Adams AmyHon AMY ADAMS (National—Selwyn): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm happy to be taking a call in this third reading on the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill. As we've just heard from the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety this bill will of course see paid parental leave further extended after the two extensions it's had under the National Government so that by 1 July next year families will be entitled to 22 weeks and then as the Minister commented in his speech it is rising to 26 weeks by 2020.I want to actually and somewhat surprisingly commend the Minister for his new-found commitment to fiscal responsibility and his reflection in the speech that he's just given that it was important—and I'm not quite quoting him but I'm getting as close as I can from memory—that the advances in paid parental leave happen in tranches as fiscal conditions improve. Actually I think that could've been taken straight out of a Bill English or a Steven Joyce quote on the matter because that is exactly what this side of the debating Chamber or the National Party has always maintained.That is why when we had the privilege of being in Government we extended paid parental leave twice during some of the most fiscally challenging times in recent memory in this country. That is why we also in our election manifesto made it very clear that if re-elected we too wanted to extend paid parental leave to 22 weeks. But most importantly—and I want to raise this because members of the Government have had lots of pot-shots in this debate about the fact that a National Government did veto an earlier attempt to go to 26 weeks. I simply pose the question to the Minister this way: if he is now quite happy in this House to acknowledge that it wouldn't be fiscally prudent at this stage at the end of 2017 to go to 26 weeks why have they given the National Party such a hard time for making exactly that call last year when we acknowledged that it wasn't fiscally prudent at that stage to go to 26 weeks?What would have been quite gracious of the Minister when he followed on from saying that it wouldn't be fiscally prudent to go to 26 weeks straight away would have been to acknowledge that actually the National Government was absolutely right to fiscally veto that change at that time. While staged increases as financial conditions permit is a good idea and we've always supported it going that far that fast at that time wasn't right. I thank the Minister for recognising that for acknowledging that you do have to move carefully in stages as conditions allow but as I say it is a shame that he couldn't bring himself to acknowledge that despite all of the pot-shots that they have had at the Opposition over that financial veto they have now effectively agreed that it was absolutely the right thing to do.Paid parental leave is a very important aspect as we've heard of allowing families to bond with their babies to care for their babies to be with their babies—just to adjust to that incredible upheaval in your life that is having a child. Those of us who have had the privilege of being parents know that it is the most utter change in everything you know about life that you can go through. And the time to adjust to that is critical. I've done some exciting and challenging and difficult things in my life but I can tell this House that nothing was as hard as learning to be a parent and going through that phase. I want to just in my contribution reflect on the incredible importance of both parents in that role. Both parents have a critical role in supporting bonding with the child supporting each other and building that family unit. That is something that the National Party feels very strongly about.I just want to take a moment to reflect on an email that just came through to me late yesterday from a 32-year-old mother who has shared with me very generously her story—and I don't intend to share her name because that wouldn't be appropriate. But she has epilepsy and her epilepsy while it's normally well-controlled she has noted that it's well known that that leads to stress and sleep deprivation that can lead to an increase in seizures. So when she is stressed and sleep deprived she can have an increase in seizures.Unfortunately when her baby was three months old exactly that happened and as a consequence she crashed her car while driving with her baby when it was three months old when she had a seizure. Luckily—other than her—there were no injuries and she wasn't seriously injured but as a result she lost her driver licence for a year. So of course from that time on she was at home with her baby and unable to drive.That is just one story—the multitude of variations that happen in family lives are so extensive and any one of us could name any number of situations that highlight the incredible challenges that a parent at home with a baby can face in those early months and how careful we have to be to support them. It's certainly very encouraging to know that in the UK in 2015 they went to full flexibility in the way they provide paid parental leave. And as the Minister did—and noting that brief reference is permitted—I am going to put on record that we continue to want to see full flexibility with paid parental leave.One other matter that I did want to touch on in this bill and in this third reading wrap-up debate is the fact that I do feel that there has been a lost opportunity for this bill to have gone through a select committee process when time certainly permitted that within the time frame the Government wanted to bring it in—so without creating any additional delay—to look at some of the matters that could otherwise have been addressed. One matter that is certainly not included in this bill but does come into issue when you're extending the period of paid parental leave—and so therefore it's absolutely relevant—is the rate at which paid parental leave is paid. I don't know that many New Zealanders understand that paid parental leave is paid at less than the minimum wage. Now when you're off work for a shorter period of time a considerable drop in income can often be managed and worked through but as we are now providing for and enabling partners to be off work or parents to be off work for six months to be paying them at under the minimum wage I think really does take some thought. Now National again when we were in Government put that rate up. Of course the new Government has indicated their intention is to raise the minimum wage to $16.50 very shortly—I think in the same time period that this entitlement extension would take effect. That would mean that for paid parental leave to even reflect the minimum wage there would need to be a 23 percent increase in the rate of paid parental leave.So I do think if we are true to our word and if the Government is true to their word that they want to enable parents to be at home with their babies and focus on forming that family connection they really need to be considering whether a rate that is 23 percent below the minimum wage when they increase it is really defendable. As I said when National increased the period of paid parental leave we also put the rate up.I just want to reflect on one other aspect that is very important when you're considering the term of paid parental leave and that is that there are a multitude of international studies that show that the longer—and it is particularly a woman so I appreciate that paid parental leave is for either parent—women particularly are out of the workforce on paid parental leave then the risk of them not returning to the workforce increases. So I do think it would be interesting to see and I would be interested in having a look at the Cabinet papers when they're the released—because of course they will be under the most transparent Government the world has ever seen—and seeing whether those Cabinet papers where they considered this legislation go through and consider and assess whether there will be any impact on women returning to the workforce because actually it's something that I feel very strongly about: ensuring that we do everything we can to make sure that women's biological reproductive function in the human race doesn't become a barrier to them progressing in their career the same way they would if they were men. I know that in my career and in this day and age there are certainly some real challenges for women in that regard. So I'll be very interested to see whether the Government in their Cabinet papers turn their mind to and address that international research that shows although paid parental leave and having parents at home with the baby is a very very worthwhile thing whether the impact on women's retention in the workforce has been assessed considered and thought about how that can be managed.In the last minute that I have I just wanted to note that on the National Party side we will be continuing to support this legislation because as I've said it is entirely consistent with our approach. It is entirely consistent with part of our election manifesto—the other part being of course to provide full flexibility. And for our part we will continue to support the extension but we will certainly want to see the Government continuing to address some of those issues that I've talked about in this contribution.