Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you Mr Chair. I just rise to address some of the issues that have been put up by the Opposition and a few inaccuracies. I will try and do this carefully. I don't want this to be an antagonistic debate. I want this to be one that's grounded on the legislation but I must admit that I'm a bit confused from the last speech.We've heard the member Jo Hayes speaking about strengthening the bill and talking about Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 41 that will make changes to clause 14 which is the clause in the bill that provides up to 10 days' leave and they are suggesting we actually get rid of the 10 days' leave. That's at the very heart of the bill so I really struggle to see how removing the heart of the bill could be understood as strengthening it.I really really respect the conversation about us needing to care for our children and recognising the impact of family violence on our children. It is profound and it carries on beyond generations. That is why in this bill—in SOP 39—the leave is available to victims of family violence and people caring for children who are affected by family violence. At the absolute core of this legislation is that understanding that this is about how we strengthen our whānau.That leave is available to—usually—mums but it could be another parent who is coming out of a violent situation where the children have been traumatised and they're expected to carry on as if nothing has changed. The kids are dealing with trauma and freaking out and they're expected to leave them at home and go to work. This leave is to enable them to stay with their kids when they're freaking out and they just need them there. That is at the heart of what this is about.I also just want to address too the point that we need to do some education around what is domestic violence and to expand people's understanding of it. The bill links to the Domestic Violence Act. So it does do that. And while we are not supporting the SOPs that have been put up by the National Party—and I do feel a bit of frustration about it because maybe we could have actually had a discussion about the education. But bringing it and putting it up today without coming to us and actually engaging in that discussion about what is the best method for implementation and going through and educating people—you know actually maybe we could have had that conversation but putting it up today it does look a little bit disingenuous to say that they're committed to that. And I would also say that actually we've got it. We know that implementation is incredibly important in realising the potential of this legislation and we're not just going to pass this legislation and not engage with employers as well as our communities. We have got that under control.I also want to touch on some of the issues that have also been raised: that this is placing—I will touch on them again—the burden on business and that the Crown needs to take responsibility. Well I do want to say that actually that is what we've been doing for a really long time. Almost all of our response—and the research that the previous Government did was about where Government spending is and where society spending around family violence is—almost all of it is after the police have been called. It's about police and prisons and our healthcare system—1.5 percent of Government spending is on prevention and not much more on early intervention.Actually if we're going to turn around these horrific rates of violence in our society it's going to take all of us. We can't just leave this with the Government. We need to be joining hands to actually support changing this culture of violence and that is part of what this bill does. And there will be very real benefits to businesses from doing that. I would talk to the research from Suzanne Snively in New Zealand that showed that it's over $3500 per victim per year cost to businesses now. So this idea that businesses won't be able to deal with the cost of what the Australian experience shows is women taking an average of I think 43 hours a year—Hon Tracey Martin: A year.JAN LOGIE: A year—that businesses couldn't deal with that cost when it's costing them about 3.5 grand at the moment is just not getting with it.And the saying as well that actually this is unfair on business—we had businesses submitting to us supporting this saying that it's made a real difference to them. We have evidence from businesses in Australia as well that have been saying this has been really positive for those businesses that have engaged and put these policies in place. Those policies cover 1.6 million workers in Australia. I think they've got some experience of this.And I would also say that I know Suzanne Snively has written passionately in support of this legislation and she's done the research modelling on it. She was a previous governor or board member of the Reserve Bank partner in KPMG—she's a very very experienced business leader and very aware of the challenges for all of our businesses in New Zealand and she believes that this legislation will help improve the wider culture in business to improve productivity by helping employers get with the programme that if they support their staff they're going to have increased productivity.So it has benefits for business on a wider level. But at the very heart of it what this is about is saving lives and when a victim comes to their employer and says that they are experiencing domestic violence or they need some help I believe that the right thing to do is to ensure that person gets the help that they need. And that is what this piece of legislation at its heart will do.