Paid maternity leave is a good idea in principle, but I'm bothered by the fact that it only goes to women, and the drastic income drop at the end of the designated period forces many back to work whether they like it or not.

Andrew Leigh http://andrewleigh.com/?p=1822 has recently been spruiking the benefits of negative taxation, which (if I've understood the concept correctly) would apply equally to men and women, and is received for as long as parents need - or choose - to stay home and look after the kids. Best of all, it's inherently means-tested.

An advantage for government would be that the negative tax rates could be adjusted up or down to suit prevailing economic conditions and/or population policies.

And did I mention that it's inherently means-tested? Rather than paying all mothers regardless of their capacity to support themselves, benefits go to parents who are truly in need.

'The will of the people is that women should be able to combine work and families.'

Really? Is that proven anywhere? Is there any 'will of the people' for men to be able to combine work and families? There is from me at least.

Out of interest, how does '14 weeks leave at the minimum wage' compare to the $5000 baby bonus?

'We know that 14 weeks leave would cost much less per year than the billion dollar baby bonus'

If that is so, why would you prefer 'maternity' leave over a baby bonus? Or do you want both? Or do you just want the baby bonus to be called 'maternity leave' because it sounds better or is more explicitly for women?

'In Sweden, women enjoy 16 months paid maternity leave at government expense'
Yes, but have you seen the taxes in Sweden?

If agreements can be reached between employees and employers for paid maternity leave, that's fine; even though it could impact on prices, the public could overcome any increase by avoiding the companies involved.

But, to expect money to pay mothers who are not working to come from the public purse is outrageous. New mothers should be grateful to be able to resume their jobs after the child is old enough to leave with relatives or in a childcare centre.

Despite all the babble about 'equality' and women being able to act like men if they choose to, women are the ones who have children. If they can't cope with that, and a job, they should adjust the lifestyle to survive on one income until their kids are at school.

It would be a hell of a lot cheaper than subsidising child care to the extent the government currently does.

Others have already made the point but I'll go there anyway.
Drop the sexism and let families decide which parent is better doing the stay at home part.

Perhaps a rephrase of one the opening comments

"The will of the people is that parents should be able to combine work and families. It has been expressed plainly by numbers."

Men are often criticised for not taking a more active role as parents (I'm not sure if Natasha has done so). Proposals which further entrench the idea that the stay at home parent is the women perpetuate issues which are already high on the agenda of sections of the womens movement.

The proposal as maternity leave rather than parental leave
- Increases the economic pressures on families for it to be the mother who is away from work rather than letting families decide according to their circumstances
- Increases the gender related costs of employing women compared to men, possibly reducing the employment opportunities for younger women.
- Serves to perpetuate the idea that parenting is womens work which has flow on impacts

The simple solution is to make a parental leave after a childs birth a decision for the family involved. Some safeguards could be put in place to ensure that families did not double dip.

I suspect that in many instances the initial care will be done by the mother to facilitate breast feeding and to provide some recovery time but at least it's the parents choice then rather than something enforced by economic circumstances.

R0bert

Well said R0bert. Yes I agree that if the period is 14 weeks, then its most likely going to be taken by women, given that breastfeeding is best for the child, and that some recovery time is needed. That said, it is possible to find employers who are flexible enough to combine work and breastfeeding - it doesnt leave much spare time and usually requires sitting up during the night expressing, long past when baby can safely sleep through the night without a feed.

I agree with your comments though that this should be referred to as parental leave, and that families be encouraged to work out arrangements that best suit them.