Warren-Clark AngieANGIE WARREN-CLARK (Labour): Thank you Mr Chair. It's with pleasure that I take a second call tonight. I just wanted to raise a couple of matters that haven't been raised so far this evening. I am going to talk a little bit about Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 42 in regards to the educational campaign that Mark Mitchell has submitted. Essentially what he is saying in this is that there needs to be a systematic educational process around leave applications and how to manage that. He's also saying that there needs to be some education about flexible working environment requirements. One of the things I have to say in response to that is that I actually believe that our employers know what they're doing. I am an employer; I work my way through legislative requirements. There are some amazing tools online if people get stuck. Those tools even include just looking at writing up contracts and they're automatically there. So there's the Department of Internal Affairs there's Government departments etc. There is access and help and support in order to be able to navigate through this process.The second part is around the educational awareness and I really just wanted to draw this committee and the wider community to a really brilliant resource for employers which is actually out there right now and very valuable. It has been in place for quite a number of years. For those employers who are seeking and need to know what to do right now I recommend that they go to It's Not OK"  to the business resource and have a look at the provisions and the support available and the way to help your employee in that situation. It's really important and often in my role at the Ministry of Justice and also in my role at Women's Refuge we had employers just wanting to know what to do. We often directed them to this and also talked them through the process. Compassion is the key really when you're an employer and you have an employee suffering.One of the things that is really clearly articulated in that tool is the following findings: when an employee is managed appropriately there is less absenteeism there is lower staff turnover there is greater productivity there are fewer safety risks there is better morale it meets the health and safety requirements that everyone must follow—and in fact has been pulled back from this bill—they have a reputation as a good employer and the community recognises that. And the community recognises that. So that's the first issue.The second issue is just in relation to when this leave arises and there's a concern that there's a cost. Well there are a couple of parts in the member Jan Logie's SOP 39 that limit that liability if you want to call it that. So new section 72F says that domestic violence leave is not to be paid out. So this is not an accruing entitlement; when you leave you don't have to be paid out this leave. It's very much exactly like sick leave. That's important so that people know that this isn't going to accumulate. So that's the first thing. The second thing is that there is no carry-forward provision. As an employer we'd sometimes put in place that a person could hold up to 20 days of sick leave and they can use that at any time. There is no provision in this SOP for that to happen. So in lots of ways we are limiting the cost to an employer and that is an important fact even though I firmly believe that most employers out there would very happily support the ending of domestic violence for their staff. I'm very happy to say thank you Jan Logie for your wonderful work on this."