Great article. This is something which I wondered about and glad that someone has done the work.

You offered a solution of increasing the bonus by $50 per month. I am wondering whether there are other solutions. Certainly I have thought about it. My suggestion for incrementing the bonus would be $20 per day, on the principle that who interfere with a natural birth for a mere $20.

Another approach would be to declare a retrospective date. The legislation would say "sometime in July or August", and the Treasurer would later say "the bonus is payable as from yesterday." That is a very simple solution, and the speculation would help promote the bonus.

Ah! If only they spoke to us beforehand!

I have absolutely no problem with people getting this payment. In fact, when I was active in major politics, I was calling for this for years.

People who arrange the vasectomy after the 1st of July to get this payment show that their materialism of trying to control everything around them is wrong. If the baby is due beforehand, then the baby will come and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

Spider writes: "If the baby is due beforehand, then the baby will come and there is nothing you can do to stop it."

This statement does not conform with the data presented in the article which says that more children were born on 1st July than any other day in the last thirty years.

At the very least, one could assume mothers who were asked to have their delivery induced, for whatever reason, would have a financial incentive to say no.

I think a rise of $25 every three months would be more appropriate. Slightly above inflation, so it keeps the incentive up without being exorbitant. It would also be a lot cheaper and easier for the government to manage than monthly rises and a lot cheaper and easier for the hospitals to manage than rises simply at Costello's whim.