June 5, 2025 • 34 mins
Clearer boundaries around Kāinga Ora tenant behaviour could explain a 600% surge in formal warnings.
In the past 10 months, 63 tenancies were terminated because of abusive, threatening, or persistently disruptive behaviour.
Nearly 1,500 warnings have been issued in the financial year to date.
Chief executive Matt Crockett told Kerre Woodham behaviour isn't worse, rather the previous framework wasn't as sharp.
He says clearer boundaries and more follow through now have more people's behaviour changing for the better.
The fate of multiple vacant Kāinga Ora sections sitting empty will be confirmed in the next month.
Multiple projects are on pause as the state housing agency re-focuses on the Government turnaround plan.
This includes selling 900 older homes a year and a new build programme.
Crockett told Woodham Kāinga Ora's been reviewing which areas are cost effective and serve populations.
He says about 20% of its current land holdings will be sold back to the market.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Mornings podcast from
News Talks.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
He'd b this are We're joined by Matt Crockett, King
Order Chief Executive. At the start of February, the government
announced plan to get King Order back on track. The
new cost saving plan included the sale of around nine
hundred older homes, annually replacing them with newer, simpler builds.
Under the new plan, debt was also forecast to be
(00:31):
one point eight billion dollars lower in twenty seven twenty
eight compared to that of the twenty three forecast. King
of Aura board chair Simon Mucher joined me in studio
at the time, but there were questions asked that he
felt were better answered by his chief executive, Matt Crockett.
Talk about throwing you under the bus. Thank you very
much for coming in. Matt. Nice to have you.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Thank you very much for having me, though I think
of it more as opening an opportunity for me to
connect with you.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So that's a lovely way of putting it. Why on
earth did you take on the job. It was huge
and what was being our of the new government as
compared to the former government was completely different to the
charter that had been there before.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Yeah, so this came out of left field for me.
I had worked with Simon before, but when he put
the opportunity to me, I didn't have to think too hard.
And the main reason I've done it is because kind
of aura and what it does for New Zealand, in
particular our most vulnerable communities.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Is really really important.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
And I've got a lot of experience, not in the
public sector and certainly not in state housing, but a
lot of experience with turnarounds and transformations. And so what
was really being asked was to get kind or refocused
on its core social housing mission and to guess, get
it operating better, more cost effectively, doing good things for
our tenants and doing that in a really cost efficient way,
(01:54):
more cost efficient way that was there. So I had
some skills that were relevant for that.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So when you came into the job, did you have
a look at the books and think what on earth?
Because I can remember asking the former chief executive, you know,
how many chances do people get and how do you
decide if their behavior has improved if you get a
second chance because you trash the place, how do you
(02:18):
measure that there are behaviors and there were no measurements
in place with that kind of policy. They didn't seem
to keep track of how much damage had been caused.
What happened next that the record keeping was really poor.
There was a really nice philosophy, but very poor record keeping.
Is that what you found when you came in.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
What I would say is that the policy of the day,
which was around the sustaining tenancies, really heavily weighted towards
making sure tenants stayed in their properties. And so I
think the focus wasn't as sharp as it probably could
have been on setting clear boundaries and sticking to them
and keeping track of those things. That was clearly a
very clear direction from the new government at that time,
(03:01):
and that's what we've been following through on. And so
you know, with that shifting policy, we've been putting a
lot of focus on being a fair but more firm
landlord around things like disruptive behavior and renterre.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Is because the people who are impacted generally when tenants
behave badly are the next door neighbors. So it's other
kind of order tenants who are behaving well and paying
their rent on time and trying to live good lives,
who are most severely impacted when tenants go bad.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
Well, I'm glad you've raised that, Kerry, because the vast
majority of our tenants are really good talents there, good
kiwis just living their life. And I think during that
sustaining tenancies period there was an overweight to the kind
of the rights of the individual versus the rights of
the neighbors and the wider community. And I think we've
got that needed to be shifted, and I think we're
(03:53):
getting the balance right on that because we also don't
want to just kick people out Willy Nelly either, but
there is definitely a need to look after neighbors, many
of whom are kinder or A tenants, but also who
are just members of the public. And I don't think
under that regime that those settings were quite right, and
we're just getting that balance better now.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
I just don't understand where the shift came whereby people
abuse the privilege of a state house when you know,
we have a former Prime Minister John Key who famously
grew up in a state house. A lot of Keyws
either grew up in a state house or had parents
who did. My dad got a state house and grew
up there in christ church, and not one of his
(04:35):
siblings or himself needed a state house after that, it
was the opportunity in the leg up that the state provided.
They certainly wouldn't have dreamed of trashing their home. And
I just don't understand what happened where a privilege and
an opportunity was something to be destroyed.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Well, I think there's a couple of things that were
going on. One of them is you have to remember
that a lot of our tenants are into quite challenging
life circumstances and sometimes they lose their call.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
The real problem is when there's not clear.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Boundaries and they're not policed, then.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
People get a little bit out of control.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
Right, And what we're seeing now with this clearer boundaries
and clearer follow through on it is the vast majority
of people that their behavior is changing. So most people
who get a section fifty five a notice, which is
the notice which is you're on warning for having shown
some kind of disruptive we have most of them go, well,
I you know, I don't want to lose my house.
I'm going to change my behavior. So so I think
(05:34):
it was the combination of those things that led to
too much stuff happening that was allowed to continue.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yes, and as you say, it's a teeny tiny proportion
of card Order tenants, but so much time and so
much money was being spent on them as opposed to
the wider KRK Order community.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Yeah, I'm not sure, so much more money being spent
on them, but there was.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Giving to redo the houses.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
Oh, yes, yes, correct, correct, And look, it's definitely not
a riot. It's a privilege to have a house, and
I think the vast majority of our tenants absolutely get that.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Yeah, and we've seen with the tenancy behaviors, a six
hundred percent increase in formal warnings, sixty three evictions for
violent or threatening behavior in the past ten months. Now,
those evictions can only happen once you've been through the
tenancy tribunal, isn't that right?
Speaker 4 (06:24):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Yes, So you're following the process, and you have to
go through a process. You can't just say right, that's it,
you're out gone.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Absolutely, So we will issue the formul fifty five a notice,
and there's a series of warnings that happened before the termination.
And most importantly, we'll be working really closely to try
and understand what's going on, what's sitting behind it. How
can we get help for this tenet? How can we
help them course correct? So we put a huge amount
(06:53):
of work into trying to avoid terminations and all termination
enforcements I sign off on personally, But sometimes tenets just
won't engage, won't get help, and you leave us no
choice but determinating. It's sad when that happens, but they've
left us no choice.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
When it comes to the enforcement action and when it
comes to seeing the six hundred percent increase in formal warnings.
Was it just that the previous administration hadn't been issuing
warnings or is it now a higher standard of behavior
(07:32):
is expected or I mean six hundred percent increase seems
an awful lot.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
Yeah, I don't think it's because there's more disruptive behavior
going on. So I think the policy and the boundaries
were less clear, and as a result, there was less
clarity around when to formally follow through because obviously I
think all along, if there's violent stuff or really bad stuff,
then things were being taken. But it was it was
just not clear enough and not followed through enough.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Okay, Dean has a question that I was going to
ask a really Dean, but I'll let you do it.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
Dean.
Speaker 5 (08:01):
You have a question for Matt Lovely, thanks very much.
Mad Yes, the previous head I'm going back or we
will allow to come and remember, and I was so, madam,
I've got an interest in because those steers a front
blind police officer and the head said, Okay, we've got
these terribly disruptive kinds. We've got to kick them out.
