Page 968 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 25 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
employment test. A paid parental scheme would improve child and maternal health and welfare as families have more time together, improve employment rates of women as working arrangements are more conducive to having a family and relieve some of the financial strain felt by new families. However, there are some concerns that still need to be addressed.
Some businesses that already have paid parental leave have indicated that they may cancel their schemes and replace them with the federal government’s scheme, which pays all eligible parents the minimum wage regardless of their income. This has the potential to save a company money while employees go backwards. Many small businesses have also indicated that providing access to paid parental leave for all families will lead to higher costs for them as temporary staff need to be recruited and trained. This needs to be considered in any of the final recommendations by the Productivity Commission and in any actions by government. Whatever scheme is introduced, we must ensure the outcome is the best possible for families and that there are no adverse effects on small business.
The Productivity Commission report also stated that those not working and, therefore, not eligible for paid parental leave, would receive the baby bonus. However, the difference in pay between the proposed paid parental leave scheme and the baby bonus is nearly $5,000. We believe that regardless of whether a parent is working in the home or working outside the home, they deserve the same treatment. A paid parental scheme should not create two classes of parents, and I think this is a very important point.
It may be indicative of the ACT Labor Party’s position on this point, that we have the Minister for Industrial Relations speaking to this issue rather than the Minister for Women. This cannot be looked at simply as a workforce issue. If it is going to be government funded, if the government is going to fund paid parental leave, then we do not believe there should be discrimination between women who work at home and women who work outside the home. We believe there should be parity there. I think that is a reasonable principle.
We have not heard from the minister on this, and maybe when he closes he can give an indication of what the ACT Labor Party believes on this, but the fact that the industrial relations minister, rather than the Minister for Women, is speaking to this issue does cause us some concern. It is not strictly an industrial relations issue. In fact, during the election campaign when this issue came up, it was the Minister for Women, Katy Gallagher, who actually spoke on the government’s behalf. So we hope there has not been a change in emphasis.
Our position, though, is clear: we believe a paid parental scheme is something that is worth pursuing. We believe there are issues to be ironed out, and particularly how it interacts with small business. We do not want to see a scheme whereby women who are not in the paid workforce when they have children are discriminated against and are disadvantaged by the scheme. We do not believe that is a reasonable outcome, and it is not something we support.
Currently women participate in the workforce at rates higher than at any other time in Australia’s history. According to the Productivity Commission’s report, during the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .