OPINION: When project deadlines start blowing out, its only ever downhill from there.

Longer delays, greater costs, more corners being cut to try and get it back on track.

KiwiBuild was never going to be able to reach the milestones the Government had set – not without significant reform of the Resource Management Act. And yet, it could prove to be the most unforgiving policy to get wrong.

But then, Labour never fully expected to be enacting it when they made the grand election promise

Of all the promises to break though, this is the one inextricably linked with the Kiwi dream. Now the Government has officially scrapped its first term building targets and the policy isn’t just in danger of failing – it is failing.

The housing shortage is a big and tangible problem, affecting hundreds of thousands of Kiwis, and there were countless times on the campaign trail when Labour leader Jacinda Ardern and her MPs literally said “we will fix the housing crisis”.

With the admission the Government would only be able to build 300 by houses by July 1, Housing Minister Phil Twyford has all but confirmed the rest of their deadlines are likely to blow out too.

And as much as Ardern tries to claim the longer deadline to build 100,000 houses in 10 years is still on, no one’s kidding themselves. Their flagship policy is six months in and already a dead duck.

Let’s not pretend National has any credibility on housing, either.

With the amount of gleeful hand-rubbing going on, one would think the previous Government took bold and wide-sweeping action at the outset of a burgeoning crisis, rather than adopting the political equivalent of sticking one’s fingers in their ears and singing “LA LA LA”.

But that Twyford had to announce he was “recalibrating” the policy just a day after his Prime Minister branded 2019 a “year of delivery” for the Government, it’s probably too much to ask National’s housing spokesperson Judith Collins to keep herself contained.

And as the Government drafts legislation to allow the confiscation of land to build houses – against the advice of officials – Twyford’s response to the collapse of this policy has more than a whiff of desperation about it.

It could not have been a worse start to the year for the Government.

Fresh from an international trip where Ardern dazzled, she might have hoped to begin the year with a visit to Waitangi that mirrored last year’s exultant celebrations, a caucus retreat where MPs brimmed with strategy ideas, and to deliver an economic speech that neatly positions the Government as “economic visionaries”, winning over business on tax reform and fair pay agreements.

KiwiBuild’s stumble has put paid to that, and a surprise commitment from National leader Simon Bridges has backed Finance Minister Grant Robertson into a corner, with the apparent argument it’s not feasible to index income tax brackets to inflation.

If both parties are starting how they mean to go on, then the return of Parliament is unlikely to be a gentle start to the new political year.

When Parliament resumes in a couple of weeks the Prime Minister may well be reflecting wistfully on her time in Davos and the adulation she received for saying nothing of substance, but smiling ever so sweetly as she did so.

Helen Clark was correct in her assessment that so much of the Prime Minister’s international appeal is the difference she cuts between her and other leaders. She is young, enthusiastic, and radiant – not the glowering bully of the United States President, nor the stubborn grimness of the British Prime Minister.

In a world of political grayness, she is a bright spark of colour, but the sad thing is that seems to be all that matters these days. Policy achievement seems to run a distant second to the new show business of contemporary politics.

The Prime Minister is not the first New Zealand leader to have been admired on the world stage, or to have found its lure attractive. Most have taken it in their stride, although one or two have let it go to their heads.

Walter Nash was an inveterate international traveller as Prime Minister, practising what he saw as international “summitry”, but generally treated as a nice old man from the colonies, while David Lange found the international stage fitted so well that he quickly lost interest in and control of what his government was up to domestically, with disastrous results when he realised, and tried to reassert his authority. For his part, Sir Robert Muldoon saw himself as a potential international economic saviour  through his promotion of a reformed Bretton Woods agreement, a course few others seemed interested in following.

So when the Prime Minister flops back into her comfortable green leather seat in the debating chamber when Parliament resumes, it will be perfectly understandable if her mind starts to drift back to the excitement of Davos, rather than the comparative drudgery of how to rescue the rapidly crumbling Kiwibuild programme, what to do with the recommendations of the Tax Working Group, or how to balance the mounting calls from China and the United States to take one side or the other in their ongoing tussle for dominance.

All will require difficult decisions – something this Government has hitherto run a mile from, preferring instead the comfort blanket of another review group.

Given that Labour has been talking about Kiwibuild for the last two, if not three, election campaigns, it is a mystery bordering on a scandal that when it did come to office it seemed to have little idea how to implement it.

Much of what this Government has been about so far is scene setting, painting a picture of the positive future it has in mind for the country. That is a laudable and sensible approach, but the problem is that as the midpoint of its term nears, there are as yet not too many visible, specific examples of this positive future in effect, and with the next election only the end  of next year away, time is beginning to run out.

That is what makes the omnishambles of the flagship Kiwbuild  programme all the more spectacular and politically serious.

The dramatic failure to come anywhere near previously expressed target levels for Kiwibuild houses risks becoming a metaphor for the entire Government programme across all portfolios.

Given that Labour has been talking about Kiwibuild for the last two, if not three, election campaigns, it is a mystery bordering on a scandal that when it did come to office it seemed to have little idea how to implement it.

It is all very well blaming officials, or in the ridiculous case of the National Party support partners who would not allow it to tear up the Resource Management Act, because the reality is the failure lies fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the Minister who was Kiwibuild’s architect and champion for so long in Opposition that one might have been forgiven for assuming he had some idea of what he was talking about. For the sake of her government’s credibility, not to mention the thousands of young families who saw Kiwibuild as a potential answer to their housing concerns, but are now becoming disillusioned, the Prime Minister needs to ensure her government averts this mounting disaster – and quickly – before it engulfs them.

