Should the government increase spending on infrastructure (roads, water and sewerage) to support the construction of more housing communities?

While more houses need to be built, this will not solve the housing crisis entirely. All assets should be taxed, to scare off investors and property moguls who are trying to make a quick buck off the less fortunate, who will most likely be renting their whole lives due to an extortionate market.

No, we should stop urban sprawl and increase density in already populated areas.

Yes where necessary, but in consideration of need to protect green space

Fix the potholes on the roads

If it is the right development. In auckland where I live for example, spreading out and building more suburbs is not the right idea. it costs a lot to build new roads and utilities to accommodate new developments that are far away from where people work, this also causes more traffic. We need to be like Europe, have a city boundary and build up in the city. But we must also keep our parks, green spaces and heritage houses and neighborhoods. we dont need to demolish mt eden and build a concrete jungle. there are plenty of places, mainly along main roads where we can build apartment buildings,…  Read more such as what was done in new lynn and is being done in glen eden by the train station. there is lots of good land that can be redeveloped into apartment buildings without the need for tearing down nice neighborhoods. I am opposed to intensifying existing neighborhoods with crammed in 3 story town houses. Its much more efficient to build a high rise behind main roads shops, train stations, malls etc. Old industrial land can be redeveloped too. Neighborhoods with poor quality leaky homes can also be upgraded, such as ones in south auckland that are made of fiberlight and other poor materials. they are cheap, nasty homes that look ugly and so it makes sense to replace them. but it doesnt make sense to bull doze historic homes and beautiful suburbs with trees. We need to protect our heritage homes and trees and parks through out the city. i dont think its hard. we need proper planning so we can also live in a beautiful city. we cant just build whever its profitable to squeeze in an ugly house, and chop all the trees down. we want to be like europe. have housing but also nice parks and heritage buildings.

The privacy of living independently over checked formed by legend former UK prime minister Boris Johnson and former US president Donald Trump talk with white House dramatic

The government should fix exiting sewage problems nationally

DO not continue expanding when there is no infrastructure to support this. Water, waste and even health (for example; hospital in Palmerston North can not cope now!)

No but we need to spend the money more wisely

We should limit immigration to slow down housing demand, BUT government should shrinked , taxes should be reduced & private companies should be encouraged to development of private property as well as transport.

The spending by should go to fixing what we already have not to creating new

Developers should pay a large portion of the cost and investment into roads should go to public transport instead

Yes but stop overseas buyers

Yes, and decrease the number of trucks on the road by increasing the funding on rail infrastructure

Yes but private developers should pay a much higher portion and more should go to public transport and climate resilience

Redistribute the GST take from council rates to cover this.

Yes, but not in Auckland. All of the money goes there and the rest of the country is forgotten.

No, it should support the existing infrastructure and change the way housing is built to increase the efficiency of it.

50/50 split between developers and governments

Yes, but costs of housing developments should be shared with private developers

Split the money in half

More spending should go to projects that the Nation benefits from, main roads, water, ports and shipping

Increased spending for existing failing water, sewerage and water infrastructure

Yes, as well as regulating roading code of practice for good quality roads that will last a long time.

Yes but do the job right not right price

No, I believe it could be done with current budget but construction could be completed more effectively and in a more time efficient manner.

yes and use longer lasting materials for roads, etc

No, only for increased density

There should be less urban sprawl and more intensification. Focussing on building livable communities.

Yes they should. But copy Australia where private companies build infrastructure in a set timeframe before handing back to the public

No, We should limit immigration, send some people back and spend more money on flood prevention and quality materials for roads and new houses

Yes, but stop build ugly houses

Developers should pay to connect greenfields developments.

The Government should use allocated money to projects they are allocated too

No, the quality and output of work shown isn't at a good standard.

Give the reading back to the council's. That way we know that the job will be done properly rather than 4 different contractors doing a section of road

Increase spending on infrastructure to better serve the communities we already have

No, we don't need more houses. We need to update existing infrastructure first.

