Stay at home mums the losers on Mothers Day while working mums win 259



View Profile

A few more of the big budget headaches that will be delivered this Tuesday have been leaked in advance by the Government and these are likely to cause a lot of chatter  Stay at home mums might be a thing of the past if the government policy writers get their way in the budget, whilst working mums will get more support.

There’s some big changes to the maternity leave and childcare funding regimes coming, and for those who have been enjoying a leisurely ride on the taxpayer, it might be about to get a little harder; whilst those doing it tough to try and juggle family and work will be rewarded.  This is the new Australian economy it appears, and the government are lining up to drive cultural change.  Under this regime, stay at home mums can no longer receive childcare subsidies, and there’ll be no more double dipping maternity leave programs.  All the money being handed out will be to those contributing to the economy actively, through participating in the workforce.  Do you think such an enormous cultural shift is desirable?

The big discussions on social media tonight lie in two areas and we want to hear your thoughts:

1) The government are removing the ability for couples who are paid maternity leave by their employer to double dip against the government’s maternity leave scheme.  Hockey revealed the change in an interview with Laurie Oakes pointing out that new parents who have been lucky enough to be offered paid maternity leave have been able to have their hands in the public purse too, and Abbott and Hockey plan to put a stop to it.  Rightfully so many will say.

“At the moment people can claim parental leave payments from both the government and their employers so they are effectively double dipping,” Treasurer Joe Hockey said.

“We are going to stop that. You cannot double dip, you cannot get parental leave paid from your employer and taxpayers … so for people on the minimum wage they will still get $11,500 for the 18 weeks they are off on parental leave but people will not be able to claim it both from their employer and the taxpayers.”

2) Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey have also declared that parents who want to access childcare subsidies need to contribute to the employment market in Australia and are putting in place changes to make working more worthwhile, but also, mandatory if you want to access care.  They are proposing some seemingly positive changes to the childcare system to make families earning under $165,000 up to $30 better off a week if they use childcare, attempting to encourage greater workforce participation from people who could return to work after having children.  And the means tests on access will become uniform in two years time.   But stay-at-home parents with a household income of over $65,000 will be the losers,  losing all childcare subsidies.  Under the new regime parents must do eight hours a fortnight of work, study or training to qualify for any childcare support.

“We are changing the economics of going back to work so that we will get more work, so that families will have more opportunities to increase their income,” said Mr Hockey.

But the Treasurer went to pains to point out that the extra spending of $3.5 billion over four years on childcare changes is contingent on the Senate passing cuts in last year’s budget to Family Tax Benefits, including stopping payments entirely to single-income families when children turn six.

“Unless we offset this new spending it cannot go ahead,” Mr Abbott said.

It’s clear to all… all money being handed out will be to those contributing to the economy, through participating in the workforce.  Is this the society we want to create?   On Mothers Day shouldn’t we be celebrating Mums all round?  Or do you agree?  Money should only go to those who are helping grow the economy productively?  



Rebecca Wilson

Rebecca Wilson is the founder and publisher of Starts at Sixty. The daughter of two baby boomers, she has built the online community for over 60s by listening carefully to the issues and seeking out answers, insights and information for over 60s throughout Australia. Rebecca is an experienced marketer, a trained journalist and has a degree in politics. A mother of 3, she passionately facilitates and leads our over 60s community, bringing the community opinions, needs and interests to the fore and making Starts at Sixty a fun place to be.

  1. I agree with stay at home mothers not getting childcare subsidies. Maybe these young things who keep reproducing with different fathers can now look after their children. Maybe they will limit their children outside of any commitment. I also think couples should fund their own maternity leave. We had to.

    22 REPLY
    • So internalised misogyny is alive and well girls?!! You know where the attitude of ‘well if it was good enough for you to have had hardship it should trickle down to your daughters! Talk about enabling and collaborating with men to facilitate the ‘demeaning’ of the female gender. Of course men don’t participate in creating the sorts of situations some women find themselves in! No just blame those human beings with a pesky Womb. Any wonder nothing changes under the Sun.

    • That’s a bit harsh Robina. No one has to have a baby nowadays. Its a choice a woman makes…… If they choose to have babies, perhaps they need to also choose to provide for them?

    • You are all such idiots and Robina is the only one with a brain abbott has no intention of bringing this in he is trying to win back votes this budget will be the biggest scam put on the australian people nothing will change

    • Am happy to see my daughters get more assistance if they go to work than I did. Will it ever actually be passed by the government, we’ll see. I babysit and the grand daughter also goes to day care, I had no one to help me, my parents lived interstate. If they work they are paying taxes and we all benefit in one way or another.

