Ardern has a good front end but no back end

Jacinda Ardern: Let’s do this

Jacinda Ardern?s biggest leadership problem is reflected in her media image. She projects well as an attractive, capable woman with noble ideals, but then fails to deliver on promises. As they say in IT, she has a good front end but no back end.

Ardern campaigned on dragging children out of poverty, building affordable housing and improving the lot of the lowest income New Zealander. So far she has failed to deliver on any of it.? Instead, she has indicated the implementation of a capital gains tax, which she says will be revenue neutral. The mere whiff of it has already driven rental property owners out of the market. Lack of private investors will cause a shortage of rental properties and increased rents for the vulnerable that she had promised to look after.

The Australian Women?s Weekly adores Ardern and frequently features her on the cover or as a feature article.? In the latest issue, February 2019, Ardern tells us about ?My New Life with Baby Neve?. ?Ardern can do no wrong with the Australian Women’s Weekly and much of the New Zealand media. It?s just a shame that she couldn?t report in the magazine on her promise that there would be fewer New Zealand children living in poverty under her watch. She will learn the hard way that the voting public do not tolerate politicians who don?t keep their promises. ?

The New York Times has pricked up its ears on Ardern?s failure to deliver 100,000 affordable houses over the next decade. Of the 1,000 houses promised by July 2019 only 47 have been built. Quote.

Those numbers suggest that an answer to the worsening shortage is still years away, and the acknowledgment came as a new study showed that housing had grown more unaffordable around the country, with property priced further out of reach than in the United States, Britain and Australia

That study, the annual Demographia International report, compared median house prices with median income in cities in seven wealthy countries and in Hong Kong; data from the third quarter of 2018 suggested that only Hong Kong was less affordable than New Zealand, where the country?s median house price was 6.5 times the median income, up from 5.8 in the same period a year earlier .? End of quote.

The housing problem will not be solved by KiwiBuild. This study also highlights that we have an issue with incomes that are unliveable. To get children out of poverty the parents first need a higher disposable income. Quote.

Hugh Pavletich, one of the report?s authors, said housing had become more affordable in Australia over the past year as prices fell amid tightening credit.

?If they?d got out of the starting blocks with structural reforms centered around land supply and infrastructure financing soon after the election, it would have sent a far clearer signal to the market and subdued it significantly as these changes were put in place,? he said.?


Pavletich is not alone in criticising Ardern?s government. Quote.

Shamubeel Eaqub, a housing economist with the consultancy Sense Partners in Auckland, New Zealand?s largest city, said he was not surprised that the construction industry and buyers had not warmed to the KiwiBuild program.

Neither the building nor purchasing of KiwiBuild houses is subsidized by the government, which only acts as a guarantor to facilitate the building of affordable properties. It also decides who can buy such units to ensure they go to first-time home buyers who earn less than the designated income cap.

?The government is telling builders to use exactly the same processes we have in place now, but build cheaper houses,? Mr. Eaqub said. ?That?s why you?ve seen very few builders participate.? End of quote.


Well guess what? Twyford has now indicated that the government is considering an incentive payment to developers to entice them into KiwiBuild.

This government does not understand the housing market and did not address the bigger picture including land availability and the unwieldy Resource Management Act. Just on this basis, you have to question their capability to deliver.