spinofflive
The old Tasman pulp and paper mill, located just outside Kawerau in the Eastern Bay of Plenty (Photo: teara.govt.nz)
The old Tasman pulp and paper mill, located just outside Kawerau in the Eastern Bay of Plenty (Photo: teara.govt.nz)

BusinessJanuary 25, 2021

NZ’s biggest house price surge? Kawerau. Here’s what it means for the town

The old Tasman pulp and paper mill, located just outside Kawerau in the Eastern Bay of Plenty (Photo: teara.govt.nz)
The old Tasman pulp and paper mill, located just outside Kawerau in the Eastern Bay of Plenty (Photo: teara.govt.nz)

As house prices escalate rapidly around the country, Kawerau saw them more than double, the biggest nationwide increase over the decade. Alex Braae goes to the Bay of Plenty town to find out what impact it is having on renters. 

The headline figure was stark. Data from realestate.co.nz showed that over the last decade, Kawerau’s property prices had gone up 132% – the highest increase out of any district in the country.

Kawerau only exists because of a pulp and paper mill, founded in the 50s to service the forestry in the area. Driving into town from the north, the factory still dominates the side of the road, steam billowing out above massive piles of unprocessed logs.

The town’s fortunes have always been inextricably linked to that of the mill, and when the workforce grew in the 70s, the town did too. But industrial decline in the 80s led to mass redundancies, hollowing Kawerau out and contributing to some of the social problems that persist today. Many around the town thought there was a real chance it could die altogether, especially if the mill closed.

As a result, house prices here came from a very low base, and the town still has the lowest average prices in the Bay of Plenty region. There are a few factors that explain the jump. The population is growing again – from bottoming out at about 4000 during the worst years, it is now back up to about 7000. And it comes at a time when property prices around the country are escalating dramatically.

There has also been a change in the nature of buyers. When once it was largely absentee landlords and investors, the town has now become a destination for retirees, who have been able to cash up their houses in Auckland and Tauranga and settle down with a comfortable nest egg. But because of that, Kawerau now has a severe shortage of housing, with the lower end of the market being hit hardest.

Social support organisation Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau Hauora sits right in the centre of town, next to the police station and across from the main shopping centre. The organisation has flags up in several other spots, with its prominence reflecting how important it is in the lives of the 4000 people it sees each year. 

Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau Hauora CEO Chris Marjoriebanks (Alex Braae)

In an interview surrounded by some of his team, CEO Chris Marjoribanks outlined how for many clients life was only getting harder each year. He said emergency housing capacity is now at its limits, meaning some are now being forced to leave the town, and live away from whānau support.

Those that stay typically face serious overcrowding, with several families typically living under the same roof. For most of the people a year Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau sees every year, home ownership isn’t even on their radar, rather “a house for an individual family is the dream,” said Marjoribanks. The average income of the town is under $30,000 a year, so saving up a deposit becomes impossible.

Even accounting for overcrowding, some of the town’s rental stock isn’t up to standard, which creates social and health problems of its own. They’ve also seen anecdotal evidence of illegal rent rises being forced on tenants. But many tenants – aware of the power imbalance against them in the market – are scared to complain. “They’re not going to challenge the landlord under threat of being kicked out,” said Marjoribanks.

Debbie Henton, the coordinator of the local Kawerau Budget Service, said what she had seen was indicative of rent increases. An analysis of what 10 clients were paying showed that between 2015 and 2020, the average rent increase was 32%. That’s much faster than wage growth, let alone the small increases in money made available to beneficiaries in that time.

“It used to be that you had a choice, you’d think I can’t afford that, and you wouldn’t go into it. But those choices just aren’t there now,” said Henton. In one extreme case, she saw someone on an income of $390 paying $350 a week in rent. 

Debbie Henton at the Kawerau Budget Service office (Alex Braae)

The squeeze can quickly become intense, and results in impossible choices. “So then you get people feeling pressured to take on credit straight away because usually the only variable left is money for groceries. That’s the last thing that’s flexible, so people are living on noodles. That’s the reality,” said Henton.

“So then they come here, and become regulars on our food parcel system, which is supposed to be temporary support while they’re working things out.” She said one move that would change people’s circumstances would be raising the accommodation supplement, to reflect the increased cost of renting.

One significant advantage Kawerau has as a town is people who are willing to help each other out. “It’s a great community as far as voluntary support goes, there’s heaps of that,” said Henton. “There’s a lot of retirees here that just want to give back.”

