University of Otago politics lecturer Dr Bryce Edwards
holds a copy of Inequality: A New Zealand Crisis, while in
conversation with its editor, Max Rashbrooke, yesterday.
Photo by Craig Baxter.
Public opposition to increasing benefit levels means no
political party is likely to reverse the cuts that did most to
contribute to income inequality, Max Rashbrooke, the editor of
a book on the subject, says.
Mr Rashbrooke was participating in a University of Otago
election year ''vote chat'' forum filmed in Dunedin yesterday
with politics lecturer Dr Bryce Edwards.
Inequality: A New Zealand Crisis was published last
year and features different writers on the topic of income
Income inequality rose in the 1980s and 1990s. Since then, it
had not moved greatly, and at some points slightly declined.
Top income earners were hit by the 2008 financial crisis, but
Mr Rashbrooke believed there was a pick-up in their incomes
from 2012 onwards, which had not shown up yet in official
New Zealand used to have income inequality levels similar to
those of Scandinavian countries, where the top 10% of earners
had about five times as much as the bottom 10%. Now, in New
Zealand, the top 10% had up to 10 times as much as the bottom
More equal countries had fewer social problems and higher
economic growth. The effects permeated all levels of society,
not just those at the top or bottom, and in more equal
countries the ability of the very rich to influence laws and
policies was constrained.
Asked to name the biggest cause of increased inequality, Mr
Rashbrooke cited the early 1990s benefit cuts. However, they
were unlikely to be reversed, because public opinion weighed
against giving beneficiaries more money. Likewise, reversing
the big 1980s tax cuts on the wealthy depended on what was
''feasible'' politically, in terms of public opinion.
Constraining the ability to collectively bargain for higher
wages had also increased inequality.
Mr Rashbrooke emphasised he was not advocating particular
solutions. Declining to state a political party preference,
he said he was a journalist, but also disclosed he was
working for the Green Party on a short-term basis to help
formulate its inequality election policy.
He would also work for the National Party if requested. It
was wrong to assume income inequality could not fall under
National, he said, pointing to the Keith Holyoake era when
top earners saw their share of income fall.
Some ideas about countering inequality cut across the
political spectrum. An example was the universal basic income
idea, which was supported by the late right-wing economist
Milton Friedman, but also by many people on the left. A
universal income would give everyone in society a basic wage,
unaffected by other income streams.