Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Mackellar, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Seniors) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Paid Parental Leave and Other Legislation Amendment (Dad and Partner Pay and Other Measures) Bill 2012 and on the opposition amendment that proposes that, whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, we insert:

(1) notes that the Government's paid parental leave scheme is too short, does not provide superannuation and does not maintain the income of the majority of Australian mothers; and

(2) calls on the Government to immediately adopt the Coalition's better, fairer paid parental leave scheme.

In the first part of my speech, which was prior to question time, I was outlining the fact that women who return to the paid workforce and many women who delay having children or decide not to have children are very much impacted by whether there is adequate paid parental leave and whether there are adequate childcare arrangements. I spent some time outlining findings from the report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family and Human Services, of which I was the chair in 2006, entitled Balancing work and family. I outlined the importance of those two issues in women's contribution to the paid workforce, particularly outlining the fact that women will soon be a majority of those with tertiary university education. We cannot as a nation afford to waste that education. We do need them to be utilising those skills. Therefore, these two issues are of fundamental importance not only to them but also to the nation as a whole. In fact, if women withdrew from the workforce today, our economy would collapse. Therefore, the opposition thinks it is fair that we have a proper paid parental leave scheme of 26 weeks, at the existing wage of the person concerned, capped at $150,000 per year.

I now want to raise the matter of in-home care or nanny care, as some like to term it. I want to refer to the fact that as part of our policy, the Leader of the Opposition has said he would refer to the Productivity Commission the question of in-home care receiving the same childcare benefit that is paid in respect of people who put their children into institutional care called a childcare centre. I would simply say that there are very similar reasons to argue in favour of delivering in-home care—that is, services into the home—applying to child care as there are for applying it to aged care. As former Minister for Aged Care, I introduced thousands of community aged-care packages, allowing people to have care in their own home where they wanted to be. I believe it is equally fair that mothers should have that same choice with regard to their children, of having the care delivered in their own home. It has a double benefit. It is a less expensive way of delivering services if you build a specifically built institution called an aged-care facility or called a childcare centre. If you build an institution, you have to pay for the land, for the bricks and mortar and for the electricity, rates, taxes and everything else associated with running that, whereas if you deliver those services into the home, the land is already paid for, the bricks and mortar are already there and somebody else is already paying for the services to that building.

In our report, we recommended that in-home care, or nanny care, be categorised as approved care and thus attract payments extended to users of approved care where providers are registered with the Family Assistance Office. We further said that those people should have, or be at an advanced stage of attaining, a minimum certificate II qualification in child care or an equivalent recognition of prior learning, have a current working with children police record check and have current first aid certification. We believed it was important to have those. That is something that others may deliberate upon later.

The whole point of the report was to give mothers a choice and to overcome the difficulties of people who do not work the hours during which childcare centres operate. Even long-term day care does not take into account people who do night shifts, people who work at intermittent times or people who work a 12-hour shift. So we believe that the policy that the Leader of the Opposition has put forward, to refer this to the Productivity Commission to outline how this can be best achieved, is very sensible—just as we believe that our system of paid parental leave is far superior to the one that the government has put in place. That is why we moved this amendment. It will not deny a second reading but allows us to debate this important question and to put it on the record.

The point that we make very strongly is that ours is the only policy that would allow the government to live up to its rhetoric on paid parental leave. It provides paid parental leave and suitable arrangements so that mothers can nurture their own children, can make arrangements for their children that are satisfactory to them and their family situation and can return to the workforce, and it takes into account those women who can only progress in their careers by working full time. As I stressed, it is in the interests of mothers. They could nurture their children during the paid parental leave and then continue their careers knowing that the arrangements they had made for their children suited their family arrangements and were in the best interests of their children. I call upon the government to accept that ours is a superior recommendation and adopt this motion.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am proud to voice my support for the Paid Parental Leave and Other Legislation Amendment (Dad and Partner Pay and Other Measures) Bill 2012—proud because this bill builds on the historic government funded Paid Parental Leave scheme, the first of its kind in Australia, and proud because this very important social policy reform was introduced and delivered by a Labor government.

