Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

This to me is not about left or right, or right or wrong; it is about fairness. That is why I support the government's intentions in relation to this bill. No-one of either gender should be discriminated against in the workplace. Any behaviour of this sort is unethical and abhorrent. I think there is consensus in this chamber and everybody shares that view. The question is: what is the best? I think I got an affirmation from Senator McKenzie as she was leaving the chamber. It was not quite an interjection, but clearly there is no question that we all agree that any form of discrimination in the workplace is abhorrent and unethical. What is the best mechanism to achieve equity?

No bill is perfect; this bill is not perfect. But I believe that this bill does advance those issues of fairness and equity, and that is why I will be supporting it.

So I acknowledge that the government's intentions in amending this act to ensure fairness and equity emphasise this point, but we cannot and must not ignore the fact that women are still far more likely to need the protection of this act than men. That is pretty axiomatic if you look at the statistics and the research. I do not speak on behalf of women; thankfully, they do not need others to speak for them any longer. But I speak because I believe that men and women deserve equal rights, equal opportunities, equal protections and equal freedoms. Even in Australia that is not always the case. It has been 110 years since women won the right to vote federally in Australia and 91 years since the first woman was elected to a parliament in Australia—Edith Cowan, to the Western Australian Legislative Assembly. In my home state of South Australia we really led the way in many respects in terms of the right of women to vote and stand for parliament.

There is a lot of discussion about how far women's rights have come. In fact, if you speak to many young women and girls they believe women and men have equal rights in our society and the fight is over. But the whole issue of equity and fairness must continue to be debated and must be at the forefront of our minds in determining good public policy. We are no longer in the days when women had to starve, chain themselves to railings or throw themselves under horses to get people to listen to their pleas, and we know of the valour of the women in the suffragette movement over 100 years ago. But that does not mean there is no longer a plea to be heard.

In February 2010 the Review of Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999 consultation report was released. This report was quite revealing. It found that women are overrepresented in areas of study linked to lower-earning industries, while men are overrepresented in the areas linked to higher-earning industries. It found that female dominated industries have historically been undervalued and that women are less likely than men to be in leadership positions. It found that women are likely to earn less over their lifetimes than men for the same type of work. And it found that Australia is lagging behind other developed countries on a number of key indicators, including economic participation opportunity, education attainment, political empowerment, and health and survival. Compared with other OECD countries with similar tertiary education levels, Australia has the fifth-largest pay gap between men and women. Research by Goldman Sachs and JBWere found that closing this gap would improve Australia's gross domestic product by 11 per cent. Australia's ranking in the World Economic Forum's global gender index dropped from 15th in 2006 to 20th in 2009, behind New Zealand, the United Kingdom, South Africa and the Philippines. Only 58.7 per cent of Australian women over 15 are in the labour force, making up 45.3 per cent of the total labour force. In comparison, 72.1 per cent of Australian men are in the workforce.

The ACTU's submission to the committee inquiry into this bill stated:

Despite making up half the workforce, women in full-time paid work still earn 17.8 per cent less than men in full-time paid work, amounting to over $1 million less over a lifetime. Women are now more likely to have a tertiary qualification than men but women graduates will earn $2,000 less than male graduates and $7,400 less by the fifth year after graduation. Fewer than three per cent of ASX 200 companies have a female chief executive officer, 8.4 per cent of board directors are women and only eight per cent of executive managers of Australian companies are women. Women retire with less than half the amount of savings in their superannuation accounts than men and women are four times more likely to experience sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace compared to men.

Whatever disagreements I may have from time to time with the ACTU, I think that those figures speak for themselves. They are based on research and facts and they ought to be noted very carefully.

Many of these disadvantages can be tied to motherhood. We do not make enough allowances for women who are mothers getting back into the workforce. We have seen the legislative amendments in terms of paid parental leave that this government passed, and they are welcome. But I also think that the coalition's plans for a more generous scheme have a lot of merit. That is something that we must continue to debate and discuss. We need to have more flexibility and more support in our workplaces so that women are more likely to take time off to have children and then return to the workplace. So that level of flexibility is crucial and I do not think we have done enough in relation to that.

