Labour’s High Density Housing

With John Armstrong and Annette King both convinced Labour can deliver cheap high density housing, things are looking good for David Shearer this February.  Now, as discussed before, containers are out.  And pallet housing may also not hold the answer.

How about this then?



THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Gazzaw

    Fantastic! Where do I sign up Annette?

    I would particularly like one that has been cross-subsidised by my wealthy neighbours.

  • blokeintakapuna

    Yeah – but the caravan at the top receives more rain and wind and is smaller than the biggest one at the bottom, plus we have stairs to climb…so we deserve a cheaper place to live…

    • Gazzaw

      That’s socialism for you BIT. Some people are just a bit more equal than others.

  • tarkwin

    Reminds me of Tui Glen in Henderson when I was a kid. The tenants back then were mostly beneficiaries with drug and alcohol problems. Classic Labour voters – they might be on to something here.

  • Sym Gardiner

    Wonder how that would perform in an earthquake? I think the phrase “pancake” comes to mind.

  • maninblack

    The irony about all this as i see it..
    Part of the reason housing/building is so expensive is because the resouce consent system, and all the red tape required to build new housing, that was established under the previous labour govt is a massive part of the cause of this.

    • blam

      are you saying that the only houses for sale are those built between when Labour introduced the Resource Management Act in 1991 when Jim Bolger was Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party and 2008 ? or, the only Houses being sold are those built between 1999 and 2008 ?

      • Mediaan

        Uh? Did you lose a bit of text there?

        It was a Labour Act, finally pushed through in the last moments by Catholic Jim Bolger’s National in 1991. Straight after he abolished the death penalty for treason (note).

        Labour PM of the late eighties, Geoffrey Palmer is most to blame for the RMA.

        Yes, the same gravel-voiced Pompous Prat who started ACC and thus took away New Zealanders’ right to sue for medical incompetence, poisoning nastiness and drug company experiments gone wrong. The same PP who left us paying for injuries to every twot who wanted to jump off a mountain on some ridiculous device.

        Obliging Geoffrey not only gave us in the RMA a very complex bureaucratic structure, he also craftily put in to the RMA a lot of “Maori rights”. This was no doubt to suit his horrible backers, who planned to ride to power on the backs of Maori when they had built them up with donations a bit.

        Then Jim Catholic Bolger’s version of National came in around 1990. By this time, people were moaning fatigue and looking glazed of eye. The public had by this time paid for so many years of expensive drafting and mucking about with the proposed RMA. It had been started to “simplify” existing acts like the Town and Country Planning Act.

        Bolger gave it to unctuous brat Simon Upton who in turn put in a fairly soft-headed quango including (selectively-obliging lawyer) Prue Kapua and (forest and bird notable) Guy Salmon to look at it.

        • Patrick

          Don’t understand your point re Bolger being Catholic. What does that have to do with the RMA?

          • Mediaan

            Big story expressed here and of necessity this is a brief summary.

  • blam

    I suppose it beats renting in Howick then

  • sheppy

    Isn’t this Len’s vision for the “Worlds most livable City”?

  • Sir Cullen’s Sidekick

    Tories – Laugh your heart out, Whale Oil – Make fun of Sheep and aunty – but the voters have spoken. They like Sheep’s policy. They are voting for him in droves. Sheep will be the PM in 2014 and implement this policy, Let me see who is laughing at that time bros.

    • tarkwin

      if they get in this’ll be the flash part of town.

    • Mediaan

      Take your own poll on the street. Most wouldn’t know what “this policy” was if you asked them. They just heard a fuss about something on the TV and people mentioning Shearer a lot.

    • wiltinpenis

      I saw a quick excerpt from a shshSheep show, last night on TV (without sound). His antics reminded me of a blooming fascist; screwed up face and hammering arms (well one arm at least; I think the other, he had in our pocket )

  • ConwayCaptain

    If any Govt wants affordable housing the answer is simple.
    STOP STOP STOP CRAMMING more and mor epeiople into the narrowest part of NZ.
    The price of housing will be so high no one will bele to buy or rent. And that includes businesses.
    The Govt has to start putting in incentives to get businesses to move out, and by this I mean National Govt and Local Govt. If the Local Govts made it attractive for people to move their businesses to their area they will.
    Akl is getting so expensive people wikkl start moving their businesses and homes out to cheaper areas. Why not distribute your imported goods from the Waikato, Hawkes Bay or even Northland???
    Why pay MEGFA BUCKS to rent premises in Akl either business or private.
    Business is down for me the last year and if I had stayed in Akl it would have been a disaster. I am now in the S Waikato and my costs have plummeted and all my inwards/outwards goods go by COURIER

    • “The Govt has to start putting in incentives to get businesses to move out”


      When things are too expensive, people find ways to solve the problem. Get a thrid job, move further away, move to another district, town or even country.

      No need for governments here – Auckland is doing what it is doing and it’s doing just fine.

      Last thing I want is my tax dollars spent helping people be “incented” to move when all they really needed was a working brain to think it through themselves.

      • Dave

        100% correct Petal, supply and demand, Economics 101 when things get too dear for purchasers they seek alternatives. Just like Captain, move to cheaper housing and use a different form of business distribution.

    • Mediaan

      I see Petal bewailing your mention of Government incentives. I didn’t read it that way.

      The way I read your comment, I was thinking about local government and how they planning-restrict size of building region and zoning for this and that. Get them to be less prescriptive.

      Plus, roading. That’s an incentive. Building a better SH1 from Auckland to Hamilton, as they mostly have done, is/was a government incentive.

      All infrastructure spending is a “government incentive”. Historically it has encouraged businesses to go here or there. Broadband. Schools. Ports. Hospitals. It’s not the spending. It’s the way it’s applied.

      • Yeah, good point. I went off on the individual, where it clearly said business. +1

    • Seems to me

      Seems to me you are describing “the market” ie when people decide its too expensive and move out. Unfortunately you throw in the emotive statement “the price of housing will be so high no one will be able to rent or buy” Sorry to disagree but if the asking prices get too high buyers/renters will do something else and then prices will come down.

      • Mediaan

        You think that will stop the arriving Asians, the in-case overseas investing Asians, and many new migrants from wanting to be in Auckland and nowhere else?