Page 3420 - Week 11 - Thursday, 15 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Having a workplace that allows its workers to achieve a work-life balance is crucial not only to optimise job satisfaction for employees, but also to achieve higher levels of productivity that come with this satisfaction. It is worth noting that such a workplace minimises the level of social disruption in our community. It is clear that, in order to achieve this, employers, and particularly governments, need to be very mindful of a worker’s responsibility outside the workplace. Whilst not perfect, past industrial relations systems have at least reflected these responsibilities. Work Choices, of course, does not. I am very pleased that, through the work of the committee, these issues have been able to be highlighted.
The position and investigations of this committee present an interesting contrast when compared to the statements of the Liberal Party, and particularly those of the deputy leader in her comments yesterday. I think they highlight what the true Liberal position is in relation to work-life balance and to those who seek to re-enter the workforce. I quote from the report of our own Skills Commission:
Many workers want to have and raise families. That is an investment in the future. An extension to paid maternity leave will discourage some new mothers from cutting ties with employers and should be seen as an important part of retention policy. Female participation rates in the labour force have fallen over the last 12 months in the ACT. This decrease may be related to a rise in fertility rates … The extension of paid maternity leave in the ACT Public Service could encourage women with children and those intending to have children to remain with the ACTPS.
Accessing child care for very young babies is often difficult and extended paid maternity leave could alleviate some pressure in this area of child care. As the Access Economics Report points out, there is likely to be an increase in demand for child care in the ACT (possibly as many as 7,600 places above the present level of 30,400), with an increased reliance on more formal channels of child care.
So there we have it: a key recommendation, and an issue discussed by our own Skills Commission, is the importance of considering the extension of paid maternity leave within the ACT public service from 14 to 26 weeks. And what do we have from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in her statement yesterday? A suggestion that anyone who is employed in the Assembly or involved in the business of public policy and who happens to have a young family is, by definition, part time. That is an appalling statement and a very poor reflection of where the Liberal Party is at in 2007.
Perhaps it was a slip of the tongue; perhaps it was just a matter of shooting off at the mouth in the chamber in the middle of a heated debate. But to then appear on television and in the electronic media and repeat those allegations puts paid to any suggestion that it was just a slip of the tongue in a heated debate in the Assembly. It was a very deliberate statement and one that has been repeated. The cheer squad made up of her colleagues has come out to back up that position. Let me make it very clear that those on this side of the chamber reject the notion that, if you have a young family and you are still committed to your job, somehow you are part time and you do not give your full commitment to your work. That allegation deserves to be treated with contempt. I think the disappointing thing is that the deputy leader—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .