Wall Louisa: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWall Louisa: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 June 2016. Volume:714;Page:11838. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]LOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): It is my pleasure to take a call in this Committee stage of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (6 Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. This Part 2 debate is about extending paid parental leave from 22 weeks to 26 weeks and I would like to really focus on the rationale for 26 weeks. The proponent of this piece of legislation Sue Moroney has been very clear that it is linked to the World Health Organization (WHO) and evidence about the optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding. For the information of other members of the Committee WHO has actually looked at 14 research publications and that optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding has been determined for the first 6 months of life. It is considered a global public health goal that is linked to a reduction of infant morbidity and mortality especially in the developing world. So there is actually a rationale around the 6 months and why 6 months is so vital and a link between this specific piece of legislation and the breastfeeding of our children.It is also relevant in the debate to look at article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. That particular convention states that children have the right to good quality health care—the best health care possible. What we know is that “Breast is best” and for the first 6 months of life children having an opportunity to be breastfed is incredibly important. So the rationale for the 26 weeks comes from that piece of research evidence the World Health Organization and an array of research and publications about how important and vital it is for the growth and development of our babies.For people listening out there the 26 weeks was also part of a recommendation of a November 2013 report by the Health Committee. That select committee was chaired by Paul Hutchison. That Inquiry into improving child health outcomes and preventing child abuse with a focus from preconception until three years of age (Volumes 1 and 2) actually had a section about paid parental leave. I am sure the National members of Parliament would be really interested in the inquiry and this piece of evidence that I am about to propose. Actually Dr Hutchison was a huge champion particularly of the rights of the child making sure that every child in New Zealand had the best possible start.On page 39 of that report under the heading “Social economic determinants of health and well-being” there was a section about extending the duration of paid parental leave to between 6 and 12 months. The rationale for that really was again about breastfeeding because it helps baby form positive attachments with their primary caregivers. To quote from that report it also said this: “common sense suggests that a non-stressful relaxed environment for as long as possible after birth fosters breastfeeding and helps babies form positive attachments with their primary caregivers.” In fact the proposition for extending paid parental leave in that report was from 26 weeks at a minimum to 52 weeks.It is interesting when we look around the world. When this bill passes—and I want to congratulate my colleague Sue Moroney—we will join Chile Mongolia and Hungary. Poland actually allows 26 weeks the Czech Republic 28 Bulgaria 32 Slovenia 34 and Norway between 35 and 45. Ireland allows 42. It is 52 weeks in Albania Montenegro and the UK. Croatia allows 58 and Estonia 62. The champion around the world is Sweden at 68 weeks. So what we are actually doing is creating a minimum level of paid parental leave which so many international organisations around the world have said is incredibly important if we want to focus on the health and well-being of our children. I think what we have heard tonight really is procrastination on that side of the Chamber and a focus on what is important to them versus what is important to us. I think the compelling arguments from our side of the Chamber really have put children and families at the centre of a piece of public policy and legislative reform. Kia ora.