It seems Tony Abbott’s ill-conceived paid parental leave scheme can’t win a trick, with the policy univerally slammed in the media as well as by some within his own party.
Surprisingly, it is the Murdoch papers, which have previously been biased towards the Coalition, that are most scathing, with The Australian newspaper launching a stinging attack on multiple fronts:
The opposition’s sales pitch is beset with contradictions. First and foremost, it is fundamentally regressive, privileging the privileged and leaving the battlers to battle. It unequally redistributes the proceeds of a universal tax and, whatever its intent, will serve as another form of middle-class welfare. If PPL is a workplace entitlement as Tony Abbott maintains, why then should taxpayers foot the bill? If it is a productivity-enhancing reform, why must company tax, one of the most economically damaging, rise? Making the scheme universal will eradicate the competitive advantage of any firm that had built up its own PPL scheme to lure female staff. Other employers may fear the disruption of holding a job open for six months and may be wary of hiring women of child-bearing age. And the likely need for more bureaucrats to administer a scheme ripe for rorting jars against the Coalition’s promise to trim the swollen Canberra bureaucracy…
The object of government policy should be to remove tax and welfare signals that distort decisions to work or stay at home. The Grattan Institute says reducing both the high effective marginal tax rates women face and the costs of childcare are the most effective strategies to boost female workforce participation.
Even the Daily Telegraph, which earlier in the month produced a front page encouraging voters to kick the Labor Government from power, describes Abbott’s paid parental leave as “economic vandalism” and “upper-middle-class welfare gone barking mad”:
It makes little political sense, borders on economic vandalism and, via obscenely generous handouts to the very wealthiest Australians, does far more to wage “class war” than any policy prescription that Abbott and his claque of urgers have attacked Labor for in recent years.
It is also out of whack with paid parental schemes elsewhere in the world…
What Abbott is proposing – and remember this is one of his exploding thought bubbles announced without first consulting shadow cabinet – is a rolled gold transfer of wealth to those in our society who need it the least…
Apparently the “Budget emergency” that Abbott uses to frighten small children, kittens and swinging voters is so dire that a Coalition government will kill off the Low Income Earners Superannuation Contribution and scrap the schoolkids bonus, but still manage to find millions for Malvern mummies…
As the Productivity Commission notes: “Full replacement wages for highly educated, well-paid women would be very costly for taxpayers and, given their high level of attachment to the labour force and a high level of private provision of paid parental leave, would have few incremental labour supply benefits”…
It is upper-middle-class welfare gone barking mad.
Coalition premiers are also distancing themselves from the policy, which they perceive as far too generous, open to rorting, and/or ill-conceived:
West Australian Liberal Premier Colin Barnett said the scheme was too generous and, although his state would co-operate, it wouldn’t contribute any money.
South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill rebuked the Opposition Leader for announcing a plan that needed state funds to work, and declared he would not make any commitment to help pay for the federal scheme.
And Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings slammed the “ill thought out” Coalition scheme and said her state could not countenance returning any “savings” on parental leave to Canberra.
The Premier’s comments came as Jeff Kennett declared that Mr Abbott’s paid parental leave scheme was an “extraordinary extravagance” and must be means tested. The former Victorian premier predicted it would be manipulated by families who had a baby for the benefit of full pay without working rather than because they wanted one.
With any luck, pressure from the media and from within the Coalition will force Abbott to back down or, at a minimum, significantly wind-back benefits from the scheme, which is some of the worst policy making that I have seen.
