"....Must the entitlements of these women be cut back by you to that of the middle managers..."

Lol!

If yer don't mind, I think I've got better things to do.

I can sense an "otb Faux Outrage Special" in the wind - and I'm kind of over bothering to respond to you...knowing your style so well.

Have a nice evening : )

Poirot,

It is a simple enough question and I will make it simpler for you, why should other women who excel and have made their way to leadership positions or to the top of their profession not get the same parental leave entitlements as their equivalents in the federal public service?

What about politicians?

You have been asked similar questions in threads before, but never a reply directed at answering the question.

Hi,
Can someone please tell who pays? Is it the boss or the taxpayer.
If its the boss I hope he's got deep pockets.
If its the taxpayer then that really p#@#%% me off because I am already paying for pre-school, child minding and after school care, pre and post natal care and all the other medicare costs associated with having a baby and all the subsidized pharmaceuticals needed to care for the child and now I expected to pay the mother (and/or father) a wage to look after the child for a few months.
Fair go mate.
Pregnancy is a S.I.W (self inflicted wound) People make their own choices and in doing so they should make the necessary adjustments in their life.

Rehctib "So Suxe, correct me if im wrong, but what your saying is, although it is an unaffordable policy, you hope it gets in for your daughters sake. interesting view."

Absolutely!
Why not?

Chrisgaffe1000, I don't like paying taxes that might go towards tax-free religious 'charities' either, but because I realise I am part of the larger community, I suck it up and deal with it.

To my mind, encouraging families to be able to afford to have more children can only be a good thing for our country. With our rapidly aging population, we need more young workers bringing up the rear.

All those against paid parental leave will, of course, be quite happy with working mums leaving their newborns at daycare from a few weeks old?
With all the blame being directed at mothers for 'allowing' themselves to get pregnant when they can't afford to be off work, why not blame the daddies who were also involved in making the baby, and who are unable to support the wife and child on one wage then?

I believe low and middle income women should be paid their full wage while off with their babies for 12 months. The higher paid women should be paid a wage equivalent to most of the middle income earners.

We do need a definite cut-off point, and it should be lower than what the generous (foolish?) Abbott Govt. have proposed.

Dear Suze,

>I believe low and middle income women should be paid their full wage while off with their babies for 12 months.<

How about we change our system so that mums in amenable employment just take their baby to work with them (bus and train drivers and mine workers and such excluded) - under appropriately adjusted conditions - after an initial say 12 weeks 'adjustment' period on full (asset-capped) paid leave?

I realize you don't believe in population control, and won't accept any argument that global resources are already being stretched towards breaking-point, but just because we in Oz are in the fortunate position of being able to afford to pay many thousands of people not to work, is that any reason to prefer bolstering local procreation over the possible relocation of some of those garbage-dump kids and their families in Asia to Oz and a much brighter future?

We may be the 'lucky country', but in so many ways we are looking more like a lot of spoilt brats living in a fool's paradise.
(But of course 'we' are not alone in this folly, this illusion of 'entitlement' and of infinite prosperity.)

Our national budget is shot to hell, our productivity curve is in rapid decline, unemployment is going up, population growing and jobs declining, with exports down and no silver bullet on the horizon; yet everyone wants pay rises, better conditions, more jobs for youth and for the over-50's, and full-on retention of capable women in jobs/careers by paying them more to have babies.
Something doesn't compute.

Education, healthcare, NDIS, NBN, high-speed rail, expressways and better roads, low-cost housing and more and better amenities, and increased welfare and allowance 'benefits'; all competing for a share of a shrinking budget.
So, where's the money coming from? Increased national debt?
But, increased PPL trumps the rest of the grab-bag? In whose opium pipe-dream would that be?

where I live mothers & grandmothers have been receiving financial assistance for the same baby/child. School chidren are getting $25.- a day pocket money plus free boarding school. PPS has been in place long before the name Tony Abbott become well known. If people can't afford to raise children then they should a: see a clinic to have a snip or b: ask the anti abortion lobby to fund them. Leave the taxpayer alone. PPS is an idiotic proposal & if that's what's needed to get votes then we can all give up now.