Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2)

I move, That the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2) be now read a first time. I nominate the Education and Workforce Committee to consider the bill.

Current legislation provides that New Zealanders are entitled to bereavement leave after the loss of a family member or a child, but it is currently unclear whether that includes loss through miscarriage or stillbirth. Currently, the bereavement provisions within the Holidays Act 2003 are ambiguous in their application to this particular area. Employees are entitled to three days’ bereavement leave on the death of a child, but it is unclear whether this would also apply to a pregnancy that ends in miscarriage or stillbirth. This means that an employee’s entitlement to take leave is left to the discretion of their employer. An employee would otherwise need to take sick leave or annual leave, depending on whether they had it available. Because the law is unclear, it can lead to disputes between employees and employers regarding the entitlement to bereavement leave at a particularly sensitive time in someone’s life.

My bill proposes a simple change that allows existing bereavement leave to be automatically made available for those who have had a miscarriage or stillbirth. This leave would be made available to both the mother and her partner, as both parents are affected.

Miscarriage is the term used for the loss of a pregnancy up to the 20th week of gestation. The loss of a pregnancy after that date is known as stillbirth. The overwhelming majority of miscarriages happen before 13 weeks. One in every four New Zealand women has had a miscarriage, with over 20,000 miscarriages occurring each year in our country. For something that occurs so much, we do not talk about it that often.

While this bill may be a small and simple change in legislation, if passed, it will make a significant difference. I know this as nearly 7,000 people have signed a petition in support of this particular legislative change. Along with these signatures, many women have written, with their stories of miscarriage experiences. They’ve also described the process of engaging with an employer afterwards. While there were many instances of good employers providing adequate time for families to grieve, there were also accounts of women who were not afforded any time to recover, whether that was physically or emotionally.

The most common concern raised was that women were unsure of their rights. They did not want to ask for leave at a time when they were feeling vulnerable. More than one stated that they did not want to cause a fuss or to enter into a dispute with their employer at a sensitive time such as this. They just got on with life.

One particular account that has remained with me was from a woman in the Hutt Valley who found out that her baby’s heart was no longer beating. She was advised by her health professional to wait until she miscarried and that further medical steps would be taken if the process did not occur naturally. At this time, she needed to work, and she travelled into Wellington and back each day on the train, fearful each day that she would miscarry while away from home. What she had wanted was to be with her partner to feel safe and supported in her own home and to have the time to pack away the things she had purchased for the nursery. I believe no woman should have to go through this.

The measure of our society is how we look after people. I believe that New Zealanders are compassionate, and this proposed change in law will demonstrate that we care.

Many women spoke about how they felt: ashamed, sometimes embarrassed, fearful of being judged, and concerned that others would find out what had happened. While it is important that this bill provides greater certainty in employment law, it is just as important for the message that it sends. For too long, issues related to women’s bodies, sexual health, and reproductive rights have been treated as topics that are not up for public discussion. I believe we owe it to ourselves and the next generation to change this. Being embarrassed or made to feel ashamed helps no one. The more we talk, debate, and encourage openness the more informed we will be.

There have been some significant issues debated in this very House this year. As a new MP, it has heartened me to see the maturity and the level of agreement on issues that people feel so strongly about and that affect the lives of so many. I’ve spoken to all parties represented in this House, and I hope to have their continued support for this bill.

I was genuinely surprised at the extent of international interest in this bill when it was first drawn last year. Not just Newstalk ZB but also CNN, BBC World, The Guardian, The Independent, and Marie Claire reported on our country being one of the few in the world to introduce legislation that enabled bereavement leave to be taken for miscarriage. As part of that coverage, the question was raised as to whether this bill applies to abortion. It does not. It specifically relates to miscarriage and to stillbirth.

First, it is important to note that the origin of this bill was from a member of the public who had miscarried and who wished to access bereavement leave but was unsure of whether she was entitled to it. Second, I want this bill to pass. There is a genuine need for New Zealand men and women to have time to grieve when a pregnancy ends in miscarriage or stillbirth. This is a simple member’s bill that will provide some support to families in need.

There are a few people that I would like to acknowledge. Firstly, Kathryn van Beek, this is really your bill. Thank you for having the courage to raise this as an issue and to bring it to your local member of Parliament. You have been a strong advocate for women. I am proud and grateful to live in a country where a member of the public can identify a problem, bring it to an MP, and potentially change the law to help many others.

