Brown Peter: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Brown Peter: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15517] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I was interested in that speech made by Paula Bennett. I thought she started off quite well but then she said we should educate not legislate. If that is the official stance of the National Party then I ask those members why they are supporting the Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill. Why do they not stand by their own convictions and say “Let’s educate and not legislate. We will support the bill because what it states makes sense to us.”? 
Maybe the member should read the bill. Under the subheading “Infant feeding” of the explanatory note it states “This Bill amends the Employment Relations Act to require employers to provide appropriate facilities and breaks for employees who wish to breastfeed (including expressing breast milk) as far as is reasonable and practicable.” What is wrong with that? It is quite fair-minded. 
The bill tells us why it is necessary to give this consideration. Later in the bill under the subheading “Infant feeding” it states “Breastfeeding is key to providing the best start for New Zealand infants and important for both infant and maternal health. This was most recently reiterated in the Government Response to the Inquiry into Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes.” It goes on to state “Breastfeeding is a key indicator for Health Target 8 of the Health Targets 2007/08 to improve nutrition increase physical activity and reduce obesity. A number of government initiatives are underway to protect promote and support breastfeeding.” 
The bill then lists six areas of concern. I will read the following paragraph because I think it is important: “The main barriers to maintaining breastfeeding for New Zealand women are lack of community support and acceptance of breastfeeding in public and women returning to work.” That is why we are getting this legislation. That is why New Zealand First is supporting it. We do not believe that we can educate and guarantee to solve the problem. 
Kate Wilkinson 
: You don’t believe in education? 
Paula Bennett 
: You don’t believe in educating? 
PETER BROWN 
: I tell those two ladies over there to be strong in their own convictions. If they want to oppose this bill then they should do the decent thing and say that they oppose it and that it is not necessary. They should not give all the waffle and say that they will support it but really they do not believe in it just so they do not look like “nasty Nats” as Paula Bennett referred to. 
The second part of the bill—and I am not going to take too long—deals with meal breaks and what I call and probably what most of us call smoko breaks. We are talking about the same thing are we not? [ 
Interruption 
] Oh are we not allowed to call them smoko breaks? I am politically incorrect again. 
To be honest I did not know that those breaks were not in the law. I always thought that people were entitled to a 10-minute break. I suggest that in many contracts the breaks are longer than 10 minutes. This is sensible legislation. I know that some small employers are concerned about the 10-minute breaks which are paid for. It is true that they have been in contact with at least some of my colleagues. We think that the bill is quite reasonable because there is a lot of flexibility on when breaks can and cannot be taken. The bill states “Employees and employers however may agree to vary the timing of the breaks.” 
This bill is simply the vehicle to providing a law so that people will get 10-minute breaks in a 4-hour work period plus a 30-minute non-paid meal break. That is eminently sensible and fair. New Zealand First will support the bill going to select committee. We would like to hear what New Zealanders have to say about this matter and we will make up our minds on whether we support the bill’s proceeding after that. Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker.