Baby plans, not policy, first hurdle for New Zealand Labour's new female leader

[webfact]

Baby plans, not policy, first hurdle for New Zealand Labour's new female leader

By Ana Nicolaci da Costa and Charlotte Greenfield

 

Jacinda Ardern (C), New Zealand's new opposition Labour leader, speaks to the press alongside members of her party after Andrew Little stepped down in Wellington, New Zealand, August 1, 2017. REUTERS/Charlotte Greenfield

 

WELLINGTON (Reuters) - New Zealand's charismatic new Labour leader, who took over in a desperate gamble to revive her struggling party seven weeks out from an election, spent her first 24 hours in the job fielding questions about babies rather than her policy plans.

 

Jacinda Ardern, 37, took over as Labour's youngest leader on Tuesday after her predecessor quit over "disturbing" opinion poll results, leaving little time to plot a strategy to break the centre-right National Party's decade-long hold on power.

 

One of the first questions Ardern, 37, faced on Tuesday night was about whether she had made a choice between having children or a career. She took it in her stride and said she had spoken before about the dilemma that many women face.

 

However, the question refused to go away and she clashed on Wednesday with a radio host who said New Zealanders needed to know whether she planned to have children, in the same way that companies would if they were employing a female worker.

 

Pointing her finger at AM Show panellist Mark Richardson, Ardern said "it is totally unacceptable in 2017 to say that women should have to answer that question in the workplace".

 

"It is a woman's decision about when they choose to have children, it should not pre-determine whether or not they are given a job or have job opportunities," she said.

 

The controversy was at odds with New Zealand's progressive reputation, having been the first country to give women the right to vote in 1893.

 

Ardern could also become New Zealand's third female prime minister while many countries, including the United States, are yet to have their first. The issue was given added resonance by Hillary Clinton's failed 2016 U.S. presidential bid.

 

About a third of the members in New Zealand's parliament in 2014 were women, putting it ahead of Australia and Britain but behind Germany and most Nordic countries, according to the global Inter Parliamentary Union.

 

"I don't think we could say New Zealand is still ahead of the curve when such a small percentage of our politicians are women, both at parliament and at local government level," said Julie Anne Genter, a member of parliament for the Green Party.

 

Genter also took issue with the tone of questions about Ardern's family plans. "They're just saying: 'how can you do this job if you plan to have a family?'," she said.

 

Figures also showed that women in New Zealand lagged behind their counterparts in Britain and Australian in representation on company boards.

 

With Labour facing a crushing defeat at the Sept. 23 election, Ardern took over in the hope she could breathe new life into the party. Analysts saw it as a potential game-changer for a poll that until now had been seen as a slam-dunk for Prime Minister Bill English's National Party.

 

(Reporting by Ana Nicolaci da Costa and Charlotte Greenfield; Editing by Paul Tait)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-08-02

[Katipo]

I honestly couldn't care less whether she wants to have a baby or not. There are plenty of male politicians who have/are doing a far worse job than her without a baby, so what's their excuse? 

[Kiwiken]

To even ask such an inane question was typical of the idiot Richardson. It would be nice to see Policy so an informed decision can be made.

[thaibeachlovers]

Putting someone I never even heard of in shows how desperate Labour has become, with a blatent attempt at "gender politics". Hopefully, NZ voters will see it as the scam I believe it to be.

Doesn't matter who is "in charge" of Labour, or National for that matter. Since the appalling PR system used in NZ was brought in, NZ politics has been a race to the bottom. That MPs can be installed in Parliament without being voted in shows how corrupt the system is.

I can only expect things to get progressively worse for NZ whichever party wins.

40% on welfare- IMO insanity writ large.

 

BTW, the first two female PMs didn't exactly benefit NZ.

Edited August 4, 2017 by thaibeachlovers

[Roadman]

And the issue would now have even see the light of day if Arden had not stated to women's mags a few months ago that she did not want the leadership as she wanted to have a family. A lot of ado about nothing at her own doing. 

[Kiwiken]

22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Putting someone I never even heard of in shows how desperate Labour has become, with a blatent attempt at "gender politics". Hopefully, NZ voters will see it as the scam I believe it to be.

Doesn't matter who is "in charge" of Labour, or National for that matter. Since the appalling PR system used in NZ was brought in, NZ politics has been a race to the bottom. That MPs can be installed in Parliament without being voted in shows how corrupt the system is.

I can only expect things to get progressively worse for NZ whichever party wins.

40% on welfare- IMO insanity writ large.

 

BTW, the first two female PMs didn't exactly benefit NZ.

Yes Non of the current Political parties will address the Welfare issue that has be used by Employers as a wage subsidy in conjunction with employing Migrants on 2 year contracts as a means to keep wages down. It is hard to garner more productivity out of a demoralised population

[Lokie]

It should not make a difference as to whether she wants to have a baby, if she is best candidate for the role then thats that, although if she does want any help having a baby then I am available to fly down to NZ and assist as she is sure easy on the eye...

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, Lokie said:

It should not make a difference as to whether she wants to have a baby, if she is best candidate for the role then thats that, although if she does want any help having a baby then I am available to fly down to NZ and assist as she is sure easy on the eye...

It should. If she has a baby and takes 6 months off, or whatever the current paternity leave is it means she is not doing the job for which the taxpayers are paying, and if she does not take time off it will be held against her for being a bad parent.

Either way, a baby is a distraction that the taxpayers do not need.

Edited August 6, 2017 by thaibeachlovers

[stevenl]

43 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

It should. If she has a baby and takes 6 months off, or whatever the current paternity leave is it means she is not doing the job for which the taxpayers are paying, and if she does not take time off it will be held against her for being a bad parent.

Either way, a baby is a distraction that the taxpayers do not need.

"It should. If she has a baby and takes 6 months off, or whatever the current paternity leave is it means she is not doing the job for which the taxpayers are paying, and if she does not take time off it will be held against her for being a bad parent."

Following your reasoning, no government employee should be allowed maternity or paternity leave.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, stevenl said:

"It should. If she has a baby and takes 6 months off, or whatever the current paternity leave is it means she is not doing the job for which the taxpayers are paying, and if she does not take time off it will be held against her for being a bad parent."

Following your reasoning, no government employee should be allowed maternity or paternity leave.

Rubbish. My reasoning applies only to the position of ELECTED taxpayer employees, and SPECIFICALLY to the PM.

If they know that they will not be fulfilling their duties to the public that elect them because they intend to get pregnant, they should not stand for election.

[stevenl]

31 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Rubbish. My reasoning applies only to the position of ELECTED taxpayer employees, and SPECIFICALLY to the PM.

If they know that they will not be fulfilling their duties to the public that elect them because they intend to get pregnant, they should not stand for election.

Thanks for the addition.

[Lokie]

39 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Rubbish. My reasoning applies only to the position of ELECTED taxpayer employees, and SPECIFICALLY to the PM.

If they know that they will not be fulfilling their duties to the public that elect them because they intend to get pregnant, they should not stand for election.

So all females of childbearing age in a positions of power across the world should be removed from the posts and forever exempt from these roles... ha ha ha

 

What century are you living in? I have never heard so much rubbish in my life, you have defo been out here too long... leave the Thai whisky alone, have you stopped for a second and listened to yourself...?

 

Im not a Kiwi so not really up to speed with this story, Has this woman stated she is now going to get pregnant? I am pretty sure that NZs laws of equal rights would block your preferred action as it is simply unjust and sexist (for the record you think any Taxpayers get real value for money from any Politicians? Really??)

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, Lokie said:

So all females of childbearing age in a positions of power across the world should be removed from the posts and forever exempt from these roles... ha ha ha

 

What century are you living in? I have never heard so much rubbish in my life, you have defo been out here too long... leave the Thai whisky alone, have you stopped for a second and listened to yourself...?

 

Im not a Kiwi so not really up to speed with this story, Has this woman stated she is now going to get pregnant? I am pretty sure that NZs laws of equal rights would block your preferred action as it is simply unjust and sexist (for the record you think any Taxpayers get real value for money from any Politicians? Really??)

She has stated she wanted to start a family.

 

Any woman of child bearing age can do whatever she wants, but if she intends to have children while in office, she should tell the voters so they can decide based on that information. This one refuses to say if she will, so I guess the voters can assume she does want to, and we will see what they think at the election.

 

I guess you are OK with paying taxes so your elected officials can still get paid even if not doing the job they were elected to do, but many tax payers are not.

 

I am pretty sure that NZs laws of equal rights would block your preferred action

I disagree with many of the things going on in NZ, but I can't do anything about it, however, I'm not going to get into all that on here as completely off topic.

[Lokie]

I see where youre coming from, as a UK taxpayer I want value for money BTBH where Politics are concerned they are all bent as nine bob notes, however I still feel its her business and she should not have to divulge her personal preference as to whether start knocking out children, I would not think she would start a family if serving in office as PM, I think she will gain more votes from the female Kiwi electorate because of all this hoohar to boot so will make her stronger as her right to be a women and succeed in another male bastion of power...

 

Lol and I thought the UK and US had the sole run on nutters and not-rights in politics...?

