Ngaro AlfredHon ALFRED NGARO (National): Mr Assistant Speaker it is Cook Islands Language Week so if I may indulge in a brief introduction in Te Reo Kuki Airani [the Cook Islands language]. Kia Orana tatou katoatoa i te aroa maata o te Atua no tei uru mai ia tatou i teia po nei. Tangi ke tangi ke. Kia Ora tatou katoatoa.[Greetings to all of us in the almighty name of God who has guided us here tonight. Greetings greetings greetings to all of us.]Those were brief greetings. It is Cook Islands Language Week so I just wanted to acknowledge that in my first speech in the House this week.I want to acknowledge the intent of this bill. Jan Logie and I came into Parliament at the same time in 2011 and we were both on the Social Services Committee and we actually went together to maraes and community places. We travelled to hear the responses of those who were victims and those who were NGOs providers of services much-needed counsellors and social workers at the forefront. We heard their concerns. The concerns were not only that there was a need for more resources to support them in the work they were doing but also that there was a need for better provision in legislation and also too in some of the policies that allowed all Government departments to acknowledge the importance of holding to account the issues of domestic violence and family violence in our country.I go back a long way in regards to the work around domestic violence. In the early 2000s when Steve Maharey was the Minister for Social Development and Employment there was some work done by Judge Mick Brown around the baseline review which looked at the whole of the social services but more importantly family violence was included in that. I can remember when we came together to talk at Te Rito which was the first effort to put together a policy platform to deal with family violence. So the Te Rito strategy was born out of that work. So I come from a place where I absolutely am a big supporter of both work that is done legislatively and work in policy development to address the issues of family violence in our country.I am also like a number of members across the House a White Ribbon ambassador and I've been on marches and bike rides and I have gone up and down the country and I've spoken and taken the pledge—Angie Warren-Clark: Then vote for the bill.Hon ALFRED NGARO: If Mrs Warren-Clark would just listen for a bit. We sat and listened to you so just be respectful. I didn't say anything; I just allowed you to have your voice so I just ask for the same that's all. OK? That's all. I'm just asking for the same respect that we afforded you. The fact is that I'm a White Ribbon ambassador along with a number of others right across the House who have stood side by side to ensure that domestic violence—and as you've said Mrs Warren-Clark in your speech the fact is that we have one of highest rates. In fact there are 110000 incidents of domestic violence of intimate partner violence in this country and in the developed world it's the highest of its kind. It's an issue that we're not proud of as a country and when I say we" it's all of us who have to be held responsible and held to account.I just want to say that the issues that have been championed have been championed by many. The work that has gone on has gone on over a long period of time over successive Governments in order to get to where we are here today. So while I applaud my colleague Jan Logie for this bill and her intent—and she has been consistent all the way through so I will acknowledge the fact that all the way through Jan has stood up in this House and has constantly talked about the issues of family violence and sexual violence that we need to address as well. So I want to acknowledge her work and her commitment and her pledge to that as well. I suppose one of the interesting issues then is: where do we differ? Now where we differ in a sense is not in intent. We don't differ in the sense that even under nine years of a National Government what is it that we put in place? We're not going to talk about that because it looks like we're defending what we've done but you know we have played our part in regards to addressing that.Mrs Warren-Clark I just want to speak to one of the comments you made in regards to flexible working arrangements. That was actually put in place in 2014 which allowed for employees to then negotiate with employers in regards to flexible working arrangements if there was an issue that they needed to mitigate if there was an issue on which they needed to seek some counselling and some support. So that was there. And I know that Jan now is actually then taking this through and wanting to include that in parts of the bill that she's put in place as well.But this issue then I suppose is where do we have the concern and from our point of view here where do we draw the line and say it's just a step too far for us? There are a number of things that we have put in place: flexible working arrangements; the 24/7 family violence line that was initiated under the National Government to ensure they were there; the Integrated Safety Response the integrated response services forum that we had actually initiated and a pilot was put in place. So it was a multi-systemic approach to ensure that the Government departments who had a role of responsibility a duty of care made sure that they were accountable. And so that was critically important.I want to acknowledge that the fact is that those on the front line—our social workers our counsellors and our police force—are out there. I've been out even on the front line with police. In fact I went out in West Auckland—went out in the graveyard shift; so started at 11 finished in the earliest hours of the morning. And in West Auckland when we went out over the period of about nine to 10 hours that I was on that shift we stopped only once—to go to Lincoln Road McDonald's to get a Filet-o-Fish—and that's about it. Throughout that whole time 40 percent of the incidents that we went to were all about domestic violence. So you're absolutely right—I saw first-hand just the carelessness to which anger had allowed them to take away I suppose the loving care and aroha that should have been afforded to children and also to women in those particular incidents as well.The part on which we do differ then—the part in which we say that we have come as much as we have to all the parts that we think are important and the Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) that was put together as well. We have other businesses like Countdown and The Warehouse and others and it's good for them because they can consume I suppose in a sense the cost factor of what it means to be able to put in place the cover and the expense in regards to be able to mitigate the concerns and also too for those women in this case—and I imagine there could be men as well because there are men who are victims of violence as well—who can then apply for the 10 days that's actually in this bill.The concern I have is when I think about the people—even in my community of Te Atatū—who are in the local small businesses who are running small cafes and running small restaurants and so forth whom I spoke to just last week. I asked them how they're going and at the moment they're struggling—they're just making ends meet. Over 50 percent of what they generate in revenue goes on wages and salaries. So even when people take off annual leave yes they comply but they did say to me that any extra burden will be really difficult for them. So what we were asking here I believe under SOP 41 under the Hon Mark Mitchell was not unreasonable.It was a rational response to say that if we could have the opportunity—number one—to be able to transition those in small to medium sized enterprises—which by the way are 80 percent of our growth of our economy. Why could we not work with them to transition to see if this would work in a way in a response with them as well? If we think the fact is that if we accumulate them with the opportunity that we have now we're now going to impose another 10 new days of annual domestic violence leave upon four weeks of annual leave 11 days of holiday leave five days of sick leave and on top of that three days of bereavement leave. Now those are entitlements—we understand that because we were part of actually putting those through. What we were asking for was not unreasonable.So I stand here today with those of this party who are not saying that we don't agree with the intent of dealing with issues of family violence but we cannot say that we'll put another burden upon those in small to medium sized enterprises—small businesses. Many of us in our electorates will know them by name—the people who work there day in and day out to try and make ends meet. When you go to them and you sit down with them as I have done they have said to me first-hand that this will impose another burden upon them. We asked in the SOP for a transition to actually go and work through this—that wasn't accepted either. We asked if they could use that—Mark Mitchell did in his SOP—if it could be included in the annual leave. That wasn't accepted as well.I have to say that while the intent is applauded and we agree on this side what we can't agree with in this bill is the imposition that it will have and at the end of the day the burden that that will have on small businesses who are all genuinely trying to do the best that they can. But if we do this then we'll have those who will be victims of another sort who then in some cases as they have said to me may have to find themselves closing their doors because they're no longer able to operate.We on this side don't support that part of the bill that we don't believe works in a way that benefits our communities. We cannot support this bill to the House."