Cathy McGowan (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) among 15 rural research and development corporations which receive statutory levies partly matched by the Commonwealth, the representation of women is no higher than 44 per cent, is as low as 11 per cent, and averages 26 per cent;

(b) the Australian Institute of Company Directors (Institute) says its quest for 30 per cent female representation across ASX 200 boards by 2018 has stalled;

(c) the Institute's latest gender diversity report shows that as of 31 August 2017 there were 25.4 per cent female directors, only marginally higher than the 25.3 per cent reached at the end of 2016;

(d) at the time of the publication of the Institute's latest gender diversity report, 11 ASX 200 companies had no women on their boards; and

(e) the Institute says that the Government may be forced to intervene with quotas to force companies to appoint more female directors;

(2) acknowledges the Diversity in Agriculture Leadership Program (Program) initiative launched by the National Farmers' Federation and AACo on 15 October 2017, which asks organisations to commit to auditing the gender diversity within their leadership teams and pledge to make 'meaningful change' towards achieving enhanced gender equality; and

(3) calls on the:

(a) Government to support the Program and similar initiatives to ensure that companies appoint more female directors; and

(b) Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources to outline to the Parliament a plan to increase the representation of women to a minimum of 30 per cent on all agricultural boards over which the Government has some level of influence, including rural research and development corporations, agricultural committees, panels and councils.

Colleagues, International Women's Day is on 8 March. The National Rural Women's Coalition, which is made up of the ALGWA, Australian Women in Agriculture, the Country Women's Association of Australia, the National Rural Health Alliance and the Women's Industry Network Seafood Community are all visiting parliament this week. This year the theme for the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women meeting in New York is 'Challenges and opportunities in achieving gender equality and the empowerment of rural women and girls'. We have had new ministers for agriculture, new ministers for the status of women and new ministers for regional Australia. I think it is timely today to remind the parliament about the importance of a proactive approach to ensuring gender equality on all boards.

Today I would particularly like to talk about agriculture boards as they relate to the power the government has. In my speech today, I'm going to be talking about the 15 rural research and development corporations which receive statutory levies, partly matched by the Commonwealth, where the representation of women is very low. I'm going to be talking about the Australian Institute of Company Directors, which says its quest is for 30 per cent female representation across all ASX 200 boards. Their aim is to achieve that by 2018, but that has stalled. I'm talking about the importance of diversity at a time when we are at the crux, I suppose, of going forward with gender equality.

Today I would particularly like to focus on rural and regional Australia in the bigger picture. Rural and regional Australia is the backbone of this nation—truly. The Regional Australia Institute tells us that the regions are responsible for one-third of total employment in this country, just over one-third of our economic output, about two-thirds of our exports by value, and our regional capitals are home to about one-quarter of all Australians. So there's nothing insignificant about rural and regional Australia. Of all that work done in rural and regional Australia, agriculture—together with mining, but today I'm focusing on agriculture—is the hub.

Before I was a politician, I had the real pleasure of being involved in the national organisation called Australian Women in Agriculture. I was one of the founding directors and later on became president. The aim of that organisation was to raise the status of women in agriculture—the scientists, the journalists, the academics, the economists, the educators, the marketers, the international traders, the financiers, the public servants, the CEOs, the agronomists and, of course, the farmers. That was our job, and part of raising the profile was to make sure that representation right across the board was real and that the people who took up positions of power actually represented the experience in the workplace. I'd just like to take a moment to acknowledge some of the leaders in this area from my electorate—Marion Rack, Elaine Patten, Alana Johnson, Dr Rohan O'Hagan, Jill Briggs, Alana Young and Nerada Kerr—and to thank them for their work.

Government policy set in 2016 set the target for women holding government board positions at 50 per cent, and, in June 2017, women held 42.7 per cent of government board positions. But in agriculture that's not the story. In agriculture, there are 18 government boards with 114 positions and 39 women in those positions, which is 34 per cent—way short of the target. In preparation for today, I asked the library to do a bit of a deep dive into some of the agricultural statistics we need to be looking at. Across government portfolios of agriculture and water resources, Attorney-General, communication and the arts et cetera, they found that, second to the Attorney-General's, agriculture has the lowest representation of women on boards. For agriculture and water resources there are 18 government boards with 114 positions and there are 39 women, which is 34 per cent. That was just topped at being the worst by the Attorney-General's, which is at 32.6 per cent.

