Martin Tracey: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMartin Tracey: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 28 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18447. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave) Amendment Bill. I hope that members of the National Council of Women and the New Zealand Federation of Business and Professional Women and the 52 percent of the voting public of New Zealand who are women have been watching the debate this evening. I hope they have noted the behaviour of National with regard to this bill and its attempt in the first instance—even raising a point of order—to collapse this bill. I have been here for 3 years. It is the first time in 3 years that I have seen that behaviour used to try to close down a bill that over 3000 New Zealanders asked to be considered. And yet the Government tried to not even address it.I am stunned by the way the National Party has chosen to deal with this issue. It is surprising and it is disappointing—certainly as previously we had such collegiality in this House with a National Party member’s bill. I think it is really disappointing that the National members were unable to rise to their feet. They attempted to close down a bill so that they did not have to stand before the public of New Zealand particularly the 52 percent of the voting public who are women and explain to them why the Government will veto this bill. It has the ability to veto it. Stand up in the place where you are and answer to the public why you will ignore their overwhelming submissions in support of the bill.You say paternalistically that it is all very nice and lovely that the New Zealand public whom we are supposed to represent support this bill. It is all very nice and lovely—even though it is the money of taxpaying New Zealanders who have come through the select committee process to this House and have overwhelmingly said “This is what we want the Government to do with our money.”—to then stand and say “We know better. We know better.” That is at the same time as spending $27 million on charter schools that not a single New Zealander who needed to be here came to this House and submitted on and at the same time as spending millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money on other things that the Government needed to actually give it the ability to rule but that were not asked for by the public of New Zealand. To then try to shut down the conversation is beyond belief. It is incredibly disappointing. So I do hope that those women’s organisations are watching today and taking note of how this has been dealt with.This reminds me of theKōwhai Festival in my town. Around about 15000 people come. At the lastKōwhai Festival we ran a survey. The survey that we ran was not a very scientific survey. We stood there we stopped people and we said “What would you like your Government to do with your taxes?”. The answers were quite interesting and there was a clear division. Most of the women actually stopped and said “I’m quite happy to pay taxes but I want the social contract to be there. I want the support for my family. I want the health care. I want the education for my children.” They wanted their children to be supported. They were prepared to work. They were prepared to pay their taxes. They were prepared to do everything that the State asked of them as long as their children were cared for. That is what this bill is about.There is an old saying that where there is a will there is a way. This Government says that this bill is unaffordable. The Government pushed through in the Budget the smallest amount of support it could give to newborn babies to try to convince the public of New Zealand that it cared. Whereas the reality was that the pressure placed upon the Government by Sue Moroney and by the 26 for Babies campaign made it almost impossible for the Government to say no. That is why two speakers after they were unable to close down this debate stood and read out their own Act. That is the only comment the Government members have made—they have read out their own Act. It is an attempt to ignore what the public of New Zealand asked them to do which was to support SueMoroney’s bill. Where there is a will there is a way. There is no will here for the women of New Zealand. There is no will here and there never has been from this Government. It has merely taken this moment and given the small crumbs that it could give because it was forced to to try to stay in the game.I say to the women of New Zealand the 52 percent of the voting public of New Zealand: do not feel guilty about asking for things that support your children and do not hold back your vote. The women should say to this Government “We gave you our voice. Support us. Support our newborn babies.” The Government tells you that this bill is far too expensive. So let us just go to another nation. Swedish parents are actually entitled to 480 days of paid parental leave when a child is born or adopted. The onething that the Government did do inside the Budget legislation that was very good with regard to newborn children was when children are placed in a Home for Life. It extended that to a Home for Life. That is absolutely appropriate and I applaud it for doing so.Of those 480 days of paid parental leave in Sweden 60 days are reserved for fathers. In 2012 24 percent of Swedish dads took the whole of the parental leave. For 390 of those days parents are entitled to nearly 80 percent of their normal pay. The remaining 90 days are paid at a flat rate. Those who are not in employment are also entitled to parental leave. Why? Because it is parental leave. It is not an in-work family tax credit; it is parental leave. It is for the benefit of the child. We keep having a conversation about adults. The whole purpose of bills such as this is around the benefit of the child. Yet we keep talking about—and Mr Simon O’Connor was the very one talking about it over there when Ms Logie was talking—the adults in this conversation and that the women themselves should be standing up and being independent. I am sure Mr O’Connor is going to rise to his feet or perhaps he will not because we are not sure how many calls the National members will actually take on this. They did not want to discuss it to start with so they may not take any now. But we are yet to see.One of the great things about extended parental leave apart from what we know are cost savings around the health of the children is the long-term benefit and economic benefit for families because those women who can are able to breastfeed longer without stress. Anybody who has been a mother and been able to breastfeed will understand what stress does to the quality of that breastfeeding. To remove stresses from mothers gives a better start to the baby. That is what this is about. It is about babies not about women wanting to skive off and take some time off. It is not about women asking any more from their Government than they deserve. They are taxpayers too. It is about the best start for babies.This Government will veto this bill. That is obvious. Government members have stood up and said it. They have tried to shut it down already. But New Zealand do not allow the Government to tell you that we cannot afford it because look at what else money is being spent on. Do not let the Government tell you that you do not deserve it. Do not let it tell you that it makes no difference. This was an opportunity. This Government has no will because ideologically it does not believe in it. It got forced to do something in this Budget. Good on you Sue Moroney. New Zealand First will support the bill.