I wrote last week about Taylor Swift winning her historic fourth Album of the Year Grammy, only to have the press pull apart all the ways in which she didn’t perfectly accept the award — Slate wrote she was too ‘self-effacing’ — in that it was a strategy to endear her to the public rather than an authentic response, or she was too ‘strategic’ in the way she spoke as though it was too calculated and not spontaneous enough. That she didn’t give enough deference to Celine Dion when being presented her award and that she was crass because she used the occasion to announce her eleventh album was on its way.

Not everyone thought all these things, but far out, man. Imagine being — objectively, according to the Grammy’s — the most highly decorated (because Album of the Year is considered the greatest accolade) singer-songwriter-artist of the last few generations, only to be picked apart on precisely every possible tiny misstep she made in the space of 75 seconds (the amount of time she had to accept the award)? 75 seconds.

This is after months of relentless commentary about whether she was using her attendance at her boyfriend’s football game as a PR scheme, whether she attended them too much, whether she was being shown too much by the broadcasters when she did attend, not to mention the daft conspiracy theories about whether her relationship is actually some government psychological operation to influence the election.

Which itself was off the back of years of relentless criticism by the press for being stupid, for dating too many men, that she couldn’t hold on to a man, that she was petty for turning her real life events into song lyrics, and so many more she turned it into a song Shake it off.

And lastly, she was effectively shunned after the accusation by Kanye West that she had lied about approving his song lyrics “I feel like me and Taylor might still have sex, why? I made that bitch famous” by providing recorded ‘proof’ of her consent after asking her if “it was cool?”.

Later on, that was revealed to be based on doctored recording. Her song Look What You Made Me Do on the album Reputation, references this false consent:

The vanishing woman

In response to the backlash, Swift disappeared from sight, renting a house in Europe where no one could find her for two years. She thought the world hated her and was sick of her. This is something Margot Robbie is doing right now, pre-emptively. She recently admitted she was taking time away from film making for a while out of fear that, after the enormous success of Barbie, ”everybody are probably sick of me”.

The relentless standards of perfection that successful or powerful women are held to, to be considered deserving is something to behold. But women must also be on constant surveillance of the limits of society’s tolerance for them, and then strategically never meet that limit to avoid ‘cancellation’. It seems we just can’t quite let some women deserve or enjoy their success or power, unless they are absolutely, 100 percent, unimpeachably, perfect, yet also, aware and humble enough to stay out of view and know her place, when she is.

While it would be easy to write this off as ‘champagne problems’, as the Barbie movie highlighted, this is a systemic issue for all women. If Taylor Swift or Margot Robbie as white women of immense privilege are vulnerable to it, imagine the challenges for other groups of women.

Double standards

These are standards that men simply are not held to.

I don’t recall Harry Styles being criticised in any way for any missteps he made when accepting the Album of the Year award last year at the Grammys. I don’t see any famous male spectator who regularly attend sports games ever criticised for attending too many games, or accused of it being a play for PR or being shown too much by the broadcast.

In fact, Ryan Reynolds literally bought a sports team then made a documentary about buying a sportsts team and he doesn’t get criticised for doing it for PR. I don’t see other male actor, say George Clooney or Brad Pitt, ever saying they need to step out of the public eye lest the public turn on them for saturating the cultural consciousness.

The former President of the United States was elected to be the President of the United States – the highest office in public service and one of the most powerful positions in the world – despite numerous allegations of wrongdoing, including an infamous recording of his admission on how he assaults women.

Closer to home, this past week we saw our video footage of former Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, still a member of parliament, sprawled on a street, drunk, yelling expletives into his phone. There was criticism of his actions but there was also substantial grace afforded to him and concern aired that he needed medical treatment. You may recall, however when the Finish Prime Minister Sanna Marin, a woman, had a small house party where she had a couple drinks and danced and it was posted to social media. She was forced to apologise publicly to the world.

The silent woman

Nor can we give successful women permission for the voice or feelings they express publicly. Taylor Swift wrote in Dear John (yes, the song she wrote about John Mayer):

Mayer later said publicly how he was humiliated by the song “Because I didn’t deserve it. I’m pretty good at taking accountability now, and I never did anything to deserve that. It was a really lousy thing for her to do.” Despite Mayer (and every other songwriter in the history of the world) using his own life as fodder for his songs (and rumoured to have written his song Paper Doll about Swift), he has never been criticised for it.

Swift has subsequently said in an interview when talking about Folklore several years later:

“The most rage provoking element of being a female is the gaslighting that happens when, for centuries, we’ve been just expected to absorb male behaviour silently. Right? Silent absorption of whatever any guy decides to do. And often times when we, in our enlightened state, in our emboldened state now, respond to bad male behaviour or somebody just doing something that was absolutely out of line and we respond, that response is treated like the offence itself.

There’s been situations recently, somebody who’s very guilty of this in my life, it’s a person who makes me feel- or tries to make me feel- like I’m the offender by having any kind of defence to his offences. It’s like, oh, I have absolutely no right to respond or I’m crazy. I have no right to respond or I’m angry. I have no right to respond or I’m out of line.”

Society struggles to show a woman they are “impressed when she aces their tests”, so we react by picking apart any slight imperfection. Moreover, a woman better not have a reaction to male behaviour, or a public or private expression of her own feelings, or she will be treated as the offender — she will be accused of going about it the wrong way, being humiliating, being petty or spiteful, having a victim mentality, having an illegitimate motive, or just plain wrong.

Double standards for women in every industry

In the corporate realm, if a woman is not perfect or has opinions or feelings then she is accused of being ‘unprofessional’ or hurting the interests of the men around her. It will be coded as what’s in the best interests “of the company” but it will actually be about men’s feelings and reputations.

When Christine Holgate, the former CEO of Australia Post, was put on blast by the press, the Prime Minister and many others for gifting her staff some watches as a bonus for their good performance, it eventually resulted in her stepping down. However, she was an extremely effective CEO, and had turned around the performance of Australia Post.

Compared to those which she succeeded and those that succeeded her, Holgate outperformed and was paid less. Her base salary of $1.375 million was much lower than her predecessor, Ahmed Fahour, who pocketed $5.6 million in a year. Fahour left with a $10 million golden handshake. Nevertheless, when she and her Board made a calculated decision to reward the staff for some landmark agreements they executed, she and the Board chose not to give her staff $150,000 bonuses they were authorised to do and gifted them a $5000 watch instead. The Prime Minister at the time, used it as a political point scoring exercise, demanding in parliament that she step aside for awarding her staff such an egregious gift.

Eventually she would be forced to step aside for the “good of Australia Post”. Her successor went on to actually award eight senior executives collectively $4.45m in bonuses with another $24m in incentives paid to 362 non-executive staff, who already earned more than $235,000. And there was no controversy whatsoever. The moral of the story is, despite her success in her role, despite history subsequently showing her not to have made a mistake afterall, she was held to higher standards and the perception that was not utterly perfect, was her downfall.