Last year's introduction of the scheme followed decades of debate about the merits and affordability of paying mothers to stay home to look after their newborn babies. The scheme gives eligible working parents up to 18 weeks leave at the national minimum wage of around $590 a week before tax. More importantly—and I think this is welcomed by a lot of parents—it gives parents the opportunity to stay home and bond with their newborn children at a stage in their development which is most critical.

In every respect, the Paid Parental Leave scheme was a revolution in Australia, but we had long lagged behind the rest of the developed world. Around 1,000 people living in the Chifley electorate have already benefited from the Paid Parental Leave scheme and. For women on low incomes or in casual or part-time work, this was the first time they had ever had access to this type of support. When parents decide to take time off work to look after a newborn child, they do not need the added burden of worrying about how to make ends meet. This scheme ensures that Australian families no longer have to make the difficult choice between spending time with their new baby and earning an income.

Today, in this bill, we build upon the Paid Parental Leave scheme. At the last election, we gave a commitment to give Australian dads and other eligible partners the chance to join mothers in having time off work. From 1 January 2013, dad and partner pay will give eligible fathers and partners, including adopting parents and parents in same-sex relationships, two weeks pay at the national minimum wage to support mums to care for their babies. This reflects our belief that bonding with a new child is just as important for dads and other carers as it is for mums.

Most fathers do take time off work when a child is born or comes into the home, but usually it is at their own expense and they do it by either taking leave without pay or dipping into annual leave. Fathers often feel pressured, though, as the primary breadwinners to stay at work and maintain an income at a time when the household income has fallen. Dad may be, for example, a casual employee without annual leave entitlements or a self-employed business owner—such workers have not been quite so fortunate in the past.

Dad and partner pay will make an enormous difference for thousands of Australian families. Payments to dads and other eligible partners will be available in addition to any employer funded paid leave. This is consistent with the recommendations made by the Productivity Commission. Just like paid parental leave, a work test and a residency requirement will apply, and dad and partner pay will have the same income test for eligibility. Eligible fathers and partners will be able to lodge claims for dad and partner pay from 1 October this year. Their eligibility will not rely on the mother having been in paid work before the birth of the child or adoption. That means they may claim dad and partner pay even if the mother is not claiming paid parental leave. I think that is a fantastic move. Where the mother is not claiming paid parental leave and the father is claiming dad and partner pay, the family may also be eligible for other family assistance payments such as the baby bonus and family tax benefit. Dad-and-partner pay cannot be transferred to the primary carer. So if you do not use it you lose it. This should encourage fathers and other partners to take more time off work and will signal to employers that a father's role in caring for a new baby is equally important. I am very supportive of this as I believe that in many instances, as I indicated earlier, there are pressures on new fathers from an income perspective. They wonder whether they have the time to be there at that critical point when a baby first comes home. Income should be less of an issue now for new dads and these measures should also ensure that there is an opportunity to bond with a new child at a very important time in a new family's life.

Where a family chooses the father or partner to be the primary carer of a new or adopted child, the balance of the paid parental leave can be transferred from the mother to the father or partner in addition to the dad-and-partner pay. However, they cannot claim more than the 18 weeks maximum leave. It is important in the modern age that the scheme be suitably flexible in providing families with choice about who should care for the child and who should return to work.

In bringing this bill before the parliament, I am confident that the dad-and-partner pay is fair for families and businesses alike. Employer and employee groups were consulted, along with family and community groups, in an effort to get the balance right. As is the case with paid parental leave, dad-and-partner pay is fully funded by the government and will not rely on a new tax on business to pay for it. Without a new impost on business, dad-and-partner pay will not drive up the price of groceries as would the scheme proposed by those opposite, if it were adopted.

In conclusion, I am very pleased about this bill—and I have spoken in great support of it—but I am also pleased with a number of measures that were announced this week in the budget that aim to assist families with their cost of living pressures. In particular, I am pleased with the Schoolkids Bonus and the changes to family tax benefit. I think these are enormously important. I am particularly mindful of how important these measures are to families in my neck of the woods, where 15,000 families will benefit from the Schoolkids Bonus and approximately 19,000 families will benefit from the family tax benefit changes.

