Auchinvole Chris: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuchinvole Chris: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 28 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18443. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National): I had hoped to be following Sue Moroney and I do not say that with any sense of criticism or disrespect—hence the delay in taking a call—because it would be logical and I think courteous to hear what Sue has to say on her Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. As it was we have had it introduced very clearly in the second reading by Carol Beaumont and spoken to very thoroughly by Jacinda Arden. So in anticipation of Sue taking a call I will perhaps say the things I would have liked to tell Sue—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Full name.CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: —Sue Moroney—had I heard what she wants to say. We have got to know one another quite well over this bill so I think none of it will come as a surprise.I guess I would say that this bill is a little before its time. I think the events that we are seeing at the moment are indicating that that is the case. Carol Beaumont and Jacinda Ardern both commented that they understand there was a lot of work done by the Government Administration Committee in a very non-partisan way and there certainly was. It was a very very interesting exercise that we went through as a committee and as individuals and in working together. I do not doubt that there will be criticism levelled against National but I am afraid that I do not colour up and feel guilty because we worked very sincerely in the hope that we could see whether we could avoid the financial veto with the work that was done and whether it could be incorporated into National’s version of the bill.But let us see where we are at the moment because we are not just talking about this bill; we are talking also about the entitlement basis we live with. Today the Minister of Labour Simon Bridges announced that parental leave payments will increase from 1 July 2014. The maximum payment for eligible employees and self-employed persons will increase from $488.17 a week to $504.10 gross per week. The minimum parentalleave payment for self-employed people will also increase from $137.50 per week to $142 gross per week. National’s website states: “ ‘We have increased parental leave payments to reflect the 3.3 per cent increase in the average weekly wage over the past year’ says Mr Bridges. Under the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act 1987 parents eligible for the scheme are entitled to up to 14 weeks paid leave at a rate calculated on the basis of their average weekly earnings. The maximum rate is adjusted every year to account for any increase in average weekly earnings.”Minister Bridges adds that “In addition to this increase the Government announced a significant overhaul of parental leave as part of Budget 2014 which will make it available to more people for a longer period and with increased flexibility.”—and that I think is a considerable advantage. “The current 14 weeks’ paid parental leave will increase to 18 weeks in two stages—to 16 weeks from 1 April 2015 and 18 weeks from 1 April 2016. The eligibility of paid parental leave will also be expanded to include caregivers other than parents (for example permanent guardians)”—and that is a wonderful development—“and to extend payments to people in less-regular work or who recently changed jobs. Some flexibility will also be introduced to parental leave to allow for example an employee to attend a course or work an occasional day. Supporting children and families is a priority for this Government and the changes will ensure New Zealand’s parental leave framework better reflects modern working arrangements in today’s diverse family structures.”I think that was a concurrent thought that we have running through our discussions at the select committee. In fact the previous system before the alterations that came through the Budget was very much about sector payments—very much about sector payments.Darien Fenton: What? Who’s a sector? Which sector?CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: A sector yes. Which sector? The ones who benefited from it and there were not lots of them. It was fairly isolated. So all that we have achieved in the Budget would not have occurred because this is part of a suite of changes that are a real benefit to parents.I was moved listening to Jacinda Ardern celebrating her family’s production of a grandchild. I can well remember the pressures of parenthood when we were blessed with our two children. It is tough—it is tough. Things like doctors visits being free until the children are 13 are a huge thing for parents—they really are. They really are. We do not want to do without any of those things. So I think we examined this bill which we are talking about now very thoroughly—we considered it very thoroughly. It has never been a goer as far as National is concerned. Previous speakers have been saying how there was a majority of people and therefore it should pass must pass. Well I think Labour and every party in the House acknowledges that the Government has to have fiduciary control over legislation and therefore I do not think anyone has criticised Mr English for having the power of a veto. We were unable to produce a convincing enough argument for the indication of a veto to have been removed.I think Sue Moroney should be proud of the work that she has done on this bill. I think the committee members can be relaxed in the face of criticism because we did do a very thorough job. It was enjoyable and it was certainly something I think we all learnt a lot from. From that point of view it was a satisfactory bill but we will not be supporting it going through Parliament. Thank you.