculation from Chinese investors was a key driver in introducing the
legislation.1 3
Unaffordability of Housing
- Under
international human rights law States are required to undertake measures to
ensure access to housing that is affordable regardless
of household income.
Affordability must be based and measured on household income, not on market
rates.
- Until
the late 1980s, various forms of financial assistance provided by the State
allowed for low-income families to build or acquire
homes that met their needs.
However, over time this has been reduced to insignificant volumes, resulting in
very few affordable houses
for low-income families.1 4
During the 1960s and 1970s approximately 30 per cent of all new builds were
affordable for low-income families. By 2014, however,
this had dipped to just
five percent.
- At
the same time, housing costs have exploded. There has been a significant rise in
median house prices over the past two decades.
Between June 2001 and June 2019,
prices rose by 234.3 per cent. Auckland is the most unaffordable area in New
Zealand and has been
regarded as severely unaffordable for the past 16 years.
Between 2009 and 2017 median weekly rents increased by 38.7 per cent, while
median weekly incomes only increased by 25.3 per cent during the same period,
thus rents have outstripped incomes. While 31.3 percent
of all tenants are
spending over 30 per cent of their income on rent, for low-income households
this number is over 50 per cent of
their income.
- It
might be noted that the Government is attempting to address this challenging
situation by increasing the stock of public housing
and providing various
housing benefits for low-income households. This includes the Income Related
Rent Subsidy (IRRS) which is provided
to social housing tenants, and an
Accommodation Supplement for a further 285,000 households. Total annual
expenditure of the various
housing related social transfers has increased to 2.5
billion NZD per annum, but the level of support beneficiaries receive is
insufficient
to protect low-income households from housing cost overburden or
energy poverty.
- As
the private rental market is under-regulated, some benefits may actually have
contributed to pushing up rental prices, offering
home-owners an opportunity to
maximize profits instead of making housing affordable for their tenants. In
addition, there is insufficient
take up of the social and housing benefits of
those who are most marginalized, meaning that the complex range of State
supports often
fail to reach
those whose right to adequate housing is most at risk.
Lack of adequate social housing supply or state subsidized
housing
- The
Government has committed to building or buying 6,400 additional publicly owned
social housing units between 2018 and 2022 - a
rate of 1,600 per year in order
to reduce the number of people on the social housing register, which has grown
three-fold since 2016.
- I
welcome the efforts to expand the provision of decent social housing through the
newly formed public housing provider Kāinga
Ora. The Salvation Army,
however, has estimated that future demand for social housing will require at
least an additional 2,000 units
to be built per annum over the next
decade.1 5 With this in mind, I recommend that
rent-to-buy schemes are expanded, together with improved access to State insured
mortgages for
low-income households and those who experience difficulties in
accessing home ownership financing. In addition to this, the Government
should
consider increasing its support for Community Housing Providers in order to
significantly increase public housing stock and
ensure that social housing
responds to the specific needs of local communities. While the national public
housing provider Kāinga
Ora has received additional competencies to roll
out quicker social housing, Community Housing Providers should also be able to
complement
and amplify State efforts to ensure community- based solutions to the
housing crisis. Competition in the public housing sector is
a healthy aspect of
ensuring high quality, well maintained and responsive homes that go beyond the
provision of a roof and four walls.
- While
I welcome the intention of the Urban Development Bill to facilitate construction
of public and private housing, I am concerned
about the lack of adequate legal
provisions to ensure that urban development is socially inclusive and that local
communities can
participate in urban development and redevelopment in an
effective and meaningful way. The draft legislation is, in my view, lacking
adequate safeguards to ensure that urban development does not result in spatial
segregation, neither does it respond to housing and
social infrastructure needs
which can be best identified by local residents and through housing and
community needs assessments.
Rights-based urban development, on the other hand,
aims to prevent the economic or physical displacement of residents; offers
decent
and culturally responsive housing that is affordable for people of all
ages and different income levels; is fully accessible for
persons with
disabilities; facilitates intergenerational cohabitation; is well serviced by
transport, child care and medical services;
and responds to prevailing and
future household and family sizes.
Homelessness
- Aotearoa
New Zealand has a broad definition of homelessness and includes people sleeping
on the street, in temporary accommodation
or sharing with other households.
