The Hoon

The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts Bernard Hickey and Peter Bale talking with regular guest Robert Patman and special guests about the economy, politics, geopolitics, climate change, Jim Bolger’s funeral, Treaty of Waitangi issues and yesterday’s ‘mega-strike’ by doctors, teachers and nurses.This week’s special guests were Lawyers for Climate Action Executive Director Jessica Palairet, former Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister and Chris Finlayson and Association of Salaried Medical Specialists Executive Director Sarah Dalton.We talked about:* The Government’s gutting of climate reporting requirements and its shifting of its methane emissions reduction goalposts.* The latest moves by the United States and Europe to sanction Russian oil and gas exports to try to force Russia into a ceasefire in the Ukraine War.* Jim Bolger’s legacy on Treaty of Waitangi issues, and his National-led Government’s differences with the current one. We discussed Chris Finlayson’s obituary for Bolger in the NZ Herald-$ and his interview with columnist Audrey Young in the NZ Herald-$.* The Marine and Coastal Area Act, which passed into law last night, and why Finlayson opposes it.* Yesterday’s marches by over 100,000 supporters of nurses, teachers and doctors, who went on strike the 1% pay increases offered by the Government. We discussed pictures of signs at the marches, including the ones below. We discussed this research report on fiscal rules for the ASMS by Ganesh R Ahirao and this research report for the ASMS on health economics by Marilyn Waring.The Hoon’s podcast version above was recorded on Thursday night during a live webinar for over 200 paying subscribers and was produced and edited by Simon Josey. The Hoon won the silver award for best current affairs podcast in this year’s New Zealand Podcast awards. (This is a sampler for all free subscribers and anyone else who stumbles on it. Thanks to the support of paying subscribers here, we’re able to spread my public interest journalism here about housing affordability, climate change and poverty reduction other public venues. Join the community supporting and contributing to this work with your ideas, feedback and comments, and by subscribing in full. Remember, all students and teachers who sign up for the free version with their .ac.nz and .school.nz email accounts are automatically upgraded to the paid version for free. Also, here’s a couple of special offers: $3/month or $30/year for under 30s & $6.50/month or $65/year for over 65s who rent.)Ngā mihi nui.Bernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

I spoke with Labour Finance Spokeswoman Barbara Edmonds last night about Labour’s first big policy idea for the 2026 election: a new sovereign wealth fund to invest in New Zealand infrastructure and growth businesses. It would be seeded with an initial grant of $200 million and topped up regularly with dividends from state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and potentially partially-owned SOEs such as the gentailers and Air New Zealand, although that wasn't confirmed due to ‘commercial sensitivities.’I asked her what problem it solved and why other tax and more direct Government investment policies couldn’t solve it better. Here’s a lightly edited version of the conversation below, just in case the video above is too sketchy to watch. We had some connectivity issues and then the AWS wrecked my usual backups. A PDF of the policy is also attached below.People are saying we want to see a long-term vision, we want to see a plan for the country. So this is a first step for us. Barbara Edmonds.Edmonds said she couldn’t say which assets would be included because of commercial sensitivity and fair disclosure reasons.“Ultimately, the fund is purpose-built to back Kiwi ideas and our small innovative businesses, and basically is here to create wealth for New Zealand, by New Zealand, for New Zealanders,” she said.I asked what problem Labour was trying to solve.“When we look across the world, future funds are set up to help countries recycle their wealth and help to back and grow within their own economies. New Zealand doesn’t lack talent and skills and ideas, but what we lack is backing. So one of the key things that the Productivity Commission talked about before it was collapsed by this current government is that we have shallow pools of capital,” she said.“We want to set up this wealth fund at arm’s length to the government, similar to how the Super Fund works. But actually, it has a different purpose, which is to create wealth in New Zealand to help secure jobs, transition to clean green energy, to help us back our innovators in tech industry, and to help us build a resilient infrastructure.”I then asked if New Zealand actually had shallow capital pools, given there was $123 billion in KiwiSaver funds as at the end of March, the NZ Super Fund has $88.6 billion and counting as of today, the ACC had $51.1 billion in funds under management of June 30 this year, and there was $302 billion in bank term deposit and savings accounts as of the end of August this year. Why aren’t those $565 billion being invested here?I asked why those funds weren’t being deployed into New Zealand infrastructure, businesses, jobs, new technology and jobs, and whether another fund would make a difference.