Headline in Australia's "The Australian" newspaper
Anyone care to comment?

NO CONTRACEPTION ,NO DOLE
IF a person’s sole source of income is the taxpayer, the person, as a condition of benefit, must have contraception. No contraception, no benefit.

This is not an affront to single mothers or absent fathers, or struggling parents. Such a measure will undoubtedly affect strugglers, it undoubtedly will affect Aboriginal and Islander people in great proportions, but the idea that someone can have the taxpayer, as of right, fund the choice to have a child is repugnant.

Large families of earlier generations were the result of the combination of absent contraception and the need to have many children, in order that some survive to care for parents in old age.

These conditions do not now apply. Infant mortality is minuscule in all sectors of society, and the taxpayer picks up the tab for aged care.

Therefore, there should be no taxpayer inducement to have children. Potential parents of poor means, poor skills or bad character will choose to have children. So be it. But no one should enter parenthood while on a benefit.

It is better to avoid having children until such time as parents can afford them. No amount of ‘‘intervention’’ after the fact can make up for the strife that many parents bring down on their ­children.

Opinion piece in "The Australian" by a former labour mp who lost his seat in 1996.

As Australia's population is only 23 million and of that the indigenous population is expected to increase to just over 700,000 by 2021, it all seems a bit trivial as in comparison ,our population is treble that at 63 million.

Maybe it's a warning to all the anticipated influx of asylum seekers and refugees.

good on them should bloody start it here

Something needs to be done.Its getting well out of control.

Disgraceful.

Please read it again!! The reference is to the Aboriginal people and is the opinion of one person.Is Australia the new South Africa??I hope not.

Imust have missed where it says it ONLY applies to Aboriginal people . There may be more of them that it applies to, but where does it say that it wouldnt be across the board?

I don't think it applies to aboriginal people only, they seem to imply that the aborigines will be hit harder due to their reliance on the state for their income.

Yes thats exactly how I interpreted it Bobario .
Whether fair, mad, unjust or otherwise, it will never get off the ground for the simple reason theres no way it could be realistically administered or policed .

Accept my apologies, I thought you had read the full article and my comment was based on that.
"The Australian" newspaper columnist and former labour part mp Gary John writes "Some families, some communities and some cultures breed strife, the idea that someone can have the tax payer as of right fund the choice to have a child is re pungent".
In a column titled "no contraception no dole" John singles out a Sydney Aboriginal family and the recent tragedy in Cairns involving a Torres Strait Islander family (indigenous family)-to push his case.
Paddy Gibson a researcher with Jummburra indigenous house of learning says "There is no confusion in the article about who John is mainly referring to for his proposed solution.

And who is going to oversee the usage if said precautions? It is utterly ridiculous and unworkable. No wonder he lost his parliamentary seat.