web analytics
The Standard

Choices, choices: parental leave too expensive?

Written By: - Date published: 6:40 am, April 11th, 2012 - 189 comments
Categories: benefits, same old national - Tags: , ,

The Right says that extending paid parental leave to 26 weeks is too expensive. Typical. The bastards know the price of everything and the value of nothing.

If anything, Sue Moroney’s Bill doesn’t go far enough as it doesn’t extend eligibility to the nearly 60% of mothers who don’t meet the rules currently (only 26,000 of 60,000 mums per year get it).

But, if money is so tight, how does the cost stack up against other National Party decisions?

So, we’re talking about a tiny sliver of government spending – 0.2% to be precise. And a tiny fraction of what the government is borrowing. If money is really so tight, there’s plenty of poor quality decisions that National could reverse first.

189 comments on “Choices, choices: parental leave too expensive?”

  1. deinacrida_v2 1

    Parental leave?
    [Bunji: fixed}

  2. james 111 2

    Nice idea from fantasy land however totally unaffordable $150 million we dont have as a country. We have to earn the money as a country before we can spend it. This is a problem with Socialist thinking spend spend spend but where does the money come from? Tax Tax Tax and more Tax

    • So James you must think those roads of national significance really suck.

      • Deer Hunter 2.1.1

        Roads of national significance are paid by road users. Good thing you don’t own a shop. A customer comes in to buy some bread, you’d take their money and say: “Actually bread isn’t good for you. I’ll give you half a weetbix instead.”

        • mickysavage 2.1.1.1

          But I do pay fuel excise duty.  The RONS still suck.  My fuel taxes should be used on the inner city rail loop instead.

          • Deer Hunter 2.1.1.1.1

            Road users disagree with you. Road users want better roads. The only referendum on the inner loop was the auckland central election, what happened? Pony girl did no better than Judith Tizard.

            • Bunji 2.1.1.1.1.1

              The road user in your head wants better roads. I want a city rail loop.

              The only ‘referendum’ on the rail loop? If anything it was the mayoral election, trains being the centrepiece of Len’s campaign, and the rail loop the centre piece of the trains.
              Who won that again?

              The AK central election was hardly a referendum – Nikki Kaye supports the rail loop too, just her party doesn’t want to pay for it. So if you count voters who voted for a candidate who supported the rail loop (Kaye, Ardern, Roche…), vs those who don’t… Well, we better get on with that rail loop…

              Road users should all support the rail loop: it’ll get lots of people off ‘their’ roads…

              • Rusty Shackleford

                This is shithouse reasoning. People love voting for stuff when someone else is going to foot the bill. It’s easy to make promises, economic viability be damned.

            • Matthew Whitehead 2.1.1.1.1.2

              Actually I want better buses and trains.

            • bbfloyd 2.1.1.1.1.3

              my word, what a load of specious drivel you speak little fawn…. EVERYBODY who pays tax, irrespective of whether they drive or not pays for roads…

              and one assumes you believe that none of those “road users” would switch to public transport if it was widely available… especially in cities where past national govts have allowed transport infrastructure to become horrendously overburdoned….

              but no…. you have to be utterly narrow, shallow, and self interested to the point of excluding everything that could undermine your deeply held bigotries, and everyone capable of exposing your ignorance of common sense….

              you aren’t related to “convoy” joyce are you? … or own a freight company do you?

            • lprent 2.1.1.1.1.4

              Actually she did.

              However I’m puzzled why do you think that was a referendum on the central loop (it barely came up during the campaign).

              The primary use of the loop is allow the more effective use of the rail system throughout the whole of Auckland apart from the North Shore without getting bottlenecked at Britomart. At the current rates of expansion of use in the rail system and assuming that we get the usual increases in usage from the current updates, Britomart will be at capacity within a decade. The inner loop is designed to increase the capacity for trains both into Britomart hub and also bypassing (ie south going west).

              It also means that when the lazy idiots in Wellington NZTA get around to putting another harbour crossing in, it will be able to handle the capacity from a rail link to the shore.

              Of course these are things that I really shouldn’t expect an idiot to think their way through… It might cause you to strain something through unexpected usage

            • David H 2.1.1.1.1.5

              I’m a road user and don’t put words into my mouth. This is a fucking disgrace. Children NEED to have that first year -18 months to bond, my little boy is 11 months old, and as we have been made redundant the only bright side to being broke is his smile we see every day. and we would have hated t o have some stranger, caregiver telling us about his first words, and his crawling, standing up Laughing. we would not have missed that for the world. So stick the RONS up your arse, they are nothing bit a complete waste of money. And only the trolls think they are a good idea.

        • Blighty 2.1.1.2

          So, you’re saying the government doesn’t have a duty to spend the revenue from transport taxes on projects that get the most bang for the buck? They should just build highways to nowhere instead?

    • Zetetic 2.2

      Are you for real James, or just playing at being this dumb? It’s like you missed the whole post. Which is a rebuttal of your rightwhinger argument.

      If we don’t have $150m for paternal leave, how come we’ve got $1.4b a year for roads to nowhere also known as the RoNS, or a billion a year for tax cuts for the rich?

      • Hami Shearlie 2.2.1

        Z, you know the rich NEED their tax cuts. If they don’t get them, their annual holiday in the South of France might have to be reduced to only 1 month, instead of 2! Shame on you Z, fancy wanting to deprive them of that! Next you’ll want them to drive around in cars that are more than 1 year old! Awful! LOL!

    • mike e 2.3

      jturd we can afford it!
      spending on consultants a staggering $600 million National
      Borrowing $14 billion a year under national
      tobacco $6 billion a year problem
      alcohol a $6 billion a year problem
      Gambling A 6 billion a year problem
      poverty a $ 6 billion a year problem
      National is the problem the do nothing government!

    • Georgy 2.4

      So James, how do you see the tax cuts National made in their 2008-2011 term? Affordable? Did NZ earn the money or did it borrow the money? How have these cuts helped our economy? Compare this to the value placed on parents being at home with their babies without being penalised.

  3. james 111 3

    Need to get cars around Micky cant afford Lens rail loop dream that only affects 50,000 people in a city of 1.5 million

    • The cars get around just fine now james. And as oil becomes more expensive people will drive less.  And they will think what bunch of idiots built all these roads we do not need?  And they will complain the the train system cannot handle any more passengers because we did not build the inner city loop.

      PS try nesting your comments. 

      • aerobubble 3.1.1

        Its a fact that much of the growth (energy into the economy) has stopped coming from new oil coming to market but come from citizens cutting back their travel, this will continue for a time until we reach a tipping point, where drivers cannot even afford to get to work. People by then will be screaming for homes near work places and public transport. Every moment the left gets a chance they will be citing Nationals roading white elephant. As capitalists the money is in sidewide economics, where people shift away from high energy usage patterns. That’s why its so shocking to hear the rightwing and their media buddies still pushing the naked weirdo neo-liberal economic paradigm. Methinks its more because they are alrady shifting their own investments to the new societial architecture while the party faithful are being taken for mugs. i.e. farmers are handing out shares in Fonterra, and tax payers handing over state energy asset. Oh, and no buying energy share isn’t the money spinner, the money is in the fees and the bend over approach to trade with China, opening doors here opens doors there for the few behind National spins.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 3.2

      The roads are north of Puhoi !

      • fender 3.2.1

        Please dont confuse james 111 with geographical facts, hes just looking forward to playing on a new road on his mobility scooter, drunk as usual, naked apart from his old socks.

    • irascible 3.3

      If you really want to experience driving where roading & private cars have taken priority over public transport try driving in Egypt or Lebanon or any city where there is no public transport available. Roads are clogged with cars and trucks as well as pedestrians – traffic jams are what you join and spend more time in than getting to work or getting home.
      Give me efficient public transport over roads clogged with private cars any day.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.4

      Need to get cars around…cant afford Lens rail loop dream that only affects 50,000 people in a city of 1.5 million

      Man, are you out of touch with reality.

      We can’t afford cars as they’re far too inefficient especially now that Peak Oil has hit – that’s the real problem that NACT won’t face.

    • rosy 3.5

      “Need to get cars around “
      Funny, I thought we needed to get people around. Cars are simply a method of doing that, and not necessarily the most efficient method. Also thought you’d be for personal choice – which doesn’t mean ‘shall I take the blue car or the silver one today?’

  4. Craig Glen Eden 4

    If we cant afford this we cant afford tax cuts, loan to Media works, payouts to failed investors, holiday roads. But hey this money to help parents and babies aye so National wont give a shit.

    • burt 4.1

      Craig

      Tax cuts are not something we afford… it’s not money the government spends…. I know to a loopy lefty with a sense of entitlement to other peoples money that’s a hard thing to grasp.

