Tony Abbott with his daughters Louise, Frances and Bridget
By TONY ABBOTT
As parents, Margie and I knew all too well the struggles families face when they don’t fit into the one-size-fits-all child care system which currently exists. The child care sector has to catch up with the changing family working patterns. This week I took my pledge for a Productivity Commission inquiry into child care a step further by releasing the terms of reference which highlights the key problems that need to be addressed and key proposals which must be considered, such as greater access to in-home care and the option of tax deductibility. There’s no doubt that it’s time Australia had a more flexible, more accessible and more affordable mix of child care options.
A more responsive child care system is good for families but it is particularly important for mothers who suffer the greatest impact when child care is scarce, inflexible and expensive. It provides women with power and choice in their career decisions and makes it easier for them to work how they want, when they want, which is not only critical for working women, it’s critical for our nation’s.
More flexible child care is not the only important concern facing new and expectant mothers. Australia might have been the first country to give women full electoral rights but we have been just about the last to give them paid parental leave. Some 38 countries have a paid parental leave scheme – including places like Morocco and Mexico as well as Denmark and Switzerland – but Australia still doesn’t have a scheme based on a woman’s real wage.
The scheme that the current Government cobbled together, is basically a re-badged Baby Bonus. It’s a welfare scheme rather than a workplace entitlement.
Increasing women’s participation in the economy is a sure-fire way to boost productivity. Increasing productivity is the key to building a stronger economy. By better supporting women to juggle work and family commitments, we empower them to be better economic (as well as social) contributors to our country. That’s why paid parental leave is not just a women’s issue or another a family benefit but a policy that makes good economic sense.
Of all the countries with a paid parental leave scheme, 36 out of 38 base parental leave payments on the salary that the individual mother actually earns. Just two countries – one of them Australia – have a scheme that doesn’t pay women their real wage. Labor’s scheme is based on the minimum wage. It’s not a workplace entitlement based on a woman’s real wage.
Tony Abbott’s wife and daughters
This is the key difference between Labor’s paid parental leave scheme and the policy I took to the last election and will take again to the next election. I want a scheme where Australian women enjoy paid parental leave based on what they actually earn. Women receive their real wage when they’re sick or on holidays so why diminish the contribution of raising children and make light of the inevitable career interruption this brings by paying them the minimum wage only?
Most modern families need two incomes to pay the rent or the mortgage and to keep their heads above water financially. By paying women anything less than their real wage, we devalue family life and put more barriers in the way of women who aspire to both a family and a career.
That’s why I reject any suggestion that the Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme is too generous. Parental leave based on what a woman actually earns isn’t generous – it’s only what’s fair. It’s that simple.
As many people know, I was a slow and late convert to the idea of paid parental leave. That’s the truth and I don’t try to hide it. In fact, I think it’s proof that good policy can prevail provided the argument stacks up and politicians are big enough to admit getting it wrong. I got it wrong when I earlier opposed paid parental leave.
Personal experience is often the best teacher. Watching friends and colleagues trying to juggle work and family persuaded me that I had to reconsider this issue lest society condemn my daughters’ generation to having fewer life options than their male counterparts.
So I revisited the arguments and changed my mind.
What’s more, the broad framework of what was to become the Coalition’s paid parental leave was outlined in my book Battlelines, which was published months before I became Leader of the Opposition in December 2009. The fact that my paid parental leave change of heart came about before I was elected to lead the Coalition is an inconvenient truth that explodes Labor’s claim that it was a cynical ploy to gain the female vote.
The Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme pays superannuation while the mother is on leave, unlike Labor’s scheme which pays no superannuation. Paying super is essential if we are to try and arrest the growing divide between the retirement incomes of men and women. Our scheme covers the six months duration recommended for breastfeeding mothers while Labor’s scheme covers only 18 weeks.
On every measure, the Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme is better for mothers, families, our community and our economy than Labor’s welfare scheme.
Still, being the better scheme hasn’t made it an easy sell. I have had to fight hard for the Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme against some fierce internal criticism. I’ve always believed that if something’s worth fighting for, fight for it you should. Anything less than a fair dinkum paid parental leave scheme would leave us poorer as a society, an economy and a country and the test of good government, after all, is to leave the country better off than you found it.
Tony Abbott is the Leader of the Opposition and the Federal Member for Warringah.
Do you think there needs to be an inquiry into the child care sector? Do the current paid parental leave arrangements work for your family or do you prefer Tony Abbott’s proposed system? What other issues would you like to hear from Tony Abbott about?
