Sharman Stone MP

 

 

STONE:            Now if you’re a higher paid worker than just a minimum wage of about $500 odd dollars a week at the moment, then your mortgages and your other costs of your household are much more than for you to be able to take 18 weeks off on just about $500 a week.

 

So it’s a second rate scheme that Labor has put in. They a certainly are saying “ we know its second rate, we should go and get it topped up with an alternative scheme that your employer might offer you or might already be in your entitlement if you’re a public servant or in defence or work for a bank or whatever.”

 

 The problem with that is that that just perpetuates the current inequities because we have higher paid women right now in Australia with paid parental leave entitlements; they will get an additional go from the government on top of their current entitlement.

 

But your lower paid women, these are your farming women, self employed, part timers, seasonal workers, all of those women, they don’t have a paid parental leave scheme offered by their employer and they are not going to get a top up. They will just have Labor’s second rate scheme and that’s it.

 

PRESENTER:    Should the scheme have been means tested as well on top of everything else? Is that what you’re suggesting?

 

STONE:            Well in fact there is a means test on Labors. You don’t get the access of paid parental leave over $150,000, if that is what you earn.

 

No what we are saying, is that our scheme, which offers you 6 months of time off at your replacement salary, which means you don’t need a top up you have your replacement salary, or the minimum wage (which ever is greater), with superannuation and not directed through your employers pay role but in our scheme directed through the Family Assistance Office, where there is no additional read tape or administrative load on the business as you take your paid parental leave, that is a far superior scheme.

 

We are also very concerned that Labor’s introduction of that legislation although they had two years to do it, is and was shambolic. They have made such a mess of having the business continue to be the paymaster that they still don’t know whether they are going to be eligible for pay-role tax with the double whammy if you like.

 

You have got the person on paid parental leave, you have also got the replacement maternity leave person so that’s two wages and Labor still hasn’t managed to get the states to all say ok we will exempt that second salary from pay-role tax.

 

So that’s why they’ve said for the first 6 months of the scheme we will have to give the businesses that six months off in terms of being the pay master for us. That’s shambolic.

 

Small businesses in particular, don’t want, and can’t afford the extra burden of red tape, bureaucracy and handling pays for the government. So we actually tried to pass an amendment yesterday. We said look- leave businesses always out of the deal in terms of having to be the paymaster. Let the Government handle that like with the Coalition Scheme. But Labor defeated that amendment. So it’s going to be a mess for businesses and that’s really unfortunate.

 

PRESENTER:    Just while we have you on the line Dr Sharman Stone, we have another caller……

 

 

STONE:            Yes, well that’s what people are saying right across the country. But the points that you mentioned Joseph; that you don’t have to offer additional top up if you don’t want to as an employer.

 The point there is that if it is already an entitlement to your worker that you built into the work place contract or enterprise agreement then you cannot replace that scheme with the Government scheme, it has to be in addition to.

 So if you are already offered say 2 months or 4 months or whatever paid parental leave and its part of your work contract or work based agreement then no you certainly can not cease to pay that. That’s what the top up is about.

If it’s just a handshake between you and your employee that they will give you the paid parental scheme if they ask, then that is different. You can choose not to give that additional leave as a top up. So that’s where it is so inequitable because if you are a public service, say a teacher right now; then you are going to get the double dip. Good luck to you.

 

Its unfortunate, that in the lower paid women, particularly a person in retail, hospitality, tourism, the self employed person who works part time, shift work and all of that, they don’t have that top up opportunity. So they are just going to have a very lean and mean, I call it second rate scheme, which is right down the bottom of the developed world scheme when you compare them.

So what we have said of course, as the Coalition, is that as soon as we get into government, we will bring in our scheme which has no difficulties in costs for business, it will all be handled payments through the family assistance office, there will be 6 months opportunity for leave on the replacement wage and superannuation. There is also 2 weeks leave for the father, a use it or loose it two weeks, to try and encourage men to take part in those early first time when the baby is home.

 

So our scheme lines up with best practice world wide and we think that’s what we think Australian families deserve. We also think that it is good for the economy.

 

PRESENTER:     Look there is a couple of sides of things. It’s good to make up your own mind about. Dr Sharman Stone, Thankyou very much for being with us on the program today.