Your argument does not make sense. If labor was an incompetent govt; we would not be so well of as we are now.
You are taking Abbott's foot in mouth approach. The noalition have yet to change anything so what do you make of that. Everything is ok.
Abbott has an agenda that he did not disclose before the election.
Persons far to the right are the only ones endearing such a fool.

579.....if labor was an incompetent govt; we would not be so well of as we are now.

You must be taking the piss!

How can anyone sit there and not only watch, but support a government to take our nation from $20Billion in the bank and ZERO $0 DEBT, to hundreds of billions in debt, finnish NOTHNG, COST LIVES, remove the border protection THAT WORKED, impose a great big tax THAT ACHIEVES NOTHING, introduce dud policies such as grocery watch, fuel watch, cash for clunkers, offer 30c, THATS THIRTY CENTS per day, per head of cattle to farmers to feed their cattle during the live export debacle THEY CREATED, introduce the il failed NBN,, dream up policies such as the NDIS and Gonski, knowing there is no money and impose a HUGE TAX on the only sector that is getting anywhere, then HAVE THE HIDE to say THEY DID A GREAT JOB.

Pleeeeese tell me you're taking the piss. PLEEEEESE!

Im dumbfounded to say the least! Especially considering it took Howard/Costello the best part of ten years to pay back Keatings debt, thats loosing Testra along the way, when these incompetent fools took only SIX YEARS TO UNDO IT ALL, and create the mess you call a GREAT ECONOMY.

Give me a break!

Oh come on rehctub, don't go having a stroke!
I think we can safely say that all Governments we have had, have all had their ups and downs.

Labor steered us through the world financial crisis, and we came out much better than most other nations.

Howard and co. WERE voted out of office, so they were unpopular at that time, and I doubt anyone has ever been happy with the GST he promised he wouldn't impose on us.

The parental leave scheme is the best policy Abbott has ever had, and you are bagging him for it. Other well off countries have even more generous PPL schemes, and their financial sky never fell in.
Who better to support than parents being supported to stay home with their newborns as long as possible?

Nothing but good can come from parents and babies bonding well together without the added financial and emotional,wrench of being separated so soon after birth to go back to work.

Babies can be breast fed for longer, mums will be less likely to suffer post natal depression, financial problems will be less, and both parents will be happier knowing one or other parent will be home with baby.

Hi Rehctub,

I'm a bit concerned about the government's paid
parental scheme. Concerned, because I'm not sure
how the government is going to be able to fund it
if it isn't going to be means-tested especially
during the difficult financial times that lie
ahead of us.

If someone could explain to me how this scheme will
work without means-testing, I'd be grateful.

Foxy, "If someone could explain to me how this scheme will work without means-testing, I'd be grateful"

Goodness gracious dear, do you mean you are unaware of the legislative provisions related to maternity, adoption/foster and parental leave within the Australian Public Service? Or are you ducking that subject along with Poirot?

Allow me to advise you as others are likely to have done before, that women public servants get their leave and all entitlements at their current remuneration. They have done so for decades. What about the Maternity Leave (Commonwealth Employees) Act 1973?

A far as the feminists who advise government are concerned the 'initiative' they advised Abbott to take would only bring the conditions of women in the private sector onto a par with the conditions already enjoyed by women in government departments and agencies for 40 years. The angst at present is because Abbott adopted the policy and not ex-PM Julia Whatshername, who was too parsimonious to pay peanuts to single supporting mums. Or in Julia Whatshername's case, too mean to support an increase in the single rate of aged pension, despite the majority of single pensioners being women.

The APS has quite a feminised workforce and so have most public service agencies, federal, state and local government. It is worth asking if you intend that (say) Elizabeth Broderick, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner should have her present entitlements under the relevant Act curtailed if she was to claim them. What about (say) a senior government minister, who arguably was on damned good conditions too, should she have been able to avail herself of taxpayer funded conditions via Medicare as well for her and her partner to have a child?

As mentioned earlier, I don't care which way the coin lands on this policy, but there is obviously a lot of reticence from all parties for frank disclosure and public consultation. More 'I'm alright Jack (Jill?)' and political gamesmanship from the elites.

otb,

What I can't get my head around is how is this
paid parental scheme going to work that the
current government intends implementing.
As I understand it - women who earn quite generous
incomes are going to receive more generous
paid parental leave. I would have thought that this
scheme would be means-tested. But it apparently
is not going to be. And that's what I have difficulty
with. Why should someone on a very high income and
can afford the best - be paid to have children.
It would be the equivalence of giving pensions to
millionaires. To me at least it doesn't make sense.