Page 818 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 21 March 2017
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There is a range of responsibilities that the ACT government has in this space, aside from the points that Minister Gentleman made about having a minister for industrial relations here in the ACT and a range of other matters.
This impacts on our public housing system. Those who are earning well below average wages will often be the ones who are seeking public housing assistance in the territory. In fact, the group I am particularly concerned about, who have perhaps not had as much discussion in public debate as they might, are what is generally considered the next income quintile above those who are able to access a significant number of government benefits. They are sometimes referred to as the working poor. They are people who are working, who do not qualify for many government welfare benefits but who, in fact, really struggle to obtain secure housing and the like.
I think this is a relevant matter for us to be discussing today. It is something that certainly I and Ms Le Couteur are very conscious of when we consider the issues that come before us. It is certainly something that we considered strongly going into last year’s election as we framed our policies. I know that, for example, in my ministerial capacity it is something the government is giving quite a lot of consideration to as we go through this year’s budget process. Each of the ministers has to consider these issues in their day-to-day business. I look forward to the further discussion tomorrow on penalty rates and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these matters this afternoon.
MS CODY (Murrumbidgee) (4.21): I rise today in support of the matter of public importance Ms Cheyne has brought forward. I would like to offer my voice in support of those in our community who depend on penalty rates. In particular, I would like to highlight the consequences of this cruel decision on single working mothers, who will carry the brunt of this cut to their take-home pay.
Already women in our community make up the bulk of those working unsociable hours in accommodation, retail and fast food services. Their work takes them away from their children, from their social networks and from their weekends. Their jobs are often insecure and susceptible to last-minute rostering changes and personal disruptions. They balance it all with family obligations, personal challenges and the social isolation that often comes with single parenthood and living on the breadline.
As a young mother, I raised two small children on my own. I spent weekdays ferrying my boys between day care and school on my way to work, then collecting them in the evening and rushing home to make dinner, check their homework and prepare them for bed. For me, working on weekends and having the benefit of penalty rates was not a choice; it was a lifeline. I would be able to work weekends while my family and friends helped care for my children, without the burden of childcare costs. I was compensated for giving up valuable weekend time with my boys.
Penalty rates kept food on my family table. Penalty rates allowed me to buy new football shoes when my sons inevitably grew out of theirs. And penalty rates meant I did not have to work excessive hours for the rest of the week to get across the line. For a lot of single mothers giving up their weekends in order to work is not a choice; it is a necessity they take so as to keep themselves above the poverty line.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video