
The coalition Govt just doesn't care about women
Analysis: In the 1970s, women workers the world over came together for the Wages for Housework campaign. Beginning in Italy and spreading globally, the campaign focused on the invisible and unpaid labour of housework primarily done (then and now) by women.
The domestic sphere, and the domestic labour required for society to function, became visible through mass feminist mobilisation. But these feminists – housewives, mothers, waitresses, and a myriad of other workers – weren't just trying to make domestic labour visible.
Neither were they just focused on showing the direct relationship between gendered oppression and labour relations. Crucially, they were demanding the wages they were due for all of the work they had been doing for free.
The demands of this movement are useful in illustrating why people are rightfully angry about the chopping of the pay equity claims for these so-called Budget savings. Women's liberation movements in 2025 should be far past having to fight for equitable pay in waged work, let alone having to fight to even seek legal recognition of pay inequity.
Basic recognition of inequitable pay for the labour that is paid is the very least the Government could do for women. Market-traded and paid labour would not be possible without the care work done (with and without wages) by women. The work historically and presently assigned as women's work is systemically devalued, often unpaid, and almost always underpaid.
The Government's dismissal and belittling of women workers is the latest in a long history of ignoring the life-making and society-sustaining labour of women. Like some sort of cruel joke, the pay equity claims were dismissed within days of Mother's Day and May Day.
Mothers, women, and workers – and crucially mothers and women as workers – are struggling each day in Aotearoa New Zealand to navigate gender injustices. We live in a country that is far from any sort of women's liberation or even gender equity.
Women comprised 90 percent of job redundancies during the Covid pandemic, and their experiences of intimate partner violence surged.
Women did the majority of unpaid labour caring for children and the household throughout the lockdowns, often holding down paid work at the same time.
Out of OECD countries, New Zealand ranks among the very lowest for paid parental leave entitlements and has some of the most expensive childcare.
In 2024, a two-parent household in Aotearoa New Zealand spent 37 percent of their combined income on early childhood education fees. If parents can't afford childcare, it is usually women who leave paid work to do childcare – for free – thus losing job opportunities and their source of independent income.
National campaigned on 21,000 families being $250 a fortnight better off under its government, yet fewer than 50 families have received this promised amount.
Our statistics for sexual and domestic violence are stark. For incarcerated women, the numbers are even worse. At least 75 percent of women prisoners have been victims of intimate violence, and almost 70 percent of these are wāhine Māori.
Not unrelatedly, their right to vote was removed shortly before the pay equity announcement. These examples barely scratch the surface of the structural gender oppression faced by women in Aotearoa New Zealand, and they are all connected to the ability to access material resources.
We can better shape our feminist politics – and our society – if we consider the lessons from the Wages for Housework movement: labour relations and gender oppression are deeply entwined in our society.
That is, the primary way we access money and resources in society is to work. If the labour that our society makes women's work is paid less or not at all, then women have less access to money and resources.
They therefore have less power and freedom in society. The correlation between wages, work, gender and freedom will be true so long as capital, not life, is at the centre of our economy.