I acknowledge the difference a paid parental leave scheme will make in Australia but we were among the last to join in the chorus and we must make up for lost time, and we need to look at a more generous scheme. We need to take into account the costs of such a scheme but also the impact that such a scheme will have on our national productivity and our participation in the workplace. Because of this, many women simply do not have, or have not had, the same opportunities as men to plan for their retirement and I think that is a real issue, a sleeper of an issue that needs to be debated and discussed even more. One of the main aims of the feminist movement is to ensure that women have greater financial independence, to reduce women's financial dependence on men. I do not think that is a bad thing. But still, so many years later, women face financial disadvantage if for whatever reason they end up, in post-retirement in their senior years, without a partner. So these are big issues. And this issue of lack of retirement income for women is a pressing issue that I believe we need to address with a great degree of urgency in our public policy area, because equity demands it.

We have come a long way but it is disingenuous in the extreme to believe we do not have a long way to go. In some parts of the world women face violence, starvation and treatment as second-class citizens. In other parts of the world, including the United States, there are still challenges to hard-won rights and freedoms. It is important to put that in context. Just because in relative terms women in a developed country do not face the same challenges as in a developing country in terms of discrimination and a lack of rights, that does not mean that there are not still challenges that must be addressed and dealt with. It is not the case that we should excuse smaller indiscretions here because they pale into insignificance when compared with the callous disregard for female life elsewhere. I think we should be smart enough, generous enough and brave enough to fight for fairness.

Throughout 1945 and beyond, women flocked to the Liberal Party. In 1994, Ian Hancock, former Harold White Fellow, pointed out in a lecture to the National Library of Australia in Canberra that 'the Australian Women’s National League, a major contributor to non-Labor politics, especially in Victoria, turned over its funds and material assets to the Liberal Party'. Hancock also made the point that many people would not have been aware that, from the party's inception, measures that would today be described as affirmative action were built into the Liberal Party. For example, women in Victoria were given equal representation on all committees and councils—notably, May Couchman and Edith Haynes. Each of the other divisions also established separate women’s sections, and the party formed a federal women’s committee, whose 'chairman', as she was known, was an ex officio member of the Liberal Party. There are no faceless men or women in our party; indeed, there are no quotas in our party.

Many of the firsts for women in politics were achieved by women in the Liberal Party. Dame Enid Lyons was the first woman to be elected to the Australian House of Representatives—in 1943, for the United Australia Party, and then as a member of the Liberal Party. She was also the first woman appointed to the federal cabinet, in 1949, under the first Menzies Liberal government, when she became vice-president of the Executive Council. In 1947, Senator Annabelle Rankin became the first woman to hold the position of Opposition Whip in the Senate and then became Government Whip in 1951. In 1966, Senator Rankin then became the Minister for Housing, under the Holt Liberal government, thus becoming the first woman to administer a federal government department.

In 1949, Eileen Furley was elected vice-president of the party. She went on to become the first woman representing the Liberal Party in the New South Wales Legislative Council. In 1968, Senator Ivy Wedgewood became the first woman to chair a Senate committee.    In 1975, Senator Margaret Guilfoyle became the first woman senator to be a member of the cabinet, under the Fraser Liberal government. From 1974 to 2001, Kathy Sullivan of the Liberal Party served longer in parliament than any other woman—over 27 years. She was also the first woman to serve in both houses of parliament.

In 1996, the Howard Liberal government became the first to appoint two women cabinet ministers and then expanded that to three in 2006. This compared with Labor’s previous record of one woman cabinet minister. In 1996, Senator Margaret Reid became the first woman President of the Senate, under the Howard government. In 2000, Jackie Kelly of the Liberal Party became the first serving Australian minister to give birth while in office. In 2001, under the Howard Liberal government, Senator Helen Coonan was the first woman to hold an Australian Treasury portfolio since Federation. In 2006, she also became the first women to be Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate. Senator Amanda Vanstone of the Liberal Party, who served from 1984 to 2007, remains the longest-serving female senator and the longest-serving female cabinet minister in Australia’s history. And the list goes on and on and on. As well-known Australian feminist Professor Deborah Brennan has pointed out, 'Liberal women have had many more guaranteed opportunities within their party organisation than their Labor sisters'—all done without quotas, I again note.

The Liberal Party, as part of the coalition, has also made enormous achievements for women and gender equality since first coming to government in 1949. In her article on Liberal women Deputy Leader of the Opposition Julie Bishop pointed out that 'under the Menzies government, between 1949 and 1966, policies were introduced relating to child endowment and a national health scheme, and women’s workforce participation was substantially lifted during this period, with the Liberal Party’s postwar policies actively encouraging female workforce participation'.

