One big fat voting bribe

National has pledged to keep Working for Families intact to please the rich.

It is not keeping the WFF it should have kept - that is, reducing it for those who earn more than $50,000 and eliminating it for those who earn $100,000. Those people get to keep their tax cuts and WFF because they need their certainty.

Despite concerns we hold about the system, I consider that offering people certainty is much more important in these tough economic times," [Key] said.

These people don't need certainty, they need to learn how to budget.

Furthermore, those who earn over $60,000 and get a pay increase or promotion get to keep around 10% of it if they have kids due to the abatements in WFF, the accommodation supplement and the tax rate. Better to have another child for financial security and less job stress - and you get to take parental leave in the process, often topped up by the employer.

Employer groups should be having a chat to National about this. WFF should be for those who need it, not for those who either can't budget or mortgage themselves to the hilt.

Or both.