I would like to acknowledge my colleague Clare Curran, who was that member of Parliament that Kathryn van Beek initially approached with this as an idea. I would like to acknowledge those unions who have already put this as a provision within collective agreements since the bill was first drawn. To my mum, who had more than one miscarriage and was brave enough to talk to me about it and the impact it had on her.

I would like to thank the hundreds of men and women who have taken the time to write or contact me to voice their support for this bill. I hope there is enough support in this House for it to proceed to select committee so that many others get the opportunity to have their views heard and their stories told. The bill would also be strengthened with the benefit of the public submissions process. It currently provides that bereavement leave is able to be taken on the unplanned end of an employee’s confirmed pregnancy by way of miscarriage or stillbirth. Further advice and information gained through the select committee submissions process will be important in order to understand the best way for this new provision to be accessed by the public and also for it to practically operate.

Losing a baby unexpectedly is a painful experience for parents and whānau. No legislation will ever have the power to heal that loss, but this bill can give a bit more than what we have now, giving the certainty to families that they will have at least some time to grieve. I commend the bill to the House.

I rise on behalf of the National Party to commend this bill to the House. Firstly, can I take a moment to acknowledge everybody who has been involved in the development of this bill: firstly, Kathryn van Beek—what an extraordinary, amazing woman. I have read her comments around the development of this bill. She was a New Zealander that chose to fight, through courage and resilience, to have this issue brought to Parliament. In doing so, she has fundamentally changed the course of history to ensure that a group of women and families, in my view, are better off as a result of this law.

Secondly, can I acknowledge her local MP: Clare Curran. The reality is that like many of us, I know in my electorate I would have somewhere over 10,000 constituency cases or queries or contacts that come through my office each year, and often, when people sit in my office and they say “Well, will it really make a difference—sitting down with your local MP?”, I say, “Yes, actually, there are times where I’ve written to Ministers and policies have changed, and laws have changed as a result of it.”

So I acknowledge you, Clare, as well, and that as a result of someone approaching you—a constituent—we’re now in this position where law, in my view, will change, and then, obviously, Ginny Andersen, because you’ve then taken up the mantle of putting forward a bill that has been drawn out of the members’ bill ballot. That takes work. It takes quite a lot of drafting and it takes the ability as well to work across the House to try and gather support for it. So I want to acknowledge all of those people that have worked hard to get to this point.

But, fundamentally, the reason that the National Party supports this law change is we understand the real trauma that occurs as a result of a miscarriage but also stillbirth, and we don’t want to leave it up to chance. That’s why we’re prepared to support a law that says that as of right, women will have access to three days’ bereavement leave. So the question then becomes: well, what’s been happening now? Now, the reality is we do acknowledge that there are many employers out there that have done the right thing: naturally, when they have someone who is grieving, they have given them leave. But what this bill is about is actually establishing a much stronger parliamentary provision in law that says, actually, as of right, people should have that right to have three days’ bereavement leave.

I do want to acknowledge the real—both physical, and emotional and mental—impact of a miscarriage. There’s research that demonstrates many women experience depression. They experience anxiety. There’s increasing research that demonstrates that for a number of women, there’s post-traumatic stress disorder as a result, and also there are physical impacts that occur often for many women when they have a miscarriage. So from our perspective, this is absolutely the right thing to do. It’s not just about being a compassionate country; it’s also about recognising the real health and wellbeing issues and the trauma that is often, for many people, lifelong that results as a result of having a miscarriage or losing a child.

I just want to acknowledge as well—and we hear it when we read some of what Kathryn van Beek has written—the fact that there are women in New Zealand and families that have had to deal with being turned down and not have leave. So not only have they been through this extraordinary trauma they’re dealing with of having a miscarriage, but then at that moment of extraordinary trauma, where they could have depression or anxiety or have post-traumatic stress disorder, and they could be dealing with physical issues as a result of the miscarriage, they’ve been told that they will not have leave. We’ve heard women who have spoken out on this, and I guess what I would say, from the Opposition’s point of view, is our heart goes out to you and to all of those people that have experienced that terrible, horrific situation of, basically, having further trauma at the time of your greatest need. Again, that is why our party have said we support this law proceeding, because we understand there are real people that have had additional trauma as a result of being turned down.

I do want to acknowledge as well—and I’m sure that this will be discussed at select committee—that people will raise real privacy issues in terms of the mechanics around how this all works. I think we should have that debate at select committee, but I think the principle that we strengthen the law is incredibly sound. I have no doubt that there will be some employers that will turn up to select committee and say, “Well, as a blanket rule, this Act could add additional cost.” From our perspective on this side of the House, we are absolutely supporting this bill because we would actually argue the additional cost in trauma—can you put a price on the trauma and additional depression, anxiety, the physical impacts that women and families are going through? What this is about is just ensuring that we entrench that right that people can take that time period off.

