Collins JudithHon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Thank you Madam Chair; good choice might I say. There's a couple of issues that have been raised by the Government that I want to address. The first is that the Hon Tracey Martin—one of her major issues with the Hon Amy Adams' Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 3 is that it has choice. It provides choice to parents which apparently is a bad thing and needs to be looked at with a great deal of scepticism.In addition to that I've heard all of the speakers for the Government say that the National Party didn't do it in their nine years of Government. Well by the way the Labour Party didn't do it in its nine years of Government before either and I'm sure it won't in its next 18 months of Government either again. So when I look at that particular argument I think that's just completely specious. It's ridiculous to be able to say that we have to come together in Parliament to put forward bills that we've already progressed. What would be the point of this debate? What would be the point of any debate?We've also had the answer from the Minister in the chair the Hon Iain Lees-Galloway that parents can have unpaid leave at home. Well I just put this to the committee: it is not at all unusual for a mother to experience post-natal depression. This is not an unusual thing. It is a hormonal thing and it is something that many mothers have gone through and are going through. Is it right to say that at a time of life where people are often the poorest that they have ever been because the costs associated with babies whether it's prams whether it's bassinets whether it's clothes—everything—are immense for most families? When people are often young—because those after all are childbearing years—have mortgages or are paying large rentals it's that time when they need their income. And why shouldn't two parents who are able to decide to have a baby also be able to decide that they can take their paid parental leave together for a lesser amount of time because it works for both of them and for their child? Why can't they? We trust people to have their children and we trust people to bring them up; why can't they make decisions like adults about their own circumstances?I almost couldn't believe what the Minister for Women the Hon Julie Anne Genter was saying. I think her experience of this is clearly completely different from mine which is that it is really tough at home with a baby by yourself when you're used to being in the paid workforce making decisions and having discussions with adults—actually hearing something back that's not a cry. It is really tough. And for some people they are able because of their situation to be able to have a partner at home for a period of time. Well why not other people? Why can't they?This is an opportunity that we're putting forward tonight and we're doing it in good faith. We've had Mr Iain Lees-Galloway say Well you know we've looked at it. It's too difficult. We can't make it work. Sorry." He ruled it out before he'd seen the Supplementary Order Paper so how disingenuous is that? How can you say for the moment "Oh well it's too hard; oh but we haven't read it."? Then we've had the Hon Tracey Martin who said she hadn't had time to read it. It's two and a half pages with lots of great big gaps and big font. Well frankly she's supposed to be a Minister of the Crown; I think she can probably read that within a few minutes. It takes about two minutes to read it.David Seymour: She's living proof that anyone can do anything in this country.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well she is living proof frankly. Mr Iain Lees-Galloway has said his excuse is "Well National didn't do it." No but National is trying to do it. We're actually trying to help you.This is a matter under urgency. Why is it under urgency? Because this Government has no other legislation ready and they've had to pull up Sue Moroney's old bill stick Iain Lees-Galloway's name on it and shove it through under urgency. Why is that? Because they don't want any other bill having to be debated because they haven't got any. Why does it need to be in urgency? It doesn't come into effect until 1 July next year which actually is—what's that?—7½ months and he can't get it right. This is an opportunity for the Minister to show some leadership to stand up and say "Just because it's a National SOP just because it's the Hon Amy Adams—it can still be a good amendment.""