With the election already under way, it was particularly apposite to have a guest who has been researching New Zealand politics for 30 years.
He did his first two degrees, a BA and MA, at University of Canterbury , where he still has close family ties in that city. While he began by studying sociology and minors in philosophy and educational sociology, he went on to a PhD in political economy, which led him into the area of politics. He finished his PhD at Brisbane, carefully selecting places to study which offered a good surfing, and good access to alternative music. In the 1990s, Melbourne and Dunedin were the places with the heaviest concentration of alternative bands.
The period he studied for his PhD was a fascinating one in New Zealand political history, from the 1960s to the late 1980s when the change from social democratic Keynesianism took place. This spanned the turbulent economic period of Rob Muldoon followed by the Douglas-Lange ‘User Pays’ era.
The older system used progressive taxation to fund health, housing, education and welfare. For example, when Brian Roper first enrolled as a first year student at Canterbury he paid just $176 in fees, along with an adequate living allowance, finishing with an overdraft at the end of only $1,100. The tax system used in those days meant that, the more you gained in employment and salary terms from your education, the more you paid in taxes, and these taxes then went in part towards the education of the tertiary students of the time. Professor Jonathan Boston, of Victoria University of Wellington, has argued that this was both a fair and efficient way of funding tertiary education.
Associate Professor Roper noted the current volatility in New Zealand politics paralleled the volatility of politics in many parts of the Western world, noting events in Europe, Britain and the USA. Britain is particularly interesting in that the left-wing anti neo-liberal Jeremy Corbyn had been polling at 23%, but rose rapidly in the polls to almost win the British election. Among the things he was promising was a return to the tertiary education funding arrangements, including free education and adequate living allowances applying to all students - a policy that led to several hundred thousand young people canvassing door-to-door in support. He ascribed part of National’s success in winning the last three elections to John Key’s political acumen and personality, bolstered by a series of three less than ideal leaders of the Labour Party. All were competent people, but lacked any charisma. Jacinda Ardern in contrast is articulate and fast on her feet in debate, though rather less to the left in terms of policy than Jeremy Corbyn.
As is usual at Expert Breakfasts, the questions from St Margaret’s members were intelligent and concise. The first noted that medical students are told about what makes a good doctor, and asked “what do you think makes a good politician?”. In reply, Brian began by saying he preferred honest politicians, which raised a few eyebrows. He went on to say he had been surprised to find one National MP he came to know through a friend was not as staunchly right wing as he had expected, but was following the neo-liberal paradigm as much from a career pathway point of view as anything.
He described Neo-Liberalism as the need to maintain low inflation, fiscal austerity, balance the budget or maintain fiscal surpluses, maintains a funding regime based on high tuition fees and student loans, maintain a taxation system that is much less progressive than the system in New Zealand used to be.
Politicians on all sides are a mixture of the less honourable and very honourable people who in their minds at least, think they are doing the best things. A good politician would be honest, and principled, using Jeremy Corbyn as an example. They also need to be good orators and debators, responding on their feet quickly and precisely to questions and interjections.
Asked about his views on immigration, Associate Professor Roper stated that his views are quite radical. In his view, capital and business are free to move anywhere they want in the world. If that is okay, then it is okay for labour to move freely also. There is a danger in comments such as ‘migrants are causing house prices to rise’, in that such statements can fuel racism. Personally he feels that the main driver of rising house prices in Auckland is because New Zealand is one of the few countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that does not have a capital gains tax which is coupled with low inflation and a stable exchange rate, and this has encouraged international investors to put their money into the Auckland housing market.
The current stabilisation in house prices he puts down to the possibility of Labour introducing a capital gains tax, to which businesses are vehemently opposed. Migrants in fact bring a lot to the country economically, culturally and in other ways. He also feels the government should be more involved in building state housing. He did note, however, that residential property prices in many parts of the world are rising fast, largely because residential property is a relatively safe investment. Even if this investment lost value, it would not go down to zero, unlike investing in a financial institution that completely collapses.
Regarding the nature of the election campaigns in New Zealand, he noted the parallels between the recent British campaigns and ours, with Jacinda Ardern’s personality being a stand-out difference, and Stephen Joyce’s $11.7 billion dollar fiscal hole claim regarding Labour’s policy, now scorned by all leading economists not helping a mediocre National campaign. Bill English’s injudicious ‘stardust’ remark has also not helped.
A number of other interesting questions were asked and answered, including the possible undue influence of the media, the influence of education funding on society, the GST rate being too high, the rapid growth of inequality*, lobby groups vigorously opposing capital gains tax, but now I have reached my limit of 1,000 words . . . . . .
Brian closed by stating that “it was a privilege to teach such talented and intelligent young people who ask brilliant questions and have such interesting things to say.”
*Search for ‘Brian Perry household incomes’ for more on the growth of inequality.