“Ultimately, there are different funds for different purposes. And what we’re saying is this wealth fund is solely dedicated to reinvesting back in New Zealand. The Superfund, for example, they invest around 11%-18 % of their funds in New Zealand. However, they’ve got a very different purpose. Their purpose is to maximize returns to help with future superannuation costs,” she said.“We’re saying it’s a model that works well for the Superfund. However, for the future fund, we need a different pool with a different purpose to back Kiwis.”I asked whether this fund was being announced instead of changing the fundamental savings incentives for households, which mean buying leveraged residential land was vastly more attractive in risk-adjusted and after-tax terms than in businesses, pension funds or infrastructure, given pension funds don’t receive any significant incentives, as pension funds overseas do, as in Australia.“We will have a savings and investment policy, which we will announce in the future. However, this is just the first step to realize New Zealand’s potential. And again, it’s about backing Kiwis and making sure those that get away and see the world, there are opportunities for them to come back to. That pullback to New Zealand is diminishing,” she said.“We have 200 people leaving every day to find opportunities offshore. People are saying we want to see a long-term vision, we want to see a plan for the country. So this is a first step for us.”I then asked how big the fund could be and what assets it could include.“Top of the list of the types of assets we will see the fund with will be a lot of those publicly owned commercial assets that the government owns. We also set aside $200 million one-off capital costs to go into the fund. And again, the governance of this will be at arm’s length to the politicians because it will be looked after by the Guardians of the New Zealand Superfund.“It will grow every year, depending on the assets that are put in, the dividends that come back to it. But also, we want to be able to use those dividends better. Currently, at the moment, those dividends come back to the crown coffers. Ministers can spray that wherever they want to. “There may not be any strategic use of it, or for example, they may be trying to go into clean energy but then they’re doing an underwrite for gas subsidies. Whereas this is different. This is saying that those dividends should remain in the fund, be reinvested into the country, and depending on what the assets are, that’ll determine the growth.”Why not just borrow and invest directly?I then asked why the Government shouldn’t just use its balance sheet to borrow to invest directly, which would be much cheaper.“At the moment, the politicians are are fiddling around too much with this. Ultimately, we have government assets. We believe that they should be managed with a commercial approach. The dividends should be reinvested in New Zealand. Ultimately, where the fund will go will be set out in legislation. We want it to be reinvested back for the public good.“Yes, the Crown may lose money because we may forego some dividend in relation to it. But ultimately, the money is staying back in our economy so that it can grow in New Zealand, as opposed to us having to wait for foreign investors and speculators to come and save us. So we truly believe for us this is about a future made in New Zealand. It’s one where we want to make opportunities for the next generation to want to stay here, or come back here because there are opportunities for them.”So is this a good idea?In my view, a Future Fund is try to solve problems that would be better addressed more directly, faster, cheaper, more efficiently and with more honestly and transparency by:* firstly, the Government simply borrowing with its own balance sheet and investing directly in publicly-owned infrastructure, staffing and systems to improve housing, health, education, skills and training; and, * secondly, changing the tax incentives that currently mean households have ploughed $1.6 trillion into residential housing, and are choosing to leave $302 billion in term deposits, ready to be deployed with yet more mortgages to make more tax-free capital gains in residential housing.Changing those incentives would involve:* taxing the unearned wealth bogged down in New Zealand’s housing market through a wealth or capital gains tax, and not just on the family home, given a big chunk of that $1.6 trillion is embedded in those family homes and exempting them will leave the incentive intact; and,* providing a tax incentive to save in pensions funds, as is the case in Australia and other developed markets with much higher investment in their businesses, much better productivity and higher real wages.For example, New Zealand’s housing market value is seven times bigger than our stock market’s value. Australia’s housing market is three times bigger than its stock market. America’s housing market is actually worth slightly less than its stock market. Australia and the United States have (imperfect but substantial) taxes on capital gains and incentives for investing household savings into businesses. New Zealand has neither. Still wedded to the catastrophic 30/30 rule?My concern is that