      • Zetetic 4.1.1

        In your dipshit world, we could cut all tax and it wouldn’t matter. The fact is that, against the status quo, the 2010 tax package has resulted in a billion dollars a year more borrowing. The decision to cut taxes isn’t free or consequenceless.

        • burt 4.1.1.1

          Zetetic

          In your dipshit world, we could cut all tax and it wouldn’t matter.

          Only a complete dipshit would say that Zetetic… I could be equally demented and say in your dipshit world we can spend as much as we want because all we need to do is tax the rich pricks more to pay for it….. Hey lets quickly forget that under Labour’s great promise to make the rich pay more tax that the real top earners weren’t paying it and the burden fell on middle earners…. Harsh reality…. sorry Zetetic to burst your beautiful dream that socialism works…

          • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1.1.1

            Hey lets quickly forget that under Labour’s great promise to make the rich pay more tax that the real top earners weren’t paying it and the burden fell on middle earners…

            Got proof of that?

            And, also, rich people engaging in theft isn’t an excuse not to tax them.

      • framu 4.1.2

        i think youll find burt that taxes are most definately money that the government spends

        can you afford to cut your revenue stream?

        • burt 4.1.2.1

          Really, taxes are the money the government spends … who would have guessed….

          But seriously, the point is that tax cuts are not an increase in government spending. I can understand that if you take the approach that all income above the level paid to a beneficiary is there for the government to take so it can spend it elsewhere then it’s easy to conflate revenue with expenditure.

          • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.1.1

            That makes no sense burt. Taxes are there to cover government spending. NACT cut taxes which cut the government revenue which meant that the taxes could no longer cover the governments spending – especially after this government radically increased government spending.

      • Burt, if I was selling you a product, and you asked me for half off, and I told you I couldn’t afford it, you don’t get to tell me that’s loopy logic just because “it’s your money”. If you want even a semblance of a functional government, you have to pay for it, and that means we have to take in enough in taxes that we can afford minimal social protections, which means we can only afford to cut taxes so far.

        Now, I acknowledge many on the right do NOT want a functional government, but that just isn’t something that the rest of us will ever agree to.

        • burt 4.1.3.1

          Burt, if I was selling you a product, and you asked me for half off, and I told you I couldn’t afford it, you don’t get to tell me that’s loopy logic just because “it’s your money”.

          Ah no… that’s not even remotely similar to revenue v expenditure.

          Now, I acknowledge many on the right do NOT want a functional government, but that just isn’t something that the rest of us will ever agree to.

          Functional government…. so extending paid parental leave when we need to borrow to do so is functional government now – god help us when we get closer to the election and all sorts of lolly scramble bribes get classified as essential for functional government.

          You loopy lefties need to understand that every time you dream up new ways to spend other peoples money for electoral popularity that it is actually other people paying.

      • Reagan Cline 4.1.4

        Burt, “entitlement” is a very recent word, therefore a very recent concept, could be a term for a fad concept. You don’t want to be unduly influenced by a fad concept do you ?
        The money you control is yours temporarily, until you dispose of it in some way – how about helping find a way to get it to people who do need it ?

    • ghostwhowalksnz 4.2

      Dont forget the scholarships to private schools. Can we afford that , so that full private schools can boost their declining numbers

  5. Peter Dunne acknowledges that it is expensive, but he’s claiming that in the long run it will save money as it’s an investment in early childhood. Very difficult to quantify that though.

    For every parent on paid leave there is also the opportunity for another person to come off the unemployment benefit or DPD to take up the position, albeit often temporarily. But it may be an important first step into (or back into) the workforce for some.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 5.1

      Surely you arent having a doubt about Peter Dunnes fiscal probity ?. The Minister of Revenue, by definition is an expert on these matters !

    • $150 million is not that expensive as government projects go. If we normalise tax per individual, it adds up to about $9580 each. If we didn’t reduce any costs for the paid parental leave, it would bump that up to about $9600. I’d be quite happy to pay $20 a year to know that if I want kids I get half a year off to bond and take care of my kid, and I’m quite happy to pay that even if I never have kids myself, because I know people who will, and I want them to have plenty of time.

      (If that number seems high, it’s because it includes corporate taxes and other indirect taxes that you don’t directly pay to the government)

  6. ghostwhowalksnz 6

    What about the $180 million paid out to bond holders ( who didnt have a guarantee) in South Canterbury Finance ?
    Was that affordable ?

    They have just built a $30 million temporary rugby stadium in Christchurch- in record time , which is unusual as far as any reconstruction goes down that way.

    • james 111 6.1

      I believe it we can make it cost neutral by stopping young female breeding machines using the DPB as a revenue source without due consideration for the children then it may be possible.

      If we limit the DPB to a genuine accident 1 child as Bill Clinton did in the States we could probably afford to give parents this payment.

      Unfortunately we don’t have money trees out there and the problem for Socialists has always been when they run out of using other people money what then?

      When you have a child you have to make sacrifices be it financial or life style. What I don’t understand with the Socialist ideology. They want to take personal responsibility and accountability out of every situation is this carefully contrived thought controlling process agenda? subtle Social engineering may be

      • framu 6.1.1

        why are you bringing the DPB into this? they arent the same thing

        also – your last para makes no sense

        • ghostwhowalksnz 6.1.1.1

          What he means, is the rich can afford to have a mother full time at home, the poor just ‘make bad choices’

        • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.2

          It’s james111 – he doesn’t make any sense at all, ever.

          • fender 6.1.1.2.1

            NEVER EVER

            james 111 needs to stay off the grog, he’s off the planet and requires help.

            As McFlock pointed out a few weeks ago there’s a rather gross habit james has to ensure he never impregnates a woman (although surely just him talking would ruin his chances to copulate). It involves an old sock and clearly its overflowing again. But take it easy on little jim as its obviously time his extended family intervened to cure his drunken wanked up ramblings.

            james dont be too embarrassed if you read your posts after you recieve treatment, we understand and look forward to you showing us that you do have a coherent thought process.

      • Uturn 6.1.2

        If you reference your own misunderstanding of concepts then it’s no wonder you’re confused. Who really can help you? You could pick up a book, or even do a google search, to find the definition of the terms you redefine here incorrectly, but your ideology has stolen all your personal responsiblity. Subtle social engineering, maybe? I don’t even know how a person can hold an ideology they clearly don’t understand. Like some others, I think you might be more interested in the philosophy of Egoism rather than right-wing politics.

        The idea you were looking for is… unavailable. Uturn has not charged you for this idea.

      • Hami Shearlie 6.1.3

        “Young female breeding machines”? I think you’ll find it takes two to tango J111! The women are left holding the babies, but where are all the invisible fathers. When does their share of blame get meted out?

        • mike e 6.1.3.1

          HS the men that help create the children are in the prison Australia .
          The rest are in the Nact party misogynist rednecks.
          Ask dirty old Don or nick

      • McFlock 6.1.4

        I think we could lower the number of “breeding machines” by giving abstinence rings out in schools, and shooting more storks as they fly overhead with the babies.
           
        Better yet, even more tax cuts for the rich will motivate more “breeding machines” to avoid pregnancy and concentrate on their careers. /sarc
              
        I think that covers most of jimmy the turd’s idiocy for the next couple of hours.

      • mike e 6.1.5

        J turd Paula Bennett her daughter grand child future son in law John Key all products of the DPB.
        I rest my case.

        • burt 6.1.5.1

          Exactly, so what’s the plan – win an election by creating more of these people – yep that will be good for NZ.

          • McFlock 6.1.5.1.1

            “these people”
                      
            One of the expressions I regard as a big flag that the commenter is possibly an ignorant jerkoff.
            Oh, it’s Burt. Issue no longer in doubt.

      • Millhouse 6.1.6

        @ james 111

        I am afraid to say that the “young female breeding machines using the DPB as a revenue source” are simply a lurid and masturbatory fantasy dreamed up by people like you in order to justify class warfare. Only 3.1 % of those on the DPB are under 20 years of age, and of those 67.7% are on the DPB for less than four years. Aside from the odd morally bankrupt person nobody is breading for $293 a week.

        Grow up.

        • ianmac 6.1.6.1

          Millhouse good response, but I am afraid that James 111 is impervious to facts and figures. Fairly sure that he plays a weird game of deliberate provocation. And it works. A sort of bullfighter from the safety behind the rails of the arena.

    • aerobubble 6.2

      National like to assert the deposit guarentee was Labour’s policy (despite there being a global crisis) and ignore the fact that National failed to manage the scheme leaving it open.

      Remember that National does not believe in regulation. Did, for example, Peak River Mine suddenly become even safer when key won power, because of the now widespread belief that deregulation makes the markets more concerned about disasters? Or really does it just give middle managers more time to relax and not do their jobs? Safe guard investors and keep employees safe.

      National are naked freaks and weirdos, their beliefs are moronically simplistic and self-over rated.

