Paid Parental Leave

Will Dunne try to sell the Government out again?

If it wasn’t for National’s right to veto anything that isn’t budgeted for, this could be another one to run away from what was supposed to be a majority government.

These problems are only arising now because of Steve Joyce’s stuff up in Northland.

Labour MP Sue Moroney has had a second bill for 26 weeks paid parental leave drawn from the ballot — and NZ First leader Winston Peters’ win in Northland means this time the bill may not be voted down.

Ms Moroney’s Paid Parental Leave Bill was one of four drawn from the member’s bill ballot today and follows on from a similar bill she put up in the last Parliamentary term.

Ms Moroney had enough support to pass that last term — which would have forced National to use its financial veto to block it. However, after the 2014 election National and Act had just enough votes to vote it down and it was defeated in February.

Mr Peters’ win in the Northland byelection means National has one fewer vote and NZ First has one more, so Moroney has enough support to pass it again if NZ First, the Maori Party and United Future’s Peter Dunne continue to support it.  Read more »

And so it starts. Thanks Winston

John Key may be “relaxed” over losing Northland to Winston Peters, but it’s changed the dynamics of parliament.

Sue Moroney is having another go at getting her paid parental leave bill through parliament.

The Labour MP had the numbers to pass it in the previous parliament but the government managed to hold it up until the election.

After the election it was able to defeat the bill on a tied vote of 60-60, but Winston Peters’ Northland victory has changed the maths.

Ms Moroney could now count on 61 votes from Labour, the Greens, NZ First, the Maori Party and United Future.

The government would have 60 – National’s 59 and one from ACT.

Ms Moroney wants paid parental leave extended from 16 weeks to 26 weeks.

She’s going to update the previous one and put it in the member’s bill ballot.

It won’t get to parliament until it’s drawn from the ballot, and there are 66 others in the box.

One or two are usually drawn every second Wednesday parliament sits. Read more »

Sue Moroney on Paid Parental Leave

Sue Moroney’s had a slash at Bill English for using ‘trumped-up’ & ‘shonky’ numbers to inflate the cost of her Paid Parental Leave Bill.

Forgetting the fact that whatever the cost we can’t afford it, Moroney is a total moron.

Just so she doesn’t shoot herself in the foot again – I will helpfully provide Labour with its own costings for its Paid Parental Leave policy.  Sue, you can link to this like Clare Curran did.  Pity Labour has removed all its 2011 policies…

Lucky I have copies of them all…Happy to help…

Labour PPL Policy 2011

A little reminder

Since it appears that the Paid Parental Leave bill is going to be debates this evening I think it is timely to have a little reminder about Sue Moroney’s thinking behind the bill.

The Shearer Disease it seems is contagious:

Yeah that’ll sell them

Cash-strapped Labour’s latest fundraising drive is the sale of Paid Parental Leave tee-shirts at $25 a pop.

Perhaps they can put that money towards paying for the policy, which Labour itself estimated to cost $150m.

Thankfully for Labour, there’s now bound to be a stampede of people wanting the shirts, given Sue Moroney’s modelling efforts…

I’m not sure this version of the shirt is a winner though…telling us that Labour plans to borrow the $150 million. Great messaging for Labour’s policy. One shirt says we can’t afford it and the other says we need to borrow millions to fund it…way to go Labour.

UPDATE: Some of you haven’t grasped that the shirts have added truthiness statements at the bottom.

Paid Parental Leave – A highly flawed concept

Taranaki Daily News

Gordon Brown uses some plain provincial speaking to deride the poster child for picking the pockets of taxpayers for paid parental leave:

Ultimately though, this debate comes down to the highly flawed concept that somehow, the rest of us have to pay women for having babies. It’s their choice, surely? It seems not. Once again, we are being flogged by some for not doing enough for working women.