Chris Reynolds has been in Kawerau for about 40 years, after arriving to do an early form of IT at the mill. After being made redundant, he stuck around, and ended up doing similar work for the Council. His wife has worked various jobs, and been involved with the church and charity shop. They’re now semi-retired, and deeply embedded in the community. He’s a great admirer of the beautifying murals painted all over the town in recent years, pointing out the bits of history they represented on a drive through the streets.

The Reynolds now own three houses in the town – the one that they live in, and the house on each side. Both neighbouring houses are tenanted. One houses nurses at the local retirement home. “We charged about market rent at the time, but we haven’t really bothered to put it up that much, just slightly since then, and same with the other house. But essentially their income hasn’t gone up.”

“So they can’t afford to pay [more], and they’re more than covering the costs of the houses, and we got this huge bonus when the last valuations came out,” said Reynolds. He said he’d heard of other landlords moving to increase rents in line with new valuations.

The first neighbouring house he bought was for about $50k in the early 90s. The other house was purchased for about $95k five years ago, and would now be worth about $300k, said Reynolds. “It’s about what I’ve earned from the Council, working for 13 years and paying tax. But it’s bloody tax free, and I think that’s wrong, but that’s a separate issue.”

For Chris Reynolds, one of the biggest factor pushing up house prices is the town’s population growing again, coupled with the damage done over a long period of economic stagnation. He estimates that over at least a decade around the turn of the century, not a single new house was built. Some were even taken away for relocation.

Kawerau mayor Malcolm Campbell, in front of his butcher shop (Alex Braae)

One of the flashest storefronts in town is the local real estate agency, with windows packed with listings. They currently tend to be in the range of $3-400k, some advertised at first home buyers and investors, others described as “do-ups”. A few doors down is the office of Kawerau’s long-serving mayor Malcolm Campbell, a butcher who owns Campbell’s Quality Meats.

Speaking at his shop, he said the rise in prices was something to be celebrated, as it was a good measure of the town’s fortunes turning around. “House prices were so ridiculously low, there was only one way they could go – they couldn’t go any less. You could buy a house for less than you’d pay for a small car shed, it was just crazy.”

The change in ownership patterns has also benefited the town, he said. “When we had 47% [of housing stock] rentals, it was a very dangerous situation. A lot of people, landlords, never reinvested or poured money back into their rentals, they just took the money they could, and that was it.” Now owners were much more likely to make improvements to the houses, increasing the quality of the stock.

He also decried previous patterns of the ministry for social development using Kawerau as a “dumping ground” for people without strong connections to the town. “And I’m saying to social welfare, don’t dump them here unless they’ve got somewhere to go.”

Campbell said the controversial description of Kawerau as one of New Zealand’s ‘zombie-towns’ focused the minds of many, and forced the council to look more closely at economic development – work which is now starting to pay off. He also sees further room for house prices to increase, given the relative costs in the rest of the country.

Pockets of new housing are currently being developed, some of which is aimed at the retiree market. There are also efforts underway to reclassify the former football fields at Stoneham Park so that they can be developed in future. “You’ve got to start building houses, and rentals are expensive wherever you go.”

And as far as problems to have, Campbell said high house prices are a big improvement on what Kawerau used to experience. “I know what it’s like to be at the bottom end of the pile, and it’s much nicer to have growing pains than dying pains.”

A ‘worst case scenario’ would see the search engine withdraw from Australia
A ‘worst case scenario’ would see the search engine withdraw from Australia

BusinessJanuary 23, 2021

Google goes nuclear, threatening to pull the plug on its search engine in Australia

A ‘worst case scenario’ would see the search engine withdraw from Australia
A ‘worst case scenario’ would see the search engine withdraw from Australia

At an antagonistic hearing yesterday, the internet giant laid out the ‘worst case scenario’. And Facebook is also considering an ‘amputation’. Hal Crawford was watching.

Google is poised to hit self-destruct in Australia according to a fractious Senate hearing into an unprecedented law that will force digital giants to pay money for news. The impact for New Zealanders could be big, with Facebook also contemplating an “amputation” that would see no news on the social network locally.

The hearing into the Mandatory Bargaining Code saw executives from Google and Facebook dialling in to Canberra to receive a grilling from generally hostile senators. Representatives from the big media companies, who mostly appeared in person, were given a more sympathetic hearing.

At issue is a code which mandates deals between every news publisher and Google and Facebook, in order to set a value on the news content that appears as links and snippets in search results and social feeds. The code has a method of forcing a deal – called final offer arbitration – and also mandates that news businesses be given notice of significant algorithm changes.