Grace Tame, as Australian of the Year, was a force to be reckoned with in highlighting the plight of victims of child sexual abuse. She categorically refused to be silent about her opinions and feelings, or to play nice simply to placate the people around her, and for that she was relentlessly criticised.

Despite being an extremely effective Australian Of The Year, promoting awareness and legislative change for the victims of child sexual abuse, she was accused of being a ‘brat’, ‘disrespectful’ and unprofessional for refusing to smile in photos, for example. She was accused of not having sufficient deference for those who bestowed the award on her , or undermining the then Prime Minister Scott Morrison as though she was using her position to make a political statement….sounding familiar? (But also, so what if she was?). Grace Tame received far more criticism for simply not smiling than Scott Morrison ever did for secretly assuming 8 portfolios.

Over the years, when I’ve dared to have opinions, express my feelings or not tolerate poor male behaviour in the workplace, I’ve been called stupid, or crazy (the classic insults if you want to undermine a woman) or psychologically damaged, and made out to be the offender as a result. All these accusations, comments and feedback, were always from men.

This is not about not taking on board constructive feedback which we should all do. It’s also not saying women can’t be called out when they behave badly themselves. This is about how intolerant we are of women refusing to absorb male behaviour that they believe is out of line, or to stand up for themselves and how we try to coerce women to silence by making them out to be the offenders when they do. It’s also about how when women are successful, or they gain any power, we will still reserve the right punish them or dismiss them for the slightest missteps that simply don’t apply to men.

Are we really saying for women to enjoy their power or success or to not be relentlessly criticised, they should be perfect, and if not perfect, then neither seen, nor heard?

I’ll leave you with a lyric from The Man, a song from Swifts album Lover which I think is apt for this article:

The post The relentless pressure on women to be perfect and silent to ‘deserve’ their success appeared first on Women's Agenda.

She’d been suffering from suicidal thoughts, and now says fronting the inquiry was one of the hardest things she’s ever done.

“I was still quite ill when I went to parliament but I had to find that strength to speak. I knew it was the only way we could get things to change,” Holgate told the Forbes Australia Women’s Summit on Wednesday.

“To go to parliament — the very place you were abused — and to speak up against the very man who abused you. And it’s his house, not yours. A  lot of people are telling you not to do it.”

The man she is referring to here is former Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

“But one day I just woke up and – excuse me for swearing – I just thought ‘fuck you bastards!’”

Holgate, who is now the CEO of Team Global Express, told the audience what it was like when Morrison told parliament she could “go” if she refused to stand aside from her job after it was revealed she had spent $20,000 on rewarding four executives with Cartier watches after they closed a $200 million plus deal.

“When something happens to you and somebody in one minute can destroy your whole life and whole career, you go through a whole set of experiences,” she said.

The inquiry eventually demanded Morrison apologise to Holgate over her treatment. 

Holgate said she wasn’t sure she had the capacity to front the inquiry at the time, but that ultimately she needed to use her experience to push for positive change. 

“If I didn’t do it, I would never have been able to live with myself, because if you don’t speak out you tolerate it,” she said. 

“How would I ever have deserved the right to lead people again and to ask those people to respect each other if I was prepared to be abused and silenced.

“You feel incredibly alone, but once you get to that stage you can lift your head up and you can take it and use it for positive change.”

Holgate also referred to the Saturday morning she woke up to find herself depicted as a prostitute in a national newspaper. 

“It was the Saturday morning that followed that I was depicted as a prostitute in the Saturday morning paper. That wouldn’t have happened to a man. Yet it was deemed okay. I was told I was not allowed to speak. I was silenced.”

Strength from Carla Zampatti

Holgate shared a moving story about her friendship with the late Carla Zampatti, one of Australia’s most beloved fashion designers, and how support from Zampatti gave her strength to front the inquiry. 

“I used to meet her on a Thursday afternoon,” Holgate said.

“Forgive me if I get her accent wrong, but she went, ‘Darling, what are you going to wear?’ I went ‘Carla, wear!? I’m lying on the bathroom floor vomiting most days.’

“And she said, ‘Darling you have to look fabulous. The whole country will be looking at you.’

Zampatti gave her a jacket to wear on the day – it was suffragette white. Sadly, Zampatti passed away one week before Hoglate gave evidence. 

“But wearing her jacket that day, I felt I had her armour, her soul, her protection. I had the vibe of people like Wendy McCarthy. I had the strength.”

The post ‘I just thought ‘fuck you bastards’: Christine Holgate on fighting back appeared first on Women's Agenda.

Mckenna was appointed to the role by Communications Minister Michelle Rowland and Finance Minister Katy Gallagher on Thursday. She will step in as Chair following the departure of Lucio Di Bartolomeo, whose term has come to an end.

McKenna has vast experience in the corporate world, having been group director of News Corp’s broadcasting arm since 2016. She is the chairman of Fox Sports, Foxtel, Sky News and Nova Entertainment. She is a director of AMCIL Limited and has been a partner at McKinsey & Company. She is also a former director of Woolworths.

“Ms McKenna’s knowledge, leadership and experience will help support Australia Post as it modernises and adapts to meet shifting consumer demand. The government looks forward to working with her in her new role,” Rowland and Gallagher said in a statement.

“The appointment of Ms McKenna and her extensive experience in corporate governance will help support this treasured national institution in achieving these important outcomes.”.

McKenna comes to role at Australia Post after a turbulent period for the national postal service, which involved the controversial departure of its former CEO, Christine Holgate.

Holgate received a $1 million payout from her former employer for her treatment during the fallout of the Cartier watches scandal (where she had signed off on a number of Cartier watches for executives totaling around $20,000 after they had closed a signifiant deal).

The payout came after former Prime Minister Scott Morrison publicly humiliated Holgate on the floor of parliament, demanding “she should go” over the Cartier watches.

Australia Post admitted it lost an “effective CEO” in Holgate. She is now the Group CEO of Global Express.

On Thursday, Rowland and Gallagher acknowledged the service of Lucio Di Bartolomeo, Australia Post’s outgoing Chair.

The post Siobhan McKenna appointed new Chair of Australia Post appeared first on Women's Agenda.

And it’s a payout that costs a lot more than the $5000 a-piece watches that Holgate was dragged over the coals for signing off on as a bonus for four executives, who had landed a massive major banking deal.

Holgate has received a $1 million payout from her former employer, following a negotiated settlement announced today that will also see her receiving $100,000 to cover her legal bills.

In a joint statement released Wednesday morning, Australia Post acknowledged that it lost an effective CEO in late 2020, and that the payment has been made without any admission of liability.

“Australia Post acknowledges that it has lost an effective CEO following the events on the morning of 22 October 2020. Australia Post regrets the difficult circumstances surrounding Ms Holgate’s departure from her role as CEO,” it read.

