C.H.I.P. critics emotive, says Minister

Press, 23 September 1983, Page 4

C.H.I.P. critics emotive, says Minister

The “emotive and often ill-informed” reaction to the dropping of the Community Housing Improvement Programme has been criticised by the Minister of Housing, Mr Friedlander.

It was time that the issue was put in its proper perspective, he said. The scheme had been introduced to encourage urban renewal, the restoration of existing housing, and the trend towards inner-city living. Its success had been such that the movement would “continue and thrive” without Government subsidy, Mr Friedlander said from Wellington. He also said that the programme had been reviewed earlier this year and submissions sought from 31 local bodies. The feedback had shown that of all the funds provided through C.H.1.P., only some 25 per cent had been directed at rehabilitation.

The biggest proportion of the money made available under the scheme had been “in the nature of low-in-terest loans to local authori-

ties for rental housing construction,” Mr Friedlander said.

They had been shown the way and might now be expected to promote urban renewal on their own initiative. It was possible, for example, to use the District Scheme to stop the encroachment of commercial and industrial developments in residential neighbourhoods and to set out programmes for street and amenity improvement. Mr Friedlander said that local authority building projects did not always provide accommodation for those most in need and that the Government would prefer to put its limited resources into this area. “To ensure that those in need obtain the maximum benefit of the funds available for housing, such funds will in future be channelled into Housing Corporation activities,” he said. The discontinuation of C.H.I.P. did not mean a sudden end to Government assistance as many vocal groups had suggested, Mr Friedlander said.