What do we do with the young children? And that
(08:21):
was the excuse. I'm wondering how you've dealt with that aspect.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
That's yeah, yeah, thank you for the questions.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, because look, children are often impacted, and that's why
we put a huge amount of focus into trying to
avoid the situation where we need to terminate in all cases,
but particularly when there's children involved.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
But sometimes we have no option but to follow through.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
Really, and we will again try and broke a connecting
the family with help connecting them with other housing providers.
We're at community housing providers or transitional housing, et cetera
that may be able to take them, but sometimes that's
not possible. And unfortunately people are affected in including children.
But we really are le no option if there's very
(09:07):
disruptive behavior or if tenants are just refusing to pay
rent over extended periods and refusing to engage. So we
do everything we can to avoid it. But sometimes that
is an unfortunate situation.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
But you try and do what you can to put
them with aid agencies that can provide them with other accommodation.
Speaker 3 (09:25):
Absolutely, and like I mentioned, every every single termination enforcement,
I sign off personally and the team has gone through
everything they possibly could before it ever gets to me.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Thank you, News Talk said B. Thank you, Dan. Eight
hundred and eighty ten eighty is the number to call
if you have a question regarding Caring or Order it's operations.
Now is your time to ask the man in charge,
Matt Crockett. News Talk said, B. You with Kerry Woodham
and you're with Matt Crockett, Caring Order Chief executive John.
You have a question for Matt.
Speaker 6 (09:57):
Yeah, Matt. A little in an area in Uckand where
all the state houses have been pulled down and they're
just vacant sections, and they've been like that for some
time now. We've been told that the houses are going
to be built to market the Hillure houses, not to
return to state houses. But all around us the houses
(10:17):
are multi story and lots of more people coming in.
I just like know what the policy is on those
properties that are setting vacant and have done for probably
two years at least now.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Yes, thank you for the question, and a very fair one.
We've been in the process where we've paused a bunch
of projects while we really adjust to the new volume
requirements that have been put on in terms of the
number of homes, also looking really hard at whar's the
most need and the best cost effective places to build.
(10:49):
We're very close, very close to completing that review, and
we'll be confirming the outcomes of that, and in cases
like the one you're talking about, either we'll reconfirm that
we are going to build there, or we will confirm
that we think that we will build there but not
for some time, but will hold it, or else will
be selling that land and returning it. And we certainly
don't want to be land banking, and so there's probably
(11:13):
about twenty percent of our current landholdings that will be
looking to sell and sell back into the market because
we want them to be out there and being developed.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
For housing in the private sector, for example.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
So we're making sure we're getting the balance right between
keeping what we need to meet demand for social housing
in the coming years, but not hanging on to things
that are access to requirements.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Does that answer the question?
Speaker 6 (11:34):
Oh no, not really because when it is likely to happen,
because it's affecting the values of all the property because
we're privately owned, so you know, we own our own property.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
So that we're completing that review and confirming the results
of what's happening with those projects within the next.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Month, within the next month, and then the land will
be either sold or developed.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Yes, So the sales process may take longer if that's
what we're doing.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
I obviously can't comment on.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
The specific property, but there is clarity coming. We know
that's taken while, but that we're very close within the
next month.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
There you go, John, thank you very much. The other
thing was I've just done the architects awards in Auckland
and Wellington and Kangora Developments. The architects who designed them
one awards and they are beautiful, absolutely beautiful, But at
what cost?
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Yeah, So I think firstly it's really important that we
build houses that are safe, dry, warm, and also actually
fit in with the community.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Right and the team's rightly proud of.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
I think some of those developments in the awards, they
work quite costly, and I think what we're trying to
do now is ensure we don't completely flip the other way,
because we don't want people living in ugly shoe boxes.
But also I think we need to be more cost
effective and be very thoughtful about kind.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
Of what we're building.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
And we're confident that we can do that, and it's
been a huge focus and we're seeing real results in
terms of our unit build costs already.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
I totally get that if you're living in a lovely home,
you're less likely to trash it than if you're living
in a squalid, soulless slum. But at what caused? I mean,
is there a way of doing it?
Speaker 3 (13:17):
There absolutely is, you know, And we're committed to building
quality homes that are good for our people to live in,
that aren't ugly in the community, and so we can
absolutely do that. Are we going to be winning as
many architectural awards? I hope so, but that might be
a little bit more challenging. But I'm confident that they
will be quality homes that we could be proud of
(13:38):
and that our tenants will enjoy living.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
In and will you be Will people be buying them
eighty years from now the way the old state houses.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
Were built, possibly, we're certainly building them to last at
least fifty years. Like we're long term holders, are long
term landlords, and so they've got to be built to last.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
I'm with Matt Crockett, these chief executive of Caring Order. Genny,
you have a question.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
Yeah, oh sorry, I've actually got a few. I just
want to pose, when a family is in a home
and like the mother, the parents have passed away, why
is the home passed on to the stil drum when
there are so many houses, and when they're quite capable
to go to work and getting their own house, but
(14:22):
they've been living there as adults, why if it passed
on to them.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
I mean, I have to admit I'm not fully across
the policy that we have on that, but what we
wouldn't be doing would be housing and over certainly an
extended period people who don't meet the requirements for being
on the MSD waitlist. That said, there's obviously a degree
of compassion and consistency if there's a family who's just
had a bereavement, So I don't know the exact policy
(14:52):
on that and would need to come back on it.
But ultimately they need to meet the requirements to be
on the MSD waitlist.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
So if the adult children and the home are working
capable of putting a roof over their head, I mean,
you wouldn't put them out the next day after their
mum dies, but you'd ask them to move on and
find your own accommodation.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
That would be my expectation. I don't know of a
policy that's different than that. I can look into that.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
Yep.
Speaker 7 (15:15):
Right, Just a friend I went to school with, she
has a home, a state home, and her mother because
it was her mother that passed away, so she lost
the house that she got, but she moved into her
lovely mom's state house in Pontombay and she she's pretty
much been and she's what fifty hours sixty sorry, and
(15:35):
she's still living in a state house. So she's been
in the state house almost all her life and she's
just had and you know, she's quite capable of getting
her own place. Yeah, And I've seen a couple of
state houses pulled down in Mount Albert and the land
who has been sitting there for three.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Years that's what Matt was just saying that they're undergoing
a review and that's going to be announced in a month.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Hearing that when I turned on Storry.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
That's okay, Well that answered that question. I've got a
number of techs, Ryan and mus and a couple of
other tradees And this is a common talking point too
when I have people phone in about caying order builds
that when it comes to the actual build contractors are
having a laugh. When it comes to invoicing government departments,
(16:29):
it's double what a private builder would do for a
private job. So how do you keep track of not
inflating your invoices when you're building the government.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Yeah, So we've got a huge focus firstly on getting
our build costs down and within that really both within
the build space but more broadly building the procurement capabilities.
And we've brought in some expertise on that and we're
in the process of building out that and we've got
a new head of procurement starting shortly.
Speaker 4 (17:00):
So that's a huge focus for us.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
You know, I don't think it's correct to say that
we're twice the cost of the market. I think we've
been over market. Our commitment is to get to market,
and we are in the coming months going to be
starting to publish our build costs per square meter on
an average basis, so that we can actually show the
progress that we're making. But with what we are being
(17:22):
able to contract, we're seeing substantial reductions from where we were,
and we may not be there yet, but we're getting
much closer to market and we're going to be very
transparent with the public on that.