“Australia Post recognises and thanks Ms Holgate for her outstanding contribution and strong leadership during her employment as CEO of Australia Post. Australia Post wishes Ms Holgate the best in her future endeavours.”

Holgate will receive the million dollar payment as an “employment termination payment”, which accounts for around eight months of her salary.

The Chair of Australia Post Lucio Di Bartolomeo– as well as Prime Minister Scott Morrison who publicly humiliated Holgate by demanding that “she should go” on the floor of Parliament — must both be wondering if it was all worth it.

Because it’s not just about one million dollars.

Holgate also has a new job, recently appointed as CEO of Australia Post rival, Global Express, taking on the job within days of her non-compete clause with Australia Post expiring.

Let’s also not forget that she used her time appearing in front of a Senate Estimates committee to describe how she was “driven to despair”, “humiliated by a prime minister” and “thrown under the bus of the chairman of Australia Post, to curry favour with his political master”, as well as to tell the men who put her in that position that she is “still here and I’m stronger for surviving it.”

Meanwhile, of course, Holgate also took the opportunity of that very public appearance to call out the “bullying, harassment and abuse of power” she has witnessed, and that she believed the way she was treated was a gender issue. She noted the recent reports of corruption in Parliament that were aired around the same time that Morrison demanded she leave Australia Post, as well as the fact he had members in his Cabinet “accused of the most terrible atrocities against women”. Holgate compared all of this to what she had been publicly humiliated for doing, “I bought four watches, two years ago.”

Indeed, Holgate left Australia Post with a powerful voice that is willing and able to call out hypocrisy, bullying and sexism.

She’s said multiple times that she is expecting an apology from the Prime Minister, telling Channel Nine back in May that she hadn’t heard from him, yet: “He can find my internet and I will take his call any day.”

She may not get the apology. But Holgate is certainly getting other forms of retribution. Particularly now able to use her leadership talent and experience managing a major delivery and logistics experience to drive the “potential” of Global Express, with 8000 workers across Australia and New Zealand and growing.

The post Worth it? Christine Holgate leaves with $1 million payout, new job and powerful voice calling out hypocrisy appeared first on Women's Agenda.

The news comes within days of Holgate ending her non-compete clause with Australia Post, and weeks after she appeared before a Senate hearing in which she described how she was “bullied” and “humiliated” out of her job, and when she also described how she was “thrown under the bus” by the Chairman of Australia Post.

She said at the time she wanted to see those responsible for her dismissal to be “held to account” and that she was expecting an apology from the Prime Minister, who effectively fired her from the role on the floor of Parliament.

Her leadership talent and experience managing a major delivery and logistics organisation will now go elsewhere, with Holgate saying she is “honoured to be joining the Global Express team” and that she strongly believes in the “potential” of the business.

Global Express was recently acquired by Allegro Funds from Toll group. The Australian Financial Review reports that it recorded $3.2 billion in revenue during the 2020 financial year.

Holgate also shared more on the news on Nine’s Today this morning.

“It was a big decision, but it’s not a hard decision. It’s doing something I love, which is growing a business,” she said.

Asked if she thought Australia Post would be a “bit worried” about her taking her role, Holgate said: “Hopefully they will give me a bit more of their business and help us make it a bit stronger.”

But she remained positive about Australia Post, noting the hundred thousand families involved. She said what happened to her came down to a few individuals.

And she also referenced the more than “100,000 messages and letters” she’s received since she opened up about her experience — saying that prior to doing so she had been silent “and sometimes when you are silent you can feel alone.”

Holgate confirmed that Australia Post has agreed to mediation and that she has promised to stay confidential on the process, but she’s hopeful that it can help wounds “heal”.

As for her long awaited apology from the PM? It hasn’t yet come.

“I haven’t heard from the prime minister yet. He can find my number on the internet and I will take his call any day,” she told Today.

The post Christine Holgate appointed CEO of Global Express, rivaling her former employer Australia Post appeared first on Women's Agenda.

This is despite the fact that in 2020, Mr Pahari was involved in a workplace sexual harassment scandal that resulted in assets under management falling $6 billion over 12 months as employees scrambled to leave the beleaguered company, and investors pulled away.

While Pahari’s imminent windfall might be contractual and disconnected to his conduct, it’s a cold comfort for people damaged by his bad behaviour.

It begs the question: why is it that bad behaviour does not lead to bad consequences for some?

Compare and contrast this to the treatment that former Australia Post CEO Christine Holgate received, for example.

As a consequence of gifting four executives with Cartier watches valued at a total of $20 000 for securing a lucrative deal, Prime Minister Scott Morrison coined the gifts as “disgraceful” in Parliament. Holgate lost her job (despite the government insisting that she quit of her own volition) and has faced severe reputational damage since a slew of incensed men led by the Prime Minister hog-piled on the movement.

There’s a long history of this differential treatment.

Junior publicist, Kristy Fraser-Kirk, sued David Jones for $37m due to the sexual harassment she endured at the hands of then CEO, Mark McInnes. Fraser-Kirk received $850 000 in the end (much of which went to paying her legal bills) and Mr McInnes resigned, complete with a golden handshake rumoured to be at least $2m.

Meanwhile, Fraser-Kirk was labelled a ‘gold digger’ and McInnes an ‘inveterate flirt who had simply misread the signals’. Fraser-Kirk was left to flee Australia to escape the vitriol, while McInnes was employed as head of Solomon Lew’s Premier Retail and Executive Director of Premier Investments up until January this year when he stepped down for personal reasons.  

Cadet reporter, Amy Taeuber, and her freelance sister Sophie were BOTH sacked by Channel 7 after Amy lodged a complaint of harassment against a senior male reporter. A few days after lodging her complaint, Amy was summoned to a meeting with HR and escorted from the building, told she was being suspended. The male reporter remained safely employed.

Or take Amber Harrison, Executive Assistant at Seven West Media whose contract was terminated when the company learned of a consensual affair between she and [married] CEO, Tim Worner. She left her position in 2014 with an enforced gag order firmly in place. Harrison became involved in a messy court battle with the broadcaster after she publicly disclosed details of the affair in 2016, and eventually walked away. As for Worner? He remained in his position for a further three years. 

Just last year, an independent investigation commissioned by the High Court found that former Justice Dyson Heydon sexually harassed a minimum of 6 former associates. Despite this, Justice Heydon retains his Order of Australia.

And most recently, Christian Porter continues to hold his position as a high-ranking minister, despite persistent and wide-ranging claims in relation to his behaviour with women recently and earlier in his career.

I’m sure you can see the pattern.

If you are a senior male, in a position of power and/or profit generation, then bad behaviour doesn’t always lead to a bad outcome. In a country where Aboriginal people are incarcerated for minor offences, how can public and private sector leaders in Australia not see the unjustifiable inequity of this situation?

There’s a lot of talk now about ending the harassment and mistreatment of women at work and in the community. When it comes to the workplace – we have no hope of any change as long as bad behaviour continues to be tolerated, minimised and even rewarded.

