Labour’s aspiring home owners not actually looking to buy

August 28th, 2014 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

David Cunliffe is backing the party’s choice of a couple used as a case study for ’s housing policy, after the pair conceded they weren’t actually looking to buy.

But one of them is a member of the Labour affiliated EPMU, so they’ll do!

Mr Cunliffe introduced Jordy Leigh, 20, and Harrison Smith, 22, as “a young couple who make about $75,000 a year”.

Not bad for so young.

Ms Leigh said they were currently living with her parents and although they had “had a look at houses in the Auckland area” she conceded they weren’t actively in the market to buy.

Twyford could not point out one of the properties he was talking about, saying they were scattered through the development.

The party could also not say how many $360,000 homes would be built.

“We haven’t actively been looking for a home to buy in the near future – that’s definitely not our goal – our goal is to have a home in a few years. We’re trying to start a family.”

Stuff points out:

However, Leigh, an EPMU union member, said their first home would still be out of reach even under Labour.

National’s policy would help only with the deposit and she and Smith couldn’t meet mortgage repayments.

“So, we haven’t been looking actively for a home to buy in the near future, that’s definitely not our goal,” Leigh said.

“Our goal is to have a home in a few years … not actively looking but aspiring to have our own home. We would not be able to get one next year. Under KiwiBuild we would have to wait a few years.”

Cunliffe shrugged off the gaffes and told reporters he wasn’t worried about Labour’s campaign.

What were the gaffes?

Twyford could not point out one of the properties he was talking about, saying they were scattered through the development.

The party could also not say how many $360,000 homes would be built.

So they could not point to a single specific house and say this is what they would build for $360,000 and can not say how many they could do for that price. It’s almost a con.

Nick Smith also points out the reality of Labour claiming 10,000 houses a year:

“KiwiBuild is a joke because Labour has no idea how it would build 10,000 homes a year, cannot explain how they would pay for it and they still have not worked out who would be eligible for the homes,” Dr Smith says.

“Launching the policy in Hobsonville only served to highlight Labour’s previous failings.

“Labour in government announced a 1600-home development on this land in 2002, but by 2008 had no planning approved, no resource consents, no infrastructure built nor a single house constructed.

“If they couldn’t build 1600 houses in six years, how can they promise 10,000 a year now under KiwiBuild?

As I said previously, if they do win it will be hilarious watching the excuses.

Tags: ,

18 Responses to “Labour’s aspiring home owners not actually looking to buy”

  1. alex Masterley (1,535 comments) says:

    As I noted yesterday there is another problem with Kiwibuild. The name is already in use in Wellington. That might be a teeny policy hurdle for Labour to overcome with tax payer money.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Rich Prick (1,750 comments) says:

    “Leigh, an EPMU union member, said their first home would still be out of reach even under Labour.”

    Memo to Cunliffe: You should know your policy is a dog when even one of your union mates thinks it won’t work.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. dime (10,213 comments) says:

    ““We haven’t actively been looking for a home to buy in the near future – that’s definitely not our goal – our goal is to have a home in a few years. We’re trying to start a family.””

    god forbid you get some financial stability first. all good, start a family, get that juicy working for families bonus and then start whining til you get a grant for a house. A holes.

    As for Labour- lmao. just absolute morons

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. backster (2,196 comments) says:

    Labour associated projects will also entail a ‘Living Wage’ which may make restricting price to $360k a trifle difficult.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. trout (954 comments) says:

    Harrison (and to a lesser extent Jordy) did not exactly look like a poster couple. And anyway when did a 20, and 22 year old couple (without children) expect to be handed a subsidized house without saving up for part payment. The ‘houses’ that are proposed by Twyford (you may have missed it but he mumbled the word ‘terraced’) are in fact medium density joined together 2 bedroom maisonette units. Hundreds were built in Auckland in the nineties on redundant business zoned land because this zoning did not require the usual residential bulk and location restrictions; ie outdoor living courts, service courts,outlook provisions, etc. etc. The State had a go at building a few but they do not age well. Second time around (after the 5 year restriction on selling) they will become renters.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. mjw (401 comments) says:

    They are not looking to buy because they are locked out of the market under the current government. That’s the point.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 0 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. polemic (460 comments) says:

    Why worry about the details as to whether they want to buy or not.

    Wait for the MSM to embarrass labour about this – Yeah right !!!

    “Our goal is to have a home in a few years … not actively looking but aspiring to have our own home. We would not be able to get one next year. Under KiwiBuild we would have to wait a few years.”

    but we have faithfully paid our union dues and therefore have a right to get a free subsidised deposit because the EPMU are co joined to the Labour Party. The Co Boat again

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. lastmanstanding (1,310 comments) says:

    So we will have the Department of KiwiBuild staffed by a caste of thousands of civil servants all make work adding to the overheads of the actual houses. An army of purchasing officers all paying way over the top for materials and labour.

    One small problem. here are the tradies to build houses in Auckland. Cant get enough of them for Cch let alone any where else.

    But heh Don’t let any practical problems or issues get in the way of a theory.

    Think I might top up on Fletcher Building shares.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Raphael (88 comments) says:

    I am young. (in my early 30’s). I make under $70000. I have 4 kids and my wife looks after them full time (so we’re a single income….we do get WFF)
    Through my own choice I don’t have Kiwisaver (and can’t afford i)
    18 months ago I bought a 5 bedroom house for $350 000 (Thames). repayments are high because I could only afford the smallest of deposits.
    I certainly couldn’t have afforded a $360 000 house. And definitely wouldn’t have bought one that was only 2 bedroom.

    But then I’m never going to vote Labour so I guess I’m not the target demographic.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. lastmanstanding (1,310 comments) says:

    Raphael

    Well done hats off to you and your wife. You have taken a practical solution and looked outside Auckland and good on you. We need more of you to move relocate out of Auckland in particular to help stimulate other areas.

    God forbid as an Aucklander born and bred I would move but for the missus of 40 years ( How UNPC of me) Hoping her in doors sees sense when I retire and we can move to the peace and quiet of the country.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Pete George (23,798 comments) says:

    Patrick Gower was scathing of Labour on this – Opinion: Labour’s listless, shambolic campaign

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Ross12 (1,484 comments) says:

    And the wonder why they are dropping in the polls.It looks like Gower had a short 12 hours in the lime light given the Herald poll results just released.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Sarkozygroupie (209 comments) says:

    “Mr Cunliffe introduced Jordy Leigh, 20, and Harrison Smith, 22, as “a young couple who make about $75,000 a year”.

    Under Michael Cullen’s definition what was the cut-off for being a Rich Prick again? $50,000?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Raphael (88 comments) says:

    Seem as Pete George’s linky didn’t work, here is a working copy: http://www.3news.co.nz/opinion/patrick-gower/opinion-labours-listless-shambolic-campaign-2014082810

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. mandk (1,030 comments) says:

    Quick, mjw!
    Duck, or you’ll be caught in the jet-wash of the point flying over your head.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Rich Prick (1,750 comments) says:

    From Gower:

    “Then it turned out that they were members of the EPMU, and they stopped answering questions when asked if they voted in Labour’s leadership campaign last election.”

    #heymatt, why did you roll out a couple of ABC’s …. #@%&!!

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Bad__Cat (141 comments) says:

    How about a new name for Labour?

    KiwiJoke

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. edhunter (554 comments) says:

    Why are they looking at $360,000 first home in the first place, why not start with a flat or a unit under $300k FFS my first home was never going to be my last home.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote