Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

You are a part of the rolled gold paid parental leave fiasco that was Mr Abbott's primary policy. It was thrown out, along with Mr Abbott himself, and then you come back in with a policy to actually dud mothers out of paid parental leave. What we are asking here are some simple questions for very straightforward answers. There is no reason why this information could not already have been provided.

Yes, the minister says the answers will come at the end of the week. You know what? I have been at an estimates committee where Senator Nash said we would be getting a response 'shortly' on a community affairs legislation report—that was 18 months ago! What 'end of the week' is Senator Fifield talking about? I do not know. But I do not trust what they on the other side have to say. I have asked, the Senate has asked, for a timely response. It is not asking for much at all. We have asked for a timely response, and the minister still leaves parents in the dark as to their plans.

Time and time again the Liberals have failed to show any real commitment to supporting paid parental leave. They did not support the Labor Party's paid parental leave scheme; instead, they have attacked it at every opportunity. As I mentioned earlier, they had a rolled gold paid parental leave, championed by Mr Abbott, and eventually thrown out, with Mr Abbott. What did they do next? They went from having his rolled gold paid parental leave to coming in with a scheme that seeks to attack. Everyone will remember what they said about mothers. They said they were 'double dippers'. It was a disgraceful performance on behalf of the government. Australian families, Australian mothers, deserve better.

I want to remind the Senate that it was in 2010 that Labor introduced Australia's first ever national paid parental leave scheme—one that was attacked by the government, who were the opposition at the time. Prior to the Labor government introducing the national paid parental leave scheme—the first ever in Australia—Australia was one of just two OECD countries without a government-funded paid parental leave scheme. More than 55 per cent of Australian women had no access to paid parental leave prior to the introduction of that scheme.

Based on the recommendations of the Productivity Commission, Labor's fair and sustainable scheme provides new mums with 18 weeks leave at the minimum wage. Since it commenced in 2011, more than 550,000 families have benefitted from Labor's paid parental leave scheme, allowing them to spend more time with their newborn babies. On this side of the chamber, we know how important it is for mothers to spend as much time as they can with their newborn babies. Many of these mothers have also been able to extend their leave, with support from their employers. Under Labor's dad and partner pay scheme, dads can receive two weeks paid leave at the minimum wage. The scheme is good for parents, good for children, good for employers and good for the nation.

An independent evaluation of Labor's scheme, released in March 2015, showed the scheme is delivering valuable support for families when they take time off work to care for a newborn or a recently adopted child. The evaluation also found that the scheme was particularly assisting low- and middle-income women who had no access to any form of paid parental leave prior to the introduction of the scheme. More importantly, one of the key findings of the evaluation was that paid parental leave had a clear effect of delaying mothers returning to work, up to about six months after the birth of their baby.

That is the Labor Party record on paid parental leave. Let us contrast that with the Liberals' record on paid parental leave. We know that the former Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, initially said that a scheme would be introduced over his 'dead body'. I am sure everyone on this side of the chamber remembers when Mr Abbott indicated that any paid parental leave scheme would be introduced over his dead body. I have already mentioned what Mr Abbott did then, and it is worth mentioning again because the backflip after backflip on paid parental leave really show what this government is all about. It is not committed to paid parental leave. It has shown that. Mr Abbott has shown that.

Senator Edwards interjecting—

Senator Edwards can chuckle all he likes over there. It is all on record, Senator Edwards. First of all, Mr Abbott said 'no scheme' and 'over his dead body'. Then he said he had his rolled gold Paid Parental Leave policy, and he took that to the 2013 election. As I understand it, half his caucus was not in support of that policy anyway, but he pushed on. He promised an extravagant $20 billion scheme that gave wealthy women $75,000 to take six months off to have a baby. $20 billion! That scheme, which would have paid $75,000 to millionaires to have a baby, we know was all a con to try to buy votes from women. Then he said he would cap the amount at $50,000. What did he do next? He abandoned the scheme altogether. So first of all it was no scheme and 'over my dead body', then he came up with a rolled gold scheme costing $20 billion, then he capped it and then he abandoned it—pretty much like what has happened to Mr Abbott by his colleagues. He scrapped his 'signature policy', despite declaring that it was a 'fundamental conviction'.

Last year, what did we see next? In last year's budget, the government did a complete U-turn and announced a massive cut to paid parental leave. It was proposed to make savage cuts to paid parental leave that would have left around 80,000 new mums worse off every year, some by as much as $11½ thousand. It is clear that the Liberals' word stands for nothing in this area. It is clear that you cannot trust this government when it comes to helping Australian families with the costs of their new babies.

It is also worth noting that the government not only sought to cut assistance for new mothers but also sought to demonise them. Not only did Mr Abbott and Mr Morrison want to slash as much as $11½ thousand, as I said, but the language they have used to justify these cuts has been absolutely appalling. That can be agreed with by the majority of the senators, I believe, in this chamber.

First, the budget papers refer to working mothers who access their employer scheme and a government scheme as 'double dippers'. They should be ashamed at that language. They should be ashamed at describing Australian mothers as double dippers, as rorters. Then Mr Morrison launched an incredible attack on new mothers, describing the situation where they access two schemes—just as the law allows, I remind you—as a rort. He called it a rort.

Senator Edwards interjecting—

Senator Edwards, if you do not like the history of paid parental leave, the history of your government's commitment to paid parental leave, then just leave.