Good Leaver/Bad Leaver clauses in bonus schemes have been widely used for a long time – so why do we not see them transparently apply to corporate benefits and recognition? If business is serious about creating change and improving the treatment of people in the workplace, then they need to hold up the mirror and take an honest look at the structural and behavioural disincentives to creating true culture change.

The post We have no hope of ending harassment at work so long as bad behaviour continues to be rewarded appeared first on Women's Agenda.

Welcome to Australia where sexism isn’t just everywhere, it’s brazen!

A leadership crisis or a leadership vacuum?

What’s worse? The prevalence of sexism or the lengths others will go to protect perpetrators

Sexism & sexual harassment have a lot to answer for

Long live International Women’s Day? I certainly hope not

If this is merit isn’t it time to try something else?

I just dove into the Women’s Agenda archives as I do from time to time, looking for a particular piece of writing, when the headlines above caught my eye. 

They all belong to stories that were published on Women’s Agenda during a one month period … back in 2015. Six years ago. Realising that every one of those headlines could have been attached to a piece written this year felt like a sucker punch.

As the author of most of those stories I am, quite obviously, well aware that the subject matter in question is sadly both ubiquitous and timeless. 

I know there is nothing new about blatant sexism, about prolific sexual harassment, about sexual violence, about lucrative incompetence dressed up as ‘merit’ or prime ministers with a wholly absent regard for improving the lives of women. I know all of that. And I know there are hundreds of thousands of women who have known that for far longer than I have.   

The ways in which our workplaces, parliaments, schools, universities, businesses, communities and leaders are failing women has reached a very public crescendo in 2021. For some, Prime Minister Scott Morrison included, the events of 2021 have constituted a “big wake up call”. But, to quote Tracy Grimshaw, it’s been less of a shock to 52% of Australians who know all too well the difficulties too often associated with being female.

Being fed up with that enduring, immutable understanding is what ignited the fury that compelled tens of thousands of Australians to take to the streets all around the nation back in March. #March4Justice could only seem a spontaneous reaction to new information to someone who hasn’t been paying attention. Women didn’t march because it just dawned on them, this year, that women are being failed. They marched because women being failed has been wilfully and systematically overlooked, ignored, dismissed and disregarded for too long. 

Which brings me to the reason for my trip down memory lane that brought me face to face with the old headlines. I delved into the Women’s Agenda back catalogue after seeing the news that the 2021 Women’s Agenda Leadership Award finalists had been announced. That particular announcement always feels uniquely wonderful but never has it felt more urgently necessary than in April 2021.

Casting your eye over the finalists selected from over 900 entries is a welcome counterpoint to the toxicity 2021 has revealed so many women endure.  

As a longtime writer and editor here, I am naturally completely biased, possibly closer to evangelical, about Women’s Agenda. Its value and function as an independent and small-but-mighty, female-owned media platform that champions women and unapologetically applies a gender-lens to the news daily cannot be overstated.

But the annual Leadership Awards are the most tangible expression of one of its defining objectives; to create new female role models, to uncover the achievements of unsung leaders, to place the spotlight on a diverse range of emerging female leaders doing extraordinary things. (Small aside if you’re wondering, I can brag shamelessly about these awards because aside from always being there and being involved behind the scenes, I cannot claim any credit! Angela Priestley and Tarla Lambert are the powerhouses who make it happen.) 

These awards, conceived by Angela and Marina Go in 2013, have always been living testament to the fact that there is no shortage of talent, education, skill, capability, ambition or determination among women in Australia. These awards are proof women are not underrepresented because they’re deficient. Australia’s systems, our policy settings, our infrastructure, workplaces and attitudes, are deficient in supporting, accommodating and recognising female talent. And yet even with structural hurdles women are out there doing and achieving remarkable things.  

In 2015 the former Prime Minister Julia Gillard delivered a keynote address at the Leadership Awards in Sydney in front of 400 guests. Giving a welcome speech on that occasion remains a career highlight I’ll never forget and yet I live in hope for the day the remarks I made are rendered obsolete.

That day is not yet upon us. The reason I searched the archives for the speech I gave on the 26th of February in 2015 was because I sensed how tragically prescient the comments I delivered that day would feel to re-read in 2021. It felt worse to read back than I expected.  

Back in 2015 I said it was time to tell Australian men and women a new story about women, because the old story wasn’t working.  

“When an author can sell a million copies of a single book and be reduced to “plain of feature and overweight” in her obituary, as the late Colleen McCullough was, it is clear that the story isn’t working.

When a seeded tennis player can finish a match at an international tournament and be asked to give a twirl, like Eugenie Bouchard was at the Australia Open, it is clear the story isn’t working. 

When it is revealed that the gap between what men and women earn in certain areas of management, in Australia in 2015, is as high as 45%, it is clear. 

When Alan Kohler presents research on the ABC News about female-led companies in America and can’t show a corresponding graph for female-led companies in the ASX because there aren’t enough to form a sample size. 

When the first two months of a year haven’t even finished and already 15 Australian women have been killed at the hands of a partner or an ex-partner. 

When a country like Australia can rank number 1 in the world for educating women but rank 52nd in the world for female workforce participation and yet barely create a ripple in the news.  

All of these things illustrate that the story isn’t working.”

Extract from a speech delivered in February 2015

In 2021 the details might be a little different but the substance is shatteringly similar. As devastating as it felt to contemplate how little has changed in the intervening six years – not for lack of solutions but the absence of commitment and leadership – at the very end of my speech I found a glimmer of hope. 

Shining a light on women who defy the odds won’t alone create change but it can certainly plant the powerful seeds that might. Supporting women to create a new story and a new conversation for women matters. It is my sincere hope that each of us might leave here today more emboldened to live the new story.’  

In 2021 women in Australia are more emboldened than ever before to live a new story and lead a new, necessary and deeply uncomfortable conversation. A story in which women who have been hurt or humiliated or silenced or punished are willing to directly challenge the assumptions, leaders, power, and systems that have failed them – and, critically – be met with widespread support and solidarity.

The courage of women like Grace Tame and Brittany Higgins and Christine Holgate to fight back against powerful institutions and individuals, has started a new conversation for women in Australia. These women were less powerful than the people and structures that hurt and failed them, but they are all incredibly privileged. They are white, middle-class and highly educated. That privilege didn’t protect them from being hurt but what they were subject to raises a sobering and pertinent question, that Industry Professor at the Jumbunna Institute of Education and Research, University of Technology Sydney, Nareen Young, posed last week. If a woman as privileged and relatively powerful as Christine Holgate can be bullied, imagine the treatment that less privileged, less powerful women face at work?

The discrimination, harassment and violence that women suffer is prolific and it is compounded exponentially by racism, disadvantage and inequity for First Nations women and women of colour.

The story needs to change for all women in Australia – but for some women there is more that needs to change.

If you are committed to changing the story for women in Australia I invite you to support the 2021 Women’s Agenda Leadership Awards. Read about the current and past finalists. Be overwhelmed by their tenacity, determination and innovation. Consider the breadth and depth of their talent, and note the diversity of the women recognised. Follow them online. Support their ventures. Promote their work. If it’s at all feasible to buy a ticket to the dinner on the 29th April in Sydney, please come along. Even better, buy a table!

This event often sells out and you will not be disappointed. Aside from hearing from Yasmin Poole, Louise Milligan and Senator Larissa Waters in conversation with Tarla Lambert, you will walk away inspired and comforted that the future of this country is in good hands.

The post I just revisited a speech I gave in 2015. It could have been delivered today appeared first on Women's Agenda.

It feels like every day brings more harrowing claims of harassment, bullying and abuse of women in our community.

In the space of just two months, we have seen Brittany Higgins’ claims she was raped at parliament, historical rape allegations against Christian Porter (which he denies), staffers performing sex acts on the desks of female MPs, MP Andrew Laming’s harassment of women and Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s “bullying” of Australia Post CEO Christine Holgate.

Last week, senior Indigenous academics authored an open letter, decrying the lack of public concern and national planning about the violence against First Nations women. Indigenous people are 32 times more likely to be hospitalised for family violence than a non-Indigenous adult.

And as Australia marks 30 years since the royal commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody, the massive over-representation of Indigenous women in the prison population remains a “national shame”.

There is hope

Many women are understandably feeling traumatised, triggered, overwhelmed and exhausted. And it would be easy to think it is all bad news and nothing is changing.

* Brittany Higgins
* Kate
* Defence chief warns women re alcohol & being attractive.
* Laming upskirts
* Empathy training
* Fin Review on Sam Maiden
* Christine Holgate
* Navy Twerkers
* Newspaper 1985-style phwoars
What a time to be alive, a woman, in Australia.

— Louise Milligan (@Milliganreports) April 14, 2021

But there is hope. As a result of what’s emerged, we’ve seen an outpouring of rage from people around Australia who are fed up with the way we treat women and victim-survivors. As an organiser of the recent March 4 Justice rally in Canberra, I saw firsthand the collective anger and frustration directed at federal parliament and wider society and the thirst for change.

I’m also taking heart from the many Australians — some household names, some less well-known — who are fighting for change and making a difference to gender equality. Here are just nine.

1. Grace Tame

Tame is the 2021 Australian of the Year for her advocacy for survivors of sexual assault. She is a prime example of how one person can make concrete change.

As a teenager, Tame was groomed and sexually abused by her school teacher. But despite his conviction and jailing, she was unable to publicly share her story because of Tasmania’s sexual assault victim gag laws. https://www.youtube.com/embed/LJmwOTfjn9U?wmode=transparent&start=0

Almost a decade later, her experience was a catalyst for the creation of the #LetHerSpeak campaign , which reformed these laws.

Tame is now redefining what it means to be a survivor of abuse. Her focus is on empowering survivors and using education as the primary method of prevention. As she says,

Change is happening and it’s happening right now.

2. Brittany Higgins

Higgins can arguably be credited as prompting Australia’s second #MeToo wave.

A former Liberal staffer, Higgins came forward in February with allegations she was raped in parliament house by a male colleague. In part, she was inspired by Tame’s call to arms a month earlier.

Higgins’ claims have rocked Australian politics, sparking a fresh focus into its toxic culture. In the weeks since, more allegations of sexism and assault in politics have emerged, with an independent inquiry into parliament house culture now underway.

But Higgins has also ignited the anger of many around Australia, resulting in nationwide protests against sexism and gendered violence. In her speech at the March 4 Justice rally in Canberra, she said,

I came forward with my story to hopefully protect other women.

3. Latoya Aroha Rule

Aroha Rule, a Wiradjuri and Māori Takatāpui person, is an activist and writer.

After their brother Wayne Fella Morrison died in custody, Aroha Rule created the #JusticeforFella campaign and helped organise nationwide protests calling for justice for the hundreds of Aboriginal people who have died in custody.

Around the recent March 4 Justice rallies, Aroha Rule played a pivotal role, drawing attention to the experiences of First Nations women.

Imagine if white women surrounded Parliament House to call for justice for dead black women.

— Latoya Aroha Rule (@latoya_aroha) March 10, 2021

As they wrote in The Guardian:

Women’s liberation marches have been growing since the 1960s in Australia, just as the incarceration rates and deaths of Aboriginal women in custody have steadily increased.

They also point out the complexity of experiences and perspectives when it comes to equality, race, gender and sexuality.

Taking a minute to reiterate that voices of queer & gender diverse ppl in the abolitionist movement, especially queer ppl who’ve lived experience of being in custody, & queer ppl campaigning against the killing of their family members in custody, really fucking matter!

— Latoya Aroha Rule (@latoya_aroha) March 20, 2021

4. Stella Donnelly

Donnelly is a singer-songwriter who writes music that critiques rape culture, the patriarchy and Australian politics.

Her first song, Boys Will Be Boys, was written about a friend’s sexual assault and released in 2017 during the “first wave” of the #MeToo movement in Australia. It was quickly adopted as an anthem by victim-survivors.

Why was she all alone

Wearing her shirt that low

They said, ‘boys will be boys’

Deaf to the word no

Through a “reel-‘em-in, knock-’em-out” comedic style of lyrics and indie-pop tunes, Donnelly sparks awareness of issues like sexism and sexual assault for a wide audience.

5. Amy McQuire

McQuire, a Darumbal and South Sea Islander woman from Rockhampton, is a journalist, writer and PhD candidate, researching media representations of violence against Aboriginal women.

She is one of a number of younger Indigenous voices who are helping to put First Nations women at the centre of conversations about violence against women and equality.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amy McQuire (@amymcquire_)

McQuire has written extensively on Aboriginal deaths in custody and the erasure of Aboriginal women from the mainstream feminist movement and discussions about domestic violence.

If you think Aboriginal women have been silent, it’s only because you haven’t heard us, our voices now hoarse after decades of screaming into the abyss of Australia’s apathy.

She also writes about the racism inherent in violence against Indigenous women.

In Australia, violence was not just used as a tool of patriarchy – it was and is used as a tool of colonialism.

When we talk about eliminating violence against Aboriginal women, we aren’t just talking about individual acts, or solely interpersonal violence. Sexual violence was and is used as a strategy to mark our bodies as acceptable for violation, not just by individuals, but by the forces of the state.

6. Saxon Mullins

In a 2018 Four Corners episode, Mullins told the story of her 2013 sexual assault and the widely publicised trials and appeals that followed.

This generated debate about sexual consent laws and how they differ around the country. The NSW Law Reform Commission then reviewed the section of the Crimes Act that deals with sexual assault and consent (the final report was a disappointment to those wanting comprehensive reforms).

Mullins recently founded the Rape and Sexual Assault Research and Advocacy Centre. It aims to prevent sexual violence through reforming consent laws and raising public understanding of consent, healthy relationships and sex education.

As she recently told the ABC’s 7.30,

I have moved into an advocacy position […] this feels like my resolution. This feels like me being able to finish this story how I think it should be finished with real change.

7. Yasmin Poole

Poole is a speaker, writer and youth advocate who champions the inclusion of young women, particularly women of colour, in political conversations.

In 2019, she was listed in both the 40 Under 40 Most Influential Asian Australians and the Australian Financial Review’s 100 Women of Influence. She was also named The Martin Luther King Jr Center’s 2021 Youth Influencer of the Year.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Yasmin Poole (@yasmin.poole)

After the March 4 Justice, Poole criticised Morrison’s comments about the rally — he said protesters in other countries are often “met with bullets” — and the inadequate handling of Higgins’ allegations by the government.

I’m not thankful for not being shot. I’m furious. I am angry that any young woman that desires or aspires to go into politics now will have to think twice.

Poole clearly demonstrates that young women need not wait to speak up about political issues and create societal change. They aren’t simply “future leaders” but, like Poole, are already leading the way.

8. Nicole Lee

Lee is a family violence and disability activist. As a woman with disability and a survivor of family violence, Lee fights for the rights of survivors who are often excluded from this conversation altogether.

“If we’ve got 50 per cent of men to women, and if they’re all white, straight, able, and neurotypical, and cisgendered, then that’s still not equality.” Nicole Lee says she feels left out of the conversation about gender equality because it excludes real diversity #TheDrum pic.twitter.com/GMmNFZurGS

— ABC The Drum (@ABCthedrum) May 15, 2019

As a member of Victoria’s Victims Survivors Advisory Council, Lee has helped shaped the state’s response to family violence.

We can’t get away from the fact that women with disabilities are vulnerable. Society is slowly changing, but as much as people hate hearing it women are already on the back foot and then you add a disability […] we’re so much further behind.

9. Caitlin Figueiredo

Figueiredo is an Anglo-Indian woman, internationally recognised activist and social entrepreneur.

She is the founder and CEO of Jasiri Australia, a youth-led movement that encourages girls to be leaders in their communities, and fights for the increased representation of women in politics through leading the Girls Takeover Parliament program.

As Figueiredo said in 2017,

I want to accelerate change.

Blair Williams, Research Fellow, Global Institute for Women’s Leadership (GIWL), Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Now for some better news: 9 Australians fighting for gender equality and making a difference appeared first on Women's Agenda.

This time it was in relation to Christine Holgate, the former CEO of Australia Post, who Morrison effectively fired on the floor of Parliament late last year.

More than fire her, he humiliated her. He said he was “appalled” by Holgate’s actions signing off on four watches worth around $20,000 — given as gifts to four executives after they just closed a $200 million plus deal.

He said the purchases would not pass the “pub test” and that if Holgate did not want to stand aside then “she can go”. He made all of these comments without speaking to Holgate first or being fully briefed on the situation. Perhaps, most tellingly, he made all these comments at a time when several members of his own party had their own questions to answer regarding the potential misuse of millions of dollars in taxpayer money.

Yesterday, during a parliamentary inquiry, Holgate shared her side of the story, including how at one point the experience had left her “suicidal”. Last night in addition to that hearing, Holgate shared an interview with the ABC’s 7:30, again reiterating how the Prime Minister had “humiliated her”.

“So maybe if the PM is watching, he could give me a call. I would love an apology,” she said.

But the word ‘sorry’ — or even any kind of attempt at an apology — is not coming. Rather, Morrison said he “regrets” any distress his language may have caused.

“It’s a government company. It’s taxpayers’ money. And it should be treated with the same level of respect across government organisations,” he said. The hypocrisy in his double-down never seeming to faze him.

As Holgate herself outlined during the Senate inquiry on Tuesday, there’s a dire lack of “respect” that Morrison’s own ministers have applied to their spending of taxpayer dollars, of which Morrison has failed to personally address.

Morrison’s admission of regret puts the responsibility again on the individual impacted — something he’s developed a habit of doing in expressing such regrets and has likely done his entire career.

In Holgate’s case, his regret came down to the manner in which Holgate had received what he’d said about her in parliament.

“The language in Parliament was very strong,” Morrison said Wednesday morning. “It was not my intention to cause distress to Ms Holgate and I regret any distress that that strong language may have caused to her, and indeed did cause to her. That was not my intention.”

Morrison added that the words he had said were “not about gender”. Rather it was about the Cartier watches that he said had gone to “well paid executives.”

But this “strong language” the PM alludes to, that he regularly employs, has a habit of causing distress.

Last month, the PM told parliament that we should be grateful that protesters participating in the #March4Justice events were not “met with bullets”– comments which triggered swift backlash.

When he stood in front of journalists a week later to declare he had been “hearing women”, he stopped short of apologising for the bullets comments. There was certainly no ‘s’ word shared. Instead, he “acknowledged” that such a statement may have come off as offensive.

He also failed to apologise for comments he made in response to rape allegations made by Brittany Higgins, in which he said it took a conversation with his wife who urged him to consider how he’d feel if it had happened to one of his daughters, in order to appreciate the enormity of the situation.

Back in 2019, The Saturday Paper revealed that Morrison paid an empathy consultant $190,000 for his team to learn to compassionately liaise with drought-stricken communities across Australia.

$190,000 in taxpayer funds to learn what any leader in his position should have figured out by now.

Morrison reverted back to this empathy training “quick fix” most recently, by ordering backbencher Andrew Laming to take a course, in order to understand how his constituents might feel about his actions— and his propensity to bully women.

But let’s be clear. Such training is a waste of time — and a waste of money. No amount of training will teach our PM and many of our MPs how to show true remorse. No amount of training can teach them how to say sorry.

Apparently, there’s only one place it works, and that’s when it comes to dealing with News Corp; a company which controls 59% of newspaper readership in Australia, including 17 of 31 metropolitan newspapers according to a new report by GetUp.

Morrison’s biggest and best apology this year came late one night on his Facebook page, in which he shared his deep regret over his insensitive approach to a question from a News Ltd journalist, referencing an anonymous incident of sexual harassment at News Ltd which the company rejected.

“I accept their account. I was wrong to raise it, the emotion of the moment is no excuse.

“I especially wish to apologise to the individual at the centre of the incident and others directly impacted. I had no right to raise this issue and especially without their permission.”

It’s interesting who and what Morrison reserves his best (and only) apologies for.

The post Christine Holgate will not get an apology from the Prime Minister because he is incapable of saying sorry. Unless News Corp is involved appeared first on Women's Agenda.

They underestimated how forensically she’d prepare evidence regarding her claim that she never agreed to stand down from the role. And they underestimated how she’d use the media interest in her story to call out example after example of the hypocrisy of Prime minister Scott Morrison for taking her on over the purchase of four watches for executives.