      • Dv 6.2.1

        And the nacts agreed to the scheme too!

      • Frida 6.2.2

        But the decision to pay out the unsecured, unguaranteed bond holders was definitely under National, not Labour. Same with the decision to let SCF into the extended scheme.

        • mike e 6.2.2.1

          Frida against treasury advice, I suspect to many Nat supporters would have gone bankrupt.

  7. Colonial Viper 7

    When the RWNJs say its “unaffordable” its because the money is going into the community at large, and isn’t going into their rich mates’ pockets. If it was, it would be a “national priority”.

    • burt 7.1

      No CV, money is going to people having children…. many of which will enjoy it but certainly don’t need it. But I’ll put my socialist hat on – why only 26 weeks ?

      Why not pay full parental leave till the child leaves home – whatever age that is?

      • Colonial Viper 7.1.1

        burt returns to his well worn “you’re asking for one lollypop, but we’re going to turn you down because next you’ll be asking for the whole chocolate factory” argument.

      • framu 7.1.2

        ” But I’ll put my socialist hat on – why only 26 weeks ”

        no – thats putting your idiot hat on

  8. bad12 8

    Lets have a little look at the economics of this,an examination of such economics should by definition be of more intellectual rigour than that which can be mustered by the economic neanderthals currently in charge of the treasury Benches,

    National,s economic ”thinking” on this and ”its” overall approach can be best described as more akin to economic decisions a tribe of Chimpanzees would make around a collection of Bananas,

    To make such an extension of Paid Parental Leave stack up in terms of economics We only have to satisfy ourselves of one economic ”Given”,

    If We take it as a ”Given” that those who would be the beneficiaries of the Paid Parental Leave extension,(leaving out the impending moko’s for the moment), were in fact in employment on the basis that that employment was neccessary for the employer to enable His/Her business to successfully operate,

    Then the supposed 150 million dollars cost to Government is simply highlighting the downside of the cost while ignoring any benefits on the plus side of the Governments revenue indicators,

    Heres how it works,assuming that the employer will have to employ someone for the 6 month period of Paid Parental Leave to cover for the employee away on Paid Parental Leave then in the churn of employment someone will be employed,

    That person employed isn’t neccessarily going to be employed in that particular position having come straight off of the dole queue BUT in theory someone must become employed and there would now be a reasonable expectation that in the economy there would now be 1 more employment position available albeit only for the 6 month period of the Paid Parental Need,

    The economic reality says that for every Parent off work for a period of paid leave should that leave be extended to 6 months there in fact will be 1 person currently unemployed who will be employed for that 6 months

    So,while Government pays out 1 Paid Parental Leave it will gain 1 new employee into the workforce paying tax and that 1 new employee would have been either on the dole or expected to join the queue,

    Its a blindness that the economic Chimps currently pulling the levers of economy in desperation to create for themselves some good news just cannot grasp as they view the economy through a microscope concentrating on the micro and macro situation whilst ignoring the glaring realities that sit mere inch’s from their noses,

    Of course 6 months Paid Parental Leave is affordable, such an extension also creates wider social and economic pluses than just within the family where the Parental Leave is being extended to….

    • ChrisH 8.2

      Actually this is more likely to happen with 6 months leave. The employer will take on a temp for that long. At 14 weeks they’ll just let the work pile up because it won’t be worth the hassle to take on someone for that short a time.

      • Colonial Viper 8.2.1

        Taking on a temp means another worker employed in a useful job. Awesome!

        • Jim Nald 8.2.1.1

          Re economics … cost … benefits …

          It would be nice to hear the progressive parties stating the case for this legislative initiative as a worthy and financially wise investment in families, children, our next generation, et al.

  9. tsmithfield 9

    So, if this parental leave proposal isn’t too expensive, perhaps some of the lefties here could give an opinion on the level at which it would become too expensive.

    • Colonial Viper 9.1

      Just cancel the fucking holiday highway, it’ll pay for 20 years of additional paid parental leave.

    • Uturn 9.2

      Alternatively, can you give an opinion of when it would be affordable?

    • bad12 9.3

      Naturally as per your political prediliction you can only see Paid Parental Leave in strict dollars and cents,

      The imperative for such Paid Parental Leave rests not in any ”we thunk it therefor it should be” mentality,such Legislative imperative is strictly the preserve of the National Government,

      EVERY study whether local or international on the raising and caring of children clearly shows that in particular Mothers should be on hand for the first 6 months of a childs life not on a part time basis but as a matter of full time care,

      It would then seem obvious to all except the most dull that 6 months would be the ultimate in terms of time for such Paid Parental leave to be extended…

      • tsmithfield 9.3.1

        I am not the one claiming it to be affordable. If someone is claiming something is affordable, they must have some idea of when it is unaffordable to make the first claim.

    • McFlock 9.4

      If we can afford to spend many times the amount on roads that will probably not be needed, we can afford to enable parents to spend more time with their newborn. In fact, I’d suggest at least matching funds.
            
      It’s not a fixed amount that determines “affordability”, it’s a question of priorities. Children or limos with heated seats? Children or tax cuts for the already wealthy? Children or casino conference centres? Children or roads to nowhere? 

      • tsmithfield 9.4.1

        See my post below. I agree with you it is about priorities.

        Roads are obviously an important function of government. I am sure there is a lot of varying opinion on the merit worthiness of any particular roading project.

        I agree with you about MPs and Limos. We should have our politicians and visiting dignatories transported around in 1992 Camrys. We could also bowl the beehive, sell off the land, and find a farmer willing to rent a large barn somewhere for the politicians to debate in. That would also free up more money for social endevours.

        • Colonial Viper 9.4.1.1

          We should have our politicians and visiting dignatories transported around in 1992 Camrys.

          I’m glad you brought this up. What exactly was insufficient about the 2007 BMW 7-series limos valued at over $170K each new, that they had to be replaced during this time of “fiscal restraint”?

          Seems like another case of priorities for rich mates and the road transport industry, and nothing for young mothers.

          National is getting fucked over this. They’ve got another 2.5 years to keep it up.

          • tsmithfield 9.4.1.1.1

            If the deal stacked up financially, I wouldn’t have a problem with this. For instance, if the cars were coming out of warranty, but still had high resale value, and the new cars were purchased on very favourable terms, then it may well have stacked up as a package.

            I guess it is the price of running government that there needs to be some prestige and respect associated with the role that is reflected in the type of car driven. Notice that the previous government set up the deal for the 2007 BMW’s, so you shouldn’t just blame National in this respect.

            We just need to decide what is an appropriate level of vehicle for government officials and dignatories. I don’t think many here would think my suggestion of 92 Camry’s is suitable, for example.

            I would question buying BMWs though. European cars tend to be maintenance nightmares, having owned a Audi previously (never again). I would prefer to see them in Lexus’s, as they are just glorified Camry’s so, tend to have much higher reliability.

            • Colonial Viper 9.4.1.1.1.1

              So you agree that there are a lot of savings which could be made, and which wouldn’t be at the expense of young expectant mothers?

              • tsmithfield

                I agree there are savings to be made. Where those savings should be directed is another matter. For instance, should they go to young mothers, health care, paying off government debt etc etc?

                • McFlock

                  Prioritising needs is definitely a debate to have. In the future. When we get to it. When the government decides that the various cases of bling-expenditure (like roads that aren’t actually needed, or limos with all the options, or ministerial jaunts on the airforce 757) should be turned into actual savings.
                         
                  At the moment there seems to be an awful lot of higher-level waste at the whim of ministers. Once that is sorted (probably by an incoming Labour/Green government) we can argue about prioritising which needs are addressed first.

                  In the meantime this is a piddly step in the right direction.

                  • tsmithfield

                    And the government is focusing on getting rid of waste from the public service, so in principle, you would agree with this sort of approach if it frees up money for other things?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      I guess doubling and tripling consultants fees is “getting rid of waste” eh?

                      Oh I see, spending money on helping people who need it is “waste”, while spending money on National friendly consultants is “important”.

                    • tsmithfield

                      I didn’t mean that you necessarily agreed with the way the government is going about it. But, would you agree, in principle, it is a good thing for the government to cut out waste so they have more to focus on important areas?

                    • McFlock

                      It is a good thing to cut out waste from the public service.
                              
                      Where “waste” is synonymous with “duplicated or archaic work practises that serve no good purpose, excessive higher-level remuneration packages, appointments that do not follow best practise, or projects that have negligible benefit:cost ratios”.
                                
                      This government seems to ignore all the above and instead define “waste” as “firing trained and experienced public service staff who previously provided needed, but unglamorous, services to the general public, and fill in the gap with often issue-unfamiliar people who charge more to do less”.  

                    • tsmithfield

                      Ok. We’re on the same page, in principle. It is just a matter of objectively identifying waste, free of political bias.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Clearly, poor people are a waste. Send them to Fiji.