Speaker 8 (17:32):
Well.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
It's just amazing that you're going to know, because I
don't think under the previous administration they would have known
what on earth was going on there. It was like
they had an unlimited budget to do whatever they wished.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
No, I think they did know what their build costs were,
but the big focus, I think, again on the direction
that they were getting, and the policy of the time
was to focus on speed of build and building and
that the commercial side of it was a little bit secondary,
and I think that balance was needed to be rectified,
and that's part of what our reset plan is. So
(18:04):
we're still building a lot, we're doing a lot of buildings,
still not quite as much as what was there, but
we've got to do it a lot more cost effectively
and look I say this to our people all the time,
which is, look, there's no money tree here.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
So every dollar that we waste or.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
We don't spend as efficiently and effectively as we can
as a dollar, we're not spending on social housing, you know.
So my aim is that the better we get at that,
the more social housing we can do, and the less
drain we have on the taxpayer.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Is it a huge, meaty, difficult to get hit around
kind of job, you mean.
Speaker 4 (18:37):
My overall job?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (18:38):
Well, on one hand, yes, it's a big job.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
But at the end of the day, particularly with the
direction we've got now to just really focus back to
being a good social housing provider. Is we basically build
and maintain quality social houses and be a good, supportive
but firm landlord to our tenants.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
So we've got very clear direction.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
We're getting much more focused, and really a bit of
my challenge has been to get the organization focused back
onto that core thing and more focused on the commercial
side of the equation. The reacting extremely well, we're making
really good progress, but plenty of.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Work to go, So that was what was lacking the focus.
Speaker 3 (19:16):
I think that Kain and Gore got asked to do
quite a lot of things outside that core social housing
focus in urban development and proving new building methods, and
a whole bunch of other things, all of which were worthy,
but just distracted the organization. And I think the other
thing is the organization just grew too big, and when
I came in, there's a bunch of great people, but
(19:38):
too many people tripping over each other, too much paperwork
flying around.
Speaker 4 (19:41):
So part of my challenge has just been getting.
Speaker 3 (19:44):
The place more focused on that core social housing mission
and more focused on commercial sustainability as well as continuing
to build and do great things for our tenants.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Because one of the things about Caring Order that really
alarmed a lot of us as taxpayers was the debt
that it had accrued just in that complete race to
build as many houses as they possibly could. You know,
I think twenty sixty was when we were going to
look to get on top of that debt. How do
you wrangle that?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Well, I think anytime I'm still building houses, Yeah, anytime
you build quickly and at scale, you need to take
on debt. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, but
it's public debt, right, So there's an opportunity.
Speaker 4 (20:26):
To cost for that elsewhere.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
But with our reset plan, I think debt peaks this
year and then we'll be coming down.
Speaker 4 (20:32):
So while we're still renewing.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
A whole bunch of our houses, so we're still going
to be doing two thousand a year, we're either going
to be completely replacing a house, probably about sixteen hundred
of those, and another four hundred of retrofits because we've
got a lot of pretty old, pretty ordinary, you know,
fifty sixty seventies type houses and sometimes before. And we'll
be able to do that while still reducing debt. And
(20:55):
as I said, I've got a lot of focus with
the team on just pushing even further to see, well,
what more can we do to be even more cost
effective so that we can get that happening faster and
get the debt down. But by the same top and
if we asked to grow and build again, that will
go up again, right, And but it comes with assets
like we've got forty seven forty eight billion dollars of
assets in Kandlora.
Speaker 2 (21:20):
All right, John, good morning to you. Oh yeah, good
question for Matton.
Speaker 5 (21:28):
Yeah, thank you listening to them just now. I don't
think you know.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
You have a question or not. I do right, What
is it.
Speaker 6 (21:40):
The hime order houses are full of.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Okay, I don't think we're going anywhere there.
Speaker 8 (21:47):
Hello sir, good morning, Thank you for this. I would
like to ask Matt, what are you doing to help
the people with disabilities century and physical disabilities because some
of the places getting into them, there's little lips and
there's no color contrast around doorways or anything like that.
(22:08):
So it's quite difficult, especially for the vision impaired, because
i have a very bad habit of banging into things
because there's no color contrast. And I've got friends and
wheelchairs that cannot get into my place because of a
small lip at doorways and things like that. So what
kind of things are you looking at doing towards supporting
(22:30):
people with disabilities.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Yes, so thank you for the question. And look, there's
been a big focus and will continue to be a
big focus on trying to ensure we've got accessibility and
other things to support people with disabilities.
Speaker 4 (22:46):
And you know, part of the reason that our build
costs are higher.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Than they might be in the privacy is we try
and keep the flexibility both specific features but also space
and other flexibility so that over time, if we do
get disabled tenants. We have been building universal accessible homes
and our intention is to continue to do so. We
are working with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development
(23:13):
to make it clear from them what it is that
they would like us to build, because we really build
what we're commissioned to build by them, and I think
part of what they're reviewing is the degree to which
we'll have those universal accessibility type houses and.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
How much of our mix that should be. Do we
have it right everywhere?
Speaker 8 (23:31):
No?
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Is it a huge focus.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Yes, if there's someone who is injured, we work with
acc to try and get an assessment and then get
things retrofitted in there. But we've put a lot of focus,
but we can always do more, and we really do
want to make these great places for all of our tenants.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
Here as yours in order to play sue or does
it need to be retrofitted or is it a new one.
Speaker 8 (23:54):
Mine's about thirty year old where I am, it's a
unit and the biggest problem, well, there's a couple of problems.
One is, as I said, the lips giving in the
back door. Nobody in a wheelchair or with physical ability
to get out there.
Speaker 6 (24:07):
It's too dangerous.
Speaker 8 (24:08):
And in my bathroom. The floors the shower is a
so slippery that when the floors are wet, it's exceedingly dangerous.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
Right, So, I guess with the thirty year old home,
that would need to be maybe a nonstick matt.
Speaker 8 (24:22):
I've got one of those, but they still right, Okay,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (24:26):
Part of the renewal program that we've got is that
when we replace those older houses, we'll be with the
new ones we're replacing them with, we'll be trying to
address the kind of things you're talking about. We won't
be able to have the full features everywhere. We were
just avoiding things like lips and things like that.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
Yeah, just the obvious stuff. This is one that came
up constantly too a couple of years ago. Might be
over now, what's coming or doing to address claims that
they consistently overbid for land and existing houses. They were
competing with private sector developers and also private and first
home buyers. I guess that's gone by the buy now.
There isn't that edict to get as many houses and
(25:02):
put as many people in as possible.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
Yeah, So couple of things with that.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
One of them is that for a period cong were
always asked to actually do urban development that was nothing
to do with social housing, and that was where some
of those big property acquisitions were. We will still be
acquiring land from time to time, though in the short term.
As I said, we've actually got excess land, so that
won't be an issue for the next while, and it
will be important to bring the sourcing and commercial discipline
(25:29):
to that. I think that the Conger team believes that
they were doing that. I don't really want to debate
the past, and I think at the time they were
sourcing the land they were asked to do and think
they were trying to get and in their belief it
was at the market rates and I haven't seen anything
that suggests that's not the case. But it won't be
an issue moving forward because we won't be buying.
Speaker 4 (25:49):
Any land in the near term.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
So good to here. Thank you very much. We have
the chief executive of kind order taking your questions. I
just wanted to ask one on these You've talked about
the vulnerable some vulnerable tenants.
