Back

Mother's plight shows why the economy must work for parents, not against them

Family First Party

Family First National Director and NSW Legislative Council candidate Lyle Shelton says the experience of Gold Coast mother Miranda Anderson is proof that Australia’s tax and childcare system is stacked against parents who want to care for their own children.

 

 

Ms Anderson, 33, told News Corp she and her husband Mark had well-paid jobs, properties and assets before their son Luca was born. Relying on one income proved impossible. They sold an investment property, gave up the “Australian dream” of a four-bedroom house with a yard, and she has had to take on one day a week of relief teaching to make ends meet.

 

“Miranda Anderson wanted to do what her own mother did — stay home with her child. The system made that choice almost impossible,” Mr Shelton said.

 

“Just one in five households now has a stay-at-home parent, down from 53 per cent in 1980. That is not because parents have suddenly stopped wanting time with their children. It is because the economy has been restructured to work against that choice.”

 

Mr Shelton said Family First has long called for income splitting so couples with a stay-at-home parent are not penalised.

 

“A single-income couple is taxed as if one person earns the lot, while a dual-income couple on the same household income is taxed more lightly. That is a couple penalty. Income splitting would let married couples share their income for tax purposes, so a family on one wage is not punished for having a parent at home.”

 

He said Family First has also long called for childcare subsidies to follow the parents’ choice, not the government’s prescription that the money go only to industrialised childcare outside the home.

 

“Under current policy, parents receive substantial support if they outsource care to a centre, and far less if mum, dad, a grandparent or a nanny provides that care. The money should follow the child.

 

“Parents who want centre-based care should be free to use it. Parents who believe their baby or toddler is better cared for at home should not be financially penalised for making that choice.”

 

Mr Shelton said Ms Anderson’s own words exposed the policy failure.

 

“She said there is no policy that supports you, no financial gain, and no one looking out for the mother who wants to stay home. She is right. The expectation is that you go back to work. That is a government prescription, not a family choice.

 

“Raising one child now costs a family about $17,800 a year. Housing costs have soared. Mortgage stress is acute. Families are selling assets, delaying retirement and cutting back just to keep a parent with their children. That is not a functioning family economy.”

 

Mr Shelton rejected the claim that the collapse of the single-income family is simply progress.

 

“Women’s freedom to work, earn and own assets is a good thing. Family First is not arguing that mothers should be forced home. We are arguing that the pendulum has swung so far that the choice Ms Anderson’s generation was promised has been taken away.

 

“Parents, not bureaucrats, know what is best for their children. Restructure the tax system with income splitting, and let childcare subsidies follow the child. Then the economy will finally work for parents, not against them.”

 

 

MEDIA ENQUIRIES:

Lyle Shelton, Family First National Director

Email: [email protected]

Contact details:

[email protected]