Rents in the Auckland region rose by nearly 3 per cent last year, but that rate of increase is among the lowest in a decade, the city’s biggest real estate agency says.

Barfoot & Thompson’s latest quarterly data shows the average weekly rent was $609 in December, up 2.89 per cent on the average of $592 in December 2020.

Auckland’s average rent hit $600 for the first time early last year, and it climbed throughout the year.

Barfoot & Thompson director Kiri Barfoot said while rents continued to trend upward, the annual increase put last year’s rental price movements among the lowest in a decade.

“Only 2020’s 1.81 per cent rise, which was unique due to a six-month freeze on rents during the first lockdown, and 2019’s 2.58 per cent rise, were lower.”

The biggest annual increase was between December 2014 and 2015 when the average Auckland rent rose 6.73 per cent, or more than $31 per week, she said.

“In contrast, the average Auckland home currently costs around $17 more per week than it did a year ago.”

The fact Auckland’s rate of rent increases was the lowest in the 10-year period went against the grain of nationwide rental information.

Stats NZ’s latest rental price index showed rents for new tenancies nationwide were up 5.8 per cent in the year to December, while rents across the entire rental market, including existing tenancies were up 3.7 per cent.

But Auckland’s situation was different to the rest of the country. The Auckland CBD had become well-known for being an area where more rental properties were available and rents have dropped, due to the impact of Covid.

And Crockers Property Management’s latest Auckland rental price figures showed rent declines in some property sizes in some areas between 2020 and 2021.

Rents for three-bedroom homes in City Bays (Mission Bay to St Heliers) and Remuera were down by 4 and 3 per cent respectively, while rents for four-bedroom homes in Birkenhead/Northcote Point and Devonport declined by 7 and 8 per cent.

Barfoot said the bumpy period of lockdowns, rent freezes and changes in demand, such as in the Auckland CBD, meant many factors were at play in the last couple of years of rental figures.

“Rental price rises are now driven by increases in the cost of operating a rental property more than property values, while other factors, such as increased supply through new builds, help to balance that dynamic.”

But a small “catchup” from 2020’s freeze on rents might also be affecting the numbers, she said.

“Looking ahead, the impact of tightened lending on the first-home buyer and investor markets, the lack of tax deductibility for landlords, increases in interest costs and rising inflation are likely to show in the coming months.”

The agency’s figures showed the districts with the highest annual rate of increase last year were South Auckland and West Auckland, where rents were up by 4.72 and 4.19 per cent to $548 and $571 a week in December.

OPINION: Maihi Ka Ora – The National Māori Housing Strategy 2021-2051 was launched last week by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.

It was written in partnership with Te Puni Kōkiri, with the support of the National Iwi Chairs Forum, some hapū and iwi, and Te Matapihi he tirohanga mō te Iwi Trust, and developed through Maihi Whare Wānanga.

The strategy takes a systems thinking approach, acknowledging the complexity of our housing system, our system failures, and therefore the range of responses required.

It’s long range, with a life span of 30 years intended to live well beyond any political changes. Critically, there are specific provisions for ongoing monitoring and evaluation, and formal review every three years.

It’s impossible to entirely future proof long-range strategies given our electoral cycle, but the current government has made a serious attempt at embedding Maihi Ka Ora across government and the housing system more broadly.

In my view, this strategy is a game changer. The strategy, whilst not being a statutory document, critically refers to the articles, rather than the principles, of Te Tiriti.

It explicitly refers to the Government using its levers under Article One, to enable Māori-led solutions under Article Two, and, if these are achieved, works towards providing oriteranga/equity under Article Three.

There are six major components to the strategy: Māori-Crown partnerships, (Māori-led) local solutions, (Māori) housing supply, (Māori) housing support, (Māori) housing system, and (Māori) housing sustainability. All are anchored in Te Tiriti.

The Maihi Whare Wānanga model represents a Te Tiriti-based partnership, with Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti partners clearly named, with actions tagged.

It also has an inbuilt process to respond, review and reset. Essentially: Respond to current issues through new funding, legislation and policy; Review existing government funding priorities, legislation and funding through a Te Tiriti lens, with a focus on current Māori involvement across high level government decision-making processes; and finally, Reset, implementing new legislation, policy and processes that centre a Te Tiriti partnership.

