Last night the final act of Sue Moroney’s paid parental leave bill played out in Parliament, as Labour struggled to get a symbolic vote in the face of Bill English’s disgraceful and undemocratic veto.
English vetoed on the grounds of “unaffordability”, but did he actually know the cost?
English admits maths error in bill veto defence
Finance Minister Bill English has admitted he got his numbers wrong when he was defending his decision to veto a Labour Party bill to extend paid parental leave.
…
Mr English put the nail in the coffin of the legislation when he tabled a financial veto the week before last.At the time he told RNZ that he did so because the costs of extending the leave to 26 weeks were simply too high.
“The six months paid parental leave would add about, when it’s fully in place, about $280 million a year on top of the current $250m we spend,” he said
Ms Moroney challenged him about the figures in Parliament.
“Does he stand by his statement to Radio New Zealand on 17 June 2016 that extending paid parental leave to 26 weeks would add when it’s fully in place about $280 million a year.”
Mr English admitted he was incorrect and should have used the figures written in the veto certificate he himself had tabled.
…
Ms Moroney then asked how Mr English got it so wrong.He replied that he did so because he confused the $280m over four years, with $280m a year….
Yup, that’s how much English knew about the cost of the bill – supported by a majority in Parliament – that he vetoed on the grounds of cost. (Unusual for English he’s usually knows where the last $20 is.) As to whether or not English cared – well – not enough to speak to the debate last night. Shame.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress