I don't understand the argument that it would be more expensive for the government?
I thought his idea was to allow the current rates of CCB/CCTR to apply to nannies? So, doesn't that mean that the cost to the government would be the same for each child regardless of the setting?
I also don't get the whole 'Abbott proposed it so I can't agree with it' frame of mind. Either you think its a good policy or not.
On the surface
it is an excellent policy.
But to be workable it would need to be:
- means tested to parents earning under (at a guess) $200k,
- funded without removing funding from another area in need (which would mean a new tax/raising taxes)
- regulated and staffed by relevant professionals
- pay and conditions monitered
- not just a vote-grabbing sound-bite with no hope of ever seeing the light of day.
I loved the flexability of employing a nanny. My kids loved having someone who could look after them in the comfort of their own home. It was very helpful in allowing DH and I to advance our careers post-childbirth.
If Tony Abbott actually brings a workable version of this scheme into being, however, I will tapdance naked on the roof of Parliament house.