Flavell Te Ururoa: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15520] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia ora tatou e te Whare. I know that the Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill is not just about breastfeeding as such but having five children myself I think I am quite a good authority on some of these issues at least at an observer level. 
I have always held the quiet belief that tangata whenua are at the cutting edge of some of the most innovative and enterprising initiatives in our world. I think that this bill provides a pretty good opportunity for us to recognise that. Almost a century ago as a 1909 publication put forward by Dr Maui Pomare reveals Maori were suggesting that the longer a baby could be breastfed the better.  
Nga Kohungahunga Me Nga Kai Ma Ratou 
 was written by Dr Maui Pomare when he was a native health officer and was initially published by Te Aute Society. The booklet recommended that babies ought to be breastfed as it was both beneficial to the child and health-giving to the mother. Maui Pomare explained: “Ko te u o te whaea te mea tika a ko te Atua hoki tena i homai ai hei ngote ma nga pepi.” The mother’s breast which was given by God for babies to suck on is so right. 
So here we are a century later finally requiring facilities and breaks to be provided for employees who wish to breastfeed in the workplace or during work periods as well as requiring employees to be provided with rest breaks and meal breaks. Dr Pomare may well have wondered why it took so long particularly when we consider that around three-quarters of mothers with children under 1 year of age are now in paid employment. I think it is all to do with attitude. I recall the late Irihapeti Ramsden presented research that revealed that while Sir Maui was writing his guidelines there was evidence of social attitudes that actually frowned on breastfeeding in public. That attitude seemingly is still prevalent as reported in the 2006 study 
 Infant Feeding and Work 
 developed by Dr Debbie Payne a director of the Auckland University of Technology Centre for Midwifery and Women’s Health Research. The study—New Zealand’s first qualitative study of breastfeeding mothers at work—identified that many women were put off breastfeeding in the workplace after observing the treatment of other employees trying to feed their babies. Some of the women had to feed in a shower cubicle. Some of the members tonight have referred to some of these particular issues. Other women received feedback from their peers that implied mothers feeding were simply slacking off at work. 
This bill today attempts to directly impact on those concerns. It responds to the problems reported in the study that women who breastfeed in the workplace are often discouraged by a lack of facilities and the attitude of their employers and colleagues. One of the issues that wahine Maori have commented on in the past from what I have heard is the acute discomfort they have experienced in being led to spaces to breastfeed that may be linked to a toilet. We all understand breast milk is kai and the question that inevitably arises is whether anyone in the House would be happy to have their lunch in the toilet—hopefully not. As such we hope the bill will ensure that appropriate facilities are to be provided for breastfeeding and expressing breast milk as well as for storage of expressed breast milk. 
Breastfeeding has often been a stumbling point for mothers with babies returning to work; they are faced with the choice of stopping breastfeeding or not being in paid work. We hope that through the leadership demonstrated by this bill that difficulty can be somewhat alleviated. The issue of breastfeeding and paid work also raises the question of whether we should consider extending paid parental leave to a period of 12 months. Although this bill seeks to provide for some very significant rights and health benefits the reality is that many women will just not be able to arrange for their babies to be brought into the workplace or for milk to be collected at times when the baby really needs it. The ability of women to have a real choice about whether to stay at home with their babies while breastfeeding is hugely dependent on the kind of financial support that paid parental leave can offer. The current choice along with the negative attitudes to breastfeeding in public are significant barriers and as such act directly against the Government’s intention to protect promote and support breastfeeding as a key health target. 
We in the Maori Party have also thought that the strategy to promote and protect breastfeeding through the creation of minimum standards should at the very least consider some ways of communicating the message that employers and workplaces are being required to become more family-friendly and that the wellness of children and mothers is an employment priority. A recent study of Maori women’s decision-making around breastfeeding by Marewa Glover Harangai Manaena-Biddle and John Waldon revealed that whanau are central and that whanau should be mobilised to support healthy choices. The women’s partners mothers sisters and aunties were cited most often as having a role in the decision to breastfeed and in supporting breastfeeding. For workers then we see the developments in this bill as a real gain for whanau well-being. 
The other key amendments in this bill require employers to provide employees with paid rest breaks and unpaid meal breaks. As a result of this legislation rest and meal breaks are required to be provided at 2-hourly intervals where reasonable and practical. As the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions has pointed out I believe these changes are long overdue. People have taken it for granted that rest and meal breaks are already provided for in law. We have taken it for granted because before the Employment Contracts Act 1991 breaks had been provided for. Yet some 17 years later we are now informed that the question of breaks is a frequently raised issue in the collective bargaining in newly unionised workplaces even though more rightly they should be guaranteed by law. Rest and meal breaks are not included in the minimum codes in the present legislation which provide for minimum wages paid parental leave holidays and health and safety. Yet one would surely assume that having breaks is critical for health and safety and well-being. 
Although it seems bizarre for these times and conditions it is apparent that there is no explicit legal requirement for employees to have rest and meal breaks. Although almost 93 percent of active collective agreements provide for them there are some sectors where the provision of breaks is inadequate and it is hoped that this bill will do much to bring in the changes necessary to enhance the overall workplace environment. The Service and Food Workers Union for example reported that the largest number of calls and queries they field are from employees asking about their rest and meal break entitlements. Most of these employees are in small workplaces across the hospitality sector which are not covered by collective agreements. These rights are human rights. They are health and safety rights. They are basic employment provisions and the Maori Party is happy to support them as is consistent with our position that workplace environments be worker-friendly. 
We believe also that this bill is entirely consistent with Maori Party policies on health and with the well-being of tamariki and whanau. We are therefore very pleased to be able to support this bill and we look forward to the subsequent stages of the bill and to hearing the voices and views of all the parties involved.