Turner Judy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Turner Judy: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:627;Page:22124] 
7.  
JUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader—United Future) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: What assistance is there for families who do not qualify under the Working for Families package but wish to have one parent stay at home to care for children such as the Garside family featured on Television One’s  
Sunday 
 programme recently? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 The Working for Families package targets tax relief to the 61 percent of families with children who are most in need. Families earning between $25000 and $45000 a year will get around $100 per week from that package. For other families the best Government strategy frankly is a growing economy and investment in those things that will raise productivity levels so that wages can rise rather than tinkering with complications to the taxation system which would give us no long-term profit. Families earning $60000 or more with young children may however be eligible for an expanded childcare subsidy and will qualify for 20 hours of free early childhood education from 2007. 
Judy Turner 
: Does the Minister agree that the introduction of income splitting as proposed by United Future would give a family such as the Garsides who missed out on the Working for Families assistance an extra $98 a week and allow them to achieve their dream of having one parent at home while their children are young; if so does he support the introduction of that family-friendly policy; if not why not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Garside family who I understand are on a main income of about $65000 with a part-time income coming from the second earner may well look at the income-splitting idea. But from the Government’s point of view we have no plans to move on that policy. We do not believe that income-splitting benefits those families that most need financial assistance; income splitting is more beneficial to those who are on higher incomes rather than those whom we are targeting. I note also that the price of United Future’s income-splitting package is the cancellation of the rest of the Working for Families package—no in-work payment and no $10 increase per child for all eligible families. If that is not now United Future’s position I welcome that. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Given the Minister’s response to the House can he inform it of what reports he has seen about assistance for families who wish to have one parent stay at home to care for their children? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I have seen a report that: “This issue is very very complex.” that: “It cannot be addressed without the resources of the State behind you.” and that: “Frankly in Opposition no party certainly not National has the capacity to deal with it adequately.” A person told Radio Rhema that and he was Dr Donald Brash who is clearly intent on stealing home in this election rather than openly telling his voters his plans about his policies. 
Judy Turner 
: Has the Minister seen the Littlies Lobby survey results released yesterday which indicate that the No. 1 concern of parents with under-fives is spending more quality time with them and that parents want policies that affirm “support and recognition for a parent to stay at home with children”; if so how does he reconcile that desire for parenting to be valued with the Government’s clear agenda to get more mums into work? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Government’s clear agenda is to give men and women choice about staying at home or going into the workplace which means providing proper support through things like childcare to ensure that that choice is real and meaningful for both partners. 
Judy Turner 
: Does the Minister agree with the comment from Diane Garside on the  
Sunday 
 programme that she wants the choice to stay at home to care for her toddlers “no matter what income her family is at”; or does he still stand by his comments on National Radio last year that such a choice is simply a luxury? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I note that the Garside family who have a $65000 main income plus a second part-time income do want to make that kind of choice. As I said before it is the Government’s intention to try to put in place policies that provide both men and women with a choice as to whether they will go back into the workplace or stay home with their children. As I said last night at a seminar here which was attended by a number of members of Parliament the key to that of course is to lift wages. That is what this Government has also embarked on doing rather than giving silly waste-of-time tax cuts.