I would acknowledge—and I heard it, obviously, in Ginny Andersen’s speech—that the world is watching. There are only a few jurisdictions, potentially, that do this, but I do also acknowledge that if you look at a country like India, for instance, they have actually a number of weeks. As I understand it, in Canada they also have a number of weeks. So you can argue that, well, this is a small number of jurisdictions across the world, but the other argument is, actually, that in other jurisdictions, they’ve done a lot more. But we look forward to having that debate at select committee around the time period and the appropriateness of that, and we look forward to investigating further what other jurisdictions do.

But, ultimately, I would step back and say that, look, fundamentally, we are a kind and compassionate nation. We have demonstrated on numerous issues in the past that we can be incredibly progressive and that the Parliament can work together cross-party on a number of those issues. Again, I don’t think that it matters whether it’s dealing with issues of health and safety or dealing with this particular issue and the ability of entrenching the right of people to take bereavement leave where there is a miscarriage. I think we can do more in this area, and that’s why the National Party want to support this bill.

Finally, I do want to make my final comments to, again, Kathryn van Beek, who has worked incredibly hard with both Clare Curran and Ginny Andersen. I just acknowledge you. I acknowledge all of the other women that have raised their voice on this issue, and from the National Party’s point of view, we will absolutely be supporting this bill to the House because we want to do everything that we can to reduce, where possible, additional trauma and anxiety and to give women and their families the ability to have the time together to appropriately grieve in what is one of the hardest situations that you can imagine in life. National supports this bill to the House.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Well, I think it was nearly three years ago—in fact, it might be slightly more than three years ago—that Kathryn van Beek wrote a letter, actually, to all of the MPs in Dunedin raising her own personal circumstances, having suffered a miscarriage and the pain it had caused and having done a little bit of research on what a potential change in law might look like and begging to come and talk to somebody about it.

I met with her at the beginning of 2017 in my office and we talked for a while, and what we decided was that she would go away and build some support amongst other women—she had been, I think, on a Facebook page; there was a support page—for a law change and then we’d talk again. It took her nearly a year to come back to me, for lots of reasons. Kathryn, I hope that you are watching today, because, boy, you did the work.

She had built a lot of support and I want to read to you some of the comments that were made by other women when Kathryn reached out. I’ll just read a few.

“I found out at 17 weeks my baby boys heartbeat had stopped and had a D&C the next day. My bosses didn’t even question details, giving me full bereavement and any time I needed off in the weeks following (which is awesome because they’re all the biggest bunch of lads). This was a big help, I was incapable of functioning for a while. Totally support this.”—that woman was lucky because she had support.

“I lost my very first baby [in 2017] to miscarriage. After having a miscarriage confirmed, I took a week off work to help with the grieving process. My partner also took a week off. What really pissed me off is that he got given bereavement leave by his work, yet I wasn’t, even though I was the one who was carrying the baby. After my week off, I attempted to go back to work but was not ready to so asked for another day off. I was told by my bosses to ‘get over it’ and ‘move on’ because it wasn’t a real loss and that I had been taken off the rosters for two weeks and that they were now looking for a replacement for me as I had become unreliable. I handed in my resignation the next day. Miscarriage definitely needs to be recognised as bereavement leave.”

Kathryn, the work that you did has made such a huge change. By the time she came back to me the Government had changed and I was a Minister, and I really wanted this to become law. Ginny really was keen, and Ginny, you have done such incredible work on this issue that has got international recognition. It is something that really means an awful lot.

If we did a survey of women in this House, I wonder how many would put up their hands and say they’d had a miscarriage, because we are reflective of society. I haven’t had a miscarriage, but I did go through several years of pain and trauma in trying to conceive and going through IVF. Every woman who has been through these sorts of experiences knows how important it is to receive support and how alone you can feel without it. What this bill does is makes society recognise the importance of this issue, and gives and sanctions the importance of women and families going through the pain and trauma of miscarriage. This is a bill that corrects an ambiguity, it removes an ambiguity, and it’s simple but powerful. It’s amazing today that everyone, I hope, across this House, is going to support it.