    • Why bother having children if you aren’t going to be there for them 24 hr. Just my opinion but if all those working mums stayed home and looked after their kids maybe we won’t have kids running wild. There would be more jobs for young people. Why have baby grants, why have maternity leave. If you want children, You look after them yourself!

    • Suzanne I think he is in election mode. Maybe we should be ready for an early election. All sounds too good to be true and none of it comes in until 2017 anyway.

    • Why couldn’t this have been in the last budget? Because then they would have to actually do something. Sounds like election mode to me

    • IDIOTS Suzanne? My, just goes to show what kind of a person you are to make such a hateful comment because people have an opinion that’s different to yours! I can’t believe how many of you are making such spiteful comments about why these child care rebates have been offered to working mums! Talk about doubting Thomas’s!

    • Very few fit the category of having ‘different fathers’; what a prejudiced, ignorant viewpoint

    • So consider this scenario. Happily wed with a couple of young kids, hubby takes up with a younger woman and dissapears. No child support no contact. Mum has been out of the work force for a few years having and raising his kids. She wants to train to get a skill to re enter the work force rather than be a burden on society. How can she do this without some sort of support? Or do we just say hey, lets go back to the old days where the women just have to deal with it?

    • It’s important for children to socialize with other children. One or two days per week isn’t a big ask!

    • Morvyth Howard your entire argument is ridiculous. It’s like saying that because in certain parts of Africa young girls have always suffered female genital mutilation, it should continue. Stupid women like you are why it’s so hard for women to achieve respect and the opportunity to raise their children without being rendered destitute by predatory sexist governments.

  2. Its demeaning. It tells stay at home mums they are less than going out to work mums. One rule for all I say. But the rich will get richer-again.

    3 REPLY
    • As Deborah said the economy is not bottomless and shoudl be helping women who work. They get so many benefits nowadays that we didn’t & still want a subsidy to stay at home. Isn’t that the paid parental leave???

    • Kay Eller your opinion is only of value to you..others may not think the same, that does not make you right and them wrong. Fran is entitled to her opinion

    • Women who stay at home DO NOT NEED childcare!!!! They need encouragement to get out of the house with their children and socialise!!!

  3. Dont believe in paying anyone to bring up their own kids. Why have them if you want a teacher to bring them up. Cheaper to stay home and not go to work anyway.

    6 REPLY
    • One or two days at day care is good for the child , helps him or her to mix with other kids and also prepares them for big school.

    • Barbara Smith……. Why can’t the stay at home mothers get off their “$&?!” And take them to community groups and the park or meet other mothers to have the children socialised !!!

    • I agree Fay.I think it is right for parents to raise their own children.I shudder to think what the kids of today will be like.They are put into child care at 6 weeks which our taxes pay for and only see their parents at night.It is a wonder they recognise their parents.why have kids if you are going to give someone else the responsibilty of rearing them?

    • Kathleen I am an early childhood educator, mother to 4, grandmother to 5 at the moment.
      Playgroup is a wonderful place for mums to get together and share. It breaks the isolation some mothers feel. It is socialization for mums. Time away from mum helps a child to socialize independently and helps the child assimilate better at “big school”

    • Yes, that’s what we did Kathleen & got a job to fit in with husband times of work, so one,was there all the time!

  4. Totally agree Morvyth, why are my taxes paying for someone to get their child looked after while they sit on their backside watching the soapies. Time to get real. I agree we didn’t get it. And for those that say their children need interaction with other children, that’s what playgroup does. But mum has to stay, what does it cost? About $2 or $3.00.

  5. Surely to goodness in this day and age with unemployment so high, stay at home households should be entitled to the governments rebate…their children have the same needs as working mums but have to cop the full cost from a single income…not fair phoney…if you want mums back to work then surely there should also be more child care centres too…Jan

  6. Easy solution….don’t pay anything to working mothers or stay at home mums. If mums choose to work, then they can fund childcare. Sounds harsh, but we had to do it. Would save all the arguments and stacks of money.

    8 REPLY
    • The childcare operators are the ones laughing all the way to the bank. Why cannot the government invest in kindy’s etc like the municipal councils did. There was a great free kindy in the inner Sydney suburb where we lived in the early 60’s. There would be no need to pay families anything, and there would be greater control of the running of them, and parents could pay a reasonable small cost.

    • I agree with Christa, be it harsh or not. I think we have this huge problem that families of todays generation have this entitlement mentality and it’s so wrong. It is the governments fault in the first place for dishing out these handouts and now its almost impossible for them to stop it.

