Tolley Anne; Collins JudithPARENTAL LEAVE AND EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILLIn CommitteePart 1 Amendments to come into force on 1 July 2018The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Anne Tolley): The Hon Judith Collins.Hon JUDITH COLLINS (National—Papakura): Oh what an opportunity! David Seymour: I'm sure she'll take it with both hands.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I always think this place is a land full of opportunity and I think I will take it too. Thank you so much MP for Epsom. This is a bill that the National Party fully supports. We certainly campaigned on the same provisions during the last election. But there are a couple of amendments that we would like to have made. The first is in the name of my colleague the Hon Amy Adams which is that a person and their spouse or partner may both be primary carers simultaneously and that they will be able to decide between themselves how they take that parental leave—concurrently or in overlapping periods. I think that this is a very very good suggested amendment and I have no understanding at all as to why the Labour Government is so set against it.We've had the Hon Kelvin Davis say that the Labour Government does not support the ability for parents of a child to be able to decide how they take that leave and whether or not both of them take it together for a shorter period of time or one takes it for the full period. Well I can't understand why in this day and age we can't acknowledge that the parent who is not actually the person who has given birth can contribute towards the care of that child. I would have thought that in a Government that should be for the 21st century—not the 19th—there should be an acknowledgment of the role of fathers or other parents should it not be a heterosexual relationship. I think it is very important that each parent be able to contribute towards the upbringing of a child. As a mother I think that one of those things in life where there's great joy is when both parents are intimately involved in bringing up their child.In this particular case what it doesn't take into account—which is what this side of the Chamber wants to take into account—is that the circumstances of parents may be quite different. For instance we could well have a parent who is for instance overseas for a period of time and they come back and the mother of the child for instance may want them to take up more of a primary role with that child. Why can't they be able to do that? For a Government that says that it's for children—well actually isn't the right of every child to have their parents intimately involved in their upbringing and isn't that what paid parental leave is all about? So I don't understand why it is that Labour in particular has been so against this. I would expect that the Green Party would want to support this provision because it's actually about giving people choice. I don't know about the New Zealand First Party—if they believe that fathers should be involved in the upbringing of their children. I would have thought that they did but look I've been surprised by quite a lot of what they've done over the years—particularly lately I have to say. But I would have thought that they would want to do this.When we're looking at people who want to be able to use this why can't they do it? We've got this very good amendment ready to go easily slotted in. It won't cost anybody anything by the way. It will however give choice to parents to make conscious decisions for the betterment of their child or children and it also accepts that not everybody works in exactly the same circumstances—in a 9 to 5 job working in various offices or anything like that. People work shift work. All sorts of different things are going on. And why can't they do this?It might well be that someone who has given birth—a mother—may well have had twins and wants her partner to be able to stay home with her. She may have had a caesarean and not be able to drive to the doctor or anything else or go and get groceries or do anything that people who are mothers do. The fact is: why can't they have someone home with them? If they're willing to have that person home and they want to do it why can't we do this? This is a very simple but very good amendment and I would really urge the Government to understand that not every good idea has to come from that side of the House. Some of them come from this side of the House.Clayton Mitchell: Well we've had nine years of it coming from that side of the House.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Actually we've had this opportunity—and I see that Clayton Mitchell doesn't believe in fathers having an active role in the upbringing of their children but I do. I'm one of those mothers who congratulate and champion fathers who look after and are involved in the rights of their child. This is a good Supplementary Order Paper. We should support it.