Comments
254 Comments so far
So women who earn minimum wage or below are expected to pay for my maternity leave, at a higher rate than they receive, through the tax system? I think TA forgets that in “supporting women” he is completely ignoring a massive amount of them who happen to earn the minimum wage or below. Do they even exist in his world?
These women should not have to supplement those on higher incomes. If employers want to supplement the govt. scheme for their valued staff then great. The current system is designed to encourage this and it happens all over the world.
loading...
You know what really irks me about comments like this. ‘These women should not have to support those on higher incomes.” So I work hard and sacrifice to get to a position where I earn a good salary and as a reward I should lose a huge chunk of pay to tax and never be eligable for anything ever!!!
Because I missed out on many normal teenage experiences because I had my head stuck in a book. And I spent 5 years working two or more jobs, while completing two university degress with 40+ contact hours a week, to cover the cost of my books and some lab supplies so that I could get a good, well paying job. And once I started at the job I missed Christmas and birthdays and engagements and the birth of nieces and nephews and the opportunity to say goodbye to my grandfather before he passed away because I was in the middle of nowhere.
And yes I earn decent money but out of the $125 k I earned last year I paid almost $50 000 in tax and HECS repayments. Pay that tax plus a mortgage alone (and a fairly standard $380 000 one at that not some multi-million dollar mansion) plus land and water rates and power bills and groceries and $300 a month for medical specialists and $200 a month for private health insurance, which won’t get me a rebate on those doctors fees, because I earn too much to be deserve a rebate now, plus those 6 or so meds that make it possible to get out of bed and go to work everyday and you know what – there is not a whole lot left. I am walking around in shoes that have holes in the soles that are larger than 50 cent pieces because I can’t afford new ones.
And after all that when I have a doctor tell me that I need a certain medication to prevent deteriotation of my skeleton I have to wait three months, waiting, jumping through hoops, taking ridiculously strong pain medications and relying of friends and family to help me bathe and cook me food because the gov’t wants to be certain that they aren’t wasting $1500 on subsidising a medication that my specialist says I need.
And now you want to deny me the right to have paid maternity leave that is commensurate to the amount of tax I have paid and effort I have put in to earn a salary that allows me to pay that amount of tax because “These women (on lower salaries) should not have to support those on a higher income)!!!. What I would claim on 6 or 12 months maternity leave is pittance compared to what I have and will pay in tax over my career.
When do I get a break!!!
loading...
Jeepers. I did everything you did. Two degrees. Head stuck in a book, etc, etc. But I’m a teacher and earn half of what you do. The only thing we are eligible for on my husbands 65k salary (which looks after all 4 of us as we can’t afford 2 kids in childcare and kindy fees on my salary if I return to work) is $125 a week in family tax benefit. While I am exceptionally grateful for this, I would hate people to think that people receiving ‘middle class welfare’ are receiving huge amounts of money- we’re not. No health care card, no reduction in anything at all. I would certainly rather be on your salary and not receiving any family tax benefit than be in our situation.
loading...
And while maybe not worded the best that’s kind of what I am trying to get at. We all have our own trials and tribulations and we are all individuals with a unique set of circumstances and there is no magic figure where if you earn over such and such amount you can afford everything and do everything and all will be ok.
My salary, while awesome for someone like you or even better for a single person with no kids, doesn’t account for me and my disgustingly high medical bills ($300 a month for one specialist, $360 for a second specialist, $200 for private health insurance, plus all the meds, and the unpaid time at work to attend all these appointment as 10 days a year doesn’t cover it.)
So why, when I put so much into the tax system, should I not be able to access services and allowances so freely available to other (medication subsidies and maternity leave payments that are commensurate with what I pay earn and therefore pay in tax) just because I earn more than some magical figure.
I think it’s the “Why should I subsidise you?” arguement that gets me. Instead of thinking of it as someone who earns less than me contributing to my payments why not think of it as the individual reclaiming some of what they have already contributed to the system.
We all need help sometimes..
loading...
Dont people like you with high medical expenses get the Medicare safety net rebate? If you don’t then you should ask Medicare, because it sounds like you would get a lot back. If you do, then your complaints are rather exaggerated and not honest.
It seems to me that some people like to complain a lot about their lot. And I don’t just mean this person, so many commenters sound unhappy with their lot.
loading...
“why not think of it as the individual reclaiming some of what they have already contributed to the system.”
Because that’s not what the tax system is about. It’s about creating a society where people don’t get to take out what they put in, they get to take out what they NEED. You should speak to your accountant if you’re spending that much on medications etc and not getting it back, because the Medicare Safety Net is there to help people in your situation.
loading...
