A/HRC/29/31 38. The World Bank has also been active on this front. In its Annual Report 2014 it noted that “rising inequality in many countries is harmful to economic stability and the sustainability of growth, but well-designed policies can reduce inequality without hurting growth”. In January 2015, the Bank’s Chief Economist suggested that the “deep and pervasive inequality that exists today can only be condemned”. He recalled that the annual income of the world’s 50 wealthiest people was close to the total income of the poorest 1 billion, a figure that he characterized as “a collective failure”. He called for the consideration of “policies and interventions to curb such extreme inequality”, which he said must be done “not only out of a sense of justice, but also because, in a world afflicted with such extreme disparities, its poorest residents lose their voice, even when they have the right to vote. Extreme inequality is, ultimately, an assault on democracy.” 60 39. It seems clear, however, that the deeply expressed concerns about the consequences of inequality are not in fact bringing the sort of deep changes that would be required in the policies of such institutions. For the most part, the response seems to involve the tweaking of traditional policies rather than any change in the fundamental priorities underlying the work of those institutions. This makes it all the more important to inquire into the role that could or should be played by human rights bodies. IV. United Nations human rights bodies and inequality 40. Economic inequalities have long been a focus of analysis within the United Nations human rights system. But despite the various reports by different special rapporteurs calling attention to the problems associated with extreme inequality, little has been done to follow up on any of the studies or recommendations. 41. In 1992, the Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities on the realization of economic, social and cultural rights, Danilo Türk, recommended that a special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights be appointed. He characterized income inequality as one of the main challenges of the time, and stated that income distribution within States remained distressingly inequitable. The Special Rapporteur lamented the fact that, in the 1980s, the urban working classes and large segments of the middle class had been impoverished, while groups and businessmen associated in one way or another with the internationalization of capital represented the major economic beneficiaries of the previous 10 years. He found that drastic measures to rectify that income injustice were required and that adequately carrying out poverty-reduction programmes and fulfilling economic, social and cultural rights throughout society was unthinkable without also redressing current income imbalances. He identified taxation as a central means of redressing existing imbalances of income distribution (see E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16, paras. 76–84). 42. In its resolution 1993/40, the Sub-Commission, recalling the report by its Special Rapporteur, stated that it was deeply alarmed that the gap between the rich and the poor had more than doubled over the previous three decades and that it was conscious of the impact of inequitable income distribution on the realization of the rights to health, education, housing, food, environmental quality and other economic, social and cultural rights. Also, it reiterated the fundamental principles of equality of treatment, human dignity, equity and justice. Aware that the relationship between income distribution and growing levels of poverty, as well as the violation of human rights, required further in-depth research and 60 14 Kaushik Basu, “The state of global poverty”, 23 January 2015. Available from www.projectsyndicate.org/commentary/global-inequality-persistence-of-poverty-by-kaushik-basu-201501#A3Y1IvE6roHVRbfK.99.