I just want to say something else about Kathryn van Beek. She has many strings to her bow. At the time she came in to see me at the end of 2017, she handed me a book that she’d written and illustrated. It’s called Bruce Finds a Home and it’s about a kitten. She’s a children’s writer. She’s writing another book at the moment on pets. It explores the relationships that we have with animals in a short story, and that is called Emotional Support Animal. Thank you, Kathryn, for the amazing work that you’ve done to get us this far on this issue.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am pleased to stand in support in the first reading of this piece of legislation, the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2), which, as those who’ve been watching or listening will know, is in Ginny Anderson’s name, and Clare Curran, who’s just resumed her seat, has been instrumental in bringing it to the House.

I do want to just say, though, in terms of Kathryn van Beek that I think that the reality with bringing this issue to an MP and then to Parliament is it’s actually exposing a very hidden issue. There’ll be other examples in this House, myself included, where a constituent—in my case, Graeme Moyle—has brought an issue that ends up as a member’s bill. But this one is different because it’s an issue that has been hidden from view, and it’s hidden for a couple of reasons.

One of the challenges is that often miscarriages take place in the first 12 weeks of a pregnancy. That is the time that many parents to be, on medical advice or other advice, actually don’t tell anyone they are expecting, so then, if there’s a miscarriage during that time, not only have you not told anyone you’re pregnant but to then tell someone you’ve miscarried is also kind of a bit strange. I’ve been in that situation. I was six weeks with my first miscarriage, and because I hadn’t told anyone I was expecting, it then felt quite strange to tell someone I’d miscarried.

So I think for an employment situation, I’m sure there are many employers who want to support the people that work for them, but because they weren’t aware of the pregnancy it’s particularly challenging to then be able to respond, in a way, as well. So I think this piece of legislation is really important, and I think there’ll be issues, like every piece of legislation that comes out in a select committee, that will be traversed in terms of the practicalities, but I do think it’s a really important issue to be talking about.

I also had a miscarriage at 17 weeks, which was the next kind of scenario—when everybody knows—and the thing that’s strange about miscarriage, and why I think it’s particularly important this Parliament debates it, is how frequently it occurs but, actually, how rarely it’s spoken about. So by bringing this issue to Parliament, I’m hopeful that this will be a conversation that more people can have, not just with their loved ones but also with their employers and their work colleagues, because the reality is there are a number of health impacts with pregnancy, and very definitely when a pregnancy comes to an unplanned end. My colleague the Hon Nikki Kaye talked about these. There are physical ones, there are emotional issues, and it is an issue for a family, you know, and not just the woman who was pregnant and then miscarried.

So National will be supporting this in the first reading. It’s a very sensible, practical measure that supports women and their families. I think, more importantly, it’s an issue that needs to be discussed and that we need to talk about. We need to have a conversation as a wider community and as a country, so that for someone who has miscarried—and I can totally get the comment that Clare Curran made about an employer who says “Just get over it.” Well, you know, what that tells us very clearly is some people have absolutely no idea, and, unfortunately, part of having no idea is because it’s a hidden issue and it’s not talked about, and people have no idea how traumatic it is. I remember trying to explain to my three-year-old son that now there was no baby.

So it’s about having those conversations more openly. It’s about the ability for someone, whether it’s the woman who was carrying the baby, the wider family, or the husband, to be able to get support, to be able to have conversations, to get professional advice if they need it, and to take this issue and put it under the fresh air, which means anyone who’s got a challenge in dealing with it can get the support they need, and, actually, the front-line support is from their employer, who can say, “Take the time you need.” So by putting the three days’ entitlement to bereavement leave into this legislation, I think it’s a fantastic first step that will help women and children and their families up and down this country. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just want to acknowledge Louise Upston for sharing some private details with this House and those people back home. It is a subject that is a very emotional one for many people, and those that have suffered the loss of a child through a miscarriage know that feeling too well. I also want to acknowledge Ginny Andersen and Clare Curran for stewarding this bill through the House, and also acknowledge Kathryn van Beek, who started with small beginnings, had a situation herself, and wanted to find a solution. That, for me, just resonates how important this parliamentary system that we operate under is and how this open democracy that we have enables the voice for people that sometimes don’t know how to follow a pathway. When you can actually see that first-hand today, it gives me a great sense of pride because not all countries have what we’ve got here, and I think we should all be very pleased that we belong to this system. New Zealand First will very, very proudly be supporting this piece of legislation.

