021 2 TEST4P   021 2 837847

scientists agree with each other, just not with Gluckman


Therefore, it is not appropriate to claim, as the Gluckman report does, that "the data are therefore likely to significantly overestimate the extent of the problem in the wider New Zealand housing stock." because they agree with both our data set and that of Analytica which encompass a much larger pool of analyses across the wider NZ housing stock.


Based on our data and a housing pool of 1.8M houses: 1 in 35 properties are likely to be above 15ug/100cm2 (56,000 properties) 1 in 100 properties are likely to be P-labs (18,000 properties) How about a question for Phil Twyford from Lawrence Yule: Can the Minister explain why the Gluckman report deliberately presented misleading data by saying that the number of P-labs from the Housing NZ investigation that ESR carried out was less than 1%, when in actual fact the true figure was 4.5% of properties were P-labs, and 14% of the properties were above 15ug/100cm2?