Housing NZ should do weekly ‘educational’ visits

A comment from Lanthanide at The Standard:

If it takes education for tenants to be ventilating their houses so they’re not cold and damp, then HNZ should be providing that education when the tenant first takes up residency in the house.

If it takes weekly visits from a HNZ agent to go to the house and check that it isn’t damp, and remind the tenants on how to keep the house damp-free, and also do whatever is required to achieve that goal (ie, install carpet, fix up / install extraction fans / range-hoods / vented dryers), then that is what HNZ should have done.

Carpets and curtains used to be the tenants’ responsibility last century. Now some people want everything provided.

Did HNZ do those things? Almost certainly they did not do the latter things, and I doubt that they did the former.

Could HNZ do those things? Yes. They would of course need more funding from the government.

It might solve unemployment.

If HNZ had done all of those things, would the house have been damp and contributed to the death of the child? The house may still have had a likelihood of being damp, but much lowered if all practicable steps were being taken (and the steps I have listed *are* practicable, but of course require more money to achieve).

Therefore, HNZ is responsible, for having *not* taken these practicable steps. The government is responsible for under-funding HNZ and also not requiring such practicable steps be taken.

That’s bollocks. As Psycho Milt points out:

Yes, Housing NZ could hire an army of inspectors to visit its 30,000 Auckland properties weekly to ensure its tenants aren’t damaging the property through ignorance, negligence or malicious intent, if the government were that profligate with taxpayers’ money.

But if we’re going down the money-no-object path, it could build brand new houses for all its tenants with the latest in passive systems for heating, ventilation and energy conservation, with more funding from the government.

No matter what the level of funding, the government can’t be and shouldn’t be entirely and completely responsible for adult citizens unless they’re mentally incapacitated.

RedLogix disagrees:

what is going on here in State Housing (and other substandard rentals) is pretty obvious, just on a bigger scale. Government does have a public health responsibility in this matter – a broad corporate (in the widest sense of the word) responsibility they are openly refusing to acknowledge.

That’s also bollocks, responsibilities have been openly acknowledged, just not total responsibility for everything regarding every state tenant’s lives.

Next thing they will be suggesting HNZ employs people to sleep in the middle of tenant’s beds to ensure they don’t breed more progeny than they can adequately care for.