jayr

It seems that the $20 billion splurge back to taxpayers for spending on plasmas and pokies may result in the Government reneging on some elction promises. The paid maternity leave proposal costing some $400m per annum is no longer affordable.

http://www.news.com.au/business/stor...44-462,00.html

Pollyana

Something seriously wrong with the way this country does the finances, isn't there. I've never needed maternity pay,( and I hope I never will !) but it strikes me as one of the things that Australia really needs to provide for working mums. Why they decide to give away hufge lumps of cash to people, almost at random, rather than providing something as useful and necessary as maternity pay I will never understand.

Notts_bloke

I don't have/ want kids. Why shouldn't I be entitled to financial benefits. Having kids is a personal choice.

Sammy T

You are right there, having kids is a personal choice but the point here is that because large amounts of money have been spent in the stimulus packages there is now no longer the resources to put into motion the maternity pay structure.

This was something promised by the current government in the election and they are now finding excuses not to implement it, after years and years of campaigning to get if off the ground.

In most other developed countries, maternity leave and pay have been around for some time, allowing women to combine both a family and work.
Making it difficult for women to return to their previous jobs is short sighted and wasteful especially if they have been trained to a certain level.

Many benefits and tax rebates/concessions etc do not apply to me eg

Veteran Benefit Scheme, very generous in Oz
Unemployment benefit
Pensions
Maternity Bonus payments
Farmers Bonus

But that does not mean for one minute that I don't consider them to be worthwhile and very important to the recipients of those payments. How selfish would that make me?

Sam

sr71

Because kids provide benefits for society and the economy as a whole, as well as ensuring the survival of the species.

Notts_bloke

Not all of them. Some become future criminals etc.

Anyway that misses my point, I wasn't arguing that we shouldn't have maternity pay. I was asking why I, as a well qualified young professional, am less deserving of the stimulus package because I don't have kids.

sr71

Well I have the same question about income too, can't see why people on $100K+ don't get the payment either - I mean it's supposed to stimulate the economy which is exactly what i would do with it.

Notts_bloke

Because it was targeted at middle-lower income earners.

jayr

There are very few benefits that myself and my family are eligible for. We don't receive FTB, child care rebate, the recent "back to school" bonus, the new tax rebate thing for costs associated with schooling or pretty much anything. My wife will get the $900 thing due to low earnings last year but that is our only handout. Also, we plan no more children so no baby bonuses or maternity pay for us.

As a net payer of these benefits to others, I would have preferred some $400M per annum being spent on maternity leave than an almost random hand out of $20bn.

Paid maternity leave is useful in that it assist in removing disadvantages that would be otherwise suffered by women. It means women are more likely to be in the workforce and productive inthe economy. I suspect for that reason alone it is a net contributor to the economy.

There are lots of activities I choose not to engage in but I am happy for the government to spend money on; aboriginal affairs, drug programs, alcohol programs, tax credits for low earners etc.

Sammy T

But there are lots of people who don't get anything in the package, I'm not a farmer so I don't get the farmers bonus but I don't have the hump about it!

I don't smoke, I eat carefully in moderation and take regular exercise yet the medicare levy pays for the those that do not look after themselves and end up obese with a heart attack. But I dont whinge about it, they need the care, so they get it.

We don't get to pick and choose what our taxes are spent on, there will always be something you don't get the benefit from eg schools, libraries, health care etc but that's just what living in our society generally means, some of what you pay benefits you directly and some of it just doesn't.

Life is not just about what you get out of it..............

Sam

Sammy T

Well said

Sam

slipshot

But that's the point - why was it targeted at lower income earners since surely it should be a boost the the economy which means everyone should get it since everyone contributes. Except those people on benefits (as in the full load who scrounge) who do not contribute but still get it.

As others, it just made Australia have a shortage of plasma and LCD TV's. Bloody silly decision - I'd much rather it was spent on drug counselling, or smoking or the like, either thought neither affect me. At least it has a benefit to society, not a benefit to TV manufacturers!

Broad Shoulders

Would you have spent the income from the paid maternity leave on a plasma?

jayr

Given that being on unpaid maternity leave results in a drop in income it seems reasonable to assume that any payment would be spent on "normal living" and go straight back into the economy.

Paid maternity leave would arguably be less likley to be spent on say paying off the mortgage or credit card debt (which has no stimulus effect) but would be spent on things that such families would otherwise cut back on.

sr71

But as someone else has said, it was to stimulate the economy, not to help out middle-lower income earners.