In its October 2022 budget statement, the Federal Government noted gender equality is essential for national wellbeing – but how effective are its proposed policies towards achieving this on the ground?
A recent webinar by Women in Super, hosted by ESSSuper CEO Robbie Campo joined by Professor Miranda Stewart of the University of Melbourne Law School and Mel Birks, deputy CEO of the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (AIST).
The Albanese Government had highlighted the importance of creating fairer outcomes and ensuring equal access to opportunities and resources by all members of the population, to improve Australia’s economic prosperity and resilience.
In the 2022-23 Budget, the Women in Super panel noted noteworthy contributions including removing the $450 threshold for superannuation, extending Paid Parental Leave (although it does not include superannuation payments), a $1.7 billion investment to address gender-based violence, and the National Housing Accord.
“As we know, superannuation is just the product of women’s participation in the paid workforce. So we need to understand the triggers that either fulfill or prevent women from participating in a way that they would like,” explained Birks.
Another major aspect of discussion was the low-income tax offset (LITO), which provided an offset of up to $700 for those earning taxable income up to $66,668.
“This is a bit of a no-brainer. I understand everything costs money but when it was introduced, it was actually aligned with the tax bracket and it hasn’t moved,” Birks stated. “We should be eligible for that contribution, which essentially just means that you’re no better off, but also not worse off.”
The $4.7 billion investment in early childhood education and care was welcomed as a means of improving women’s workforce participation, where families with a combined income of less than $80,000 would see an almost 90% subsidy increase.
“If we have changes in policy that bring more women into the paid workforce, then it’s a good thing from a gap perspective,” Professor Stewart observed.
However, the income tests for childcare payments and benefits were based on joint income, she added, which could hinder women going back to the workforce if they crossed the threshold.
The subsidy ranged between 85% to 50% for families earning more than $72,466 and below $177,466, with a 1% decrease for every $3,000 of income earned by the family.
The Women in Super panel also noted the significance of having the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Women being the same person, Senator Katy Gallagher, in the current government.
“Historically, both the Treasury and finance didn’t really take ownership of gender, budgeting, or gender impact analysis. They would tend to say, ‘well, that was the job for the office for women’ or somewhere else in government or maybe social services,” Professor Stewart explained. “It’s really interesting in bringing the gender lens, which is for the benefit of all Australians.”
“The Women in Super panel also noted the significance of having the Minister of Finance and the Minister for Women being the same person..” So achieving equality means biased elected officials governing for all australians?
HERES another doozy: “$1.7 billion investment to address gender-based violence”. Much of that went to the Family Court to ensure men are royally screwed over when it comes being dads. lastly: “If we have changes in policy that bring more women into the paid workforce, then it’s a good thing from a gap perspective”…why?, working in an office is better than being dedicated to your children? why let feminist brainwash women is how to be valued?