The legislation, and the trouble, has been brewing for more than a year. News Corporation, with substantial media holdings in Australia, has been a prime agitator for the law, but has been backed up by the equally influential Nine and other media. It was clear from the news executives’ testimony yesterday that they contemplate big dollars coming their way.

Google and Facebook have resisted, threatening pullouts, and saying it is not their responsibility to subsidise news and that the legislation leaves them exposed to unquantified costs.

The Senate hearing represents the final thorough examination of the law before it is returned to parliament to be enacted, and as such the stakes are high.

Google goes hard

Mel Silva, managing director for Google in New Zealand and Australia, did the talking on behalf of the search giant. Out of the gate Silva went hard, saying paying for links and snippets “would set an untenable precedent” and calling the current legislation “unworkable”, she said. “If this version of the code were to become law, it would give us no real choice but to stop making Google search available in Australia. That would be a bad outcome for us, but also for the Australian people.”

Silva had three suggestions to make the code work:

  • Remove the need to pay for links
  • Change the final offer arbitration model
  • Further restrict the algorithm change requirements

She also cut news down to size in a quote certain to provoke media hostility. “In the context of search, the ability to show results from a diverse range of news sources is equally important as an ability to show results from a diverse range of child care centres.”

Silva said Google wanted to make the code work, but to someone who has been observing the struggle for a long time, it seems possible that a bridge has already been crossed in Googleland. Silva answered a question about the experience of an Australian user post-pullout very specifically.

“The preparations that have gone into … that worst-case scenario would result in users landing on a Google search page but being presented with a screen that tells them we are unable to offer the service in Australia.”

Several senators leapt on Silva’s “worst-case” statements.

“If you care about Australia and the Australian market why would you make this threat?” said Senator Susan MacDonald

There was a lot more in Google’s testimony that was fascinating, and at times Silva seemed ready to lose her temper, particularly when quizzed on tax payments. Her performance was not always smooth but appeared to be genuinely felt.

One of the biggest problems in Google’s position has been inconsistency in terms of changes demanded in the various drafts of the code. While the senators and the ACCC construed this as bad faith on Google’s part, it seems more likely that the US-based giant has taken a long time to work out exactly where its red lines are in relation to the law. As is clear from the final three demands, those red lines are pretty much where the code begins. The guys at Bing search (Microsoft) must be rubbing their hands together right about now.

The Facebook blokes

Facebook’s representatives took a very different approach to the hearing, and you have to wonder how annoyed the two digital platforms are with each other. Throughout the hearing the senators conflated the responses from both companies, and often referred to one when they meant the other. All in all, Facebook’s arguments received less attention than Google’s because they were less extreme.

Zuckerberg’s people – policy pair Simon Milner and Josh Machin – were far more conciliatory in tone, but one of their basic demands was the same: that final offer arbitration had to change because it exposed the business to “uncapped, unknown and unknowable” costs.

“We have supported making a balanced code, this draft is a long way from that,” said Milner. “There is no other law like it in Australia.”

Milner and Michin could afford to be calmer, because all they were proposing was banning news links, which coming after the Google bomb seemed moderate. It isn’t. Milner was at pains to say banning news links wasn’t a threat, but an explanation of likely impacts. This insistence shows how reality changes inside big companies.

News point of view

News Corporation, The Guardian, AAP and Nine presented from within the Senate Committee room, and the change in atmosphere was palpable. Gone were the searching questions about “columns of smoke” and accusations of “threat and blackmail”. These guys were not only passionate and fluent, they were welcome. Pointed questions about why digital advertising companies should meet news costs, or what exactly was being paid for, were not asked.

Chris Janz, Digital and Publishing Chief at Nine, was eloquent in his initial takedown. “Just last week, Google decided to remove local news from the search results it presented to some Australians. It did so without giving any notice and the impact was instant. It was disturbing … Google’s ability to execute this … demonstrates a truth at the core of the digital ecosystem. You either play by their rules or not at all.”

News Corp’s Campbell Reid and The Guardian’s Dan Stinton were all superficially convincing, and close to united in their position: the digital giants were using their market power to avoid paying for news content.

The day’s play

I have argued for close to a year that the code is fundamentally flawed, because of a basic error at its heart: the idea that businesses that make money from advertising are somehow responsible for funding news. Despite knowing all that, I was impressed by the news position and the fluency of argument presented in defence of the code. This doesn’t bode well for the digital platforms, which in turn doesn’t bode well for search and social networks in this part of the world. Neither Facebook nor Google landed a killer hit on legislation that will now have to be either tested in a court, or shelved for want of actors to take on the role of the “giant international villain”.