Many will remember He Whare Āhuru He Oranga Tāngata – the Māori Housing Strategy. The strategy was introduced in 2014 under the National government, with the Māori Party as confidence and supply partner.

Despite originally being intended to run through to 2025, He Whare Āhuru has now been superseded by Maihi Ka Ora, the new Māori housing strategy.

It was not a perfect strategy, but it was one that Māori housing advocates, ministerial champions, hapū, iwi and housing providers fought for and contributed to.

The strategy, which sat within the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, was not appropriately resourced. To my knowledge no resourcing or staff time was specifically allocated to its implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

In the 2014 document, priorities were set out for 2014-17, yet were not refreshed beyond this date. For the new strategy to be successful, it is critical that resourcing and dedicated staff be allocated to the implementation, monitoring and evaluation, review and refresh.

Hei aha, we are now in a very different space. The current government has demonstrated a commitment to funding Māori housing on parity with mainstream housing, as demonstrated through the May 2021 Budget announcement.

Maihi Ka Ora seems set to avoid the mistakes and omissions of the past, and clearly sets out the development of a detailed implementation programme and monitoring framework, and a cycle of review of the strategy every three years.

So what about the GPS? The Government Policy Statement (GPS) on Housing and Urban Development, which was launched the same day as Maihi Ka Ora provides clear direction to all government agencies across the housing system.

It has its legislative basis under Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities Act 2019. The GPS is intended to be a whole of system strategy, and is complemented by a range of other strategies, including Maihi Ka Ora, Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, The Disability Strategy and Disability Action Plan 2019-2023 and Better later life – He Oranga Kaumatua 2019 to 2034.

Māori housing researcher and landscape architect Jacqueline Paul’s (Ngāpuhi, Kahungunu, Tūwharetoa) recent master’s thesis He Rautaki Whakatauria Whare o Te Tiriti o Waitangi: Treaty-anchored Housing Strategies (Department of Land Economy, The University of Cambridge, July 2021), focuses on Te Tiriti-anchored housing strategies.

Her research, based on interviews with experts, recommends that current government strategies and plans should be strengthened to align with Te Tiriti.

At the time Paul’s research was undertaken, there was no national housing strategy. The GPS fills this gap: it is well-aligned with Maihi Ka Ora and is explicit in directions regarding genuine partnership under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Whilst the Maihi Ka Ora strategy rightly focuses on Māori, given the Government’s responsibilities under Te Tiriti, demographic inequities, as well as the persistent advocacy by the Māori housing sector Paul’s research shows that we also need to cast a Te Tiriti lens over all housing strategies and policies in Aotearoa.

Maihi Kā Ora and the Government Policy Statement on Housing and Urban Development both deliver on this expectation.

– Jade Kake is an architectural designer, writer, and housing advocate based in Whangārei. Of Māori and Dutch descent, her tribal affiliations are Ngāpuhi, Te Whakatōhea and Te Arawa.

The only thing more predictable than rising house prices is the tenor of stories as monthly data from governments or the real estate sector are reported. Record highs in particular places, predictions of trends from economists. Or, the young couple who managed to “get on the housing ladder”, but upon reading you realise it was with financial help from parents.

However, behind these articles a much larger housing story has gradually unfolded. An account of huge and growing inequality. How a government policy designed to respond to the global pandemic and the fear of economic recession has not just created significant wealth, but distributed it in such a concentrated way that it will change the nature of Aotearoa New Zealand for generations to come.

Our story starts in January 2020 as fears of the coronavirus began to emerge. The political focus quickly turned to the deteriorating economic outlook and cheap money was pumped into the economy via lower interest rates and quantitative easing. There were warnings at the time from the Reserve Bank to Grant Robertson, the minister of finance, that this policy may increase wealth inequality by raising asset prices. And, when uncertainty was making a mockery of many predictions, that particular advice proved accurate, if more than a little understated.

At the end of January 2020 the median house price in New Zealand was $612,000. By August 2021 it was $850,000. Prices are up 25% in the last 12 months alone. All during a pandemic that disrupted economic activity and confidence. And all consolidated on top of recent record price rises.