What I'm saying today is that we've moved some way. There has been some effort, and slowly there has been an improvement, but it's not nearly enough. In bringing my comments to a close, I call on the government to work closely with the National Farmers' Federation. They've got the Diversity in Agriculture Leadership program. And I call on the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources to outline to parliament on a regular basis what the minister is doing to raise our representation up to 50 per cent in the near future.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Cathy O'Toole (Herbert, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm delighted today to speak to this motion and, more broadly, to support my colleague and neighbour the member for Indi. Whilst the issue of the proportion of women on our boards, both agricultural and non-agricultural, has been the subject of much discussion in this place, particularly amongst the women over many, many years, I have to say that I have moved my own position somewhat since those early days. If I had stood up here 15 years ago, I would have said, 'No, no, no, leave it as it is. Women need to compete on their merit, and they have plenty of merit. Let's just get on with it. The times have to catch up with the increasing proportion of women who are entering the workforce at a variety of different skill levels.' However, having watched the situation for as long as I have, I am moving much more towards the position that the member for Indi has enunciated this morning. I am particularly sympathetic to her description and calls on the government when it comes to the proportion of women on agricultural boards and those boards that have a composition which is at least in part determined by government. If we, through our research and development levies, are supporting an entity, then we have a stake. We may not officially have a stake at the table, but we should have an ability to influence something as important as the composition of the women on those boards—not the appointments, not the individuals, just the broad composition.

This debate has moved from nothing at all, to targets. Those targets are often expressed as: 'Well, it would be really good if we could get here. Everyone come on board and let's admit that we aren't where we need to be, and it would be really good if we could get here." I've seen this in the Liberal Party over many years. In fact, my good friend Chantelle Fornari-Orsmond said at the New South Wales Liberal Party's AGM on the weekend—and I'm paraphrasing her here because I didn't actually attend; I've just read reports of what she said—'Can you men stop pretending that you support women in positions of leadership and power in political parties and then doing absolutely nothing about it? Stop coming here to our regular events and just rolling out the lines and then going away and doing what you've always done.' I'm not suggesting, as others of my gender may, that there's a boys' club and there's a conspiracy. I don't actually think any of those things exist, and I certainly don't think they exist on agricultural boards. But I just think there's a lack of momentum and there's a lack of commitment, and if everyone keeps doing what they've been doing then the pace of change, as the member for Indi has outlined, will just be too slow. I think we need some hard targets in there at some point in time. I think we need a commitment that says we actually have to get to these numbers.

This is no more important in any section in society than it is in agriculture. What I know, as someone who has lived her life in rural Australia—and, while I would have once described myself as a 'farmer's wife', I would probably now describe myself as having been a farmer for 17 whole years of my life—is what women contribute. I saw firsthand what women contribute in their communities. I represented, as I call them, the 'wonderful women of the west' in outback New South Wales through the Millennium drought. That was 10 years of the most heartbreaking climatic and societal conditions that any family could face. Families broke apart—of course they did—under the strain. Children were sent away to school. Children came back from university because they couldn't bear to see their parents unable to work the farm and unable to support the cost of keeping them in their education. There was untold pain and distress.

But it was the women who kept things together. The women never took a top-down approach to life and the future; it was the women who always did everything from the grassroots up. They kept their families together, they kept their communities together and they recognised that the holistic approach is the only one that sustains into the future. So we need those women on our boards. We need them making decisions. How dare anyone suggest that somehow they're not capable? We know that they are.

The Australian Institute of Company Directors, a very august body, and many members in this place are very supportive of the member for Indi's motion today, as am I.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm delighted to support this motion brought forward by the member for Indi, and I would like to agree heartily with the statements made by the two previous speakers.

As a father of three sons and three daughters, it would be absolutely absurd to think that my sons are more deserving of higher positions in their workplace for no reason other than their gender. However, this concept continues to be a reality in Australian industries, particularly in agricultural industries. I'm someone who clearly remembers when the Whitlam government lobbied the Australian Institute of Company Directors for equal pay. I would have hoped that over 45 years later gender diversity in the workplace would be at a much higher level than it is today.

