Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of a critical Labor reform—paid parental leave—and namely the second phase of the Albanese Labor government's reforms in this space—the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (More Support for Working Families) Bill 2023. Last year, the Albanese Labor government passed the first phase of our paid parental leave reforms with the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Improvements for Families and Gender Equality) Bill 2022. Upon its implementation, it was not just foreshadowed; it formed part of a key commitment made by this government as part of the 2022-23 budget.

Policies like this, big reforms, are in Labor's DNA. They echo through our history with initiatives like Medicare, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and the National Disability Insurance Scheme and with, most notably, the introduction of paid parental leave in 2011 under the Gillard Labor government. In 2011, the introduction of Australia's first paid parental leave scheme marked a significant milestone in our history, demonstrating our dedication to supporting working families. Prior to this, many families were unable to access any form of paid parental leave whatsoever. However, as societal needs develop and evolve, even some of the great reforms must adapt and keep pace with them.

This bill doesn't just expand on the Albanese Labor government's recent reforms of paid parental leave; it continues to build on the legacy of the Gillard government's initial vision. The current paid parental leave framework, groundbreaking at its introduction, now faces the challenge of meeting complex demands of modern family life.

I commend the work of my South Australian colleague the Minister for Social Services in building upon the policy legacy of her predecessor, Jenny Macklin, the former member for Jagajaga and the minister who introduced the Paid Parental Leave Bill 2010 in this place.

The bill's inclusive design recognises the diversity of modern Australian families, ensuring that all structures can be afforded the same level of support. As it was at the inception of paid parental leave, it is imperative that a mechanism exists to support working families across Australia as they grapple with the difficult choices in trying to balance careers and parenthood. This policy has benefited many parents and their children since 2011, with real and lasting positive impacts. In the past financial year alone, in my electorate of Spence nearly 1,200 people accessed paid parental leave and, roughly, another 800 accessed dad and partner pay. Just in 2022 alone, Spence had the joyous occasions of welcoming roughly 3,700 newborns into the electorate. The new measures in this bill would have made a material difference to the parents of Spence's newest arrivals in 2022, but I'm sure many of them share the same outlook as myself and the member for Boothby—we are thankful that Labor governments have come along to make paid parental leave more accessible and equitable, despite not being able to enjoy those benefits ourselves.

We are, like all members on this side of the House, proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government, that is putting families first, putting babies first and, by both circumstance and design, improving outcomes in gender equality and productivity whilst doing so. Unlike many in the opposition and the wider commentariat, we don't just throw the word 'productivity' around as a clarion call to slow or curtail any measures that come close to improving conditions for workers. We listen to the experts from all sides of the political spectrum and from all professional backgrounds. This was certainly the case with PPL, with our government working in recommendations by the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce, a taskforce brought into existence, as with many good things, from our government's Jobs and Skills Summit. This is taskforce which contains those who would ordinarily disagree with our side of politics. Many on the taskforce are extremely eminent women across their fields who would ordinarily disagree with each other on many subjects, but not this one. They know the difference that access to paid parental leave can make for women and for our economy. It's policy that makes a tangible difference to the lives of many young families who are experiencing the joys of introducing their newborns to the world and forming that close bond that only parents know all too well.

These reforms soon became so ingrained in our consciousness, it's difficult to remember a time prior to their introduction and implementation. But many parents can remember the days before paid parental leave, especially when they weren't fortunate enough to work for an employer with a scheme of their own in place. Being the parent of a newborn without access to either a government or employer based scheme is a lived experience that I had to share as a young parent of a newborn back in 2004. Back then, choices were fairly limited, unless somehow you had the financial capacity to take a period of unpaid leave. That's a luxury not many Australians had back then. I know that I sure didn't and, listening to a couple of the contributions made by other members earlier in this debate, it wasn't a luxury they were able to access either. Not having that luxury back then robbed many parents of time with their infants and, in many instances, of the opportunity for caring responsibilities to be shared more evenly. That's not to mention that it allows for those first weeks to include ones that are shared together as a family. These are precious formative experiences, not just for newborns but for parents, too. These are experiences that no parent should be forced to put a price tag on and a price that no society should force parents to have to factor in—whether they will be able to spend time with their child during some of their first moments on this earth.

Prior to the inception of paid parental leave, society indeed did put a price tag on these tender experiences for many parents, causing parents to contemplate the opportunity cost between their ability to earn a wage during the time they would otherwise spend with their newborn baby. Parents are stuck between the proverbial rock and hard place, caught between sharing moments together, sharing parental caring responsibilities as a young family, and having the ability to put food on the table. It's thanks to Labor governments past for introducing such a reform so that parents needn't face such an impossible choice in the future.

