Grandparents paid for babysitting

Grandparents may finally receive a wage for the time spent caring for grandchildren.

Grandparents paid for babysitting

In many families grandparents become the designated babysitters. Although it can be a joy to have grandchildren around for a few hours, if babysitting becomes a regular occurrence it can take a big chunk of time out of your week.

A proposed overhaul of Australia’s convoluted childcare system could see hardworking grandparents getting paid for the time they spend as nannies. The proposal suggests that the various childcare subsidies on offer should be replaced with a single, means-tested payment which would go directly to the parents’ choice of childcare provider. This would include nannies and grandparents, as long as they held a Certificate III in early childhood education from a TAFE.

Under the proposed changes families on an income of $60,000 or less would be able to get 90 per cent of the cost of childcare covered. This would then drop steadily so that families on $300,000 or more would only receive 30 per cent of the cost of childcare.

Currently the average cost of childcare in Australia is $74 per child, per day. A nanny costs, on average, $20-25 per hour for two children.

Commissioner Wendy Craik said the proposal would help the childcare workforce increase by about 15 per cent. It would also help to meet the needs of families struggling to find flexible childcare, as well as those in areas with long waiting lists for crèches and kindergartens. The payment would be available to cover childcare for children whose parents work at least 24 hours per fortnight, are looking for work or who are studying.

A Certificate III in early childhood education takes six months to complete at a full time study load, but undertaking this study could mean that older Australians and grandparents who already care for grandchildren could receive income to subsidise their superannuation or Age Pension.

Assistant Education Minister Sussan Ley has cautioned that the report is only a draft, and that there is work to be done before it is handed to the Government later in the year.

Find out more at the ABC News website


Opinion: Finally, some acknowledgement

It is worth noting that the Abbott Government has stated there will be no extra funding for childcare in the foreseeable future, so any new payments will have to take money away from somewhere else in the childcare system. Having said that, I do feel cautiously optimistic about this turn of events.

Not all childcare payments are currently means-tested, so including means-testing would help to cover some of these costs. I think that including both qualified nannies and grandparents in childcare payments is an incredibly important step. Individuals can cater for flexible timetables and families with special needs in a way that the stock-standard childcare system can’t. I also think that acknowledging the amount of work some grandparents put in to care for grandchildren is hugely important. For those grandparents already caring for grandchildren this could mean finally receiving a wage for their work, and for other older Australians it could be a way to find work in a job market which has not always been accepting of older workers.

As our population grows we are going to have to find new ways to employ people, and to accept that institutionalising all care and education is not going to be viable forever. To me this is simply the mirror of the Government’s realisation that many Australians are going to need, and want, to age in their own homes, rather than in a care facility, and that this option needs to be provided for.

What do you think? Should grandparents receive payment for babysitting? Is this a positive for older Australians, or will this prompt more families to leave the kids with grandma and grandpa instead of finding space for them in a childcare facility? And is it fair to insist grandparents go back to TAFE to look after their own grandchildren?





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:01am
    Yes why not.
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:46pm
    PlanB, I think it time our Politicians start looking after the seniors of our country.........we worked hard during our working days and paid taxes.....nothing given to us on a silver platter...........
    Anonymous
    24th Jul 2014
    4:51pm
    Yes, grandparents should be paid if the parents are wanting them to look after their grandchilden while they work.
    Hasbeen
    26th Oct 2014
    9:49am
    If grandparents want payment, they should ask the parents, not the taxpayer.

    It is getting totally ridiculous. Some people want to be paid to have kids, & now they want to be paid to mind the grand kids. If people don't want to raise their own kids, they should adopt them out, not expect the have tax payer pay them or the grand parents to do it.to do
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:04am
    How ever I don't think they need to "learn" to look after them--they could maybe teach the "teachers" a thing or two
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:07am
    You haven't seen some of the grandparents these days. Go to some of the lower socio economic areas and be educated.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:59pm
    Yes Mick spot on.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:05am
    Give it a break Rachel. So how is this next round of welfare being paid for?
    Whilst a great idea people are not looking at the bigger picture. Australia is becoming a welfare state where people can choose not to work and the government (that's taxpayers by the way) pays for everything in life. Such a model can only fail and it will in time.
    So whatever happened to hard work, sacrifice and families helping each other? Now replaced by welfard dependency and everybody getting in for their bit like vultures around a carcass. Sorry, but your grandchildren will be paying the (economic) price of this ongoing foolishness.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:09pm
    Yep, this has been evidenced in Society and social welfare system for the last 30 years, The breakdown of the family unit. Expecting The Teacher, the Nurse, the policeman etc, and Centrelink to take over the parental role, I come from a big family of nine - no tv in those day's. we were poor but hey we supported each other plus those around us which we got back in kind. People can drone on all they like about us saying the good old day's but the truth of it is they were.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:15pm
    Well' for me anyway.
    Blossom
    22nd Jul 2014
    8:24pm
    Kato,
    Most Mums didn't go back to work. Some do it to help buy a house rather than pay rent which is "dead money".
    It can be very tiring minding more than one gradchild every day or a few days each week. I know one deserted Mum who went to TAFE part time to study so as to get a job in a field that has a shortage and got a good job. That way she only had to leave her little toddler in Childcare some days, not every day. She had no family support, through no fault of her own but was determined not to have to rely on full time Govt. support......Some parents provide their child's food or pay enough to cover at least part of the cost to grandparents or other relatives. It can be difficult for grandparents etc. to feed the children on a regular basis if on a restricted income.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    9:22pm
    Engy - Yes you make some good points.
    Wendy HK
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:06am
    I like the idea of Grandparents being paid to provide childcare.
    I also like the idea of them doing a TAFE course in childcare - imagine a room full of grannies being taught how to care for children by a uni taught young thing - LOL!!!
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:14am
    Amusing thought. It kind of reminds me of retrenched people who have come from very important positions and then, desperate for work, take on lowly jobs only to be given an inservice from their new boss, a total dimwit in many cases. One has to smile at the master being taught by a novice at best.
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:27am
    I hear you too Wendy--so many UNI graduates have NO logic or common sense because they have never learned from LIFE. I see this so often.
    Blossom
    22nd Jul 2014
    8:46pm
    Most Uni graduates have no children and have had no personal experience either.
    They only know what they are told in lectures and is printed in text books.
    It is like 50+ years ago when the Education Dept. said there was no such thing as a left handed person. I would love to have heard the guy say that to the head of paediatrics and the Childrens Hospital. Argument between parent and principal of the school who was told who to contact at Childrens Hospital. Result - student no longer smacked across the back of hand when writing and colouring in left handed.
    DOCS has a few staff who only know what they have been taught, not from any experience at all - not even observation in any location at all.
    dippity
    23rd Jul 2014
    6:22pm
    hey Wendy, I started out doing one of these courses years ago with a previously childcare employed woman who did nothing but talk down to her students. Most of them were young, but about half a dozen of us were mums of grown children. A lot of the lessons were taken up with how to change a nappy, or how long to lather your hands and how long to rinse them when you were washing your hands. I had, at the time, raised 4 children and was minding my 6 grandchildren 3 days a week. But, to become a child care worker in my own home, as I wished to do, I had to do this course. I decided to let the younger ones have the joy of this course and the course coordinator, who took 3/4 of the lectures, and talked down to everyone in the class...quite insultingly at times. Of course, the girls who completed this course would then be able to assist the childcare "teachers" who had a degree. Australia has gone mad, expecting tiny children to be educated before they are old enough to be in the education system!