The Reserve Bank figures of the total value of the housing stock help translate this gain into a national picture of wealth. In December 2019 the total value of housing stock was $1.188tn. The most recent figures are from March 2021, which reveal that since the pandemic hit the total value of housing stock had increased by $324bn. For the “team of 5 million” mentioned so frequently in conjunction with Covid-19 this equates to about $65,000 each. But that windfall isn’t shared equally among players, and to understand its effect on inequality we need to analyse who owns those assets.

People of European ethnicity are far more likely (58%) to own their own home or hold it in a family trust than Māori (31%) or Pacific (21%) ethnicities. This figure is also influenced by demographics, as the median age of those who identify with European ethnicity is 41, while Māori and Pacific peoples are 25 and 23 respectively. As may be expected, homeownership rates tend to increase with age. For example, around 78% of those between 70 and 74 own their own home, while around 21% of those between 25 and 29 do. People with partners are also much more likely (68%) to own their own home than those without (29%).

Inequality also includes how housing provides capital for future speculative investments. The number of properties held by investors almost tripled between 1986 and 2018 and the proportion of equity in owner occupied housing and land is at an all-time high. The average property value is now 7.9 times the average annual household income, the highest disparity recorded, and more evidence of how wages have very little to do with house prices, which has become more to do with the assets owned and access to finance.

As may be expected, with the financialisation of housing we have also seen an increase in renters. In 1991, 23% of households rented, by 2018 over a third of households didn’t own their home. But again, this broad figure masks a significant difference. For example, the proportion of Māori living in rental accommodation increased from 41% to 77% between 1986 and 2013.

While government policy has been valuable in maintaining employment and staving off a recession, an additional boost to landlords is that it also ensures renters have the income to help service the loans on their investment assets. But, as renting households also pay a higher proportion of their income on housing than owner occupiers, and the median rent increased by 8% in the last year alone, they are further away than ever from homeownership.

It should be noted there are regional variations and nuances in this data that are difficult to discuss in a short article. For example, home ownership peaked in the 1990s and since has fallen systematically for all age groups and all ethnicities. But it has fallen much less for some than others. While aspects can be explained by the rise in investor ownership and property held in family trusts, it opens up further questions of who is more likely to speculate on housing or have interests in those trusts.

The pandemic response created national wealth and national debt. But it compounded inequality by giving the former to homeowners, older generations, and housing investors, and sharing the latter amongst everyone. The situation is made all the more remarkable as it happened under a Labour government with a leader who has campaigned on fairness and equity. For the “team of 5 million”, it is clear some players have been rewarded very differently to others.

This distribution is a particular problem in a country with a legacy of settler colonialism. One of the questions for economic historians is if, hiding behind the masking language of “averages”, “medians”, and “percentages”, we may have quietly witnessed one of the biggest increases in inequality for indigenous populations in generations.

To compound this situation, just before the pandemic hit prime minister Jacinda Ardern ruled out a capital gains tax under her leadership. So, this wealth, and the uneven opportunities and inequalities it brings, is set to become embedded in asset inheritances for decades to come.

So what now for a Labour government who speak frequently about social justice? Housing supply is part of the answer, as are increased rights for renters, but how can you even get close to addressing inequality based on inflated financial assets without reopening a debate on taxes relating to land, wealth, or capital gains?

While we can now begin to piece together the story of how the response to one crisis has helped create another, the key issue is whether this rapidly increasing inequality will become a problem similarly worthy of urgent policy attention.

• Iain White is professor of environmental planning at the University of Waikato in New Zealand.

… as you’re joining us today from India, we have a small favour to ask. Tens of millions have placed their trust in the Guardian’s fearless journalism since we started publishing 200 years ago, turning to us in moments of crisis, uncertainty, solidarity and hope. More than 1.5 million supporters, from 180 countries, now power us financially – keeping us open to all, and fiercely independent.

Unlike many others, the Guardian has no shareholders and no billionaire owner. Just the determination and passion to deliver high-impact global reporting, always free from commercial or political influence. Reporting like this is vital for democracy, for fairness and to demand better from the powerful.

And we provide all this for free, for everyone to read. We do this because we believe in information equality. Greater numbers of people can keep track of the global events shaping our world, understand their impact on people and communities, and become inspired to take meaningful action. Millions can benefit from open access to quality, truthful news, regardless of their ability to pay for it.

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Guardian from as little as $1 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you.