I guess it’s worth noting that with regard to the two stories that Clare Curran shared with the House in relation to a good employer versus a bad employer, it’s not actually a 50:50 situation. I don’t know what the numbers are, but I know a lot of employers who wouldn’t hesitate for a second to absolutely support their employees in moments of need and who understand the importance of time and giving that certainty and who would be compassionate to the people that help their businesses grow, develop, sustain, and maintain. So I guess it’s an opportunity to shame what I believe is a very, very, very small number of employers that don’t have that compassionate side in their thinking and understanding of what people go through. Whether they haven’t experienced it themselves, or whether they’re on a spectrum, potentially, that doesn’t understand the necessity of giving time and space for people, I think it’s a time for them to have some reflection.

This bill I see going all the way through and not only through select committee, and we’re certainly very keen and interested to hear what submitters will say about how the mechanics will work, because I think protecting people’s privacy is absolutely key. Telling people intimate parts of their lives—as Louise Upston has already mentioned, she was in a situation in employment, but she hadn’t told her employer that she was pregnant—and then to go and share that intimate information around having a miscarriage could be very, very daunting and could actually slow down that process and add more unnecessary stress at a time like that. So I think the select committee process, where people have the opportunity to come and air their concerns and talk about some of those solutions, is going to be very closely monitored and looked at, and I believe that if there are any changes being looked at to be made, that is the time and the place.

The only point that New Zealand First would like to raise—and, again, in select committee, this would be an opportunity to look at that, and in the committee of the whole House, potentially, put forward a Supplementary Order Paper, unless we can resolve it beforehand—is in the amendment to section 69. It’s only a very small bill. It’s new section 69(2)(d). It says here “on the unplanned end of an employee’s spouse or partner’s confirmed pregnancy by way of a miscarriage or still-birth.”, and it doesn’t specifically mention fathers. It does talk about partners, but sometimes you have situations where a relationship breaks up post-pregnancy and this miscarriage takes place, and that would potentially preclude a father from actually having that same time to convalesce and grieve in private. So that needs to be considered, because I don’t believe the intent was ever to miss out fathers in this situation, and it would be certainly worthwhile us considering.

The removal of any subjectivity from an employer is, I think, important. As I’ve already said, this is a very small part of the employers out there. I for one have been an employer on a large scale for many, many years, and I wouldn’t have batted an eyelid for a second to ensure that the staff, the team, the family—the extended family that you have working in your environment—aren’t properly and adequately looked after.

So New Zealand First very proudly supports this bill through and looks forward to it being fully completed and the measure introduced. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity. I’m taking this call to support this legislation in its first reading. I would like to join my other colleagues in acknowledging Kathryn van Beek, and I also want to acknowledge the Hon Clare Curran and Ginny Andersen. I want to acknowledge Kathryn van Beek for her courage—the courage that she had to bring this issue up with her local member of Parliament—and then I want to acknowledge the Hon Clare Curran for taking up this issue and passing it on to Ginny Andersen, and, of course, Ginny Andersen for putting this bill forward as her member’s bill.

I want to congratulate Ginny Andersen for her bill coming before the House for the first reading. I would like to also add that the timing for this bill to come up for the first reading is great, because we are about to go on Christmas break. I’m hoping that the bill will go through the first reading and that it is coming to the Education and Workforce Committee, which I chair. So we will be able to open for submissions for this legislation, and by the time we come back, we will be ready to work on this legislation in the select committee process. So I believe the timing for this bill to come before the House is actually really good.

This bill deals with the Holidays Act 2003. This bill is to make an amendment to the Holidays Act 2003. This is the part of the section that deals with bereavement leave, and I have to say that this bill deals with a real concern within the community.

We understand that when a miscarriage happens in a family, it’s a very traumatic situation, and I want to acknowledge Ginny Andersen for sharing her family’s experiences and I also want to acknowledge the Hon Louise Upston for sharing her family’s experiences. When you hear about those experiences, sometimes you wonder why we have missed out on including bereavement leave for miscarriages in the Holidays Act 2003 for so many years, because there are a number of women who go through a miscarriage, but, as we have also heard from the members, it is an issue that is very difficult to talk about.

I personally know many families and individuals that didn’t disclose their pregnancy only because they were not sure if their pregnancy was going to last for the full term, so they waited for that assurance from their general practitioner or a doctor before they went out and announced their pregnancy not only to their friends but also to their extended family members. So to talk about a miscarriage can be quite difficult, and the last thing those people want to do is negotiate for the kind of leave they should be getting from their employer. If they have any sick leave left, yes, they can access that sick leave, but if they don’t have any sick leave remaining, then the only situation they are left with is to take annual leave to deal with the traumatic situation.