    Just by the way, at the time I was looking after my grandchildren there was an allowance payable for grandparents minding their grandchildren. My daughter and I looked into it, but I was unable to jump through all their hoops and bend over backwards at the same time to collect a pittance every fortnight. So, as far as I know, there is some kind of payment for grandchild care already in place, courtesy of the Howard government
    Anonymous
    24th Jul 2014
    4:53pm
    Look at some of the parents these days. Some of them are not parents at all; they just gave birth to them!
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:12am
    I hear you Mick--

    I don't have any Grand-kids --and I am sure I wouldn't mind looking after them for short stints BUT no way would I want to have them all the time --kids are hard work IF you do it right
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:34pm
    PlanB...........why is up to the TAXPAYERS to foot the bill for these young families..........they already receive money for having babies???......... dont you think they can afford to pay their parents............. with that hand outs from taxpayers..........FULLY OUT OF CONTROL No No No
    biddi
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:39pm
    Totally agree with you, tia-maria. If you want kids, or anything in this life,
    "Think before you buy", so to speak. Don't expect others to foot your bills.
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    6:03pm
    Problem is biddi, there's too much 'try before you buy' these days and the kids are the result. LOL
    Anonymous
    26th Jul 2014
    4:46pm
    How strange it is that our parents having just come through a war managed to bring us all up OK without all the government handouts available today and dare I say it was a safer, more polite society than the one we have today.
    Wstaton
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:40am
    Goodness, Grandparents have to take a course to look after their grandkids.

    Next thing they will say prospective parents will have to take a course before they can have children and receive benefits.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:46am
    The reality of generation now is that many should be taking a course.
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:04pm
    Actually Wstaton, a parenting course might not be such a bad idea!
    Polly Esther
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:16pm
    and some really need to be rigorously tested and obtain a licence to breed, full stop.
    elephants
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:21pm
    Wstaton,That would be an excellent idea for parents to do a course as working in child care plus seeing news reports some really need it. Parents that courts order to do the ppp program or other coures its far to late & thay only go because they are ordered to & have such a negative outlook to it on a lot it doesn't work
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:17pm
    Flying doctor: Sadly I'd agree with your sentiment and Iwould vote for that. At the very leasy a whole generation of children would be spared the baggage which comes with bad parenting.
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:38pm
    mick I agree just maybe they should take a parenting course......dont seem to be around to look after them so they have no experience some parents
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:13pm
    The flying doctor - have to agree with that, and add to it that they should be neutered in the case of failing it.
    biddi
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:08pm
    Yep, time to neuter.
    professori_au
    26th Jul 2014
    8:09pm
    I believe those you are speaking of education won't help. these are some of the young people who drop out of school as soon as they are old enough to leave school. Often as not, they seek work in the fast food chains and once they are considered too old to employ on minimum wages are dismissed. From then on it is a down hill slide.
    We need to seek the solution in the very early years. However, if they are children from parents who have grown in in a similar fashion, then we need to consider the appropriate time for interaction. The education system seems one option where for both male and female students courses and child rearing, home hygiene, healthy cooking, even home maintenance, e.g. sewing, gardening, etc.
    Now I can see the education system claiming it is not its problem, it is an education system. Well I would suggest this is also very much an education problems: life skills. Many years ago I was involved in developing a project that involved these issues. The participants were young people who suffered literacy and numeracy difficulties. A couple were basically homeless. The project involved providing some semi trade skills and included 2 hours per day "schooling"
    Schooling was not a formal programme but we took all of the forms we are plagues with every day and taught them how to complete them and what they were for. As they worked on cash in hand when they had work because they did not trust the system not to cheat them, they were taught to budget their money, create a contingency fund for emergency and to open an account with a bank. A couple showed exceptional ability and special courses were designed around their special aptitudes. We had a bit of a hiccough causes by well meaning media. It was part of my job to resolve this if possible. I convinced them that media is only a nine day wonder and meant little more than a sob story. Next week it would be someone else. As it was my job to monitor and administer the project, then it was important to show they could do it. I said they were halfway there as I believed they could complete the project and had approved funding. The result? A very successful project with all participants gaining fulltime employment. That is the sort of solution I believe we need to address. while I support a good education, not every not every one manages to successfully complete a sound education, therefore we need to consider what their needs are to assist them to become useful and perhaps a proactive member of society, instead of treating them as pariahs. find the right button to generate an interest. N wonder they turn to drugs when their future s so uncertain with no jobs for them. with our increasing unemployment, jobs when they are available will go to those with some level of qualification. I hope I am making my point clear, but it is not easy to summarise the issues when dealing with a wide range of problems and put it into a couple of sentances
    bartpcb
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:48am
    It's a good idea generally. The only inconsistent part (and unfair) is that a grandparent who is already being used as a free substitute for a child care institution, would be required to take a formal certificate to prove they are capable of doing what they are doing already. What happened to RPL's. (Which should be re-designated RPE's by the way. Recognition of Prior Experience.
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:54pm
    There would automatically be an RPL process should this suggestion ever go ahead. Anyone who thinks they can meet all the competencies would be able to apply for RPL. The only issue is that most RTOs make the RPL process so arduous and expensive, most people give up and do the course.
    professori_au
    23rd Jul 2014
    3:17pm
    colleges don't like RPL and often when forced to consider it will begrudgingly give a little credit. After all, didn't government direct the education system to go out and generate revenue so the funding could be reduced. Before retirement I was a qualified RPL assessor and also qualified to assess those applying for recognition. One day a parent came to me to ask why her first year university daughter had to do 6 grade maths when she was qualified at university level. I recommended that she ask for RPL and take on another relevant subject. The college refused, saying we do not give out RPL credits. It was informed that it was the law and if this college would not give RPL, then she would be assessed by another college and I would also attend. The girl was assessed and received her credits and took on another subject in lieu. It pointed out to me a weakness in the system was requiring the educations system at any level to generate revenue. Education needs to be funded entirely by the taxes. To do otherwise creates conflict of interest, corruption potential where research is funded by those with a vested interest in a particular outcome and so on.
    professori_au
    24th Jul 2014
    11:27am
    It is the crazy bureaucratic way of doing things. Put people without experience and knowledge apart fro the text book to teach those who have had many years of experience. When I met my wife, she was a widow with a 15month old baby. We clocked and got married and it was agreed that I would formally adopt her baby as my own. As someone said, the hoops that you are expected to jump through. I had to give references, which I did; one from the Mayor, one from my doctor and one from my accountant. I was told they were not good enough. they had to come from people who were friends and visitors to my home. I told them that as a farmer I did not have many friends who were lawyers, accountants regularly visiting my home. The Mayor was a friend and visitor and they would have to accept hi. He fought in ww2 and was one o the Rats of Trobook. He was a farmer and chairperson of the country Party. They decided not to push it any further but expected my wife to also provide references. I asked them what did they think would happen if I was not acceptable by the department. did they expect my wife and I to divorce? whether or not they approved made little difference to me as far as I was concerned he was my son, a son I am very proud of. So much for interfering bureaucrats. We had four more children and they are all very close. A family you can look on with pride
    professori_au
    26th Jul 2014
    8:16pm
    The rogue government we have today are not really interested in people. They are only interested in generating revenue and not spending it on behalf of the people.
    Abbott is a good example; looking for a fight at any cost. He is presently trying to send Australian forces to fight another war he has no business being involved with.
    These wars nothing more than revenue generation for the rich. How will we benefit from them. Not at all but we will lose some of our loved ones and the rich get richer. they do not involve themselves being in the front line. However, I seem to have diverted from the topic. Not really, If the government spent the "war" moneys on providing services to our people, encouraging R&D and built our own industries, etc. we would, following appropriate education and training have full employment and we need not misuse the 457 clause to bring others into Australia to work in jobs claimed no Australians are available,
    professori_au
    22nd Aug 2014
    10:11pm
    I was a qualified RPL assessor. I found one problem involved the education system that did not in practice support RPL. Those that did not support it, I found it necessary to remind them that it was accepted by business and the government and should they not provide RPL, once it was established the person was entitle and was experienced then I would arrange another venue to assess the experience and skills of the applicant. I do not believe this attitude has diminished, perhaps it has become more entrenched, despite the claims of the executive and policy people claiming to support it. It is not them who work with the applicant and there is still that power thing entrenched in the system and they do not want to relinquish that power. I have come across people who have learnt their skills, gained their experience in the workplace or even as a hobby and their knowledge would leave their teachers miles behind. RPL is publically still a right as is the Tradesman's Right Qualification, but the education system adds more to the intended qualification, (not always relevant) but lessens the value of these rights. Trades and similar areas where training was of the highest qualification have now been "mickey moused" to coin a phrase that many employers I have spoken to claim that the training is not of a high standard and the employer must need retrain the person again. Now I do not suggest that all education and training has degraded but certainly some by providing certificates over 6 months, 12 months or two years. I speak not only as a training adviser but also as an employer when I state good training involves on the job training (e.g. apprenticeships) with the mix being constant over a period. Some alleged training involves education on the subject in school with little or no on the job experience. Rote education and training is a way of entrenching the knowledge. governments have bowed to the demands of the big players who wish now to not be corporate citizens taking on the responsibility to provide this training. This is short sighted. If we are to develop our industries we need to ensure we have the required pool of educate, trained and experienced labour, otherwise industry will continue to exploit the 547 clause and bring the trained people from other countries. Again this is short term thinking by politicians and big business. When the social conditions improve in the countries we are "stealing" the skilled workforce, we will be faced with training our own again. Why not start now, including our government developing policy to protect our businesses from cheap labour sources,
    BeezNeez
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:06am
    Wow...this is actually a really complex issue and i don't think it's as simple as saying, 'yes, they should be paid' (and by whom??) or 'no, they shouldn't'. There are so many facets to this issue.