First, Holgate broke her silence after being sacked on the floor of parliament late last year, by delivering a powerful written statement to Senate Estimate last week.

And speaking in Parliament this morning, she went much further. Delivering a calm and measured responses to various lines of questioning regarding the purchase of those watches, her plans for the future of Australia Post and whether she believed the treatment she received may have been different if she were a man.

She described how she was “bullied out of my job”, that she was unlawfully stood down, and spoke of atrocities against women and taxpayer spending among parliamentarians to highlight the hypocrisy of how she was treated. At one point, she noted she experienced a period of being “suicidal”.

She did so with a number of supportive questions from an unlikely alliance of cross-party women, including Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, Senator Pauline Hanson and Senator Bridget McKenzie.

“I was bullied out of my job. I was humiliated and driven to despair. I was thrown under the bus of the chairman of Australia Post, to curry favour with his political masters. But I’m still here and I’m stronger for surviving it.”

Composed and measured the entire time, Holgate urged that those involved in her dismissal be “held to account”.

“I do not want what happened to me to happen to any individual ever again in any workplace,” she said.

“Yet I lost my job, a job that I loved, because I was humiliated by our prime minister for committing no offence and then bullied by my chairman who unlawfully stood me down under public direction of the prime minister. This made my leadership at Australia Post untenable and seriously threatened my health.

“I have done no wrong. Their bullying of me was far from over. I was subjected to a biased investigation and intimidated with constant threats of further allegations and criticism.”

She said she’s been depicted in ways that she has not seen applied to male counterparts.

“I think it would be fair to say I’ve never seen a media article comment about a male politician’s watch, and yet I was depicted as a prostitute, humiliated. I have never seen any male public servant depicted that way.

“So do I believe it’s particularly a gender issue? You’re absolutely right I do.

“But do I believe the real problem here is bullying, harassment and abuse of power, I absolutely do.”

She noted recent reports about corruption in Parliament, that were aired around the same time that she was questioned about the four watches she’d purchased back on November 9.

“The prime mininster was asked about the behaviour of two of his ministers… his response was ‘that was two years ago'”.

“I bought four watches, two years ago.”

“He has people in his Cabinet, members of parliament, who have been accused of the most terrible atrocities against women — proven with one of them, and they are allowed to stand and represent their jobs. I was forced to stand down.”

Holgate also noted the numerous media reports out this week, noting the millions of dollars spent on parliamentarians taking flights.

Holgate told Senator Sarah Hanson Young that she believed she deserved the opportunity for either the mininster or the prime mininster to speak with her, but neither did. She said that Morrison never spoke to her.

She said she did not know why the Prime Minister took the action that he did, demanding that she step aside on the floor of parliament.

“I’m putting to you today, I was unlawfully stood down and my contract got repudiated. I’ve only ever asked for respect. And I have never been allowed it. So, maybe I answer that slightly differently. I don’t know why the Prime Minister did what he did. But I was unlawfully stood down, I believe, because he instructed it to be so.”

Holgate also accused Australia Post chair Lucio Di Bartolemeo of lying, saying that he fabricated an agreement between the two of them that Holgate had agreed to step down.

“Those gifts, rewards, were given during a moment of celebration in the organisation. They were not in any breach of any policy,” she said.

No Australia Post employees or representatives raised concerns about the gifts. “I could have given – awarded those four people up to $150,000 each as a bonus. I chose not to. I chose to give them a watch,” she said.

These men also failed to understand Holgate’s love for her job and desire to build a bigger and better Australia Post. Indeed, Holgate still has “CEO of Australia Post” on her LinkedIn profile.

So would she return? Well the chair would have to leave. And, Holgate has now been officially replaced by a man. Scott Morrison named Holgate’s successor within 24 hours of Holgate making this parliamentary appearance, with Paul Graham appointed.

“I love Australia Post, there is no day that I don’t admire and respect its people. But I cannot work for a chair that lies in the Senate and has no integrity. The chair would have to go.”

The post Calm and measured, Christine Holgate slays the bullies and the Morrison Govt hypocrisy appeared first on Women's Agenda.

Scott Morrison is inclined to underestimate tough women.

He’s done this in the past, to his detriment. In 2006, when he was managing director of Tourism Australia, Morrison was sacked after falling out with the board and federal Liberal tourism minister, Fran Bailey.

Years later, in 2018, the Australian Financial Review quoted Tim Fischer, who’d chaired Tourism Australia at the time, saying “a lot of us could see it coming as relations between Scott and Fran Bailey had deteriorated over a range of issues. But Scott didn’t seem to see it.”

Morrison was close to then prime minister John Howard and he thought – erroneously – Howard would step in and save him from Bailey. But Howard supported his minister.

Fast forward to 2021, and Morrison’s grappling with a broad “women’s problem”. And women playing hardball are all around the place.

Take just two current examples, Christine Holgate and Grace Tame.

In a submission to a Senate inquiry released this week Holgate, former Australia Post CEO, has launched a comprehensive counterattack to her being effectively forced out of her job last year, after a ferocious prime ministerial attack.

On a very different front Tame, the young and feisty Australian of the Year, has targeted Morrison’s choice of Amanda Stoker to become the new assistant minister for women.

Morrison in October excoriated Holgate over her rewarding four employees with Cartier watches (worth an average of $5000) for landing a lucrative deal with banks, which sustained Post’s network of franchises around the country.

Immediately after Holgate had told a Senate committee about the watches, a furious Morrison let loose in the parliament. Declaring the action disgraceful, he said: “The chief executive has been instructed to stand aside and, if she doesn’t wish to do that, she can go.”

A devastated Holgate, regarded as a high-performing CEO, soon left her position.

A later inquiry (which the government initially declined to release) found no dishonesty or intentional misuse of Post’s funds, although it did find the purchase of the watches was inconsistent with the legislative obligation imposed on Post.

The controversy has now resurfaced with a Senate inquiry, instigated by Pauline Hanson, at which Holgate will appear next week.

Holgate argues in her submission the watches’ purchase was “legal, within Australia Post’s policies, within my own signing authority limits, approved by the previous Chairman, expensed appropriately, signed off by auditors and the [chief financial officer]”.

While Holgate in her submission focuses her ire on Post’s chairman, Lucio Di Bartolomeo, rather than on Morrison, the affair goes directly to the PM’s original reaction, which blackened her reputation.

Regardless of whether Post, as a government business, should have used watches as rewards, Morrison’s outburst was extreme and ill judged.

It led to a highly competent chief of a government business being publicly trashed and unnecessarily sacrificed, over not very much.

Holgate – who attracted sympathy from many CEOs and support among Australia Post small businesses – has yet to be replaced, a long and expensive process.

Morrison obviously thought the name “Cartier” would resonate (negatively) with his “quiet Australians”. If the employees had each been given cash bonuses of $5000 would he have reacted in the same way? The answer seems clear.

