Gosche Mark: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Gosche Mark: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:2942] 
Hon MARK GOSCHE (Labour—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I want to congratulate the Minister Ruth Dyson for moving another step along the way towards giving parents out there an opportunity to take time off work and care for their children. Yes we did that for employed workers in the past; today we are doing it for self-employed workers. They will be out there saying what a great Labour Government they have and they will be listening to David Bennett who wants to have a baby bonus instead of this very sensible provision. 
The Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill was submitted on by all and sundry and everybody was in favour of it. Not a single submitter opposed it. Can we find a statement in the commentary on the bill from the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee that anybody was opposed to it and found fault with it? No only David Bennett and some of his colleagues are opposed—not all of his colleagues because some of his colleagues do not believe in that at all but they have been told to stay in the office and not to make a speech. Some of the National Party members said some people will go out and get a job just in order to get this benefit. The fact that one has to have a baby slipped their minds. It was a man—someone who has never given birth—who said that he thought this paid parental leave for the self-employed was such a good deal that people would become pregnant have a baby and look after that child for the rest of their life— 
Darren Hughes 
: Was that Bob Clarkson? 
Hon MARK GOSCHE 
: I do not want to mention names. I will just say that a well-known member of the National Party does not agree with David Bennett. 
I am really interested in David Bennett’s position on whangai adoption. I look forward to the debate on his member’s bill next week when he will say that this is a lazy Labour Government and that he will show everybody on the Government side of the House how to do business and that he will get a bill through the National Party caucus to allow all workers and self-employed people to receive paid parental leave in the case of a whangai adoption. I say to David Bennett that he should go for it and we will see whether his colleagues on the Opposition side of the House—particularly Dr Wayne Mapp who has a certain responsibility for these matters—agree with him. I would like to be a fly on the wall in the National caucus room when David Bennett—that trooper—gets his member’s bill drafted heads to the National caucus and says he wants to change the law because it is absolutely hopeless that people who adopt culturally cannot receive paid parental leave. 
I happen to agree with David Bennett on that as did the entire Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and that is why we noted that point in the report. David Bennett has a law degree but he does not know that an amendment cannot be made to a bill if it is not within the scope of the bill. In other words one cannot have provision for whangai adoption in a bill that deals only with self-employed people because that would produce an anomaly whereby all the employed people would be unable to receive a payment. So quite rightly the officials said the matter was outside the scope of the bill. One should not need a law degree to understand that point. If a matter is outside the scope of a bill Parliament cannot amend the bill. 
Are members on the Opposition side of the House given training about what to do when they become an MP and about how the law-making process actually works? Obviously not. The member should go back to the National Party school for brand new MPs and find out about the scope of a bill and whether an amendment can be made to it—even if someone wants to do so—if the amendment is outside the scope of the bill. Did David Bennett seek the leave of the House to make a change to the bill? No I did not hear him do that. Did we see an amendment on the Table to change the bill? No. This is just a whole lot of hot air and nobody believes it. 
However what people do believe is that this Government is serious about the ongoing improvement of the law. So if members listened to Minister Dyson’s speech they would have heard her say that a full evaluation was going into the whole question of the parental leave scheme. If that were done in the way that David Bennett wants it to be done employers would be ignored as would Federated Farmers and the Council of Trade Unions; one would just go ahead and change the scheme without a proper review or evaluation process. This Government is not as stupid as that; it would not do that. If we are to evaluate the entire scheme we will ask how it is working for everybody. We will engage with businesses Federated Farmers the National Council of Women the Council of Trade Unions etc. and then we will come back with further improvements. When we do come back I bet National will vote against them. 
This is a great bill. This is an excellent day for the Government and an excellent day for self-employed people. I am very happy to see this legislation finally passed. 
Bill read a third time.