Bye bye Troy.
And here is the link between Dr Smith and those sneaky Greeks of 3000 years ago.
Dr Smith is using the idea of reducing the cost of houses as his Trojan Horse to smash our major environmental protection - the Resource Management Act.
The National Party has made no secret of its desire to reduce the influence of the RMA which, together with the country's regional councils, are the only real defenders of our extraordinarily vital environment.
Why is it so important?
Well, New Zealand trades upon its clean-green reputation and attracts squillions of tourists here with the 100% Pure campaign.
Both of those are, in my opinion, dodgy (to say the least) but they drag in billions of dollars a year so I can live with it.
The trouble is if our environment is allowed to degrade further - through stripping its protections back in the name of making money - then our major earners are going to suffer the consequences in the long-term.
So will our environment. And that will take a long time and masses of dollars to repair if we let it be ruined.
But back to housing.
Dr Smith says the RMA is the big bad wolf and adds $15,000 to an average house price and $30,000 to a flat.
Those figures are based on responses of developers.
He reckons under the current RMA low-cost housing is near impossible.
Now let's have a bit of a squizz at the figures put forward shall we.
The median Auckland house price is about $678,000.
That is driven in the main by market forces - that being there are not enough houses to meet demand from those who want to live there; the high cost of building materials and the desire from every developer and house owner to maximise every cent they can get from building or selling the places.
So $15,000 out of that $668,000 is not much is it?
Really.
In fact it only works out at about 2.2 per cent. The fact is that Auckland house prices have risen by an average 10 per cent per year over the past six years. All up a 60 per cent jump.
Makes the RMA costs look piddly, doesn't it?
Don't get me wrong, people, making money is fine, but let's not allow the Government to sneakily hamstring our environmental protections under the guise of doing the right thing by people wanting their own home.
If they truly wanted that, the Government would have an inquiry into building material costs and why they are so expensive here.
It would also introduce a Capital Gains Tax on every dwelling other than your home.
It would re-invest all the money from selling off state houses in valuable now-prestigious areas and build modern, sustainable units and homes that could ease the fight for housing.
It would also force developers into creating a mix of dwellings within their subdivisions that includes single and two-room houses through to four and five-room places.
And after the leaky homes debacle, which was due to both Government and local councils taking their eyes off housing quality, do we really want processes speeded up or slackened?
The faster the snails in public service go the more likely they are to make an error.
So you ask why does the Government want to geld the RMA?
In my less-than-humble opinion it's pretty obvious.
The National Government wants to open up more areas for mining as well as oil and gas exploration. Many of the areas that have been closed from such work have been in environmentally sensitive zones.
Weaken the RMA and you make it easier for those areas to be exploited.
Even more threatening, however, is the desire to intensify dairy farming.
As Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright has said "large-scale conversion of more land to dairy farming will generally result in more degraded fresh water."
But dairy farmers make the country a lot of money and, in my view, that is far more important to the Government than long-term sustainability.
The RMA is a bastion for our environment and we must oppose moves to weaken it.
richard@richardmoore.com
*Richard Moore is an award-winning Western Bay journalist and photographer.