Today, we are building on this great Labor reform with this paid parental leave amendment bill. This bill is a step forward in supporting Australian families. It extends paid parental leave to 26 weeks—a considerable increase from where it stands currently. This change is methodically planned, adding two weeks each year from 2024 and reaching 26 weeks by July 2026. This bill is more than just legislative reform. It represents the Albanese Labor government's commitment to improve outcomes for working families across Australia, recognising that strong families form the bedrock of a prosperous society in whatever shape they might take. The extension of paid parental leave and the increase in reserved weeks for each parent are steps towards a more supportive and inclusive society. The bill will also increase the period of time reserved for each parent from two to four weeks on a 'use it or lose it' basis. It doubles the period where parents can access paid parental leave concurrently from two to four weeks.

This bill is about more than extending time off. It's about nurturing the Australian family unit. By increasing parental leave from 20 to 26 weeks, we're providing a stronger foundation for parents and newborns. This additional financial support allows families to focus on their children's early development without additional stresses and financial constraints. Importantly, this bill is a deliberate and strategic move towards improving on gender equality. By extending reserved periods and increasing concurrent leave, we are fostering an environment where both parents are actively involved in their children's upbringing. Investing in paid parental leave is about boosting the overall health and wellbeing of society. It recognises that strong, healthy families are essential to our nation's prosperity. The Albanese Labor government recognises the important contributions families make to our country at home and in the workforce. This is evidenced by the paid parental leave reforms that formed a key part of our first budget. Through this bill, our government will deliver a $1.2 billion investment across five years. This represents the largest investment into paid parental leave since the Gillard government introduced the scheme back in 2011.

In speaking of the history of paid parental leave, I would also like to touch on some remarks made on this bill by the member for Deakin last year and earlier in this debate. I hope that I can be forgiven for not having the historical context of this matter as I, unlike the member for Deakin, was not a member of this place when the Liberal Party was apparently the champion of women's rights. I may have missed that lesson in contemporary history. He talked about the coalition's paid parental leave policy that they took to the 2013 election which, as we all know, brought them into government and into this parliament, in the case of the member for Deakin. It marked the start of almost a decade of Liberal-National government. They were successful at not just the 2013 election but the 2016 election and the 2019 election—nearly an entire decade. The member for Deakin claims their policy on paid parental leave was intrinsically tied to their mandate to govern, yet here we are. It must be the fact that I wasn't here, but I am feeling a logical disconnect here amongst all of the whining, passive aggression and self-aggrandisement that oozed out of the member for Deakin's speech that day. He even called what we are doing now a 'huge hypocrisy'. How is it that the Liberal and National Party government across nine years and two elections put a policy up which never eventuated? They were after all in government. I don't think it was due to their sudden realisation that they needed to appear to be the trademarked responsible economic managers. No, I don't think so at all. It couldn't be down to the practical realities of passing legislation. That is, after all, what governments are meant to do even though they were a government that lost floor votes in this place in majority government. They couldn't put it past them.

This was a government that wore its priorities on its sleeves. They even went to a double dissolution election to fight for them. They did it over the antiworker, union-busting Registered Organisations Commission and the ABCC. Why wouldn't they have done the same over this policy? How can a majority government over three whole terms in office not manage to accomplish a legislative outcome that they paid good money to print pamphlets about? It's frankly a bit rich to hear those words coming from someone who was there at the coalface as it was happening. We know where the priorities of the former government were, and it sure wasn't on furthering the status of women, though the former government's first minister for women, Tony Abbott, may strongly disagree with me there. Quite possibly, that government's first Treasurer, Joe Hockey, might disagree with me there too—the very same Treasurer who, on Mothers Day, said it was 'basically fraud' for women to utilise both their employer's and the government's paid parental leave schemes. What a stellar record they had! I'm surprised the member for Deakin felt that those things should be omitted from his second reading amendment.

Nevertheless, despite the passive-aggressive road the member for Deakin has travelled on behalf of the opposition by way of his contribution to this debate, thankfully he reached a Damascene moment of clarity by the end of his contribution and announced that the opposition would be supporting this legislation. For that much I am glad. I'm glad that both sides of this place can reach a consensus that paid parental leave and the measures introduced in this bill are good policy with wideranging benefits for families and for our economy. I'm glad because we can join together with businesses, unions, economists and stakeholder groups alongside a vast array of academics who broadly agree that the measures being introduced by this bill will boost productivity whilst encouraging and increasing workforce participation. This policy has received support from stakeholders ranging from the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Industry Group all the way through to the ACTU.

This level of concurrence is no mean feat to accomplish at the best of times, but it speaks to the Albanese government's approach to consensus building and to the foundational good behind paid parental leave, which this bill builds upon. By coming together to pass the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (More Support for Working Families) Bill, we can start seeing the benefits as soon as 1 July this year and all the way through to 2026, when all periodic increases are to have been implemented. We can continue to build upon a great Labor reform, one that is already being utilised by over 180,000 families across Australia each year. This is legislation that shifts the dial towards assisting families whilst they spend the formative weeks with their newborns. Improving gender equality and workforce productivity isn't just a fair representation of the Albanese Labor government's commitment to supporting working families and bringing about a fairer, more equitable, more prosperous and more productive Australia; it is also the reason why this bill deserves our support. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context