Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I second the motion. I'm very pleased to support this motion. There are significant financial and social obstacles that still face women in Australia. In our society too often women are treated with disdain and complete disregard. The statistics of rape, domestic violence and sexual abuse point to just that. The death of 22-year-old Eurydice Dixon in Melbourne is a tragic reminder of just how quickly women's lives can be taken. It was because she chose to walk home, which should be a right, not a death sentence. Thirty-eight per cent of women between the ages of 18 and 24 report that they have been sexually harassed in the past year, according to the Bureau of Statistics. Our economy and tax system too often treat women with total disdain and disregard. Women retire with 53 per cent of the superannuation that men do. Women earn about 17 per cent less than men do. That data is one of the reasons why women are more likely than men to experience poverty and homelessness.

This government has done little to improve the lot of women. Since being in government, the Liberals have tried to cut paid parental leave, calling working mums rorters and double dippers. Their childcare policy creates losers at either end of the financial spectrum. They've cut penalty rates and cut community legal centres, all of which disproportionately impacts women. They've cut almost $2 billion worth of pay rises and support for workers in feminised industries such as early childhood education and disability care. They failed to reinstate the women's budget impact statement, which was canned by self-proclaimed feminist and former Minister for Women Tony Abbott. And now we have them unwilling to budge on the simplest of measures to bring a modicum of equity to every menstruating woman.

Women are now in the unenviable position of having to rely on the benevolence of a Liberal government still, unsurprisingly, predominantly filled with men to change the rules. Really, I should say 'increasingly' filled by men, as they allow men to push women out of held positions. We rely on these men to decide whether our pads and our tampons are necessary items or not. A classification of 'necessary' is already bestowed upon condoms and things like Viagra. Only a bunch of blokes would let it get to this point. You really have to wonder what their definition of 'necessary' is if it doesn't apply to tampons or pads.

I'd like to remind everyone in the room that we have to buy these items every month for as long as we have our periods. Menstruation is not a choice. It's part of a woman's reproductive health. While there is a policy in place that deems Viagra more necessary than pads and tampons, the message being sent to women and men is that man's ability to have sex is more important than a women's access to basic hygiene.

To those who believe that removing the tax is tokenistic and won't make a real economic difference to the lives of women, I want to share with you what I was told recently by a young woman who had to count every penny while she was at university. She told me that she and a group of friends worked out that it was slightly cheaper to go on the pill and skip periods as often as they could than buying sanitary items on a monthly basis. This is the sort of calculation that young women trying to make ends meet have done. So, on economic grounds, for women who are students, who are among the working poor, who are unemployed, who are homeless, who are carers—for any woman who is doing it tough financially—the cost can be a factor in the decisions they make about their reproductive health.

I say to all the gentlemen in the room, and I note that there are but a few on the other side: these things aren't cheap; they definitely aren't a choice; and the women of Australia would be better served by you as their representatives if you were to stand aside for once, stop the garbage arguments, axe the tax and let us get on with it—and support this motion.

Those opposite should not continue to treat this matter with disdain and disregard. These are important issues not just to women but to people who care about women. This government, despite the lack of women in its cabinet and even in the house at large, has an opportunity to take one simple step in the right direction for women. We say, 'Take the glory—we don't care. Just do it: axe the tax.'

See this speech in context