There is no recent data on homelessness. According to the 2013 census there were
more than 41,000
individuals in New Zealand living in homelessness.1
6 In recent years there have been rising demands for emergency and
public housing which suggests this figure has likely increased1
7 and it is believed there are a substantial number of people
living in hidden homelessness.
- The
2013 census provides a staggering picture of homelessness, showing that over 50%
were under 25, with a quarter aged between 15
and 24.1
8 32% were Māori, though they only represent 15 per cent of
the overall population; 29% were Pacific Peoples, and 43% were single
parents.1 9 Being a student or in paid employment
provides no protection from homelessness, with 52 per cent of the homeless
population working,
studying or both.
- According
to more recent data obtained in a homelessness count in Auckland in 2018, over
45% of the homeless population was under
18 years old. 43% of those surveyed
were Māori though they only represent 11% of the city’s total
population. Similarly,
single-parents, particularly single mothers, Pacific
Peoples, LGBTQI+, sex workers, and persons with disabilities were all
disproportionately
represented in the total number of individuals living in
homelessness.20
- I
learned that many people avoid sleeping on the streets by living in their cars
or campervans, and that some live in these conditions
for many months, if not
longer. I have been pleased to learn that many are able to do so without
repercussion. The ability to sleep
in a vehicle or tent without fear of
criminalization is a human rights compliant position which I encourage, because
persons who
do not enjoy the right to adequate housing should not be persecuted
or criminalized for resorting to the few elements they have to
shelter
themselves. Some cities, unfortunately, have been imposing fines,2
1 making it increasingly
difficult to live in a vehicle or camp without incurring fines.
- One
emergency response to homelessness has been to house people in motels. In
Rotorua for example, 35 hotels catered solely to emergency
housing beneficiaries
in 2019. The amount of money being spent on this response to homelessness is
significant. I was told by several
motel residents that the government was
paying over 4,000 NZD per week for this type of accommodation. Beyond cost
inefficiencies,
motels are an inappropriate response to homelessness,
particularly for families or those requiring ongoing social support.
- The
Government is applauded for adopting, for the first time, a Homelessness Action
Plan (2020-2023) the aim of which is to ensure
that homelessness is prevented
where possible, and that it be rare, brief and non-recurring. The Government has
indicated that the
action plan will assist 10,000 individuals experiencing, or
at risk of experiencing, homelessness. The Action Plan foresees a partnership
with Māori to deliver solutions for Māori and achieve Māori
housing and wellbeing outcomes.
- The
Homelessness Action Plan includes a $300 million (NZD) commitment to fund
various activities including measures to reduce the
use of motels as an
emergency response to homelessness, and to increase short-term housing support
by 1,000. The Government also
announced that those using emergency housing
services will pay 25% of their income to access accommodation. I encourage the
Government
to ensure that this fee-for-service arrangement include human
rights-based provisions that would ensure no one ever be evicted or
turned away
from receiving such services for lack of sufficient funds, or that the
fee-for-service in no way jeopardize access to
food or other human rights.
- I
am concerned that despite these commitments, the Government will not be able to
address homelessness at its current levels or prevent
its continued occurrence.
While the Action Plan includes a commitment to ‘Housing first’ -
Government officials, service
providers and advocates with whom I met indicated
that without more affordable and accessible housing stock or without being able
to access existing supply on a priority basis, it is impossible to roll-out a
substantial national programme.2 2
- Moreover,
for ‘housing first’ to be successful in the Māori context
requires that the model be developed and administered
by Māori, as is for
example being undertaken at Te Puea Memorial Marae. As I understand it, overall
Māori iwi have not
been provided the resources to provide such
programming.
Discrimination
- Discrimination
in the housing market is a significant problem. I heard from many Māori,
Pacific Peoples and other racial minorities
that tight rental markets allow
discrimination to flourish, where landlords will repeatedly choose people of
European descent over
other racial groups making access to private rental
accommodation very difficult. In Christchurch, I was told that anyone who is
non-European is basically turned away from private accommodation in favour of
white tenants. Between January 2016 and December 2019,
the New Zealand Human
Rights commission received 256 complaints regarding discrimination in the area
of land, housing and accommodation.
Of these complaints, 108 were classified as
relating to grounds of race, colour, and/or ethnic or national origins. The
pervasive
discrimination tolerated in the rental market puts additional pressure
on Housing First programmes that may have to rely on private
rentals.
- People
living in homelessness also experience significant discrimination. I heard
repeated references to their “anti-social
behaviour” by government
officials and within the general population. Māori living in homelessness
indicated that they
are often treated with disrespect and suspicion when trying
to access services.
