Two happy servants of inequality: John Key and Bill English at the cutting edge.
Listening to Bill English today in his role as Minister Responsible for Housing New Zealand Corporation and Finance Minister extolling the virtues of “social bonds”, one could almost be forgiven for missing the euphemistic wiliness of these two warm fuzzy words, so nicely linked: social, yes, bonds, yes. What’s not to like? Anything that promotes the closer bonding of society has to be good, doesn’t it?
Well, as we all know, when English says something like this in relation to what was formerly the State Housing Corporation’s stock of homes for all New Zealanders, it means privatization by stealth. Or maybe, not so stealthy: English is quite open, if we listen in stating that the private sector, including philanthropists, will be invited to invest in government housing stock and projects with the promise of a return on that investment.
There’s a lot surplus capital out there looking for such opportunities, he tells us and what could better than these private-public partnerships where those who have already creamed off large surpluses from the common weal are looking to increase their share? Yes. That’s right: this is an attraction to the rich, to get richer. It is not designed to benefit the next generation of New Zealanders looking to buy a property and avoid a life of servitude, paying over half their shrunken incomes to landlords and property investors. This is National, once more, carrying on where Labour left off (no pun intended) where the Rogernomes of the 1980s started: selling the state to the highest bidder.
Do you sometimes get the feeling that we are living in an altered reality where the obvious is avoided and PR machines make history so malleable it hardly seems to matter anymore? The obvious, to me, being that this housing stock was paid for by preceding generations of taxpayers, who since 1935 set out with the then Labour government to banish the exact situation we see returning now: the poorest of the poor denied work, health and housing by a ruthless self-interested international financial system that had collapsed under its own weight and brought the world down with it.
I don’t want this rising generation to face the re-run of history currently being played out by the activities of rentier pirates, those buying housing stock from under the noses of the poorest paid members of society and then selling that space back to them for their own profit. This is exactly what is happening in South Auckland, as a recent post on a Radio Live Website points out: since 2001, the already low level of home ownership in this area (31%) has dropped into the low twenties and is declining. Strugglers working for peanuts are being forced by absentee landlords to pay up to 65% of their already sparse income just for rent.
Instead of undertaking a massive refit and building programme for state housing, using public funds, National under Key and English is preparing the “market” for more investors to take out a profit from human need – the need and the right to adequate forms of housing within their ability to pay. Germany does, the Scandinavian countries and many others in Europe manage this mental feat quite easily: a housed, healthy, educated and gainfully employed citizenry is far more likely to be stable, productive and integrated.
Instead, what do we have? Amongst the highest levels of inequality in the OECD, massive house price inflation, McJobs that can’t keep anyone on the income they provide and a health system that increasingly operates by bumping the needy off waiting lists. The idea that making housing attractive to another group of investors is the way ahead, is like pouring petrol on a fire that is already out of control.
As for the idea that philanthropists could get involved, hullo: Charles Dickens, anybody? The workhouse, charity, the poorhouse – all those evils, the medievalisms that the welfare state arose through blood and sweat to rid us of – wait in the wings of this kind of thinking. The American author Stephen King was roasted by the rich when he went public a few years ago, saying the rich like him should pay higher taxes. The Tea Party-ites were quick to savage him: “Hey, if you want to help the poor, write a cheque!”
http://gu.com/p/3793e/sbl “I’m rich, tax me!”
King was just as quick to point out that he didn’t live in a universe where individual donations ran complex modern societies: governments had a right and a duty to raise taxes for the public good.”What some of us want,” he ripostes, “is for you to acknowledge that you couldn’t have made it in America without America!” Pay your share, in other words, and enough of the tax havens and offshore trusts.
Back here, the last thing we need in this country is having the lowest paid workers dependent on philanthropic investment by the rich, in order to get into housing. As for Anne Tolley and the prospect of social bonds being applied to welfare agencies, that has to be the bottom of the barrel. Social policy over the past thirty years – privatisation, deregulation, monetization of every cultural activity – has created that same underpaid, overcharged underclass who now, it is proposed, will have their ills cured by more of the same.
What we need in fact, is a Bernie Sanders type of figure, a leader from the left who is not afraid to speak the love that dare not say its name: socialism, the types of policies which put people before profit and regulate financial markets, tax dodging corporations, tax havens and all other the other shady instruments by which the top 1% screw the rest of us. Of course Key will leap up to the microphone and accuse whoever that might be of being “barking mad”. He has to, it is in his interests to promote the system I am attacking, as he is a part of it, one of its products and benefactors. One of us? Give me a break.
Me, I’m more than happy to live and work in a mixed economy where the government and private enterprise take a fair and democratic share of the load; but when I turn on the radio and hear Bill English declare that more of the same is coming down the line, I have to declare that I no longer recognize people like him or John Key as representing anything a sane mind could possibly believe in, or vote for.