The 4350water Blog highlights some of the issues relating to proposals for potable reuse in Toowoomba and South East Qld. 4350water blog looks at related political issues as well.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Public pays for KRudd's and millionaire wife's babysitter ...

Snouts well and truly in the trough ...

See - Telegraph - Public pays for Kevin Rudd babysitter.

posted by Concerned Ratepayer at 8:00 AM

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why doesn't Therese get off her butt and do her job as mother!

What a disgrace, they all have their trotters in the trough!

2:04 PM, February 19, 2008

 
Blogger Concerned Ratepayer said...

Recent search term:

"k rudd's dog cat the lodge"

Amusing!

5:15 PM, February 19, 2008

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Daily Telegraph

Rudd put in the naughty chair

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

KEVIN Rudd has been the sultan of symbolism since he got elected - saying sorry, freezing politicians’ pay, signing Kyoto - but his taxpayer-subsidised nanny was not a popular emblem.

Talkback radio and websites yesterday raged about the hypocrisy of the Prime Minister giving himself a taxpayer subsidy for a nanny that wasn’t available to any other dual-income family.

His mistake was more poignant because it came on the heels of federal politicians complaining in December that an “astronomical” $80-a-day charge would make a childcare centre at Parliament House unviable.

It magnified the message that politicians don’t seem to have a clue that thousands of families are spending more than a third of their income on childcare.

Hundreds of working parents face childcare charges of more than $100 a day - $80 a day is a standard charge in many Sydney suburbs.

While childcare subsidies are available and will be made more generous by the new Rudd Government, there are none for nannies.

The master of motif got the message and by lunchtime Rudd was announcing through a spokesman that he would reimburse taxpayers for his childcare costs.

The Prime Minister and his business manager wife Therese Rein made a caring decision to hire someone to look after their 14-year-old son.

Their mistake was to have taxpayers subsidise that carer.

They were giving themselves a taxpayer subsidy denied to every other working woman in this country.

More than 100,000 women a year can’t get into the workplace because they can’t get access to a suitable childcare place.

Many mothers of the under-twos are left with no option but employing a nanny because of a shortage of childcare places for under twos.

Others who have to do shift work have to use a nanny because childcare centres aren’t open when they need them. But whether they are forced to or choose to use a nanny because they think it is best for their child, these families are not entitled to the same childcare subsidies enjoyed by parents lucky enough to get a place in a childcare centre.

Neither political party at the last election offered to give families who use nannies a tax break or extend the childcare subsidies available despite numerous public inquiries calling for such measures.

That’s why Rudd’s decision to take on a taxpayer-funded nanny rankled with working women. There was a principle involved here - if Rudd could get a taxpayer-subsidised nanny so should the rest of us.

Then there is the issue of whether a 14 year old needs a nanny anyway. The Daily Telegraph’s website was running hot with reader comment on this issue yesterday.

“He is 14 years old . . . surely this kid can ask one of the housekeepers to pour him some milk and get him a plate of cookies after school?” Mike Knowles of Sydney said.

Some comments were even less charitable about the Rudds’ assessment of the maturity and self-reliance of their teenage son.

Equally, other readers thought that, with the Rudds frequently travelling overseas representing the country and travelling around the country, someone should be at home to look out for Marcus.

Many cited the example of the infamous out-of-control 16-year-old adolescent and Melbourne party animal Corey Worthington in support of their case for some form of supervision of Marcus.

“For God’s sake, if they didn’t employ a babysitter they’d be getting abused for leaving a 14 year old alone” Kelly, of Sydney, said.

“This is more than a babysitter, wouldn’t the person also be a bodyguard? Remember he is head of Government. If the Rudds are attending something overseas who looks after the boy then?” Thomas asks.

Marcus won’t need the same high level of care as a toddler or six year old but he might need someone to get him out of bed and to school.

A helping hand with his homework and a nanny’s taxi to get him to his extra curricula activities is the sort of care most 14 year olds would expect at home from less busy parents.

Many of the working families Rudd spoke so often about during the election campaign won’t begrudge him hiring a carer for his son.

But they will be hoping this issue focused his attention on the paucity of subsidies available for all those other Australians who use a nanny.

If he could give up his obsession with symbols and get down to doing something practical on this issue, this storm over Rudd’s private life will have achieved something.

1:16 AM, February 20, 2008

 

Post a Comment

<< Home