Former Prime Minister John Howard has urged Federal Labor Party treasurer Jim Chalmers to re-introduce the baby bonus in Australia.

The baby bonus gave new parents an initial lump sum payment of $3000 per child born, rising to $5000 over time.

The policy was originally delivered in 2004 by then Liberal Party treasurer Peter Costello and brought in at the time supposedly due to Australia having a low birth rate.

The Federal Coalition now has also joined Mr Howard in his call for the baby bonus to be put back in place - and there is more detail in the article via the link.

http://shorturl.at/3lpl9

Personally, I am concerned this policy is even being reconsidered.

Australia is already overpopulated, alongside the planet internationally and to think we need more children is something I am not comfortable with.

I understand the want and desire to increase economic growth, but I believe there are more sustainable options in place we could consider.

I am wondering what other people think of this call, all comments appreciated.

It's an excellent idea. A return to the days of ‘child endowment’, where mothers received regular cheques to help with raising children would be good too.

Hungary has very good taxation arrangements to encourage women to have children. Changes to the taxation system here would be a good idea as well.

We might even get back to mothers actually looking after their own children instead of farming them out to strangers.

Yes, Nathan, the population is now too high. But there has to be a controlled number of people if we want to survive as a nation. It makes much more sense to breed our own than use the mass immigration of Third World peasants who cannot speak the language, and don't share our beliefs.

I am with you, Nathan: people should be fined for having babies, not rewarded!

The bonus should be in the form of housing, education, employment, health care etc, not a few bucks in the pocket! Ah yes, it always comes down to someone on the forum, usually from the radical right, calling for population control. Some of the 15% living in the developed world, whilst consuming 85% of the worlds resources, call for limiting the numbers of those over indulgent "black fellas" from the third world.

"But there has to be a controlled number of people if we want to survive as a nation." The problem for Australia is not over population, but an ageing population. With ever increasing numbers of non productive old folk, sitting on resources like housing, consuming tax dollars, eating up resources, not sustainable. Anyone in favour of a 'Soylent Green' style policy to solve the problem of too many old folk! ttbn do you like strawberries?

ttbn says" It makes much more sense to breed our own than use the mass immigration of Third World peasants."

In a different thread ttbn quotes Adam Smith's line about "The invisible hand of the free market."

For fun, let's apply that to population growth. For each child of "our own" what economic input would be required? The mother would have to take some time off work as would their partner. There would be the time of doctors and nurses and use of hospital resources. The child would need to be educated, clothed and fed for at least 18 years.

The finances of the parents would take a substantial hit and that money otherwise could have been invested into generating wealth.

Smith might argue "let the free market rule." It would make far greater economic sense to import people who are already adults than to go to the expense of raising our own.

From memory, Smith only uses the phrase "Invisible hand of the market" once in "The Wealth of Nations". I suggest ttbn takes note of this before he pens yet another of his seeming endless rants about people who are not like him.

Paul makes a good point about what real support should look like - housing, education, childcare, health care - not just throwing a few bucks in the pocket. That’s exactly the problem with the old baby bonus.

When Howard and Costello introduced it, it looked like families were being looked after. It felt safe to have another child because there was cash on the table. But once that cheque was spent, parents were left with the same crushing costs: expensive childcare, housing pressures, and long-term career and retirement sacrifices.

By the time those realities hit, it was too late… devil take the hindmost.

This wasn’t just a policy quirk, it was classic short-term Coalition politics - creating the illusion of support without fixing the real barriers stopping families from having the number of kids they actually want.

Labor’s approach now - longer paid leave (with super), cheaper childcare, and investment in housing - might not be as flashy as a lump-sum payment, but it actually makes raising kids financially sustainable. If the goal is to truly support families and manage an ageing population, structural security beats quick cash handouts every time.

I have responded to a thread started by Nathan. That response is for Nathan, and only Nathan. I have no interest in what other posters wish to say to Nathan; yet some posters (always the same ones) rudely ignore the instigators of threads, and use the opportunity to disparage the responses of people they don't like, and fling personal insults at them, and to hell with the actual topic.

You are bloody morons.

Baby bonuses will invariably abused by the undeserving & selfish & dark ages religious groups !
The mothers who really need them will not see any improvement in their life.
Child care will go up before the first bonuses are paid as will baby food etc etc.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/1417588032769628

This is what Baby bonuses contribute to !

NO to another baby bonus. In business at the time it was fantastic, I will readily admit this. A common comment from many pregnant customers at the time was "gotta get that baby bonus" when a baby in a pram was hungry, the one on the hip was hungry and some KFC or similar was tea for the night. The kids were not wanted from conception unfortunately, and that is where many problems are coming from now. TV sales, rubbish toys, bikes, cars, sales of numerous not required items, went through the roof, great for business but did not achieve the results expected. Not in the region of low income, maybe in some areas people made hay out of it.

I will go through some of the comments here and respond.

ttbn,

<<It's an excellent idea. A return to the days of ‘child endowment’, where mothers received regular cheques to help with raising children...>>

I think in principle people should be able to afford to look after their own children - and not rely on the government.

<<It makes much more sense to breed our own than use the mass immigration of Third World peasants who cannot speak the language, and don't share our beliefs.>>

Well you can't pick and choose with a baby bonus. Our own does include people who have come here from overseas and cannot speak the language etc.

Yuyutsu,

<<I am with you, Nathan: people should be fined for having babies, not rewarded!>>

I wouldn't want fines, but I think people should have a child out of reasons of love and not be enticed into children they don't really want. I don't think we should be paying people to increase an already overpopulated planet.

I would also hate to find out later on in my life my parents only had me due to a baby bonus being put in place. I was always in ripped clothing, I had little food each day and hardly had any doctors appointments. I felt sick every day and uncared for. Not a nice experience.

