One of my favourite politicians is Senator Amanda Vanstone, who was the Employment Minister during the 1990s when unemployment hit 10% plus. Vanstone’s ‘take’ on why it took so long to beat this jobless problem is great to explain how economies can take a long time to recover and create jobs. For now, however, I want to focus on her recently floated idea to beat something else — deadbeat dads who don’t cough up for their left-behind kids!

In an opinion piece for the Canberra Times today, Vanstone has some strategies to make sure those fathers who get up and go and avoid their financial obligations get to face a better penalty system based on hitting them with a debt that they have to make payments on!

If you disagree with her, in principle, this is what she’d argue: “If you say no, you’re agreeing with what we say now. Here it is in plain English. You can create babies, pay a minimal amount in financial support, show no interest or care, you can keep doing it time and time again and don't worry about you’re overworked zipper because people who work hard and look after their kids will pay for your indifference”.

Let me sum up Amanda’s let “market forces” fix the deadbeat dad problem below:

1. No more bits and pieces payments from just welfare and the father’s pay packet, which can oscillate because of numerous factors.
2. The deadbeat dad debt will be for life!
3. Welfare works on what the taxpayer can afford to make a deserted family’s life fair, but a debt obligation could mean a significant regular repayment that gives the affected family a decent life.
4. Young men will need to be taught that a night of unprotected sex/fun could mean a life of financial slugs that you can’t run away from, like a debt to a bank.
5. Vanstone sums it up this way: “This is what we've decided is a fair contribution from a father and over time you will have to pay up. In effect, we'd operate as the fair debt collector for the mother.”

The impact of new, innovative and controversial system would mean a change of thinking for men and Amanda explains it this way: “So then instead of ‘I can impregnate you, change your life and walk away scot-free’, he’d be thinking: ‘She can dob me in and I'm stuck with costs for years and years to come’.”

Vanstone wants long-term consequences on what can be ‘the quick moment’ for some men and she insists young men in particular would have a different attitude. “She might be left holding the baby, but he'll be left with a lot of bills, for life,” the former trailblazing female politician argues.

Of course, many would argue that the debt could cease when the kids leave school and start work but over those young years when families struggle, there’s a lot of merit in her “market forces” solution.

Arguably it could operate like the fines system for deadbeat drivers and billpayers, so we could see a lot more action in court and more blokes in the clink!

However, Amanda is addressing a big social problem where mothers who are left holding the baby get left with abject economic circumstances and inequitable social crisis that often not only ruins the lives of the deserted family members but can create criminal and mental health issues for the community.

I wonder if there’s a politician or party that would seriously look at how this deadbeat dad debt debacle can be sensibly and fairly resolved.