    • Yes they have Dianne, but we all wanted the same things then as they do now, but we had to wait a bit longer to get them. Yvonne is right…the owners of these child care centres are the ones laughing, but then they have overheads and staff to pay for. Catch 22!

    • Christa I worked full time as a single mum in the 70’s and lodged a complaint each year at the tax dept ….. Objecting to not being allowed to claim child care as a tax deduction “money spent in order to earn an assessable income” ……. Businessmen were allowed to claim business lunches in there but we weren’t for childcare!!!! So I now feel THATS WHAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED …… Not the Govt subsiding it!!!

    • Yes, a tax deduction would be much fairer to assist with child care fees. The whole tax system needs overhauling and made fairer for everyone.

  7. Mothers should be paid to stay home and raise their children Not give them to someone else to rear …Let it be the mothers choice….

    4 REPLY
  8. Just a sweetener to make sure this idiot gets back into power in the 2016 elections !!! The way this government lied about other promises pre election could see this child care package never happen . This is like blackmailing families !!!!

    4 REPLY
    • Angela you sound like you are a bit blinded by your blinkered political persuation.
      This is a discussion not demeaning political name calling.

    • Well said. Scott, they are full of demeaning adjectives, and calling them liars! They don’t know what they are talking about. They are like sheep following blindly.

    • Angela, that sticks out like a sore thumb, a ploy to grab the votes in next years election.Lets have a look at benefits families receive today. !st home owners grant,Baby bonus, Family benefit payment,Part payment for child care, now paid maternity leave. Not to mention the superannuation paid by employers.This is just madness.

  9. Back in my day we got child endowment which was very little. If you stayed home as most mums did hubby got a second job for any extra money to pay the mortgage and food. No luxuries like false nails, hair coloured with all extras.
    We just lived simple and enjoyed playing with our children.
    I had to work for a short time and paid full fees for 2 children.
    No hand outs back then and we were happy.

    7 REPLY
    • …..& housing was far more affordable. I am hearing you, & I think we probably had children in a similar time, however things are very different now……..sadly.

    • Different YES because they ae all trying to keep up with the Jones’s. Where did go without until you can afford it . go.we ad to save to get hat we wanted.

    • But its all relevant we earned money in accordance to housing prices.
      Same as they do today.
      But we saved for a dryer or had secondhand things.
      The kids of today want it all now. No saving and heaven forbid secondhand.
      I could go on and on.
      We did without they don’t! !

    • And paying women to have babies I honestly think this was the biggest joke there ever was.
      We had babies because we had as much to make us comfortable and then decided to go ahead and reproduce. No payment for that back in the 60′ to 2000.
      Why should any person receive money for a baby.
      Young women think wow down the pokies or new car or whatever they can spend it on but never the child

    • I don’t think the younger ones understand that we paid x amount of dollars for a house, usually a 3×1 or a 4×1, without any frills, and the cost, like you say Sue, was equivalent to what it is now, when you compare our take home pay then to what the young earn now.
      We did make do without baby bonus or the huge family payments they get now compared to the token child endowment we received.
      Of course we did not have to pay for the internet or foxtel which most of the young I know simply can’t do without.
      No girls or boys night out on the town.
      We visited each other for coffee and a goss at our own homes, and not go out for coffee.
      Our children SOCIALISED with each other during the visits.
      We entertained at home with BBQ’s and good friends, and the children ran around and played till they dropped :).
      All our spare money went towards the mortgage.
      We managed quite well, with one breadwinner and 4 children.
      Life was so simple then.

    • Oh to go back and take the kids of today how we did it.
      Yes I had 4 kids never a new thing in the so called nursery it was a spare wall where there was another child on a bed.
      My daughter’s spent $1600.00 on a bugaboo pram (gasp). Plus monitors and every possible thing the local childcare centre have.
      My eldest son did it the same as we did and never spend any money unless it is completely needed. But they have also lost their son and my grandson to cancer aged 8. They have never recovered from it and 2 years have passed and we miss him so much. They have a lovely house on Tamborine bought before having their 3 boys.

    • I agree Susan, we got nothing and looked after our kids it’s what mums do, my husband also had a second job and we were all happy with our lot.

  10. Mothers have a real job!!! be there for their children during the most important years of their lives…. future tax payers need a loving parent with them during the formative years.

    1 REPLY
  11. Not everyone can be helped. Working Mothers need help with childcare. It is a matter of priorities, the economy is not a bottomless pit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *