Justine Keay (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the legislation before the House, the Fair Work Amendment (Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2018. It is quite disappointing though that it does not go far enough. It's heartening to hear my colleagues on this side of the House talk about the reasons why this piece of legislation doesn't go far enough to support those victims of domestic violence who, as we know, are predominantly women, predominantly on lower incomes, who do need paid leave of at least 10 days to ensure they can do what they need to do to make their lives better not just for themselves but for the children they may have in their care.

We know the facts of domestic violence in this country and we know how shocking it is. We know that every single week in this country at least one woman is killed by a partner or a family member as a result of domestic violence. It is a national crisis. This government has been slow to act on this. When you have around 800,000 women in this country experiencing violence at home this year, it is quite shameful that this government is not taking this matter seriously in supporting the victims of family violence.

This piece of legislation was introduced on 13 September. It has taken until now, December, to debate it. This legislation was on the books to debate all last week, with one member of the government speaking on it. It saddens me that that is the case with this parliament on such an important issue. The minister at the time said that they would introduce legislation as soon as possible to extend the same entitlements that other workers have to access family and domestic violence leave. That was in March this year. We're now at the end of the year, in the last sitting week, and we're just getting around to debating this. Hopefully, we'll have this debated today.

Labor recognises how hard it is for victims of domestic and familial violence to leave a relationship. It's heartening to hear people on this side, my colleagues, express their understanding of this issue and what we will do to support those people that are experiencing domestic violence with 10 days paid leave. We know how long it can take for victims and their children to recover from domestic violence. There are sacrifices and challenges for surviving family members. Meeting with police, lawyers, real estate agents, schools and doctors all takes time. All those services are available during the work day. Counsellors, schools and childcare centres all operate within business hours. It takes hours upon hours to find somewhere new to live, pack up belongings, move to a new house, find a new school or childcare arrangements, and talk to children's support groups, doctors, counsellors and teachers. That all takes time, and that all happens during a work day. Changing bank accounts and other financial arrangements, appointments with Centrelink to apply for or change personal benefits, meetings with police and lawyers to apply for protection orders and, of course, attending court hearings all take place during working hours. The victim has to take time off work to do these things to keep themselves and their family safe. They should be able to count on continuing to receive an income and being able to go back to work. To escape a violent relationship, victims have to take that time off work. There is absolutely no other way around it.

The Senate did an inquiry into this legislation, and one of the bodies giving evidence was the Australian Human Rights Commission. The government senators' report mentions the interaction with work. The report says:

Financial security can be a critical determinant of victims' ability to escape violent and abusive relationships. Employment improves affected workers' ability to remove themselves and their children from abusive family relationships and maintain, as far as possible, a decent standard of living.

So my question is: why should a victim of family violence be financially impacted because they are a victim of family violence? Why is that the case? It's pleasing that so many businesses in this country are supporting what Labor will do if elected, providing 10 days of paid leave, because they understand that a victim of family violence should not be financially disadvantaged because of what they have to go through.

We know that the most dangerous time for a woman, or any victim of family violence, is when she or he is leaving a violent relationship. Without paid leave, victims simply don't have time or resources to find a new safe place to live. We on this side see and understand how difficult it is, and we understand the costs: removalists, new utility connections, new phone lines, lawyers, rental property bond plus rent paid in advance, court costs, child care, counselling, and new house set-up with appliances, food and furniture. Family violence victims are telling us what they need, and Labor is listening to what they need. To leave, they need 10 days of paid leave.

In my electorate of Braddon, family violence is, sadly, very prevalent. I come from a place where multigenerational family violence has been happening for decades and is still happening today. Victims have less opportunity to escape. Traditionally, we just haven't had the services available. We don't have enough lawyers. Many of our residents are isolated, with less public transport. They are in regional spaces where many just aren't aware of services and options. As a result, family and domestic violence in regional areas like Tasmania's north-west is highly complex and will often take the victims a lot longer to process. With limited services and long waiting lists, the trauma increases and is compounded. Clients of organisations like the Burnie office of Women's Legal Service Tasmania often require numerous appointments with a counsellor before enough trust is built so they can feel safe enough to share their experiences. These clients often have to travel a long way just to sit down with someone for an hour to talk about their domestic violence experiences.

I would like to at this point pay tribute to the departing CEO of the Women's Legal Service, Susan Fahey, for the amazing work that she has been doing in this space for about 16 years in the Women's Legal Service and her strong advocacy on issues like this. I wish her all the best in what happens for her in the new year.

The people who come to services like the Women's Legal Service come from all walks of life. They come from all sectors across the workforce in my electorate, whether it be mining, forestry, dairy or tourism. They are people who are suffering significant trauma, shame and fear and are dealing with the enormous stigma that is still attached to these experiences. In situations of domestic and family violence, a child's safe place should be their school; for adults, it should be and is their place of employment. Adults may feel that they have nobody else in their life whom they can trust enough to disclose their situation to. For many victims, their workplace is their only support mechanism. Their work colleagues, and sometimes their employer, may be their only support in these situations.

Among the claims as to why the government is not putting forward paid leave is the impact on small business. But I doubt whether there would be very many employers who would not want to value their staff and support them in any way possible—and giving them paid leave is the best way to do that. They come to work sometimes after being up all night, not only because of being terrified and terrorised by an abusive or drunken partner but also because of dealing with children who are frightened and confused. They come to work to feel safe, but often their capacity to do the job is impacted: they become unreliable in getting to work, or they start making mistakes at work. A national employment standard that offers a victim five days of unpaid leave is inherently cruel and is moving well behind the pace that is currently being set by many employers on this issue. It is not safe, it is not supportive, and it is using a system as a means to perpetuate the violence. The minute an employer says, 'Here are your five days of unpaid leave to attend court,' they are penalising the victim. This legislation will make it even harder on domestic violence victims, and easier on domestic violence perpetrators. It will impact on the organisational climate, and on an employee's sense of wellbeing in their workplace. It lacks compassion and it lacks understanding across the entire community. What this government is offering is a belated effort and, frankly, it's completely inadequate.

The Minister for Women has said:

People do have access to personal and carers leave … people do have the ability to take unpaid leave …

Under this government, that's the price you pay for being a victim of family violence. The former Minister for Women is on the record as saying that domestic violence leave would be a 'perverse disincentive' to employ female workers. I mean, that's just ridiculous. What happens with the extra six million predominantly women workers that this leave will cover? Does it mean that they're not going to be employed, because they are going to take unpaid leave? Those extra six million workers will be covered, regardless, under this new legislation. But how many are likely to come forward and seek the support required from their employer if their employer makes the process difficult for them to come forward at all? They are faced with choosing between getting help or toughing it out and paying the bills.

There was a dissenting report put forward with the Senate report on this issue. Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia gave evidence that one in four Australian households possess less than $1,000 in cash savings, whilst people suffering from family and domestic violence suffer a 25 per cent loss of income associated with abuse. Victims are therefore more likely to experience food insecurity, struggle to find affordable housing, and are less likely to be able to cover the basic essentials like utility bills. Rape and Domestic Violence Services Australia stated—and this is in the report—that paid leave is essential in achieving safety for victims. But what is this government doing by not giving that leave to over six million Australian workers? Workers should not be forced to choose between an income and safety. I think that's the crux of what we're talking about here today.

We should also acknowledge the work that we've been doing on this side of the House. The government seem to think that the only option for a victim of family violence is to leave the home, and that, under this government, they have the right to access superannuation early. This is a cost to that person, which may be helpful in the short term but in the long term is a cost, because that money will no longer be there for them in retirement. But if they had paid leave, they wouldn't necessarily have to dip into their superannuation. We know that the victims of family violence are predominantly women and that they have less money in their superannuation funds, but that's the option which the government have put forward. They also put forward an increase in Good Shepherd Microfinance under the No Interest Loan Scheme, which, again, is a good incentive for people who need to maybe buy a new fridge.

But there is this perverse understanding that all victims of family violence must leave the home. Therefore, most victims of family violence are women, they have low and less income, and they're going to go into debt for a considerable period of time to pay off this loan because they need to leave the home.

On the other hand, while Labor are supportive of these measures, they certainly do not address the issue that not all victims of family violence should leave the home and should be financially worse off for doing so. I'm really pleased that Labor will not only invest $18 million over three years to ensure that Keeping Women Safe In Their Home continues after the government had confirmed it was cutting funding to the program—this is a program to keep victims of family violence in their homes—but also commit to a new 10-year plan for reducing violence against women and their children. I think this is important to note, because the government doesn't seem to really understand that it's also important for women and victims of family violence to feel safe in their homes. This program will provide practical help for women and children in their homes, allowing them to live safely away from perpetrators, through expert safety assessments and safety planning; home safety upgrades and devices such as new locks, alarms, cameras and safety phones; screening for bugs to ensure privacy; and supporting women in enforcing apprehended violence orders.

Everyone deserves to feel safe in their home. Women should not have to choose between their homes and their safety, and neither should their children. This is something that the government seems to not take any notice of—that women who are on less income and less superannuation under the policies they've put forward would be financially worse off. They would not be supported to stay at home. They would not be supported to earn an income whilst they're dealing with matters to address the violence they have been subject to.

Safety shouldn't be conditional on where you work. We on this side recognise and acknowledge those employers already offering the support of paid leave to their employees—employers like Houston's Farm in Tasmania, the first privately-owned business in the state to offer paid leave to employees affected by domestic and family violence. In Tasmania, around 50 cases of domestic violence are reported each week. Houston's Farm recognises that, as an employer of over 200 workers, they too share a responsibility to recognise and respond to these issues. Paid leave is offered to both the victims of domestic violence and those who are accused of perpetrating it, and this is paid leave that Labor supports fully. Perpetrators need to access the same paid leave as victims. This needs to be available to everyone, irrespective of gender identification or who is experiencing domestic or family violence. They need to get help; they need money to do that, and only those on this side of the House will acknowledge that support and provide it, if we are fortunate enough to form government next year.

See this speech in context