We know that most of our employers are really good employers, and that employees and employers work in a good-faith relationship with each other. But there could be a small proportion of employers—and it could be because of the workload that they have—that may not be prepared to give annual leave to their staff when that annual leave is requested, and it can become quite difficult for that staff member to actually disclose that the leave is required to deal with a miscarriage. So with this amendment, what will happen is that the employers will be required to give that leave—three days of bereavement leave—to deal with the trauma and to deal with their grief.

On this side, we highly value work and family life balance. When we were in Government, we extended paid parental leave. We also extended paid parental leave to other forms of work arrangements that were not included in the legislation before, and this will be another thing that will get added to the Holidays Act 2003 if this bill goes through all the stages in the House.

I also want to talk about the difference between a stillbirth and a miscarriage. A stillbirth is when a birth happens after 20 weeks of gestation, and the weight of that dead foetus is more than 400 grams. A miscarriage is when it happens before 20 weeks, and the weight of the foetus is less than 400 grams. Bereavement leave applies if a child dies, so the overall outcome in these circumstances—we cannot compare it directly, but the overall outcome, I would say, if we try to compare it, is the same. A family is in a situation where they have lost a child or a to-be child in their family, so I believe that this is legislation on which we will receive a number of submissions in the select committee process, and I look forward to hearing various views on this legislation. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s with great pleasure that I rise to add the Green Party’s voice of support in the House today to the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2). I too would like to add my acknowledgments to Kathryn van Beek for bringing this issue to Clare Curran as a member of Parliament initially, and then for her work with Ginny Andersen, who has so effectively brought this piece of legislation to the House with—so far—unanimous support. That is a significant achievement.

This is, in the heart, quite a simple piece of legislation. It’s ensuring that bereavement leave is accessible, and universally accessible, for families who have experienced a miscarriage or stillbirth. That’s needed because the current legislation for bereavement leave is silent on the application.

We’ve heard from many people in the House that a lot of employers automatically gave it when asked, because they had a sense of connection, I can only imagine, to the wellbeing of their staff and wanted to support them, but that has not been a universal experience. Kathryn spoke and wrote quite, I think, eloquently describing her outrage after her own experience to find out on asking the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment around whether bereavement leave was accessible, only to be told that it was up to the bereaved person to convince their employer that their baby is worth grieving. Those are her words, and that is what we are changing today—that the onus will not be on the bereaved parents to prove that their grief allows them access to time to grieve, and that, actually, this is our expectation as a country that every family be able to grieve as they need.

I do want to also reinforce the message that has come from others in the House today—and I heard it eloquently presented by Louise Upston—around the value of providing visibility for an issue that is still very taboo in our society and there is so much silence over. But I want to acknowledge the case as represented by Clare Curran via Kathryn van Beek of somebody being told by her employer to get over it and that she wasn’t entitled to feelings of grief, and just how inhumane that response is. All of the research and evidence and lived experience tells us that everyone’s experience will be different. Some women, some people, will find that, actually, it doesn’t have a huge impact on them, but for others, it’s going to be a very complex mix of feelings of confusion and grief and loss, a sense of emptiness, a sense of loss of trust in their own bodies and a sense of loss of control, and a concern around their future hopes and dreams for their family. That’s a lot to be dealing with.

I’m very, very pleased, on behalf of the Green Party, to be supporting this legislation to ensure that people who need the time to grieve are given at least the consistent ability to access time as other people who are experiencing bereavement. I think we are all better off when our workplaces are compassionate and humane, and this legislation helps us towards that end. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m pleased to be able to stand to make a contribution on this, the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2) at its first reading. I’m pleased to also support this bill to the House.

I’ve been very heartened by the speeches on this bill so far. It’s been handled with a lot of sensitivity and compassion for something that we will have to still apply some robustness to in the select committee process. We’ve heard today that miscarriage is an issue that affects, roughly, 20,000 women every year. I believe that number’s probably higher, and I echo the sentiments that my colleague Louise Upston mentioned about the number of women that, because of the early stage of their miscarriage, wouldn’t have necessarily reported it to their GP.

As a woman and as a mother of five children, I say that I have also experienced a miscarriage. This was quite a long time ago and I’m having to reflect on that time, but, particularly, I had already given birth to two very healthy children, so I was extremely shocked that, at 12 weeks, my baby had died—so the shock in terms of “How could it be that I couldn’t bring another healthy baby to life, to full term?” There were mixed feelings, including one of guilt and including one of being quite critical of perhaps “What did I do or what did I not do right this time around?” I can imagine this is an experience that is very different for every woman. That was a profound sense of loss for my husband and myself. At that time, because of the early stage, not many people had known. We hadn’t told many people, so it was sort of a sense of loss that we just shared between ourselves.

