sharetrader
Page 17 of 697 FirstFirst ... 71314151617181920212767117517 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 6963
  1. #161
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iceman View Post
    If we are going to have paid parental leave, the parents should decide for themselves how they want to use it, not the Gummit
    Some would have us believe that since its the Gummits money they decide the rules.

  2. #162
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justakiwi View Post
    Simple. Labour has committed to extending the period of paid parental leave (for one parent) to 22 weeks initially, up to 26 in 2020. There are several ideas behind this. That provides a significant chunk of time for one parent to focus on bonding with their baby, establishing breastfeeding (if its Mum), recovering from birth especially if it was a birth requiring medical intervention. The NZ College of Midwives has come out in support of this initiative.
    It would be useful for Labour to cite the research that supports an extension to 26 weeks. Thus far all I have heard is "NZCM supports it" and the odd mention that the policies other countries in the OECD are currently greater than ours, neither of which adequately supports their policy in an objective fashion.
    Last edited by Zaphod; 15-11-2017 at 11:54 AM.

  3. #163
    Speedy Az winner69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    37,738

    Default

    If National MP Jian Yang was the China conduit to NZ I wonder whose doing that role for the Labour Government.

    Labour in Opposition seemed quite comfortable with Jian Yang and never made any comment about him at all.

    That Professor Brady has some interesting views on Chinese relationships.
    Last edited by winner69; 16-11-2017 at 07:23 AM.
    “ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”

  4. #164
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,502

    Default

    Wellington trains on strike. No coincidence that happens under Labour. No coincidence the Speaker of the house is a card carrying member of that Union

  5. #165
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minimoke View Post
    Some would have us believe that since its the Gummits money they decide the rules.
    But it isn't the gummints money; it belongs to those they are returning it to - minus about 40% for handling fees.

  6. #166
    Guru justakiwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Canterbury
    Posts
    2,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minimoke View Post
    Wellington trains on strike. No coincidence that happens under Labour. No coincidence the Speaker of the house is a card carrying member of that Union
    Wow ... I feel like I’ve just stumbled into Trump’s Twitter feed.

  7. #167
    Guru justakiwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Canterbury
    Posts
    2,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    But it isn't the gummints money; it belongs to those they are returning it to - minus about 40% for handling fees.
    As it was under a National government too. Don’t pretend your government spent our money any more wisely than Labour is/will. It’s fake news.

  8. #168
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justakiwi View Post
    As it was under a National government too. Don’t pretend your government spent our money any more wisely than Labour is/will. It’s fake news.
    What a strange response. I didn't mention National or Labour and I certainly didn't pretend anything. And neither is 'my' government. Whichever is in power is 'our' government.

  9. #169
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justakiwi View Post
    For some strange reason National has (apparently suddenly, unless I missed something) decided it would be best to give both parents leave at the same time, but only half the amount of leave. Which kind of defeats the purpose of increasing the period of leave in the first place. So of course Labour isn’t going to buy into that suggestion.
    Strange? It's because the current PPL entitlement may be taken by either parent, so logically having both parents off at the same time results in half the entitlement to each. Having both parents entitled to the full amount places a significant financial burden upon the taxpayer, and without peer-reviewed evidence that having both parents present for 26 weeks provides significant benefit for the child, it cannot be justified.

  10. #170
    Guru justakiwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Canterbury
    Posts
    2,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
    Strange? It's because the current PPL entitlement may be taken by either parent, so logically having both parents off at the same time results in half the entitlement to each. Having both parents entitled to the full amount places a significant financial burden upon the taxpayer, and without peer-reviewed evidence that having both parents present for 26 weeks provides significant benefit for the child, it cannot be justified.
    I agree with you. Just wondering why National would consider it a better option for both parents to have time off for a much shorter period of total time, than one parent (could be Mum or could be Dad) having a decent period of time to devote to their newborn (and other children they may have).

    From a mother’s perspective, I would rather see a parent home with a newborn for 26 weeks than two parents home for only 13. If both parents take the 13 week option, they then presumably have to go back to work, which means baby has to go to some form of childcare (might be family but might not be). OR, one parent then makes a decision to give up work. Either way, an 13 week old baby in childcare is not the ideal. Personally, I don’t believe its ideal for a 6 month old baby either but the longer baby can be home with a parent, the better.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •