Mapp Wayne: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:631;Page:2858] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 One of the points I wish to make is about the way the Minister has been conducting herself in the chair. Members will notice that on this side of the Committee there has been considered and thoughtful debate analysing not just the bill itself but also the wider issues—the issues of for instance whether one should do this by a tax deduction whether one should do it by a welfare payment whether one should do it by a lump sum or whether one should spread it over 14 weeks. Should for instance people listen to the Business New Zealand submission and pay a parental benefit for all parents? Those are legitimate and reasonable questions to ask. In fact I have even heard my colleagues congratulate the Government—it is not something I am personally prone to do but some of my colleagues have done it. 
Do members know what the Minister’s response to all of that has been? There has been a bitterness about it has there not? The Minister has wanted to play shallow politics all the way along in this particular debate. I think I know the reason for this. The Government just squeaked into office in the last election. All those members look across—all of them those tired old faces over there—at an energised active and proactive National Party. I look at my colleagues and there are 23 new members of Parliament and they add energy to the debate. One of the things they have done—and I would like to note this specifically for this debate—is to be willing to say that actually the Government in certain things might be doing something right. 
Hon Member 
: Might! 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: Might—indeed my colleagues have noted that. That is why we have been supporting this legislation. Is that not such a contrast? Is that not surely one of the things Mr Hughes on the occasional times he is seen in his electorate hears people on the street say: “Would it not be a good thing if Parliament acted in the interests of New Zealanders that they were not always indulging in name calling petty politics and so forth?”. But that is what this Government is doing at the present moment. I have to say that that is the sort of activity Governments that are on the way out that are tired that are worn out and that are lacking in ideas tend to indulge in. 
I am frankly disappointed that the Minister has not noted the fact that National supports this bill and understands that all Governments—and I acknowledge this—get to make changes to the fabric of society. One cannot just run elections as if nothing has changed. So the truth is that National clearly will not be repealing the paid parental legislation as amended in 2002. It is simply absurd for the Government to make that kind of suggestion. The truth is that each Government gets to make changes. 
Another disappointing aspect of this current Government is that it seemingly fails to understand why it lost the 1990 election. It is still railing about the bad old days of the 1990s. Actually the public could not care less—they simply could not care less when Ministers in this Government get up on a daily basis and say: “Oh let’s just trot out what National did between 1990 and 1996 and indeed National and New Zealand First between 1996 and 1999.” The public could not care less. They are interested however in what will happen in the future—what the future agenda for parties is. 
 That is why the issue of the Business New Zealand submission which I thought was imaginative and interesting is the sort of thing this Parliament this place of elected representatives should be discussing. Business New Zealand has actually put a challenge to all parliamentarians to consider what it has laid down in its submission—its kaupapa if you will. It has said we should move beyond distinguishing people on the basis of whether they are employed or self-employed and actually step back and ask whether we can get a more creative family-friendly policy that would reward all parents with an appropriate level of benefit and submission.