Ka Tu Kainga Rua

Below is an excerpt for the Utakura Housing Report written by Kristen Maynard and published in September 2020. Although it has been written with very little in put from the Committee of Management, is does however, with uncanny accuracy, mirror every aspect of the body of work we have set for ourselves in our Ka Tu Kainga Rua housing policy.

Partner with and/or empower a local organisation to drive projects, with appropriate incentives and support

Building on this theme of working with the community and keeping it local, is the idea of partnering with and/or empowering a local organisation to drive the projects for their community – a sentiment that is consistent with MAIHI. In this regard, the Utakura 7 Incorporation and the newly formed Utakura 7 Atawhai Trust, appears to be well-placed to collaborate and co-invest with others, take up, project manage and/or facilitate future projects aimed at improving housing and wellbeing in the Utakura Valley.

As previously mentioned the Incorporation is the largest landowner in Utakura Valley and have been actively pursuing a range of opportunities to grow their economic base and provide training, employment and housing for their beneficiaries and the broader community. Although most of the land is in forestry at least until 2038, land identified as being suitable for housing developments has been put aside for papakāinga, social and kaumātua housing. Furthermore, once the lease expires on the forestry contract there will also be other opportunities to use the land in different ways and in ways that align with the communities’ broader aspirations. For example, by providing a space for growing and sharing kai and pursuing some of the local’s ideas on the creation and use of sustainable housing products (eg, hempcrete, and a solar power package) and for re-introducing kai that tupuna use to eat (eg, particular species of the Māori potato). Moreover, the Incorporation could also help to tackle some of the more gnarly issues facing the community such as, water supply and quality (eg, by lobbying local and central government to take action on the 2014 water reticulation proposal and other infrastructure issues, and to clean up the Utakura river).

There are two areas (in particular), identified through the course of writing this report, where the Incorporation appears particularly well placed to take up and drive projects for improving housing and wellbeing in the Utakura Valley. Firstly, the Incorporation could help to increase the numbers of quality, suitable and affordable housing in the community, in line with more general aspirations for sustainable housing and living, the creation of localised training and employment opportunities and the return of a thriving culturally revitalised community. Secondly, the Incorporation could help to sustain the quality of housing by being a central hub or by helping to facilitate the ongoing capacity and capability building among whānau to undertake basic maintenance and repairs on their kāinga and/or support the ongoing maintenance and repairs more generally.
The success of these initiatives and the Incorporation’s primary role in driving these will likely be enhanced through a collaborative approach (eg, with key community leaders, TRAION, government agencies and NGOs and the private sector), and with appropriate government incentives and support.

Housing development
Iwi, hapū and Māori organisations play a dual role in housing developments, both as investors and advocates for their people. This means that iwi/hapū/Māori organisations typically have to balance a range of socio-cultural and economic interests and responsibilities and to come up with housing solutions that accommodate all of these factors. Such a broad approach provides a number of
benefits to the Government. Unlike property developers, iwi/hapū/Māori organisations are not only interested in growing capital but also in meeting the needs of their whānau, with the latter typically being the overriding concern. However, while focussed on ensuring that the housing and socioeconomic needs of their whānau are met, iwi/hapū/Māori organisations should not inadvertently take on the Government’s obligations under article three of Te Tiriti, without being duly recompensed in some way.
For the Utakura Valley there appear to be several potential housing development opportunities, which could also meet broader community aspirations and wellbeing outcomes that the Incorporation could pick up and drive. The first group of opportunities involves the Incorporation’s aspirations to develop papakāinga, social and kaumatua housing, and tourist accommodation. The other opportunity is the potential to be involved in any future programme aimed at addressing the substandard and insecure housing in the Utakura Valley.

There are a number of different models and approaches that have been used for housing developments throughout the country and to incentivise and support Māori-led community-based housing developments. The particular approach that each community takes appears to be based on a number of factors, including the goals, aspirations and unique circumstances of the community and the specific housing development in mind (eg, papakāinga, social housing).

For the Utakura Valley, an analysis of their needs, strengths opportunities and aspirations would suggest that key considerations for housing developments (in addition to ensuring quality housing) would include:

• keeping the housing costs as low as possible to ensure it is affordable for whānau

• employing local tradespeople and training and upskilling whānau as part of the
development (which would also keep costs down)

• using sustainable materials

• ensuring that the housing development is designed in a way that meets the social and cultural aspirations of the community.

Using kitset, modular and/or prefabricated homes for housing developments appears to be increasing in popularity, as they can be quite a cost-effective choice (particularly if building on-site using sweat equity and training schemes overseen by a qualified local tradesperson). These homes also come in a range of designs and ecofriendly options, and a number of organisations are now selling these.
A recent case example is the Tallwood’s design system used for developing papakāinga on the Matekuare Whānau Trust’s ancestral whenua at Tāwhitiwhiti, Te Whaiti, Eastern Bay of Plenty. This design optimised rapid construction on-site (using modular pre-fabricated building components) and material usage, minimised construction waste, and applied standards well above the building code minimum. The emphasis was on ease of construction and sustainable building materials to develop a culturally appropriate, affordable, healthy and sustainable housing for whānau (Emery, Tapuke, Lyford & Martin, 2019).

