Copyright news
Australian parents grieving the loss of a child will have added workplace protections after a landmark parental leave law passed parliament this week. Dubbed Priya’s Law, the amendment to the Fair Work Act ensures parents grieving a stillbirth or neonatal death can access employer-funded paid parental leave to recover from the traumatic experience. The law is named after baby Priya, who died at just 42 days old in 2024. After Priya’s mother informed her employer that her child had passed away, she was refused paid parental leave, while the baby’s father was allowed to take his full leave entitlement. But it’s the intervention of four male MPs that has incensed some voters, after four Coalition MPs Andrew Hastie, Tony Pasin, Barnaby Joyce and Henry Pike raised concerns that parental leave for stillbirths could be used by women having late term abortions. Abortions late in pregnancy after 20 weeks are incredibly rare. Doctors maintain it is generally done only for serious medical reasons including genetic syndromes, late-diagnosed major foetal abnormalities, severe growth restrictions, or situations where continuing the pregnancy would severely harm the mother’s mental or physical health. News.com.au understands angry female voters including women who have undergone late term abortions for much-wanted babies for medical reasons have written to Liberal MPs this week raising concerns over recent debates in Parliament. Speaking on ABC radio Ms Ley said the bill which passed with bipartisan support – was “really important” and that women should be supported. “Losing a baby is one of the most difficult things that can ever happen to a mother and to a family,’’ Ms Ley said. “And as a mother and a grandmother, this is very personal. Any commentary about this bill applying in other contexts is insensitive.” ABC host Sabra Lane then noted that backbencher and leadership aspirant Andrew Hastie last week intervened in the debate about extending parental leave to those who had had stillborn babies, and questioned whether it would apply to late term abortions. “This was interpreted as sort of positing that women would deliberately terminate a baby to collect government money. How surprised were you by that intervention?,’’ she said. “It’s a really important bill. We should be supporting women through tragic events where a baby is lost,’’ Ms Ley replied. “I’m once more, not talking about individuals in my party room or individual comments. I’m making a point about the importance of this bill and the real struggle that mothers face in the circumstances where they do lose a baby. It’s a very difficult thing for a lot of women to talk about and the last thing I’m going to do is issue judgments on mothers and certainly, very supportive of the bill as is my team.” ‘Horror’ over four male MPs Liberal MP Jane Hume spoke out about her “horror” over the intervention by the four male MPs during the debate on Priya’s law. “I think that there was a bit of horror from many of the women in our party that this intervention was at all necessary,’’ Senator Hume told Sky News. “For families of stillborn children, this is a very serious and deeply personal issue. Look, I respect other people’s views, but let’s not use important legislation as a vehicle for personal crusades. “I’m not sure how much experience they personally have had in this space, and I don’t want to speculate on that, but what I would say is that I have always supported a woman’s right to choose, as I know have the majority of people within my party. “This is a deeply personal issue. We shouldn’t be using straightforward legislation as some sort of Trojan horse or personal opinions on this stuff. I thought it was an unnecessary distraction and perhaps a bit of an error of judgment.” Questions asked about the bill While Mr Hastie said he backed the “intent” of the bill in principle, he argued it was necessary to question the potential unintended consequences. “I think it’s a noble and good thing and Baby Priya’s Bill deserves our support for that reason … I note the sensitivity around this, but I do call upon the government to clarify that it does not apply to late-term abortions,’’ he said. One Nation’s Pauline Hanson has previously raised similar concerns. During the debate last week Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce said regardless of medical conditions he didn’t believe doctors should “interfere”. “The day after a child is born, no matter what medical conditions or impairments that may be there, you have no right to interfere in their life. And therefore, the day before, we believe, is the same,’’ he said. But speaking to news.com.au in the wake of Ms Ley’s intervention, Liberal MP Tony Pasin insisted that he had never suggested he didn’t support abortions for medical reasons. “Nobody said that we were worried that this would incentivise abortions, I mean that’s offensive,’’ he said. “Families that have suffered the unspeakable tragedy of a Stillbirth, a baby passing away shortly after birth or indeed those that have terminated a pregnancy late