Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, a young woman employed as a sales account manager on a salary of $55,000 will receive $9,788 for the 18 weeks spent on parental leave under Labor’s scheme, a reduction in her usual wages of nearly $10,000 for that period. Under the coalition’s plan, the same young woman will receive 26 weeks leave at her full salary, giving her an extra eight weeks at home with her new baby, no pay cut and no loss of superannuation. As the Prime Minister has refused to commit to a real paid parental leave scheme for Australia, can he explain why he is supporting big business over working families?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think working families are interested in a couple of things, one of which is to make sure that the work laws of this country are fair. They are interested to know whether they will still be paid penalty rates. They will be very interested to know whether they are still going to be protected from unfair dismissal. They are going to be very concerned about whether or not they are going to be forced onto new style AWAs. That is what working families are concerned about, because each and very one of those things means dollars in the pay packet and the ability to put food on the table.

The second thing they are concerned about is people being fair dinkum about what is going to be delivered to them. What we have said is that we are delivering not through a tax on business but through the government stepping up to the plate and providing the paid parental leave scheme that the government proudly announced during the course of last year. We have costed it; we have done the right things about it. It is in the forward estimates for us to deliver. It comes into operation in 2011. That is what normal policy development is about. That is what we have done, that is what we stand for, and it is $10,000 more than was ever, ever put on the table by those opposite. Those opposite duck and weave around this fundamental breach in their commitment about no new taxes. This morning we heard the member for Murray asked about this—‘Well, we don’t call it a tax; we call it “an investment in human capital”‘. Good old Barnaby Joyce, when asked the same question, said, ‘Um, certainly we have to acknowledge that this is a tax.’ Thank you, Barnaby. We got it nailed in one from Barnaby. Those opposite are squirming because they have sought to try and put forward a policy snapped out of thin air.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, a point of order on relevance: the Prime Minister was asked why he preferred big business, his mates, over working families.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Indi will resume her seat. The Prime Minister is responding to the question.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government is committed to some $731 million for Australia’s first comprehensive paid parental leave scheme from 1 January 2011—the first in this country’s history. Secondly, the scheme will cost approximately $260 million per annum and will not be imposed on business. Thirdly, the scheme will provide the primary carer with 18 weeks postnatal leave paid at the adult federal minimum wage, currently $543.78 per week, more than those opposite had ever proposed when they occupied the Treasury bench. This is a real commitment; it is not a Leader of the Opposition thought bubble which is plucked out of space on a Monday morning.

If those opposite were concerned about the question of paid parental leave, why is it that in their entire period of office Australia ended up as only one of two OECD countries not to have a comprehensive paid parental leave scheme? That is the legacy those opposite left Australians, that is the legacy those opposite left working families, and they now stand up here and pretend that this has been their concern all along. The Leader of the Opposition has been on the record a thousand times saying he never believed in it, then he changed, then he said he would bring it in but not tax people for it and now he is bringing it in and taxing people for it. Is it any wonder that people scratch their heads and wonder what will next come out of the mouth of the Leader of the Opposition as he simply makes one piece of policy up after another? The government’s commitment is real. It is $10,000 more than was offered by those opposite. The government stands by its policy.