 The next item of business is a member's business debate on motion 2029 on extending maternity and paternity leave for parents of premature babies. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put with those members who wish to speak in the debate press the request-to-speak buttons now. I call on Alison Johnstone to open the debate. Ms Johnstone's microphone, could you move to the next seat, perhaps you have been jinxed? Any better? That's fine, you can start now. Thank you very much. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I'm very glad to have the opportunity to lead this debate this afternoon. I'd like to thank Katrina Ogilvie and Karen Stewart, whose campaigns and petitions have gathered so much support, and thanks to, to bliss, the national charity supporting premature and sick babies and the many local charities who help families and raise funds for neonatal units, including members from Simpson's special care babies in Lothian, who are here in the public gallery today. I want to focus on two important matters this afternoon. The private member's bill in the House of Commons seeks to extend maternity and paternity leave and pay for the parents of premature babies, and the steps that we can take in Scotland to improve financial support for families whose babies are born prematurely or require neonatal care. I want to express my heartfelt support for Steve Reid's private member's bill in the Commons. Legislation relating to parental leave and pay is currently a reserved matter, however I'm sure many of us here wish the campaign to extend parental leave and pay for the parents of premature babies every success. I understand the bill will seek to extend paid maternity leave when babies are born before 37 weeks, allowing an additional week of statutory maternity pay for every full week the baby is born before term. This additional maternity leave could be used as shared parental leave between mothers and fathers. Campaigners have been calling for such changes to parental leave legislation for years. Currently, parents of premature babies are not entitled to any additional maternity or paternity leave. In the difficult, distressing, unexpected period between a premature birth and a baby's anticipated due date, time spent on a neonatal hospital ward, research by bliss estimates that families with babies in neonatal care can be faced with an average additional expense of around £218 a week when extra costs such as childcare and travel are taken into account. Those costs can impact on the number of visits that parents can have with their premature baby. Premature birth can also mean that mothers lose out on their last few weeks, the weeks that they were expecting to work, the wages that families rely on when they are budgeting for their baby. Families often count on those savings to cover the gap between the end of statutory maternity pay and returning to work. That degree of financial pressure can force parents to return to work earlier than they would like and before they feel that their baby is ready for childcare. In some cases, it may not be appropriate for that baby to go into childcare. A baby born very prematurely between 28 and 31 weeks of pregnancy may spend an average of 44 days in neonatal care. That is over six weeks in a hospital, six weeks not knowing when or if it will be able to take that tiny baby home. Mothers can take 52 weeks of leave, but statutory maternity pay is only available for 39 of those weeks. A mum of a very premature baby returning to work after paid leave finishes would have had on average just 33 weeks at home with her baby, far shorter than the year of leave that many parents plan to take. Premature babies can take longer to reach developmental milestones during maternity leave. It cannot be right or fair that parental leave in the UK does not accommodate that difference. Additional paid parental leave is already available to parents of premature babies in a number of European countries, including Finland and Spain. His standing leave and pay is the simplest and fairest way to address those problems. However, if the bill in Westminster does not progress, it is incumbent on us here in Scotland to listen to the clear message that campaigners are sending and find alternative ways of supporting the parents of premature babies and parents of all babies in neonatal care. I would ask the Scottish Government to do all that it can to deliver financial support to all parents whose babies need prolonged hospital care. NHS paediatric hospitals lead excellent work supporting those who need help with the unexpected cost of hospital care. However, the Scotland act gives the Scottish Parliament the power to provide assistance with maternity expenses and we have the power to create some new benefits. I would ask the Scottish Government to heed this campaign and make support for parents in these circumstances as robust as possible. We do not have the latitude to replace pay, but we could introduce a premature birth maternity grant or a neonatal care maternity grant to help parents with additional maternity expenses to take the financial shock out of a situation that no parent can prepare for. Let us build on the good work that is happening with the baby box scheme. Sadly, up to 40 per cent of premature babies—the mothers of premature babies—are affected by postnatal depression shortly after birth. I am glad to see that the draft mental health strategy makes perinatal mental health a priority and that we will finally have a managed clinical network for perinatal mental health. However, I would like more clarity on how front-line perinatal mental health services will be resourced. I note that Wales has already ring-fenced Barnett consequentials related to perinatal mental health. The forthcoming review of maternity and neonatal services should highlight opportunities to improve maternal health. Boosting the income of pregnant women is one of the best ways to improve their nutrition, their mental health and their overall wellbeing, and healthier, wealthier children is a well-evidenced approach to income maximisation. Midwives and health visitors have helped more than 10,000 families gain over £11 million in benefits that they were entitled to, but they did not know about them. