WFF changes will be post-election
March 24th, 2011 at 2:15 pm by David FarrarBill English just confirmed in the House that any changes the Government may make to Working for Families, will not take effect unti 1 April 2012 – after the election. This means that once again National is behaving entirely correctly – as with SOE sales.
They gave a pledge for their first term, and have kept their word. They will go into the 2011 election with a different policy for their 2nd term. This is exactly as it should be. If people do not want changes to WFF, then they will be able to stop them by voting Labour, Greens etc.
Promises are generally for one electoral term only. That is why we have elections – to decide on policies for the next term. Only when a party or politican explicitly states a policy is for longer than one term, do you expect it to never change. The most well known example of that is John Key’s pledge on superannuation, which he said was for as long as he is Prime Minister.
Related posts:
- National’s Super problem
- Dom Post on Labour
- Election 2008 Facts and Stats
- Questions that should be put to Helen
March 24th, 2011 at 2:29 pm
What about John Key’s pledge on not raising GST?
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
I think this is the right approach – but there have already been tweaks to WFF eligibility this year.
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 3:04 pm
That is why we have elections – to decide on policies for the next term.
So where was the National party policy on sacking ECAN and cancelling elections? I don’t recall it anywhere in their manifesto.
Shame the electors of Canterbury are not deemed worthy enough to decide on policies for next term.
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 3:08 pm
@MyNameIsJack:
Presumably in your eyes they should also have predicted the ChCh earthquake and made a policy for that ahead of the election?
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
What about this Key said, just to change course 180 degrees and give us the new tax, the ETS?
“This is a complete and utter hoax, if I may say so. The impact of the Kyoto Protocol, even if one believes in global warming, and I am somewhat suspicious of it, is that we will see billions and billions of dollars poured into fixing something that we are not even sure is a problem”
Vote:(Hansard 10 May 2005)
March 24th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
“The most well known example of that is John Key’s pledge on superannuation, which he said was for as long as he is Prime Minister.”
Which is why I can’t vote for a Govt he’ll lead – completely irresponsible fiscal position…
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Toad – thats all ya got? gst? i can live with that.
jack – who gives a shit about ecan. trivial compared to the damage your mob did.
this govt has been pretty dam honest imho. i kinda wish they had have lied, come in and just slashed and burned.
look forward to seeing their WFF policy. i hate WFF with all my heart.
speaking of election promises – why didnt labour ever release their mini budget? they keep telling us national are doing a bad job. the mini budget they had planned may have shown us the light..
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
My name is Jack s, what part of ECAN’s failure in 19 years of existence to forge a credible policy on water management,one of their most basic responsibilities, leads you to promulgate a position of acceptance of their inaction. Poor comprehension skills I presume.
Vote:Apologies for going off topic DPF, I plead provocation (severe).
March 24th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?
Flat out lies are bad. There is no way a party should campaign on something and then consciously do something different. That said, there is no way that you can run a company (or a country) without changing the strategy as the facts change, as they clearly have in the past 3 months.
We don’t simply elect people to do what they say. We elect them to show real leadership over the three year period. If that means reneging on promises, then so be it.
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 7:49 pm
Will the changes to WFF be announced before the election or afterwards?
Will the plans to hock off assets be announced before the election or afterwards?
Watch this space.
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 7:55 pm
I’m sure bill English knows the changes they will make to WFF after April 1st, think you are been very generous with your comment David. Yes by all means say you will dick with the rules in 1012 but if they had any real belief in future polices they should state them . Bloody hell most of the voting public realise the country is in deep poo, I’m sure the truth or what needs to be done can be handled by the people. Why do politicians treat us like children, we can handle the truth.
Vote:March 24th, 2011 at 10:45 pm
The promise not to change superannuation entitlements while he remains PM will be his epitaph. The most self-serving and gutless election promise in NZ’s history. Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows that at a minimum the entitlement age will need to rise.
A good start would be to allow people to elect when they want to retire, and to adjust the level of super they recieve according to the retirement age they elect. This would break the voodoo of the magical age of 65. This element of choice would be helpful both for people who are infirm before that date and also for people who are fighting fit and want to keep working beyond 65.
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 3:11 am
Oh dear Jack, you would rather have the sacking of a failed Council sit about waiting for the next election. Actually who cares about Ecan. I serriously hope WWF is scrapped entirely, and have every tax credit recieved by any couple earning over $100,000 converted into debt to be repaid with interest. Same idea with interest on student loans. We cannot afford to continue to spray our money all over the last Labour Government’s vote buying folly. Times are tough.
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 6:48 am
What the hell is this silly concept “keeping promises” all about?
Under the Labour/Green government they never bothered with things like promises, they were not restrained by something as outdated as honesty.
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 7:04 am
Maggie, you just can’t help yourself can you.
1) Yes
2) Yes
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 7:23 am
What the hell is this silly concept “keeping promises” all about?
There is a lot of confusion, deliberate or otherwise, over the difference between a promise and a proposed policy. Pre-election policies cannot be promises because:
- the party may not get into power
- the party may get into power but have to make policy compromises with coalition partners
- situations may change during a term that demand a different approach
If anyone hears pre-election poliwaffle, or if anyone actually reads any of the letter box political junk, and they think there are promises involved, they must be nuts.
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 9:15 am
Ah the joys of pejorative language.
Maggie – given the postulation that the Government should continue to own all the assets it owns now:
(a) does that mean it now owns just the perfect amount and mix of assets; or
(b) does that mean that it doesn’t own enough assets and should buy more; or
(c) something else?
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 9:29 am
(c)
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 3:07 pm
davincimode, I can help myself and frequently do.
I have never been able to understand why a government would forgo an annual return for a one-off payment. It makes no sense.
But then, National governments seldom do.
Vote:March 25th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
“davincimode, I can help myself and frequently do.”
You being an unemployed leftie we would expect nothing less. Fortnightly I suspect.
Vote: