i honestly think it's a step backward to consider it under the guise of "maternity" payment - there are some, if not many, corporations that DO pay maternity leave, and would see this as a way to stop. for some of us, the baby bonus, or whatever they call it from Jan, would be a huge reduction in entitlement to what we're currently getting from our paid maternity leave. for me, i'm working part time at the moment, and getting the baby bonus on top of my half pay mat leave will mean, essentially, for six months i'll get full pay (well, full for what i'm being paid now).

i don't believe giving people an either/or option with CCB is realistic, or fair. to tell someone they only get CCB if they forfeit the baby bonus payments is essentially telling them that the government know better than them what is appropriate for a child under six months of age, which is ridiculous. every family, every situation, is different, and the need or desire to use child care under that age shouldn't negate entitlement to another payment. a lot of mum's, particularly first time mum's, need to return to work before that magic six month mark as $380 and the small amount they get for FTB isn't enough to supplement their wage. it's not appropriate to take away that bonus simply because they need to use child care.

PM - i understand where you're coming from with trying to find ways to encourage parents to stay at home with younger babies, but it's not something the government should legislate. personally, i could see it causing massive issues as a discriminatory action