          • Fortran 9.4.1.1.2

            CV

            Please advise where you got the “$170,000” limos from ?
            Just bulldust – look up the relatve figures and get your fact right.

            • Colonial Viper 9.4.1.1.2.1

              $180K then. That’sshowroom sticker price of course, the Govt got them cheaper by buying a shipload.

              But why did they need to be replaced?

              Savings need to go in sensible places and not buying new cars for a couple more years in a time of “fiscal restraint” would be more sensible than harming young mothers and infants.

  10. Dune from Firstline:

    Parental leave bill ‘step in the right direction’ – Dunne

    The bill will strengthen the relationship between parents and children, providing a long-term benefit for social development, Mr Dunne says.

    While the $150 million required for the bill “is expensive”, Mr Dunne says criticism of the cost “actually misses the point”.

    “There’s a long-term saving because of other social costs not having to be met [and] you can stage the implementation over a period of time, to spread that cost,” he says.

    Issues including cost and implementation time “can be teased out during the select committee stage”.

    • bad12 10.1

      In the context of the ”Government Spend” 150 million is a mere puff of steam from the boiler-room of economy,

      Government could simply rid itself of the myriad ”con-sultants” busily goosing the various Ministers egos by writing white papers for Ministers attempting to find justification for actions the various Ministers want and intend to do…

    • Dunne on the confidence and supply possibility (from FB):

      I would be very surprised indeed if the government chose to make this a confidence and supply issue. While it is technically possible, it is most unlikely, I would think.

      I think National will have to tread very carefully considering use of the veto. I expect they’ll do their usual research and find that it’s something heavily supported by women – it’s mostly men arguing against it.

      • Pascal's bookie 10.2.1

        using the veto wouldn’t make it a C&S issue, it would just mean that the bill would be denied a third reading and vote.

        He is saying that he doubts the govt would grant leave for a confidence vote if/when they use the veto.

        • ghostwhowalksnz 10.2.1.1

          The veto is not a vote , its just a procedural thing that stops it in its tracks.

        • Pete George 10.2.1.2

          Yeah, I mixed the two up.

          The C&S possibility was first raised, but that’s moved to speculation on a possible veto. Far too soon for that anyway. The bill should at least be considered by select committee.

          Instant blog and MSM decisions fortunately aren’t a binding part of our democratic process.

  11. Karl Sinclair 11

    Quote from the Movie Equus:

    ‘The normal is the good smile in a child’s eyes. There’s also the dead stare in a million adults. It both sustains and kills, like a god. It is the ordinary made beautiful, it is also the average made lethal.’

    The National Party is AVERAGE……

    Mind the GAP (educational one that is)

  12. tsmithfield 12

    I don’t think anyone would argue this is a bad idea. In fact, if both parents are together, it would be even better if they both could have time off with the new child. For a whole year would be wonderful. However, it is a question of priorities.

    If the government wants to run a zero budget, or reduce debt through reducing expenditure even further, then something else has to miss out. If the government increases income through higher taxation or borrowing, then that extra funding could have been applied elsewhere. Perhaps more hip operations, or increased funds for parents to care for disabled children maybe.

    • Roy 12.1

      Hip operations for old farts who are socially and biologically obsolete, rather than paid parental leave for the citizens of the future? Makes no sense at all. What we ought to have is palliative care only for anyone over 75. Oh yeah, and means-tested superannuation. That would save a lot of money that could be spent on people who are more valuable to society: Babies and children!
      There is no more important time of life than prenatal, infancy and childhood. THAT’S where we should spend money, not on the Greedy Greys.

      • tsmithfield 12.1.1

        See if you still think like that when you’re over 75.

        • King Kong 12.1.1.1

          See if you still think like that when you are over 18.

          • tsmithfield 12.1.1.1.1

            To true. :smile:

            • Roy 12.1.1.1.1.1

              I’m over 50. I still think people over 65 are socially and biologically obsolete, and need to get their greedy snouts out of the trough and recognize that infants and children matter far more than they do. If my kids don’t love me enough to help me when I’m old, that’ll be my fault and proof that I failed as a parent. I think they will help me, though. Why, won’t yours help you?

              • Colonial Viper

                I still think people over 65 are socially and biologically obsolete

                Some are, but some get this way by the time they turn 35.

                Frankly, some of our rasher younger ones have a lot to learn from our wiser older ones.

              • lprent

                Ummm. An interesting viewpoint. So because I didn’t have kids to support me (I merely supported my parents helped raise my sisters kids and half of the teens around the family), then by definition I will be worthless.

                Damn I knew that I should have never paid all of those taxes for the superannuation of others and to help raise all of those kiddies.

                Basically, I’ll file you under category “A fool for the teasers to play with” aka dickhead

                • tsmithfield

                  I can’t tell if this person is left wing (e.g. he wants to spend lots of money on children and babies) or right wing (e.g. he wants to reduce costs), but you can have him on your team if you want.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    It seems the Right haven’t figured out that in an aging population, you have to look after the young ones and keep them in NZ, or you’re going to be stuffed when its your turn to be a geriatric cripple.

                  • Roy

                    I want to spend lots of money on babies and children, and I propose to raise the money by halting the absurd practice of throwing superannuation at multi-millionaires (e.g. Bob Jones, Don Brash)just because they are over 65. Hence, I think superannuation should be means-tested so that if you have lots of money from other sources (continued employment, investments etc) you don’t get it. That’s what Australia does, and it works.
                    I am also opposed to squandering money on top-of-the-line medical care for people over 75, at the taxpayer’s expense. Hence, palliative-only care for those over 75, or maybe over 80. Whatever. I’ve seen in my own family people well into their 80’s, whose bodies are trying desperately to die, being propped up at ridiculous expense to the taxpayer, and I know plenty of medical and nursing professionals who complain about the same thing. Society’s attitude that length of life, rather than quality, is important, is foolish. So is our practice as a society of pandering to the aged and assuming that grey hairs mean wisdom, while treating children and those who care for them with contempt. That’s completely ass-backwards. Grey hairs don’t mean wisdom; people who have been stupid all their lives stay that way when they are old or get worse as senility sets in. Infants and children are the most important stage of life, in terms of establishing the physical, mental and social health of the person for the rest of their life, and we should be recognizing them as the most valuable. Old people should have the humility to recognize that their time is over and that it’s someone else’s world now. Instead we have the Greedy Greys enjoying the lowest poverty levels of any demographic (<5%) while 25% of children grow up in poverty. That's obscene, and it suggests that sociopathy is epidemic among our elderly.

                • Roy

                  If you didn’t have kids, you should have been able to save $$$ for your retirement and medical care therein. If you didn’t save, that makes you the dickhead.

                  • lprent

                    Apart from my own personal stash, I have also paid taxes for a universal untargeted national superannuation and the health system. That makes that system simple, effective, and covers the whole of our society. If you want more than is available from that, then you pay for your own extras like health insurance and extra savings.

                    The costs of means testing most of these types of systems almost invariably costs more for both the system and participants than what would be saved. It is cheaper for society to not means test. It is only a few mindless dorks like yourself who prefer inefficient systems who ever argue against it.

                    Doesn’t rely on freeloading on kiddies – which is what you were advocating.

              • King Kong

                You make a splendid argument for privatised healthcare.

      • ghostwhowalksnz 12.1.2

        And what about disabled people?

        Thats about $2 bill a year for people who will never work and are also “socially and biologically obsolete”

        • Roy 12.1.2.1

          Why do you assume disabled people are socially and biologically obsolete? I wouldn’t make that assumption. I know too many disabled people who are socially and/or biologically functional.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 12.1.2.1.1

            Your argument is absurd. Now we are down to choosing who is obsolete because you know a few that arent?

  13. jcuknz 13

    If you are going to keep the children you have around eight/nine months to prepare for the expense …. if you cannot afford it then take precaustions so you don’t have children. The world doesn’t need more children.
    I am sure the money can be found, just borrow more.
    It is typical and foolish left wing ‘money grows on trees’ thinking.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 13.1

      Thats why the taxpayers spent $1 billion plus to the investors in SCF, plus the bondholders who werent guaranteed.
      They got the money because it was ‘tidier’

    • ghostwhowalksnz 13.2

      What about this on IRD website for 2012

      You may be eligible for a tax credit if you:

      paid for childcare or a housekeeper.

      Paying for childcare is a tax credit, ie government giving you money , while an extra 14 weeks parental leave is impossible since money doesnt grow on trees

    • QoT 13.3

      take precaustions so you don’t have children

      Check it out! JC has discovered a completely free, convenient, 100% effective method of contraception! Awesome! Or, possibly, lives in a magical alternate New Zealand where abortion is legal! Someone pass the ‘shrooms, I wanna go visit.

  14. Sam Hill 14

    I get the point of the graphs. Our economy is in so much debt that $150 million is hardly a significant amount to be spending to insure that kids form a bond with their parents. All those people arguing against this because we can’t afford it should be thinking about whether New Zealand even has a chance of fixing our 40 years broken economy without a very radical government being elected. At the moment National and Labour have neither the guts nor the brains to come up with anything that addresses the major problems facing this country.

    • ghostwhowalksnz 14.1

      Yeah right , how come ACTs policies which you endorse got a little over 1%.

      The government borrows for the same reason companies do. It spreads the cost over future generations who will benefit.

      • Sam Hill 14.1.1

        What are you on about? I don’t endorse Act’s policies. Where did you get that preposterous idea?

        We need to make land available to provide affordable housing for the next generation of New Zealanders. We need to smash down many of our poorly built, damp, leaky homes and build new sustainable homes. We need to understand that Auckland will not be able to cope with the crisis emerging in that city because it has neither the finances or the logistical ability to cope with the task. Christchurch is facing huge pressure right now, but our largest city will face massive population, economic and housing problems in the next 20 years.

        The entire country needs to understand these issues and think of nationwide solutions to the problems. We need to stop looking at homes as financial assets to make a profit on and start thinking about them as a basic human need.

        • Reagan Cline 14.1.1.1

          Sam, our government needs to ensure that affordable housing is available to those on a low income, particularly those who support others.
          The interest in Property and Cars is obvious. Look at the Herald supplements, listen to conversations over the back fence. It is pretty strong in NZ – would take a bit of changing.
          It does provide employment – estate agencies, lawyers offices, painting, building, plumbing and electrical and gas fitting firms, furniture and household goods like bathroon and kitchen fittings shops etc etc.
          The craving for capital gain on residential property provides a lot of employment and encourages do-it- yourself endeavours and property maintenance (a creative endeavour – very satisfying to many).
          People making a buck out of residential property is acceptable in my book as long as everyone can readily afford to live in a house or apartment. Housing is a fundamental need and a good government would make sure it was available.
          My own view is all land should be owned by a democratically elected body with universal suffrage and compulsory voting, no election advertising other than of policies and a funding ceiling – and rented out as need be. Owning things is crazy when you can borrow and share.

  15. Treetop 15

    The government not finding 150 million a year for child welfare is the third strike for me.

    First strike: punitive policies for parents receiving the DPB.
    Second strike: not completing research and discussion on the green paper (child welfare).
    Third strike: will only increase paid parental leave to 26 weeks if it is going to cost them votes.

    The Nats need to consider a by election being held due to the unexpected occuring.

    • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 15.1

      Oh noes. Did you vote National last election?

      • Treetop 15.1.1

        Did you vote National last election?

        Do I sound as though I would vote for National?

        I always vote.

        • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 15.1.1.1

          So what was all that strike nonsense? You were never going to let them bat anyway.

          • Treetop 15.1.1.1.1

            You were never going to let them bat anyway.

            I do not go around with blinkers on my eyes when it comes to any government. Occasionally I like a National Government policy. When I feel that a government is getting it wrong I will voice my opinion as I have in 15 and I do realise that I am being judgmental.

  16. Jeremy 16

    I agree it’s not a question about being too expensive.

  17. Apparently the veto is going to happen according top @avancenz:

    English says govt will veto paid parental leave bill.
    He says it will not be politically damaging as the public are “pragmatic.”

    It will be interesting to see how “pragmatic” the public are, especialy when English is making this decision before the actual size and timing has been discussed and decided in parliament.

  18. Ed 18

    NRT has an interesting perspective on this
    http://www.norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2012/04/financial-veto-and-constitution.html
    Would a majority in favour of the bill be prepared to also vote to suspect Standing Orders?

    • Ed 18.1

      Of course I should have said suspend not suspect.

      Is such a suspension of standing orders possible by a majority of members of parliament?

  19. fender 19

    Its interesting that Double Dipton says we cant afford this and need to wait until we return to surplus, however surely the same argument would apply to cutting taxes.

    • Treetop 19.1

      English is not interested in the gains, all he is focusing on is the money hook.

      A major gain would be giving a woman 12 extra weeks to sort out post – natal depression which is not always picked up in the first 14 weeks of a delivery.

      Even if extending the Paid Parental Bill does not make the third reading, I hope that it is debated in the House.

      • Jim Nald 19.1.1

        Is TAB taking bets that John Key will go ahead and kill le Bill ?

        • bad12 19.1.1.1

          Nah the Tory’s are fronting the Member from Dipton on this, no-one likes Bill so they consider that there is less damage being done to the Party overall at a time when the support has definitely gone soft than have Slippery on the TV giving out the negative message,

          In such situations We don’t see Slippery as having the intellectual rigour to front foot stuff like this anything past the politics of smile’nwave is way over our Prime Ministers head…

    • David H 19.2

      And what about the double dipton dipping on his properties???? Farkin thief.

    • PoliticallyCorrected 19.3

      Surely the same argument would apply to his double dipton accommodation rort.

  20. George D 20

    The moment it becomes about cost, the debate is lost. It’s their spin trump card. Never mind that we can afford it; what do families know about government finances?

    It’s about families, children, mothers, fathers, people. Not cost. It was very nice to see Labour put a policy-based hit on the government. But if they don’t go into an intense media-drive, with a disciplined message about families, they’ll lose the impetus they’ve built. That would be disappointing.

  21. Descendant Of Smith 21

    Of course if they paid more money directly to the families there would be:

    1. Less paid to the private sector from government funds for childcare
    2. Less DPB paid as some people currently do separate due to the financial pressure

    It makes no sense to pay childcare centres money to care for some mothers child who has to go to work – much of which would then be paid in childcare.

    Of course if they lifted the minimum wage to a decent amount.

    Here’s some expenditure they could cut:

    It also shows the cost of consultants at the Treasury has increased from $1.5 million in 2008 to $8 million in 2011.

  22. fatty 22

    This is National’s forward thinking again…in 16-20 years we should have ourselves a significant crime spike which will create a number of jobs – police, social workers, law etc.
    Reminds me of how Fatty Brownstain claims to be building roads cause oil prices are cyclical…that will come in use in 10million years.

    Roads ‘already paid for’ is a stupid line to suck in stupid voters. Tax is tax, spending is spending.
    please, can people try not to be stupid

  23. Steve 23

    Complete BS that we as a country cannot afford this..

    Cancel Puhoi-Wellsford in its current form and instead spend $3-500m on Operation Lifesaver to bypass Warkworth and alleviate the bottleneck at the end of the Northern Gateway. This is estimated to bring in approx 80% of the Puford benefits which if you believe has a BCR of around 1 on a $1.5-$2b project would result in between $1.2-$1.6b of benefits for Lifesaver and BCR of at least 2.4. Wow a BCR that suggests a project is worth doing1

    With the remaining $1b or so spend some on upgrading / extending the North Auckland Rail line to Marsden Point so big freight trains can run from the deepwater port to Auckland. This not only reduces the some of the need for a trucking route but also saves us in maintenance to repair the damage that the bigger trucks on the road do.

    We’ve still probably got $750m left which pays for 5 years of extending paid parental to 6 months and there are likely to be other benefits e.g. costs avoided that make the return on this investment well worth it.

    We could also look at rebalancing some of the WFF spend e.g. why are taxpayers contributing where there are more than 3 kids – population replacement is only 2 point something. Am all for population replacement, but beyond that.. Same could apply with paid parental to make it more equitable..

  24. Foreign Waka 24

    I am reading through the comments and a lot of them are about roads, taxes, cars etc…. not many comments about mothers who have to get ready in all but three months to go back to work. Many European countries have a minimum of 1 year maternity leave because of the support for mother and child to establish and maintain breastfeeding, bonding between child and mother, any routine development – sleeping, feeding, health issues etc. I belief that 1 year should be the minimum, after which a good daycare center that has some understanding of the importance of the child’s brain development over the next 2-3 years.Of cause such wild and lofty ideas would need investment but I guess the difference to politicians is the choice of words for such undertaking. One should not forget that a parent thinks about a child’s future that goes beyond 3 years and some populist pondering to the one’s who sponsor the election campaign.

  25. Blue 25

    This is what really pisses me off about Labour. Priorities. Extending paid parental leave is a nice idea. But it is not really top priority at the moment. The current leave entitlements are far from barbaric, the country is in the economic shit, and there are bigger fish to fry.

    But Labour only ever get headlines for shit like this, making them look like morons who live on a different planet to most Kiwis.

    This is not the right time for this bill, it’s as simple as that.

    If there is one thing that lame-duck Shearer could try to get right, it’s making sure that Labour focus on and are seen to focus on what is most pressing and important.

