Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I rise to provide my support for the Paid Parental Leave Amendment, adding superannuation for a more secure retirement. Parental leave is not a holiday or a long-term illness, yet when people take leave for these reasons, they don’t return to the office with a lower superannuation balance than their colleagues. It's essential that we pay superannuation on paid parental leave so parents are not disadvantaged in their retirement.

Many members of this house have experienced parenthood and the challenges of a child’s first year. While fathers are increasingly taking parental leave, women are still the primary caregivers in Australia and more often take time out from their careers to do so. My personal experience aligns with this. I had a rewarding job before having children, took time off after each of my three children, and even with a supportive husband, I returned to work part-time instead of full-time. I sought and accepted different types of jobs to balance my career with the time I wanted to spend with my kids. I worked part-time for 17 years and fully understand the impact that caring for children has on earning capacity and superannuation.

Economists refer to this as the “motherhood penalty” — the amount of their previous earnings level that mothers give up after having children. In Australia, this is significant, with mothers losing about 55% of their earnings, much higher than in most OECD countries. This loss can last for at least 10 years. While I made my choices freely, this data reflects my own experience. Women aged 60 to 65 retire with 25% less superannuation than men of the same age, largely due to caregiving responsibilities. While this bill won't fully fix this issue, it helps close the gap.

This bill will benefit around 180,000 families annually by providing an extra 12% of their government-funded paid parental leave as an annual lump sum payment of up to $3,000 to their super fund. Analysis from The Parenthood shows that the compound interest on this contribution could result in as much as $330,000 extra in retirement savings per family, per child. I support this bill because it helps mitigate the motherhood penalty.

Families, especially in the current cost-of-living crisis, face tough decisions every day about mortgages, parental leave, and returning to work. Paying super on paid parental leave provides parents with better long-term financial security, which may not be top of mind at the time, but has a significant impact over a working life. Industries with a higher proportion of women in their workforce, such as nursing and midwifery, will particularly benefit. Women in these fields, who comprise 89% of the workforce, can retire with up to 40% less super than men, and that must change.

It has been suggested that this super entitlement could be restructured to give women the choice of a cash payment or additional leave instead of super. While cash or leave would be welcome, I wouldn't support such an amendment because the goal is to reduce the disadvantages women face in retirement. It would be too tempting to take the immediate payout without considering the long term. If the intent is to provide more support for women or parents, I'm happy to consider additional measures, but they should be in addition to, not instead of, the super entitlement.

I also support this bill in its current form because recognizing the loss of super during time off to care for children normalizes paid parental leave as a workplace entitlement, just like sick leave or annual leave. While more work is needed to address the motherhood penalty, this is an important step toward closing the gap for women as they reach retirement. I commend this bill to the house.