Parmar Parmjeet: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParmar Parmjeet: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 25 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11288. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you for the opportunity to speak in the second reading of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill in the name of Sue Moroney. This bill is to extend the period of paid parental leave to 26 weeks and to have work contact hours for those who are on parental leave. This bill proposes that it should be done in two stages the first stage being increasing to 22 weeks from 1 April 2017 and then increasing to 26 weeks from 1 April 2018.This bill was considered by the Government Administration Committee and I am not a member of that select committee but I understand that the select committee recommended that the work contact hours provision be removed from this bill for a simple reason and the reason is that this National Government has already provided for keeping-in-touch hours. I can see that this bill is driven by the importance of bonding and various other factors that the member listed before but we have increased paid parental leave already from 14 weeks to 16 weeks last year and then we have increased it from 16 weeks to 18 weeks this year.When we amended the principal Act it was not just about the length of paid parental leave; we also looked at making this whole scheme modern and practical. What we did is we widened the eligibility criteria for those who can avail themselves of this entitlement. Casual workers seasonal and contract workers and those who work for more than one employer can now be entitled to paid parental leave. We also increased the kind of care that is entitled to paid parental leave. We introduced the concept of primary carer and with that people can without going through the process of formal adoption look after a child have paid parental leave if they are eligible and No. 3 which is very important is that parents of pre-term babies can be eligible for longer paid parental leave depending on when the premature baby is born. The gestation period is 37 weeks and if a baby is born before 37 weeks the parent receives weekly payments for that many weeks depending on how early the pre-term baby is born. For example if a baby is born at 27 weeks then the parent will receive payment for an additional 10 weeks making a total of 28 weeks. With our current 18 weeks’ paid parental leave we are in line with the OECD average.Having a child can change a lot of things in a family and having a pre-term child can actually bring more changes in the family. It can create more mental and physical strain because you are looking after that child for the first few days and weeks from a distance. Generally speaking pre-term babies are kept in medical care before they are sent home with the family. We also increased the parental tax credit from $150 to $220 and we extended the period for that from 8 weeks to 10 weeks. So through giving more parental tax credit through extending paid parental leave and through making more people eligible what we did is we provided choice for people—it is about providing choices.This theme that we have introduced this National Government is about giving more access and about flexibility. In looking at the family structures how they are changing how the family needs are changing and how their work needs are changing it is really important that we are able to cater for all of that. We are committed to supporting children so that they can have the best possible start in their life. We recognise that families and employees have to plan their personal and financial lives and that on the other hand businesses should be flexible to adapt to changing demands. We also want to see that parents are able to stay in touch with the labour market. This is not just for the wider economic and social good but it is good for them too.Every parent goes through different experiences so I do not think it is fair to generalise those experiences. I actually want to share one of my experiences. When I started leaving my child in a day-care centre to go back to work I did feel guilty about it. Yes it is not easy and it is not easy for any parent to leave their child in a day-care centre to go back to education or work no matter what the age of the child is. Moreover people also frown at new mums who decide to leave their child in a day-care centre to go back to education or work. It is about making new mums guilty about leaving their child in a day-care centre to go back to study or work. I strongly feel that that needs to be stopped. We want a society that is equal for men and women. We want to see that women have equal opportunities to men and have access to education and work as and when they require and we want to close the gender gap. I do not support any ideas that promote segregation of women just because of their biological make-up.A lot of research has been done and members opposite have spoken about research that they are using to support their argument but in research the important thing is that the outcome of any research will depend on the question that you ask in that research. So I want to ask: why stop at 26 weeks? Why not make it 16 years because parenting is a long-term commitment and parents ideally should be there to support their child through their childhood to get into adulthood.Talking about research I want to talk about one piece of research. This study is led by New York’s Columbia University School of Social Work. It is published by the Society for Research in Child Development. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development study of early childcare followed more than 1000 children so it is a very healthy sample size—1000 children. These children were from 10 different geographical areas and were up to the age of 7. The study followed their family circumstances and their development. What they found in that research is that yes there are some downsides to mums getting to work within a few months of their child being born but overall the advantages are more than the downsides. The advantages include increased income and the overall well-being of the mum. In this research what they finally concluded is that the net effect is neutral. The net effect is neutral because we need to look at the full picture—we cannot just pick one or two points and debate this; we need to look at the full picture. It is about the overall outcomes for the child and for the mother and the overall effect that they found in this research is that it is neutral.The research also recognised that parenting is a big thing. The researcher also recognised that it is important for working mothers to be sensitive to their child’s needs. It is about how when they get back from their work it is important that they leave their work before they get in the door so that they can give full attention to their child. So it is about having that quality time to have that bonding with their child. It is about being sensitive to the child’s needs. There is no point to someone staying with their child 24 hours 7 days if they are not attentive to the child—it is not going to give any benefits to the mum or her child. I spoke about this research because I do not want new mums to feel guilty about getting back to work and given the work that we have already done in this space I oppose this bill.