TDB pointed out before welfare increases were announced that unless the Government put a rent freeze in place, greedy landlords would simply steal it with a rent rise…
Grant says the is no evidence of that…
Government has ‘no plans’ to implement rent control policy, Robertson says
There was some concern yesterday’s announcement benefits will increase by up to $55 a week would lead to rent increase.
But Robertson said he was confident this was not the case.
…but there is evidence of that!
Greedy Landlords are oline bragging about how they will punish renters for Labour closing their tax loopholes and we saw them do it when Labour raised student allowances $50 in 2018…
Student allowance boost blamed for rent spikes
Renters are blaming a new $50 boost for students for a spike in Wellington rents, but landlords say the market is simply tight.
The price hike is particularly acute in the capital, where 30,000 students compete with highly-paid young professionals and families increasingly priced out of the property ladder.
The average rent for new leases of an entire property in Wellington increased $42 between November and December 2017 to $482.
Several students say that in anticipation of the boost, their rent has been hiked by landlords specifically citing the extra cash.
Wellington student Teri O’Neill, 19, lives in a four bedroom flat near the central city and was paying a combined $185 for her room and expenses.
…Why increase welfare if Landlords steal it?
An immediate rent freeze to stop them until new renters rights laws are passed.
Don’t pretend this wasn’t bought up when it predictably happens.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
You are right about the need for a rent freeze. It shows the disconnect that this government have with the real World. Landlords are not in themselves a social agency and any business has the need to be make a profit. The income from rent needs to be offset against costs and how much rent is varies from case to case so some checks need to made by the state as it is not something that should be not left entirely to the landlord . On the other hand the state can look at its housing stock as an asset to assist those in need to have a stable warm and dry home to give families the best start . They do not need to make a profit. If there were enough of these homes it would hold the private rents down to be competitive as many do not want to be beholden to a government agency.
Remember back in the day ( 1960’s – 1970’s for example) when we had State Insurance, and that child benefits could be used to procure a deposit on a first home?
Weren’t no homeless back when I was a lad… wasn’t til them there rowdy neo liberals came to town we all started having problems. Time to run ’em all back out of town back where they came from.
Scum tenants refusing to pay their reasonable rent causes rents to rise. Off to the tribunal
Scum tenants refusing to pay their reasonable rent, causes rents to rise, also
@ kyle… If the Rent is reasonable, but unpayable then the best course of action is to raise the reasonable rent to completely unpayable??
call me a stuck record…but…nothing will change without a popular campaign for rent control, and a state house mega build.
The sure way to get the Labour Caucus attention is Direct Action! Co-ordinated nationwide occupations of suitable empty residential property–for accomodation of homeless, and commercial property–where small businesses could set up. The more the merrier to stretch Police resources.
Part of the deal could be wiping all MSD debts accrued by the need for food, medical care and shelter.
Part of the deal could be wiping all MSD debts accrued by the need for food, medical care and shelter.
Yes.
Why does the government not put a compulsory offer on vacant housing instead of renting unsuitable motel rooms . This would be better than an illegal occupation.
Also, with bene’s going up. WINZ/MSD will be increasing repayments from them for being homeless because the government doesn’t build houses as a main priority. MSD will be taking back from those living in motels more than $1.5m per week! The 25% deduction for living in a motel will be deducted from their bene increase!
Remember, these people are not eligible for accommodation supplement whilst they’re living in a motel.
Benefit increase right after increasing tax on the landlords , 1+1= 2.
Like the accommodation supplement.
This is classic blairism, make noises about helping the poor but effectively subsidise the middle class landlords who are the voting bloc Labour needs to stay in power.
Sadly this is true..
Rent controls don’t work. Pity the govt hasn’t made a priority of building social housing. There is a level of tenant that no sensible landlord wants to deal with but they shouldn’t be left in the street. Nor in garages as happens commercially in places like Hamilton..
Social housing is part of the competitive mix, it is not an antithesis to it.
Like all crises the housing shortage provides the opportunity to make money and ‘greedy’ landlords can already smell the government money on offer. The promise that the ‘free’ market is the answer to supply & demand has well and truly been shown to be a lie; extracting ourselves fairly from this inequitable cycle of rich getting richer at the expense of the poor getting poorer is going to require regulations.
Like all crises the housing shortage provides the opportunity to make money and ‘greedy’ landlords can already smell the government money on offer. The promise that the ‘free’ market is the answer to supply & demand has well and truly been shown to be a lie; extracting ourselves fairly from this inequitable cycle of rich getting richer at the expense of the poor getting poorer is going to require regulations.
And it’s not just private landlords. When the accommodation supplement bar was raised by $20 a while back my elderly mum received a letter from her social housing provider advising her of a $20 rent rise along with an actual step-by-step guide on to how to apply to WINZ for the extra money. The rise would kick in the exact same week the extra money was available. So Labour government policy designed to make life a tad easier for those on low incomes was effectively neutered by the Hutt City Council and the money outright stolen.
Similarly for the Winter Energy Payments. At least three electricity companies raised their prices as the Energy Payments were delivered this year.
https://youtu.be/E_gP4GFUnS8?t=16
Well,… we don’t need anything quite like this ^, but we DO need to ensure scum landlords do not pilfer the new benefit rises and that means legislating in bans in rent rises for a certain amount of time.
Personally I think potential rent increases is the least of the worries for beneficiaries. The already-here and inevitably increasing cost of food, electricity, transport and all consumer goods is far more problematic. We could give all beneficiaries $100/week extra but it would be of no real value if the cost of living increases by $100/week at the same time.
Well now here’s a trick, – compulsory unionism and award rates, couple that with a living wage, and / or a UBI. But back in the day , we had the CONSUMERS PRICE INDEX.
That was the standard by which we measured the costs of living and inflation and adjusted wages to suit, which of course, was adjusted by union award rates.
After ruth richardsons odious Employment Contracts Act 1991, none of that was relevant. Instead, we had to opt for a park bench or one of these…
https://media.istockphoto.com/photos/grass-hut-in-the-forest-in-autumn-picture-id833483472?s=612×612
And live off worms for protein and grass for ‘roughage’.
Eh ruth.
Um not sure why my contribution was not included ?
Comments are closed.