Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Thank you Madam Chair. I am delighted to take a call on Part 2 of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill in the committee stage with respect to the further extension of paid parental leave in 2020 out to the 26-week period. I really want to add my voice to the plea for the Government to take a modern view of families which is so well illustrated in the amendments to Part 2 that have been tabled by my very capable colleague Amy Adams.What disappoints me is that in this age when we are seeing men taking a greater role in the parenting of children when it comes to paid parental leave why would it be that the Government wants to take a 1960s view of families and not a 21st century view of families. Why is it that members of the Labour Green and New Zealand First parties want to lock fathers out of being able to flexibly access the new paid parental leave provisions? It's just beyond me as to why.The only explanation that I could reasonably take from Government members' opposition is that it's a National proposition. In fact I was quite moved in my electorate in Nelson during the election campaign when former Prime Minister Bill English pointed out that he'd taken a full year for the care of their first child reflecting a very modern perspective from the National Party of families where fathers do take a lot more of an active role in the parenting of children and particularly of very young children. My colleagues have outlined you know the special situations that go where children have disabilities where they're premature and where there are instances of colic and the sorts of pressures that there are on families at that time when actually we should give families the flexibility as proposed in Amy Adams' Supplementary Order Paper.The only—the only—response that we've had against this provision from Government members is Oh it makes it a bit complicated." Well I'm sorry—the amendments that have been provided by Amy Adams specifically to this part address those issues. But here it is: these provisions are not proposed to come into effect until 2020. None of these provisions have been to a select committee. If I had to list every lecture I've been given by members opposite about the importance of bills going to select committees I'd be here all night. I could assign over 100 speeches from members now on the Government benches on their first week in the Parliament going back on what they have lectured us for the last nine years: that is bills of this sort should go to select committee. Hon Tracey Martin: Concentrate on Part 2.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I hear Tracey Martin interjecting. What's Tracey Martin got against dads? What has Tracey Martin the new Minister for Children got against dads? Why won't she take a call and explain to this Parliament why we won't have modern—modern—paid parental leave that allows dads to be able to flexibly access these new arrangements? What this debate on Part 2 reinforces is why this bill needs to go to a select committee. There's absolutely no reason why these detailed provisions—the first batch in Part 1; these in Part 2—don't come into effect for three and a half years. So the right thing—the right thing—if we really are committed to the very best of parenting and arrangements for our children and support for families is for this bill to go back to a select committee and get the detail right. Why do we need to do that? It is because the Minister in the chair has not put up a coherent argument as to why we shouldn't provide this flexibility—this flexibility that will principally help fathers—and so on that basis the right thing is to get it right."