    • QoT 25.1

      You know Labour’s in Opposition right now, right? You know that the bill is a Private Member’s Bill in the name of Sue Moroney, so not actually official Labour policy (though obviously it has the support of the caucus) right?

      On top of those annoying little facts … you’re talking about a bill which has an obvious good social impact, for comparatively low cost, one which at least in its first reading will have the support of a majority of Parliament, every party except NACT, and is garnering a lot of media attention which is at worst neutral publicity-building and at best a signal to disaffected centre-left voters that Labour gives a shit about important social issues …

      Yeah. Such a terrible own-goal. *headdesk*

      (Well, I’m sure they’ll find a way to spin it wrong, in which case you might have a point, but right now? Not so much, mate.)

      • Blue 25.1.1

        I am not saying that this is a bad idea. I am saying it blatantly flies in the face of the public mood at the moment. If the economy was healthy, then I would say go ahead, have at it. But it’s not.

        Times are tough, and people in the street know that because they are suffering. They want a party that understands that, not one that looks like it doesn’t get it.

        Labour right now look like they don’t get it. However the bill came about, all the public sees is Labour with a ‘let them eat cake’ attitude. It is a PR disaster.

        • Colonial Viper 25.1.1.1

          You’re no judge of the public mood.

          However the bill came about, all the public sees is Labour with a ‘let them eat cake’ attitude. It is a PR disaster.

          WTF are you on about.

          How does extending parental leave equate at all with a dismissive “let (the poor) eat cake” attitude? Let’s hear your logic.

          • Blue 25.1.1.1.1

            It’s about having no idea and being out of touch. If the poor are rioting because there is no bread, well, why don’t they eat cake instead?

            If the people in NZ are struggling with job insecurity, rising living costs and the public services they rely on being cut, do they really give a shit about extending paid parental leave that they will never take because they are too worried about not having a job to come back to?

            It’s about priorities. Extending paid parental leave = cake. Fixing the economic shitstorm we are currently in = bread.

            • Colonial Viper 25.1.1.1.1.1

              It’s about having no idea and being out of touch. If the poor are rioting because there is no bread, well, why don’t they eat cake instead?

              Which riots (literal or metaphorical) are you referring to?

              do they really give a shit about extending paid parental leave that they will never take because they are too worried about not having a job to come back to?

              A large proportion of the million or so employed women in this country will care.

              It’s about priorities. Extending paid parental leave = cake. Fixing the economic shitstorm we are currently in = bread.

              Labour can’t fix the economic shit storm we are in. Well, it could, but its not going to be the kind of fix which ‘brings back BAU growth’ and anyhows, the will is not there to do it.

            • Ed 25.1.1.1.1.2

              So if it is just priorities, would 0.5 % added to all tax rates increase revenue by more than enough to pay for it? That would be choosing a different priority wouldn’t it? Would 0.1% be enough?

              Alternatively, we know that the government believes that reducing the top tax rate stimulates higher profits and increased tax revenue – would a reduction in the top tax rate of say 1% be enough to generate additional revenue to cover this initiative?

        • QoT 25.1.1.2

          … You don’t think the “people in the street”‘s concerns also include “how the fuck can I afford to have kids / why would I even bother having kids when I’ll have to go straight back to work”?

    • Draco T Bastard 25.2

      The current leave entitlements are far from barbaric, the country is in the economic shit, and there are bigger fish to fry.

      Actually, economically, we’re not – financially we are but that’s all delusion anyway.

  26. Tombstone 26

    Hand outs to the rich no problem – do something for our mums and their babies and suddenly the National faithful are beating their chests and claiming that it’s unaffordable and just another case of handouts for bludgers. Seems to me that the National faithful are just a pack of sorry arsed wankers who love nothing more than worship false gods and sneer at those who they consider to be beneath them. It’s called ignorance.

  27. just saying 27

    30 years ago I would loved to have had another child. We chose not to because we both worked and could not afford the time off. $150m in the scheme of things is not a lot (if that is the correct figure). The author mentions some National errors etc, so identify those costs, eliminate them and then we can afford the parental leave.

  28. Steve Wrathall 28

    So, $1B/month of extra debt piled onto our children is unsufficient? You want to increase this further by even more middle-class welfare? Obviously Labour’s learned nought from last year’s public rejection of their sanctimonious spendthrift ways and their smearing their opponents as anti-family. And funny how the bloated Euro welfare states thrown up as examples to emulate in this debate are hurtling towards bankruptcy and desperately trying tio claw back their entitlements. Yeah, lets follow them over the cliff.

    • Billy Fish 28.1

      “And funny how the bloated Euro welfare states thrown up as examples to emulate in this debate are hurtling towards bankruptcy and desperately trying tio claw back their entitlements. Yeah, lets follow them over the cliff.”

      some are and some aren’t so this is a diversion and pointless issue to raise.

      the question of piling an extra $1B per month onto debt is a valid one and how this pans out in this discussion is a good question.

    • Descendant Of Smith 28.2

      If you were being consistent you would agree that the tax cuts National gave were unaffordable.

      You would also be critical of much of this government’s expenditure including giving more money to private schools, the spending on the roads that make little difference to the country, the increase in the Prime Minister’s support team, the shift of money to private enterprise via consultants, the Prime Minister awarding financial cash prizes to people, the payments made to Jenny Shipley et al for doing what in Chch ( if you can tell me what Shipley has actually done to earn her money I’d be gobsmacked), the “loan” to cover Mediaworks licensing fees, the millions thrown at religious fundamentalists for “parenting programs”, and so on.

      The list of expenditure we could not afford is endless.

      You would be highly critical of the government extending the bailout further for SCF and also including interest payments over and above.

      You might also be arguing for income testing of NZS.

      This government has borrowed more money than any other government and somehow you think they are some sort of financial maestro who have the country’s interests at heart.

      The only austerity measures being implemented are on the most vulnerable – it’s completely fucked up and upside down.

  29. james 111 29

    Interesting when Labour was in and brought in parental leave for 3 months.The mother and leader of the party at that time Helen Clark was asked why they didn’t do 6 months like other countries? She replied we looked at it but it was unaffordable.
    So it was unaffordable then in better economic times than now . Why would it be affordable now?

    Very hypocritical for the Labour party to even be supporting the bill.This is the issue I have with the Labour party there is no pragmatism,and realism.

    • Colonial Viper 29.1

      So it was unaffordable then in better economic times than now . Why would it be affordable now?

      Uh, because Labour had a whole range of other important things to spend on back then, and 3 months was a vast improvement on no months. Any other daft questions?

  30. james 111 30

    Can anyone tell me what the Meatworkers union has been doing with all the funds it has been receiving as it certainly hasnt been fully declaring them. Surely they havent been ripping off the workers ?

    CEO Hamish Simson says the union has not declared its total income, and has failed to disclose what it does with its members’ contributions.

    “It appears from the union’s published financial statements that only a fraction of its total income has been declared,” says Mr Simson.

    “Affco workers contribute over $500,000 to the union each year, paying $5.95 each per week. Affco workers represent less than 10 percent of the 23,000 members the Union says it has and yet it only declares revenue of just over $700,000 per annum”.

    • fender 30.1

      Hey “old sock jim”, check out what the SFO spokesman had to say on the matter. He stopped short of calling the allegations “frivolous” to protect himself legally, but its clear to all that Affco were just trying to detract from the real issues with their mud slinging. Theres been no misappropriation of funds as the Union are an honest bunch and dont operate like many dishonest companies, however much you wish they would.

  31. Jenny 31

    Dictatorship

    Democracy suffers with use of veto.
    What is even more appalling, is that this first ever unprecedented use of the veto in the history of our parliament is being used not in war, or Depression, or dire national emergency but to attack mothers and infants.

    Acting Prime Minister Bill English confirmed yesterday the Government would stop Labour MP Sue Moroney’s member’s bill, which would have increased the allowance from 14 weeks to 26 by 2014.
    The bill seemed likely to pass after most political parties, except ACT and National, had indicated they would vote for it

    stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 12/04/201

    The big lie

    Like all attacks on democracy it requires the big lie.

    A Big Lie from a government that has thrown away $billions on bailouts, and tax cuts for the well off.

    “The Labour Party don’t appear to have learnt anything, they think that handing out lollies is how you get political favours.”
    Bill English Stuff.co.nz

    Why aren’t we marching in the street?

    Labour or United Future should be calling a rally on the steps of parliament to protest this attack on our democracy.