    I definitely think that if you are going to expect payment for such a service via the govt. then it should be mandatory to receive training - you may not have any respect for the 25 year old grad training you, (which might go some way to explaining why you might need to get some training!) however if you want to be paid for a 'job' then you have to expect some level of expectation from those paying you to ensure you are actually competent - having raised your own children really isn't proof of that, now is it!?! Childcare workers complete studies before they are able to secure a position - and for the work they do, the hours and the expectations, they are not well paid. Mention was made that childcare centres charge approx. $74 per child per day (this figure is higher in many suburbs) - however the parents receive 50% of that fee back in rebates. So would grandparents expect to be paid $70 a day by the government or would it be more reasonable to expect that they were paid by the parent, with a cap on the fee charged, and the parent would have to claim back the rebate - just as they would with the existing chilcare rebate now.

    In all reality surely it makes sense that if grandparents WANT to mind their grandchildren, thereby helping out their own kids, that they themselves come up with an arrangement that best meets everyone's needs and doesn't seem them out of pocket - unless of course that is a sacrifice they are happy and willing to make. For example, if the parent can afford it, why not agree to pay grandparent something close to the amount they would be out of pocket (after rebates) if using the local childcare centre?

    At the end of the day, we have our kids and they are our responsibility until their reach adulthood....if you don't want to mind your kids, kids, then don't do it...and certainly don't do it just to be paid-it should be an act of love, no matter what the arrangement! If you feel bitter that you are minding your grandchildren or feel you are being taken advantage of-perhaps best to change that arrangement-no-one benefits from that situation, least of all the children.
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:02pm
    I think you raise some important issues here BeezNeez. Childcare is not just babysitting it is a whole lot more than that and the childcare centres must show they provide an early childhood education. They are audited on it. If payment to Grandparents is to go ahead on the same terms as childcare workers then it would be reasonable to expect the same outcomes.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:17pm
    Beezneez - well put together.
    Shar
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:13am
    I find it offensive to expect grandparents to gain a cert 3 in childcare; to get a cert 3 one must at least already have a cert 2, believe me I've looked into it.
    I successfully raised 4 children and frequently look after my four grandchildren, as far as I'm concerned that in itself speaks for me and my capabilities.

    This new proposal is a rort ... an effort to make the government look like they are doing something when in actually fact they aren't.
    Wstaton
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:25am
    I agree somewhat. There are many things in these certs that are not applicable to grandparents. (understanding Aborigine and Torres Straits Islanders needs for example) If anything a completely separate course needs to be developed for this area. Grandparents give a lot more to children than for profit childcare centres. love for example.
    Tom Tank
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:34am
    Good points Shar. While it is a tricky issue the question not raised is why should taxpayers subsidise childcare when having children these days is a lifestyle choice.
    It is not uncommon to hear couples bleating about not being able to make ends meet on only $150,000 a year income.
    This is a narcissistic age when individuals think life is all about them and whatever they want they should have. Perhaps if less was spent on the big new house fully equipped with all new mod cons and the big SUV in the garage then financial pressures would be so much less and a single income would suffice.
    I suppose I am a silly old f**t who got by by existing on only spending the money that was coming in each week.
    Sheets on windows instead of curtains for a couple of years, mattress on the floor etc etc. Life was a lot of fun as well without the continual grab for money. We even survived horrendous interest rates on our mortgage that would send most of the current young couples bankrupt.
    I am not trying to be some paragon of virtue but our whole society today is based upon blatant consumerism and "I want and I will have" mental attitude. This puts tremendous pressure on gullible people who feel they must stay up with the latest thing.
    Adrianus
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:18pm
    Shar, maybe you could get some Recognition for Prior Learning? Make sure your Trainer is a Registered Training Organisation and legally able to provide RPL.
    InspireWill
    22nd Aug 2014
    12:11pm
    Hi Shar,