So I actually really commend Ginny Andersen and Clare Curran for bringing this issue to light and bringing this to Parliament. I commend this going to select committee, as a woman and as a mother that has had a miscarriage, and I am also a business owner and I am also an employer of a small business that has employed largely women. In that intimate setting of a small business with predominantly female employees, over the last 17 years, it has been an environment where we, as business owners, become quite intimately aware of some of the issues that our workers have in their lives. We have dealt with issues of domestic violence with our workers, we have become aware of issues where there are issues with their children, and we have become aware of issues where they have had miscarriages and also where they’ve had pregnancies.

So as an employer I understand—and I think most small-business employers would fall into this category—that we are very compassionate in those situations and generally understanding, and that it works in the best benefit of our businesses to take that approach with our employees. I understand, sadly, that that won’t be the case for many. So I do commend this process going to select committee so that we can hear from other voices, other businesses, and other women, ensuring that we put the best light on this bill as possible. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is with great pride that I rise to make a contribution on the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2). I say that for a few different reasons: firstly, of course, because it is a significant bill that will make life a little bit easier for those who are going through a particularly traumatic time in their lives. I also say that I rise with pride because the bill is in the name of Ginny Andersen, who is a fellow “class of ’17er”. I just want to congratulate her for her luck in having her bill drawn from the ballot—a bit of luck that some of us haven’t experienced yet. But I also want to commend her for the work that she’s put into getting the bill to where it’s at today.

I also want to acknowledge at the onset of my contribution the role that Clare Curran has played in the genesis of this bill, and, of course, Kathryn van Beek, who brought this to the attention of her local MP and who has worked incredibly hard also to get us, collectively, to the point that we’re at today. As others have mentioned before me, this is a simple bill—if one were to look at it now, it makes a simple change that allows for existing bereavement leave to be made available to those who have had a miscarriage or a stillbirth—but, as I said when I started my contribution, it makes a significant change to the lives of people, and that’s what all of us are here in this House to do.

It clarifies the law, in which, previously, allowing the leave has been left to the discretion of an employer. It clarifies it and makes things a little bit easier for women who have been in a position where they’re unsure as to how that piece of legislation might be interpreted by their employer. We’ve heard before that we’ve seen mixed results when employers have been approached by those who want to take bereavement leave after losing their child through miscarriage or stillbirth. Some have been successful, and others haven’t. There are always good employers who are empathetic and want to support, but there’s always that problematic minority as well, and this legislation clarifies it for everyone involved.

Members before me have spoken about the time of trauma when someone has lost their child. There is trauma, obviously, for the woman who has miscarried or experienced a stillbirth but also for the partner who goes through that time of loss, and, from what I’ve heard, a time also of loneliness that the couple feels, either because they haven’t talked about the pregnancy before and therefore feel uncomfortable to talk about the loss of that pregnancy but also because there are issues around shame and guilt.

I want to echo a point made by Ginny Andersen in her speech, in her contribution today, where she talked about the fact that the content of this bill is incredibly important but equally important is the message that it sends, which is the fact that it is OK to talk about these experiences. It’s OK to talk about women’s sexual health and reproductive rights and related issues. I want to commend the women who have supported the passage of this bill to its first reading and who have talked about their experiences in the public domain, and that includes my colleagues here in this House, from both sides of the House, who have shared some very personal experiences and stories. It is incredibly difficult to do that in the public domain, and I want to commend you for that.

As the chair of the New Zealand Parliamentarians’ Group on Population and Development—the focus of that cross-party group here is to shed light on issues to do with women’s sexual health and reproductive rights—it makes me particularly proud to support the passage of this bill. Also, I just want to touch on the fact that this bill is a testament to the strong democracy that we are in New Zealand. The fact that a constituent takes a matter of importance to a member of Parliament who listens to her, takes it seriously, and works with her to shape the concern into a piece of legislation which we can now support to first reading and, hopefully, beyond, I think, is incredibly powerful.

Can I once again acknowledge everyone who’s had a role to play in this and those who will have a role to play at the select committee, going forward, as well. The international community is watching. This is the right thing to do. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m privileged to stand and take a call on the Holidays (Bereavement Leave for Miscarriage) Amendment Bill (No 2). This is a momentous time in this House for women and for women’s sexual health. I cannot even hazard a guess as to the emotion and as to the loss from a miscarriage because I have never had one, but I have family members that have had one. For some, they have had multiple miscarriages. What we have done as a whānau is we have rallied around them, but it has also been one of those things that many people decide they don’t want to talk about. This whole area of secrecy around miscarriage should never happen, and I think that this bill will actually bring it to light. It will bring it to light. There is no shame in a miscarriage, and I think that this is what this bill is about.

For most women, pregnancy is one of the most highlighted experiences that a woman can have and a family can experience. It’s where a mother and a father and all the family rally around. Unfortunately, as Ginny Andersen pointed out in her contribution, one in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage, and that is very sad. It’s a very sad indictment that women who experience miscarriage also have to experience the humiliation of seeking leave—bereavement leave—so they can go and grieve their loss along with their husband and their family.

I want to acknowledge everybody who’s been involved in developing this bill. I don’t know Kathryn van Beek from Dunedin, but I just want to say congratulations to you, Kathryn. As Ginny Andersen pointed out in her contribution, this is your bill. This is your bill for standing up for all women who have suffered miscarriage. So in this House, this bill is dedicated to the hard work and for you making the approach to the Hon Clare Curran so that she can bring this to the House. I also want to acknowledge Clare for the hard work that she has done over the three or four years in bringing this bill here, and also Ginny Andersen for picking up the mantle and shepherding this bill in for its first reading.

On this side of the House, we are very proud to be able to support this bill to the select committee. I think more and more stories will emerge around some of the issues that women who have faced miscarriage have faced in their employment. But, in saying that, I also want to acknowledge most employers, who are sympathetic and who are empathetic to women who have had miscarriages, and who have given them, in some cases, more than three days to grieve their loss along with their family members.

I want to acknowledge also Louise Upston and Agnes Loheni on this side of the House for sharing with the House their losses. It’s very difficult. Along with other bills that we’ve had in this House around abortion and all of those other issues that women face throughout their lives, we can actually stand in this House and support these women so they need not hide in secrecy or hide away in shame that they have suffered a loss of miscarriage.

I want to close my contribution by, once again, acknowledging all of those brave women who will come to the select committee and share their stories, along with agencies and along with employers, around how they can actually support their stories around how employers give women leave to go and grieve. I want to acknowledge all the fathers as well and the children of the families, because in those miscarriages, for some of those women—as Agnes has outlined—they were either second or third babies that were miscarried. So ka aroha to all of those women. It is with pleasure that I commend this bill to the House. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, thank you very much. I’m very honoured. I feel quite privileged to have my very first member’s bill read for a first time in this House today, and it is an even greater sense of pride I have that all parties within this House are supporting this bill. That’s so encouraging to see on such an important issue, not just for women but for families in New Zealand as well.

I would like to acknowledge all of the women that have spoken today, whether they’ve shared their personal experiences or spoken about issues that are important to them. This is not just an important change in law but it provides a great opportunity for women to talk about issues that are important for women, opening up a lot of those discussion areas that previously I don’t think we’ve done well enough in the past. So I thank all of those women who have spoken today.

The next step in this bill will be the select committee process at the Education and Workforce Committee, so I would like to spend just a short period of time making a clear call-out to anybody who would like to submit on this bill. I think it’s incredibly important for all of those who have already written to me, whether they be organisations or individuals, to be aware that over the holiday period, we hope that the submissions period will be open. I wholeheartedly encourage any person or organisation in New Zealand with an interest in this area to make sure that your voice is heard. It’s yet another opportunity in our great democratic system for your voices to contribute to how legislation is formed and takes shape, and I encourage everybody to take that opportunity up.

In that same vein of how wonderful the small and beautiful democratic nation of New Zealand is, I’ve been in frequent texting contact with the person who started this bill off, Kathryn van Beek. I asked her, just recently, “The summing up bit is coming. Is there anything that you would like to add?”, so it’s quite nice to be in contact with the person who really was the starting point of this bill. Her words that she would like added at the final stage of this first reading process are that this is a small change for employers, but it makes a big difference for people, and it shows that people care and that society cares at a time when someone can feel isolated. I think that wonderfully encapsulates what we’re doing today. It shows that a small change in legislation to make bereavement leave available for miscarriage and for stillbirth enables a grieving process to take place, and it’s the right thing to do for a compassionate country such as ours.

So I would like to finish by thanking all of the parties that have given their support for this piece of legislation today and all of those members that have spoken so wholeheartedly about their views and the importance of this issue for New Zealanders. I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Education and Workforce Committee.