Foxy
Can you reply to Foxy for me? You know much better than me. Simple I say that Australian Unions, Society did not support women very much. The ILO included paid maternity leave in its third Convention which came into force in 1921,about one century later and we did not signed it! USA did not signed the convention too but many States pay the maternity leave.
At least the majiority of Australians support the paid maternity leave. A Newspoll survey last year reveals there is widespread support by Australians for paid maternity leave (76%)
http://www.nfaw.org.au/media/2007/07-07-13.html

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Foxy,

'The whole idea of maternity leave is to allow a woman to stay at home for the first few weeks of her baby's life'

I would say all women can, as they receive a baby bonus that equates to at least 12 weeks minimum wage.

Anyway, using the word 'allow' is pure furphy. Anyone can CHOOSE to make sacrifices somewhere in order to have enough money to achieve this without needing a hand out. And I suggest if they are unable to they should reconsider having children.

I have just had a baby. Why is it anyone else's responsibility but my own to save up enough money to cover expenses while my wife doesn't work before having children?

'How they are raised, and how well, is important for all of us and the evidence is clear that small babies in particular - as well as their mothers -
benefit from full-time care at home.'
Obviously. But you are fighting from the wrong angle here. Until couples decide that the house 2 suburbs closer to the city, or that new bathroom, extra TV or yearly holiday will have to come second to a priority to have one of them take care of their own child, nothing will change.

I just don't think handing out money will achieve a change in people's prioriites. Having children IS a lifestyle choice. Your lifestyle WILL change. It's not society's responsibility to allow you to have children without having to make any financial sacrifice.

It's a perfectly valid question. So let's have the decision made at the ballot box, like any self-respecting democracy.

The acid test, of course, is for a political party to establish maternity leave payments as an unbreakable electoral commitment, ahead of an election.

We could then vote directly on it.

The shape of the payments would need to be spelt out, of course.

Is it to be paid for out of our taxes? In which case, how much would it cost us? Would singles pay the same tax rate? Is that fair - why not simply tax couples at a higher compensatory rate?

Is it to be paid by employers? In which case, how much would their obligation be?

Perhaps even more importantly, would the government apply sanctions against employers who turn away applicants on the basis that they are of child-bearing age, and might therefore be more expensive to employ? In my business, I can't afford to take the risk.

Or how about if a company paid higher wages to someone not of child-bearing age, safe in the knowledge that they wouldn't be whacked with a pregnancy overhead? Would that be OK?

On a more business/technical note, would I be allowed to accrue the potential future expense on my balance sheet, in the name of full disclosure of issues of material impact? Would that accrual be deductible, like an insurance policy?

In a democratic society, we should be allowed to vote on such matters, rather than leave the decision to be made in the backrooms where politics and big business collude and conspire.

Incidentally, any bets on whether the "let's subsidize pregnancy for all and sundry" platform would get up?

ASymeonakis “You are a hard person”

Unlike many who see a supposed “goal” and then work back from that goal to the reality of where we are; I start from where we are and look forward to what, among many other objectives, we might become.

I believe the best society is achieved by people accepting full and complete responsibility for the choices they make and not presuming a wider society is responsible in any way for those personal choices.

Re caring for others, compassion is a personal quality, it cannot be transferred or executed through government. Government can only treat people as uniformly “equal”. “Compassion” requires the beneficiary to be treated as a unique individual whose circumstances are different to all others.

“If you want to create responsible, mature people try to find the right way”
then you start by making sure they are held personally accountable and responsible for their personal decisions and not rewarded for failing to be responsible, by placing a safety net of social support underneath them.

I recall reports of when DDT was universally adopted as the cure for many things, as you are suggesting paid maternity leave is going to be some universal panacea. Then they found out it was not quite as wonderful a thing, especially as it quickly got into the food chain including the milk of breast feeding mothers.

As far as I can see, paid maternity leave is just another “socialist panacea”, sounds nice and cuddly, basic sentimentalist tripe but in the longer term, erodes the self accountability and responsibility of the individuals who are supposed to be responsible for the children they sire.

You may think me hard, I think and I have been told I am first and foremost a realist. Basing any goals or objectives on anything other than “reality” is a fools errant and not something I would seek to aspire to, despite its popularity among socialists who seek uniformity of outcomes, regardless of the overall diminished quality of life.

No system can ever protect all children from irresponsible parents, that is another fools errant.

I am going to be purposely contentious.

The following is not what I believe but what I think we might all benefit from if debated.

I am extending the parenting role which Foxy suggests is “It's time - it's beyond time - that Australian women had government-paid maternity leave. It is a question of equity . . . the losers in this are not just the families involved, but our entire society.”

We are talking here about how people should discharge the financial responsibilities for the welfare of their children

If the state is inclined to pay women maternity leave for a number of months, why do we not make children a wholly tax supported expense?

Everyone could be income taxed at say 60%, no income thresholds or individual allowances.

All other taxes remain the same.

The additional 30% or so tax income is paid back as a substantial pension, according to the child’s age for each child a couple (or parent) has responsibility for and (in divorces) paid to the one with custody or in proportion to A family court lodged parenting agreement.

This “system” would, likewise, largely remove the problems being debated on the “Child Support and Parents.”” thread

And since we see many parents acting irresponsibly with their money, 70% of the pension is to be paid as food, clothing and other vouchers, redeemable only at government approved retail outlets.

This way, children are securely raised, parents are not disadvantaged by divorce and as so many others (although not me) keep saying, children are our future, fundamental to the health of society and every child must be protected at all costs.



Before I post my response, I would like to see a few others post their view

Dear Antonios...I am trying to understand you..and I don't have a quarrel with the basic idea of paid maternity leave....

I have a BIGGGGG problem with the idea of ME, paying directly for another persons pregnancy choices!

I did NOT invest 100% of my superannuation and long service leave, all of which I could have lost withing months of doing so, (in 95) and been bankrupt and poor.. just to have then to pay for other peoples time looking after their children. no NO NOoooooo.. GET IT ? :)

This morning I took my car in for a repair.. my mechanic spent most of the time returning whining (justifiably) about the new "Safety" compliance regime in place. I'ts cost him over $3000 thus far to put little signs here and there, and other stuff.. more to come..and he employes just TWO people in a workshop! Then there is 'log books' and so on. Regular checks....

Ok.. safety is a good thing, but one sniffs some "Politicians/Union" hands in the shareholders/boards of safety compliance companies here.

If you wish to make maternity leave paid...FINE.. just do TWO things.

1/ Do NOT penalize or punish and employER in any way for this, or cost him money for OTHER peoples child choices.
2/ Ensure it is ONLY a government funded thing which we ALL pay for through our taxes because population is for the NATIONAL benefit.

grrrrrrr...

Small business is being bludgeoned to death at the moment. Don't add to it. Unless you want us ALL to simply pay Chinese laborers to do out jobs. One of my other business associates is doing that right now.
I don't feel happy looking at the faces of his current 8 or so Aussie employees who KNOW "time is short"