The conversation around female representation in top positions in each industry, especially board director roles, has been had for many decades and yet our progress has been inordinately slow. Change seems to be happening at a snail's pace; in fact, we're seeing progress stall. The Australian Institute of Company Directors' quest for 30 per cent representation for female company directors across ASX 200 boards by 2018 seems highly unlikely to succeed, with only a 0.1 per cent increase in female directors from 25.3 per cent in 2016 to 25.4 per cent in 2017—a pathetically small increase.

There's no justifiable reason that we're not seeing consistent increases in gender representation at these levels. It comes down to two things: poor excuses and gender bias. We hear that there aren't enough qualified women, that women are not flexible enough and that women have to look after and bear children and therefore they cannot fully commit to the position. These excuses are very archaic and just don't cut it these days.

Only 66 companies in the ASX 200 are meeting or exceeding 30 per cent female representation, while the other 134 are falling short—often way short—and 64 of those companies that are falling short only have one female board member. It is a far cry from gender diversity and gender equality, and for no particularly good reason. There's no reason why women can't be represented, in the same proportion they represent of the general community, on company boards. No-one's seriously suggesting that women are less intelligent, less capable or less able to do the work, yet this bias persists. We just cannot continue at this rate, and I certainly don't want it to continue at this rate for my children and my grandchildren. We cannot continue to allow male-dominated boards to promote only men. Gender diversity is a choice—this is a choice—that companies have to make. Any industry, company or organisation that does not strive for equal gender diversity needs to be put on notice and needs to be put on notice now.

I come from a profession, paediatrics, which has embraced gender diversity for decades. Over 50 per cent of practising paediatricians are female, and over 70 per cent of registrars—that is, paediatricians in training—are female. With figures like these, it's no doubt that some of Australia's most famous paediatricians, and hardworking paediatricians, are female: Professor Fiona Stanley; Professor Elizabeth Elliott, who's been very prominent lately in alerting us to the considerable numbers of children with foetal alcohol syndrome disorder; and Professor Ingrid Scheffer, from Melbourne, who's world renowned for her work in the genetics of epilepsy. One of my old mentors, Clair Isbister, pioneered the importance of breastfeeding in the mid 20th century. Dr Audrey Greenberg, my cousin, was one of the first developmental paediatricians in Australia. Dr Genevieve Cummins was one of the first female paediatric surgeons. Dr Verlie Lines was one of the first paediatric anaesthetists in Australia. Paediatrics was one of the first professions that brought in job-sharing with great success. When we see more women at the top of their profession, we see more women promoting the cause of women, and that's a great thing.

We need to change. I want to stress that: it is time for change. We can no longer accept the snail's pace of reform. Women make up 50 per cent of the population yet are still held back from top positions on boards in many companies. Gender diversity is an issue that this parliament needs to take seriously. Corporations are receiving government funds; it is time for them to act.

Julia Banks (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Indi for raising this important issue today. Like the member for Indi and the other members who have spoken on this issue, I believe that gender equality throughout Australia in leadership roles in government and business is crucial to the ongoing success of our nation. Gender equality is a complex and multidimensional issue. I do know that it is when men support men and women, and when women support men and women that the cause for gender equality comes equally from the hearts and minds of both, and we as a society can and will prosper. That is why the Turnbull government is fully committed to supporting and encouraging women into leadership positions. We've set an ambitious but achievable target of women holding 50 per cent of Australian government board positions.

I know from my experience in business that the business world, across industries, has always made the business case and understands that diversity delivers success. However, this happens only when real, substantive measurable mechanisms are implemented to increase representation of women in leadership positions—measurable and achievable targets for which leaders demonstrate their accountability. There is more work to do. It is imperative that business and government recognise that the meritocracy argument is flawed, and that the two things that get in the way are often discrimination and unconscious bias. Targets work in business as a way of incentivising people. However, quotas are a necessary element in politics, in my view.

I'm pleased to report today that, as of June last year, women had reached 42.7 per cent representation on government boards, and women comprise more than 52 per cent of appointments made in the April to June quarter of 2017. It is a promising trend in the growth of women's representation; however, more substantive measurable mechanisms need to be implemented. Likewise, the statistics on women's representation in the private sector have demonstrated a similarly positive trend, but not a trend that is sufficient to get the fifty-fifty action that we need. According to recent reports by the Australian Institute of Company Directors, women now make up a record high of 26.1 per cent of ASX 200 directorships and women accounted for more than 43 per cent of appointments to manager roles in 2016-17.

