Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Whilst, with all due respect, I can understand that the opposition is at the moment being very careful of committing to financial arrangements, this is about the wellbeing of children, fairness and ensuring that parents are equally able to look after their children. There is a clear anomaly between family law and Welfare to Work. Clearly, a set of parents are suffering as a result of that anomaly between the two acts and, as a society and as legislators, we are sending two separate messages to the community and to parents. They are: on one hand, we think you should have equally shared parenting—and that is now law under the Family Law Act; but, on the other hand, under Welfare to Work only one parent is to be the principal carer and have the right under the Social Security Act to get benefits to enable them, if they are on income support, to be able to properly parent—only one parent can do that.

It is clearly inequitable. This inequity in the act has been identified from the start. I am glad that the government and the department are reviewing this, but I am concerned that the review seems to be taking a long time. I was hoping that I might be third time lucky with this amendment, because I think this is the third time I have put this amendment up—