- I
also met with a number of persons with disabilities who indicated that public
and private accommodation is rarely accessible. According
to the 2013 Census,
persons with disabilities make up 24 per cent of New Zealand’s population.
However, it is estimated only
2 per cent of New Zealand’s housing stock is
accessible – even though one in six people require home
modifications.2 3
- The
legal principle of reasonable accommodation2 4 appears
not to be applied by landlords. For example, one resident who used a wheelchair
said that for several years he had lived
in a private rental that had stairs to
the entrance. Another resident told me she had to shower at work because she
could not access
the bathroom in her house.
- In
addition to this, persons with disabilities face discrimination from landlords
when applying for rental
properties due to the perceived risk of property damage, and there appears to be
a discrepancy between funding models, which provides
different levels of home
support and housing modifications based on the cause of disability. This calls
into question the New Zealand
Government’s obligation to progressively
realise Articles 19 and 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons
with Disabilities - the right to live in the community, and the right to
an adequate standard of living and social protection. It
was also concerning to
learn that other than Kāinga Ora’s recent commitment to 15 per
cent2 5 new builds being built to universal
design standards,2 6 there has been very
little commitment to universal design in government-led housing schemes, and
that accessibility is not currently
being considered
under the Building Act reforms (2004).2
7
Christchurch Earthquake and Aftermath
- In
2010 and 2011, Christchurch and the wider Canterbury region were struck by a
series of large earthquakes, causing 185 deaths and
severe damage to the city,
including 65,000 homes. Following the second earthquake on February 22, 2011,
“Red Zones”
were established in areas considered unsafe and
uninhabitable due to earthquake, liquefaction and flooding risks, leading to the
eventual demolition of approximately 6,500 homes. As a result, 20,000 people
were believed to have been displaced. Many of these
people settled far from the
city centre in the north and south of Christchurch, meaning that not only did
Red Zoned people lose their
houses, but also their communities. Tenants living
in rental accommodation were particularly impacted, having received no support
to relocate and with very few affordable and accessible rentals available in the
city. Following the earthquakes local and national
governments implemented
various measures to prevent, mitigate and respond to natural disasters,
including a mandatory natural disaster
insurance through a two-tiered system of
State and private insurance. Even so, many residents experienced significant
difficulties
in accessing independent damage assessments in a timely manner that
respected their human rights and dignity.
- Many
Red Zoned people I spoke to reported a high number of visits from experts
contracted by public and private insurance providers,
but noted that they had
not received timely compensation for necessary damage repairs. Further concerns
were also raised about the
independence of the Finance and Insurance Ombudsman;
the barriers residents experienced when bringing concerns before the Ombudsman;
a readiness of contractors to complete cosmetic repairs that did not
sufficiently reduce earthquake risk; the overall lack of State
inspection of
building standards; and inadequate support for residents dealing with complex
and bureaucratic issues. Additionally,
it was reported that compensation and
insurance claims in privileged neighbourhoods were settled 2.5 times faster than
in areas where
disadvantaged populations lived.
- It
is my recommendation that the Government of New Zealand draws lessons learned
from this unprecedented disaster to ensure a human
rights-based approach is
implemented in future disaster prevention and response. This should include
measures to prevent homelessness
in the aftermath of disasters, carrying out
timely and non-discriminatory responses that allow affected tenants and home-
owners
to access affordable and accessible housing, while also ensuring that
relocations are proximate to the communities in which residents
were living in
prior to the disaster. In doing so, the New Zealand Government will be aligning
itself with international human rights
standards relating to involuntary
displacement.
Access to Justice
- The
right to adequate housing cannot be realized if it cannot be claimed by a person
or a community. As it stands in Aotearoa New
Zealand the right to adequate
housing is not enshrined in legislation and does not fall within the scope of
the Bill of Rights Act
(1990). The right to adequate housing must therefore be
enshrined in appropriate domestic legislation including clear pathways to
remedies under administrative, non-judicial and/or judicial review.
