The Government’s scheme would pay eligible recipients the adult federal minimum wage ($543.78) for 18 weeks. Other benefits and transfers available would provide support equivalent to six months.
Abbott’s scheme would pay someone on $150 000 a year $75 000 for six months. (The full replacement of the wage being the reason why his plan would cost close to $3 billion dollars rather than the government’s $300 million a year). But someone on less than the current minimum wage would presumably only receive what they earn.
The article goes on to link to the original Larvatus Prodeo post which in turn links to the original Tony Abbott speech. I attempted to follow that link today and got a 404 error.
However, a quick search of the Liberal Party site from there linked me to something called Direct Action Plan on Paid Parental Leave. It says:
The Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave scheme will:
- provide primary carers with 26 weeks paid parental leave, at full replacement pay (up to a maximum salary of $150,000 per annum) or the Federal minimum wage, whichever is greater;
- be available to all employees in the public and private sector, including contractors and the self-employed; and
- include superannuation contributions at the mandatory rate of nine per cent.
Carers will not have to be working full-time to access the Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave scheme because it uses the same ‘work-test’ as the government’s proposal which requires:
- an average of at least one conventional day of paid work a week;
- over a ‘continuous qualifying period’ which amounts to a least 10 months of the 13 months prior to the expected date of birth.
It shows that those earning less than minimum wage will receive minimum wage on parental leave. It also shows at the very least, the political bare bones of the package shows that the Tony Abbott Coalition’s plan is superior to the one offered under the Rudd government for the parents that would receive parental leave.