Speaker 8 (26:01):
That you have.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
You know, people who might need these headphones are doing
my head and people who need a bit of extra
support and care. I also saw that there'd been a
large number of layoffs at Caring Order. Is that going
to impact on the sort of care that you're going
to be able to give, the extra care you're going
to be able to give to the tenants who need it.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
No, absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (26:21):
That's our first priority is to make sure that we
don't go backwards on our tenant management. So, for example,
in our recent restructures, there's been no impact on our
frontline tenant managers, and where there is in other changes,
they were mostly overhead or things that were directly related
to volume. So we are one hundred percent committed to
making sure that we're going to be providing the same
(26:43):
or better service than we are. We're just looking at
ways to do it more cost effectively, and that's what
people should expect to see.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I remember listening to the chat from Monte Cecilia and
he said that his tenant managers had fewer clients to
look after, so they could nit problems in the bud
and he thought that was a large part of the
reason why there were unruly tenants with caying or Order,
is that the the property managers just didn't have enough
time to get to see the tenants because they were
(27:13):
so overloaded. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Absolutely, and look, we're putting a lot of focus on
what are the things that are wasting our tenant manager's time,
So how can we, through technology and through process, redesign,
et cetera, allow them to do more? And also just
looking at we've done a lot of research into the
needs of our customers, of our tenants, and then how
can we do a better job when we're onboarding them
(27:35):
to really help them connect with the right support, really
understand their needs. And then how do we make sure
that we can focus our efforts on the highest needs
tenants who need the most support, whereas a whole bunch
of our tenants who just pay their rent get all
the life and don't need a huge amount of support.
So we're trying to be a little bit more sophisticated
about understanding their needs and adapting our model. But as
(27:58):
I said, we're not cutting costs there at the minute.
We haven't taken out any tenant managers, but we are
looking for more efficient ways for how we can tackle that.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Just on that, Peter has a question. Good morning to you, Peter, Thank.
Speaker 6 (28:10):
You very much.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
I can see you a common cause of common problem
arising here.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
Who gets priority?
Speaker 4 (28:17):
Is it?
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Families?
Speaker 2 (28:18):
With children or is it just a.
Speaker 5 (28:21):
Husband and wife.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Well the way can they give a house?
Speaker 5 (28:26):
Or do families with children? Do they get priority?
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Well, we kang or actually doesn't make those decisions. The
Ministry of Social Development has very clear criteria and they
assess the need on the wait list and they'll balance
things like are their children, is there a disability, is
there other things that are challenges and they we then
place the people that the MSD asked us to place.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I would have thought you would have some say in
who your tenants might be.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
No, that's not really the way it works.
Speaker 6 (28:59):
Now.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
We obviously work collaboratively with MSD to go right, where's
the best house that's the fit for this family or
for this individual or this couple. But no, we actually
are effectively given that this is the tenets that are
the next off the weight list, can you help us
find some houses for them?
Speaker 2 (29:16):
Right? So, but generally the ones at the top of
the list would be families with kids or mums or
dads with their.
Speaker 4 (29:22):
They would be high up there.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
But there's other factors as well, like if they have
a disability, or if they've got mental challenges, or if
they've got some other things. So that those things will
all be taken into consideration. But clearly, getting families out
of emergency housing, for example, has been a really huge priority,
and you know it's worth calling out that we've been,
you know, one of the biggest, if not biggest contributors
to getting down the emergency housing list because they're going
(29:45):
into our homes. So so families will always get a
heavy weighting, but there's other things that MSD takes into consideration.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
What about when it comes to the mix of who
goes into a housing development, a caring order housing development,
Like there's a lot of single men who need homes,
but you know they're probably down the list. But then
would you want to put eighteen single men in an
eighteen one bedroom unit block or do you try and
(30:13):
mix up generations and.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
Carry you you've touched on something that's absolutely super critical
for getting this right because if you put the wrong
groups of people or the wrong individuals and the wrong situation.
Speaker 4 (30:24):
You are asking for trouble.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
So again we work very collaboratively with MSD to avoid
that and try and get people in the right place.
And quite interestingly, coming back to the disruptive behavior sometimes
and people out there in the private sector will know
this as well.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
Is sometimes there's just a.
Speaker 3 (30:41):
Bit of a falling out between neighbors, and if we
move the tenant somewhere else, there's no more problems. So
not only when they first go in, but on an
ongoing basis, just being thoughtful about where we put people
and why they're going to fit and where they won't
fit is absolutely critical.
Speaker 4 (30:54):
So we put a lot of focus on that.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Yeah, because if I was moving into a housing development,
I wouldn't want to just see people who look like
me all the time. I'd like to see kids, and
I'd like to see men, and I'd like to see
a variety of people.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
Yeah, and we do that both in the placements, but
even before that in the way that we're looking at
our developments and what we build.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
So quite often we might have.
Speaker 3 (31:19):
Apartment style things and then around them more terrorists or something,
and then a shared open area or a community garden
or something, so you get a bit of a mixture
of people, and we find those well, particularly if they're
close to amenities.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
Okay, I'm just going to read out these two texts
here before we go to the break. I would like
to thank Matt for the good work he both has
done and continues to do. It's a thankless task and
he handles the job and the knock is really well,
says Tony, and Andy says, I'm really enjoying this interview.
He speaks very well in his head around his role.
Very refreshing.
Speaker 4 (31:54):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
You can't really say much to that, really, exit think
you can you news talks. It'd be that went quickly.
You'll be able to go back to your real job
very very shortly. Thank you, Matt. What what are the
things you've found about the role since you took it over?
Speaker 3 (32:11):
Well, I think I was going to call out maybe
some misconceptions, and I'd say this too. One of them
is a misconception that every conger or tenant's a rat
bag and you know, doesn't deserve their house or whatever.
Like the vast, vast majority of our tenants don't cause
any trouble. A great Kiwis have various challenges or needs
that and giving them stable social housing really helps them.
(32:33):
So that's one misconception. And the other one would be
that conger or is staffed by a bunch of incompetent numpties,
which is just absolutely not the case. There's a bunch
of passionate, capable people doing great work. They just need
to be focused and focused on the right things. And
we're making huge strides and I'm very proud of our
people and how they're coming to the party to get
(32:54):
behind the new plan.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Is the aim to get people into social housing, to
give them a chance to get back on their feet
and then out again. Is it a trampoline rather than
a safety net or is it a safety net that
people can stay in?
Speaker 3 (33:11):
I think it's certainly trampoline. Is the aim of what
it should be about. Does that happen as often as
in practices as maybe we'd like. I think that's still
a work in progress, and you know that's a policy
matter and a policy issue. Our real role here is
to is to make sure that we can provide quality homes,
maintain well and that we give our tenants good support
(33:31):
while also being firm with them around expectations of their behavior.
And that's the core of what we're about in kind Aura.
Speaker 2 (33:38):
Yeah, see, straight back drilling down to what the job is,
which is really refreshing. I have to say, after what
we've done, thank you so much for taking the time
and maybe if you haven't been horrified by the experience.
You'd come back again.
Speaker 4 (33:53):
It was a pleasure to carry.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
Happy to come back, Goat and thank you very much
to those of you who took the time to call
and texts. We do appreciate it very good questions.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news Talks it Be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Mornings podcast from
News Talks.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
He'd b this are We're joined by Matt Crockett, King
Order Chief Executive. At the start of February, the government
announced plan to get King Order back on track. The
new cost saving plan included the sale of around nine
hundred older homes, annually replacing them with newer, simpler builds.
Under the new plan, debt was also forecast to be
(00:31):
one point eight billion dollars lower in twenty seven twenty
eight compared to that of the twenty three forecast. King
of Aura board chair Simon Mucher joined me in studio
at the time, but there were questions asked that he
felt were better answered by his chief executive, Matt Crockett.
Talk about throwing you under the bus. Thank you very
much for coming in. Matt. Nice to have you.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Thank you very much for having me, though I think
of it more as opening an opportunity for me to
connect with you.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
So that's a lovely way of putting it. Why on
earth did you take on the job. It was huge
and what was being our of the new government as
compared to the former government was completely different to the
charter that had been there before.
Speaker 3 (01:14):
Yeah, so this came out of left field for me.
I had worked with Simon before, but when he put
the opportunity to me, I didn't have to think too hard.
And the main reason I've done it is because kind
of aura and what it does for New Zealand, in
particular our most vulnerable communities.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Is really really important.
Speaker 3 (01:31):
And I've got a lot of experience, not in the
public sector and certainly not in state housing, but a
lot of experience with turnarounds and transformations. And so what
was really being asked was to get kind or refocused
on its core social housing mission and to guess, get
it operating better, more cost effectively, doing good things for
our tenants and doing that in a really cost efficient way,
(01:54):
more cost efficient way that was there. So I had
some skills that were relevant for that.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
So when you came into the job, did you have
a look at the books and think what on earth?
Because I can remember asking the former chief executive, you know,
how many chances do people get and how do you
decide if their behavior has improved if you get a
second chance because you trash the place, how do you
(02:18):
measure that there are behaviors and there were no measurements
in place with that kind of policy. They didn't seem
to keep track of how much damage had been caused.
What happened next that the record keeping was really poor.
There was a really nice philosophy, but very poor record keeping.
Is that what you found when you came in.
Speaker 3 (02:37):
What I would say is that the policy of the day,
which was around the sustaining tenancies, really heavily weighted towards
making sure tenants stayed in their properties. And so I
think the focus wasn't as sharp as it probably could
have been on setting clear boundaries and sticking to them
and keeping track of those things. That was clearly a
very clear direction from the new government at that time,
(03:01):
and that's what we've been following through on. And so
you know, with that shifting policy, we've been putting a
lot of focus on being a fair but more firm
landlord around things like disruptive behavior and renterre.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
Is because the people who are impacted generally when tenants
behave badly are the next door neighbors. So it's other
kind of order tenants who are behaving well and paying
their rent on time and trying to live good lives,
who are most severely impacted when tenants go bad.
Speaker 3 (03:30):
Well, I'm glad you've raised that, Kerry, because the vast
majority of our tenants are really good talents there, good
kiwis just living their life. And I think during that
sustaining tenancies period there was an overweight to the kind
of the rights of the individual versus the rights of
the neighbors and the wider community. And I think we've
got that needed to be shifted, and I think we're
(03:53):
getting the balance right on that because we also don't
want to just kick people out Willy Nelly either, but
there is definitely a need to look after neighbors, many
of whom are kinder or A tenants, but also who
are just members of the public. And I don't think
under that regime that those settings were quite right, and
we're just getting that balance better now.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
I just don't understand where the shift came whereby people
abuse the privilege of a state house when you know,
we have a former Prime Minister John Key who famously
grew up in a state house. A lot of Keyws
either grew up in a state house or had parents
who did. My dad got a state house and grew
up there in christ church, and not one of his
(04:35):
siblings or himself needed a state house after that, it
was the opportunity in the leg up that the state provided.
They certainly wouldn't have dreamed of trashing their home. And
I just don't understand what happened where a privilege and
an opportunity was something to be destroyed.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
Well, I think there's a couple of things that were
going on. One of them is you have to remember
that a lot of our tenants are into quite challenging
life circumstances and sometimes they lose their call.
Speaker 4 (05:05):
The real problem is when there's not clear.
Speaker 3 (05:07):
Boundaries and they're not policed, then.
Speaker 4 (05:10):
People get a little bit out of control.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
Right, And what we're seeing now with this clearer boundaries
and clearer follow through on it is the vast majority
of people that their behavior is changing. So most people
who get a section fifty five a notice, which is
the notice which is you're on warning for having shown
some kind of disruptive we have most of them go, well,
I you know, I don't want to lose my house.
I'm going to change my behavior. So so I think
(05:34):
it was the combination of those things that led to
too much stuff happening that was allowed to continue.
Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yes, and as you say, it's a teeny tiny proportion
of card Order tenants, but so much time and so
much money was being spent on them as opposed to
the wider KRK Order community.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
Yeah, I'm not sure, so much more money being spent
on them, but there was.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Giving to redo the houses.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
Oh, yes, yes, correct, correct, And look, it's definitely not
a riot. It's a privilege to have a house, and
I think the vast majority of our tenants absolutely get that.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
Yeah, and we've seen with the tenancy behaviors, a six
hundred percent increase in formal warnings, sixty three evictions for
violent or threatening behavior in the past ten months. Now,
those evictions can only happen once you've been through the
tenancy tribunal, isn't that right?
Speaker 4 (06:24):
That's correct.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Yes, So you're following the process, and you have to
go through a process. You can't just say right, that's it,
you're out gone.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Absolutely, So we will issue the formul fifty five a notice,
and there's a series of warnings that happened before the termination.
And most importantly, we'll be working really closely to try
and understand what's going on, what's sitting behind it. How
can we get help for this tenet? How can we
help them course correct? So we put a huge amount
(06:53):
of work into trying to avoid terminations and all termination
enforcements I sign off on personally, But sometimes tenets just
won't engage, won't get help, and you leave us no
choice but determinating. It's sad when that happens, but they've
left us no choice.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
When it comes to the enforcement action and when it
comes to seeing the six hundred percent increase in formal warnings.
Was it just that the previous administration hadn't been issuing
warnings or is it now a higher standard of behavior
(07:32):
is expected or I mean six hundred percent increase seems
an awful lot.
Speaker 3 (07:36):
Yeah, I don't think it's because there's more disruptive behavior
going on. So I think the policy and the boundaries
were less clear, and as a result, there was less
clarity around when to formally follow through because obviously I
think all along, if there's violent stuff or really bad stuff,
then things were being taken. But it was it was
just not clear enough and not followed through enough.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Okay, Dean has a question that I was going to
ask a really Dean, but I'll let you do it.
Speaker 4 (08:01):
Dean.
Speaker 5 (08:01):
You have a question for Matt Lovely, thanks very much.
Mad Yes, the previous head I'm going back or we
will allow to come and remember, and I was so, madam,
I've got an interest in because those steers a front
blind police officer and the head said, Okay, we've got
these terribly disruptive kinds. We've got to kick them out.
What do we do with the young children? And that
(08:21):
was the excuse. I'm wondering how you've dealt with that aspect.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
That's yeah, yeah, thank you for the questions.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, because look, children are often impacted, and that's why
we put a huge amount of focus into trying to
avoid the situation where we need to terminate in all cases,
but particularly when there's children involved.
Speaker 4 (08:42):
But sometimes we have no option but to follow through.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
Really, and we will again try and broke a connecting
the family with help connecting them with other housing providers.
We're at community housing providers or transitional housing, et cetera
that may be able to take them, but sometimes that's
not possible. And unfortunately people are affected in including children.
But we really are le no option if there's very
(09:07):
disruptive behavior or if tenants are just refusing to pay
rent over extended periods and refusing to engage. So we
do everything we can to avoid it. But sometimes that
is an unfortunate situation.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
But you try and do what you can to put
them with aid agencies that can provide them with other accommodation.
