Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Delivering for women matters for everyone. When women are safe, healthy, supported and economically secure, families are stronger, communities are stronger, the economy is stronger and Australia is stronger. A rising tide lifts all boats. I welcome that this government has continued the Women's Budget Statement. Gendered analysis of the budget was abandoned by my predecessor, Tony Abbott, and restoring it was an important step.

But analysis is not enough. This budget was largely underwhelming for women. This Women's Budget Statement rightly identifies many of the key problems—the gender pay gap, women's safety, unpaid care, financial insecurity and the compounding disadvantage faced by First Nations women. But the measures funded in this budget do not meet the scale of the challenge. In too many areas, the budget repackages existing announcements, applies selective gender analysis and celebrates progress against benchmarks that are far too low. There is no published gender analysis of the NDIS reforms that will divert some 160,000 participants to Thriving Kids by 2030 despite the enormous implications for women, who remain the majority of carers. Climate change, which disproportionately affects women in disaster recovery areas, in housing insecurity, in unpaid care and in community resilience, does not even get a mention in the Women's Budget Statement. These are serious omissions if the government wants to seem legitimate with this statement.

There are some really important measures in this budget that I do want to commend in relation to gender equity around child support. I welcome the government's investment of $182.6 million over four years, with $19.6 million ongoing, to improve patient compliance within the Child Support Scheme. It's long overdue and an issue I've raised on many occasions, because unpaid child support keeps women and children in poverty. As a former family law barrister, I have seen firsthand the impact of problems within this system. Child support is too often weaponised after separation, and the government has acknowledged that in this budget.

It's important to know the facts. There's around $2 billion in unpaid child support across Australia. Those payments are owed by 229,000 parents, and about 83 per cent of recipient parents are women. So overwhelmingly this unpaid child support impacts women and—let's be real—it impacts children's because ultimately it is what the children need to grow up healthy and have their needs met. Single Mother Families Australia has also highlighted the scale of the problem. Nearly 300,000 families lose approximately $810 million annually in family payments due to child support income that may never be received. So that's a structural failure. The maintenance income test can be harsher than the income test applied to wages or investment. A mother is often treated by the government as though she has received child support from the former partner when in reality that money has never been paid or arrived. Too often, mothers are left with unpaid child support from an ex-partner and then the Commonwealth seeks to recover a debt from them through the family support payments because it has arisen from their former partner's delay in disclosing their income or attempts to minimise their income to avoid paying child support.

In this context of domestic and family violence, it's deeply concerning that the system can effectively facilitate financial abuse. Parents should not be forced back into conflict, unsafe contact or repeated administrative battles with an abusive former partner simply to secure payments their children are owed. Where there is a debt owed to the Commonwealth, because child support has not been paid or has been under-declared for too long, the Commonwealth should recover that debt from the parent with the child support liability—not, as it currently does, from the parent to whom that debt is owed, who is already carrying the overwhelming burden of care. So this measure in the budget is an important step forward, but it is not the level of reform needed to make this system safe and fair. I've discussed this issue with the minister, who is well aware of the problem. More must be done to rectify this systemic abuse that is occurring, essentially facilitated by the Commonwealth.

The area where the budget falls most seriously short is keeping women and children safe from violence. Domestic and family violence is a national crisis. Women and children escaping violence need safety, secure housing, legal support, trauma informed services and long-term pathways to rebuild their lives. The budget includes $62 million a year to continue action on gender based violence. You'll hear, from many members of government, big numbers extrapolated over numerous years. What you need to do is break it down on a per year basis to understand the real shortfall. Violence against women is estimated to cost the Australian economy $21.7 billion every year. So consider the discrepancy of the scale of the commitment. The Women's Economic Equality Taskforce has estimated that $128 billion could be added to the economy by boosting women's workforce participation and productivity. So why are we still underinvesting in the very services that keep women safe and support women's economic security and productivity?

Women's Legal Services Australia has warned that services are already forced to turn away around a thousand women a week. In the same day the budget was announced, Domestic Violence NSW reported a 49 per cent increase in high-risk referrals to services by New South Wales police. This year alone, 29 women and nine children have reportedly been killed by violence from people they knew. That includes five women and two children in the week following the budget. Yet frontline services remain chronically underfunded.

Every budget is a reflection of priorities. If this government is serious about ending violence against women in a generation, it must provide secure, long-term funding for frontline services including women's shelters, legal clinics, counsellors, crisis accommodation and perpetrator-intervention programs. This means listening to organisations calling for at least a 50 per cent increase in frontline service funding just to meet existing demand. We can't keep funding fragmented responses without interrogating the system that continues to fail women and children. We need accountability and we need funding that matches the scale of the crisis. And this is where we have to call out the government and the Prime Minister around the response to the now over 112,000 people who have signed a petition for a royal commission into domestic violence. The Prime Minister, when pressed, said:

We know what keeps women in these relationships. We know what's required … And we need to get on with action …

He said that we don't need a royal commission.

If the government knows what needs to be done, the real question is: are they doing it, and are they doing it to the scale that is really required? And that is what a royal commission can expose. It can force states and territories together, with the federal government, for some accountability around what is really happening. It's too easy to say, 'We know what needs to be done and we're doing it,' but you're not. You have not changed the laws around alcohol, you have not impacted gambling and you have not impacted the drivers. We need the accountability that only a royal commission can provide.

I need to say—and I accept and understand—that many in the industry are tired of providing evidence to various inquiries; there are hundreds of outstanding recommendations. But, again, we need that accountability. A federal royal commission can show how many of those recommendations have not been implemented.

This budget delivers no targeted relief for women in poverty. Lifting income support would have one of the most immediate impacts on women's economic security. The government has said 'no-one left behind', that this is a budget about fairness. But the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee has repeatedly called for income support to be increased. That will have an impact on women's economic equality. The Australian Bureau of Statistics say there are more than one million one-parent families in Australia. Most are single mothers, and one-third of single-parent families are living below the poverty line, yet JobSeeker remains below 50 per cent of the minimum wage. Income support remains too low, too conditional and poorly designed for women experiencing coercive control or financial abuse. For example, a woman in an abusive relationship may be disqualified from support because her partner earns a sufficient wage even if she cannot access that income or benefit from it. That is a dangerous policy blind spot. It ignores the reality of financial abuse and coercive control and that poverty can trap women in unsafe relationships.

If the government is serious about women's economic security, it has to lift income support and decouple it from relationship status. The structural pressures that keep women in poverty—unaffordable child care, insecure housing, unpaid care, low-paid feminised work, inadequate support for single parents—continue. You can pat yourself on the back if you want, but there are so many other areas that need to be addressed. Women cannot leave violence if they cannot access housing and those kinds of supports. So, if you're genuine about leaving no-one behind, address these issues.

See this speech in context