Poverty defence flawed, claims Labour

Last updated 05:00 28/02/2014

Relevant offers

Politics

North Taranaki iwi welcomes first Government Minister in almost 100 years Green lawyer hopes to be first refugee to win a seat in Parliament MPs' hidden talents: Kris Faafoi turns to guitar for 'a bit of an escape' The truth about inequality in New Zealand Labour, Greens team up for joint 'state of the nation' event in Auckland Matt Lawrey competes against Nick Smith as Green Party candidate for Nelson MP Labour approaches former Police Association president Greg O'Connor about running in 2017 Jo Coughlan mulling tilt at Wellington Central seat Prime Minister Bill English hopeful of reviving TPP, keen for quick EU deal Government heads towards ban on microbeads

Finance Minister Bill English continued to quote a report on inequality despite knowing it was flawed, Labour says.

Yesterday the Ministry of Social Development said it estimated that 285,000 Kiwi children were living in poverty, which was 20,000 more than previously thought. It also said income inequality was slightly larger than thought. It came after Treasury and Statistics New Zealand confessed that calculations about household disposable income dating back to 2007 contained a major flaw, with an accommodation supplement counted twice. Treasury insisted that there were no "real world" implications.

In January, as Mr English dismissed Labour claims that there was a growing gap between rich and poor, the finance minister continued to quote the MSD report to claim there was no evidence this was the case.

Yesterday Mr English confirmed that he was told of the error before Christmas, but that the real picture was "roughly the same", a spokeswoman said.

Labour said Mr English's statements were misleading.

"If he is trying to say that [inequality] figures aren't getting worse . . . well, that's just misleading," Labour's finance spokesman David Parker said.

Ad Feedback

- The Dominion Post

Special offers
Opinion poll

Where do you stand on political coat-tail riding?

If it gets marginalised voices into Parliament, I'm for it.

I'm against it - if you don't get the votes, you shouldn't be there.

It's just part of the political game.

Vote Result

Related story: Voters reject riding on the coat-tails

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content