Prime Minister and Labour leader Chris Hipkins spoke about his party’s policy today at the Brooklyn Kindergarten in Wellingtonwhere he indicated his support for making paid parental leave more flexible, including allowing parents to take paid leave at the same time - even though Labour recently killed a bill from National that would have enabled that.
Labour’s policy would allow a partner to take four weeks of leave after the birth of a child, whether or not the main carer was using the 26 weeks’ paid parental leave scheme.
It would be introduced in stages, starting with two weeks of partner leave from July 2024, lifting to three weeks in July 2025 and the full four weeks in July 2026.
It was expected to cost $230 million for the first four years – about $70m to $75m per year once the full four weeks were in place.
On Tuesday morning, Luxon said partner leave would be good for families and National would look “very closely” at whether it was affordable.
“We would love to do it. We think it would be fantastic for New Zealand families and parents. The key issue is the affordability of it. When you look at what’s happening in the country at the moment, we are over-taxed, we have $73 billion worth of debt, we have deficits and it’s really important that we are prudent with and responsible with taxpayers’ money and that we can actually afford to do it.”
He said there would be more details on National’s plans in an upcoming families policy package.
Prime Minister and Labour Leader Chris Hipkins reading to children at the Brooklyn Kindergarten in Wellington before announcing his policy. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Act leader David Seymour also expressed caution about what a future government could afford but stated he was opposed to extending the currently available 26 weeks of paid parental leave, which included offering paid leave to partners.
“I think it’s already got to a stage where it’s pretty generous.
“Of course, you could keep on going and someone will always find another country that has more but ultimately New Zealand is about to go into a pretty tough time balancing its books.
“My message to Chris Luxon is, I think the next government is going to have to work very hard to balance the books based on some of the forecasts we’re seeing.”
Act did support National’s policy to provide flexibility to parents in how they used their paid leave.
In developing its policy, Labour estimated about 22,000 people would receive paid partners leave for four weeks each year.
It assumed that of the 59,000 live births per year, 26 per cent would not involve an eligible partner - they didn’t meet the criteria of working an average of 10 hours a week for 26 of the 52 weeks prior to birth, or the birthing parent didn’t have a partner living with them.
It also assumed only 50 per cent of eligible partners would utilise the available leave, an assumption based on a 2005/06 survey that found about half of surveyed fathers would be interested to have paid parental leave transferred to them.
Prime Minister and Labour leader Chris Hipkins was joined by several MPs to talk through his party's proposal to offer paid partners leave. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Hipkins, speaking from the kindergarten, said he would personally love to extend paid parental leave, but the proposed package was all that could be afforded currently.
“If you look internationally, New Zealand is catching up with many other countries who have more generous paid parental leave entitlements, there’s always more work to be done.
“In the future, there will be choices for a future government to make around whether partner leave increases or whether the, you know, the parental leave for the primary carer increases.”
National’s unsuccessful bill, belonging to deputy leader Nicola Willis, would have allowed parents to split paid leave and take it at the same time, meaning both parents could get paid leave for 13 weeks each.
Despite his party’s opposition to the bill, Hipkins said he was open to giving parents more flexibility in the future.
“Look, I’m open to a conversation about whether people should be able to take some portion of their leave concurrently but at the moment, the way the bill was presented and the way the law is structured, it simply wouldn’t have allowed for that.”