Dear Nathan,

Well I do not support direct fines either, only indirect fines when parents will have to finance all child-related expenses from their own pocket.

Give a fair advance notice to accommodate for those already conceived, but for any baby born afterwards, no Medicare, no free schooling, no subsidised childcare, no tax rebates, etc.

Even if parents love to have a child, having more people is a luxury this planet cannot afford until human population is drastically reduced.

For those concerned locally about aging Australian population, first, those presently involved with childcare and school-teaching can move into aged-care, and second, there are plenty of dedicated young people in and around Asia who are eager to come to Australia and care for the elderly in order to support their starving families at home. They don't even require extra housing because they are more than happy to just have one room in the home of their elderly client.

It's going to be interesting how Government & incompetent bureaucracy will juggle one stupid with another stupid in this upcoming race of the races.
Looking at the dark ages religious & the absolutely mindless Left Woke makes it impossible to take sides for any sane citizen to choose.
I mean, the tattooed, stud-riddled, nose ringed unemployables vs the primeval unquestioning, both drugged to the eyeballs unemployables do not leave any option other than let them lie in the bed they made themselves. Let the sane do their thing !
'The Planet of the Apes' doesn't suddenly look all that far fetched along with 'Soylent Green' & 'The Island' !

No need for baby bonuses, cash pays, child keeping money, nah, just employ some old fart ex Liberal PM as the new 'LITTLE JOHNNY STUD MUFFIN', the women will be lining up in their thousands!

Nathan,

You say that people should be “able” to afford to look after their own children.

I agree. They used to be able to do that: women could (had to) resign from their jobs after marriage, and they could afford to do that, and look after their own children, unlike now, when taxpayers are paying billions for them to keep working and put their kids in care to be brain-washed earlier, and in some cases - probably many more to be revealed - preyed on by perverts.

Could you explain these two sentences to me, please. My poor old brain doesn't get it.

"Well you can't pick and choose with a baby bonus. Our own does include people who have come here from overseas and cannot speak the language etc".

There is a lot of scoffing about things in the past from people who were not there. But having been there myself, and living through the current chaos, I know what was preferable. People under 50 have been denied the benefits of learning history, so I don't expect them to know that, apart from technology and the things that they can't manage without, Australia used to be a much, much better place. I am grateful that I spent most of my life in those times, and I am sorry that younger generations never enjoyed them, and now never will.

One of the great misconceptions is migrants don't speak English, the fact is 90% of new arrivals either exclusively speak English or are proficient in English as a second language. The stereotype migrant that some Old Farts would have you believe is all, the man and woman wearing turban and hijab, with a tribe of kids in tow, leading a couple of goats speaking gibberish is not true.

My Tamil family friends who arrived in February 2023, have just had their second child. They could speak excellent English the day they arrived. he has a very good skilled job earing around $85k/year. Living in a very nice rented house, saving hard for their own home. The oldest daughter is top of the class in primary school. Unfortunately they still eat curry, and he doesn't like meat pies (I got him to try on), doesn't like beer, likes a glass of red wine instead.

The fact that all pro willy nilly migration are evading at all cost is that the greater majority of modern migrants are simply building up numbers.
We saw them walking over the Harbour Bridge a few days ago & it was clear that their focus was not on building Australia, they were using the comfort & safety of being in Australia to keep on spreading hatred against people who simply ran out of patience after thousand or more years of seeking peace.
There are migrants & then there are migrants. Let Australians have a say in a referendum which they prefer to come here !

Indy

On the Sydney Harbour Bridge March;

WHEN GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTHING, BAD PEOPLE DO SOMETHING!

I understand you arrived in Australia as an economic refugee with nothing, and were able to take advantage of this very generous country. Yes I agree not all migrants are an asset, there are those who only take, and bring "baggage" from back home with them, but fortunately they are in the minority. You seemed to have arrived with a hatred of our progressive liberal democratic society, and those different to you, including our indigenous brothers and sisters.

I understand you arrived in Australia as an economic refugee
Paul1405,
Unlike you I came here as a working man who paid his way for well over 50 years. I came here for the nature of Australia not anarchists like you who now make me increasingly feel like a potential refugee.

John Howard has done a reasonable job u until he disarmed the Nation ! As for the Baby bonuses he surely could have done with some foresight !

John Howard should call for the reintroduction of common sense & make One Nation a Coalition partner !

Indy,

Just what we need a bunch of inbreeds from One Nation in government. Are YOU a member? If not why not, they're always on the lookout for more of your type to join the party. You'd fit right in!

Indyvidual,

Although your mention of the shameful performance on the Sydney Harbour Bridge is well off the topic, you have reminded me of something I read recently.

The embarrassment caused internationally by the misuse of an Australian icon should never have happened. The Bridge is not to be used for public assembly or processions. The hate -march could have been held where the one on 8/10/23 was held, or any street, with a permit.

But, not on the Sydney Harbour Bridge. If the NSW government and the NSW Police had the ability to find their own backsides with two hands, they would have known of the Roads Act 48, which states: “A person must not, on the Harbour Bridge … conduct or participate in any public assembly or procession”. If they had, they could have advised Judge Belinda Rigg of the law.

Part 4AF of the Crimes Act, imposes criminal penalties on protesters who block access to major facilities. The Bridge is a ‘major facility’.

The un-advised Judge could only find on the basis of permission to use ordinary streets, not an icon that is protected by a law that nobody involved was aware of.

Not only have anti-Israel thugs, in the stupid belief that Israel would take any notice of their nonsense, made utter dicks of themselves, they have also offended under the NSW Crimes Act.

Fortunately for the thugs, the NSW Police are also incompetent in actually enforcing the law - no terrorist flag wavers arrested AGAIN - they have nothing to worry about.