Sharman Stone MP

At a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra the Prime Minister was asked a very serious question by a journalist. Latika Bourke, from Radio 2UE, asked Mr Rudd why his leadership was “in crisis”. Mr Rudd did not answer the question but commented instead on what Ms Bourke was wearing.

 

What she was wearing is beside the point. The fact that Mr Rudd thought it appropriate, even humorous, to comment on her outfit is entirely the point.

 

Do male journalists get singled out by the Prime Minister for comment on the colour of their tie or the stripes on their shirt? No wonder Eva Cox from the Women’s Electoral Lobby described the PM’s comments as “sexist”.

 

These comments were especially unfortunate in that the reason for the press conference was paid parental leave. You would think Mr Rudd would be watching his language, surrounded as he was by mothers with babes in arms but his suit of female ministers and backbenchers.

 

Australia is the second last developed country to get a paid parental leave scheme. Many who have worked to get a scheme in to place are now sadly calling Labor’s scheme a ‘’first step”. Why should Australian parents have to accept entitlements the rest of the developed world enjoys in increments?

 

The Coalition put its Paid Parental Leave scheme on the table on International Women’s Day. This is a scheme offering replacement wages for 26 weeks, with superannuation and a two-week “use it or lose it” component for the non-primary carers, most usually the father.

 

There is also no extra pay-master impost for businesses who have been so concerned by Labor’s shambolic and half-baked legislation that they have been given a six-month moratorium before the pay-master function kicks in. By then Labor should have worked out what to do with the payroll tax implications.

 

Australian families, particularly our mothers in the work force, need a decent paid parental leave scheme. Labor acknowledges their scheme is second rate and inadequate by expecting employers to “top-up” their slim offering with extra time and financial support. The likely problem is that higher paid women are much more likely to have a paid parental leave entitlement now, to supplement the Federal scheme. Lower paid women, casuals, part-timers, contractors and the self-employed are a lost less likely to have a pre-existing scheme. This is not equitable and not fair.

 

As for Senator Steve Fielding’s assertion that “welfare cheats and drug addicts” could become pregnant and seek an abortion after 20 weeks to secure the paid parental leave payment or the baby bonus, this comment is beneath contempt and such attitudes have no place in reasonable debate.

 

There have been amendments moved in the Senate but even when defeated the community at least gets to see that improvements were sought.

 

Small business across the country is up in arms saying what does this mean for us? Additional costs, additional red tape and the thing I fear is if with that additional fear of red tape and administration, something eliminated in our scheme with the use of the Family Assistance Office, we may have discrimination again against women because they are childbearing age. That would be a terrible shame as Australian women are some of the most highly educated in the world.

 

A decent paid parental leave scheme is not a welfare measure, it is an economic measure about productivity and workforce participation. If you deny working women in paid parental leave superannuation and adequate income for them to have at least six months leave, you are then impoverishing the economy because more women will be pushed back to work too early.