The transference of ownership of suitable surplus Kāinga Ora and other Crown-owned houses to the Incorporation is another potential solution for increasing the supply of quality housing in the Utakura Valley. Depending on the circumstances (eg, if the houses are intended for disposal and the Incorporation’s intention is to use these for social housing) then a case could be made for transporting these houses onto the whenua at no cost. This is because I understand that the cost of demolishing the house is typically slightly less or about the same as transporting the houses to another site. I am also aware that this has been done before in Te Tairāwhiti and more closer to home by Ricky Houghton’s He korowai Trust, so there is a precedent for this.
The Government could also incentivise and support Māori-led community-based housing developments by (among other things):
• releasing vacant Kāinga Ora and other Crown-owned land that is not being used, and negotiating a suitable housing solution and arrangement for that land with iwi/hapū/Māori organisations
• allocating a specific amount of government funding toward each new build
• putting in place temporary housing solutions for whānau (such as transportable pods that are built to council specifications) while houses are being repaired or built
• undertaking research into prefabricated, modular and kitset homes that could be utilised in housing developments
• supporting iwi/hapū/Māori organisations to navigate the development process and to coordinate the various agencies and professionals involved (Kake, 2019)
• helping iwi/hapū/Māori organisations to establish good working relationships and placebased models with local authorities that support whānau housing aspirations (eg, special housing zones, the provision of staff to help develop and implement a housing plan)
• co-designing a range of suitable financial products, such as:
o bridging finance for housing development start-up costs
o infrastructure subsidies
o interest free loans
o 100% Government guaranteed loans

Some iwi/hapū organisations could potentially take on the role of a lending institution if the Government was prepared to underwrite the loans. Such a role has been taken up overseas by some tribal authorities with sufficient capital, utilising the 100% government guarantee to loan to tribal members and re-invest the profit made from interest payments back into the community through the provision of social and affordable housing. For iwi this could also potentially open up opportunities for cross-rohe investment and Government co-investment that compliments social programmes (such as home ownership and financial literacy). See: https://pureadvantage.org/news/2018/11/20/innovative-financing supporting-housing-aspirations-on-maori-land/.

The Incorporation, could also work with TRAION, Te Hau Ora O Ngāpuhi, Kainga Ora and other relevant government agencies to come to a suitable arrangement for providing social housing for their whānau on their whenua.
The Incorporation could also go directly to private lending institutions (such as Westpac) to work with them on a financial package that would best support whānau to progress into home ownership on whenua Māori and meet broader community aspirations. A case in point is the Ngāti Koroki Kahukura papakāinga development, which involved working with Westpac to establish a model that would create greater opportunities for lending and therefore move whānau more quickly into new and affordable homes on their ancestral land. The Iwi utilised their land to provide the equity for whānau, which could then be used as leverage into share-equity agreements. The houses were built on freehold land titles and while each whānau had their individual piece of whenua and mortgage, there was a common wastewater system, water supply and community garden, making the papakāinga environmentally sustainable as well. Te Hau Ora O Ngapūhi is a Community Housing Provider and also provides Manawa Ora housing assessments to support whãnau with tamariki to create warmer, drier and healthier homes. As such, they are a key player in the housingarea in Te Tai Tokerau and it would be beneficial to involve them, at least in the initial discussions, moving forward.
See: https://www.westpac.co.nz/rednews/property/relationship-with-iwi-leads-to-innovative-papakainga-shared-equitymodel-for-whanau/.

At the end of the day, each community, because of their unique circumstances will require a tailored package of solutions, interventions and incentives to meet their particular needs and circumstances. Some of these packages may also include initiatives such as progressive home ownership schemes (eg, shared equity partnerships and rent-to-buy options) and/or integrated social and financial literacy support. Community development to sustain housing.
In addition to driving housing developments to increase the supply of quality, affordable and sustainable housing in the Utakura Valley, the Incorporation could also potentially play a central role in supporting the ongoing maintenance and repairs of the houses. The Incorporation’s goal to employ their own local tradespeople for their housing developments and to up skill and train whānau in housing construction and the various trades associated with this, would place them in a prime position to support and/or directly service home maintenance and repairs on an ongoing basis, with some planning and support. It would also potentially create sustainable employment.

Another idea for keeping on top of maintenance and basic repairs is for the Incorporation and/or hapū leaders to plan community maintenance/repairs weekends (every so many years). This would likely involve bringing the community together (as what frequently occurs with urupā clean-up weekends) to collectively identify and work on repairing/maintaining a group of whānau homes.
This idea aligns somewhat to Alva Pomare’s vision of the Utakura Valley moving forward in unison and growing together as a hapori through initiatives and models that build the collective capability and capacity of whānau to live sustainably. While the community would drive and provide the sweat equity for an initiative of this kind, TRAION and/or TPK/the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) could also contribute through perhaps the provision of resources (eg, paint).

Summary
Empowering a local organisation to drive housing projects, like the Utakura 7 Incorporation that is committed to improving community wellbeing, has land and other resources available for housing and has been actively pursuing development opportunities, increases the likelihood that the project will succeed and be sustainable. Moving forward it is suggested that, as a first step, the
Incorporation, hapū/community representatives, TRAION, and relevant government agencies (suchas, TPK, Te Tumu Paeroa, HUD, Kāinga Ora) get together to have an initial discussion on the various potential housing projects (ie, papakāinga, social and kaumatua housing, tourist accommodation and substandard housing), the options available for progressing these, respective roles and contributions, and next steps.