A harder question is, if the CEO had been male, would the PM’s temper tantrum have been as unrestrained?

Impossible to say, of course. But many people, especially women in this current climate of heightened sensitivity, would believe he’d have been more measured.

Grace Tame – whose passionate words when awarded Australian of the Year were an influence on Brittany Higgins to go public with her rape allegation – is potentially an ongoing thorn in the side of a PM trying to assure women he “gets it”.

She’s a strong woman who finds herself, suddenly and unexpectedly, with a megaphone and she will use it all year.

In nominating Stoker, who is socially conservative and can be combative, as assistant minister for women, Morrison was inviting trouble.

Apart from dealing with the problems posed by Christian Porter and Linda Reynolds, the PM’s reshuffle was an effort to improve his and his government’s credentials on women’s issues.

It promoted female ministers and inserted references to “women” in various ministerial titles.

Yet he put Stoker into a position that would inevitably spark a adverse reaction among some women’s advocates.

Tame claimed Stoker had “supported a fake rape crisis tour aimed at falsifying all counts of sexual abuse on campuses across the nation”.

She said Stoker had also “supported” men’s rights advocate Bettina Arndt “who gave a platform [in an interview] to the pedophile who abused me”.

Stoker returned fire, defending her record promoting justice for women, and saying, “I did not attend Ms Arndt’s campus tour. I raised it in Senate estimates to highlight the universities’ inconsistent approaches to free speech and deplatforming.”

This week she dismissed Tame’s claims about falsifying accounts of abuse on campuses as “utter nonsense”.

Leaving aside the nitty gritty of their dispute, in the circumstances Morrison made a provocative choice, when he could have allocated the post to a less controversial frontbencher.

On Thursday Morrison and his new attorney-general Michaelia Cash unveiled the government’s full response to the Sex Discrimination Commissioner’s Respect@Work report.

The measures will strengthen protection for people in workplaces against sexual harrassment and remove the exemption from the sex discrimination legislation that members of parliament and judges now enjoy – although Morrison could not say how this would be applied in relation to MPs.

On Wednesday the government announced a two-day National Women’s Safety Summit to be held in late July.

The budget will have the stamp “women” on parts of it.

But the Prime Minister is not keen on the call, put forward for Friday’s national cabinet by Queensland premier Annastacia Palaszczuk, for a summit to address the “economic and social inequality facing Australian women”.

Palaszczuk, seizing the moment, wants national cabinet to host such a summit, which would have state and territory and stakeholder representatives. It would canvass issues including the pay and superannuation gender gaps and affordable child care.

“It’s the perfect time to have it,” she says. “Everyone is having conversations – in workplaces, around kitchen tables, on social media.”

A combination of such a broad agenda and so many strong women would make that a formidable political challenge for Morrison.

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Scott Morrison finds strong women can be tough players appeared first on Women's Agenda.

It highlights, again, how quickly a woman can be thrown to the wolves when a controversy comes up. The public outrage her actions can inspire, leading even a Prime Minister to publicly declare his “disgust”, denouncing her actions as “not on”.

In Scott Morrison’s case, his move to announce an inquiry into Holgate’s apparent wrongdoing – signing off on a number of Cartier watches for executives totaling around $20,000 – was much swifter and complete than any kind of action we’ve seen from him regarding sexual misconduct within his own party. 

And it’s difficult to not consider other political parallels here, ignored by Morrison: including the ABC’s 7:30 report just last night revealing that Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack intervened on almost a third of the national Building Better Regions Fund projects (during a round of projects totaling $200 million in taxpayer funds). The Fund overwhelmingly favoured Coalition seats.

But Morrison was “shocked and appalled” by the watch purchases. He announced an investigation by the Finance and Communication departments, and demanded Holgate stand aside during the inquiry — even threatening her by saying that if she doesn’t stand aside “she can go”.  

“I was appalled and it is disgraceful and it’s not on,” he said during Question Time back in October.

“So, immediately, I spoke with ministers and from those discussions, decided that there had to be an independent investigation done by the Department, not by Australia Post, and that the Chief Executive should stand aside immediately”.

Immediately. He said.

Within an hour, he took action, so appalled and shocked he was. As, he said, would be any shareholder that might see that kind of “conduct, by a chief executive, the management or the board”

But there’s only one person who took the blame for the purchases: Christine Holgate.

And she paid a huge price. Humiliated, publicly. A lavish splash of cash that made for easy headlines, shared without much context regarding what the watches represented. An easy, memorable target — given so few women hold CEO positions. Her photograph dominated the newspapers. She was a conversation starter, did you see her actually wearing the watch?

Meanwhile, politicians wear their use of taxpayer dollars in more subtle ways — often via the very act of sitting in Parliament, having directed funding programs towards favoured seats that contribute to their election prospects.

Holgate has stayed silent on her departure, refusing interviews from major publications.

Rather, she’s saved her comments for this 154-page Senate submission, not only detailing her side of the story, but also sharing emails, photos of cards and letters. She describes having to seek mental health care and medication after being thrown into a “media storm” and cut off from resources and the support of her leadership team.

She writes that Morrison had been poorly briefed before he publicly attacked her in Question Time, and that she was “hung” for the simple act of rewarding executives for delivering on a landmark contract. 

She says she was disappointed by the lack of public support from other ministers she had worked with. And that her experiences, including alleged bullying by the Chair of Australia Post, Lucio Di Bartolomeo, should not be allowed to happen to anyone, in any organisation.

“The chair of Australia Post not only unlawfully stood me down, he lied repeatedly to the Australian people and to their Parliament about his actions,” she said. “Time after time he has made statements that I had agreed to stand down when I had done no such thing. The evidence in this submission is irrefutable and I urge you to read it in full.”

Holgate also claims that she never agreed to stand aside. Rather, she’d offered to take two weeks of annual leave for the investigation to take place. She disputes the chair’s claims that she had agreed to stand down. 

As for the watches – costing around $5000 each – Holgate says the purchase was in line with Australia Post’s own remuneration policies and had been approved by the former chair. She wrote that she’d been told employees had received watches for great performances at Australia Post for many years, some having even received cars and paid holidays.

On paper, Holgate delivered in her role at Australia Post. There is even a major campaign by Australia Post franchisee owners (and others, including Pauline Hanson, pushing to get Holgate reinstated in the role.

Her base salary and bonus entitlements were significantly lower than the man she replaced, Ahmed Fahour. And although the watches were determined as being “inconsistent” with legislated obligations on the board, she was cleared of “dishonesty, fraud, corruption or intentional misuse” of taxpayer funds in a report released by the government in January. 

Indeed, there was very little “shock” and “disgust” to be found in that report into the purchases, produced by the law firm, Maddocks.

The post Christine Holgate opens up on ‘most harrowing ten days of my career’ appeared first on Women's Agenda.