Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the spirit in which this motion has been brought before the chamber. It's great to be part of a debate about an issue that we know Australians, particularly parents of young children, really care about and are grappling with. There are lots of us on the Australian Labor Party side who are going through this right now, as we have recently had a baby or are expecting a baby. Our side really does reflect that demographic at this point in time. I disagree, however, with one of the comments that were made by the mover, saying that there has been a lack of progress on this issue, particularly in relation to child care. As we stand here this week, the make-up sitting week, one of the first sitting weeks of this parliament, we are introducing a bill to make child care cheaper. It was our election commitment. It will make child care cheaper for a majority—in fact, over 95 per cent—of Australian families. It will make child care cheaper. That was our election commitment, and we are doing it. We are making progress on this critical issue.

When we were in opposition, we saw childcare fees skyrocket, locking predominantly women out of accessing child care on that third or fourth day because of the cost of fees. The reason why it can't be done on 1 January 2023 is actually quite a practical reason. I chair the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training, and, when this question was put to the department, they just said that it couldn't be done. It would be diabolical. We can't get all the mechanisms of government together in time to introduce it. The childcare subsidy system is actually performed largely by Services Australia. They said it took about 50 weeks to introduce the previous changes put forward by the government. Meeting the deadline of 1 July 2023 was going to be a challenge that they could meet, but they could not meet the deadline of January 2023. There are functions of government that mean that this couldn't be possible; it's not just a budgetary decision.

We have a very complex childcare system, which is why I welcome the government's plan to review the entire sector. I believe that running child care as a welfare subsidy is not what we should be doing. Child care should be universal. It should be treated as early childhood education, like primary school. There has to be a better way to deliver early learning to the children of Australia.

The other point that I want to pick up on in the second part of my speech is access to paid parental leave. It was a Labor government that first introduced a fully funded government paid parental leave scheme, back in 2011. Prior to that, we were one of two OECD countries that did not have a government funded paid parental leave scheme. It was a start, and I acknowledge that it was a start. It allowed the birth parent—predominantly mothers—or the parent who took on the primary caring role after an adoption to take 18 weeks of paid parental leave at the national minimum wage. It also allowed the primary carer to have that topped up if their employer offered paid parental leave for the birth of a child or for adoption. What we find right now is that most women take leave granted by their employer, then they take leave paid by the government at the national minimum wage, and then they might take some sick leave or annual leave to get them to either nine months or 12 months, or as much time as they can get.

It's a clunky system; it's not enough. What we need to do is work out a system which is fairer for all. I am very concerned that we still have dads and partners taking only two weeks of leave. In that first two weeks—having been through it with two children now—it is too crazy to be able to really focus on what's happening. If your partner requires a caesarean, the medical advice is that they don't drive for six weeks and don't lift for six weeks. Who's there to pick up the toddler in weeks 3, 4 and 5 if the dad or partner isn't there at home? We need to be doing more to help couples and to help families in those early months of life.

It is about gender equality, because, once you get to month 3 or month 4, the partner at home tends to be the one doing the housework whilst they're caring for children. It is currently entrenched. We do need to do more on paid parental leave, more than what this motion is suggesting, and that's why I welcome the review of the government. (Time expired)

See this speech in context