Stirling Griff (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Hansard source

[by video link] I move:

That the House of Representatives be requested to make the following amendment:

(1) Schedule 1, page 5 (after line 21), after item 9A, insert:

9B After paragraph 54(1)(a)

Insert:

(aa) if the child's birth mother is unlikely to satisfy the income test on the child's expected date of birth, or did not satisfy the income test on the day the child was born:

(i) the biological father of the child; or

(ii) the partner of the child's birth mother;

Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

Amendment (1) is framed as a request because it amends the bill in a way that is intended to increase the classes of persons who can claim parental leave pay.

The amendment would allow the biological father of a child or the partner of the child's birth mother to make a primary claim for parental leave pay for a child, if the child's birth mother does not, or is not likely to, satisfy the income test at the relevant time.

As this will increase the number of persons who would be eligible to receive parental leave pay, the amendment will increase the amount of expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 307 of the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010.

Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 307 of the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 then it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that the amendment be moved as a request.

I have previously outlined the inherent inequality in the current PPL scheme where there is a bias against family units that consist of stay-at-home fathers and breadwinner mothers. This amendment will bring the PPL scheme into the modern era, as I have previously spoken about. I hope that the chamber will support it.