Obviously, every one of the families trying to make ends meet will welcome the extra pay. On occasion, in discussion with people from the electorate I represent—the electorate of Chifley—I have heard of cases where young people leave school early under pressure to add to the family income. These families feel that without children working they will not have the ability to make ends meet. It is concerning to me that in this day and age and in this country, as wealthy as we are, those pressures still exist. Certainly, the measures that we are taking and the comprehensive nature of these changes—changes for children from birth through to their teenage years—are important, not only in terms of being able to help families sustain themselves, but also for kids in my neck of the woods who are leaving school early to help build family income. I worry about the longer-term impact that leaving school early has on families in terms of the pressures placed upon them. Children leaving school early deny themselves the opportunity of maximising their own personal bank of skills or growing that personal bank of skills and there are consequences to losing those years.

So these types of measures that we are talking about, which help family life—the paid parental leave scheme, the bill that is before us now and the types of measure that are being introduced—are making our country fundamentally better from the perspective of families. The measures make it easier for families to meet their day-to-day bills and to enjoy the experience along the way. And I am proud that we have seen these measures take hold. There is room for these measures to grow and for us to build upon them. I commend this legislation to the House.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The work we do in this place impacts on people's lives—often far more than we imagine at the time. This bill, the Paid Parental Leave (Dad and Partner and Other Measures) Bill 2012, is one such example. I want to start off by sharing with the House the story of a friend of mine, Damien Hickman, and how he felt about the two weeks leave that he took when his first child arrived. Liesel Grace Hickman arrived on 23 June last year. Damien said: 'I just did not want to be anywhere else. My whole world shrank to this tiny four-kilogram bundle and the three-hourly cycles.' He said: 'It was like nothing I had experienced or could have prepared for. I was placed under this spell. She was the ultimate timewaster. I would just stare at her and half an hour would go by like 30 seconds. To be there for my partner, look after the house and be there as an extra pair of hands and support was pretty special.'

Damien said: 'I wanted to be part of it all. I was Liesel's dad and I wanted to be with, and care for, my little girl. I can still remember how scared I was the first time I gave her a bath. I remember how she would fall asleep on my chest, so small her feet barely made it to my bellybutton.' Damien said that for him the joy of being a dad was being there for all of those firsts; being there with Liesel and Kate was a great privilege. Liesel probably will not remember any of this but it is a memory that Damien will take to his grave.

That is why this legislation is so important: it allows dads and partners to take time off work and be at home to support new mothers in those crucial early days. It builds bonds that will extend to a lifetime of love, encouragement and support for children. It is the kind of encouragement and support that all kids need as they venture into life and face the challenges and opportunities that it presents—opportunities that are the foundation of the ideas and innovations that will inevitably drive a nation's prosperity.

Before outlining the measures in this bill let me share with you why dads being there in the early days is so important to their newborns and partners. Research from children's experts has found that, the more dads are involved right from the start, the better it is for the dad, for the mum and, most importantly, for the baby. Hands-on dads are important in developing social skills, independence, a strong moral sense and intellectual skills. Parenting expert Pam Linke of the children's, youth and women's health service in South Australia says:

When a man holds a baby they get a sense of security that's quite different from a mother's. While Dad's role may be only a supporting one for things like breastfeeding, it's absolutely critical in a baby's development.

Dr Kyle Pruett, clinical professor of psychology at Yale University, says, 'What dads actually do with their kids matters more than how often they do it,' so it is important that every dad gets time in the lead role. Pam Linke's advice is 'let him change nappies', and I can attest to having changed plenty of nappies in my few years as a dad. In fact, studies show that sons who are nurtured by their fathers are more likely to be more hands-on with their own children. Fathers who interact with their daughters reduce the rate of emotional problems in those girls when they reach their teenage years. Dads help daughters, even when they are young, feel competent—an essential prerequisite for self-esteem.

For us politicians, bringing up young children can come with additional risks. It might be apocryphal, but the story goes that the member for North Sydney received a phone call at home from John Howard after one of the elections. The former Prime Minister said, 'What are you doing?' 'Changing nappies,' replied the member for North Sydney. Prime Minister Howard apparently then said, 'I have something similar for you—industrial relations.' As the Work Choices episode shows, the similarity is more than passing.

I have found my own role as a politician and a father to be a constant and at the same time delightful juggling act. There are many challenges and changes with a newborn baby, and it is vital that dads can be there to support the partner and the child; to share the joys of the new baby; to give some respite—some time-out—for the partner to do little things such as take a bath, have a cup of tea and relax in front of the TV; and to share the responsibility for what is, especially to first-time parents, a vulnerable and mysterious creature. Liesel's mum, Kate, told me, 'It was so good to be home together as a family—to see her and Damien just be together. To see her respond to his voice or be fast asleep on his chest was just magical.'