    I work for a training organisation that offers childcare courses. There is absolutely no need to complete a Certificate II to study the Certificate III child care course. In fact, you can now enrol in the latest child care Diploma (Diploma of Early Childhood Education and Care) without any previous training or qualifications.
    Hoppy
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:22am
    Our children live overseas. As we live on the pension we have very limited opportunities to spend time our grandchildren. We would gladly pay to babysit our grandchildren.
    I think the government has greater priorities than paying grandparents to look after their grandchildren. The NDIS and increased funding for hospitals and education come to mind.
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:52pm
    Hi Hoppy, first sorry your children live overseas and you dont see often.......BUT I fully agree with you............ our politicians has greater priorities............ than paying grandparents???.....Government should focus more on all taxpayers (not a small greedy majority) families as they received far too much
    Adrianus
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:35pm
    Hoppy, there are many mums (more so than dads) who find it a mathematical impossibility to go to work because of lack of childcare placement or loss of welfare benefits.
    If these changes make childcare more accessible and affordable for middle income earners then I think that should be a good thing.
    I personally know of many young mums who worked because they loved it even though it cost them money to do so. Some big employers have developed their own child mining centre because of the high value of women in organisations.
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:30am
    What about this then if it is good enough for us it is also good enough for them


    A MUST READ


    I absolutely agree, if my pension isn't an entitlement, neither is theirs.
    They keep telling us that paying us an aged pension isn't sustainable.
    Paying politicians all the perks they get is even less sustainable!


    The politicians themselves, in Canberra, brought it up, that the Age of Entitlements is over:



    The author is asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
    At least 20 if you can. In three days, most people in Australia will have this message.

    This is one idea that really should be passed around because the rot has to stop somewhere.


    Proposals to make politicians shoulder their share of the weight now that the Age of Entitlement is over


    1. Scrap political pensions.
    Politicians can purchase their own retirement plan, just as most other working Australians are expected to do.

    2. Retired politicians (past, present & future) participate in Centrelink.
    A Politician collects a substantial salary while in office but should receive no salary when they're out of office.
    Terminated politicians under 70 can go get a job or apply for Centrelink unemployment benefits like ordinary Australians.
    Terminated politicians under 70 can negotiate with Centrelink like the rest of the Australian people.

    3. Funds already allocated to the Politicians' retirement fund be returned immediately to Consolidated Revenue.
    This money is to be used to pay down debt they created which they expect us and our grandchildren to repay for them.

    4. Politicians will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Politicians pay will rise by the lower of, either the CPI or 3%.

    5. Politicians lose their privileged health care system and participate in the same health care system as ordinary Australian people.
    i.e. Politicians either pay for private cover from their own funds or accept ordinary Medicare.

    6. Politicians must equally abide by all laws they impose on the Australian people.

    7. All contracts with past and present Politicians men/women are void effective 31/12/14.
    The Australian people did not agree to provide perks to Politicians, that burden was thrust upon them.
    Politicians devised all these contracts to benefit themselves.
    Serving in Parliament is an honour not a career.
    The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so our politicians should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

    If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people, then it will only take three or so days for most Australians to receive the message. Don't you think it's time?


    THIS IS HOW YOU FIX Parliament and help bring fairness back into this country!
    Wstaton
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:19pm
    You know what the answer to this will be. Hah! politicians give up their day job to enter politics and the politicians job is not guaranteed for ever. (Except maybe for some cronies who are usually put into safe seats).

    Well politicians no-ones job is guaranteed and when we lose ours we do not have a guaranteed pension such as that is given to you, except for Centrelink payments that you are trying to take away. It is said that taxpayers are paying for the age pensions. Who the heck do you think are paying for your pension after just a short time working as a politician. Pensioners have worked their whole life for theirs.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:24pm
    As I've said before - no organisation other than the Australian people employs contracted workers for a specific job at a fine salary and then offers them a lifetime income. The bullshit that they've given up a lucrative position is just that - bullshit - these people are mostly party hacks and this is just a nice sideline. Not only that but they are almost universlally slotted into some nice sinecure on a 'board' or some QANGO or something - and thus the idea that they lose out by not having a lifetime pension is absurd.

    Once they leave politics and enter a new income-earning strand - pension stops they go on Centrelink like everyone else - and all retiring politicians are banned for ten years from involvement in any organisation that may affect or influence government policy.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:20pm
    It is a bit of a game PlanB. Politicans will say that there are only a few of them and many 'us'. So paying them heaps does not affect the bottom line as much as paying eveybody else a little. Strange logic. Dishonest. But that's the game.
    particolor
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:07pm
    I FULLY AGREE !!
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:46am
    Tom Tank --boy I agree with you we had butter boxes to sit on and like you said Bon Ami on the windows till we could afford chairs or curtains --NO car and Mothers stayed home and looked after the kids till they were at school and then went to work IN school hours.

    If you aren't prepared to do the same and expect to put the poor kids in child care --DON'T HAVE THEM!
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:23pm
    Absolutely - right on the money. no more needs to be said.
    particolor
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:27pm
    Hear ! Hear !!
    DIDDY
    22nd Jul 2014
    11:50am
    Of course grandparents should be paid as if someone else was doing the babysitting they'd have to be paid. My theory has always been when looking after children, if they're getting paid, the person looking after the children should be paid regardless as to who it is. There should be no childcare rebates or subsidies. It should however be tax deductible as it's an expense incurred while earning an income. if a family's income is $300000 why should the tax payer pay any of it? Ridiculous. If childcare expenses are so exorbitant that they're taking so much of your pay, stay home and look after them yourself. Pick your career up later on. There's no greater gift to give to your children than your time yourself. Contrary to what we have been led to believe, childcare is NOT good for children. What is, is to grow up within their own families, building relationships there, free play before branching out in the wider world. Let kids be kids. They don't need or want to be ferried around from one activity to another after being at school all day. Balance their lives.
    Dodger
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:02pm
    why should I (a taxpayer) pay anyone (let alone a relative) to look after someone else's children.
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:54pm
    Dodger, thats right mate
    particolor
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:10pm
    I FULLY AGREE !!
    Budwah
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:31pm
    Who thinks up these weird ideas?
    What ever has happened to the family unit where each member looks after each other.
    As far as paying them, WHY?
    You would think that Grandparents, if they were not sick, would be overjoyed to look after their offspring’s children as no doubt their own parents looked after their children.
    And as for insisting they go to TAFE to learn how to look after their grand kids, this must be the idea of some official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment & who has nothing else to do. The grand parents could teach them a thing or two about bring up and caring for children.
    Kathleen
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:36pm
    Grandparents on limited income should be compensated by way of food and money kids need for outings. Older children are demanding and their needs are different from younger children. Grandparents bring a wealth of experience as well as many are qualified teachers or suchlike. It is up to the parents and grandparents to come to an agreement and grandparents should have their costs covered if they are pensioners and maybe a reward from their children if they can afford it like an annual holiday or something the grandparents need for their home. Governments do not need to become involved. Families can sort it foe themselves and families have different circumstances.
    Janetta
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:37pm
    I have three tertiary quals, one childcare, one nursing and one teaching. I look after my autistic grandchild five afternoons a week. My daughter in law is a single mum now and needs to work.She couldn't afford me if I chose to bill her. Should I mention that I love doing it!
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:26pm
    Yeah - Janetta your words say it all. good on you:)
    elephants
    22nd Jul 2014
    12:46pm
    13years ago u could get $2 a week to look after your grandchildren. For g/p some extra money comes in handy to feed their g/c while they are with them or take them on an outing
    elephants
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:14pm
    I have my cert lll in child care & think g/p's shouldn't have to obtain this cert lll for your own g/c but hold a cpr cert. If you are going to look after other children yes. I still have my blue card (as I volunteer) which also should be included to look after other children.G/p are an important part of childrens lives as they can contribute knowledge of a vast area eg Heritage,history,old games,sewing (for older ones) reading,understanding of older people (compassion,respect,honesty,& love) Thirteen years ago a friend told me to ring human resources (then centre link) to apply, it was an insult $2 a week to look after g/c to go through all the paper work I said no thanks.Looking after g/c keeps you on your toes but the love & bond that is given both ways can never be lost. It's a win win situation