Labour remains embedded in the view it and National have shared for 40 years: that the size of Government and the size of Government debt should not be larger than 30% of GDP. With both the size of Government and its debt currently above those self-imposed, unnecessary, unjustified and failed limits, both National and Labour are still contorting themselves into states of magical thinking that private investment in infrastructure and the private provision of housing, health, education and transport would be both better for the economy than the Government doing it.Without proper changes to tax incentives for households and without a fundamental reassessment of the 30/30 rule, this Future Fund appears to be another performative, mostly ineffective and expensive distraction from the fundamental failings of the 30/30 rule to invest in the infrastructure to support our still-fast-growth and still-ageing population, let alone catch up on decades under-investment and under-maintenance and under-replacement of both new and existing infrastructure. Labour may well have have taxation and fiscal strategies to change that view that are yet to be announced. This first policy release has a dispiritingly familiar look about it. It is suggesting New Zealand’s investment problems can be solved at arms length from politicians and the Crown’s balance sheet. It is suggesting that the current incentives and use of the Crown’s balance sheet are working. They are not. They have been disastrous for a generation, who are indeed voting with their feet, rather than their votes, at a rate of 200 day. The Future Fund mimic versions of the NZ Super Fund (which has less than 20% invested in New Zealand), NZ First’s proposed sovereign wealth fund and various Government venture capital and green funds. It gives the impression large amounts of domestic investment is possible without political involvement and in a way that would improve the performance of the New Zealand economy and leave the Crown’s balance sheet untouched.It reeks of performative politics and magical thinking that fail to address the elephants in the room:* $1.6 trillion worth of mostly unearned wealth in housing has to be taxed;* there has to be incentives for households to invest in businesses;* the Government has to be larger than 30% of GDP in the long run to provide the public services, benefits and infrastructure we believe are essential with the population structure and growth we have; and,* there is no good reason why the Crown can’t use its balance sheet to invest in the infrastructure, services and health of the generations that are both retiring and on the verge of abandoning the country.Subscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full videos and podcasts that go out with my Early Bird and Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars and our chat room, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

I spoke with Mangawhai Pharmacy owner Lanny Wong today to about plans barely-announced or covered this week by Associate Health Minister Casey Costello to deregulate the nation’s pharmacies. Lanny said she was shocked at the details revealed in full in Cabinet papers released proactively on Monday, particularly because there had been no consultation with the pharmacy sector, which would be upended by the removal of its current regulatory model. Costello barely mentioned the likely industry transformation in a release on Tuesday titled: ‘Medical Product Bill taking shape.’Costello characterised the deregulation as “allowing for more flexibility and innovation that will improve safe access to medicines and healthcare,” but Lanny, who is the spokesperson for the Independent Community Pharmacy Group (ICPG), said the reforms risked creating a US-style sector dominated by big corporates, where turnover and profit are prioritised over the health of customers and communities served by pharmacists, who own the businesses and live in those communities.“This means that pharmacy are no longer needed to be owned by pharmacists and pretty much means anyone can own a pharmacy if you’ve got enough capital. It means every supermarket can have a pharmacy, every corner dairy, and it no longer needs to have majority ownership by a pharmacist.” Independent Community Pharmacy Group (ICPG) Lanny Wong in the interview above.Currently, pharmacies are a regulated facility where only a pharmacist licensed with Medsafe is allowed to own the pharmacy, and can’t own stakes in more than five pharmacies. Pharmacists operate under a code of ethics and the patient’s code of rights.“So there’s a lot of law that govern what we do in the pharmacy and the activity that happened in pharmacy. That’s why we’re different from a retail, from a vitamin shop.“Pharmacists actually provide clinical care. So when you go into a pharmacy, you have the right to receive the care that you request and have the right to understand your medicine. That’s why pharmacists always have to be present in a pharmacy to be able to provide a patient with that care The pharmacist is actually a health professional that you can see every day, anytime, for free.” Lanny WongLanny gave the example of a pilot she is working on with Te Whatu Ora-Health NZ to screen for rheumatic fever in her practice, which would not be profitable.