Member log in

The MPs who are eligible for the baby bonus

 have said if you earn under $150,000 a year you need  payments from the Government if you have a baby. The following MPs have a salary below $150,000 so if their partner is not working and they (or their partner) has a baby, taxpayers will have to fork out a baby bonus to them under .

  • Grant Robertson, Labour
  • Shane Jones, Labour
  • Jacinda Ardern, Labour
  • Chris Hipkins, Labour
  • Nanaia Mahuta, Labour
  • Phil Twyford, Labour
  • David Shearer, Labour
  • Su’a William Sio, Labour
  • Phil Goff, Labour
  • Louisa Wall, Labour
  • Andrew Little, Labour
  • Moana Mackey, Labour
  • David Clark, Labour
  • Kris Faafoi, Labour
  • Carol Beaumont, Labour
  • Megan Woods, Labour
  • Darien Fenton, Labour
  • Trevor Mallard, Labour
  • Poto Williams, Labour
  • Clare Curran, Labour
  • Rajen Prasad, Labour
  • Raymond Huo, Labour
  • Rino Tirikatene, Labour
  • Meka Whaitiiri, Labour
  • David Clendon, Greens
  • Denise Roche, Greens
  • Gareth Hughes, Greens
  • Holly Walker, Greens
  • Jan Logie, Greens
  • Julie Anne Genter, Greens
  • Kevin Hague, Greens
  • Mojo Mathers, Greens
  • Andrew Williams, NZ First
  • Richard Prosser, NZ First
  • Brendan Horan, Independent
  • Phil Heatley, National
  • Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi, National
  • Ian McKelvie, National
  • Simon O’Connor, National
  • Paul Foster-Bell, National
  • Claudette Hauiti, National

So the question I would ask each of those MPs is if they agree it is a good use of taxpayer money to give them a welfare payment of $3,000 a year if they or their partner chose to have a baby? Do they think that on their salary of $147,800 that taxpayers should be giving them welfare payments if they or their partner have a baby?

Political commentator David Farrar posts at Kiwiblog.

Comments and questions

Superb David. Could you also perhaps write to all those Labour MPS and the inglorious Cunlifee. And tip off the TV channels. Around 80% of these MPs here are Labour-Greens. Go figure.

Because Ministers etc earn more than the threshold...

Kim Dotcom is not allowed to hold a free party at Vector Arena as the Electoral Commission states this could be a bribe but Labour offering $9k a person to people that have a baby is not a bribe. What a joke.

That has to be comment of the day!

...and not only is Labour's $9K bribe a bribe - it's not likely to be "fully costed" either.

L&G's "Power Policy" is the biggest on-going political lie this decade - beside Labour's corrupt Auckland Mayor that is.

Since there's no minimum IQ / work experience benchmark to enter into Parliament - surely as a bare minimum for the sake of NZ, all promised policies - and especially those announced to much fan fare - should be fully costed, peer reviewed by the AG office, before being announced?

Then NZ could see who is the most credible and viable - or who is offering the biggest lie and bribe in the hope that...

Cunliffe keeps trying to say that in promoting this scheme, that he is "saving" 1 billion - what bollocks, given that his first mad idea, around tax free money and GST on veges, was never budgeted or approved funds in the first place.
So how can you save something that was never there in the first place??

Also ask them if they are happy to pay $6000 extra in tax so than can get $3000 back and then pay interest on borrowed money for next 25 years.

Election promises (bribes) are always a joke.
It's even worse when they get into power on their promises and then don't honour them. Voters tend to forget 3 years later what happened last time. You can't trust Politicians - end of story.
Here's a radical idea - a Political Party that wants to do best for all New Zealanders. A Party that will ensure the financial well being of our country and our economy. Policies that are focused on fairness and robust laws that can't easily be abused by either the rich or the poor. National has made some head-way on fixing some of these issues which is commendable. But they are not perfect, and there is a lot of room for improvement.

You're right, so vote ACT with your Party vote. ACT, the Party that Winston Peters steals (some of) his ideas from.

You say they're eligible for the bonus but you actually have no idea if that's true or not. I'd say the chances that any of these people have a spouse earning under $2200 a year is very small indeed.

So that makes welfare to backbench MPs on $144k ok?

Just what we need, the lower end of society being encouraged to breed. So more on welfare so where does Cinncliffe think the money will come from. Only so many Golden Geese.