- One
area in which the human right to housing frequently arises is in the
relationship between tenants and landlords. Tenancy disputes
arising for or
between tenants and landlords can be settled through the Tenancy Tribunal, and
in some cases this avenue can protect
tenants from arbitrary evictions and undue
rental increases or other rights-oriented matters. In 2018 however, 85 percent
of all
cases brought before the Tenancy Tribunal were initiated by landlords
against their tenants mostly for rental arrears. Making matters
more difficult,
tribunal cases and claimants are made public and this creates
a
circumstance in which a tenant who takes a case may be identifiable to future
landlords, and potentially be discriminated against
as a result of attempting to
exercise their rights. This illustrates that access to justice through this
avenue may be unbalanced
and this may systemically disadvantage
tenants.
- As
many tenants are on fixed or short-term leases and under constant fear of their
rental agreements being cancelled, they often abstain
from initiating claims
against their landlords despite the state of their accommodation. In general,
consumer protection and legal
aid for tenants is severely underdeveloped and
underfunded in New Zealand. For example, in Auckland a city of 1.3 million
inhabitants,
the Auckland Tenant Association only has one professional on staff
and the organization functions without any support from Auckland
Council.28
- As
mentioned, the Government has initiated reforms of the Tenant Protection Act
that will restore balance in the rights of the tenants
vis-à-vis their
landlord by increasing notice periods to 90 days, allowing only annual rent
increases, and requiring that
landlords provide justifications for cancelling
tenancy agreements. While the reform is welcome, more will need to be done to
improve
the protection of the rights of tenants in Aotearoa New Zealand.
- While
New Zealand has ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights, there are currently no legislated
protections for economic,
social and cultural rights, including the right to adequate housing, which are
comparable to the protections
of civil and political rights – robustly
protected by the Bill of Rights Act. For example, while the Attorney General is
required
to assess whether new legislation tabled in Parliament is compliant
with various civil and political rights, there is no obligation
to assess
compliance with the right to adequate housing or any other economic, social and
cultural right.
- I
therefore echo the concern expressed by the Committee on Economic Social and
Cultural Rights of the United Nations that “economic,
social and cultural
rights do not enjoy equal status with civil and political rights”. I
recommend that the right to adequate
housing be enshrined in legislation to
render it justiciable in domestic courts and enable victims to have access to
effective administrative
or non- judicial remedies, as well as judicial remedies
where necessary.29
- Domestic
courts have occasionally handed down rulings contradicting New Zealand’s
human rights obligations. In Lawson v Housing
New Zealand [1996] NZHC 1528; [1997] 2 NZLR 474, the
court dismissed the application without considering whether putting the tenant
in a situation of homelessness would pose risks
to the life of the affected
individal nor did it inquire whether the privatization and subsequent rent
increase would comply with
the right to adequate housing. The ruling ignored
that New Zealand courts are according to international human rights law required
to take human rights obligations into account to ensure State conduct is
compliant with international human rights norms.3
0
- New
Zealand should also ensure protection of economic, social and cultural rights
including the right to housing by ratifying the
Optional Protocol to the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
- The
New Zealand Human Rights Commission has attempted to fill the void in access to
justice for violations of the right to housing
by hearing cases of
discrimination in the area of ‘land, housing and accommodation’.
This is only a partial response
as it does not render the right itself
justiciable.
Recommendations
- While
the Government has a multi-sectorial and cross-agency approach to the housing
crisis, it does not currently have a human rights-based
housing strategy in
place. Instead, the Government has adopted several independent policies for
areas such as homelessness, Māori
housing and social housing. Several
sources have called on the government to develop and implement a human
rights-based housing strategy
linked to the SDGs and Agenda 2030, including the
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights who recommended the adoption
of a national strategy in its 2018 Concluding Observations to the
Government.3 1
- A
comprehensive, human rights-based strategy should have at its base the Treaty of
Waitangi, the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities, the United
Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly principles
of free, prior and
informed consent and self-determination.
- A
human rights-based housing strategy will require the Government to implement a
national Housing
First program that is inclusive and in keeping with the principles of Housing
First. The program will require the government to ensure
that all avenues are
explored in order to secure long term housing options for those who most need
it.
- The
right to housing, as set out in international human rights law, must be
recognized in national legislation. National law implementing
the right to
housing should at minimum include a legal obligation of the State to provide
suitable and accessible emergency housing
to individuals and families at risk or
in a situation of homelessness. It should also include a complete prohibition of
any eviction
that may result in homelessness. Evictions from primary residences
should only be ordered after all alternatives have been explored
jointly with
the affected persons and ensuring that they have access to all social and
housing benefits to which they are entitled.
