Which political leader has just adopted a policy to champion the rights of working women underpinned by progressive taxation? Not the Social Democrat, Kevin Rudd, but the Conservative, Tony Abbott.
I have dumped on the term ’progressive’ in a previous Punch piece, but I suspect that’s how many would have described Tony Abbott’s maternity leave policy if it had been announced by Kevin Rudd.
You will like Tony Abbott’s policy if you accept the importance of parental engagement with a child in the first year of that child’s life. The policy with the longer period of paid maternity leave is a better policy.
You will like Tony Abbott’s policy if you think that a drop in income is a disincentive for a new parent to stay at home. A policy that continues income at the level the parent has been relying on up to the point of the birth is a sensible policy that is more likely to be taken up by the intended beneficiaries. It is better than a policy that insists that every parent receive the same minimum maternity leave payment, no matter how many of them will actually go backward.
You will like Tony Abbott’s policy if you think we should be moving faster to ensure working women have increased opportunity to honour both their parenting and career aspirations.
Finally, if you think that it makes sense to properly fund a new policy, and that capacity to contribute is a good criterion for any new tax, you will like Tony Abbott’s policy. My first thought on hearing that this policy would be funded by business was that the broader community should not seek to transfer our shared social obligations onto businesses. But the reality of this policy is that it would simply introduce a new step in a progressive tax system, and at the right end. The wealthy and powerful will always seek to pass on such taxes through product and service charges, but not all of the costs will trickle down.
I am perplexed by the responses of some business group representatives to Mr Abbott’s proposal. Some of these have previously been happy to accept the burden of a carbon emission impost as part of their broader responsibility to the common environmental good, but are apparently unwilling to accept a levy that targets the common good goals of workplace equality and early childhood quality of life.
Like most political leaders facing an election, Tony Abbott has previously taken the pledge not to raise taxes. So it took courage to decide that he would change his position in favour of a substantial reform - a potential defining and legacy reform - that the community needed to know, in advance, would require a new tax. I think such a decision is usually described as a ‘hard decision, but right decision’ that we elect political leaders to make.
It’s possible that Tony Abbott made a mistake in adopting a policy without fully consulting all of his shadow cabinet or his party-room. It’s also possible that this policy commitment will further signal to the electorate that Tony Abbott is a conviction politician, and that he is the political leader who is fair dinkum about ‘working family’ focused social reform.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
@MickNeven the game is called rugby league not rugby. Just like it's cricket not croquet! Sorry I can't catch ya show.
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Schapelle has done her time
Schapelle Corby has served more than seven years in Kerobokan prison for attempting to import 4.2 kilos…
Do women need to know when to walk away?
Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond has sparked controversy over her advice that young women should sometimes…
Who murdered the Arts degree?
Have we murdered the liberal arts education? That was the final question on Monday night’s Q&A…
Gentle jabs to the ribs
They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more
Most commented