| Call for a universal parent and carer living allowance |
|
|
|
| Tuesday, 06 April 2010 00:00 | |||||||||
You can read the proposal and comment on it here: http://www.civilsociety.org.au/PandC/Policy02.htm The universal parent and carer living allowance is intended to cover parents caring for young children, or sons and daughters with a disability or a mental or chronic illness, or frail elderly family members. “Everyone in this situation knows that their role in society is not valued as much as that of a person in the paid workforce,” a party spokesperson said. “Meagre allowances, no superannuation entitlements and no tax concessions mean financial insecurity and poverty for several million families. “Meanwhile, tax concessions in housing and superannuation cost taxpayers a staggering $77 billion annually. These concessions favour high income earners directly, and property developers and investors indirectly. The stated aim of the housing concessions is to encourage investment in the supply of housing, yet as policy measures they have failed dismally to generate an adequate supply of affordable housing. In the process, parents and carers on low and middle incomes who care for the young and vulnerable are subsidising high income earners and the burgeoning property industry. “Our policy would abolish tax concessions in housing and superannuation which favour high income earners and property developers, saving $53 billion and $24 billion respectively for annual redirection into a parent and carer living allowance set at the minimum wage figure of $544 per week. “This policy is a potential cornerstone for a political movement of parents and families, with the federal election coming up this year and state elections due in most states.”
“Abolition of some or all of these tax concessions in housing and superannuation which favour high income earners and property developers, would save a significant proportion of the $53 billion and $24 billion respectively for annual redirection into a Parent and Carer Living Allowance. This would free up a massive pool of resources for transfer from high income earners and the property industry to parents and carers in low and middle income brackets,” the spokesperson said. “It would enable parents and carers to undertake and maintain caring roles without the huge financial disadvantages that follow sustained absences from the paid workforce. “More parents and carers would choose to devote more time, for longer periods, with their children in their formative years or with loved ones in need of their care, without the need to incur crippling financial hardship or jeopardise their future financial security. More families and households would be freed from the unsustainable stresses of juggling work and family commitments. “This policy would mark a major shift in national priorities from property to people, from bricks and mortar to relationships. The property industry is robust, and can withstand the removal of tax advantages wrought at the expense of a minimum wage-equivalent subsistence income for those who care for the most vulnerable in the community.”
|
|||||||||