Between 1966 and 1972 the Holt, Gorton and McMahon governments introduced policies to protect deserted wives. Equal pay legislation was also introduced, a great achievement for women’s equality. Between 1975 and 1983, under the Fraser government, a family income supplement scheme to help low-income families was introduced. Australia also signed the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, showing Australia’s commitment to the rights it enshrines. This led to the establishment of the Office of the Sex Discrimination Commissioner. After signing the convention, the then Attorney-General the Hon. Robert Ellicott and the then foreign minister the Hon. Andrew Peacock said that the signing evidenced 'Australia’s policy of equality for women and the elimination of discrimination'. This was done under a coalition government, I again hasten to add.

From 1996 to 2007 the Howard government saw women’s participation in the higher levels of education exceed that of men, with more women than men completing year 12. The number of women on Australian government boards and bodies also increased to over 33 per cent. Policies were introduced including a ‘Women’s Safety Agenda’, which included the national ‘Violence Against Women, Australia Says No’ campaign and the associated national 24-hour phone helpline. Since the campaign was launched, in 2004, it has now received more than 73,000 calls.

As also mentioned in the article on Liberal women by Julie Bishop, the Howard government introduced measures to allow women to better prepare for their retirement through improvements to superannuation. The coalition also introduced the baby bonus in 2004 and, as Ms Bishop said, the Howard government was responsible for 'substantial increases in the rates of family benefits, the provision of extra childcare places, the introduction of the childcare tax rebate and the encouragement of flexible family-friendly work practices'.

However, the Liberal Party’s achievements are not just historical. The coalition and the Liberal Party are today more active than ever in supporting women’s equality. Let us look at what the coalition has actually done and what it proposes to do. I particularly want to focus on what the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, has done and proposes to do given the politically motivated attacks of recent times—politically motivated attacks which have been viewed by the Australian community as well beyond the pale and way beyond what is acceptable practice.

When the Leader of the Opposition was health minister, he increased screening programs for cervical cancer, resulting in a steady decline in Australia's cancer rate. He increased mental health services, including a beyondblue initiative to address perinatal depression. Of course, the coalition was responsible in helping to set up the beyondblue national depression initiative to begin with, contributing $17.5 million of Commonwealth funds over five years, with substantial contributions also coming in from the states and territories. He announced funding for the cancer vaccine, Gardasil, committing $1 million to the establishment and initial operation of the Centre for Gynaecological Cancer, and introduced the National Pregnancy Support Telephone Helpline, providing non-directive counselling advice 24 hours a day. As minister for employment, the Leader of the Opposition amended the Sex Discrimination Act to explicitly recognise discrimination in the workplace on the ground of breastfeeding as unlawful. He announced the $1.7 billion Australians Working Together package, including $251 million to support parents returning to work, the vast majority being women. In 2000, he enacted the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999. Indeed, this is the act that the amendment bill today proposes to amend. I repeat: the bill that we are seeking to amend today was actually introduced by the Leader of the Opposition, as minister for employment, when he enacted the Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Act 1999.

The coalition has a proud record and the Leader of the Opposition intends to implement further support for women if given the great honour to lead this country. If the coalition gains government at the next election, the Leader of the Opposition has proposed a comprehensive paid parental leave scheme. This is at a replacement wage of up to $75,000 per annum, including superannuation, instead of the minimum wage proposed by Labor. This scheme will enable women to stay in and re-enter the workforce and to breastfeed their newborn for the recommended minimum of six months, if indeed they can. It will also assist to increase the birth rate and, thus, in the long term will assist in increasing overall productivity, which I have talked about in other speeches in this chamber.

The coalition will be putting forward amendments during the committee stage of today's amendments. The coalition's amendments are designed to lessen the discretion that this amendment bill bestows upon the minister and to reintroduce provisions allowing the agency to waive public reporting requirements for relevant employers. Furthermore, the coalition has just announced a Productivity Commission review into child care. This will ensure that child care is more accessible, affordable and flexible for Australian parents. This compares to Labor's policies, which have resulted in the cost of child care rising by more than 20 per cent since Julia Gillard became Prime Minister. As I have outlined today, the evidence clearly supports the fact that the coalition, the Liberal Party and Tony Abbott have initiated policies and programs that have had a real effect on advancing gender equality. It has also led by example by promoting women in the party through merit. The coalition and Tony Abbott continue to promote such policies.

It is time Labor stopped its spin and its politically motivated and direct personal attacks and started taking substantial action to improve the lot of Australian women. Labor talks the talk but does not walk the walk when it comes to the economic empowerment of women. Grubby and cheap political attacks are no substitute for real action on behalf of all Australian women.