Foxy.....care needed for unemployed parent and child. Is it right to
allow the high earners to be given more money than they need?

I would suggest in this case, no, as my position is that nobody should be financially responsible for anothers child.

On that point, if a high income earner gets more by way of PPL, chances are they are going to have their hand out after the leave is over.

So, on what grounds does child support not get means tested, like, why does one child deserve more, just because the non parenting parent has a higher paid job.

So they are expected to pay extra when it comes to child support, yet they are not entitled to more if they are a parent involved in the raising of a baby.

It seem like certain laws are conveniently manipulated if you ask me.

Suze......I think we can safely say that all Governments we have had, have all had their ups and downs.

Yep, I agree, so what were labor's up's?

Dear Rehctub,

Hopefully the government will listen to objections being
raised -
and will come up with a better and more equitable solution.

How can it be more 'equitable' if women in the public services are paid in accord with their remuneration package but you are saying that women outside of the public services should get substantially less than their current remuneration?

Your 'equity' would require reduction in the entitlements women in the federal public service have enjoyed since 1973. Do you intend to change the relevant Acts to rescind their benefits?

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2010C00059

That is the question I asked Poirot earlier and you have ducked it too.

Don't you also imagine that your regressive policy might discourage women from pursuing higher roles?

Again, I don't care what way the coin falls on this one, but it does appear that you may be out to oppose Abbott, when you should be thinking things through. Pull one string and there is a whole lot of policy that really ought be reviewed and now. Because much of it is based on ideology and has scant regard for what many women, not just an elite of middle class female bureaucrats and academics, would see as priorities for expenditure of those scarce federal bucks.

otb,

I can't put it any clearer as to what I
meant. I wouldn't dream of depriving anyone
of their entitlements and I certainly would
not discourage anyone of being the best that
they can be. However in the case of PPL -
I feel rather strongly that it should be
means-tested. But of course that's only my
opinion. And surely there's room in this forum
for all of us to have different opinions - don't
you agree?

Foxy,

You may still be right for another reason.

I have yet to see any evidence that maternity or parental leave increases the participation of women in the workforce, which is why the entitlements were proposed in the first place. The main supporters seem to be educated middle class, especially as far as the women supporters of the policy are concerned, and it is unlikely that the provision or non-provision of the paid leave would affect their participation in the workforce. Or if it did the effect would be marginal. Add to that, the fact that the greatest majority would enjoy permanency and are not casual as many lower paid workers are.

Matter of fact you may have to resort to dynamite to dislodge public servants and academics from their positions. On top of that, women in public agencies are continually being fast-tracked, so any who even half want a career are guaranteed it and often on their own terms.

Should such leave exist at all is the question and it should be set against the evidence, and as mentioned earlier, other available options.

Many women might prefer employer sponsored child creches instead for example. However unions are against that and so too are the feminists who chatter in the media and advise government. As far as lower paid workers are concerned, child care close to or at work would be a boon.

Again, I don't care which way the coin lands, just saying that those who seem to have a mighty effect on policy (and many are on the guvvy payroll in some way or another) seem to have always been rooting for what suits them and payment of full salary and maintenance of all entitlements (keep the car too?) is their thing.