Thomas Coughlan: NZ Herald political editor on the Government incorrectly estimating FamilyBoost eligibility

There's a new push for changes to the FamilyBoost scheme, after the Government incorrectly estimated the number of families eligible.

New data shows 249 families have received the maximum payment of $975 dollars a quarter since the scheme came into effect last year. 

21,000 were originally forecast to be eligible.

NZ Herald political editor Thomas Coughlan explains the impacts that come with this.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Thomas Coglan, the Herald's political editors.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
But that's Thomas Hallow Afternoon, Heather.

Speaker 1 (00:03):
How did they get their numbers so wrong?

Speaker 2 (00:06):
So that basically this is a childcare rebate. You spend
money at ECE and you send in your receipts and
you get twenty five percent of that money that you
spend back. The screw up appears to have been that
IID doesn't actually know They know how much money you earn,
They know a lot of stuff about you, the IID,
but they don't actually know how much people spend on
childcare because obviously IID isn't looking through your bank account, thankfully,

(00:31):
and so essentially that's where the stuff up seems to
have been. Last year, they estimated the amount of money
that people were spending on childcare, and it turns out
that we're actually spending a bit less on childcare than
they thought. And that's why their costings for this policy,
this childcare rebate, were way way off, because that the
costing that they delivered to Nicola Willis last year was
based on about twenty one thousand people spending three hundred

(00:54):
dollars and more on childcare, and the number we don't
know the number of people are spending three hundred dollars
in more, but it's clearly much lower than twenty one thousand.

Speaker 1 (01:03):
Okay. But then on top of that, the CTU also
then estimates that it's something like fewer than fifty families
who get the full tax package.

Speaker 2 (01:11):
The whole lot, the whole, the.

Speaker 1 (01:13):
Whole thing seems to have have been vastly overestimated.

Speaker 2 (01:16):
Yes, yes it does. Now, Now the detail of this
is sort of complicated. So to get that two fifty
a fortnight, you'd need to get the full family boost,
so that's seventy five dollars a week from your childcare,
and then you'd need to get the income tax cut
and then another tax credit that National was offering at
the election. And if you're a couple, you have to
be a couple to get that two fifty, So both

(01:39):
both partners and the couple would need to be getting everything, okay,
And so the CTU has basically said, if two hundred
and fifty people are getting the full seventy five dollars
a week from the family tax credit, then of those
two fifty, a tiny number of people will also be
getting all the other tax cuts in order to hit
that two hundred and fifty dollars a fortnight care, but

(02:00):
probably a very they are probably right. It's probably a
very very small number of people who are getting the
two fifty.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
Yeah, right, So what happens with the extra money that
we're not spending on this?

Speaker 2 (02:08):
Then, well that is a very good question. It's a
question we've actually put to Nicola Willis. So the money's
the money is left in the piggy bank at the moment,
and she's got a very difficult political decision to make,
which is do you do you change the settings at
the budget to make sure that people get something a
bit closer to what they have promised, or do you
bank it to reduce the enormous debt that we've got.
You know, both of them are both of them are

(02:30):
good options and bad options equally. Really, I don't know,
I don't know which one I'd be going with.

Speaker 1 (02:34):
Fair point, so entirely predictably. Daddy is not going to
tell Winnie off as e yes, yes it is.

Speaker 2 (02:41):
It is entirely predictable. Look the line from them, the
line from Christopher Luxen on Winston Peter's a Little Scrap
with R and Z yesterday is is that Winston I'll
quote it here. It's not words I would words that
I wouldn't use. But frankly, I think Winston Peter's, after
forty years in public service, has a mode of communication
that as well understood. And you know, look, there's a

(03:02):
lot of truth to that, but but certainly he does.
Winston Peters does seem to have flown in the face
of some of that rn Z editorial editorial statutory protection.
And it is very interesting that the Prime Minister doesn't
back himself to at least tell him off a little bit,
at least sort of pull him into line. Obviously, this
isn't a second offense. This isn't you know, this isn't
a very incredibly why.

Speaker 1 (03:23):
Would he tell him off? Like what what? Why would
he tell him off? First of all, if he tells
him off, he's just gonna he's just going to get
the backup of his coalition partner. And you don't need
to give Winston any reason to misbaht. It was justinder
has recently found out there's nothing in that. Plus there's
a whole but no, no, no, I can't imagine there's a
huge number of national voters we're gonna be like, yeah, cool,
we really wanted you to defend arin Z.

Speaker 2 (03:45):
No, you're quite right, there is no there is no
political or any or any merit, and and and pulling
Winston Peters into line. The government's got eighteen months pull
the next election roughly, and and Winston Peter's already already
has plea you have incentive to act up, and you
don't want to give him any further incentive.

Speaker 1 (04:04):
Hey, do we care about China being upset about the
visit to Taiwan?

Speaker 2 (04:07):
A not particularly China always get that these trips happen
all the time. China against their back, their backup about
them regularly. This is Yeah, it's standard practice. I think
as Stuart Smith, who was on the trip, I think
he said that they sort of expected it.

Speaker 1 (04:22):
Oh hey, by the way, on that rn Z thing,
did you notice that when the Luxeon did not dissuade
us of the idea that ron Z may have its
funding cut?

Speaker 2 (04:32):
Yes, I did notice that. I would say that I'd
put money on that happening in the budget. Could be wrong,
but I've heard some whispers around the Bee Hive that
seduced that they might be looking to take some of
the funding away from our insid of the budget anyway.

Speaker 1 (04:44):
Yeah, it sounds increasingly like that's the case. Hey, Thomas,
Thanks has always appreciated Thomas Coglan, the Herald's political editor.

Speaker 2 (04:49):
For more from Heather Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news talks.

Speaker 1 (04:53):
It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.