Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[miket12]

Interesting move in the world of mortgage interest rates today….. while most of the banks are offering advertised interest rates of around 6.9% for six months, one of the smaller banks is offering a “secret” special rate of 5.99%….. the catch is it’s only available to new customers and only when the application is made through a mortgage broker. On a $500,000 loan, that’s a saving of just under $4,500 per year in interest.

While you may not be interested in changing banks, that’s a pretty good place to start negotiating a new interest rate for long-standing customers if your mortgage is going to need to be re-fixed. And, despite your current bank insisting you fix through their mobile app (as ours was doing today), I’d advise you speak to a staff member instead…. the app won’t be able to give you an interest rate below the advertised one but hopefully the staff member can….. especially when you ask for details of how to switch to the SBS when your current bank won’t reduce their interest rate below what is advertised.

 

[Noitall]

Interesting move in the world of mortgage interest rates today….. while most of the banks are offering advertised interest rates of around 6.9% for six months, one of the smaller banks is offering a “secret” special rate of 5.99%….. the catch is it’s only available to new customers and only when the application is made through a mortgage broker. On a $500,000 loan, that’s a saving of just under $4,500 per year in interest.

While you may not be interested in changing banks, that’s a pretty good place to start negotiating a new interest rate for long-standing customers if your mortgage is going to need to be re-fixed. And, despite your current bank insisting you fix through their mobile app (as ours was doing today), I’d advise you speak to a staff member instead…. the app won’t be able to give you an interest rate below the advertised one but hopefully the staff member can….. especially when you ask for details of how to switch to the SBS when your current bank won’t reduce their interest rate below what is advertised.

Pays to shop around alright Mike. I see tsb lifted their interest rate today

 

[Worried2Death]

Interesting move in the world of mortgage interest rates today….. while most of the banks are offering advertised interest rates of around 6.9% for six months, one of the smaller banks is offering a “secret” special rate of 5.99%….. the catch is it’s only available to new customers and only when the application is made through a mortgage broker. On a $500,000 loan, that’s a saving of just under $4,500 per year in interest.

While you may not be interested in changing banks, that’s a pretty good place to start negotiating a new interest rate for long-standing customers if your mortgage is going to need to be re-fixed. And, despite your current bank insisting you fix through their mobile app (as ours was doing today), I’d advise you speak to a staff member instead…. the app won’t be able to give you an interest rate below the advertised one but hopefully the staff member can….. especially when you ask for details of how to switch to the SBS when your current bank won’t reduce their interest rate below what is advertised.

Appreciate that good oil Mike. Just say the word when you're ready to enter politics and form The Warriors Perfect Utopia Party, I'll back you 110%.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

With the portion of votes distributed across the three parties, isn’t it a bit weak to pander to them so much?

Is that like saying the Warriors should just take being a spare wheel because the majority Aussie market needs to be pandered to?

Is that like the greens should have been ignored rather than costing us billions on bike lanes?

While I don’t smoke, I find the smoke free policy intriguing. NZ First clearly courted the smoking voters that have been hammered with taxes since forever and now all the non smokers are complaining about how unfair and undemocratic it al is… I don’t agree with changing the policy but who really cares?

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

What major decisions have national made?

The way I see it is the minor parties need to pander to their voters to remain relevant and ensure their survival so they pick a few high profile policies.

The main parties do the boring day to day stuff that really makes a difference to the country in the long term.

Example - nobody pays attention that National are getting more kids back in school learning and with a better curriculum which will only bear fruit in 10+ years… but look, the Ministry of Educations name might be changed away from Maori!

 

[Noitall]

Is that like saying the Warriors should just take being a spare wheel because the majority Aussie market needs to be pandered to?

Is that like the greens should have been ignored rather than costing us billions on bike lanes?