    22nd Jul 2014
    1:17pm
    The entire stupidity of the whole childcare thing is that it is only right that if one gets a supplement or subsidy to cater to childcare needs to a formal childcare facility - those who leave their children with grandies etc are equally entitled to the same treatment.

    Childcare is childcare regardless of how you handle it.

    I've never been a fan of childcare as a 'right', for the simple reason that people should learn to be responsible for their own family choices and pay their own way. The idea that childcare is some 'right' is just a feminist myth, and part of the syndrome that has lead us in the West down the garden path of the Mandatory Dual Income Family - the MADIF - that has wrought such destruction on the economy and society in which we are forced to live.

    Most on single incomes simply cannot keep up with costs of housing etc, and thus the concewpt of subsidising a fmaily unit in its childcare is just another way of exacerbating the divides between single income family units and those with the dual income - with many being abandoned (right word, too!) on the roadside of life to die of poverty, neglect and hopelessness in an environment where their genuine equal opportunities have been buried under an avalanche of propaganda about 'women's rights' and so forth - little to none of which holds any water at all and is primarily the province of the already well-heeled to discuss over a fine wine after a day's work sitting in the office.

    The focus needs to return to the Family Unit as the yardstick for consideration of social issues - not self-entitled individuals.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    5:53pm
    I agree. Childcare never used to be the responsibility of th estate like it now is. So why should taxpayers subsidise working women (or men) to earn a living and have a third party look after their kids? Age of entitlement? You bet.
    The whole welfare state we have inherited is going to unravel and Australians are going to do it tough. Falling iron ore prices are the start and if coal continues to fall as well then it is game on because we are reliant on imports for almost everything. When the money to pay is not there then the pain will set in and the pack of cards that mornic politicans from both sides of politics have built will crumble.
    I know....doom and gloom. I hope that I am wrong and hope that somebody can show me the errors in my logic.
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:30pm
    I think there is a big difference between a Grandparent looking after a grandchild and a childcare worker or Nanny doing the same. The job is completely different.

    All those working with children must hold an appropriate qualification - in this case the minimum level is a Certificate III (actually in childcare centres there is now a requirement for Diploma level). They also need first aid and must have a police check. A parent would want nothing less. Childcare workers are not simply babysitters, they are far more than that and deserve far more acknowledgement of what they do. Childcare centres are audited against standard criteria. Will the Grandparents be willing to meet those criteria in order to be paid on the same terms?

    If Grandparents are to be included in the mix of paid carers then it is reasonable to expect the same minimum level of qualification. If not they are just babysitters and that should be a matter for the family not the Government.

    22nd Jul 2014
    1:42pm
    Simple answer - means test all childcare subsidies - only those with a genuine case get a subsidy. End of argument.

    That will rapidly sort out the whole situation and offer those with more limited overall income a fairer chance in life. Might even begin to affect unemployment when family units realise they are better off with one at home.

    Maybe it feels satisfying to sit in a government office on affirmative action (EEO by any other name) and be a 'breadwinner' and a 'career' person who pushes a few papers around - but surely there's a limit to the income a family unit can be handed at the expense of a million or so others.

    https://sites.google.com/site/grappleruniversitypublications/home/department-of-irreverent-revolutionary-thought-dirt/money-divides
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:46pm
    I believe means testing is exactly what has been proposed.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:24pm
    And who are the worst rorters in society Grappler? The rich, the poor or inbetween? I think that we know who would milk such a system for all that it was worth.
    But I agree with you and I am also not infavour of this. We have too much welfare already and when the country crashes (coming) it will all be gone.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:14pm
    Problem is that ToJo said they would NOT means test to exclude the high rollers - they, after all, have mortgages on their $5m homes etc....

    Rorting of means testing takes place when people are permitted to claim excessive things for a 'business'. Simple solution is - you have a business, the yardstick is what is required for that business - not the luxury model. You do NOT need a Hummer to pick up fish at the market for your shop.

    That issue/area is THE biggest Black Hole of budget - and those with the least are expected to cover it out of their pittance - again!

    There is something that seriously goes wrong in the minds of politician bean counters the moment they begin to slosh around billions - they forget that those at the bottom end are dealing with cents.

    I say politicians live on the pension and get a voted pay for work value every year.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:15pm
    Saw a thing just this morning - said another financial crash/crisis is definitely coming. I think we've always know that.. in our water, so to speak.
    Tom Tank
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:22pm
    The subsidy decreases to 30% on incomes of $300,000 and above. This is the group pushing to get child care subsidies for nannies.
    What can one say???
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:36pm
    What about some FIFO workers and others who are away for more than ten day's at a time, claim to Centrelink that they are separated, the wife gets support payments for her and any children, then if she were to work part time, the grandparents would then get some form of payment. see how the handout wheel just keeps going around.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:00pm
    Subsidy DOES go down to 30% at $300k. At least there is some concept of insanity in giving endless handouts to the well-heeled. $300k is way too high. At that income - and I trust that is HOUSEHOLD income and not one member thereof when both work at $300k etc... Family Unit as the yardstick. One of the greatest highway robberies was making the second income separate, thus lowering the tax rate of total income and thus generating the beginning of the massive divide in our society between haves and have-nots.

    But there's the entire problem right there - our society is disintegrating into massive divisions along income and asset lines - and all of that is related to genuine opportunity - excessive opportunity for some and zero for others.

    It really is way past time for a long hard look at the way this country has gone over the past 31 years, and what passes for reality and fair play these days - fair play for some - the chosen ones for today - not for all.

    The only real difference between the two major parties is their rhetoric and the extent to which they are prepared to blatantly rob the poor - again.

    FIFO workers - family unit gets income - zero support. Anything else is nonsense. If they are 'separated' then the worker would have to pay child support anyway. But needs to be looked at.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:09pm
    Sorry - didn't finish that thought (yardle, yardle, brain scramble)

    " At that income - and I trust that is HOUSEHOLD income and not one member thereof when both work at $300k etc... Family Unit as the yardstick" the family can afford to pay for their own nanny or whatever. Household servants.. you can't cop a tax dodge and a subsidy.

    Greedy bastards just think it's all beer and skittles - maybe we need to return to a 90% marginal tax rate...... get them into line.