“That is something that I do because I want to have a good relationship with Te Whatu Ora and that’s in my community. If a pharmacist is no longer in effective control of a company, then decisions like that can become quite challenging to make when it’s not churning out the profit or the margin that you desire.” Lanny WongLanny said the reforms appear designed to enable a ‘Hub and Spoke’ model of pharmacies where pharmacists making the key decisions are centralised and the workers serving customers in stores are not enabled, incentivised or expected to provide independent advice or decisions that might reduce sales and profits.“When pharmacists no longer have business and financial control of a pharmacy, it means the corporates can call the shot on how a legislation should be written.” Lanny Wong.Lanny gave the example of the hub and spoke model enabled by deregulation in Taiwan, where medicines are allowed to be distributed that way without the supervision of a health professional, often online. She also referred to the way the oxycodone crisis developed in the United States, where ‘pill mills’ distributed pills in large numbers to swathes of customers without supervision. “The overseas evidence definitely show in deregulated environments, for example the United States with its oxycodone crisis, that’s precisely the type of risk that can happen when profit basically is more important than care.” Lanny Wong.Lanny also contested comments in the Cabinet paper that deregulation would encourage innovation, or that consolidation and economies of scale would result in lower prices. Examples of innovation in New Zealand often began with independent pharmacies working with doctors and hospitals in their areas to try things out.“In the short term, there might be some that type of benefit, but I think everyone in Aotearoa will probably understand in the long term once a monopoly or duopoly situation that has been established, prices go back up and service drop.” Lanny WongLanny also referred to the loss of regional and provincial pharmacies in remoter communities after a similar deregulation in the UK.I have requested an interview with Casey Costello.She said in the release the reforms would introduce a new role of supervisory pharmacist, which would be required in all companies that operated more than one pharmacy. The supervisory pharmacist would be responsible for compliance with pharmacy standards and regulation for the company as a whole. Costello said the bill would be introduced next year. It would also include “allowing unapproved medicines to be advertised and promoted in some circumstances.”Chapters00:00 Introduction to Pharmacy Deregulation03:01 Understanding the Role of Pharmacists05:48 The Impact of Deregulation on Pharmacy Ownership08:50 Risks of Deregulation: A Global Perspective11:46 Innovation in Pharmacy: Independent vs Corporate14:55 Legislative Process and Industry ConsultationSubscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Early Bird and Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts Bernard Hickey and Peter Bale talking with regular guests Cathrine Dyer and Robert Patman about the global economy, local and international politics and climate change.This week’s special guests were independent climate change policy expert Christina Hood and former NZPA foreign correspondent and Evening Post Business and Economics editor Bruce Kohn.We talked about:* Jim Bolger’s legacy;* The debasement trade, the price of gold and trust in the idea of money;* The future of the Gaza ceasefire and the latest in Ukraine war;* The Government halving of our methane emissions reduction target (Christina Hood’s LinkedIn post summarising the news);* The Government’s non-decision yesterday on climate adaptation (Newsroom);* Treasury’s decision to again leave our Paris climate liability out of the Crown Accounts (Page 25)The Hoon’s podcast version above was recorded on Thursday night during a live webinar for over 200 paying subscribers and was produced and edited by Simon Josey.The Hoon won the silver award for best current affairs podcast in this year’s New Zealand Podcast awards. (This is a sampler for all free subscribers and anyone else who stumbles on it. Thanks to the support of paying subscribers here, we’re able to spread my public interest journalism here about housing affordability, climate change and poverty reduction other public venues. Join the community supporting and contributing to this work with your ideas, feedback and comments, and by subscribing in full. Remember, all students and teachers who sign up for the free version with their .ac.nz and .school.nz email accounts are automatically upgraded to the paid version for free. Also, here’s a couple of special offers: $3/month or $30/year for under 30s & $6.50/month or $65/year for over 65s who rent.)Ngā mihi nui.Bernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