[thaibeachlovers]

On 8/6/2017 at 8:49 PM, Lokie said:

I see where youre coming from, as a UK taxpayer I want value for money BTBH where Politics are concerned they are all bent as nine bob notes, however I still feel its her business and she should not have to divulge her personal preference as to whether start knocking out children, I would not think she would start a family if serving in office as PM, I think she will gain more votes from the female Kiwi electorate because of all this hoohar to boot so will make her stronger as her right to be a women and succeed in another male bastion of power...

 

Lol and I thought the UK and US had the sole run on nutters and not-rights in politics...?

In NZ there is no limit on the number of terms she could be PM, so if she won she probably would have babies during her time if popular.  However, as Labour is a joke in NZ currently, it is hopefully unlikely she will ever be PM.

[thaibeachlovers]

Well, we now know the answer- she is pregnant, and Winnie will be running the show. I guess those that voted for her are going to get what they deserved now.

I have to wonder if he chose to go with Labour because he knew he'd be able to run the country eventually?

Edited January 20, 2018 by thaibeachlovers

[Roadman]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, we now know the answer- she is pregnant, and Winnie will be running the show. I guess those that voted for her are going to get what they deserved now.

I have to wonder if he chose to go with Labour because he knew he'd be able to run the country eventually?

Jeez...it’s becoming insane here. She is the media’s queen....we have constant articles about Jacinda and baby, Jacinda, Jacinda and her first husband, Jacinda and how women can do anything, Jacinda and how I’m going to breast feed my baby, ..it’s not like women before were not getting on and doing crap...

[samran]

On 06/08/2017 at 3:19 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

She has stated she wanted to start a family.

 

Any woman of child bearing age can do whatever she wants, but if she intends to have children while in office, she should tell the voters so they can decide based on that information. This one refuses to say if she will, so I guess the voters can assume she does want to, and we will see what they think at the election.

 

I guess you are OK with paying taxes so your elected officials can still get paid even if not doing the job they were elected to do, but many tax payers are not.

 

I am pretty sure that NZs laws of equal rights would block your preferred action

I disagree with many of the things going on in NZ, but I can't do anything about it, however, I'm not going to get into all that on here as completely off topic.

Geez, should an elected official have to tell you when then need to go take a dump as well? Just so you get your moneys worth of course. 

 

Newsflash, NZers have a woman PM of child bearing age, if they don’t like they can get rid of her at the next election. It’s how democracy works.

 

nevertheless, it’s good to see the misogynist keyboard warriors out in force. Women in her situation can’t win can they? Damed if she does have a baby, damed as a barren closet lesbian if she doesn’t. 

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, samran said:

Geez, should an elected official have to tell you when then need to go take a dump as well? Just so you get your moneys worth of course. 

 

Newsflash, NZers have a woman PM of child bearing age, if they don’t like they can get rid of her at the next election. It’s how democracy works.

 

nevertheless, it’s good to see the misogynist keyboard warriors out in force. Women in her situation can’t win can they? Damed if she does have a baby, damed as a barren closet lesbian if she doesn’t. 

Apparently you equate giving birth with "having a dump".

[samran]

12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Apparently you equate giving birth with "having a dump".

Mate, I’m not the retrograde who has issues with a woman with an important job having a baby, to the extent I’ll resurrect a five month old post to have a whinge about it. 

 

Must be tough watching the world pass you by...

 

[Kiwiken]

Well I voted for Jacinda. And yes am pleased for her upcoming child. As to Winnie being PM that is just a figurehead in NZ not all powerful.

For those saying we are getting what we deserve. Did we deserve being shafted by the Market way only National Govt and their lack of any cohesive Social Policy. Of their neglect of the damage caused by the Christchurch and Kaikoura Earthquakes. Of their selling of Social housing therefore exacerbating the housing bubble and accomodation crisis.

I hope we get a good 9 years of labour.

As to national until they get a Social conscience they will never get my vote

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

Well I voted for Jacinda. And yes am pleased for her upcoming child. As to Winnie being PM that is just a figurehead in NZ not all powerful.

For those saying we are getting what we deserve. Did we deserve being shafted by the Market way only National Govt and their lack of any cohesive Social Policy. Of their neglect of the damage caused by the Christchurch and Kaikoura Earthquakes. Of their selling of Social housing therefore exacerbating the housing bubble and accomodation crisis.

I hope we get a good 9 years of labour.

As to national until they get a Social conscience they will never get my vote

I'll wait and see how many social houses they build before I pass judgement, but I'm not holding my breath.

Agree on PM not being powerful- the bureaucrats run NZ.

People get the government they vote for. That they voted for that <deleted> Key only goes to show how lacking in good alternatives NZ is. Remember they also voted for Muldoon, and IMO he destroyed the economy. Clark IMO only finished the job, and she was voted in more than once.