While I don’t smoke, I find the smoke free policy intriguing. NZ First clearly courted the smoking voters that have been hammered with taxes since forever and now all the non smokers are complaining about how unfair and undemocratic it al is… I don’t agree with changing the policy but who really cares?

Probably the voters care who had no idea it was coming as it was never politicised by them or mentioned it was on the table. This is something that national previously supported or it doesn’t come along as far as it did. Cycle lanes were a policy heading into the election, the Warriors one is just a bad analogy

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

the Warriors one is just a bad analogy

I was trying to draw on the heart strings for the minority continually being ignored for the evil majority

 

[Noitall]

Example - nobody pays attention that National are getting more kids back in school learning and with a better curriculum which will only bear fruit in 10+ years… but look, the Ministrt of Educations name might be changed away from Maori!

Might. We won’t know if it will be a success until the time frame you pointed out. Think there are many more factors than the curriculum as to why kids a failing at school

 

[Noitall]

I was trying to draw on the heart strings for the minority continually being ignored for the evil majority

If you had cited the refs or bunker in some way, I could have been led down the outrage avenue

 

[Noitall]

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

This guy has form here in recent times

 

[snake77]

Yeah a lot of cyclists are assholes. I am a runner that occasionally cycles so I don’t count myself among them. But completely understand where you are coming from

I only cycle in daylight savings / summer. So I'm a part timer so don't count myself either when cyclists get grief.


As I've gotten more into it. I can see it a bit differently when I'm driving. Basically give the cyclist a bit of room, know they need time to unclip at intersections. On the discussions around crossings they know this is coming and should be able to see the pedestrians or like a motorist they need to anticipate the pedestrian may cross. So they should be anticipating and unclipping ready to stop.

As a driver I still hate how much room a lot of cyclists take up. The two abreast rule works a bit better in small towns. Not in cities where cars are often parked on both sides and there is more traffic. I ride a lot closer to the curb than a lot of cyclists.

 

[miket12]

Appreciate that good oil Mike. Just say the word when you're ready to enter politics and form The Warriors Perfect Utopia Party, I'll back you 110%.

A bit more that comes from the experience of mortgages during 24 of the last 30 years.... while interest rates are falling, re-fix for the shortest term (6 months) as possible. While an interest rate of 5.69% for five years at the BNZ looks attractive compared to their 6.85% for six months, it won't be when the interest rates bottom out and you're left paying 5.69% when their five year rate is 3.99%.

Also, while it will be easier short term to only pay back the minimum repayment each time you refix your loan as it's going down, try to keep your repayments higher. Using the BNZ loan calculator, a drop from 7.99% means repayments for a 25 year mortgage are $2,128 per fortnight, but, when you use today's interest rate of 6.85%, the payment drops down to $1,924 per fortnight. While that looks good in the short term, keeping the repayment level at $2,128 per fortnight means the term of the loan is reduced to just under 20 years and saves you over $290,000 in extra interest to the bank... and who wouldn't want that to either use for retirement or become the Bank of Mum and Dad to help children into their own house.

Only catch is, make sure the Bank doesn't hit you with a fee for making too large of a principle repayment each fortnight.... that would quickly eat into any saving you might be making with your larger repayments.

And no..... I wouldn't enjoy the abuse that would come from entering politics.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

This guy has form here in recent times

Seriously what a dick, geez there’s some ignorant fuckers out there

 

[miket12]

Seriously what a dick, geez there’s some ignorant fuckers out there

Tell you also pisses me off about that development. The original builder/developer built 8 houses beside each other but started up a separate company just for that development. All eight are of the same style and all of them have leaked. As soon as the last account was paid, he wound the company up and has not had to pay a cent in the remediation costs. I've been involved with providing the BC documents for getting one of them repaired.

The cost of the original repairs has been met by the original designer, council and cladding provider but not the plasterer or the builder. Absolutely stinks that the person who made the most profit walked away owing nothing.

 

[miket12]

When we think of housing affordability, we usually only consider the time spent saving for a deposit (if that can be achieved) or the ratio of the median household income to the cost the median house to figure out how long it would take the average house to pay of a house if all the take home pay was dedicated to the mortgage.

What is usually not taken into consideration is the household income required to comfortably pay back a mortgage. Overseas, it's considered that 30% of the median pay should be used to for mortgage payments.... in Auckland, it's currently 61% of the average household income. The median house value in Auckland is $1,020,000 so with a 20% deposit that means they are borrowing $816,000 which, at 7.06% one year (in June) means they are paying back $82,000. With a typical household income of $134,000, that means that family has 61% of their income goes in mortgage payments.

To make matter worse, to be at the overseas "comfortable" level of 30% for mortgage repayments, the household income has to rise to from $134,000 to $273,000 PA to afford the medium Auckland house.

And the rest of the country isn't that much better off... in Wellington, buyers would need a household income of $242,000 to be at that 30% comfortable repayment level, in Tauranga it's $213,000 while Dunedin households need an income of $158,000.

View attachment 8654

The figures above are from this article... https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/housi...y-buy-a-new-house/2MFWMI3SERADNIRMLEIHQNXBDU/

The herald have continued this series comparing the major NZ cities to the State capitals in Oz. They’ve used the same scale of how much the medium household income would need to increase to get to the point where only 30% of the household income would be used to pay the mortgage on the average house in that city. All the figures are in NZD.

The only city in either country which is “affordable” using that calculation is Darwin where 23% of the medium household income would be used to pay the mortgage on the average house. By comparison, Canberra requires 38%, Perth and Melbourne 42%, Hobart and Wellington 43%, Christchurch and Dunedin 44%, Hamilton and National NZ average 46%, Brisbane 48%, Auckland 49%' Adelaide 51%, Tauranga 56% and Sydney 58%.

Or another way to look at it, an Auckland household would need to earn $85,000 more than they currently do to comfortably meet the mortgage payments for the medium Auckland house using only 30% of their household income to pay the mortgage. Darwin is the only city where there wouldn’t need to be a raise in the household income. By comparison, households in Sydney would need their incomes to raise by a staggering $121,000 PA to comfortably pay the mortgage.

Another way to consider it is how much a family would need as a deposit or equity in an existing property plus enough money to cover the first years mortgage. In Sydney, that amount is just over $331,000. Auckland $269,000, Brisbane $246,000, Canberra $245,000, Wellington $239,000, Tauranga $236,000, Melbourne $220,000, Adelaide $219,000, Perth $218,000, NZ National $203,000, Hamilton $218,000, Hobart $182,000, Christchurch $175,000, Dunedin $156,000 and Darwin $143,000.

Are Aussie homes more affordable? What you need to earn to buy in Oz vs NZ

Australia has five main cities with incomes and house prices more affordable than in NZ.

www.nzherald.co.nz

The other thing to consider. We are continuously told that a CGT would make houses more affordable in NZ when compared to other countries yet Australia, who have had a CGT for just under 40 years, have comparable housing figures to NZ when it come to housing affordability. In fact, four of the six most affordable cities aren’t found in the country with the CGT but are in NZ!!!!

When will we have an honest discussion in NZ that a CGT won’t lead to lower housing values but is about wealth redistribution?

 

[MaybeTop8]

Verrall says Reti's false chart makes PM Luxon 'look like an idiot' over Health NZ claims

Shane Reti's office has admitted a chart referred to in press conference does not exist.

www.nzherald.co.nz

Shane Reti’s office admits chart used to justify $1.4b Health cuts ‘does not exist’
Thomas Coughlan
By Thomas Coughlan
Deputy Political Editor·NZ Herald·
5 Sep, 2024 05:42 PM
4 mins to read
Save

Share
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Health Minster Dr Shane Reti announcing the appointment of a commissioner to Health NZ. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Health Minster Dr Shane Reti announcing the appointment of a commissioner to Health NZ. Photo / Mark Mitchell

Health Minister Shane Reti’s office has admitted an organisational chart of Health NZ - Te Whatu Ora, which allegedly proved the organisation had become bloated and inefficient “does not exist”.