One Sunday paper even had the issue as a lead story on the front page and used the example of a journalism graduate who now had a 15-month-old child. The poor dear was complaining that the entry-level pay wasn’t enough to make it worth her while to actually get a job, what with the cost of childcare.

Somehow this was the Government’s (our) fault. Naturally there was no mention of a dad or a partner – she was “on her own”.

She also said she got pregnant (despite the free contraception we supply) while studying journalism, so presumably that wasn’t in the plan. It’s only a short leap of logic to imply that that would somehow be the Government’s (our) fault as well. Maybe there could be a work scheme for the unemployed so that someone could actually get the pill from the packet, get a glass of water and administer it to those poor dears who can’t manage it for themselves?

14 weeks is stuff all

There is much bickering over paid parental leave being extended from 14 weeks to 6 months. 14 Weeks is essentially three months.

While the living are wailing that they think they should get to pick the pockets of the taxpayers for some extra cash to extend their bludging to 6 months there are people out there that 14 weeks is literally a lifetime.

Take Helena McAlpine…given 3 months left to live she went out on the town and got pinged drunk driving. I doubt she cares very much about paid parental leave being extended, much less attending court…she is busy trying to work out how to live past 14 weeks. She would pay almost anything to extend her life to 6 months…or even two years. She has had her ovaries removed in a bid to extend her life.

Think about 14 weeks for a moment from the perspective of the dying rather than from the living…it is 14 weekends to spend time with family…but likely to only be 12 depending on how aggressive the cancer is. 14 weeks is just 98 days and every day you wake up is one day less in the count down to the end of your life.

For the dying even 6 months or 180 days just doesn’t seem like much…so let’s get some perspective shall we. Screw paid parental leave, it is just greedy living people picking taxpayers pockets for a little bit more.

If only we could simply buy people more time to live by extending an entitlement from government.

Holmes on Paid Parental Leave

NZ Herald

Paul Holmes explains why National is winning and Labour losing the argument on Paid parental leave:

In the end, people are realistic. They hear the numbers and they know what’s realistic and what’s not. People are happy that we can afford $150 million annually for 14 weeks’ paid parental leave, but they believe English when he talks about the destabilising effect of a paid parental leave bill rising suddenly to half a billion dollars a year.

We know that any dramatic increase in paid parental leave from 14 weeks to six months would be paid for by borrowings.

Meaning more debt. English is confident that argument will win through.

Labour will emphasise the value of mother being at home with baby for as long as possible.

And this is a good argument which no one seriously dismisses, but even Helen Clark was firm with Leila Harre, the champion of paid parental leave, that you can’t have nirvana overnight. Especially now that the country is in the doldrums economically.

Comment of the Day

Simon Bridges sums up Sue Moroney’s silly bill well:

Politician of the Week – Bill English

NZ Herald

Bill English gets Politician of Week for telling Sue Moroney to shove her silly paid parental leave bribe back from where she pulled it. Good luck calling Bill English anti-family when he has a full sevens team in his family.

Finance Minister Bill English confirmed this afternoon that National will veto a bill to extend paid parental leave from 14 weeks to six months.

He said the Government would have to borrow more money to fund it just at a time when it was trying to reduce its deficit.

“We have maintained paid parental leave and we currently spend about $150 million [a year] on it,” he told reporters at Parliament.

“But we are still two or three years from getting out of the woods on the deficit so we think it is a bit soon to be trying to expand entitlements when our big challenge has been to maintain them as they are.”

Mr English said Labour specialised in trying to get political benefit without showing the real cost by saying it would take 10 years to implement.

“That’s just misleading the public. The fact is doubling it will cost another $150 million a year. You’d have to borrow half a billion over the next three or four years. We’re simply not willing to do that.”

Expanding entitlements at this stage would be ”getting a bit ahead of ourselves when we are still $10 billion away from clearing our overdraft.”

“We’ve got to get on with that and be fair to everybody in achieving surplus and people can have those choices once we get there.”