Maternity pay has gone too far

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2023/sep/12/unacceptable-how-raw-sewage-has-affected-rivers-in-england-and-wales-in-maps?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Having lived a lot of my life in a Nordic country, this is one of the things I struggle with so much to understand about the UK. The general attitude to parents seems very backwards and even cruel/punitive, also in terms of paternity leave and early years childcare costs. It's a rich country! We/you will need the next generation to keep the economy going and pay our pensions! It boggles my mind that this is such a common attitude of our politicians and unfortunately a large chunk of the public.

Not true. We don’t have sewage in the water here in Scotland. We also don’t have privatised water companies who are allowed to do whatever they want.

The water companies in England and Wales are forever being fined over their sewage-releasing ways. Why do you think that is, if the drains are the cause?

The sewage in the rivers is due to the flawed design of Britain's drains which date from Victorian times and the cladding disaster straddles both Tory and Labour governments

Every time the Tory government promised to free us from regulations and “red tape”, we ended up with disaster, from sewage in the rivers to the appalling tragedy of Grenfell. And all they have to offer is more of the same?

So why did she mention maternity leave rather than any of those things, and then add for good measure ' women need to take more responsibility' ( not the men who got them pregnant and would presumably have to support the mothers of their children on one income) and ' once upon a time there was no maternity leave and women had more babies'? Or was that completely made up? In any case, it doesn't matter what we think does it? She is ' telling it like it is' to the Tory membership. It's up to them if they think she is the right person for the job. She clearly thinks they think these things. Maybe she is correct?

Can you please link to the video clip that supports your opinion @LongtailedTitmouse.

Yes, I agree with this.

Her points are regressive and incompatible with a tenets of a modern economy.

Is she? Can you link?

Business regulation isn’t just about benefits for workers, very little of it is that. It is about tax, licenses, business rates, subsidies, corporate reporting, corporate structures, share ownership, directors responsibilities, export, import, logistics, VAT, sale and purchase…

She was mis-represented, shockingly so by the BBC who initially had a headline stating she said maternity pay was excessive, rather than business regulation which is what she was referring to. But I think she hasn’t clarified her beliefs around maternity pay well and has fallen into a trap.

Really? Can you link to the video that you have watched because it must be completely different to the one that I have seen that has been well publicised.

A reduction in length and access to stutatary maternity leave is the same as a reduction in maternity pay though. Less people being entitled to leave for a shorter amount of time results in less pay.

Also being against current levels of statutory holiday, statutory sick pay, dependent leave, redundancy pay etc isn’t any better or less controversial.

Ok, she could have said she didn't mean maternity leave. But she didn't, she then discussed why maternity leave was exactly the sort of "over-regulation" she had in mind.

She wasn’t talking about Maternity pay though. The interviewer threw that in mid-sentence then media misrepresented her finishing the sentence as a response to her interruption. She was talking about reducing business regulations across the board.

She went to nursery at 7 months so she’d had a month of weaning. She just didn’t take a bottle. As is common at that age she simply made up for it either end of the day. It wasn’t an ideal situation but she’s done well.

She’s still nursing as a toddler with no sign of giving up.

This is partly what Brexit was about - isn't maternity leave red tape? One person's red tape is another person's important protection.

I wish this lot would be open about being libertarian. They don't believe in the state. They think people who struggle because they can't earn enough are just hapless and should be left that way as a kind of social Darwinism. If you're rich and successful, you shouldn't have to worry about those who aren't because if they wanted it enough they'd have been successful too.

The regulation and “red tape” she’s referring to is simply the existent of maternity leave as a statutory right to any pregnant woman who has been employed during the qualifying period though.
I mean that’s really the only regulation involved in SML so if she’s not hoping to push for a reduction or remove of statutory entitlement which excessive maternity regulations do you reckon go too far for her?

Agree. A number of posters have been quick to claim she is being misrepresented, still yet to see a compelling argument for that? She quite clearly suggested 9 months statutory maternity pay was too much regulation on businesses and heavily implied this, along with other statutory entitlements are the reason businesses fail. And also pushed for “more personal responsibility” and specifically mentioned a time when no statutory leave was available as though it was some sort of positive.
At a bare minimum she seems to be suggesting small business should be able to opt out of the ‘red tape’ of a minimum maternity leave and term.

Still waiting on the compelling argument as to why this isn’t at all what she meant and why hat she meant instead…

Yep this is it. Unfortunately we have a section of society (usually men over a certain age) who believe this. The misogyny reeks. And our country suffers with some of the worst parental and family policies as a result. The fact there are people that would like to see them cut further sickens me. Some people won’t be happy until we’re all wage slaves working 90 hour weeks with no hobbies, families, interests. Just sleep and work so someone else can get rich.

Exactly.

This is simply pandering to the wing of the Tory party who think that it's all the fault of these silly bloody women who keep having silly bloody babies which they then expect to be paid for, and who she anticipates will vote for her to be leader.

Nope. She was asked about maternity pay and she said that maternity pay is a function of the tax system and involves taking from one group of people to give to another and that this was, in her opinion 'excessive'.
She also said 'there was a time when there wasn't any maternity and people were having more babies'. This really is a laughably stupid remark.

It's pretty clear who she is pandering to with her foolish and ill thought out statements and also clear who she does not support.

Yes She has not clarified what ' deregulation' she meant. Businesses have to give a set amount of maternity leave. Many give more because they want to recruit and retain staff. They then claim it back ( with an uplift) from hmrc. She said it was taxpayers giving to 'non taxpayers' despite women who are entitled to maternity leave being taxpayers, hence being entitled to maternity leave. So what ' deregulation'? That businesses shouldn't be able to claim the money back? That they shouldn't have to give any maternity pay? That businesses should be able to make their own decisions about whether or not to offer maternity pay and leave? She has tied herself in knots and not thought through her own half baked ideas. That is no ones fault but her own.

Yes, she clearly said she was not referring to the amount of maternity pay but the amount of regulation and red tape involved. She said the actual amount is neither "here nor there".

What do you think she said and how would you interpret it?
It's perfectly possible that lots of people are aware of what she said but have interpreted it differently to you.