Question.The proposed paid maternity leave. My understanding is that employers/govt? to pay the employees equivalent to their annual wage (to allow them to retain the lifestyle to which they are accustomed?) Does this possible payment cover those earning hundreds of thousands annually, like a politician for example, all the way down to say, an expectant mum who is employed in the Aged Care industry earning around $30,000 annually. Is the baby bonus included? I will be happy to have someone enlighten me on the subject.
One comment before I go. Shouldnt bringing a baby into the world be something planned, being assured the parents are prepared and financially stable for the addition to their lives. As for 'the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed' I really hope i miss heard that one. How about across the board, to be fair to all, the affluent and the not so, a maternity leave payment equivalent to the Sickness benefit.

There should be no maternity payment - big or small.

There are way too many people on this overcrowded planet already. Maternity leave should be treated like anyone else leaving work in order to pursue their private interests.

Why should the public subsidise some people's hobbies and not others? If people like the idea of having children (or if they just like having sex without considering the consequences), then they should pay for it themselves, or if others support that outdated pursuit, then let them pay for it instead.

Abbott maternity leave scheme is unfair and unaffordable. It's a shocker in my view and I doubt it will get passed.

As for incomes, it's my understanding that it is paid for six months, up to a max income of $150,000 per year, eg, $75,000 max for the six months.

So in other words, if you earn say $60,000 you would receive $30,000 over the six month period. But as I say, I think it's unaffordable.

What I suggest would be a better system, would be to allow intending parents to pay additional into their super, pre tax, up to the allowed amount, as per their annualized earnings for say an average of the past three years.

In the event that they do not have children, within a predetermined period, then the amount contributed to their super would be redrawn out of super and the balance of tax payable would then go on to their incomes. Perhaps there could also be a government paid safety net, similar to sickness benefits.

At least a sysytem like this would mean those wanting a baby would pay for it, and the tax payer is re dived from the burden.

Rehctub "Abbott maternity leave scheme is unfair and unaffordable. It's a shocker in my view and I doubt it will get passed."

So, it was ok to rant and rave about Labor not fulfilling their election promises, but here you are hoping this pre-election promise doesn't get through?

Maybe Abbott lied about paid maternity leave, knowing all along that the opposition would be bound to stop it from actually happening?

Why was Abbott raving on about the huge 'debts' that Labor apparently left our country with, while at the same time promising to deliver an expensive scheme like this paid maternity leave?
Maybe because he knew he wouldn't have to?

This scheme had better go through, given that many people voted for them because of it.
Most other Western countries have a similar scheme, and it is meant to encourage women from all walks of life to stay home with their newborns as long as possible.
I don't think that's a bad policy.

There should be no paid maternity leave and no baby bonus.

It is the choice of the parents and is up to them if and when they can afford it.

shame on the LNP, they are just trying to buy votes as does the ALP.

It seems rather strange that we are stopping mature people, that have reached a productive age, from entering the country yet we are subsidizing the entry of those who will not be productive for a minimum of around 18 years or longer and who are going to be very expensive to get to a productive age.