Election lollies up for grabs

weeks. Remember, this came a little more than a year after outgoing Labour MP Sue Moroney’s bill to get to 26 weeks was vetoed by English.

At the time he said: ‘‘Treasury estimates the cost of this legislation amounts to $278 million over the next four years, a significant extra – unbudgeted – cost.’’

Well, it’s now election season and the phrase ‘‘unbudgeted cost’’ appears to have disappeared from both major parties’ vocabularies. Increasing paid parental leave time had strong support in Parliament last year and it was the financial veto that scuppered it.

Many would accuse National, as they have before, of taking a Labour policy, repackaging it and calling the policy its own. There is that element, but it’s also smart political tactics, appealing to a broad base of voters who could vote either blue or red.

As far as voter lolly scrambles go, Tuesday was the biggest day of the campaign.

Labour’s tertiary education plan promised increases in living costs and allowances and, most importantly, fee-free tertiary education for three years. The policy would kick in next year (with conditions).

The announcement has a familiar feel to it. That’s because in the 2005 election campaign Helen Clark’s Labour pulled out the interest-free student-loan sweetener late in the piece. In a battle that was on a knife’s edge, it was seen as the game-changing policy of the campaign.

Labour won 41.1 per cent of the vote to National’s 39.1 per cent, with the former able to stitch together a coalition. Opponents criticised the loan policy as a costly bribe, but it had the desired effect of a win in the general election.

This time around Labour is hoping for a similar response, from a similar group of voters – mainly younger – to help them get over the line. But the playing field is vastly different to that of 2005.

Back then Labour was the incumbent, with an established and seasoned leader, doing what it took to hold on to power for a third term. This time around, it has a leader with only weeks of experience attempting what would be a miraculous come-from-behind win on polling day.

The intent behind the policy makes sense, and that’s that education creates opportunity. The problem starts, as it does with a few of Labour’s policies, with how to pay for it all.

The promises of the two largest parties are coming thick and fast. They know that a large chunk of the voting population – especially those undecided – cast their vote on a single issue that they or their family can relate to. One person’s fee-free study is another person’s paid parental leave extension.