4. Inequality Economic and Social—Measurement and Homeownership RatesGRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of FinanceInequality Economic and Social—Measurement and Homeownership Rates4. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that there is no evidence that inequality in New Zealand is increasing"; if so what is the statement from Statistics New Zealand last week "individual net worth is more concentrated" evidence of?Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes I do stand by my statement. I am advised that the method used was to average three different surveys to establish the first data point and then compare that with a further different one-off survey to establish the second data point. Statistics New Zealand provides a caveat which says that "Methodological differences … mean the three surveys are not directly comparable. …We advise caution in any comparison customers make between the surveys." I am advised that the statement made by Statistics New Zealand may not be statistically valid.Grant Robertson: Is the Minister of Finance telling the House that Statistics New Zealand is producing statistically invalid reports?Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am advising the House that the statement made by Statistics New Zealand that "individual net worth is more concentrated" cannot be said to be a statistically validated conclusion.Grant Robertson: Is the growing gap between the wealth of the top 10 percent and the bottom 40 percent in New Zealand actually evidence of the disparity caused by the stark drop in homeownership by those on low and middle incomes in New Zealand?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member is simply wrong. I know it is commonly believed and he would love it to be the case but the evidence presented by this report and extensive reporting by the Ministry of Social Development set up by the previous Government does not show growing inequality in incomes or wealth.Grant Robertson: Has the rate of homeownership declined on his watch disproportionately for Māori Pasifika middle-income earners and younger New Zealanders?Hon BILL ENGLISH: That is not clear. There is some evidence—[Interruption] Well now that the member has to accept the fact that the statistics do not show growing inequality we now have to debate the meaning of some statistics around homeownership. There has been a long-term trend to greater rentals but it is not that clear what has happened in the last 5 or 6 years.Grant Robertson: What was he referring to in his interview on Morning Report last week about the Statistics New Zealand publication when he used the term "confiscating people's assets" in relation to addressing inequality?Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member may recall some aggressive questioning from the journalist who as I said then sounded tired when we started telling him what was actually happening about New Zealanders on the lowest incomes. I was simply suggesting that even if you thought there was a greater wealth differential—and actually there is no evidence for that—then what would you do about it? Confiscate people's assets?Grant Robertson: So is the Minister telling the House and New Zealand that actually a progressive tax system and one where people actually pay a fair share means confiscating people's assets for him—and is that how out of touch he has got?Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. There is no connection between those things and anything that I have said. We do have a progressive tax system. About 15 percent or 20 percent of income tax payers pay way over half of all income tax. Sixty percent of households pay no net income tax at all—zero. They get more into their household than they pay out in tax. So we have a redistributive system; it is basically working. The one area where we need a lot of work to be done is on our planning regime where—Grant Robertson: Oh we are back to that again.Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well when the planning rules constrain the supply of land the most wealthy benefit the most because their house prices go up the most. I look forward to the Opposition's support for measures to ensure that house price increases do not drive inequality.Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the top 10 percent in this country have 60 percent of the wealth and the bottom 40 percent have 3 percent of the wealth why is he standing here defying gravity and making a prize fool of himself?Mr SPEAKER: I will give a lot of liberty to the Minister in answering that question.Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member needs to understand what is being compared here. Rt Hon Winston Peters: I understand all right.Hon BILL ENGLISH: Well this just might matter. Those statistics compare a 23-year-old with no savings who is renting a flat with a double-income household with no children aged 55 who can save $100000 a year. There is always going to be some inequality in wealth—it is called the life cycle; it is called saving; it is called getting better jobs; it is called owning your own house."