ŠĒ• Stephen Franks
Sue Moroney has had her bill to extend the cost to taxpayers for paid¬†parental¬†leave and the media have lapped it up…however it commits the government to spending money, therefore it comes down to supply, Stephen Franks explains why her bill is as dead as her ability to win an electorate seat.
It¬†has no show of passing without Government support, as she would know, yet it has been reported widely as if it could proceed over the objections of the Government. ¬†Without that spurious possibility it would have had no newsworthiness.
Standing Orders are clear. A money bill (which would commit government money)can be vetoed¬†by the Minister of Finance.
“The House will not pass a bill, amendment or motion that the government certifies it does not concur in because, in its view, the bill, amendment or motion would have more than a minor impact on the government‚Äôs fiscal aggregates if it became law”
The Bill is, nevertheless the kind of measure that works politically, even if it is bad for the economy, and bad for the women of child bearing age who become more susceptible to the¬†covert discrimination by which employers protect themselves from unequally shared social costs. The accumulation of such feel-good measures has transformed Western democracies¬†over two generations¬†from world economic powerhouses to¬†parasites on the energy and capital forming sacrifice of poorer people.
Greece is just the most obvious case. It¬†is a poster example of what happens when cynical politicians pander to a nation of¬†greedy, dishonest, whining bludgers. The honest toilers pay the price along with those who’ve ruined them.
Stephen Franks gives Labour a challenge in his parting paragraph:
What a pity¬†Labour¬†has not¬†put up a bill to reform something they campaigned on last election, where the embarrrassment of the financial veto would mean more politically. They could, for example, lodge¬†bills to push out the pension age, or to impose capital gains tax. If they got a majority to support those, consider¬†the political impact of forcing the government to exercise the veto to protect John Key from doing what he has already admitted to be the right thing for the economy.