Martin TraceyHon TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Speaker. Thank you very much. Can I acknowledge my colleague that just resumed her seat. It's always great to follow the Hon Judith Collins. I was going to say Tizard—sorry I beg your pardon. It was a bit of a mind blank. It's been a while since I've been here and considering you're only 37 years old I don't know how I made that mistake.It's always a joy to follow the Hon Judith Collins because it's a juxtaposition between just hilarious and extremely outrageous some of the statements that are made by the honourable member—for example to hold up a leaflet around the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill and now say that this is National Party policy. Can we just clarify—I need to go back because there will be some National Party members over there who will believe Ms Collins that this was National Party policy.So let's be clear about what has happened. First of all let's be clear that this bill has had two select committee hearings and in the last one there were 6755 submissions. Of those submissions 99.94 percent were in favour hence why this Government—this New Zealand First - Labour Party - Green Party collegial really positive moving-forward-with-a-plan Government—is not going to cost the taxpayers more money. We already know what the taxpayers believe and want—6755 submissions; 99.4 percent.Now let's get to the comment that this is actually National Party policy. Let's remember that it was Sue Moroney that forced—forced—National into extending paid parental leave because of the 26 For Babies campaign. Let's get real. All those other young members over there the new members of the National Party; you need to listen up because you don't want to believe the spin. The worst thing you can do is believe your own spin all right? That'll catch you out with the facts every single time.So Sue Moroney ran and across the country there was the 26 For Babies campaign. The previous Government convinced Sue Moroney because she was a good decent honest woman who believed in collegial cross-party consensus in this House to hold off bringing her bill back to this Parliament. It was a gentleman's agreement and what did the previous National-led Government do? They undercut her bill by bringing in legislation of their own. They convinced her to not bring it back to the House they convinced her to delay the bill on the Order Paper and they undercut her. That is how this became National Party policy if it ever was. It's one thing to campaign on it; it's another thing to actually get up and do the work. So this is the Government that's going to do the work.Can I thank my Cabinet colleagues. Can I thank the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway for working with New Zealand First and can I thank him for the acknowledgment of fathers inside the bill. Mr Seymour may stand up a little bit later and he did actually contribute the last time this bill was in the House which is why it's no surprise to the Opposition members that the last time the bill was in the House he stood up and gave a contribution taking to task any mention of fathers not availing themselves of paid parental leave.In this country 1 percent—1 percent—of fathers avail themselves of paid parental leave. In Sweden when we were able to identify and encourage fathers and allow them in a socially acceptable way to take this leave that percentage jumped to 25 percent. I would hope that once we pass this bill through once we acknowledge as a nation that 26 weeks is the minimum that our babies should expect—the minimum that our babies should be cared for and acknowledged and supported by their Government—we will then work forward because we are a progressive collegial positive Government of New Zealand First Labour and the Green Party and we are going forward and we will encourage fathers to participate more.As the Minister for Children now one of the things that I know we need to do better is to engage fathers in the lives of their children—fathers who are under stress families who are under stress. We need to acknowledge more as a Government those equal parental rights—those parents and their importance to every child. The mention in the explanatory note of the bill acknowledges them as equal parents. I'm so pleased and I thank my colleagues for actually making that change for us.This has been a long time coming. It's been a long time coming not because we haven't discussed it for a long time—it's been discussed again and again and again. It's been a long time coming because for whatever reason the previous Government decided that things like a flag referendum at $25 million things like a Saudi sheep farm in the Middle East were more important to fund than our children—were more important to fund than to bring in financial support from the State to say that for those 26 weeks we believe in having a parent at home and we're going to support you to have that choice." The previous Government used to trumpet that word "choice". Everything was about choice except when they didn't agree with it.So we're really really pleased. New Zealand First is very very pleased to stand and support this bill through urgency. And it is urgent because our families need it. Our babies need it. Our mothers and fathers need it. They need the security to know that as soon as possible they can plan for this. The Hon Amy Adams stood and said again and again and again that there's no regulatory impact assessment—there've been two. The Hon Adams stood up and said that there's no financial mapping—there have been two sets. If the previous Government says that it was their policy did they not price it out? Are they saying that they didn't price it out? There have been two sets of financials go through this House. How did the Rt Hon Bill English do a financial veto if there wasn't already financial mapping? Upon what basis did he do a financial veto on this bill if the Hon Amy Adams said that there is no financial mapping? How can those two things be true?So let's just go and fact-check what we're talking about here. That's what I'm asking the Opposition to do. Don't stand and just start putting out piece after piece after piece because it makes a nice sound bite. People can go away and check what was said before. They can go away and check your actions before. That's what the Opposition now needs to be careful of—nine years of Hansard nine years of actions like the financial veto on a bill that 99.94 percent of submitters said they were in favour of. Twenty-six weeks for babies—across the country they marched went to meetings held coffee meetings and showed up with postcards posters. It was a full campaign. That is the only thing that took the ice out of the heart of National.I am pleased to hear that the National Party is going to vote for it but let's just be clear on our rhetoric. We know where this came from. We know whose policy it was. Don't take it away from Sue Moroney and the amazing work she did. Let's get our rhetoric right and in Hansard. Kia ora."