Hey hey hey! Andy’s back!


Labour leader Andrew Little says figures showing it was taking an average of seven months to house people who reported living in cars were “disturbing.”

Government figures show in the three months to June it took an average of 217 days to rehouse 35 people or families who reported cars as their accommodation and had applied for housing.

That was an increase from 108 days it took to rehouse 41 people in cars in the three months to December 2015.

The information also showed it took an average of 157 days to rehouse 11 people who reported living in tents or public places in the three months to June – up from 99 days for 17 applicants in the quarter to December 2015.

The figures were for applicants who recorded cars or tents as their accommodation at the time they went on the social housing register but did not mean they had lived in cars or tents for the entire period.

It was possible they had moved into emergency housing before a more permanent home was found.

The information was obtained by Little who said it also showed more people who reported living in cars or tents were applying for housing than a year ago.

Some people want to live in cars.  Others are offered housing in areas they don’t want to live.  Some reject the houses as being unsuitable for their needs.   Some are almost “unhousable” due to their “challenging” background involving, drugs, violence or damage to property.


  • Keeping Stock

    From Stuff’s story:

    “Written answers provided to Labour also show there are more families living in cars. In the last quarter there were 88, up from 76 last September.

    “These figures show those living in tents or public places haven’t fared much better. There are currently over 75 families living in a tent or public place waiting for a state house. In the last quarter the Ministry housed 11 of these over an average of 157 days – or five months. That is up from 99 days last December.

    88 families living in cars is still too many, and I doubt anyone would disagree with that. But it’s a far cry freom the figure of 40,000 “homeless” that has been shopped around of late by politicians and their mates in the media. Perhaps Mr Little would like to explain the difference.

  • metalnwood

    I wonder if people are saying they are living in cars when they are not? Seems like it could be in vogue to say that if you want a chance of skipping to the front of a queue.

  • shykiwibloke

    I cant help but wonder how Angry defines ‘disturbing’. Checking an online dictionary I find three definitions that may fit the circumstances:-
    verb (used with object)
    to interrupt the quiet, rest, peace, or order of; unsettle.
    to interfere with; interrupt; hinder:
    Please do not disturb me when I’m working.
    to interfere with the arrangement, order, or harmony of; disarrange:
    to disturb the papers on her desk.

    No 1 fits with interrupting his twenty day record
    No 2 would not seem to be right, other than real life intruding on important leader stuff
    No 3 maybe? Angry as harmonious or organised seems a stretch.

    Confused of Mayfair may fair better with this one.

  • Seriously?

    20 days. He may be better off without a chief of staff.

  • Keanne Lawrence

    Then there was the story of a drug dealer operating out of a state house making more “extra” cash than several beneficiaries put together. Tax free. The most encouraging thing if there is one is that more people are actually fronting up to WINZ. Wonder if they could provide some stats on the WHY factor that many are counted in these figures?

  • oldmanNZ

    Has labour created a situation?
    Put it this way, current rent is expensive,
    Lets live in a car for awhile so we can get a cheap state house… Everyone else is doing it.

    Its like the mission food parcel.
    If you tell us your poor, no proof required,
    We give you some free food.
    All the sudden theres a long queue.