te Heuheu Georgina: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16489] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 The title of this bill is the “Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Act 2004”—that is so my colleague Maurice Williamson is aware of what we are debating. 
Darren Hughes 
: The “honourable” Maurice Williamson. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Yes the honourable Maurice Williamson. If ever there were a misnomer in the title of a bill this is it. I say that because on the face of it one would think that parental leave and employment protection sound like reasonable things to be passing laws on. One would think that there are a lot of people in New Zealand who choose during their working life or 6 months before they take up work to have children. I would say that all those parents would want to take a little bit of a break when they have their children in order to give the mums time to settle in with their babies and to get themselves established after the birth. On the face of it one would think that people in that situation would be entitled to have their employment protected while they took their 12 weeks’—soon to become 13 weeks” then 14 weeks’—paid parental leave. But when one looks at the detail of the bill one soon discovers that a whole lot of the working people who become parents are actually left out. 
We now have a different Minister in the chair from the one or two Ministers we had before the dinner break. I wonder whether this Minister the Hon Marian Hobbs would like to get up and explain to the Committee—but more important to the New Zealanders who are listening—why those groups of people are not included in the bill and why in the end its title is a misnomer—why it is misleading and false. Federated Farmers were kind enough to set out concisely for us a list of those who are excluded. I will take it directly from their submission because New Zealanders and New Zealand taxpayers should know that a lot of concerned people came to the Social Services Committee and expressed their concerns about those who were left out. They are: firstly all self-employed women; secondly women in part-time employment job sharing; thirdly women in casual employment part or full time; fourthly women who cannot find or choose not to engage in formal employment including women who choose to stop work to have a family—that is a laudable thing to do; in fact if we had the resources we would want every woman to be able to choose to stop work and stay at home to spend those precious first weeks or months with their baby; fifthly women who for many reasons have had a new employer within 6 months—and no doubt those reasons will be legitimate and many; sixthly woman who cannot or choose not to have children; and seventhly spouses of women who fit the above criteria and all spouses who do not fit the above criteria. Those are the groups set out in the submission. So of course those of us in the Opposition who are opposing this bill have for the last 2 hours laboured the point about the issue of self-employed women. However a whole lot of other groups of women are not included. 
I want the Minister the Hon Marian Hobbs to stand and explain to the public of New Zealand why it is that all taxpayers— 
Simon Power 
: Or say something. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: That would be good. In fact have any of the Ministers said anything this afternoon? 
Opposition Members 
: No. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: My gosh they have treated the public with contempt and disdain. They have treated taxpayers with contempt and disdain because although this legislation will be paid for by all taxpayers only some of them will benefit. What fairness is there in that? There is none whatsoever. In addition to being unfair it is discriminatory. It adds costs to business. If ever there was a Government that was anti small business this is it. Gosh I would love to hear the Minister for Small Business tell me why he would be supporting this legislation.