term owing to the physical welfare of the child or mother should be afforded every support including a law preventing employers from cancelling their Paid Parental Leave. “That being said, as I made clear in my contribution, Paid Parental Leave and for that matter the Stillborn Bay payment administered by Services Australia...should not in my view be available to those who terminate an unwanted pregnancy in the third trimester. “I was saddened to learn recently that since the law in South Australia was amended to facilitate the same, a number of viable pregnancies have been terminated and whilst I am uncomfortable with this situation I have to accept this is the law that currently operates in South Australia.” Health Minister Mark Butler insisted the legislation was “very clear” and criticised the MPs intervention. “To try to conflate the two things is, I think, a very cynical, deeply distressing political exercise,” he said. “The men who are doing this — and they’re all men — know the difference between stillbirth and abortion.” “How often, when we’re talking about constraining women’s rights, constraining women’s support through these incredibly important and at times distressing events in their life, it’s men leading the charge? I haven’t heard a Coalition woman go into the chamber and make these arguments,” Butler said. Liberal employment spokesman Tim Wilson backed the need for clear and compassionate arrangements for when families lost a baby. “I am proud to support this reform and it is an important step to ensure compassion and dignity are afforded to grieving parents,” Wilson said. “That is a legacy of love and it is a gift to the whole Australian community.” ‘Killing season’ looms for Ley Meanwhile Ley has predicted her leadership will survive the “killing season” of the final sitting week as she leaves the door wide open to dumping net zero climate targets to appease the Nationals. Outlining a timeline to resolve the saga of the Coalition’s position on net zero by the end of the month, Ms Ley has insisted the public brawling over the issue is democracy in action. Despite a warning from Liberal moderate Andew Bragg “there’s a reason you have divorce laws” raising the prospect of a split, several high profile MPs appear to have shifted position in recent weeks. Conservative critics of Ms Ley are now tipped to back either Andrew Hastie or Angus Taylor in an expected leadership showdown in 2026. “For many years, that final week (of Parliament) has been dubbed the killing season. How confident are you that you will be the Leader when parliament rises?,’’ Ms Ley was asked on ABC radio. “I’m completely confident and I have a smile on my face as I answer this because I know that the media and commentary does get a little bit excited from time to time,’’ Ms Ley said. “So while we might be presented as being at war, and that’s how it’s been described to me once or twice, that’s actually not the reality.” But first, the Liberal Party needs to arrive at a formal position on net zero after the Nationals resolved to dump the target. “I said when I became Leader, that we would not have a policy that was net zero at any cost,’’ Ms Ley said on Wednesday. “When it comes to cost, this government has got it all wrong because they’ve started with this ideological position and unfortunately they’ve never been able to tell Australians what it will cost, but Australians can see that for themselves. Ms Ley said the free-wheeling debate among colleagues was a positive, “There are a lot of different opinions in our party room. I said I wouldn’t make captain’s calls.’’ she said. “Colleagues are talking about their passionate views on this subject as they should.” Liberal James Paterson said it was “self-evidently true” that the party had to compete in the cities and suburbs. “If the Liberal Party and the National Party views are completely irreconcilable, then we couldn’t be in coalition. But it is my very, very strong preference that we remain in coalition, because we cannot form a government without (them),’’ he said. “I think it will be important for the Liberal Party to demonstrate we are committed to emissions reduction, that Australia will do our fair share, but we also won’t ask Australians to do more than the rest of the world.” Conservatives including Angus Taylor, Michaelia Cash and James Paterson are understood to have argued internally that net zero should be dumped. Only a handful of Liberal MPs have backed net zero including Liberal MP Anne Ruston who privately suggested the Nationals had “put a gun to the head” of the Liberal Party. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese seized on the division in the Coalition to argue they were out of touch with voters. “Australians shouldn’t pay the price of Coalition chaos when we are looking at the reforms, including environmental reforms, that are before the parliament,” he said. “We don’t want to just return to the Noalition of the Senate, just saying ‘no’ to sensible, practical, pragmatic, orderly reforms. We want to get things done in the interests of the nation.”
