Hipkins Chris: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHipkins Chris: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 05 November 2014. Volume:701;Page:677. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka):I am happy to take a call—Joanne Hayes: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I wish to change our vote for National to 60 votes in favour.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I have declared the result and I have called the next speaker. I think we will continue. It does not stop you having another go again soon.CHRIS HIPKINS: I am happy to take a brief call on the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. I thank the Chair for the opportunity. I thank the National Government for voting down its own closure motion and giving me this opportunity to speak on this bill—one that I think is very important to this House. I certainly congratulate the Government on having the foresight to allow us to continue this debate for a little longer because I think it is an important debate. On a day when the House set aside several hours to debate international matters I think it is only right that we set aside a few hours to debate the welfare of children living in this country. Therefore I am very pleased that the Government has seen the error of its ways and decided to continue this debate. We are on clause 4 of the bill which is the purpose clause. The purpose of this bill is to extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks. That is I think a very worthy goal and I congratulate the member Sue Moroney on her persistence. One of the things about members’ bills is they take an awfully long time to drag through the House’s processes. One of the sad ironies of this bill of course is when we first started the debate on this we were in a position where the bill may well have been successful.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Can I now ask the member to speak to clause 4 and the amendments.CHRIS HIPKINS: Absolutely Mr Chair. Clause 4 of the bill which basically says: “The purpose of this Act is to extend the duration of parental leave payment to a maximum of 26 weeks.” is one that I think we will agree on. It is disappointing of course but I suspect the Committee is no longer going to have a majority to pass that. Many members of the Committee feel that is a very worthy purpose. One of the things that was raised by many members or that many members will have had raised with them on the campaign trail is what the Government is doing what the Parliament is doing and what the respective political parties are doing to ensure that children get the best possible start in life. It was one of the themes of the election campaign. Ensuring that parents have time to spend with their children when they are first born we know will have a significant flow-on positive effect on those children throughout the rest of their lives.I can say as the Labour Party’s education spokesperson that this is an issue I looked at quite a lot during the election campaign because there is a correlation. It has been well established with regard to attachment theory for newborn children with their parents—or actually with anybody but parents obviously being the logical people in most situations—that if the attachment between the parent and the newborn child is well formed and there is very good physical research and other research to demonstrate this is the case then the child is more likely to be successful later on in life. In fact there were some very good studies that came out from other countries that showed that where attachment was not properly formed in the early part of a child’s life in those first critical months and years then that child was more likely to have difficulties with their education and more likely to become an offender at a young age. We know that attachment at a young age is important. That is why extending paid parental leave can be a hugely beneficial thing because it gives parents more time to spend with their children when they are first born.I want to be clear here. This is not just about mothers either. Paid parental leave can apply to fathers too. Fathers often get left out of the debate on this but I think they are very important. Families will arrange the way they use their paid parental leave in different ways depending on the needs of their family and their family’s individual circumstances. I think that is both an important thing and a very welcome thing.I acknowledge the amendment that is being put forward by Sue Moroney to change effectively the purpose of the bill. Instead of extending paid parental leave to 26 weeks for all families it would significantly reduce the number of families that would qualify. Although I understand the reasons for doing that and I again congratulate Sue Moroney on trying to reach a compromise so that the Committee can make some progress on this matter I would like to put on record my principled position that actually 26 weeks is not too much to ask. When we look at international comparisons New Zealand is by no means a generous country in this regard.