I honestly believe that both parties are only getting into this issue because, if generous enough, it can generate enormous votes for their party.
Childcare workers are paid terribly, however the parents who pay the fees often cant afford to pay or those who can afford it complain about the expense anyway. Personally, I believe childcare fees should be a proportion of the parents income. Nation wide. The centre should then be subsidised directly, not by way of fee relief. Caring for children or paying for that care is a parental responsibility, however poor families shouldnt be suffering because they have to work to put food on the table. That way we wont have a situation where a shop assistant can only find care in a centre that charges $110 per day and that could be more than he/she earns, and an investment bankers child, whose family has a 7 figure income can send their child to a council run centre for $40 per day. This would stop this sort of thing and make the system fairer for those who need it and charge more for those who can pay for it. The fact that there is childcare available is enabling the parents to go and work and earn their income in the first place. Yet the people providing the care for their children are paid less than the cleaners who come and clean the centre. Something doesnt add up.
loading...
I agree that women deserve paid maternity leave. I do however, have two questions. Firstly, how will this maternity leave be funded? Secondly, if employers have to pay, which your refusal to comment on funding leads me to believe, how on earth would a Liberal government prevent employers from blantantly discriminating against women of child bearing age? The reality is, if business thinks a woman will cost the money, they will not hire her. It is disgusting, but it is the reality. Explain how this will be funded, and then perhaps i will give this policy more weight.
loading...
While I don’t agree with it, I don’t think it’s “disgusting” behaviour from a potential employer. It’s realistic. Not many small to medium business could afford to pay an employee for 6 months while they are not even working?? If the business goes bankrupt everybody loses.
It’s just bad policy that would clearly cause that kind of behaviour!
loading...
The obvious solution to avoiding any ‘discrimination’ with respects to employment of women (assuming business’ will have to pay) is simple. Make it PARENTAL LEAVE, available in equal quantities to both parents. so, if mother gets 6 months full pay time off, father (or other mother or whatever) gets the same entitlement. this would turn around the discrimination to a preference to hiring females aged 50+ in preference to males of any age and females of child-bearing age.
loading...
The scheme is to be paid by a levy on Australian big business.
A quick google search of “Tony Abbott PPL” shows a number of links with the quotes about funding.
loading...
While I respect that we need to give voice to all opinions, I must admit I was a bit shocked when I saw the author was Tony Abbott. Still, everyone’s entitled to their viewpoints, so I decided to read with an open mind.
I almost found myself nodding along to this, before the swings at the Labour Party left a sour taste in mouth.
I think this was a wasted opportunity for Mr Abbott – if you could have reasonably explained what you wanted to achieve, and talked about paid parental leave as a wider issue, this would have found more value than simply a written account of a speech you might make any other day. I think both parties need to spend more time sticking to their own policies, instead of undermining the other party’s. Maybe then we’d have a government we could truly be part of.
The community at Mamamia is an open, caring, and curious mix of wonderful people. This piece was simply to ‘sales-y’ and see through, at least for my tastes. I do wish you all the best with your paid parental scheme. Maybe by the time I have children it will be easier for me than it was for my own parents.
loading...
so it’s alright when Julia Gillard writes something on Mamamia, but not Tony Abbott? It’s very important to give a voice to both sides on this website as I would stop reading if it became a labour strong hold.
Julia’s no better than Tony when it comes to undermining the other party’s policies
loading...
No, I haven’t seen Gillard’s piece, but if it slags of the Liberal party I wouldn’t be in agreement with it, either.
Oops, looks like I posted twice, will delete one!
I think it’s important for both sides to have a voice, but both parties already have too many forums where they can point out the flaws of e other governmen. I’d hoped MamaMia would be a forum for an open conversation about the issues they feel are important. Maybe next time Abbott (and Gillard, if that’s the case) will be the bigger party and stick to their point of view.
loading...
Uhh, did you see Kevin Rudd and what he was saying about Tony Abbott on Q&A last night? They’re all as bad as each other.
loading...
OMG your dog is so cute what sort of oodle is he?
I also want to say that the misogynist bashing that some like to run with is not supported by all women
What whippersnapper said below … ditto
As you were
loading...
I’m confused. Are you trying to say that there are some women who believe that misogyny is okay?
loading...
No! misogyny is never ok. Also never ok is pulling out the he is a misogynist card when it just doesn`t apply.
And where did the dog pic go?
loading...