After the 2010 election, Labor made a commitment to give dads the chance to have two weeks off to support new mums at home. The government's historic Paid Parental Leave scheme has now benefited more than 150,000 new mums. Labor's Paid Parental Leave scheme is funded by the government and paid through employers, so employers can stay in touch with their long-term employees while they are taking time off to care for a new baby.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister and the shadow minister can find another place to talk if they need to do it that loudly. Otherwise, please be quiet while we listen to the member for Fraser.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That was the approach recommended by the Productivity Commission after their extensive inquiry. It reflects the fact that Paid Parental Leave scheme is a workplace entitlement, not a welfare payment. It is critical that we maintain that link to employment, and it is maintained in Labor's Paid Parental Leave scheme as the Productivity Commission recommended.

Under this bill, eligible fathers and partners will receive two weeks dad-and-partner pay at the same rate per week as paid parental leave is paid, which is currently $590 a week before tax. Dad-and-partner pay will begin on 1 January 2013. The eligibility criteria for dad-and-partner pay—including the income test, the work test and residency requirements—will be consistent with those for parental leave pay. Dad-and-partner pay cannot be transferred to the primary carer; it has a use-it-or-lose-it provision to encourage fathers to take more time off work.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The level of conversation in the chamber is just too much. The member for Fraser deserves to be heard in silence.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It also signals to employers that a father's role in caring for a new baby is important. The government expects that employers will retain their existing parental and paternity leave provisions and continue to set themselves apart as employers of choice for parents. We are working with employers to provide fathers the maximum opportunity to take time off work so that they can be involved in their child's care from an early age. The dad-and-partner payment gives families more options to balance work and family commitments. It is good for dads, it is good for mums and it gives newborns the best possible start in life.

For the last two years, I have held a welcoming-the-babies event, which was originated by the Treasurer in the electorate of Lilley.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Sturt!

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Welcoming the babies is a chance to recognise Canberra's new parents and for them to meet other parents, connect with community services and find out what is available. For last year's welcoming-the-babies event we had a terrific weather, and around 150 parents and children turned up. They grabbed a coffee or a sausage sandwich, enjoyed the sunshine and chatted to stallholders about playgroups, breastfeeding, maternal health, immunisation, toddler sports and other supports. First-time dad Tito Hasan told me: 'It's been great to see kids having fun. My wife and I see the range of things out there for first-time parents. I'm looking forward to coming back next year.'

This year we had horrendous rain and Commonwealth Park was closed on the weekend of welcoming the babies, so, in lieu of us having the event outside, around 30 parents and children enjoyed morning tea in my electorate office, shared stories and met with service providers. They all took home a baby pack and a formal certificate. As the saying goes, it takes a village to raise a child, and now dads can stay in the village for another two weeks and enjoy this special time without having to worry about the family finances.

I have a story to share about my own experience of being a new dad. I remember that first hour of my eldest son's life. It was an extraordinary period, because my eldest son was born by caesarean section. For those who have not seen a caesarean section performed, what is most amazing is how quick it is. From the first incision to when the baby comes out is only about seven minutes but then the remainder of the operation takes about an hour. So, as a dad, you then have an hour on your own with the newborn.

I remember being struck by how relaxed and peaceful my son was. I just talked away to Sebastian. I babbled away and started to think about the advice that a father should give a son. I had never given father-son advice before, so after about 10 minutes of babbling, I finally settled on the one thing I wanted most of all: I wanted him to be curious. Five years later the conversation sometimes floats back to me—when he asks questions like: dad, why is the sky blue?—and I wonder whether I should have encouraged him to be quite so curious when he is in his cupboard-opening mode.

Those first weeks are an extraordinarily precious time, and encouraging fathers to spend more time bonding with their sons is a critical thing to do. It is a great privilege to be a dad. It is really important that we as policymakers encourage that bonding. It is good for early childhood and it ensure that dads enjoy that precious time with newborns, because a newborn child is too important, too precious and too loved to miss out on those early weeks with their father.

I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned.