Subsidies create economic inefficiencies. Very rarely this can be justified, for instance to mask high unemployment, or to preserve a traditional landscape.
However a subsidy on childcare is very extensive in scope, and will effectively force women into employment and children into substandard care

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

As a woman I agree that there should be no discrimination - equal pay for equal work and experience. I decided not to have children but to follow my career. If others decide otherwise that is their choce but it is not equality if they are given preference or additional benefits over the rest of us

Gill, London,

This isn't a sexist problem at all. The father could always stay at home and the woman goes to work. It rarely happens because women find it much harder as they are genetically 'programmed' to be the principle child raiser. Families even take a cut in pay because she wants to be the one at home.

Anthony, Brum,

Extra legal responsibilities should reduce your worth to a rational employer. Where is the evidence that the inequality is caused by sexism/racism and not outlook or choices? I guess that will be decided on a per case basis at huge expense. What a waste of our country's resources.

larry, manchester,

Janice:
So the pledge "will swing the heart of every woman voter"?
"Women" and "mothers" are not synonymous.
Not all women have children.
Still, wouldn't like to stand in the way of you grabbing something else for yourself.

Barbara, Crewe, UK

An interesting article. However, the vast majority of women do not work for Meryll Lynch etc. They work in call centres, shops, local government, banks and building societies, in small offices etc. They cannot afford a nanny their wages won't run to it. Typical muddled Labour thinking.

Markham, Huddersfield, UK

The reason this country is rapidly going down the pan is partly due to the continued practice of NOT employing a candidate on ability.
The government and local councils are full of quota meeting employees who aren't as capable of doing the job as well as a non quota but better qualified white man.

Simon, Chelmsford,

Well Janice, that's telling you!

Robert Allen, London, UK

Piffle throughout- a blatantly self-interested attempt to get uinding for her choices. Women with children are a pain at work; they squander training and employers' money in time off and maternity leave, which often becmes permanent. They need to choose between motherhood and job.

Jan thomas, Nottingham, England

I cannot think of a single reason why any white working class or lower middle class white man would ever vote Labour again. The only party to give their interests any priority is the BNP. Why should they care about being called racist if they are the only group it is legal to discriminate against?

Alan Trent, London, UK

Peter, Redditch: why have you jumped on my comment? I simply said that better childcare for all would enable more women to rejoin the workforce. I'd be delighted to be a mother, whether of male or female children, and hope I could tell them that they could progress on merit, no matter their gender.

Gabrielle, Oxford,

It's not a matter of "touchy white manhood", Janice. The government has clearly stated its intention of enforcing discrimination against white men. Where there is a choice, anyone else will be preferred. Sorry, but that is still discrimination - just in the opposite direction.

Tom Welsh, Basingstoke,

Or allow the non working spouse to transfer the tax allowence to the working partner
The natural parents are always the better option for looking after the development of their own children.

Bringing a child up to be a valuable and level headed part of society is key

John Smith, N Yorks,

Dear Gabrielle of Oxford :
When or if you become a mother of white boys. Tell them, "Sorry, you are not going to progress,some one else must be given preference."
They will love you for it.
Having worked in dull repetitive,low paid work I never found anyone eager to jump in my shoes.

Peter Bolt, Redditch, UK

Women also carry the burden of 'caring', something else that isn't taken into account when Gordon Brown and his ignorant buddies push their theory that part-time workers are just lazy and not having to accomodate huge amounts of unpaid work that the state would be doing if part-timers didn't.

judy, Liverpool, England

I could be forgiven for believing today was world equality day, Harriet Harman wheeled out her positive discrimination strategy allowing employers to choose woman, ethnic or old candidates to get preference for a position if their abilities were equal to a white male candidate (Thought this was already Law) how come none of these needed to climb on her roof to get their say? Can’t a fathers have equality in parenting in these enlighten times

Dave Farmer, Broxbourne, England

In so far as there is a gender a pay gap it usually works in favour of women who are fast-tracked to promotion over equally well-qualified male colleagues. But then that doesn't make good feminist propaganda, does it?

Paul, Coventry,

The problem with the equality clause is that some women in the workplace are disadvantaged by time out for child rearing. But plenty are not. By treating women as a group rather than individuals, the clause will help those who don't deserve the help as well as those who do.

Andrew, london, uk

So a sexist sneer at white men is 'hilarious' is it? (Gabrielle, Oxford) - try that sort of generalisation about women, blacks, gays or any other *fashionable* minority and see where it gets you!

Roger Angove, Truro, Cornwall, UK

This appears to be the final nail in the coffin for highly skilled and experienced White Men in Their Own Country. Since the seventies, they have been disenfranchised by spotty youths with shiny new degrees, in addittion to the unseen members of secret societies, now women and immigrants too!

Clive Burghard, LANCING, ENGLAND

Brilliant! The phrase "grand high order of touchy white manhood" is hilarious and apt. Oh, and look - they seem to have come out of the woodwork already, spewing unhelpful inflective and inflammatory vitriol.

It's a million times more manly and brave to be able to have a constructive discussion.

Gabrielle, Oxford,

Maybe some women can't bear to deal with the nastiness in the workplace created by the the sort of reactionary male troglodytes who still dominate many professional spheres. Imagine facing Mikey Finn, M. Wilson and Steve S daily - is it worth it? Ooh, are the little boys feeling threatened?

Shirley, London,

"isn't this happening already?"

Yes it is. And the sexist racist Labour government want more of it which is why they are putting it into law.

It's now official - white men in the UK are second class citizens.

That's why BNP hammered Labour in the recent by election & will do so again.. and again.

Roger Angove, Truro, Cornwall, UK

Women should be paid the same as men if doing the same job and should employers refuse then pass a law to make it so. But spare us Harriet's Equality Bill and the huge bureaucracy it will spawn.

Simon Marshland, Bath, UK

For candidates to be truly equal, they would need to have identical experience and qualifications. Anything else is purely subjective and the employer knows better than Harman what attributes they are looking for. This proposal has not been properly thought through and is unworkable in practice.

Melchet, Edinburgh, UK

Why is "having it all" never applied to working fathers? It takes all sorts in this world - some women are happier and better-suited to the boardroom and others prefer childcare. The latter are not enslaved - certainly not at the rates paid to London nannies.

L Morgan, London, UK

Great article - the decision to have children is generally a joint one, but the female partner is biologically obliged to give birth and all the career disruption that entails. Better childcare could get capable women back to work - but I think it needs to be childcare for all, not just the rich!

Gabrielle, Oxford,

The next thing this 'government' will be legislating is who can use the loo first in the morning. Or who does the hoovering. Or who reads the kids the good-night story. Or who takes the dog out. Or who butters the bread. Gawd help us.

john problem, winchester, uk

It is very helpful of you to publish a picture of the munching John Prescott daily, it serves to remind every reader what sort of persons we have leading this great country of ours.

We conservatives think you are doing a splendid job, and hope, may it continue. Thank you....
Bernard

Bernard Olley, Leicester, England

Typical feminist, playing the victim. You obviously don't have the insight into your own personality to realise that people who play the victim are people are people who blame others for their mistakes and don't take responsiblity for their own actions. Leaders not blamers are hired by corporates.

Robin, London,

It also means enslaving the 30 percent of the female population who don't have 'career level' abilities, to look after the off-spring off the pushy middle class girls.

Somebody will always end up feeding the washing machine, when children are involved. In truth, childlessness will boom in future.

J H Holloway, London,

Janice, why does the world have to revolve around you and the other women who want to have it all?

If you want to compete in the world of work, then that’s fine but don’t whinge about the rules when they don’t suit you. Companies can’t be held to ransom by women who come and go as they please.

Steve S, Wiltshire, UK

If you break the natural human social order on the basis of a non-meritocratic, and largely sophistic, pretence of "gender equality", then you have the responsibility to continue patching up society's subsequent problems till it inevitably collapses.

Isn't modern feminism fun.

Johana, Boston, Mass, USA

How dare you even utter the word equality?
You're just a grasping harridan out to line your pockets. Equality would mean NOT automatically giving female parents custody.
Why don't you make a stand for that you greedy old woman.
your version of equality is only ever about the money...

Mikey Finn, London, UK

If you want to have children you should be prepared to pay for them; all of it. What arrogance for a woman to demand other people to pay for their education, family allowance etc.
The world is vastly overpopulated and we could take a break of 5 years at least from any more.

M Wilson, Bidache, france

Um, no it won't "swing the heart if every woman voter". Not by a long chalk.

Why is a small group of priviliged parents so self-regarding as to suggest that the rest of us will cheer if they get to have their cake and eat it too? Benefits of kids but no trade-offs.

Vicky, Germany,