It sounds fair in principle, but really when it comes down to it it means the government will be giving people who earn more, more money. And that doesn’t really seem fair to me. I think everyone should get the same.
loading...
I agree there are many benefits of having a full government supplied paid maternity leave based on current wages.
And I also agree that an enquiry by the productivity commission into other aspects of child care and productivity is very, very worthwhile.
But your article can be summed up in ten words: “I promise is to ‘think’ about it after the election”.
It’s just words. There is no policy here. No costing. No funding. No actual commitment at all.
We know that paid maternity leave is a productivity plus – why not actually make your grand plans actual policy? I wonder? Hmmm…
loading...
As Alan Jones would say “I’ll eat crow hot” (or something).
The paid maternity leave IS policy. My bad.
loading...
Dear Mr Abbott, I hope you were watching Q&A last night. Please step down as leader so that Australia can have the opportunity to vote for a party led by Malcolm Turnbull. You criticise Labor for being led by the “faceless men”, you and your fellow MPs need to do what your criticise Labor of not doing – and listen to what your constituents are telling you – we all want Malcolm Turnbull.
loading...
Rubbish. The media and Labor are the ones pushing for Turnbull so they’ve got something to attack. He was a disasterous Opposition Leader and he’s in the same uber-ego, pocket-lining mould as Rudd. In fact, they lunch together. A return to Turnbull would see the Coalition vote plummet.
We’re perfectly happy with the thoroughly decent Tony Abbott, thanks anyway.
loading...
I don’t agree at all.
Turnbull would be a disaster for Labor at the next election.
Abbott is exactly who Labor want to face.
loading...
No Johannah, I would vote for Malcolm Turnbull in a heartbeat. I will never, ever cast a vote for the Liberal party while Tony Abbott is leader.
loading...
Unless Malcolm Turnbull is your local member, you can’t vote for him.
loading...
Ok, thank you Whippersnapper. I will never vote for the Liberal party (my local member) while Tony Abbott is in power. But would happily vote for my local Liberal member if Malcolm Turnbull was at the helm.
loading...
Alright, I predict that there will be a wave of Abbott haters with the following:
1. I don’t believe you! You’re only doing this because you know you need women’s votes!
2. You are only proposing this scheme and you’ve focused on women because you’re truly an old fashioned sexist and think women belong in the home!
3. You opposed RU486 years ago, you hate women!
4. You want to control women’s reproductive rights, a vote for the coalition is a vote for the dark ages!
5. You can’t afford to fund this maternity leave scheme! Labor’s turning of the (Coalition) baby bonus into a minimum wage paid maternity leave is WAYYYYYY better!
Alright now, carry on.
loading...
Whippersnapper, I can only assume from your comment that you are lucky enough to never have had to consider using RU486. Due to several miscarriages, I have. When you have to make devastating decisions about pregnancy, wanted or not, it should be a medical decision between a woman and her doctor. Not a woman, her doctor and Tony Abbott at the door with a big stick.
A comment like yours could only be made from a place of genuine misunderstanding.
loading...
Errr, it’s actually none of your business as to whether or not I’ve ever had to use RU486. Trust me , there is no misunderstanding on my part and I find it offensive that you would be so patronising as to say that the only reason I would make my (highly sarcastic) comment above is because I “misunderstand” something.
People on here jump from A to Z with Tony Abbott, automatically accusing him of “hating” women, and his opposed RU486 years ago when he was health minister is one of the reasons people state. That’s a longer bow to draw than saying that broccoli goes well with chocolate. It’s completely unfounded and illogical to draw that conclusion that he hates women because he opposed RU486.
loading...
Do you really have to start so many comments with ‘errr’, I’m not sure if you realise it, but it’s very patronising/sarcastic.
loading...
Nice to see that you’re reading all my comments, Cee! I feel special.
loading...
Whippersnapper, I have never said that Tony Abbott hates women. Indeed, I don’t believe he does. What I do believe is that he can’t separate church and state, which is a cornerstone of our democracy. Or certainly couldn’t at that point in time when he was health minister. I do think that he is slowly putting becoming a politician before being a good Catholic though. I simply don’t believe, based on past performance (and isn’t that what we are all employed on?), that he can genuinely govern for the majority of Australians who have opinions that differ to his.
Also, I didn’t mean to offend you with my comment and I apologise if I did. I simply can’t understand a system under Tony Abbott that didn’t allow me a non-surgical option in my situation. I’d assume that anyone who found themselves in my situation would prefer at least to make the choice themselves instead of having it made for them by someone who truly didn’t understand.
loading...
But do you have any response to these (fairly valid in my opinion) criticisms?
It’s very easy to be sarcastic, but it’s much harder to offer genuine responses.
loading...
The reason why I made the above points is because they are supposed to be sarcastic and highlighting the ridiculous conclusions people make about Tony Abbott on Mamamia.
It is ludicrous to ever think or draw any conclusion that Tony hates women simply because he opposed RU486 when he was health minister. But yet I have seen that opinion offered on this site (not this article) several times in comments.
The same people saying that he only has this policy on paid parental leave to get “female votes” are not equally saying “Julia Gillard did that morning tea with bloggers to get female votes, it’s all a sham” – why not?
The points that I made above are supposed to highlight how absolutely ridiculous it is to draw those conclusions. I’m not Tony Abbott’s number 1 fan, I can assure you, but I do think that the jump from A to Z without considering the rest of the alphabet is jawdroppingly biased.
loading...
Sounds great, but how does the coalition plan to fund this scheme? Sounds very expensive so i think the public deserve full disclosure. I do not think the coalitoon has been honest and up front in regards to financing issues. Also, is there a link to further detailed info on your plan? I’m wondering if this leave entitlement will be available to fathers as well? If not, it should be. You speak as if only mothers should stay at home to raise their children.
loading...
Increased productivity (i.e. an increased number of women earning a wage and paying taxes) increases the amount of money the government has to pay for schemes like this.
It’s an economic no-brainer that we need to support more women to have children and then return to the employment if they so wish.
loading...
Are we talking 6 months paid maternity leave at full pay? How soon could we expect this change if your party wins the election? Your response may win you a vote (you have never had before).
loading...
I’d like to know where this scheme leaves women who are not working full time when they take maternity leave. It’s great for women who are on high incomes, but still leaves everyone else behind the 8 ball. I’d rather see the money spent on schemes that aim to help women up skill so they can extend their careers when they go back to work. Seems like a good way to make the rich get richer and the poor get poorer to me – there will still be thousands and thousands struggling to get by while a minority continue living their cushy lives while they raise their babies. How can it be fair that some mothers on maternity leave could recieve up to 50k for their 6 months leave while aged pensioners have to live on the bread line. Sorry this won’t buy my vote Tony.
loading...
It doesn’t leave people behind the eight ball, it’s even and fair. Why is it that women who’ve worked hard, paid to attend Uni, have a well paying job and pay lots of taxes have to support those who choose not to gain those skills prior to having children. Even if they do get 50k its important to remember they pay taxes on this income. We need women in management (god knows its taken a long time to get women into these roles) roles that are often in high income brackets, why not support those women? I’m keen to support everyone not just low income earners, how about a fair go for all? Those up skilling programs are available free of charge if you speak to your local job services provider they’ll provide you with lots of ideas of courses. I do this work and we also provide information on minimal cost child care whilst you study also.
loading...
Yeah, where the hell is my middle class welfare?? (sarcasm ++)
@L in brisbane, the majority of women who attend uni have had a lot of support from government and the community already. For instance in Australia we don’t pay the full cost of uni tuition – it is subsidised. I don’t think you understand just how hard it is for people of lower socio-economic classes to ‘rise’ above. Most of the students at uni are from reasonably well to do families.
Yes professional women do pay more taxes – but the proportion of taxes to income to disposable income is better than women of less educational standing. Professional women are smart and can manage their tax affairs better (for instance, hard to do negative gearing when you don’t have any money – even if you understood what negative gearing was in the first place).
Modern professional women generally have better career outcomes after motherhood as well and their dip in income and super is less affected.
So don’t be mean. Really think about what is “a fair go for all”.
loading...
here here
loading...
Yes, we need more women in management, but that should not be at the expense of supporting lower income women. Women who go to unviersity are not the only ones who have worked hard. To say that some women “choose not to gain those skills prior to having children” oversimplifies a complex issue.
loading...
Oh God L in Brisbane. I did work hard at uni. 3 degrees. And I earn 60k a year teaching your kids. Give. Me. A. Break.
loading...
How did it take you three degree’s to become a teacher? It’s all about choice, why should I pay for your choices? Why can it not be fair for all? Do you think those who earn a higher income should get paid less when they’re on holidays or when they’re sick? Its an employee entitlement the same as sick leave, bereavement leave etc.
loading...
It didn’t take me 3 degrees to become a teacher. I have a history degree (separate from my education degree) and a psychology degree as well as I want to be really good at my job. I believe in life-long learning and state education having exceptional teachers. Most of the teachers I work with have degrees additional to their undergrad degree.