    BTW - I post views like mine online since I know politician's flunkeys read these for a feel of the people's pulse - what's left of it! You need a little lifeblood to have a pulse!
    Micky
    22nd Jul 2014
    1:48pm
    What a load of BULLSHIT!!!!!, Grandparents have a certificate 3 in early childhood education. 30 years ago I was a Mr Mum for my 3 kids, I also looked after a friends daughter while her mum worked. All 4 have grown up to be well educated adults with children of their own. It is a joy to look after my grand children weather I get paid or not.
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:29pm
    Micky - congratulations on a job well done. but unfortunately not all are like you.
    Micky
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:33pm
    Thank you Kato, I have had some very good jobs in my time and it was the best job I ever had, I would do it again.
    Waterbaby
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:26pm
    SO, we don't have the skills to look after our grandchildren, after a lifetime spent bringing up their parents? We have to pay for TAFE for the privilege???
    I would also think that the pensions we have worked all our life for (those of us not fortunate enough to be self-funded retirees) would also be directly affected.
    For those who have the health to so so, short stints of grandchild minding are fun, but all week, every week for a working mum? Much as I love my grandchildren I'd like a life of my own too.
    PlanB
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:10pm
    Hear hear to that Waterbaby
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:17pm
    Seconded. and let us not forget that The Guv will take any extra into account - GROSS - in pension calculation etc.

    Luverly - just luverly! Your daughter gives you $50 for food and the Guv wants to include that in your 'takings' for the deal.

    Thieves the lot of them.
    Fiona
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:34pm
    I was wondering if the government would be reducing pensions because the grandparents would be receiving an income?
    Wstaton
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:37pm
    You betcha!
    KSS
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:57pm
    No doubt in line with the income rules for pensions.
    suzmc
    22nd Jul 2014
    2:36pm
    The whole purpose of government supported child care is to increase productivity and women returning to the full time work force. So now what? some parents will leave children with gran while they go out to party and the tax payer subsidises this? I support quality childcare for all children, but I do not support paying gran to babysit their grandchildren at all. Childcare is not the same as babysitting. If gran has a cert 111 or 1V in child care it does not mean that she is providing quality childcare, it still might be boring old babysitting! Suzanne
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:21pm
    How does it increase productivity when those women returning means someone misses out on a job, and I always thought moterhing was a full-time job. You can make exceptions in the case of single mothers - but why continue to disintegrate our soociety along income and opportunity lines to satisfy those who ALREADY have a family income that ONCE was sufficient to provide all the necessary - it's called the hubbie's income.

    It is the very introduction en masse of millions of women to the workforc e that has created the MADIF and the massive costs in living rises associated with it - meaning those with one or no income can no longer keep pace.

    Dumb as..... a self-perpetuating nightmare made worse every time a government gives yet another welfare handout to put someone back into a job when they already have money coming in, and one purely driven by short-sighted and selfish 'feminist' ideology.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:26pm
    You can add to that the endless whine about the 'lack of competitveness' of Western industry - how is it EVER going to become a reality of lower wages/costs of living as long as a single person earner household is force to keep pace with costs of living etc generated by the dual income?

    Then when the wage rates go up to cater to that - the dual MADIF gets the same rise for BOTH - and the cycle goes on and on. Nothing changes for the better and everything gets worse.

    Dumb as!
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    5:58pm
    suzmc: Somebody always pays. True for Medicare, true for child care and for everything else which is 'free'.
    Your argument about getting mothers back to work misses the point that mothers need to make the decision to either do part time work or to get mum to help out, as used to be the case. IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE STATE TO LOOK AFTER YOUR CHILDREN!!
    The real problem that you have uncovered is that people now rely on the second income to have a better lifestyle. But it should not be at the expense of taxpayers who are subsidising this 'right'.
    taylah
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:09pm
    Yes why not I agree but at the very least the value should be included in the GNP
    Rane
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:22pm
    I willingly gave up a very good job to take care of my granddaughter 3 years ago. Both families agreed to do this for financial and the well-being of our grandchild. Both her parents are shift workers so my services are required at varied hours five days per week and will not change when she attends school. I feel extremely grateful that I am in a position to be able to do this for all of our sakes, however it is a tough job in your late 60s and I would appreciate some form of payment and would not feel guilty about taking it. My husband is still working so I am not even eligible for a health care card, yet have saved the government their portion of childcare and will continue to do so for years to come if the system does not change.
    Anonymous
    22nd Jul 2014
    8:31pm
    I took a year off my at today's rate $260k pa job to care for my son when he was six months old. There was no childcare or whatever subsidies going on then and no parental leave either. Do I get back pay on my 50% for a year? On a cold day in hell.
    granet
    22nd Jul 2014
    3:30pm
    I wouldn't mind getting paid, at least for the petrol, not my time as I enjoy the interaction with my grandchildren. I drive 400klm per week for 2 days child care, so any small amount would be appreciated.
    Young
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:11pm
    You either look after your own children or you don't.
    As ex school teachers my wife and I found that those children who achieved the best were looked after at home by their parents.
    Today's families want everything straight away and so both work and drop off their children.
    Greed is God.
    No way should grandparents be paid to look after their grandchildren.
    MICK
    22nd Jul 2014
    5:59pm
    Well said. No self interst in your position and I for one think that you are on the money.
    tia-maria
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:23pm
    Hey Grandparents beware as our government would have a hidden agenda also ??????????????remember also pensioners............. we are only allowed to receive a few dollars a week

    22nd Jul 2014
    4:25pm
    Put simply people - all this 'equality' nonsense has created a society riven by massive and escalating divides. there is ZERO 'equality' when some have four times everything and others have NONE!

    Pretty bloody straight forward to me!

    A young man in the street here said it to me not that long ago - "One Family - One Job!"

    Fer Chrissakes - a MILLION+ unemployed in reality out of twelve million and people still want to be paid for their own kids, cop subsidies for nannies as well as servant tax dodges, and cop mega handouts to be placed back in the workforce, thus displacing someone else and refusing an opportunity to some single unemployed out there?

    Dude - Where's My Country?

    Answer - in the toilet bowl!
    Wstaton
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:47pm
    A bit like this.

    A lot of folks can't understand how we came to have an oil shortage here in
    Australia ...

    Well, there's a very simple answer.
    Nobody bothered to check the oil.
    We just didn't know we were getting low.
    The reason for that is purely geographical.
    Our OIL is located in:

    Bass Strait
    East Queensland Shale Fields
    Canning Basin
    Perth Basin and North-West Continental Shelf

    Unfortunately

    Our DIPSTICKS are located in Canberra !!!