I spoke with economist and Motu researcher Arthur Grimes yesterday about a paper he has just published today with Amelia Blamey and Norman Gemmell about the effects of monetary policy on wellbeing and inequality.The paper attached below and linked above and below is titled: Impacts of macroeconomic policies on objective and subjective wellbeing: The role of housing tenure and concludes:“Using survey data from 84,732 representative households collected by StatsNZ, we find that, relative to outright owners, higher property prices are associated with a decline in NHE for each of private renters, public renters and mortgaged homeowners. In addition, relative to homeowners, renters report significantly lower life satisfaction as house prices rise, with heterogeneous effects depending on age, income and local house price: rent ratios. Our results indicate that macroeconomic policies, operating through the property market, can exacerbate wellbeing inequalities associated with housing tenure.” Motu paperWe discussed:* how monetary policy has driven up housing prices in New Zealand;* the implications for renters vs owners; * how homeowners benefit from rising property prices, but their life satisfaction does not improve;* how renters experience a decline in well-being as property prices rise;* The lack of a capital gains tax distorts the housing market in New Zealand;* Political dynamics favor homeowners, complicating housing policy reform;* There is potential for reducing house prices through policy changes;* The current housing market is heavily influenced by macroeconomic policies;* Supply constraints have worsened housing affordability issues; and,* there’s a need for tax reform such as a capital gains tax to address housing affordability. This chart tells the story of housing costs for renters both in private rentals and state homes, homeowners with debt and homeowners without debt.Chapters00:00 Introduction to Housing Economics and Well-being02:54 The Impact of Macroeconomic Policies on Property Prices06:00 Winners and Losers in the Housing Market08:52 The Political Economy of Housing in New ZealandSubscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Early Bird and Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

I spoke to Association of Salaried Medical Specialists (ASMS) Economist Andrea Black this week about a report she’s produced on the economic, social & financial costs of the worsening health of our workforce. The 52-page report, titled Managed decline: The Health of New Zealand 2011 to 2024, details a worsening in the health of the working-age population, in particular around mental health and obesity.Andrea used Treasury cost-benefit models to work out the potential costs to society and the economy of up to $10.6 billion per year through lost hours worked, falling productivity, presenteeism and lost taxes because of the sickening health of the workforce. She estimated that a continued worsening at the same rate would increase that loss by an extra $3.3 billion by 2035/36.We talked about:* How the self-rated health of New Zealanders has declined significantly.* 80% of health determinants were outside the health system.* How 22,000 more people are out of work due to health issues.* Presenteeism contributes significantly to lost productivity.* Mental health issues had a substantial economic impact.* Social determinants like housing and income were crucial for health.* Health impacts not only individuals but also families and communities.These tables charts in the report tell the story:Chapters00:00 Introduction to Health Trends in New Zealand03:07 Self-Rated Health: A Decline in Perception06:05 Economic Implications of Health Deterioration09:05 Social Determinants of Health and Community ImpactSubscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Early Bird and Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts Bernard Hickey and Peter Bale talking with regular guests Cathrine Dyer and Robert Patman about the global economy, local and international politics and climate change.This week’s special guest was Israel Cooper from The Home Foundation.We talked about:* The economy, the Reserve Bank’s rate cut and global financial bubbles.* This week’s annual report on the marine environment by the Ministry for the Environment and Stats NZ, including how the seas around Aotearoa are warming 34% faster than the rest of the world and that $180 billion of residential property is exposed to floods and slips. We also talked about this Op-Ed by James Renwick et al for The Public Health Communications Centre on the health dangers of climate change.* The Gaza peace plan and the controversies here about New Zealand’s Gaza stance;* The housing crisis and how to solve it (no biggie).The Hoon’s podcast version above was recorded on Thursday night during a live webinar for over 200 paying subscribers and was produced and edited by Simon Josey.The Hoon won the silver award for best current affairs podcast in this year’s New Zealand Podcast awards. (This is a sampler for all free subscribers and anyone else who stumbles on it. Thanks to the support of paying subscribers here, we’re able to spread my public interest journalism here about housing affordability, climate change and poverty reduction other public venues. Join the community supporting and contributing to this work with your ideas, feedback and comments, and by subscribing in full. Remember, all students and teachers who sign up for the free version with their .ac.nz and .school.nz email accounts are automatically upgraded to the paid version for free. Also, here’s a couple of special offers: $3/month or $30/year for under 30s & $6.50/month or $65/year for over 65s who rent.)Ngā mihi nui.Bernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