If evictions cannot be avoided,
alternative affordable housing should be provided as proximate as possible to
the place of residence.
- I
would like to commend the invaluable work of the New Zealand Human Rights
Commission in promoting the right to housing, commenting
on draft legislation
and addressing discrimination in relation to the right to housing in the
country. I recommend that the Commission
is in the future able to include a
fifth Commissioner for Indigenous Peoples Rights in Aotearoa New Zealand.
- I
encourage the New Zealand Human Rights Commission to use its existing statutory
powers and functions, so far as possible, to provide
dispute resolution for
alleged breaches of the right to adequate housing in general, not just in
relation to discrimination
- New
Zealand should ratify the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which allows
for individuals who have
exhausted all domestic remedies the ability to submit complaints to the UN Body
in charge of overseeing
the implementation of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
- National,
regional and local governments should strengthen the capacity of Tenant
Protection Associations so that they may be better
equipped to provide legal
advice, assist in out of court settlements of grievances with landlords, and if
necessary support tenants
in making applications before Tenancy Tribunals.
- The
capacity of the Tenancy Compliance Investigations Team should be enhanced and an
independent service to inspect whether housing
meets building, safety, health
and accessibility standards should be established so that they may provide
advice and support for
private and public landlords to undertake necessary
renovations, as well as to fine home owners that fail to undertake required
works
and adjustments.
- Tenant
protections should be further strengthened beyond the proposed reform of the
Residential Tenancy Act. Protections must be included
for security of tenure,
regulating rent increases, providing for rental freezes in tight markets, and
fortifying rules around short-term
rental platforms. Innovative regulation could
also provide incentives for making vacant housing units available to low-income
households.
- In
order to avoid evictions resulting in homelessness, advice and financial support
for tenants and home owners who have fallen are
at risk of falling into arrears
should be expanded. The implementation of this type of support would act as a
cost-saving measure
when compared to the public spending currently involved in
placing individuals and families into emergency accommodations, as well
as the
long term social and health costs that accompany homelessness.
- In
regions lacking affordable housing, State and Community Housing Providers should
be given priority to rent or lease a housing unit
on the market to ensure that
all people on waiting lists can be housed.
- National,
regional and local governments should refrain from implementing laws or by-laws
that serve to criminalize homelessness,
including living in cars, campervans, or
tents.
- If
the Government is to address the financialization of housing, it must disrupt
the current speculative system by implementing a
Capital Gains Tax, regulating
morgtage markets to limit the debt to income ratio, and introducing a
progressive refinancing scheme
for primary homes to limit the effects of
negative equity that could result from changes to taxation and mortgage lending.
Moreover,
the Government must redirect efforts to provide alternative housing
schemes for low-income and vulnerable groups. This must also
must also include
targeted funding, finance and capacity building for iwi
and
Māori housing providers.
- Legislation
for Urban Development and Regeneration should ensure meaningful participation of
residents, be fully compliant with the
right to adequate housing. Inclusionary
zoning must be introduced nationally to support communities and community
housing providers.
- The
Government should incorporate universal design standards and obligations
contained in the United Nations Convention on the Rights
of Persons with
Disabilities in all housing-related legislation, building standards, and
policies, to ensure independent living of
persons with disabilities and
accessibility for its increasingly aging population.
- The
Government should ensure that housing and social benefits are sufficient to
actually cover the cost of living for low-income households
and reduce energy
poverty so that they may be ensured a life of dignity. In the long term,
expenditure should be redirected away
from programs that are failing to realize
the right to housing like the use of Motels as emergency shelter and subsidised
developments
that fail to deliver a net increase in affordable housing, towards
supporting housing providers and developers committed to building
and delivering
decent affordable housing that service families and households.
- In
any future case of natural disasters, the Government should be ready to respond
in a way that is compliant with human rights and
does not result in homelessness
or forced evictions.
- The
Government should also support, facilitate and provide financial resourcing to
iwi, Rūnanga and Māori housing providers
to self-determine their
housing solutions.
- Set
up by the Waitangi Act 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal is a permanent commission of
inquiry that makes recommendations on claims brought
by Māori relating
Crown actions, which breach the promises made in the treaty of Waitangi.