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport has already given me a commitment to roll it out across the country. The urgent need to deliver that is made only too clear by today's annual report on child poverty in Scotland, showing that there are 20,000 more children living in poverty in 2014-15—14 per cent rise. The parents of premature babies in particular are faced with financial uncertainty while being deprived of valuable precious time, bonding with their new babies. Too many are forced to choose between putting their babies in childcare before they think that they are developmentally ready or leaving work altogether. Extending paid leave for those parents is a matter of quality, but we cannot simply leave the matter to Westminster and we must look for alternative ways of supporting those families while we continue to push the UK Government to do the right thing. Let's do all that we can as a Parliament to help those parents and families. I congratulate Alison Johnstone for bringing this debate to the chamber today, and I commend Katrina Ogilvie for launching her small things campaign and Steve Reid MP for introducing the bill to the House of Commons. As we are all aware, employment matters, including parental leave, are reserved and the UK Parliament will have to decide whether and in what form to pass the proposed bill. However, it is still worth discussing those matters here in the Scottish Parliament and this debate rightly acknowledges that. We also want to pay tribute to everyone involved with Bliss Scotland and recognise the excellent work that they do to support families dealing with premature and vulnerable newborns. Most of my constituents who give birth do so at Crosshouse Hospital in Kilmarnock or at the RAH in Paisley. It is reassuring to know that Bliss Scotland has a presence at both these hospitals through Bliss champions who provide information and emotional support to parents whose babies are in neonatal units and that the support does not stop the moment their baby leaves the hospital. Even in ideal circumstances, welcoming a newborn baby into the world is an intense and exhausting experience. However, how often, as has been said by mothers, that all the trauma of labour and delivery melts away the moment they hold their new baby in their arms for the first time. However, for around 5,800 babies each year, their parents do not get to experience this euphoric feeling as their baby requires immediate neonatal care to simply keep it alive as soon as it is born. Instead, there is a heartache of not being able to hold the baby straight away and not knowing whether their child will survive and how the premature arrival will affect their development as the child grows up. In some cases, a mother herself requires medical care exacerbating the stress that the family is already under. Aside from the desire parents feel to be close to their newborn baby, the importance of early physical contact cannot be overstated, as it has been proven to have a significant and far-reaching impact on the child's mental and social development. As I follow myself, I was particularly struck to learn that nearly 70 per cent of fallows end up having to return to work before their baby has even left the neonatal unit in the hospital. I am therefore glad that the importance of the presence of babies' fallows is acknowledged looking at the scope of the bill. Although the matter of paternal leave is not devolved, there are things that the Scottish Government can do to increase uptake of parental leave and reduce the trauma that often accompanies premature birth. Scottish ministers are looking at ways to encourage parents to take up more of their parental leave that they are entitled to within the existing legislative framework. They are also in the process of carrying out a review of maternal and neonatal services, as Alison Johnston pointed out, with a view to improving the care provided. After extensive consultation with a variety of experts, patients and other stakeholders, the review group is currently finalising its report, which is expected to be presented to ministers any day now. In fact, perhaps the minister already has the report. I look forward to reading its findings and recommendations so that services can be further developed to meet the changing needs of babies and their parents. When it comes to the start of a life, having excellent neonatal care alone is not enough, babies need to be with their parents, and it is simply unfair that a premature date of birth eats into parental leave. A baby born at 28 weeks will, on average, spend the first 44 days of its life in a neonatal unit. One would think that a baby who has spent the first three months struggling to stay alive needs their parents to be around for longer, not a shorter time, once life really begins. Equally, after having had none of the euphoria that I described earlier, doesn't it seem unfair and damaging to send parents back to work three months earlier than her parents after their due date? That is no doubt why we have such high levels of postnatal depression that Alison Johnstone touched on. People who have cheated death are often said to be living on borrowed time after that point in life. Taking the view that premature babies live on borrowed time until the day they were meant to be born, starting their clock on parental leave any sooner than that simply makes no sense and earns the Scottish Government to do all it can to assist parents of premature babies. I hear a naughty mobile phone, no doubt it has gone away. I warmly welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I thank Alison Johnstone for tabling the motion for members' business. As a father of three young children, I recognise the supreme importance of parents being close to their children at birth and during the earliest stages of their development. I, for one, will never forget that moment when your child is born in that heady mix of emotions, relief, elation, joy and exhaustion even as a bystander. For many parents, the days and weeks afterwards are exciting and daunting times, ensuring that your newborn is cared for and receives round-the-clock care upon their arrival. We were very lucky. All of our children have been born at term and were born healthy, and I was able to hold my children and able to give them that physical contact that Kenneth Gibson spoke about so rightly. However, for some babies, sadly, much more support is required. Babies born with a severe or minor disability and, in this instance, babies born prematurely, of course require extra attention, not just from their parents but also from clinical specialists and frequently require intensive hospital care. According to figures from Bliss Scotland, there are around 5,800 babies born in Scotland every year who require specialist neonatal care, and almost half of that number are born prematurely. Depending on the time of birth, neonatal care can last anywhere between four and 93 days. It is thus vital that our NHS has the facilities and staff able to ensure that babies requiring