  32. james 111 32

    So lets explore this Labour fairy dream with a bit more depth it is an own goal as they knew they could never fund it when they were in office Helen Clark said it was to costly. Lets say it got through by some stroke of appalling bad luck

    Here is a very likely Scenario
    Candidate A a male 26 years degree qualified comes for a job well presented could do the job
    Candidate B a female 26 years degree qualified comes for a job well presented could do the job

    Both are equally qualified and could do the job

    I am the employer guess who I will employ every time the Male because there will be less business interruption, and cost to the business . This one change could easily stop females being employed at the same rate as Males.
    Just as Labour thought they were being cute in increasing minimum rates we have never seen so many youth unemployed because an employer can hire an experienced person for the same cost.This is the trouble when you become blinded with ideology you cant look at things rationally and end up shooting own goals

    • handle 32.1

      “This is the trouble when you become blinded with ideology”? Your lack of self-awareness is priceless.

    • Colonial Viper 32.2

      Lucky most employers I know aren’t as prejudiced and bigoted as yourself.

      Just as Labour thought they were being cute in increasing minimum rates we have never seen so many youth unemployed because an employer can hire an experienced person for the same cost.

      That’s mainly because National dumped older experienced workers as waste into unemployment lines.

    • QoT 32.3

      So … the point is that you’re an idiot sexist?

  33. millhouse 33

    If you were the employer and employed the man every time regardless of qualification?

    My guess is you would quickly get a visit from the Labour Department / Human Rights Commission for violating the Human Rights Act and the Employment Relations Act. Following that visit you would then find yourself being fined at the Human Rights Review Tribunal.

    • james 111 33.1

      Millhouse
      At the end of the day its my choice both are equally qualfied. I chose to take the Male because he was a better fit. It could never be proven as discrimination. Believe me it would happen ,and the trendy lefties havent even thought it through. Females would be disadvantaged by this move and there would be less employed for sure because of a move like this that would not have wide spread employers support ( you know the evil bastards that create jobs for people)

      • millhouse 33.1.1

        james 111, I believe that the Human Rights Review Tribunal would call choosing the male every time, as they have in the past, a “pervasive pattern of gender discrimination”.

        Also:

        Q). What two things do Sweden, Denmark, Canada and Norway all have in common?

        A). They all have equal or higher rates of female workplace participation* as New Zealand whilst also having more than six months of paid parental leave.

        *2010 World Bank “Labor force participation rate”

        • james 111 33.1.1.1

          Millhouse
          They wouldn’t even know it of course would be done subtly no one would know .Some what similar to Labour filling the Government departments with their cronies. Before you knew it there would be alot fewer females of that age employed over the country in relation to males, everyone would be asking why is this? When the answer would be staring them in the face!

          • fender 33.1.1.1.1

            OMG james, you have to stop posting once you are drunk, you are embarrassing yourself.

          • millhouse 33.1.1.1.2

            According to both Statistics New Zealand and Treasury female workplace participation rose following the first introduction of paid paternity leave.

            Really, what are you even talking about?

      • prism 33.1.2

        ‘A better fit’ gives me fits. Another way of saying – matches my prejudices.

        • rosy 33.1.2.1

          hmm. I know exactly the sort of employer he would be (if he made it that far). I once lost out on a job to someone like him. It was something I was easily qualified for and I was the best candidate – I lost to nobody, there wasn’t another person he’d interviewed who he thought could do the job as well as me. But the potential employer couldn’t take the risk that I might take time off because of my children, even though I had an excellent employment record and had just completed a 3yr degree in… 3 years, . He told me that himself and then re-advertised. To this day I hope he got someone who got pregnant after paid parental leave was introduced 😉

      • Descendant Of Smith 33.1.3

        James:

        You’re already a prejudiced idiot like Alasdair Thomson so it’s probably fortunate that you wouldn’t employ women. I’d feel sorry for any that had to work for you.

        You pontificate (note to self: must use two syllable words when responding to James) about how anyone remotely left wing must follow the law e.g. your recent drivel about unions, but somehow the same doesn’t apply to you.

        You are somehow magically above the law.

        Maybe your moniker is more appropriate than you know:

        “James III (10 July 1451 – 11 June 1488) was King of Scots from 1460 to 1488. James was an unpopular and ineffective monarch owing to an unwillingness to administer justice fairly and a disastrous relationship with nearly all his extended family.”