Speaker 3 (09:25):
Absolutely, and like I mentioned, every every single termination enforcement,
I sign off personally and the team has gone through
everything they possibly could before it ever gets to me.
Speaker 2 (09:36):
Thank you, News Talk said B. Thank you, Dan. Eight
hundred and eighty ten eighty is the number to call
if you have a question regarding Caring or Order it's operations.
Now is your time to ask the man in charge,
Matt Crockett. News Talk said, B. You with Kerry Woodham
and you're with Matt Crockett, Caring Order Chief executive John.
You have a question for Matt.
Speaker 6 (09:57):
Yeah, Matt. A little in an area in Uckand where
all the state houses have been pulled down and they're
just vacant sections, and they've been like that for some
time now. We've been told that the houses are going
to be built to market the Hillure houses, not to
return to state houses. But all around us the houses
(10:17):
are multi story and lots of more people coming in.
I just like know what the policy is on those
properties that are setting vacant and have done for probably
two years at least now.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
Yes, thank you for the question, and a very fair one.
We've been in the process where we've paused a bunch
of projects while we really adjust to the new volume
requirements that have been put on in terms of the
number of homes, also looking really hard at whar's the
most need and the best cost effective places to build.
(10:49):
We're very close, very close to completing that review, and
we'll be confirming the outcomes of that, and in cases
like the one you're talking about, either we'll reconfirm that
we are going to build there, or we will confirm
that we think that we will build there but not
for some time, but will hold it, or else will
be selling that land and returning it. And we certainly
don't want to be land banking, and so there's probably
(11:13):
about twenty percent of our current landholdings that will be
looking to sell and sell back into the market because
we want them to be out there and being developed.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
For housing in the private sector, for example.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
So we're making sure we're getting the balance right between
keeping what we need to meet demand for social housing
in the coming years, but not hanging on to things
that are access to requirements.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Does that answer the question?
Speaker 6 (11:34):
Oh no, not really because when it is likely to happen,
because it's affecting the values of all the property because
we're privately owned, so you know, we own our own property.
Speaker 3 (11:45):
So that we're completing that review and confirming the results
of what's happening with those projects within the next.
Speaker 2 (11:51):
Month, within the next month, and then the land will
be either sold or developed.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
That's correct.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
Yes, So the sales process may take longer if that's
what we're doing.
Speaker 4 (12:00):
I obviously can't comment on.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
The specific property, but there is clarity coming. We know
that's taken while, but that we're very close within the
next month.
Speaker 2 (12:08):
There you go, John, thank you very much. The other
thing was I've just done the architects awards in Auckland
and Wellington and Kangora Developments. The architects who designed them
one awards and they are beautiful, absolutely beautiful, But at
what cost?
Speaker 3 (12:25):
Yeah, So I think firstly it's really important that we
build houses that are safe, dry, warm, and also actually
fit in with the community.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
Right and the team's rightly proud of.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
I think some of those developments in the awards, they
work quite costly, and I think what we're trying to
do now is ensure we don't completely flip the other way,
because we don't want people living in ugly shoe boxes.
But also I think we need to be more cost
effective and be very thoughtful about kind.
Speaker 4 (12:55):
Of what we're building.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
And we're confident that we can do that, and it's
been a huge focus and we're seeing real results in
terms of our unit build costs already.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
I totally get that if you're living in a lovely home,
you're less likely to trash it than if you're living
in a squalid, soulless slum. But at what caused? I mean,
is there a way of doing it?
Speaker 3 (13:17):
There absolutely is, you know, And we're committed to building
quality homes that are good for our people to live in,
that aren't ugly in the community, and so we can
absolutely do that. Are we going to be winning as
many architectural awards? I hope so, but that might be
a little bit more challenging. But I'm confident that they
will be quality homes that we could be proud of
(13:38):
and that our tenants will enjoy living.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
In and will you be Will people be buying them
eighty years from now the way the old state houses.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
Were built, possibly, we're certainly building them to last at
least fifty years. Like we're long term holders, are long
term landlords, and so they've got to be built to last.
Speaker 2 (13:55):
I'm with Matt Crockett, these chief executive of Caring Order. Genny,
you have a question.
Speaker 7 (14:01):
Yeah, oh sorry, I've actually got a few. I just
want to pose, when a family is in a home
and like the mother, the parents have passed away, why
is the home passed on to the stil drum when
there are so many houses, and when they're quite capable
to go to work and getting their own house, but
(14:22):
they've been living there as adults, why if it passed
on to them.
Speaker 3 (14:30):
I mean, I have to admit I'm not fully across
the policy that we have on that, but what we
wouldn't be doing would be housing and over certainly an
extended period people who don't meet the requirements for being
on the MSD waitlist. That said, there's obviously a degree
of compassion and consistency if there's a family who's just
had a bereavement, So I don't know the exact policy
(14:52):
on that and would need to come back on it.
But ultimately they need to meet the requirements to be
on the MSD waitlist.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
So if the adult children and the home are working
capable of putting a roof over their head, I mean,
you wouldn't put them out the next day after their
mum dies, but you'd ask them to move on and
find your own accommodation.
Speaker 3 (15:09):
That would be my expectation. I don't know of a
policy that's different than that. I can look into that.
Speaker 6 (15:14):
Yep.
Speaker 7 (15:15):
Right, Just a friend I went to school with, she
has a home, a state home, and her mother because
it was her mother that passed away, so she lost
the house that she got, but she moved into her
lovely mom's state house in Pontombay and she she's pretty
much been and she's what fifty hours sixty sorry, and
(15:35):
she's still living in a state house. So she's been
in the state house almost all her life and she's
just had and you know, she's quite capable of getting
her own place. Yeah, And I've seen a couple of
state houses pulled down in Mount Albert and the land
who has been sitting there for three.
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Years that's what Matt was just saying that they're undergoing
a review and that's going to be announced in a month.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Hearing that when I turned on Storry.
Speaker 2 (16:06):
That's okay, Well that answered that question. I've got a
number of techs, Ryan and mus and a couple of
other tradees And this is a common talking point too
when I have people phone in about caying order builds
that when it comes to the actual build contractors are
having a laugh. When it comes to invoicing government departments,
(16:29):
it's double what a private builder would do for a
private job. So how do you keep track of not
inflating your invoices when you're building the government.
Speaker 3 (16:39):
Yeah, So we've got a huge focus firstly on getting
our build costs down and within that really both within
the build space but more broadly building the procurement capabilities.
And we've brought in some expertise on that and we're
in the process of building out that and we've got
a new head of procurement starting shortly.
Speaker 4 (17:00):
So that's a huge focus for us.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
You know, I don't think it's correct to say that
we're twice the cost of the market. I think we've
been over market. Our commitment is to get to market,
and we are in the coming months going to be
starting to publish our build costs per square meter on
an average basis, so that we can actually show the
progress that we're making. But with what we are being
(17:22):
able to contract, we're seeing substantial reductions from where we were,
and we may not be there yet, but we're getting
much closer to market and we're going to be very
transparent with the public on that.
Speaker 8 (17:32):
Well.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
It's just amazing that you're going to know, because I
don't think under the previous administration they would have known
what on earth was going on there. It was like
they had an unlimited budget to do whatever they wished.
