Ropstad wants to eliminate the reason why many parents lose their quota. It promotes legislative modifications.

Kjell Ingolf Ropstad wants to clean up the father’s fee trap. It does so by recalling a proposal that the Solberg government put in the drawer seven years ago.

– We aim to make parental leave easier, better, more accessible and adapted to the needs of families, so that parents and children can be together in a very important period, says the Minister for Children and Families Kjell Ingolf Ropstad (KrF).

Over the past six months, Aftenposten has shed light on several reasons why parents lose all or part of the parental fee to which they are entitled.

Now it’s clearing up, both on the Nav and the ministry side.

Various reasons why parents lose rights

Amend the National Insurance Law

The Minister for Children and the Family, Kjell Ingolf Ropstad, is now announcing that he will present a proposal to amend the law to remove the requirement that parental leave must be taken continuously. This requirement means that if the father (or co-mother) is planning a stay between her and the mother’s paid leave, they must request a postponement. And not least: they must submit the application within the deadlines established by Nav.

– We are in favor of a free postponement until the child is three years old. This means that you want to remove the obstacles we have seen, eg. Eg about parents forgetting to apply before the deadline. We will send out an inquiry note now in the fall where we promote that proposal, says Ropstad.

The proposal was promoted by the red-greens and placed in the drawer

The proposal that Ropstad will now submit for consultation is the same one that its predecessor Solveig Horne (Frp) put in the drawer when it took over the leadership of the Ministry of Children and Families in the fall of 2013. Ropstad admits it.

– Yes, it was probably part of a larger proposal that dealt with several things.

– And now you mention it again?

– Yes, we see that you can remove important obstacles, he says.

In a previous interview, Solveig Horne has expressed regret that he withdrew the proposal seven years ago.

The law can be changed in 2021

Ropstad cannot say for sure how long it will take from submitting a bill for consultation until the law is changed.

– Depends a bit on how eager the Storting is to consider the invoice when it’s available, he says.

The normal case processing time indicates that the change in the law can be adopted during the first half of the next year.

The change in the law will also allow parents who do not work full time to have their paternity fee deferred. They can’t do that today.

Nav cannot indicate the number of affected

Kjell Ingolf Ropstad has previously stated that it is a small group of parents who are affected by the “parental fee trap”. In the last month, Aftenposten has tried in vain to get hard figures from Nav on how many people lose all or part of their parental quota because they apply too late.

The agency has changed the way they keep statistics to better distinguish different types of rejections from each other, but they still struggle to come up with exact figures. However, there are strong indications that the figures are much higher than what Ropstad previously received from Nav and reported to the Storting.

– Now we are waiting for quality guaranteed figures from Nav on how many apply. But regardless of the number, it is important to clean. For the individual parent, this will be frustrating regardless of how many others are affected, he says.

Hub should communicate easily

– Are you surprised by the way Nav has practiced regulations?

– It is clear that Nav manages a series of schemes that have a great scope and where there are requirements for the processing time of cases. So they have the desire to close cases and move on. This is how the system is set up. I’m glad that now routines have changed when it comes to income reporting, she says and remembers that parental benefits are a rights-based scheme.

– Do you think they take sufficient account of the requirement of the Public Administration Law that all cases be duly informed before making a decision? In the last case we wrote about, a parent was denied a large portion of the parental fee even though Nav knew that the parent’s intention was to take out the full fee.

– In general, I would say that it is important for Nav to communicate very easily, so that regulations are easy for users to understand. And then users have the responsibility to inform Nav.

– It will take some time before you can change the law. Do you have a message for Nav in the meantime?

– They must be sure that they communicate well and rather scold too much once, says Ropstad. He recently returned from role number two and says he knows how hectic it can be for parents of young children.

– It is not necessarily the case that they get everything that is written in small print. Therefore, it is important to be clear in communication. Here Nav has gotten much better, but I think they should continue to strive for good communication, to make it easier.