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Time for inquiry into petrol margins
    It’s time for an inquiry into petrol companies as margins are once again at the high levels that prompted concerns late last year, says Labour's Energy Spokesperson Stuart Nash. "Over the December January holiday period, petrol importer margins jumped to… ...
    8 hours ago
  • More talk as Auckland congestion worsens
    The main impact of the Government’s agreement with Auckland Council today will be simply to delay still further decisions needed to relieve the city’s traffic congestion, says Labour’s Auckland Issues Spokesperson, Phil Goff. “Government has been aware for more than… ...
    1 day ago
  • Serco inquiry extended
    A two month delay to the Government investigation into prison fight clubs shows the extent of problems within the Serco circus, says Labour’s Corrections spokesperson Kelvin Davis. “My office received a tsunami of complaints so I’m not surprised the terms… ...
    1 day ago
  • Truck Shops ignore consumer laws
    A damning Commerce Commission report out today highlights the failure of the Government to protect poor and vulnerable families from unscrupulous truck shops, says Labour’s Consumer Affairs Spokesperson David Shearer. “The report found that 31 out of 32 firms it… ...
    1 day ago
  • Taihoa at Ihumatao says Labour
    Labour’s housing spokesperson Phil Twyford has called on the Government to rethink its controversial Special Housing Area in Māngere. Auckland Council is today meeting to discuss the development which borders the Otuataua Stonefield Historic Reserve. This project is to get… ...
    1 day ago
  • Figures suggest National deliberately excluded farming
    Figures showing the dairy industry would be categorised as high risk if there were a further five severe injuries within a year, strongly suggests National designed its flawed system to deliberately exclude farming, Labour’s spokesperson for Labour Issues Iain Lees-Galloway… ...
    1 day ago
  • Bleak report on the state of our children
    A damning conclusion by the Children’s Commissioner today that ‘we don’t know if children are better off as a result of state intervention, but the indications are not good’ should make fixing CYFs a top priority for this Government, says… ...
    1 day ago
  • Dodgy data used to justify axing KiwiSaver kickstart
    National’s agenda to run down KiwiSaver has become even clearer from a scathing critique of the Government’s justification for axing the $1000 kickstart, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson. “Since National came to power they have not only continually undermined… ...
    2 days ago
  • Unsecure website risks Ashley MoBIEson hack
    Experts have raised security concerns that vulnerabilities in MoBIE’s half million-dollar website could lead to a possible Ashley Maddison-style hack, says Labour’s Economic Development spokesperson David Clark. “The real issue here is not what data is immediately available, but what… ...
    2 days ago
  • Democracy still the loser in Canterbury
    The Government has demonstrated once again how arrogant and out of touch it is in denying Cantabrians the same democratic rights as the rest of the country, says Labour’s Environment spokesperson Megan Woods.  “The Environment Canterbury Bill which has been… ...
    2 days ago
  • Waiver cost still a mystery
    The Government still has no idea what it’s going to cost community and voluntary groups to get a waiver from the fees police will charge to carry out checks on their staff and volunteers, says Labour’s Community and Voluntary spokesperson… ...
    2 days ago
  • China exports fall 27 per cent in a year
    Exports to China have fallen by 27 per cent over the last 12 months - showing that the looming economic slowdown should have been expected by the Government, says Labour’s Economic Development Spokesperson David Clark. “The Chinese economic slowdown should… ...
    2 days ago
  • National should support all families for 26 weeks
    Families with multiple babies, and those born prematurely or with disabilities, are the winners from moves to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks but the Government must give all babies the same head start in life, Labour’s spokesperson for… ...
    2 days ago
  • National’s health and safety shambles puts school camps at risk
    Reports that schools are considering scrapping student camps and tearing out playgrounds highlights just how badly National has managed its health and safety reforms, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “Schools have been left completely in the dark about the… ...
    2 days ago
  • National’s asset stripping agenda hits schools
    National’s fire-sale of school houses and land is short-sighted, mean-spirited, and will have huge unintended consequences that we will pay for in years to come, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. Documents obtained by Labour show the Ministry of Education… ...
    2 days ago
  • Takahe massacre supposed to get all New Zealanders involved in conservation
    The Minister’s claim that a  botched cull of one of New Zealand’s rarest birds was a way of getting all New Zealanders involved in conservation is offensive and ludicrous, Labour’s conservation spokesperson Ruth Dyson says.  “An email from Minister Maggie… ...
    3 days ago
  • Serco circus rolls on with revelations of fight club practice
    Further revelations that a Serco prison guard was coaching inmates on fight club techniques confirms a fully independent inquiry needs to take place, says Labour’s Corrections spokesperson Kelvin Davis. “The Minister’s statement today that a guard was coaching sparring techniques… ...
    3 days ago
  • Government targets put ahead of students’ education
    The Government must urgently reassess the way it sets NCEA targets after a new report found they are forcing schools to “credit farm” and are undermining the qualification, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “A PPTA report released today says… ...
    3 days ago
  • ER patients in corridors as health cuts bite
    Patients are being forced to wait for hours on beds in corridors as cash strapped hospitals struggle to keep up with budget cuts, says Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King. “People coming to the emergency room and being forced to wait… ...
    3 days ago
  • Not too late to fix Health and Safety for New Zealand’s workers
    The Government and its minor party supporters are showing an arrogant disregard for workers’ lives by not agreeing to a cross-party solution to the botched Health and Safety bill, Opposition leader Andrew Little says. “Yesterday I wrote to the Prime… ...
    3 days ago
  • Speech to the New Zealand Council of Infrastructure Development
    Tēnā Kotou Katoa. Thank you so much for having me along to speak today. Can I begin by acknowledging John Rae, the President, and Stephen Selwood, the chief executive of the Council for Infrastructure Development. ...
    4 days ago
  • Reserve Bank points finger at Govt inaction
    In scathing criticism of the Government’s inaction, the Reserve Bank says Auckland housing supply is growing nowhere near fast enough to make a dent the housing shortage, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. Reserve Bank deputy governor Grant Spencer today… ...
    4 days ago
  • Chickens come home to roost on climate change
    The Government’s gutting of the Emissions Trading Scheme has caused foresters to leave and emissions to rise, says Labour’s Climate Change spokesperson Megan Woods. “The release of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Facts and Figures Report for 2014 on the ETS… ...
    4 days ago
  • Website adds to long list of big spends at MBIE
    The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s $560,000 outlay on its new website is further evidence of excessive spending by Steven Joyce on his pet project super ministry, Labour’s Economic Development spokesperson David Clark says.  “Hot on the heels of… ...
    4 days ago
  • Brownlee warned over EQC repairs but ignored them
    Gerry Brownlee was warned that EQC’s underfloor repairs weren’t being done properly by industry experts, the cross party working group and in public but he arrogantly ignored them all, says Labour’s Earthquake Commission spokesperson Clayton Cosgrove.  “Today’s apology and commitment… ...
    4 days ago
  • Serco wants in on state house sell off
    The Government must keep scandal plagued outsourcing company Serco away from our state housing after their disastrous record running Mt Eden prison, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. "Today it has emerged that at the same time Serco was under… ...
    6 days ago
  • Come clean on Pasifika education centre
    Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iinga needs to come clean and tell the Pasifika communities if he’s working to save the Pasifika Education Centre or shut it down, Labour’s Pasifika spokesperson Su’a William Sio says.  “I’m gutted the Pasifika Education Centre funding… ...
    1 week ago
  • Time for NZTA to work on alternatives to flyover
    The High Court decision rejecting the New Zealand Transport Agency’s attempts to build the Basin Reserve flyover must now mean that NZTA finally works with the community on other options for transport solutions in Wellington, Grant Robertson and Annette King… ...
    1 week ago
  • Shiny new system leads to record truancy
    Record high truancy rates shows the Government’s much-vaunted new attendance system is an abysmal failure, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “Data released today shows truancy rates have spiked more than 15 per cent in 2014 and are now at… ...
    1 week ago
  • Woodhouse wrong about quarries
      The Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety Michael Woodhouse was wrong yesterday when he said limestone quarries were covered by the farcical Health and Safety legislation, says Labour’s Associate Labour spokesperson Sue Moroney.  “He said he ‘understood’ limestone quarries… ...
    1 week ago
  • Taxpayers money spent on culling one of our rarest birds
    It beggars belief that four endangered takahe were killed by incompetent cullers contracted to the Department of Conservation and the Minister must explain this wanton destruction, says Conservation spokesperson Ruth Dyson. “It must not be forgotten that there are only… ...
    1 week ago
  • Housing NZ must immediately move family
    Housing New Zealand must immediately move a Glen Innes family whose son contracted serious and potentially fatal health problems from the appalling condition of their state house, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “Te Ao Marama Wensor and community workers… ...
    1 week ago
  • No understanding of the value of overseas investment
     The Government has now admitted it has absolutely no idea of the actual value of foreign investment in New Zealand, says Labour’s Land Information spokesperson Stuart Nash.  “It is crucial that the Government starts to understand just what this overseas… ...
    1 week ago
  • Another bridges bribe from Simon Bridges
    Simon Bridges is embroiled in another bridges-for-votes controversy after admitting funding for a replacement bridge in Queenstown is “very much about… the 2017 election”, Labour’s Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “The Transport Minister is today reported as telling Queenstown locals… ...
    1 week ago
  • Saudi tender process reeks of SkyCity approach
    The tender process for the $6m investment in a Saudi sheep farm reeks like the SkyCity convention centre deal and once again contravenes the government’s own procurement rules, says Labour’s Export Growth and Trade spokesperson David Parker. “The $6m contract… ...
    1 week ago
  • Maori Party should stand up for workers
    The Government’s proposed Health and Safety Reform Bill does not go far enough to protect those in specific industries with the highest rates of workplace deaths, says Maori Development Spokesperson Nanaia Mahuta. “We are told that Maori workers are more… ...
    1 week ago
  • Minister must explain budget blowout
    Māori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell must explain a budget blow out at Te Puni Kokiri, after the organisation spent more than 2.5 million dollars over their budget for contractors, says Labour’s Associate Māori Development spokesperson Peeni Henare.  “For the… ...
    1 week ago
  • Successful effort to raise the issue of GE trees in proposed standard
    Many thousands of people submitted on the proposed National Environmental Standard –  Plantation Forestry (NES-PF).  A vast majority of the public submissions were particularly focussed on the NES having included GE trees in its mandate. People want these provisions removed,… ...
    GreensBy Steffan Browning MP
    1 week ago
  • Fair Share Friday – Thoughts and Reflections
    As part of our Fair Share  campaign, Green MPs have been doing a series of visits to community groups across the country to have conversations about inequality in New Zealand and what communities are experiencing on the ground. I visited… ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche MP
    1 week ago
  • Crucial Auditor General investigation welcomed
    The Auditor General’s decision to investigate the Saudi sheep scandal is important, necessary and welcome, Labour’s Trade and Export Growth spokesperson David Parker says. “The independent functions of the Auditor General are a cornerstone of the New Zealand system of… ...
    1 week ago
  • KiwiSaver sign-ups continue to fall
    New KiwiSaver sign-ups in July were 45 per cent below the monthly average, despite John Key saying axing the kickstart “will not make a blind bit of difference to the number of people who join KiwiSaver”, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson… ...
    1 week ago
  • Contact bows to pressure
    Contact Energy’s decision to cut its pre-pay rates to be in line with its customers who pay monthly is good news and the company deserves credit for responding so quickly, says Labour’s Consumer Affairs Spokesperson David Shearer.  “Two months ago… ...
    1 week ago
  • I’m pushing for a ‘fair go’ for solar
    My Fair Go For Solar Bill was pulled from the Members’ Ballot last week and is set for a vote in Parliament. In this blog post I explain some of the background to the bill and how it aims to… ...
    GreensBy Gareth Hughes MP
    1 week ago
  • Key must explain why Health and Safety Bill pulled
    John Key must explain why his Government is delaying the Health and Safety Bill when Pike River families have travelled to Wellington specifically to register their opposition, Opposition Leader Andrew Little says. “Yesterday afternoon John Key suggested the bill may… ...
    1 week ago
  • Diving for sustainable scallops
    Last week, there were calls for scallop dredging to be banned in the Marlborough Sounds, following scientific report saying that 70% of the Sounds had been lost from dredging, trawling, and sedimentation from forestry. At the same time we see… ...
    GreensBy Steffan Browning MP
    2 weeks ago
  • Backdown whiff in state house leasing option
    Bill English’s admission that the Government is looking at leasing large numbers of state houses to non-government providers has the whiff of a backdown, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “This is an acknowledgement by Bill English that he has… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Housing crisis downgrade threatening banking sector
    The out of control Auckland housing market is now threatening the banking sector, with Standard and Poor’s downgrading the credit rating of our banks out of fear of the bubble bursting, Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson says. “Today we have… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Good money after bad for failed experiment
    The National government are throwing good money after bad with their decision to pump even more funding into their failed charter school experiment, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says.  “There are already major problems with several of the first charter… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • National borrows Labour’s idea on urban development
    Labour's Associate Environment spokesperson Phil Twyford says he welcomes the Government's adoption of Labour's policy for a National Policy Statement on urban development, and has called on the Government to take up Labour's offer to work together on these issues.… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Toothless OIO never refused a single farmland sale
    The Overseas Investment Office has approved more than 290 consents from foreign investors to buy sensitive land in New Zealand, but has not turned down a single application says Labour’s Land Information spokesperson Stuart Nash  “The Minister of Land information,… ...
    2 weeks ago

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere