Bradford Sue: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Bradford Sue: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Paid Parental Leave for Self-Employed Persons) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2620] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party is very pleased to be able to speak in support of this bill as it has been reported back to the House. I thank the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee for the time it has put into the consideration of the bill and into the result before us today. As I stated in the first reading of this bill and in other paid parental leave debates the Green Party has always been in favour of paid parental leave applying to self-employed workers and it is great that we are one step closer to that today. 
As we debate these extensions to the bill I also acknowledge the original work of the “mother of paid parental leave” in this House Laila Harré in shepherding the original bill through. That was no mean feat. The National Party and its doom-merchant allies at the time believed that civilisation as we knew it would end if the original bill were passed. Even Labour at the time was lukewarm on the bill and ensured that it was far more restrictive than it should have been. I am pleased to hear today how far the National Party has come. 
The legislation has been extended once already and now we are looking forward to further improving the Act so that eventually it will become legislation of which we can all be proud. Even after this bill is passed improvements are still needed regarding eligibility for paid parental leave the level of paid leave and the length of leave that can be taken. A number of those issues will probably need to be addressed before New Zealand can ratify the relevant International Labour Organization conventions on paid parental leave but at least we will now have a system that does not discriminate between workers based on their employment status. 
Although I was not a member of the select committee I did sit in on the committee that did the work originally and many urban and rural submitters were rightly angry at the inequity of self-employed working parents being denied the ability to take up paid parental leave. The arguments put up then were around the complexities of dealing with the issues of self-employed workers. Although no legislation is simple the fact that once the Government had the political will to make the changes the complexity arguments strangely enough evaporated. Unlike some bills this bill has been returned to the House largely intact and it seems that really there was general support from most of the committee at least. The Minister of Labour Ruth Dyson and the Prime Minister both stated that the bill would become law on 1 July 2006 and I am pleased that we are on target to achieve this. Those women who timed their pregnancies to fit with the passing of this legislation—and I believe that there were some—will not be disappointed unless their babies are rather too premature. 
In addition to extending paid parental leave to self-employed workers the bill also deals with three other important issues. Firstly it reduces from 12 months to 6 months the minimum period before an employee is entitled to a subsequent period of parental leave and a parental leave payment. I am pleased to see this change. It helps those parents who may be adopting again before a 12-month period and also those parents who themselves have another child within 12 months of the earlier one being born. With the complications of premature birth 6 months seems a good period to select for the purposes of this bill. 
Secondly the bill gives power to the department to accept applications for paid parental leave even if there are irregularities in the application. This is very important as it is often those who are in the greatest need of paid parental leave who have difficulty in filling out the application forms. 
Thirdly the bill gives review rights on paid parental leave to the Employment Relations Authority. This is also an important step to ensure there are cost-effective review and appeal mechanisms for the paid parental leave system and the Green Party endorses this measure. 
In regard to one of the suggested amendments to the bill made by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee I still have some concerns with new section 2AD in clause 8. Along with some submitters I was concerned that the original wording discriminates against those workers who because of their precarious employment situation move even concurrently at times between self-employed and employee status. My concern is that these workers’ entitlements should be based on the sum total of their work not just on one status or the other. Frankly I am having difficulty deciding whether the proposed amendment of the committee to this provision makes the matter better or worse. I would be grateful if at some stage during the second reading or Committee stage of the debate the Minister or one of the select committee members could explain to the House the impact on these workers of the original clause and the amendment. 
So what does this bill not do and what still needs to be addressed if we are finally to have International Labour Organization - compliant legislation? First is the issue of the right of working mothers to breastfeed. I attempted in the previous paid parental amendment legislation to have this included but was told it was outside the scope. It seems that it is outside the scope of this bill as well. This is a real shame. In the mid-2003 review of the paid parental leave scheme the Human Rights Commission stated that providing a legal framework for the right to breastfeed at work need not be complex. It advocated that the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act would be the best vehicle for this. I strongly urge the Minister to ask her department to undertake work on this issue to develop further legislation as soon as possible. 
Second is the issue around whangai and other customary adoptions. The commentary on the bill acknowledges that there were submissions on these matters but again submitters were told that this was outside the scope of the bill. We are told by the Minister today that the Government is looking into this but this is not good enough. The “looking at” seems to be taking far too long. It is time for the Government to engage on this deeply and carefully in consultation with iwi hapu and whanau and with Pasifika and other cultural groups with a view to extending the legislation to cover these situations as soon as practicable. 
Third is the continuing problem of casual and seasonal employees. These are the most vulnerable workers in this country who often miss out on many employment rights and of course also miss out on the right to paid parental leave. I join with Peter Brown who constantly reminds this House about the plight of these workers and acknowledge that although it may be too hard to deal with these workers solely through this legislation we should perhaps look at some other legislation and take a complete look at the situation of casual and vulnerable workers and perhaps even begin to consider some slight reregulation of the labour market to eliminate the exploitative practices around casualisation. Where genuine casual and seasonal work is needed we should be ensuring that those workers are entitled to all the rights that permanent workers enjoy such as paid parental leave. 
In conclusion I want to reiterate that the Green Party is pleased to support this bill today and will do so again at the third reading. We are delighted that once the Minister of Labour and her Government acknowledged the discrimination against self-employed workers in the original bill they moved in a timely way to address these issues. We support the inclusion of the additional matters in the bill especially the reduction from 12 months to 6 months of the entitlement period between births or adoptions but we also recognise that there is still some way to go before this legislation can comply with all International Labour Organization standards. The Green Party will support any Government or member’s bill in the future that further strengthens this legislation and finally allows us to ratify the International Labour Organization in this area.