- Stats
NZ, ‘He hauā Māori: Findings from the 2013
Disability
Survey’ h
ttp://archive.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/health/disabilities/He-haua-Māori-findings-from-2013-
d
isability-survey/disability-amongst-Māori.aspx
- Ministry
of Business, Innovation and Employment, ‘He Whare Āhuru He Oranga
Tāngata – The Māori Housing
Strategy: Directions 2014 to
2025’ https://www.hud.govt.nz/assets/Residential-Housing/Māori-
H
ousing/d492576716/He-Whare-Ahuru-He-Oranga-Tangata-The-Māori-Housing-Strategy.pdf
- See,
Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, ‘Statement of Strategic
Intentions 2019–23’ online at: h ttps://www.hud.govt.nz/assets/About-HUD/af1670f260/HUD-Strategic-Intentions-2019-2023.PDF
5 Reserve Bank Key Household and Housing Statistics Table C.21
- Kay
Saville-Smith, New Zealand’s Transformation from Housing Finance to
Housing Financialization, February 13, 2020.
- Somewhere
to live, Helen Clark Foundation, p. 10
- The
Act only required those selling properties after two years to pay income tax on
their gains, but this increased to five years
by the new Government in 2018,
see, h ttps://www2.deloitte.com/nz/en/pages/tax- a
lerts/articles/extension-of-bright-line-test-to-five-years.html
- Inland
Revenue, ‘Taxation (Bright-Line Test for Residential Land) Act 2015’
online
at: h ttps://www.classic.ird.govt.nz/technical-tax/legislation/2015/2015-111/leg-2015-111-ta-bright-line.html
1 0 Inland Revenue, ‘Questions and answers: Bright-line
rule’ online at: https://www.classic.ird.govt.nz/property/brightline-qa.html
- 1
See, h ttps://www.linz.govt.nz/overseas-investment/information-about-developing-residential-
l and/information-for-increasing-housing
- 2
Library of Congress, ‘New Zealand: Bill Banning Foreigners from Purchasing
Homes Passed’ (19th August 2018) 1 3 New Zealand Parliament,
‘Overseas Investment Amendment Bill — Third Reading’.
- 4
Kay Saville-Smith, Revitalising the Production of Affordable Housing for
Productive, Engages and Health Lives, Building Better Homes,
Towns and Cities,
November 2019, p.3-6..
- 5
https://www.salvationarmy.org.nz/sites/default/files/uploads/20170814spputakingstockreport.pdf
- 6
Kate Amore, ‘Severe housing deprivation in Aotearoa/New Zealand
2001-2013’ He Kainga Oranga, University of Otago, Wellington
2016, p.
11.
- 7
Natalia Sutherland, ‘Who are NZ's homeless? Thousands of Kiwi kids and it
could be getting worse, expert warns’, 18 September
2018, available at:
h ttps://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/nzs-homeless-
t
housands-kiwi-kids-and-could-getting-worse-expert-warns
- 8
Ibid.
- 9
Ibid.
- 0
See www.aucklandshomelesscount.org.nz/
- 1
See, https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12229461
- 2
Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Public Housing Quarterly Report,
September 2019, p. 5.
- 3
Paula Tesoriero, Disability Rights Commissioner, h ttps://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/112717220/barrier-after-
b arrier-as-disabled-community-locked-out-of-housing
- 4
Article 2 – Definitions of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities
- 5
Kāinga Ora, ‘Kāinga Ora’s Accessibility Policy’,
h ttps://kaingaora.govt.nz/tenants-and-communities/our- t
enants/kainga-oras-accessibility-policy/
- 6
Ibid.
- 7
Mandy Te, Accessibility and universal design not part of Building
Act
reforms, h ttps://www.stuff.co.nz/business/116625561/accessibility-and-universal-design-not-part-of-building-
a ct-reforms
- 8
The institutional underdevelopment of tenant protection in New Zealand is
obvious if one compares that for example the tenant association
of
Cologne/Germany a city with 1.1 million inhabitants has seven offices and more
than 66.000 contributing members. Its 48 staff
provide every year more than
32.000 legal consultations that are free of charge for members. 97 percent of
all cases brought by tenants
to the attention of various tenant associations in
Germany are successfully settled with home owners out of court.
- 9
See CESCR, Concluding Observations, E/C.12/NZL/CO/4, para. 6.
- 0
CESCR, General Comment no 9 on the domestic application of the Covenant,
E/C.12/1998/24 in particular para 14 and 15.
- 1
See CESCR, Concluding Observations, E/C.12/NZL/CO/4.
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/NZHRCSub/2020/5.html