Speaker 3 (17:43):
No, I think they did know what their build costs were,
but the big focus, I think, again on the direction
that they were getting, and the policy of the time
was to focus on speed of build and building and
that the commercial side of it was a little bit secondary,
and I think that balance was needed to be rectified,
and that's part of what our reset plan is. So
(18:04):
we're still building a lot, we're doing a lot of buildings,
still not quite as much as what was there, but
we've got to do it a lot more cost effectively
and look I say this to our people all the time,
which is, look, there's no money tree here.
Speaker 4 (18:16):
So every dollar that we waste or.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
We don't spend as efficiently and effectively as we can
as a dollar, we're not spending on social housing, you know.
So my aim is that the better we get at that,
the more social housing we can do, and the less
drain we have on the taxpayer.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Is it a huge, meaty, difficult to get hit around
kind of job, you mean.
Speaker 4 (18:37):
My overall job?
Speaker 2 (18:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (18:38):
Well, on one hand, yes, it's a big job.
Speaker 3 (18:40):
But at the end of the day, particularly with the
direction we've got now to just really focus back to
being a good social housing provider. Is we basically build
and maintain quality social houses and be a good, supportive
but firm landlord to our tenants.
Speaker 4 (18:56):
So we've got very clear direction.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
We're getting much more focused, and really a bit of
my challenge has been to get the organization focused back
onto that core thing and more focused on the commercial
side of the equation. The reacting extremely well, we're making
really good progress, but plenty of.
Speaker 2 (19:12):
Work to go, So that was what was lacking the focus.
Speaker 3 (19:16):
I think that Kain and Gore got asked to do
quite a lot of things outside that core social housing
focus in urban development and proving new building methods, and
a whole bunch of other things, all of which were worthy,
but just distracted the organization. And I think the other
thing is the organization just grew too big, and when
I came in, there's a bunch of great people, but
(19:38):
too many people tripping over each other, too much paperwork
flying around.
Speaker 4 (19:41):
So part of my challenge has just been getting.
Speaker 3 (19:44):
The place more focused on that core social housing mission
and more focused on commercial sustainability as well as continuing
to build and do great things for our tenants.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Because one of the things about Caring Order that really
alarmed a lot of us as taxpayers was the debt
that it had accrued just in that complete race to
build as many houses as they possibly could. You know,
I think twenty sixty was when we were going to
look to get on top of that debt. How do
you wrangle that?
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Well, I think anytime I'm still building houses, Yeah, anytime
you build quickly and at scale, you need to take
on debt. And that's not necessarily a bad thing, but
it's public debt, right, So there's an opportunity.
Speaker 4 (20:26):
To cost for that elsewhere.
Speaker 3 (20:27):
But with our reset plan, I think debt peaks this
year and then we'll be coming down.
Speaker 4 (20:32):
So while we're still renewing.
Speaker 3 (20:35):
A whole bunch of our houses, so we're still going
to be doing two thousand a year, we're either going
to be completely replacing a house, probably about sixteen hundred
of those, and another four hundred of retrofits because we've
got a lot of pretty old, pretty ordinary, you know,
fifty sixty seventies type houses and sometimes before. And we'll
be able to do that while still reducing debt. And
(20:55):
as I said, I've got a lot of focus with
the team on just pushing even further to see, well,
what more can we do to be even more cost
effective so that we can get that happening faster and
get the debt down. But by the same top and
if we asked to grow and build again, that will
go up again, right, And but it comes with assets
like we've got forty seven forty eight billion dollars of
assets in Kandlora.
Speaker 2 (21:20):
All right, John, good morning to you. Oh yeah, good
question for Matton.
Speaker 5 (21:28):
Yeah, thank you listening to them just now. I don't
think you know.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
You have a question or not. I do right, What
is it.
Speaker 6 (21:40):
The hime order houses are full of.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Okay, I don't think we're going anywhere there.
Speaker 8 (21:47):
Hello sir, good morning, Thank you for this. I would
like to ask Matt, what are you doing to help
the people with disabilities century and physical disabilities because some
of the places getting into them, there's little lips and
there's no color contrast around doorways or anything like that.
(22:08):
So it's quite difficult, especially for the vision impaired, because
i have a very bad habit of banging into things
because there's no color contrast. And I've got friends and
wheelchairs that cannot get into my place because of a
small lip at doorways and things like that. So what
kind of things are you looking at doing towards supporting
(22:30):
people with disabilities.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Yes, so thank you for the question. And look, there's
been a big focus and will continue to be a
big focus on trying to ensure we've got accessibility and
other things to support people with disabilities.
Speaker 4 (22:46):
And you know, part of the reason that our build
costs are higher.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Than they might be in the privacy is we try
and keep the flexibility both specific features but also space
and other flexibility so that over time, if we do
get disabled tenants. We have been building universal accessible homes
and our intention is to continue to do so. We
are working with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development
(23:13):
to make it clear from them what it is that
they would like us to build, because we really build
what we're commissioned to build by them, and I think
part of what they're reviewing is the degree to which
we'll have those universal accessibility type houses and.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
How much of our mix that should be. Do we
have it right everywhere?
Speaker 8 (23:31):
No?
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Is it a huge focus.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
Yes, if there's someone who is injured, we work with
acc to try and get an assessment and then get
things retrofitted in there. But we've put a lot of focus,
but we can always do more, and we really do
want to make these great places for all of our tenants.
Speaker 2 (23:48):
Here as yours in order to play sue or does
it need to be retrofitted or is it a new one.
Speaker 8 (23:54):
Mine's about thirty year old where I am, it's a
unit and the biggest problem, well, there's a couple of problems.
One is, as I said, the lips giving in the
back door. Nobody in a wheelchair or with physical ability
to get out there.
Speaker 6 (24:07):
It's too dangerous.
Speaker 8 (24:08):
And in my bathroom. The floors the shower is a
so slippery that when the floors are wet, it's exceedingly dangerous.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
Right, So, I guess with the thirty year old home,
that would need to be maybe a nonstick matt.
Speaker 8 (24:22):
I've got one of those, but they still right, Okay,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (24:26):
Part of the renewal program that we've got is that
when we replace those older houses, we'll be with the
new ones we're replacing them with, we'll be trying to
address the kind of things you're talking about. We won't
be able to have the full features everywhere. We were
just avoiding things like lips and things like that.
Speaker 2 (24:39):
Yeah, just the obvious stuff. This is one that came
up constantly too a couple of years ago. Might be
over now, what's coming or doing to address claims that
they consistently overbid for land and existing houses. They were
competing with private sector developers and also private and first
home buyers. I guess that's gone by the buy now.
There isn't that edict to get as many houses and
(25:02):
put as many people in as possible.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
Yeah, So couple of things with that.
Speaker 3 (25:06):
One of them is that for a period cong were
always asked to actually do urban development that was nothing
to do with social housing, and that was where some
of those big property acquisitions were. We will still be
acquiring land from time to time, though in the short term.
As I said, we've actually got excess land, so that
won't be an issue for the next while, and it
will be important to bring the sourcing and commercial discipline
(25:29):
to that. I think that the Conger team believes that
they were doing that. I don't really want to debate
the past, and I think at the time they were
sourcing the land they were asked to do and think
they were trying to get and in their belief it
was at the market rates and I haven't seen anything
that suggests that's not the case. But it won't be
an issue moving forward because we won't be buying.
Speaker 4 (25:49):
Any land in the near term.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
So good to here. Thank you very much. We have
the chief executive of kind order taking your questions. I
just wanted to ask one on these You've talked about
the vulnerable some vulnerable tenants.
Speaker 8 (26:01):
That you have.