    Any questions???
    Kato
    22nd Jul 2014
    9:27pm
    nope can't beat that:)
    Tim@toc
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:19pm
    Wstaton, that's the best laugh I've had today, and absolutely spot on. It is hard to believe the people who are our elected and well paid representatives, on all sides of the political divide can be so bloody brain dead. Childcare at the taxpayers expense is an insane idea and as ex teacher, Charlie indicated, is harmful to the children.
    justjanet
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:31pm
    What a great idea it would solve quite a few problems out and give some "older "austrailia s a new lease of life
    Micky
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:52pm
    As a older Australian and a person that can't sit in front of a television set and vegetate I have been doing volunteer work for approximately 20 years. I now do volunteer work for 2 organisations, i'm a past committee member, treasurer, secretary and now support group coordinator of one. I'm also visit elderly and disable residents in their homes. I love my roles and I hope I can continue for many years to come.
    Maudy
    22nd Jul 2014
    4:43pm
    The love and type of care that Grand parents give cannot be paid for, however we all know the little expenses that creep in while doing so. Pensioners etc., just cannot afford the extras but unable to refuse where necessary.
    Patriot
    22nd Jul 2014
    5:32pm
    No, I do not believe that GrandParents should be paid for looking after their grand kids.
    They're getting an (adequate?) age pension already and I find it a privileged to look after grandkids.
    No Big Cigars & Cups of coffee though!

    Rather than – in my opinion – put money towards such a project in a negative way I would attempt a resolution by (un)spending money to provide incentive to keep “One Parent” home to look after the child(ren).
    I have personally proven that this works/worked> that's why I am now on a pension rather than being a “Self Funded Retiree”.

    We all know what causes kids so, having them is A CHOICE and NOT AN ACCIDENT
    Parents should work out who is the breadwinner and who is the caretaker

    I would look at childcare issues as follows:
    1 Steer towards the objective of only ONE parent in the family working
    2 Both parents working – in many cases – requires a 2nd car
    3 If the 2nd person is the mum, appropriate wardrobe results in considerable expenditure in
    order to dress appropriately for the job
    4 Health should improve as most people can grow some/most of their own food or at
    least “Cook from fresh” which should be a considerable reduction on Aust medical
    budget
    5 No child care costs directly or indirectly via taxes
    6 Kids should be more emotionally supported by parents as opposed to strangers
    7 People should have more time during weekends to spend as a family

    Immediate effect on families
    1 Carer parent has some time to get involved in the community & School to save taxes
    Also save money on PAID childcare
    2 Running a 2nd car is a huge expense
    3 Considerable savings on clothing
    4 Improved family wellbeing & Tax savings on Healthcare
    5 Reduced taxes
    6 Reduced ADHD medicine & healthier people
    7 Kids do not have to deal with cranky & Burned Out parents at all

    Overall potential improvement as a Family from the above suggestions
    1 Much reduced taxes – More income per family
    2 Major reduced family expenses by reduction of food & Transport costs
    3 Improved family health & fewer Sickies ==> Lower diabetes, cancer, heart attacks
    & obesity rates
    4 Direct & indirect saving on Health care to reduce taxes and improve expendable
    income
    5 Less stressed & happier kids due to more relaxed parents
    6 Community building due to improved interaction via volunteering

    Overall potential improvement as a Nation from the above suggestions
    1 More reliable & focussed workers with better health & fewer sickies
    2 Reduced & simpler Tax & welfare system to further reduce costs
    3 Due to the reduction of employed adults, school leavers can now get jobs and
    therefore have some dignity & a real future
    The massive saving on welfare and infrastructure & payments would reduce taxes on
    family

    If only we could FORCE our politicians to implement such measures this country would be in a much better situation and even be a massive improvement on Joe's Budget Deficit.
    The only question to ask then – if we accept that the above measures should be implemented: “Why are our Pollies resisting”. Find the answer to this question and we know the “Root Cause” of Australia's many problems
    professori_au
    27th Jul 2014
    9:45pm
    It would seem we were doing better when only one parent had a job and one stayed home. Before anyone makes a sexist comment, let me say that it doesn't matter which parent stayed home to look after the children, as long as they were suitable and capable. this requirements to have two incomes coming in to pay the mortgage, the car or to live a lifestyle that doesn't work because the cost of childcare almost uses up the extra income. that is why the government would like grandparents to take over the job while it creates tax generating jobs to train nannies to a "high" quality standard. what a lot of hogwash! I believe the families were more community minded and were happy being part of a community. Not so today where egocentric views rule and not many wish o be part of the community any more.
    Brissiegirl
    22nd Jul 2014
    7:08pm
    I'm plain sick of paying for other people's kids' education and costly child care. The first thing that should happen is people who choose not to have kids should be able to claim a tax deduction. They are being financially preyed upon due to their foresight and knowing their limitations. They are not burdening other people with the results of their lifestyle choice.
    If grandparents want to look after their grandchildren, that's another lifestyle choice and nothing whatsoever to do with government. Sometimes I see tired-looking old women dragging themselves around supermarkets during school holidays with multiple active little kids in tow - what a ridiculous situation. Their choice. Not the responsibility of anyone other than themselves.
    Tim@toc
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:27pm
    100% correct Brissiegirl.
    MICK
    23rd Jul 2014
    10:32am
    Probably a better idea that parents who cannot look after kids do not have them. Problem solved. What is happening is that couples are having children and then demanding that somebody else pays for their care so that the parents can go off to work.
    niemakawa
    28th Oct 2014
    10:23am
    Some need to understand the age of "entitlement" is over. This proposed scheme is another attempt to extract more taxes from people to care for somebody else's offspring. Grandparents who look after their grandchildren, whilst the parents are at work, have to do so at their costs. NO to any more subsidies.
    Katie
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:15pm
    This is a great idea!
    Katie
    22nd Jul 2014
    10:21pm
    This is a great idea!
    Silverwolf
    23rd Jul 2014
    11:09am
    Yes, I would. It would supplement the pension somewhat!