I certainly don’t expect other people to fund my parental leave above and beyond the basic wage. I think there’s better things it can go towards like the NDIS, funding respite care programs, funding for children’s hospitals etc.
loading...
Why you changed your mind on paid parental leave was because you were losing votes!
I have voted liberal all my life. Now I don’t know how I can, when I feel a vote for Abbott would jeopardise women’s reproductive rights and choices.
loading...
Didn’t read the whole post did you LifelongLiberalVoter?
loading...
current system works as a bandaid for me as i was only working 2 days/wk as I was also studying my PhD fulltime before my maternity leave, so the pay almost meets how much i’d earn in those days at work. It is otherwise well short of what I’d be earning were i to be working full-time.
But where would the money for it come from??? It’d be a HUGE problem for me if it were to come from thechildcare subsidies currently in place because THAT is the only way i’ll be able to go back to work.
loading...
Well done, Mr Abbott. The stench that’s engulfing UnionLabor, both State and Federal, is making it very hard to breathe. I admire your continued dignity in the face of unprecedented personal attack and hope that your family don’t suffer too much in the coming months leading to the election.
And, next time you see Julie Bishop, could you give her a <<<>>> from me. She has been phenomenal and a female politician we can be proud of.
loading...
She’s only a “female” politician because of her gender, just like Tony Abbott is a male politician. Politicians are politicians and we should be “proud” or not “proud” of them regardless of whether they happen to be a female or male.
loading...
Yes, once there are equal numbers of both women and men in the Parliament, I will think you have a valid point there.
loading...
Childcare would need significant government investment to enable a more flexible system. At the moment it relies upon supply and demand and without enough demand then a centre would not be viable. Unfortunately the demand for childcare means places are competitive and parents take what they can get. I’m now contrasting my experiences with sourcing childcare compared with enrolling my eldest in my local state school. There doesn’t seem to be the ‘local state school’ option in childcare – it’s the highly competitive private system or nothing.
We actually moved interstate to be closer to family – partly to bring up the kids with the grandparents and cousins and partly to get better support for us to work while the kids are young (kudos to the SAHMs out there but I couldn’t do it). It helps that my husband and I both work in very technical fields that are part of the skills shortage so getting work near our families wasn’t a problem, but for many, moving closer to family can be a step back. If it weren’t for the mining boom this would have been an issue for us – and who knows if it will be in the future.
loading...
Good to hear from Tony Abbott – interesting to have more male voices and hear from the Leader of the Opposition in general
bravo.
loading...
Whilst I fully agree with the payment of maternity leave at the same level a woman is usally paid, I can’t help but feel the whole Tony Abbot conversion to supporting this policy is staged. He lost me at ” as parents” – can’t help but feel this is a dig at the PM. Poor Tony, he just can’t win!
loading...
Well they are parents!!! What do you want him to refer to himself as?
loading...
Be realistic.
If you object to Mr Abbott referencing his parenthood, are you suggesting that Mr Abbott hide his family and not make any decisions based on his family experience until he retires from Parliament?
loading...
The minimum recommended time for breastfeeding is 12 months, not 6 months.
The scheme sounds fine but I’m very interested to know what will be cut in order to pay for it?
loading...
The WHO recommendations are actually “exclusive” breastfeeding for the first 6 months of a baby’s life, followed by complementary foods alongside breastmilk to 2 years of age and beyond.
loading...
It is until 6 months.
loading...
From the Liberal policy website.
The policy be funded by a 1.5 percent levy on companies with taxable incomes in excess of $5 million. The levy will apply only to taxable income in excess of $5 million. http://www.liberal.org.au/sites/default/files/ccd/Paid%20Parental%20Policy.pdf
Seems pretty fair way to fund it. Also paid through Centrelink rather than using companies to make the payment.
loading...
Fantastic article! I am so glad MM is giving Mr Abbott the opportunity to outline his views and demonstrate how committed he is to actual practical solutions rather than symbolic gestures.
MM do you think we can ease up on the ‘Misogyny’ claims? A man that stones his daughter to death for being raped is a misogynist. A man who hires exclusively male staff or opposes women in the workplace is a sexist. Tony Abbott is none of these things and actually has a concrete plan for making the lives of working mothers just that little bit easier.
loading...
There are degrees of misogyny, just like there are degrees of everything. Just because someone’s not stoning women doesn’t mean they’re not a misogynist.
loading...