This positive progress across both the public and private sectors demonstrates the Turnbull government's dedication to tangible change for women in the workplace. Our workplaces and communities function best when they're truly representative of society. That is why it is integral that our government departments, businesses, politics and organisations reflect an equal number of men and women. From a productivity and intergenerational perspective, and given our ageing population, there must be increased participation of women in the workforce and in leadership. As such, the Turnbull government has made it a priority to reduce the workforce participation gap by 25 per cent by 2025 for Australian women. More women in the workforce means more women being made ready for leadership positions.

In my experience as a leader of organisations in the private sector for over 20 years, I noted that absence from the workplace due to child bearing, child care or caring for the elderly demanded an increasing need for flexible workplaces and policies specifically designed to help those who want to work or work more and those on the lowest incomes. Our most recent budget had a number of measures to boost women's workforce participation. We know that child care is the most commonly perceived barrier to participation for women in the labour market, so we allocated an additional $2.5 billion for a number of childcare initiatives. We're also investing $430 million to support universal access to preschool and $263 million for the rollout of ParentsNext.

The government's commitment to boosting women's participation in the workforce has seen encouraging results. Indeed, since the coalition was elected in 2013, around 570,000 jobs have been created for Australian women. The member for Indi will also be pleased to know that the government is supporting rural and regional women through the Women's Leadership and Development Strategy grants program and the National Women's Rural Coalition. The Turnbull government has also partnered with the National Association of Women in Operations, of which I had firsthand experience when I worked for many years in the manufacturing centre, to provide women's leadership programs. These integral initiatives, coupled with the Turnbull government's ongoing commitment to encouraging quality through aiming to reach our target of 50 per cent representation of women on appointed government boards, will work towards delivering tangible equality for men and women in the workforce and throughout Australia.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Cyber Security and Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In 2015, TheAustralian Financial Review stated:

The journey from the kitchen to the boardroom has been a long one for women …

Not much has changed, as the member for Indi has highlighted in her motion on leadership and gender diversity. I commend her for moving this motion. The figures the member for Indi quoted are appalling. The quest for greater representation of women on ASX boards has been going on for many years. It has been only in the last decade that we have got some greater transparency, thanks to the wonderful work of Women on Boards and the fact that they started to shine a light on the lack of diversity of women on Australian boards. The fact that in 2018 we are being told by the Australian Institute of Company Directors that the quest for 30 per cent female representation on ASX 200 boards has stalled is absolutely appalling. The fact that, according to the AICD report from last year, there were 25.4 per cent female directors, which is only marginally higher than the 25.3 per cent reached at the end of 2016 is absolutely appalling. The fact that at the time of the publication of the AICD report 11 ASX 200 companies still had no women on their boards is absolutely appalling.

Last year Stephen Mayne, a director of the Australian Shareholders Association, who has been a strong advocate of improved governance of publicly listed companies, argued:

… that women create necessary balance on boards that ultimately leads to better decision making in the complex world of corporate finance, takeovers and mergers.

He says many men are driven by their egos in the middle of a corporate raid, while women think more objectively and strategically.

New research from the BankWest Curtin Economics Centre found that increasing women's representation on boards can lower the incidence of company fraud. The study looked at 128 companies and the relationship between women on boards and corporate fraud.

I also commend the member for Indi for focusing on the lack of representation of women in the agricultural sector. I too have been advocating for this since last year, since it was highlighted by my sister, who's Australia's first female master of wine and an internationally renowned winemaker. When I saw her last year down in the member's electorate for my annual catch-up, she highlighted to me that women make up 50 per cent of winemaking and viticulture graduates but only comprise 10 per cent of the Australian wine industry workforce. So, even though 50 per cent of graduates coming out are women, they only comprise 10 per cent of the workforce. The lack of representation of women in that multibillion-dollar industry is outrageous.

A survey by wine identity Jane Thomson last year revealed 42 per cent of women knew or believed they were being paid less than their male counterparts. Two-thirds of women said they'd experienced sexist behaviour in the workplace and one in four women endured unfair treatment in regards to pregnancy, sick children or maternity leave. A quarter of the respondents believed they did not have equal career opportunities in their workplaces. These are shocking statistics for the wine industry, a multibillion-dollar industry that exports to the world.

So I'm calling on the women in the wine community and I'm calling on the wine industry itself to: first, improve the representation of women in industry; second, look at those systemic impediments to women staying in the industry because if you've got 50 per cent attending courses and only 10 per cent actually making it into the workforce, there's something seriously wrong, guys, and you need to fix it; third, establish a target for women as speakers at conferences—this is an issue I faced in the defence industry—panellists, judges and for judging, not just on local wine shows but also on national wine shows and international wine shows. It is not good enough in 2018 for one woman to be a judge on a panel of 10 other judges. That is unacceptable, particularly with the internationally renowned female winemakers we have right over the country. It is simply unacceptable. The wine industry needs to lift its game. I said to the wine industry last year that I was going to be focusing on the lack of diversity in this industry and I am going to continue to maintain a focus on this issue.

Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Agriculture is an industry that has driven Australia's economy to be one of the world's most envied. Since even before the First Fleet, farming has been part of how people manage to survive and thrive in this country. For our early settlers, agriculture in an exotic land posed a range of risks and difficulties. This so-called great southern land was hot and dry, and the earth was not covered with trees but was full of rocks. This was a land untouched by centuries of climate and cultivating that made the homeland of the British Isles not only productive but easy. Even the few experienced farmers from the first transportations were well out of their comfort zones when it came to growing food for a new colony. The old soils of this ancient land were and still are fragile to mechanical disturbance and, due to their age, struggle to hold anywhere near similar levels of moisture and nutrients compared with the young rich soils of the homeland. Fungal rust, hot weather, drought, onslaughts of destructive vermin, and theft by colonial and native alike made farming in these foundation years an incredibly fraught exercise.

Through sheer determination, colonial agriculture eventually took hold, leading to one of the great land grabs of modern history. The search for agricultural land and for the trade routes to develop markets and supply chains led to names like Mitchell, Leichhardt, Burke and Wills, and Stuart becoming household names, again, all because of agriculture. This driving force of agriculture continues to this day; and right at the heart of this drive, you will find women. From the earliest days of developing the livestock industries that would become such an enormous part of the Central Queensland economy, women have driven success. What was started by women like Elizabeth Macarthur and Eliza Forlong is today continued by modern women all over the country—women who continue to drive the industries they operate in; women like Josie Angus and Deb McLucas. Josie, with her husband, Blair, operates a vertically integrated beef operation in Central Queensland. The Anguses are passionate about providing the highest quality protein they can, and they provide it to customers around the world. Their branded beef products, Kimberley Red and Sondella, are synonymous with quality and typify the mouth-watering beef that secures Central Queensland's reputation as the beef capital of Australia.

An entirely different operation, Deb McLucas's Freckle Farm, is one of innovation and careful holistic management. Deb and her husband, Rob Bauman, have operated Freckle Farm since 2008 and have put an enormous effort into rehabilitating the land. Taking what was a depleted cane farm and developing a sustainable, productive grazing enterprise in the Pioneer Valley, Deb and Rob have developed a reputation for producing highly sought after free-range eggs, pork and beef, trading to local restaurants and markets. There's a passion for their product. Their industry and their constant search for new ways of producing and marketing are a credit to both Josie and Deb, cementing their place in the pantheon of influential women in agriculture.

Regardless of what the member for Page may say, Capricornia is home to the undisputed beef capital of Australia. Within this industry, I have acute knowledge of women not only advancing their own businesses but serving to advance their industries and the country. It probably doesn't serve the cliched image of a farmer to remind the House that thousands of women across the country are running multimillion dollar agriculture businesses; some grow beef, some grow sugar, and some consult as nutritionists or veterinarians. They all have skin in the game of life, and they all, each and every one of them, deserve to be considered in discussions around the sector that drives our economy and will continue to do so for thousands of years.

As women in this place, both the member for Indi and I are perhaps seen as oddities by some—and the same, I'm sure, is considered of women in other lines of male dominated work. In any business, industry or sector, just as in politics, it is vital to understand and represent all the views and experiences of those within that set of society. The argument as to whether quotas or goals are the be-all and end-all when it comes to how women in agriculture achieve a stronger voice within the industry is a matter of contention. One thing we can all agree on is the immense impact women have had on the sector and will continue to have, wherever the sun shines, the rain falls and people need to eat and clothe themselves.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.