Reti used the chart to justify painful spending restraint at Health NZ. He now claims that there was not one organisational chart as initially claimed, but that he was referring to an amalgam of the many Health NZ organisational charts he had seen.

Labour’s health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall told the Herald the invented chart has made Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who was standing beside Reti when he made the remarks, “look like an idiot”.

“The claims made about Health NZ in July are made up and they used those claims to justify a commissioner and cuts of $1.4 billion to the health system,” she said.

Discover more
'Makes no sense': Health Minister queries hospital ...
Govt invests $30m to improve access to X-rays, CT scans ...
How the government's view of Health NZ did a 180º in ...
Dr Shane Reti: Māori Health Authority was a bureaucratic ...
Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.
In July, Reti took to the podium in the Beehive theatrette alongside Luxon to announce Health NZ - Te Whatu Ora was staring down the barrel of a $1.4b deficit thanks to a bloated, inefficient bureaucracy.

Make a beeline for the Beehive

I’m not interested in Political Briefing newsletter. Please don’t show me this again.
The pair announced the Health NZ board had been sacked and Lester Levy had been appointed Commissioner to govern the organisation back to financial health.

To justify his claim of bloated bureaucracy, Luxon said there could be 14 layers of management between the CEO and the patient.

When asked what these layers were, Reti twice referred to a single organisational chart that demonstrated these layers.

Advertisement

Advertise with NZME.
“Look, there’s an org chart which I’ve seen which is just mind-boggling. I could not name the different layers of wayfinders, pathfinders, boundary spanners - Lord knows what else - from A to B. I could not name them for you,” Reti said.

When asked whether he could send the chart to media to prove his claim, Reti said he would approach Levy “to send around the chart and the information we have on that”.

Later, officials did send media a list of 14 management layers. It showed that there were not 14 layers between the CEO and the patient, but 14 layers including the CEO and the patient.

The Herald requested the specific chat Reti had referred to in the press conference under the Official Information Act. The request was finally answered this week, with Reti’s office conceding: “In response to your request, an organisational chart that covers the entirety of Health New Zealand’s structure does not exist”.

Labour's Health Spokeswoman Ayesha Verrall said the remarks had made the prime minister look like an idiot. Photo / Mark Mitchell.
Labour's Health Spokeswoman Ayesha Verrall said the remarks had made the prime minister look like an idiot. Photo / Mark Mitchell.

The office then attached the list of 14 job titles sent to other media.

The Herald asked Reti’s office whether he had been completely truthful when he had claimed to have seen the org chart which does not exist and when he had offered to ask Levy to send the nonexistent chart to media.

A spokesperson replied, “There is no single organisational chart covering Health New Zealand, although there are several org charts of different formats covering different parts of the agency.

“The point the minister made at post cab was focused on a number of ambiguous job titles in health which don’t clearly explain their purpose,” they said.

Verrall told the Herald she had herself asked for organisational charts from Health NZ using written Parliamentary questions. She had requested an organisational chart showing job titles and names of office holders down to tier three, meaning the chief executive, the executive leadership team, and their support staff.

This question was refused because it would have required Health NZ staff to undertake “a substantial manual collation”.

Verrall said she was concerned that the Government had yet to conclusively prove the claims used to justify sacking Health NZ’s board, inserting a commissioner, and beginning a savings exercise. This was concerning because with no board, Health NZ was no longer publishing board minutes which give an insight into how the organisation is performing.

“It matters if those claims can’t be borne out. There’s no 14 layers of management, there’s no organisational chart, the cost was not due to back-office start but due to nursing hiring. So much of what the Government built its case on has been shown to be untrue,” she said.