Last night I spoke with Kiwibank Chief Economist Jarrod Kerr last night after the RBNZ’s 50 basis point cut in the OCR. He says the cash rate may need to go under 2% to get the economy going again. Here’s his full note on the decision.We talked about:* How interest rates need to be below neutral to encourage growth.* The housing market’s stagnation was concerning for overall economic health.* Whether communication from the Reserve Bank has led to confusion among businesses. Jarrod says it has.* A new governor at the Reserve Bank may bring better leadership.* The housing market is expected to recover slowly over the next few years.* Investors are waiting for mortgage rates to align with rental yields.* Whether Debt to income controls are currently a major constraint on the housing market. Jarrod says not.* Wholesale rates have fallen, indicating a positive market reaction.* The depreciation of the Kiwi dollar may boost tourism and exports.Chapters00:00Reserve Bank’s Decision on Cash Rate02:57Impact of Interest Rate Cuts on the Economy06:07Housing Market Dynamics and Economic Growth08:52Market Reactions and Future ProjectionsSubscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

Last night I spoke with The Urban Advisory’s Managing Director Dr Natalie Allen, who has released the first results of a new longitudinal survey on the experiences and aspirations around housing of renters and owners.The New Zealand Housing Survey is a nationwide study designed by The Urban Advisory and analysed by the University of Auckland. It was conducted with 2,587 adults aged 16 and over between August 2024 and February 2025 and found:* Nearly 75% of renters expressed dissatisfaction with the housing options available to them;* 53% of non-homeowners said they didn’t own a home because they ‘can’t afford to buy anywhere’;* While 75% of homeowners “strongly agree” that their home is stable and secure, only 30% of renters feel the same; and,* Most renters expect their next move will be by choice and 47% plan to move in the next year, however, nearly 20% anticipate being forced to move.Allen says the survey showed the unmet demand for affordable homes in apartments, townhouses and other ‘co-housing’ situations in locations close to work, schools and other amenities.“These statistics highlight the stark disparities in housing experiences across Aotearoa. For some, a lack of housing mobility means they’re stuck in place, even when they want or need to move. “For many others, constant relocation is the norm, driven by the absence of affordable, suitable options. This instability has far-reaching consequences, directly affecting educational attendance, academic outcomes, and economic productivity.“There’s a big gap between what people want and what sort of housing is being delivered. The gap is between the public housing sector and the private market, and to bridge it will require flexible support and more housing options. “Until the gap is understood, which is the purpose of this ongoing research, and addressed, New Zealanders won’t have the range of housing options they need to thrive.” The Urban Advisory’s Managing Director Dr Natalie AllenChapters00:00 Introduction to the New Zealand Housing Survey02:50 Understanding Renters’ Perspectives05:53 Housing Preferences and Trends09:02 Densification and Community NeedsHere is the summary of the first year’s results and the full results in PDF form. Subscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe

Last night I spoke with economist Ganesh R Ahirao, who has written another letter with 19 other economists to PM Christopher Luxon and Minister of Finance Nicola Willis, calling on them to abandon their fiscally stringent approach to the economy.Here’s the letter:We discussed:* the Government’s sole focus on cutting interest rates as the way to boost the economy;* the need for investment in infrastructure and public services rather than solely focusing on reducing debt; and,* the disconnect between financial management and economic growth.We talked about how:* Austerity measures have historically failed to solve economic problems;* Government debt is not the primary issue; external debt is more critical;* The private sector has not stepped in to fill gaps in the economy;* Economic resilience requires investment in infrastructure and services;* Reducing government spending may exacerbate economic downturns;* The current fiscal policy lacks a clear rationale for its approach;* Saving for a rainy day should include economic preparedness, not just financial savings;Chapters:00:00 Economic Concerns and Government Response09:50Rethinking Fiscal Policy and Economic ResilienceSubscribe in full as a paying subscriber for more detail and analysis in the full video and podcasts that go out with my Daily Chorus email newsletters. Paying subscribers support my work being done in the public interest here, and via my appearances on other media such as RNZ & 1News. Paying subscribers also get early and full access to our webinars, our chat room, my morning ‘Early Bird’ post with the full ‘Picks n’ Mixes’ digests of news links, and can comment on articles.Ka kite anoBernard This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit thekaka.substack.com/subscribe