    Secondly, we of the grey nomad brigade should join forces and tackle the crippling budget for seniors. Seniors built this country, paid taxes, and and fought in all the wars. Since when was that devalued? We would have heaps of clout given our number. Come on seniors, let's show them what we are made of. Kind regards, Silverwolf (aka Anni)
    Anonymous
    27th Jul 2014
    10:41am
    I think everyone who ever worked and paid taxes should get the pension; however we would probably end up with a dollar a week as that would be all the country could afford; if that.
    professori_au
    23rd Jul 2014
    3:01pm
    Most grandparents will not hesitate to look after their grandchildren. However, let me ask a question. Are they not entitled to live their own life now they are retired. Surely to provide some recompense for their time should not be begrudged. Often their support costs come out of their pension. Not all grandparents or their children are financially well off. The comment from one politician that Nannies should be well qualified I do not necessarily disagree, but this exercise seems to need a good mathematician and not a politician figuring. If they are to be well qualified, how much is their salary to be? I would think "well qualified" would need to be receiving a good salary, taking into consideration the time spent in quality study; qualifying work experience under supervision.
    Hmmm! Not all parents will be able to meet that sort of cost, so that the parent may go to work as a temp, casual or part time at usually minimum wages. the solution to me seems that it might be better to leave a parent at home to look after their own children. Children we would believe are given love and care beyond what a qualified nanny might be able to give. today the cost of child care is well beyond the wages of many parents to support, especially if there are more than one child in need of care. what about disabled children. I know a family with several autistic spectrum children and when the youngest reaches I think 7, the mother loses one of the benefits. This at a time when they are reaching puberty. I am not suggesting it is no of some benefit but each case needs to be assessed on its merit. Children able or disabled need someone to be there when they return from school and the present system does not adequately cater for them. Some parents leave to go to work before the children need to get up and do not return until after tea because of this mandatory system that requires both parents to work unless, of course, they come from affluent parents and then there is likely a nanny to take care of them while the parents socialise
    professori_au
    23rd Jul 2014
    3:02pm
    Don't forget, with older people staying in the workplace longer, some of these grandparents may we working as well
    Silverwolf
    23rd Jul 2014
    6:40pm
    To begin with, I agree with Plan B. Sound sensible thinking there. Secondly, I'm a grey nomad grandparent and I only quit fulltime work 3 weeks ago at 70. I have been working since I was sixteen and have paid all my dues when they were due. I have a string of degrees and a lifetime of experience. I also have 4 grand children and 3 great grand children. I don't need to do a Cert 3 in anything because I already have a sound track record. We all need to unite and put in place a plan of action that will assist seniors and get the likes of Hockey and Abbott back in their boxes where they belong. We hired them - we can fire them! Cheers. Anni
    margw5
    23rd Jul 2014
    10:49pm
    My daughter wanted to return to work two days a week, when her son was one years old, and asked me how I felt looking after him, if she were to pay me as I was working full time. I decided to work part-time, so even though my wage (not the greatest)has been reduced, my daughter pays me what I loose, cash in hand, and I get to spend quality time with my grandson, which I love, although I do find it tiring sometimes at the end
    of the day. And I'm not just a babysitter - I take him out, read and enact nursery rhymes, that aren't politically correct etc!
    Anonymous
    24th Jul 2014
    4:57pm
    If it works for you fine marg. I have a friend who took on three days a week but it too much for her. Child was too heavy to be picked up etc and friend has health issues. She dearly wanted to have the little one but as she said to me..."when you get over 70 it is too much healthwise." She also found it impinged on her own social life which I might add was very limited anyway. Daughter had to put her in day care in the end.
    professori_au
    27th Jul 2014
    9:31pm
    If people are working part time, casual or fill in work. Will there be enough of those sorts of jobs available. Then again there is a logical question where working parents need to time their work to fit in with picking up the kiddies from school; where there are e.g. autistic spectrum children involved, will the employer be satisfied to if the worker go on when their is a "meltdown" with such a child that the school people cannot cope as they have no training in handling those types of situation. Employer's are there to make money, not provide a charity service for employees continually leaving at short notice to attend an incident. Many employer's will go along with it for a short period but not if it extends. where does an employer get a fill in worker while that parent is attending a family related issue? These intellectually challenged policy makers never get it right because they do not understand the whole picture. I saw a lot of policy development while in the public service that failed because the parameters were set so narrow that they were really aimed at saving money, not providing service.
    Not Senile Yet!
    27th Jul 2014
    2:28am
    How to reduce the rising cost of day care!!! by Abbot & Costello.....pay the grandparents as babysitters $5-$10 an hour!!!
    Make them do a course provided by a Private Training Company to qualify for the cheep Labour......and make out that you are doing them a favour by allowing them to earn extra.....then reduce their pension.
    What a bunch of Morons we have running our country...don't these idiots know that those grandparent's already do this one or two days a week...because no one can afford 5 days a week Child Care Fees!!!
    Too busy smoking Cigars and patting each other on the back about how smart they are....or better still writing books about how super cool they are!!!!!
    Vote these Morons out next election....vote for Independents who offer to reinstate ALL Pensioner payments and privaleges!!!!!
    DO NOT VOTE FOR PARTY PUPPETS EVER AGAIN!
    Kato
    27th Jul 2014
    1:14pm
    Lisa Owen began by asking him how much trouble the Australian economy was in given his drastic measures in the recent Budget.

    Joe Hockey: The Australian economy is not in trouble. We’ve had 23 years of consecutive economic growth.


    Read more: http://www.3news.co.nz/Interview-Joe-Hockey/tabid/1348/articleID/354234/Default.aspx#ixzz38dLvSp61
    professori_au
    27th Jul 2014
    9:35pm
    Smokey Joe is using a form of economics that allows for a high degree of poetic licence with the truth.
    aprin38
    28th Jul 2014
    4:01pm
    what about great grandmothers I am a great grandmother and I looked after my great grandchild for a year till she went to pre school
    Simo
    26th Oct 2014
    5:49am
    No it is NO Grand Parents should NOT be expected to GO back to School to learn something they have already Learnt the hard way - Raising their Own Children in the School of Life which is the Best School of all. And any Government PAYMENT given to mind their Own Grand Children SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN EARNINGS and so affect their Pension payments etc.

    It should may be be Means tested against the Parents income but noit against the GRANDPARENTS as this is what Governments in this country will do. and it is moraly wrong.
    gr82do
    26th Oct 2014
    7:58am
    bureaucracy rum amuk thinking grandparents need to do a course to mind grandkids. We have grandchildren and a dozen grandnieces and nephews. We are all university trained, not that that makes good parents. Their parents do an excellent job but sometimes come to us for advice, and they all share ideas because they are readers and thinkers. I cannot see myself sitting through a class of any sort, let alone one run by a childless theorist. If they want to run classes, make them optional.
    nan
    26th Oct 2014
    11:21am
    Reading all the replies shows what a complex subject paying grandparents for babysitting is. The Grappler was correct, that a pensioner may way find half their payment is taken by centrelink. Housing today is far more expensive than it was for us. Two wages are often needed, one just to pay the morgtage. I babysit one day a week, to save one day's payment in childcare and to spend time with my G/C. I would never dream of expecting payment even though I drive an hour to take my grandaughter home. If petrol costs were a burdon then I would need to ask for compensation. I do think that if a grandparent has given up paid work to care for a G/c then then it up to the parents to pay, not the Taxpayer. I do know a working couple that pay the grandmother $200 a week for full time childcare.The grandmother struggled financialy before. So it was a win win for both. Now if centrelink was to take $100 away, I don't think this grandmother would want to babysit 9 hours a day 5 days a week. for As I said, it is a complex subject.
    niemakawa
    26th Oct 2014
    2:50pm
    Just more social engineering to control the masses. Certainly not, parents and their extended families should be responsible for baby-sitting their children. Don't have children if you cannot afford them. The taxpayer is already forking out far to many subsidies for misguided people who believe they have a right to be paid for their own life choices.
    unicorn
    26th Oct 2014
    4:56pm
    Well one thing for sure iy did not reach the shops yet!! Thank goodness.
    HOLA
    27th Oct 2014
    8:10am
    WStaton, sounds like a good idea about taking a course before they have children and receive benefits. Some religions have pre-marital courses before they get married, although some priests wouldn't have a clue about marriage.
    alfie
    28th Oct 2014
    9:34am
    This is a good idea.... society gets rid of older people from the workforce because they like the "fresh" image for their company sacrificing experience, which explains the poor customer services you now experience in shops and companies. Therefore this is good extra income for grandparents to supplement their retirement. Caring for a child is not easy and if its a regular thing then it takes a lot of the grandparents time too. Go for it.
    niemakawa
    28th Oct 2014
    10:26am
    Let's get back to reality, the Country has a huge debt to repay, a legacy of the previous Government.


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles

    You May Like