Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (More Support for Working Families) Bill 2023. This bill is a step towards a fairer paid parental leave system—but it's a baby step, if you'll pardon the pun, and it leaves parents, particularly women, waiting. There is no reason to delay the implementation of good policy. This bill is a critical opportunity to move towards best practice, and it should start with an immediate increase to 26 weeks of paid leave, and it needs to include a pathway to 52 weeks of paid leave by 2030. The bill does neither of those things, which is why I'll be moving amendments to do both of them.

Parents should not have to wait until 2026 for 26 weeks of paid parental leave. Parents should have immediate access to a minimum of 26 weeks of paid leave to allow recovery from birth, to maximise options to establish breastfeeding and to allow parents to spend time with their infants. The only reason given by the government to delay full implementation of the increase to 26 weeks of PPL is financial: they can't afford it. Yet billions of dollars are wasted on other things every day. Women and parents should not be asked to wait while, with things like nuclear submarines and tax cuts, which still disproportionately benefit men—they're not asked to wait.

Australia has also fallen behind other countries in the rate of paid parental leave as well as in how leave is allocated between parents. Australia's paid parental leave rate is one of the lowest in the OECD. For some people, a full-time minimum wage is an increase on their previous earnings, but for many parents the minimum wage is well below their normal earnings, and this forces difficult decisions about how long parents can afford to take leave and who takes that leave.

Now, we know that continuing to pay paid parental leave at minimum wage is not an effective incentive to induce more fathers to take parental leave. The reintroduction of the 'use it or lose it' provisions in this bill to encourage shared parenting is welcome, but we need a replacement wage to ensure that there are not financial barriers adding to the cultural barriers which, sadly, still exist for fathers to take PPL.

We've seen time and time again in Scandinavian countries how the replacement wage and shared care provisions cause a huge increase in the number of dads taking leave and how the fairer share of caring that gets established in those early months is then sustained for over a decade. Australian parents deserve parental leave paid at replacement wage, with incentives for employers to top up the government scheme. We're not asking for government to pay the whole replacement wage; we're asking for a partnership approach whereby the worker receives the same amount they otherwise would, because government is paying the basic and employers are topping that up.

Without that replacement wage it's the parent on the lower income—which, sadly, is often the mother—who is too often forced to leave employment. As I mentioned before, this sets up a domino effect of women not only retiring with 23 per cent less super—that retirement wage gap—and many older women retiring into poverty; it also sets up that disproportionate distribution of unpaid domestic work. We know that mothers and women are still doing far more than their share of the unpaid labour, which is crucial and which helps our economy. We need to do everything we can to incentivise fathers to pull their weight at home, and one of the ways of doing that is by making sure that paid parental leave is a financially attractive option for men. That's why a replacement wage, as well as shared care, is crucial.

Paying parental leave at replacement wage was one of the recommendations of the government's own Women's Economic Equality Taskforce last year, for the reasons I've just outlined. The taskforce also recommended expanding PPL to 52 weeks, which one of the amendments that I'll move in the committee stage would achieve. That taskforce also recommended paying superannuation on paid parental leave. Those are the changes that are collectively needed to unlock women's workforce participation and to help close the persistent gender pay gap and the retirement income gap, and the super gap for that matter.

By failing to put superannuation on paid parental leave, which the government says is their policy yet they are somehow still not doing, the government is increasing the risk that women will retire into poverty. Paying super on PPL has been a longstanding policy of the Greens. It has been a longstanding policy of many unions. It has been a longstanding policy of women's economic security advocates. It's also, technically, meant to be the Labor Party's policy. The Albanese government have repeatedly said that they'd like to pay super on PPL, but only when budget circumstances permit. That's at the same time that they're using those budget circumstances to prioritise nuclear submarines and prop up the fossil fuel industry, for example, not to mention the tax cuts that just passed this chamber last night, which, again, still disproportionately benefit men, to the tune of about 58 per cent.

Parental leave is the only form of leave that is paid without superannuation, and it's predominantly taken by women. So leaving superannuation off parental leave is actually an act of discrimination that directly undermines the purpose of parental leave, which is to encourage people to take leave to look after their kids, give them the best start to life and keep that connection to the workplace. The Albanese government has a series of opportunities to pay super on PPL, and the Greens will continue to work with the government to find any and every opportunity to do that. Eligibility for PPL should also be expanded by relaxing the work test and residency requirements so that people are not unfairly excluded from leave. All families should be supported to take parental leave, regardless of their circumstances.

I will be moving amendments to this bill, firstly to increase paid parental to 52 weeks by 2030. The Women's Economic Equality Taskforce, many peak bodies and unions—the ACTU in particular—have highlighted that that's the international standard. Fifty-two weeks of paid parental leave is the international standard that Australian families deserve, and they deserve it as soon as possible, so I invite the chamber to give serious consideration to supporting that amendment. I'll also be moving an amendment to achieve an immediate increase to that 26 weeks by 1 July of this year so that women and parents don't have to wait until 2026 for the support that they deserve. I would urge the chamber to consider that amendment also.

This bill is a baby step to support parents in the first crucial few months of parenthood. We will be supporting this bill, but so much more needs to be done if we are to truly tackle gender inequality in this country and truly ensure that parents and kids have the best start in life. We also need more support for parents, including accessible and affordable child care; making that free should surely be a budget priority for a Labor government. We need longer paid parental leave now, we need it paid at a higher level of income replacement, we need super included and we need the scheme design to support a better share of parental care. The case for change could not be clearer.