Bye to ‘confidence’ and ‘choices’. Hello to real change for working women

As soon as I got my mitts on the hotly anticipated final report from the Women’s Economic Equality Taskforce (WEET) released earlier this week, I immediately did a search for the word “confidence”. Blessedly, the word appears just once in an entirely non-gendered context.

Relief was my initial response. This report passed the first hurdle, indicating a clear break with the empowerment feminism that has defined the past decade in Australia — and the “confidence industrial complex” that grew up around it. 

Why so grumpy? Well, where did that get us? While confidence (and women’s supposed lack of it) reigned supreme as an explanation for the lack of progress towards gender equality in the workplace, Australia tumbled from 15th in the World Economic Forum’s global gender gap ranking when the index was first published in 2006, to 50th in 2021.

Instead of resorting to the confidence furphy — the favourite scapegoat of those who seek to divert attention from the real challenges (yes, I’m looking at the previous Coalition government that spent a decade effectively blaming women and millions on various programs designed to “fix” them) — the report clearly articulates what is really “costing” the economy $128 billion a year. 

To be clear, it’s “barriers to women fully participating in the workforce”, including the lack of affordable accessible childcare, the unequal impact of unpaid caring responsibilities, the undervaluing of women’s work and, yes, gender discrimination.  

I was also delighted to see that my other least favourite “c” word, “choices”, made an appearance, but not in the usual way that blames women’s supposed “choices” for the gender pay gap. Quite the opposite. 

“Women’s economic inequality has become normalised and is often assumed to be ‘natural’ or the result of women’s personal choices,” it said. “There is clear evidence to show this thinking is out of step with the ambitions and interests of our highly educated female population and with forging a fair society. It also clashes with the development of a modern and vibrant global economy.”

Cue more relief from me. Compare this with the Coalition government’s final Women’s budget statement from 2022, where the word “choice” appeared 14 times and “discrimination” featured just seven times. Four of those were repeated references to the sex ciscrimination commissioner’s job title. 

This is a welcome paradigm shift. 

Sam Mostyn, the chair of WEET, clearly hoped the report would help shift the conversation away from one that focuses on what it will “cost” (the proposed expansion of paid parental leave to 52 weeks at full salary replacement rates with use-it-or lose-it provisions to improve men’s uptake, for example, won’t be cheap), to one that emphasises that these are vital investments in women and our future productivity with a significant return. 

Other key investments among the seven primary recommendations include a move to a universal childcare model and a concerted effort on the part of the federal government, which funds much of the care sector, to raise the pay and improve the conditions of the mostly women who work in the sector. 

“The cost of not doing what we have recommended is far greater than what is required to build a gender-equal economy,” Mostyn said. 

So I was disheartened to hear an interview with Minister for Women Katy Gallagher on ABC’s RN Breakfast on Monday in which she still seemed to frame the proposals as significant costs the Albanese government was not currently in a position to consider. 

The holding response from the Albanese government is that it will officially respond when it releases the national strategy for gender equality next year. At the same time, in a statement, Gallagher reassured the women of Australia that “the Albanese government has placed women’s economic equality at the heart of its agenda”. 

That, I say, remains to be seen. 

Ultimately, Mostyn and the WEET’s greatest triumph in reframing the debate around gender inequality — what drives it and what it’s going to take to expedite change — might prompt Gallagher and her colleagues in the cabinet to put their foot on the accelerator. 

Mostyn is a woman in a hurry to see change. In that way, she mirrors the impatience of the women of Australia who, as Mostyn wrote in her introduction to the report, communicated their impatience over the course of consultations. 

“We have heard Australian women’s call loud and clear,” she wrote. “They are tired of waiting for action to feel safe and valued and have equal access to economic prosperity. They know their labour is essential to a well-functioning society and a resilient and dynamic economy. They talk about how they are systematically undervalued, under-utilised and marginalised.”

The Albanese government would be wise to heed Mostyn’s message and consider two realities. The report’s recommendations are, indeed, the right thing to do and are economically prudent from a productivity perspective.

What’s more, what are the political implications if such a salient call from 50% of the population — whose anger helped deliver Labor to power — falls on deaf ears?