Speaker 2 (26:01):
You know, people who might need these headphones are doing
my head and people who need a bit of extra
support and care. I also saw that there'd been a
large number of layoffs at Caring Order. Is that going
to impact on the sort of care that you're going
to be able to give, the extra care you're going
to be able to give to the tenants who need it.
Speaker 4 (26:19):
No, absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (26:21):
That's our first priority is to make sure that we
don't go backwards on our tenant management. So, for example,
in our recent restructures, there's been no impact on our
frontline tenant managers, and where there is in other changes,
they were mostly overhead or things that were directly related
to volume. So we are one hundred percent committed to
making sure that we're going to be providing the same
(26:43):
or better service than we are. We're just looking at
ways to do it more cost effectively, and that's what
people should expect to see.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I remember listening to the chat from Monte Cecilia and
he said that his tenant managers had fewer clients to
look after, so they could nit problems in the bud
and he thought that was a large part of the
reason why there were unruly tenants with caying or Order,
is that the the property managers just didn't have enough
time to get to see the tenants because they were
(27:13):
so overloaded. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Absolutely, and look, we're putting a lot of focus on
what are the things that are wasting our tenant manager's time,
So how can we, through technology and through process, redesign,
et cetera, allow them to do more? And also just
looking at we've done a lot of research into the
needs of our customers, of our tenants, and then how
can we do a better job when we're onboarding them
(27:35):
to really help them connect with the right support, really
understand their needs. And then how do we make sure
that we can focus our efforts on the highest needs
tenants who need the most support, whereas a whole bunch
of our tenants who just pay their rent get all
the life and don't need a huge amount of support.
So we're trying to be a little bit more sophisticated
about understanding their needs and adapting our model. But as
(27:58):
I said, we're not cutting costs there at the minute.
We haven't taken out any tenant managers, but we are
looking for more efficient ways for how we can tackle that.
Speaker 2 (28:06):
Just on that, Peter has a question. Good morning to you, Peter, Thank.
Speaker 6 (28:10):
You very much.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
I can see you a common cause of common problem
arising here.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
Who gets priority?
Speaker 4 (28:17):
Is it?
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Families?
Speaker 2 (28:18):
With children or is it just a.
Speaker 5 (28:21):
Husband and wife.
Speaker 4 (28:23):
Well the way can they give a house?
Speaker 5 (28:26):
Or do families with children? Do they get priority?
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Well, we kang or actually doesn't make those decisions. The
Ministry of Social Development has very clear criteria and they
assess the need on the wait list and they'll balance
things like are their children, is there a disability, is
there other things that are challenges and they we then
place the people that the MSD asked us to place.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I would have thought you would have some say in
who your tenants might be.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
No, that's not really the way it works.
Speaker 6 (28:59):
Now.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
We obviously work collaboratively with MSD to go right, where's
the best house that's the fit for this family or
for this individual or this couple. But no, we actually
are effectively given that this is the tenets that are
the next off the weight list, can you help us
find some houses for them?
Speaker 2 (29:16):
Right? So, but generally the ones at the top of
the list would be families with kids or mums or
dads with their.
Speaker 4 (29:22):
They would be high up there.
Speaker 3 (29:23):
But there's other factors as well, like if they have
a disability, or if they've got mental challenges, or if
they've got some other things. So that those things will
all be taken into consideration. But clearly, getting families out
of emergency housing, for example, has been a really huge priority,
and you know it's worth calling out that we've been,
you know, one of the biggest, if not biggest contributors
to getting down the emergency housing list because they're going
(29:45):
into our homes. So so families will always get a
heavy weighting, but there's other things that MSD takes into consideration.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
What about when it comes to the mix of who
goes into a housing development, a caring order housing development,
Like there's a lot of single men who need homes,
but you know they're probably down the list. But then
would you want to put eighteen single men in an
eighteen one bedroom unit block or do you try and
(30:13):
mix up generations and.
Speaker 3 (30:16):
Carry you you've touched on something that's absolutely super critical
for getting this right because if you put the wrong
groups of people or the wrong individuals and the wrong situation.
Speaker 4 (30:24):
You are asking for trouble.
Speaker 3 (30:25):
So again we work very collaboratively with MSD to avoid
that and try and get people in the right place.
And quite interestingly, coming back to the disruptive behavior sometimes
and people out there in the private sector will know
this as well.
Speaker 4 (30:40):
Is sometimes there's just a.
Speaker 3 (30:41):
Bit of a falling out between neighbors, and if we
move the tenant somewhere else, there's no more problems. So
not only when they first go in, but on an
ongoing basis, just being thoughtful about where we put people
and why they're going to fit and where they won't
fit is absolutely critical.
Speaker 4 (30:54):
So we put a lot of focus on that.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Yeah, because if I was moving into a housing development,
I wouldn't want to just see people who look like
me all the time. I'd like to see kids, and
I'd like to see men, and I'd like to see
a variety of people.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
Yeah, and we do that both in the placements, but
even before that in the way that we're looking at
our developments and what we build.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
So quite often we might have.
Speaker 3 (31:19):
Apartment style things and then around them more terrorists or something,
and then a shared open area or a community garden
or something, so you get a bit of a mixture
of people, and we find those well, particularly if they're
close to amenities.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
Okay, I'm just going to read out these two texts
here before we go to the break. I would like
to thank Matt for the good work he both has
done and continues to do. It's a thankless task and
he handles the job and the knock is really well,
says Tony, and Andy says, I'm really enjoying this interview.
He speaks very well in his head around his role.
Very refreshing.
Speaker 4 (31:54):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
You can't really say much to that, really, exit think
you can you news talks. It'd be that went quickly.
You'll be able to go back to your real job
very very shortly. Thank you, Matt. What what are the
things you've found about the role since you took it over?
Speaker 3 (32:11):
Well, I think I was going to call out maybe
some misconceptions, and I'd say this too. One of them
is a misconception that every conger or tenant's a rat
bag and you know, doesn't deserve their house or whatever.
Like the vast, vast majority of our tenants don't cause
any trouble. A great Kiwis have various challenges or needs
that and giving them stable social housing really helps them.
(32:33):
So that's one misconception. And the other one would be
that conger or is staffed by a bunch of incompetent numpties,
which is just absolutely not the case. There's a bunch
of passionate, capable people doing great work. They just need
to be focused and focused on the right things. And
we're making huge strides and I'm very proud of our
people and how they're coming to the party to get
(32:54):
behind the new plan.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Is the aim to get people into social housing, to
give them a chance to get back on their feet
and then out again. Is it a trampoline rather than
a safety net or is it a safety net that
people can stay in?
Speaker 3 (33:11):
I think it's certainly trampoline. Is the aim of what
it should be about. Does that happen as often as
in practices as maybe we'd like. I think that's still
a work in progress, and you know that's a policy
matter and a policy issue. Our real role here is
to is to make sure that we can provide quality homes,
maintain well and that we give our tenants good support
(33:31):
while also being firm with them around expectations of their behavior.
And that's the core of what we're about in kind Aura.
Speaker 2 (33:38):
Yeah, see, straight back drilling down to what the job is,
which is really refreshing. I have to say, after what
we've done, thank you so much for taking the time
and maybe if you haven't been horrified by the experience.
You'd come back again.
Speaker 4 (33:53):
It was a pleasure to carry.
Speaker 2 (33:55):
Happy to come back, Goat and thank you very much
to those of you who took the time to call
and texts. We do appreciate it very good questions.
Speaker 1 (34:02):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news Talks it Be from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.