Labour policy is to build 10,000 houses/apartments/flats a year for ten years at an average price of $300,000.
That will cost $3 billion per year to have them built.
Green policy is for the Goverment to cover the cost of buying houses and then the owners would only have to pay Government interest rates with no compulsion to pay back any of the capital cost. Who would bother paying any back?
If you put both policies together you could need an accumulated $30 billion debt over ten years.
Not everyone would stay owners of their good fortune, some may sell and but another house, some would die, and some may move to Australia.
But there would be substantial accumulated Government provided financing. And risk.
There would be some very lucky recipients of this Government generosity. But some would miss out, whether by not qualifying, or not being drawn in the lotteries required.
Labour and Greens talk about income equity and fairness. Except when promoting their own policies that would be inequitable and unfair on the many people who miss out. And who have to cover the inevitable costs.
1 (Labour housing policy) + 1 (Green housing policy) = 0 (common sense)
There is a lot to play out on this still, not the least of which would be election policy specifics (if they give them) and then coalition negotiations (if they get that opportunity).
I wonder how much they have thought through the possible consequences, especially the Greens, but Labour have also indicated they welcome the Green policy as complementary.
And if they have thought through the consequences perhaps their motives haven’t been expressed clearly enough.
But if Labour keep playing the Labour+Green card as they have been then they need to show their Labour+Green housing policy hand as a part of their election package.
Because Labour+Green looks like being one of our choices next year.