I reckon that this could become one of the defining moments of this Government when we look back on it in years to come.
Kind of like the 'Mother of All Budgets' came to define Ruth Richardson and Bolger's Government and the way the cup of tea came to define David Lange's Government - I think this is a moment for this Government.
Not because it's the wrong thing for this Government to do, but because of the underhanded and sneaky and cowardly way that they have done it.
Now, I personally think that the pay equity system did need an overhaul. I mean, I think it is ridiculous to have librarians, as I said yesterday, compare themselves to engineers to justify similar pay.
You can see those jobs are not even the same, right?
But I do not think that it should have been rushed through with the shock and awe that it has been. ACT, in particular, has spent so much time in the past criticizing the previous Labour government for using parliamentary urgency to get around normal processes and keep people out of deliberations.
And yet, here they are doing exactly the same thing because it suits them. And this is significant.
It should have been flagged with people because it affects so many people - and yet, there was no indication whatsoever until yesterday that this was going to happen.
Where was it on the list of the Prime Minister's action plans for the first quarter, or even the 2nd quarter or any quarter? It's just popped up absolutely out of nowhere and it's taken everybody by surprise.
And what's more, they need to stop pretending in Government that this isn't being done in a hurry to have an impact on the Budget.
This is being done in a hurry to save money for the Budget. We know that - because David Seymour said so yesterday.
So everyone, and especially the National Party, needs to pretend that this is being done for some sort of principle, when actually what it's being done for is to save billions and billions and billions of dollars.
The primary problem here, I think, is cowardice. It feels like these guys are rushing this through as quickly as possible with as little notice as possible, so they do not have to own their own decision.
They should own it. It's not a bad decision, but they're making it feel like a bad decision.
And I'll tell you what, oppositions can sense weakness - and they know that these guys are weak on this and they're going to strike on it, which is why I think this Government is itself making this a defining moment.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show HERE - where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
I guess even Heather can see that this is a vote-loser for her side of politics. As Janet Wilson points out in today's 'Post', ACT hasn't many female votes to lose, whereas National has. More than that, Brooke van Velden will get back on the List next year, even if Tamaki doesn't elect her again (and as a Tamaki elector, I hope that is the case). And some who support the changes abominate the process.
I call bullshit on this from Heather.
Most people couldn’t give a rats about pay equity.
Ask anyone to define what it is. I seriously doubt you would get a reasonable answer.
Quoting from B VvV’s Cabinet paper
"Clause 95
Communications
I do not intend to make any announcement on the changes to the Act until the Bill is introduced. I am cognisant of the risk that announcing the changes before introducing the Bill could prompt pay equity claims being filed and potentially determined by the Authority under the existing Act."
Very sneaky, underhand, duplicitous, deceitful. All those sorts of descriptives. A project of this kind is not brought to fruition in the proverbial five minutes. So why was there not at least some leakage or forewarning on the issue? What other nasties does Act have up its sleeve? This issue and the school lunches debacle will lose them a lot of votes.
Last point: Hell hath no fury etc. You know the rest of that line.
If it wasn't dealt with in this way and had been nicely notified there would have been a huge move from unions that would have made things worse.
It was the type of legislation that drags the economy down.
If , as you say, it will cost National or the Coalition , then we are too far down the marxist track.
I saw Brooke van Velden's explanation on the Platform and she made a reason case. The media are distorting the issue which is to be expected.
Yep Im with above....I dont give a rats.
So it is about optics not merit. Optics is, no doubt, important at time of elections. But will it grow the economy? Or at least start fixing our ailing infrastructure? And if tou have theee years to undo a lot of bad stuff and show profess, do you think you can afford months of procrastination and consultation?
Labour and the MSM are spinning this into a web of lies...luckily the truth is emerging and I note in the House this afternoon that Minister Finance has pushed back big time on Labour about their spin, about how corrupt the initial legislation turned out to be by allowing all these fictious claims that werent even about sex based differences, they were about claimants wanting to compare themselves to another, completely different unrelated occupations.. it is good that this has been cleaned up. Labour and the Unions can bitch and moan, I think it will quieten down in a couple of days as Labour (and their mates in the media) realise they are being exposed..
Perception is reality and combined with opposition and media spin this will play out badly for the coalition ...it will be seen just as keeping down women's pay. I do not want a LGTPM govt but this govt is doing all it can to lose the next election.
Post a Comment