Australian opposition leader Abbott says sorry to childless PM in new row

What Abbott should have said is that Gillard obviously didnt find celebrating a birth appealing. The budget, the money pull on this subject does, of course, have no point. For example, the argument Gillard herself made in an interview, she compared 15000 handout over educational years for a child versus a 2000 one off at birth. What that doesnt obviously point out that education is prescribed and that 15000 covers the teachers and infrastructure costs-it rarely covers texts, uniforms, lunches, transport, and the regular yearly fee to a school for so-called public education. So the child and family really dont get much of that stated 15000, the teaching and building industries may see some of it.... No Abbott shouldnt have apologized. 2000 to celebrate a Australian birth is how he should have stated it. I mean if Gillard is going to spout 15000, I reckon most of her voters would say give me the 15000 then and I will work out how to educate my child, buy a computor and some books maybe, do a sport. I reckon she, Gillard, would be tripping over herself with that sort of suggestion. She should have let the celebration of a life be, and keep the baby bonus. At least she would have a lot more people to be paying the taxes her and her party forsee needing as normal to society.

I have been to three nations recently. Singapore which is small and no own natural resource is desperate about more babies. Government is begging educated women to have at least 3 babies. However it can afford to have more because of their wealth. China which is vast and over populated have penalized the women who have more than one. Australia has universal health care and used to have baby bonus. Interestingly, resource rich and vast continent Australia has become anti-babies nation like China.

Contrast to Australia and China, Singapore is relying more on their babies for their old and sick days. The problem of China is not enough young people for supporting Greying people. They have more funding for their industries thanks to less babies policy. Manufacturing babies needed to be adjusted with national saving and economic strength.

Unlike Singapore and China, Australia is less dependent on human resources. The question is how long will their natural resources last! If there is no more on one day, it is too late for them to sustaing their economic growth.

For someone who's been known for sowing his wild oats it's possible that he hadn't got an extra cot therefore spreading his oats somewhere.

I have to correct the considerable errors above.

Firstly, there is still a baby bonus! For the first child this is $5000. For subsequent children this has now been reduced from $5000 to $3000 - that's the only change. It's not Income tested or Means tested. That is definitely not 'anti-babies'!

Illsayit, it really concerns me that you'll presumably vote when you're so poorly informed. The Schoolkids Bonus has nothing at all to do with teachers and buildings. It's actual money given to parents each year they have a child at school to help pay for uniforms, books and other expenses incurred. In Primary school, they receive $410 per year per child and for each Secondary child they receive a total of $820 each year. Add this up and you get to a figure more than that quoted by Julia Gillard - that was a 'ballpark' figure.

... I should have added she was working it out for the school life of two children, to show a reduction of $2000 was hardly likely to deter families from having more children.

Interestingly, resource rich and vast continent Australia has become anti-babies nation like China.

It isn't interesting, its a proven social phenomena. The more educated and self sufficiant a woman is, the less child she's likely to have. I can only figure that this is because she fears for her career and knows that she won't be treated equally in society that caters to men and their needs. If governments want more kids, make pay equal for the job regardless of gender, and stop companies that dock women for taking some time off to have kids. Men, get in their and do YOUR fair share of the housework and child rearing. Women do a hell of a lot more than men do when it comes to those with kids. Women are fed up with it and not reproducing because of this. You want kids? Men, step up.

As for a baby bonus, really? Why? Isn't education and health care enough?

She just find another excuse for her competent performance. If Tony Abbott does not say sorry and then she will accuse and misuse misogyny to Tony. Julia Gillard is worst Prime Minister of Australia. I don't mind if she accuse me misogyny. Call election Juliar.

@maisie-I wasnt referring to Schoolkids Bonus, and I didnt think Gillard was either. She just pulled a number from the air, or from their books, she never referred to the Schoolkids Bonus. So I wonder why I havent been receiving any of that schoolkid bonus then.

I agree that the Bonus for babies being reduced is not that it equals a total cut. So maisie what are the costs for delivery? What are the costs if you want a choice in what sort of delivery you want? I'm pretty certain that that bonus will mostly end up in the medical department, despite that people want to say an extra crib or pram angle means that a reduction in cost is obviously an area where costs can be reduced. SO maybe the regulations on and costs for birth choices need to be taken notice of. Then again things may have changed from when I was last pricing that? The last I was pricing that costs for a natural styled birth, were way beyond the average public ward going rate(where you will, especially if you are a first time Mum, be submitted to guinea pig treatment without warning, which I note is also not encouraging of having children).