It is not a coincidence that these gendered matters have remained off the radar (or actively made worse) under the coalition Government. The cutting of pay equity claims is the coalition once more loudly proclaiming they do not care about women, let alone their health, safety, and financial independence.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Distant noises of other voices
As Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon receives no shortage of advice. Quite apart from his Cabinet and caucus colleagues and coalition partners — let alone suggestions from the ever-helpful Opposition or media — he has several staff members whose entire role is to advise him on the issues of the day. Then there are the lobbyists, business leaders, interest groups, local government leaders and other influential people who are fortunate enough to capture the PM's attention and offer their two cents' worth. Even the general public can advise the prime minister — ultimately at the ballot box, but also through correspondence or even in person should they be lucky enough to be in the vicinity when Mr Luxon embarks on one of his weekly visits out to the regions. Not all advice is welcome, of course, and Mr Luxon may well have wished not to hear from former Labour prime minister Helen Clark and former National Party leader Don Brash when they chimed in last week with some salient words on New Zealand's relationship with China., There is little chance of Mr Luxon ignoring them, though, given that they chose to drop him a line via full-page advertisements in the nation's newspapers rather than sending him an email or letter. The nub of Miss Clark and Dr Brash's letter — which was also signed by former National MP and speaker Sir David Carter, former New Zealand ambassador to China Carl Worker, and Beijing-based New Zealand businessman David Mahon — was that they thought New Zealand's foreign policy was taking a concerning direction. "In recent months, you and Foreign Minister [Winston] Peters have made a number of statements which we consider to be positioning New Zealand alongside the United States as an adversary of China," they said. "We see no upside and very considerable downside in the situation which has developed... we do believe that a military relationship with the United States directed against China has many risks for New Zealand." The former politicians were, mainly, referring to Aukus Pillar Two, a defence arrangement with Australia, the United Kingdom and United States, which New Zealand is still mulling over whether to join. Signing up would no doubt please countries with which New Zealand has long-standing relationships and alliances and also allow the country access to modern defence and intelligence gathering technology. But Miss Clark, Dr Brash, et al, point out that the strategic grouping is "explicitly aimed at China" — a country with which New Zealand is also friendly, and which is, as no-one has forgotten, our biggest trading partner. A vital plank in Mr Luxon's "going for growth" agenda is increasing export sales, and the ready, waiting and able-to-buy Chinese market is a critical one. Mr Luxon met Chinese President Xi Jinping at last year's Apec meeting, and he is widely expected to visit the People's Republic sometime this year. Such visits always include an obligatory but delicately phrased reference to some of China's more questionable policies in terms of human rights, a topic quickly skimmed over before the parties turn to dollars and cents. New Zealand's attempts to become closer in step with the United States will already have been noted by Beijing, and this will no doubt be added to the awkward topics list when Mr Luxon does make it to the Chinese capital. No-one is suggesting that Miss Clark or Dr Brash, experienced operators in their own right, are acting as stalking horses for China in placing their advertisement: their views on this matter are backed by lengthy and independent track records, and they raise a legitimate argument. Mr Luxon will not have welcomed such high-profile questioning of his policies at a time when his staff may well be making final arrangements for what will be a vital trip — as all meetings between China's and New Zealand's leaders are for this country. Mr Peters, in typically colourful language, said that he saw "no value in indulging the tired arguments of various former politicians" — before defending the government's foreign policy approach. But indulge them Mr Luxon will likely have to do. In finding language to counter them, he may well find himself grateful that those varied notables raised their voices and offered their opinion.


NZ Herald
10 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Te Pāti Māori attack Greta Thunberg's ‘abduction', Israel says she's safe and on her way
Te Pāti Māori has strongly condemned the 'abduction' of crew on a Gaza-bound ship by Israeli forces, calling for the Government to demand their safe release. Co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the party had 'grave concerns' for the safety of those on board the humanitarian aid vessel. 'Israel have proven


Scoop
12 hours ago
- Scoop
Rich Get Much Richer, Driving Inequality And Poverty
Press Release – Green Party Poverty and homelessness doesnt come from nowhere. They are created by inequality. Christopher Luxon has put his foot down on the accelerator. By design, the rich are getting much, much richer while the poor are getting much, much poorer,' says Chle … The 2025 NBR Rich List makes immediately obvious the need for a fair tax system, says the Green Party. 'The rich list is now worth more than one hundred billion dollars, while the Government has chosen to cut support to tens of thousands of the lowest income New Zealanders. It's time to tax wealth, and build a country where all of us can thrive,' says the Green Party's spokesperson for Finance and co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. 'Poverty and homelessness doesn't come from nowhere. They are created by inequality. Christopher Luxon has put his foot down on the accelerator. By design, the rich are getting much, much richer while the poor are getting much, much poorer. 'We already know that the wealthiest households are able to arrange their finances to pay half the effective tax rate of regular New Zealanders. That means, proportionally, teachers, nurses, builders and firefighters pay more of their income to support our country's infrastructure than the billionaires the Prime Minister has chosen to celebrate today. 'The Greens are ambitious for an Aotearoa New Zealand where everyone has what they need to thrive. We can have free GPs, free early childhood education, free dental care and rapidly reduce climate changing emissions – if the rich pay their fair share. 'A wealth tax on just the ten wealthiest rich listers alone would pay for free GP care for all New Zealanders. 'Don't let the people laughing their way to the bank while everyone else suffers tell you what is possible. We all deserve so much better, and our Green Budget shows how,' says Chlöe Swarbrick.