NZ Politician resigns but still gets paid

**Hepcat** · 01-07-2007, 06:03

On Thursday 30 November 2006, just one week after resigning as leader of the National party, Brash resigned from parliament. No official date was set but he stated he would not be back for the new year. Brash then made his valedictory speech on Tuesday 12 December 2006 However, subsequent news media reports clarified that he would formally remain a Member of Parliament until officially tendering his resignation to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Margaret Wilson. As such, he has no party responsibilities and will spend time answering emails and other correspondence until such time as the process of his resignation is completed, expected to be late February 2007.

This is from Wikipedia (because I was too lazy to find a news report on it) and what it doesn't mention is the fact that Don Brash has gone on a holiday to the USA paid for by NZ tax payers. He is just taking his time to hand in his resignation, it is not the actual process as the last part implies.

So, should a politician get paid for 3 months after resigning from government?

**Louis VI the Fat** · 01-07-2007, 08:12

Originally Posted by Hepcat

So, should a politician get paid for 3 months after resigning from government?

I would say so, yes.

It's just a job, isn't it? A three month transitory period with full pay doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

**Fragony** · 01-08-2007, 15:01

Lol that's not so bad, here they get 2 year full payment, most become a commisiontiger for that extra oomph and still get payed 2 years full.

**Andres** · 01-08-2007, 17:15

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

It's just a job, isn't it? A three month transitory period with full pay doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

If you get fired, you get a transitory period with full pay: sounds reasonable to me (unless you really, really screwed up big time, for example, you stole money from your employer).

If you quit yourself (like the politician in question apparantly did), it's a different question imho. Then I say: no compensation.

That's the system we have in Belgium. For humble citizens like me that is.

Our poor politicians are treated differently. Those who quit parliament, receive a "gouden handdruk" (= a big check) or get paid for the rest of the duration of their term, which is pretty disgusting, because 99 % of the time, they only quit because they can make more money somewhere else.

Gah! Politicians!

**Fragony** · 01-08-2007, 17:26

Originally Posted by AndresTheCunning

Our poor politicians are treated differently. Those who quit parliament, receive a "gouden handdruk" (= a big check) or get paid for the rest of the duration of their term, which is pretty disgusting, because 99 % of the time, they only quit because they can make more money somewhere else.

And that isn't even bad. Here they are payed for their term, and after that they recieve 'wachtgeld' (waiting money) because politicians supposedly have no friends and can't get jobs. That is 2 years of free money extra, and as I said, most are very well taken care of anyway. Like our Rosenmuller for example, hates cars because they polute, yet travels with a private jet. Had no problems with receiving 175.000 for just having a 2 hour meeting every week

I wish I was a leftie, I want stuff like that

**drone** · 01-08-2007, 18:26

Ours just become high paid lobbyists or go on speaking tours.

**Crazed Rabbit** · 01-08-2007, 21:15

If you get fired, you get a transitory period with full pay: sounds reasonable to me (unless you really, really screwed up big time, for example, you stole money from your employer).

Gah! You Europeans scare me! Why in the world should a person you fired still be paid for not working?

CR

**Andres** · 01-08-2007, 21:33

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Gah! You Europeans scare me! Why in the world should a person you fired still be paid for not working?

CR

My wrong. I stated it a bit over simplistic.

Let me be a bit more clear.

When you hire someone, employer and employee sign a contract.

If the employer wants to fire his employee without the employee having done something really bad (like for example stealing from his boss, making a lot of mistakes which the employee isn't supposed to make etc.), the employee has the right to continue to work for his employer during a limited period of time (depends on how long he was working for his employer and his salary). If the employer wants his employee to leave immediately, he is bound to pay a compensation (again the amount depends on how long the employee was working for his boss at the moment he got fired and his salary).

In a nutshell: employer and employee have a contract. On the one hand you have the employer who has the right to have the employee working for him, on the other hand the employee has the right to work for his employer and to get paid the agreed salary. Firing your employee is breaking the terms of the contract and a compensation seems just and fair.

On the other hand, if the employee resigns, he is obliged to keep working for a certain time for his boss. If he wants to leave immediately, he'll also have to pay a compensation (again it depens on the salary and the time he was working for his employer, btw, most of this is regulated by law).

This is in a few words how it works over here (at least in Belgium).

**Kralizec** · 01-08-2007, 21:40

Originally Posted by Fragony

Like our Rosenmuller for example, hates cars because they polute, yet travels with a private jet. Had no problems with receiving 175.000 for just having a 2 hour meeting every week

That doesn't have anything to do with the "wachtgeldregeling", those were payments he received for presiding over some sort of commission IIRC

Anyway all the press attention activated his conscience and he gave back most of it.

**Fragony** · 01-10-2007, 10:14

Originally Posted by Kralizec

That doesn't have anything to do with the "wachtgeldregeling", those were payments he received for presiding over some sort of commission IIRC

Anyway all the press attention activated his conscience and he gave back most of it.

I know, that is why I used him as the prime example of a commisiontiger. Doubt it activated his concience, just the inconvenience of his screaming hypocracy. But that happens a lot with these groennekes.

*cough* Ivory coast, 1000 sick 8 dead * cough*

**Kralizec** · 01-11-2007, 00:58

Originally Posted by Fragony

Doubt it activated his concience

*cough*sarcasm*cough*

**Hepcat** · 01-12-2007, 00:05

Well this is the same politician who overspent his budget during the election campaign and was hoping to pay for it all once he was in government, but he didn't get in government anyway so everyone found out he was in debt to the TV stations.

He hasn't really done anything productive to for the country, in my opinion politicians don't, the prime minister gave all politicians a pay rise last year which was very nice of her

And in this case he wasn't fired anyway, he quit parliment but hasn't done it officially and won't until he can be bothered in February, and the members of his party are saying "Oh, but he deserves a break, after all he has done."

That is like someone just walking out of their job saying "I think I'll leave." and then not actually formally quitting until 2 months later, and getting paid for those 2 months.

I know I couldn't get away with that!

I hate politicians, just because they wear a suit doesn't mean they are working.