NathanJ, we've been over this before.

>>Tony Abbott's scheme for paid parental leave hasn't been approved by parliament yet, so it is not in place.<<

But there is already a scheme in place, and operational, as you can see here:

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/parental-leave-pay

Furthermore, as Suseonline pointed out, "there isn't discrimination in this area.....as the paid parental leave can go to either mum or dad".

So what, exactly, is your problem?

Nathan's problem is once he decides something is wrong he won't accept the facts pointed out to him that prove otherwise.

Nathan is too judgemental for his own good and equates everything in his personal life (as he sees/interprets it) as an indication of the conditions throughout society... in this year of 2014. There also seems to be a tendency to use hearsay rather than solid evidence to prove his point.

ConservativeHippie,

"Nathan is too judgemental for his own good and equates everything in his personal life (as he sees/interprets it) as an indication of the conditions throughout society... in this year of 2014."

As of course this applies to no one else - including yourself, that being taking a high moral ground. Its a very clever debating technique by the deniers of an issue, with other people having to defend their credentials.

If you actually read the details put out (linked to the Centrelink page) - you will find there are a lot of holes in it, and special requirements that need to be met for the benefits listed.

And I know this because I read details for example, when I get a document or agree to something online. I don't just sign the contract or click the button - without knowing what I'm doing.

For example on eligibility: You have to meet the Paid Parental Leave work test - which includes terms like "may" for example. This is not something definite, and not every person will reach every piece of criteria, with this type of wording.

I was also listening to ABC radio yesterday on the topic of equal opportunity (with the Equal Opportunity Commission) in relation to women who are pregnant or just had children. It can be difficult to remain in work and the home at the same time, because you cannot be guaranteed your employment. Small business can also find it difficult to take on that persons job casually or part time - and then have to find another person as well to fill a gap in a service required for their business to operate.

This was raised as a point of concern by the commission - not me, so ConservativeHippie, you might like to know that - and public taxes pay for the Equal Opportunity Commission in Australia.

Hi there

I agree with your opinion o sung wu, i also think that Why organization or tax payers funded for those children who already have good earning parents.

You do talk nonsense sometimes, Nathan J.

>>You have to meet the Paid Parental Leave work test - which includes terms like "may" for example. This is not something definite, and not every person will reach every piece of criteria, with this type of wording.<<

The word "may" is used only twice in the work test document, and on both occasions is used to encourage people to look more closely:

"You do not need to be working full time to be eligible for Parental Leave Pay. You may meet the work test even if you:
- are a part time, casual, or seasonal worker
- are a contractor or self employed etc. etc."

And:

"You may still meet the work test if you are self employed.
You can include your hours of work, even if the business is not generating any income, providing you are undertaking the work for financial reward or gain"

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/parental-leave-pay/work-test-for-parental-leave-pay

Anyone who finds this discouraging or confusing probably deserves support of a very different kind.

I don't think you have approached this subject with any form of rigour or disciplined thinking. You certainly haven't remotely persuaded me that there is any kind of problem whatsoever with husbands and paid parental leave.

When this subject was first raised on OLO there were questions raised. One answer during a political interview as to why introduce 'paid parental leave' was 'to allow these women to maintain the lifestyle to which they are accustomed.' That did it for me. No no no. This was part of Abbot/Hocking budget that saw sooo many cuts to the needy. How could they possibly justify this? Unless of course the couple/ individual qualifies for assistance.
I agree with Yuyutso and O sung wu.