“New Zealanders have a right to know if these cuts are justified. The Government has had one press conference and hasn’t made the case. It has asserted there are financial problems at Health NZ. They have not released any documents to show that is the case.”

Thomas Coughlan is Deputy Political Editor and covers politics from Parliament. He has worked for the Herald since 2021 and has worked in the press gallery since 2018.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

The only city in either country which is “affordable” using that calculation is Darwin where 23% of the medium household income would be used to pay the mortgage on the average house. By comparison, Canberra requires 38%, Perth and Melbourne 42%, Hobart and Wellington 43%, Christchurch and Dunedin 44%, Hamilton and National NZ average 46%, Brisbane 48%, Auckland 49%' Adelaide 51%, Tauranga 56% and Sydney 58%.

Looks like ‘affordability’ is code word for no one wants to live there judging by the make up of the list. With the least affordable the most best cities.

Obviously Tauranga is more desirable than Auckland, which this list clearly confirms

 

[miket12]

Looks like ‘affordability’ is code word for no one wants to live there judging by the make up of the list. With the least affordable the most best cities.

Obviously Tauranga is more desirable than Auckland, which this list clearly confirms

More likely because the number of retired people in Tauranga would bring their household income average down compared to cities where more people are still working. That said, I’d love to move back to the Bay in seven years time.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

More likely because the number of retired people in Tauranga

AIMS games this week in Tauranga.

Retired people? The place is over run with kids!

 

[dean]

Dangerous attack ground boys, we all know bicycles are the preferred mode of transport for the far left.

The herald have continued this series comparing the major NZ cities to the State capitals in Oz. They’ve used the same scale of how much the medium household income would need to increase to get to the point where only 30% of the household income would be used to pay the mortgage on the average house in that city. All the figures are in NZD.

The only city in either country which is “affordable” using that calculation is Darwin where 23% of the medium household income would be used to pay the mortgage on the average house. By comparison, Canberra requires 38%, Perth and Melbourne 42%, Hobart and Wellington 43%, Christchurch and Dunedin 44%, Hamilton and National NZ average 46%, Brisbane 48%, Auckland 49%' Adelaide 51%, Tauranga 56% and Sydney 58%.

Or another way to look at it, an Auckland household would need to earn $85,000 more than they currently do to comfortably meet the mortgage payments for the medium Auckland house using only 30% of their household income to pay the mortgage. Darwin is the only city where there wouldn’t need to be a raise in the household income. By comparison, households in Sydney would need their incomes to raise by a staggering $121,000 PA to comfortably pay the mortgage.

Another way to consider it is how much a family would need as a deposit or equity in an existing property plus enough money to cover the first years mortgage. In Sydney, that amount is just over $331,000. Auckland $269,000, Brisbane $246,000, Canberra $245,000, Wellington $239,000, Tauranga $236,000, Melbourne $220,000, Adelaide $219,000, Perth $218,000, NZ National $203,000, Hamilton $218,000, Hobart $182,000, Christchurch $175,000, Dunedin $156,000 and Darwin $143,000.

Are Aussie homes more affordable? What you need to earn to buy in Oz vs NZ

Australia has five main cities with incomes and house prices more affordable than in NZ.

www.nzherald.co.nz

The other thing to consider. We are continuously told that a CGT would make houses more affordable in NZ when compared to other countries yet Australia, who have had a CGT for just under 40 years, have comparable housing figures to NZ when it come to housing affordability. In fact, four of the six most affordable cities aren’t found in the country with the CGT but are in NZ!!!!

When will we have an honest discussion in NZ that a CGT won’t lead to lower housing values but is about wealth redistribution?

These comparisons are meaningless.
It goes to show that peoples decision to live somewhere are not dictated by affordability, other factors hold more weight.
You would think that the motorways leaving Auckland would be blocked by people leaving in search of cheaper housing. They aren't, very few leave for that reason and are quickly replaced.