NZ private rentals won’t solve need for emergency housing
- Written by: Jessica Terruhn, Senior Research Fellow, University of Waikato
The number of people living in emergency housing in Aotearoa New Zealand has grown exponentially over the last eight years – but plans to rely on the private rental sector ignore fundamental realities of renting.
Established in 2016, the emergency housing programme[1] – short-term housing for people with nowhere to stay – was meant to be a stop-gap measure. There are now 3,000 active tenancies as a lack of affordability and shortages in housing place pressure on low-income renters.
The coalition government recently announced a “shake-up” of the sector[2]. People seeking access to emergency housing will need to prove they have made “a reasonable effort” to secure a home in the private rental sector. The government will also be cutting back on the length of emergency housing grants.
Our research[3] on the factors that shape people’s housing outcomes, experiences and journeys shows the private rental sector can often exacerbate housing precarity.
The government’s proposals don’t take into account the realities of households or the way the private rental sector itself is a key contributor to housing inequalities. Private renting cannot be viewed as an easy solution for the emergency and wider housing crisis.
Housing discrimination is widespread
Our survey of 800 residents across seven neighbourhoods in Auckland, Hamilton and Christchurch revealed experiences of housing discrimination are widespread in Aotearoa New Zealand.
A staggering 70% of renters in our survey felt people were treated unfairly when trying to rent or buy a home in Aotearoa New Zealand. Nearly half of all renters reported directly experiencing discrimination when trying to rent a home.
The study also showed discrimination is intersectional. Socio-economic status, family status as well as race/ethnicity combined to create clear disadvantages for people trying to secure a home. Notably, Māori and Pasifika respondents were more likely overall to report experiences of discrimination.
Read more: As NZ struggles to resolve its long-running housing crisis, investors should be taxed for keeping homes empty[4]
When asked for examples to illustrate their experiences of discrimination, renters and owners alike provided stories of struggling to secure private rental housing at some point in their lives. These included being judged, dismissed and ignored by landlords or property managers as well as a sense of “not having a chance” in a housing market in which “applying for a home felt harder than applying for a job”.
Being a low-income household, a Work and Income New Zealand client, a family with a larger number of children or a sole parent and being Māori or Pasifika, often contributed to the experience of being excluded from much of the private rental sector.
The instability of renting
This situation is made worse by the instability of rental housing.
Renters are frequent movers. Our survey results show a mere 12% of private rental tenants have lived in only one home over the past ten years. This stands in stark contrast to 47% of owner-occupiers but also 39% of public housing tenants. Conversely, 40% of all renters have lived in four or more homes over the past ten years.
This high mobility is closely entwined with insecure tenancies. Having a tenancy ended by the landlord was one of the most common reasons survey respondents provided for moving house.
As such, renters’ housing journeys are severely constrained by the imbalance between them and private landlords. Not only may renters find themselves on the move when they did not wish to, but they are forced into securing a new rental under pressure and at their own cost.
It takes time and effort to secure a home, especially one that is affordable and suitable for a household’s needs.
Our survey shows 27% of renters took four months or more to find their current home – longer than the most common notice period of 90 days, which the government is planning to reduce to 42 days in some circumstances[5]. Close to a quarter of renters viewed 11 homes or more and 25% applied for more than ten rental properties.
These periods of time and number of applications suggest that even renters who are not on the cusp of dire housing need take months to find a rental home.
Private rental sector is not a solution
Our survey adds to international research that demonstrates the impact of housing precarity.
Recent research in Aotearoa[6] and the United Kingdom[7] has shown private renting adversely affects renters’ health and wellbeing.
These effects were primarily attributed to the stress caused by insecure tenancies. Moreover, a Western Australian initiative to require public housing applicants to prove they had tried to get a private rental was dismantled following a 2004 inquiry[8].
The inquiry revealed evidence of discrimination against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander applicants. It concluded “it was humiliating for [Aboriginal people] to face often blatant discrimination from agents or owners”.
Read more: Yes, NZ landlords gain from the repeal of interest deductibility rules – but it was a flawed law from the outset[9]
In all likelihood, these issues will also be disproportionately felt by Māori who are more likely to be renters and experience severe housing deprivation[10].
The emergency housing crisis can only be responded to through immediate secure housing support for those in need and a medium and long-term focus on building safe, secure and stable housing for all New Zealanders.
Responding to the emergency housing crisis with greater reliance on the private rental sector amounts to fighting fire with fire. It seeks stability where none exists.
The government’s proposal that people seeking emergency housing demonstrate “reasonable effort” to find private housing risks exposing people to more housing deprivation, stress and discrimination that will, in all likelihood, lead some to homelessness.
References
- ^ emergency housing programme (www.workandincome.govt.nz)
- ^ government recently announced a “shake-up” of the sector (www.rnz.co.nz)
- ^ Our research (wero.ac.nz)
- ^ As NZ struggles to resolve its long-running housing crisis, investors should be taxed for keeping homes empty (theconversation.com)
- ^ reduce to 42 days in some circumstances (www.renews.co.nz)
- ^ Aotearoa (www.motu.nz)
- ^ the United Kingdom (jech.bmj.com)
- ^ following a 2004 inquiry (www.ahuri.edu.au)
- ^ Yes, NZ landlords gain from the repeal of interest deductibility rules – but it was a flawed law from the outset (theconversation.com)
- ^ more likely to be renters and experience severe housing deprivation (www.stats.govt.nz)
Authors: Jessica Terruhn, Senior Research Fellow, University of Waikato
