Sanity check on Super strategy for household with high/low income split

In short we’re a household with one high-income earner with large super balance and one low-income earner with tiny super balance. It's quite sub-optimal at the moment (we've only recently started being financially literate) and we want to improve it. What's your take on the plan below?

Background:
[me] 37, stable income at ~$190,000 and growing, super is $360,000. Hitting concessional contributions cap for 2-3 years and this year I will use up all remaining carry-forward. Work contribution is 17%, I salary-sacrifice 7%.
[Partner] 37, income below $30,000, and will likely stay like this for few more years. Super is <$10,000.
[Dependants] We have one child under 2 years.
[Out-of-super assets] PPOR ~$2M, with $1.7M equity. ~$50,000 in ETFs my partners name. And another ~$300,000 of debt-recycled ETFs in my name.
[Debts] mortgaged debt of ~$300,000, fully tax deductible now (debt recycled). My partner has a UK student loan but doesn't not have to pay it at current income and will be written off in 6 years (irrespective of payments)

Plan going forward:
1) Reduce my salary-sacrifice contribution so that I just meet the $30k cap. With the rest, we will do the following:
2) partner to make a $1,000 non-concessional contribution every year to attract government co-payment
3) me to make a spouse contribution of $3,000 each year, thereby getting a ~$500 tax offset
4) anything extra goes into our out-of-super investments (in my partners name). she will be taxed between 0-16% (2-18% including Medicare levy) for some time. Locking into super for no, or marginal, tax benefit seems unwise.
5) [still unsure] split 85% of previous years contributions into my partner’s super, to reduce my balance and avoid a div 293 at some future year (and maybe Div 296, but unlikely) – seems to early for me to start thinking about this, what do you think?

What would you do differently?