It is important, but the budget should be increased slightly

Yes, housing development needs infrastructure and developers should contribute significantly to the costs. Developers should also be required to build communities with parks, shopping centres etc which would be more consistent with our obligation to reduce the threat to the planet and would be a more socially and mentally healthy place for humans to live. These humans should also have adequate public transport.

yes because instead of giving the gangs five million dollars, road's, water and sewage would be more better.

We should ensure that current spending is effective and utilised correctly

No, build up instead of out and invest money into improving and maintaining current infrastructure

I think they should half the budget for both

quarters waste water and road counselors need rebooting house and councillors rated is 100% 4.9 of re-fixing of mortgages and the heartland banking as sbs banks can increase power- with anz or asb with kept the premises decrease mite never let their their house upstill but the workplace help the transport minister of michael woods with moe decrease with maori and european english with supported living payments with more process under whanau and ora with reheated peoples request bank accounts can increase bodies elses and china decrease worried them but out of service health doctors or accidents or incidents

Yes, and costs should be split with developers where appropriate

yes, but not to build more housing.

Yes, need more road spending as well public transport spending

Yes and no we need to use less land and grow more trees

Remove Government shares and legal protection for fletchers and reinstate the ministry of works, open up trade for foriegn construction materials, weaken the power of RMA

Maybe depends on what areas

I like trains

Only in areas in need

No, privatize infrastructure

Yes, but only if done in an environmentally friendly way.

Yes, but property currently sitting empty should be rented out to those in need of housing too.

Yes, but to support current housing instead

No, private developers should build communities

Yes but we should also limit immigration to slow down housing demand

No more GREEN plants trees If we had national as our government we would waste 6 Bil Dollers just on ackland infurstructer and have to cut down all the trees so we could have national Being rich again we could just spend a few million Dollers on infurstrutre plant more trees flowers fruit vege tadles and herds and Be safe again

Not at the deficit of healthcare

Yes if needed

I think the construction of more housing needs to be looked at and very well planned. Existing communities should be a priority.

only if theres spear money

no, because I think this is now pretty good and have nature, please don't turn it into China

Somewhat, also limit immigration with the growing overcrowd in NZ as it already is.

Yes but private construction companies should also pay more for housing developments in this infrastructure

Increase it to be spent on maintaining existing roads

Yes, but developers need to contribute

Only if it improves more sustainable transport modes

Yes, but with increased public transport and medium-high density housing projects rather than urban sprawl.

Not building new roads but maintanence and of course ensure good water and sewerage systems.

House and delete most of price with over periods for tents and owner of house demand by Donald trump

Government should be supporting the housing of its citizens, developers need curtailing.

No, it needs to be better organised and controlled, with a focus on longevity versus quick fixes.

No, rates should cover infrastructure costs. This would mean less dense communities would need higher rates to cover their infrastructure maintenance costs.

Yes but recognize that a combination of public and private investment will be required.

Increase => existing <= infrastructure spending

Yes, however new roads should be required to be multimodal

No, Towns and Communities should be encouraged, but not single use housing developments.

Yes, and more for public transport improvement too

Not concerned either way

Housing is decent the land lords decisions inc in process and the government alone inc

Increase spending anyway.

We are already spending enough.concentrate on completing our Highway 1 spine for the whole of New Zealand. Toll roads to find ( I.e.user pays)

Yes but with the understanding that private investment will need to help cover the huge costs

should spend if they need to

got-in harms support carers in process they can ive with adentivesserious keep on items up but years as b bylaws useless increase written up newsletters and ankles give me by trust very thunderstorms are coming natures deadlines are coming outsides

Yes, but the housing should be big apartments to decrease the amount of land used.

Yes but only if the reduce wasteful spending elsewhere

yes, but not much

Focus om train system then build suburbs

No but put money towards roading.

Depends on the type of housing. If it's mansions, the developer and buyer should pay, if it's affordable housing for normal people it could be subsidised by the government to make housing more avvordable. Foreigners and non residents should absolutley pay for the development of services.

No, housing should be intensified to use existing infrastructure which should then be well maintained.

i think housing should be delayed until transmission gully finishes

Yes but no housing around it

Yes, but not at the expense of New Zealand bushland and natural parks

No, but government need to take an environmental approach by promoting compostable toilets, or worm sewerage facilities