If the Minister is not up to the task, an increasingly likely proposition, he needs to be replaced by someone who is. Equally, if he magically reveals how he can now do the job, he needs to be given every support to get on with it. Either way, the Prime Minister faces tough decisions, far removed from the unreality of Davos.

The report of the Tax Working Group is due imminently, with much focus likely on how it addresses the capital gains tax question. Remember, it was Labour’s policy at the last two elections to introduce a capital gains tax, but during the last campaign, the Prime Minister kicked the issue to touch when the heat started to rise, by promising a review, with no changes due before 2021. Well, now the review is over and its report eagerly awaited.

The review head, Sir Michael Cullen, has always favoured a capital gains tax and was only stopped from introducing one during the last Labour-led government by coalition politics and an obstinately negative Revenue Minister. So, it is a reasonable bet, that now freed of such constraints, Sir Michael will seek to achieve his ambition this time.

Either way, that poses a problem for the government.

Acquiescing to Sir Michael’s wishes will leave many people feeling cynical that the whole review process was merely a cover for implementing Labour’s intended policy anyway, and will leave the government going to the next election having to campaign for a looming capital gains tax, to the relish of the National Party. Rejecting any such recommendation, will leave the Government with nothing, unless skillful and tough political leadership can negotiate a shrewd and acceptable compromise, which seems unlikely.

And then there is the matter of the mounting tension between China and the United States.

Both are important to New Zealand which is why we have so far prudently avoided taking obvious sides in the growing argument. However, there are strong signs that we may not be able to do so for much longer. China has already made clear its displeasure at the GCSB’s decision to exclude Huawei from the 5G upgrade process, with there being strong suggestions that the Prime Minister’s long-heralded visit to China was not just delayed, but deferred indefinitely (in other words, cancelled) by the Chinese as a consequence.

China is hugely important to New Zealand as a trading partner so maintaining and enhancing that is equally important for our growth and prosperity, something the Chinese understand all too well. But now, pressure is also coming from our Five Eyes intelligence partner, the United States, to back it over China, so the luxury of not taking sides may not last much longer. The United States already sees New Zealand as somewhat flaky in terms of Five Eyes, and in the volatile environment the President has established, escalating this perception will not be to our advantage in terms of the wider relationship.

The realpolitik of having to deal with these situations, let alone the likely teachers’ strikes, the ongoing junior doctors’ dispute, and a range of other day to day problems, are a world away from the acclaim of Davos. But it will be how she responds to these issues, and the level of leadership she shows, that will determine the Prime Minister’s standing with New Zealand voters as 2019 unfolds.

Kiwibuild is a failure. The government has decided to stop interim measurements, saying that they are not ‘helpful’, which just means that they have been unable to meet their targets. The scheme has not been abandoned all together though. Twyford has a cunning new plan. He wants to seize land for housing. Private land. quote.

KiwiBuild is seriously struggling to gain momentum, and Housing Minister Phil Twyford has a trick up his sleeve that he hopes will bring the scheme back to life: an Urban Development Authority.

But his officials have warned it will have a detrimental impact – made worse by the fact private companies or people could make money off the land grab.
The minister is working on legislation to give the Urban Development Authority powers to build quickly – including the ability to force landowners to sell up if they need the land for housing. end quote.

This has an ugly feel to it. Yes, the government has always been able to do this, for roading projects for example. Instead of forcing councils to rezone land, or allow more land to be released for housing, Twyford wants to seize it from private owners. Instead of converting conservation land, which is often nothing more than scrub land in some areas, Twyford wants to seize it from private owners. The government has lots of options to consider to release more land for housing before it needs to think about seizing it from private owners. But guess what? That is his first thought. quote.

See what I mean? It doesn’t sound as if seizing land will be the exception rather than the rule. It sounds as if it is likely to be the first resort. quote.

Property commentator Ashley Church says the agency will be too powerful.

“The scary aspects of it are that it’s going to be able to do much more quickly things that we’ve either expected to be able to consult on or which impact on our private property rights in a way.” end quote.

This is very worrying. Up until now, seizing land has only been for infrastructure projects. Never housing. quote.

Officials have warned that a drop in public confidence in property rights would be exacerbated by the fact the model proposed enables private actors to make a financial gain – that means developers profiting from Government land grabs. 
“I think this is the key issue, and I think it’s why there is no history of doing this in New Zealand until now,” Mr Church said.  end quote.

Absolutely. Until now, the rights of private landowners have been sacrosanct, except in a very few, special cases. This may be coming to an end. quote.

Mr Twyford is looking at new ways of compensating landowners the Government forces out, including offering up shares in the new development.

Newshub end quote.

Of course, the government could always compensate landowners by paying them the market value of the property? Even that will not be good solution for everyone, as people hold land for lots of reasons, but technically at least the owners would not be out of pocket. It does not appear though that this is going to be the standard approach.

The ability to own property has been a right of New Zealanders ever since the country was colonised by the British. Now it seems the rights of property owners are going to be diluted. Make no mistake, New Zealanders. Our new communist government will make sure we are all equal in the eyes of the law. Soon, no one will be able to own anything.

Comrades.