additional neonatal care receive the best possible treatment. We are incredibly fortunate to live not only in a country where parental leave is supported but a country that affords both parents with the opportunity to take a period of leave from work so that they can care for new offspring. Whilst for many years it was only the mother that was entitled to a full period of maternity leave, the UK Government did introduce the shared parental leave law, which allows parents the opportunity to share leave over a 50-week period. Moreover, if a child is born prematurely, statutory maternity leave commences the day after the child is born. We are also fortunate to live in a country where leave is supported financially. The ability for working parents to receive 90 per cent of average weekly earnings before tax for the first six weeks and thereafter either approximately £140 per week or 90 per cent of average weekly earnings. I fundamentally believe that these things are the sign of a country, government and society that supports parents when they need it most. Parental leave is of course a matter reserved to the UK Government, but we on these benches will do our utmost to ensure that the terms of the motion and the sentiments expressed today in the chamber reach the relevant people in Westminster. Whilst the motion today concentrates on parental leave, it is worth recalling that there is also an issue of funding the right neonatal and maternity services in our NHS. Much can be done. In England, for example, funding has been invested to improve facilities in maternity and neonatal care units across the country, creating projects that allow parent accommodation to be built with bedrooms, kitchens, on-speed facilities and so on, all designed to improve the environment for parents and families of children receiving vital neonatal care. I recognise the maternity staff in the NHS Scotland doing an incredible job in supporting babies in their families. I also commend charities such as Bliss Scotland for all the work that they do in this area. Let's ensure that our NHS here in Scotland receives adequate funding and that our NHS staff can cope with increasing demand and that parents have the ability to access maternity services as close to home as possible. Let's ensure that our NHS hospitals have the equipment that is necessary to care for children who require specialist care at birth. Deputy Presiding Officer, I hope that all the contributions today can feed into the overall debate about how we support parents and babies. In that vein, I eagerly anticipate the Scottish Government's review of maternity and neonatal services so that we can plan how we deliver this kind of care in the years ahead. I thank Alison Johnstone for tabling the motion and so paving the way for this important debate. It is often said that the measure of a society is how it treats its very oldest and its very youngest members. There are no younger members of our society than babies born prematurely in neonatal care, so the treatment of them and the treatment of their parents should be a matter of concern to us all. It is one of the single most important roles of this Parliament to give voice to the voiceless, so let us speak up for the rights of those who may not yet speak and let us listen to those whose voices all too often go unheard. For babies born before full term, and there are nearly 6,000 babies born in Scotland each year, who are admitted to a neonatal unit for life-saving care, for those babies, there is usually an early life of operations, an early life of high-dependency care, and so an early life spent not at home but in hospital. As well as the emotional trauma that brings for many families, it also means the extra costs of travelling to and from hospital. In some cases as well, it can mean additional childcare costs. For many, it is all too often a story of wages foregone when one or both parents can no longer meet the demands of their job and go on unpaid leave. Ultimately, for some, not just wages foregone but jobs and careers foregone too, as too many of those parents are forced to give up work or, indeed, are dismissed. So more costs, reduced income, a combination that plunges too many families into debt, and the cost, of course, is not just pecuniary. Four out of 10 mothers of premature babies will suffer postnatal depression compared to one in 10 mothers of full term babies. That is not the end of it. Let me share with Parliament this afternoon a real life example. Constituents of Mind, Donna and Gavin McCall and their daughter Myrran. Myrran was born 10 weeks early and has required two major operations. As a result, she was in hospital for the first four months of her life. Although she is now home, Myrran still has to attend hospital regularly. Three hospital appointments this month, two hospital appointments next month, with Worcester general, Munklands general, the Royal Sick Kids and Hair Myers. As Donna McCall said to me this week, hospital staff are great at keeping in touch, however community-based, i.e. health visitors and clubs are not prepared or trained enough. She also highlighted aftercare and support available to families is poor. She takes Myrran to clubs to help to minimise any development delay, massage, music and sensory classes, but they all have to be paid for, none are free. Because Myrran was in hospital for the first 16 weeks of her life, as Donna describes it, only five of her nine-month maternity leave have been spent with her daughter. That is the central point of this debate this afternoon. The law on maternity leave and paternity leave, as it stands, assumes babies are born at full term, but so many are not. That is why I am too pleased to see that it is a Labour MP, Steve Reid, who has introduced the maternity and paternity leave premature birth bill in the House of Commons. It will go for a second reading in March of next year, and I am pleased that it has cross-party support, although let me gently mention that no SNP MPs are recorded. They are supporting it at stage 1, and I am sure that that will be corrected in time for stage 2. In my view, the bill will have the support of every right-thinking member of Parliament and every right-thinking member of society. It is not, as Alison Johnstone has pointed out, without international precedent. I conclude by paying tribute to the organisation Bliss, who has campaigned since 1979 for babies born prematurely. I am afraid that that is it. You must conclude. It is over four minutes. I thank the various groups for their briefings and the outstanding support that they provide that has been alluded to to other members. I congratulate my colleague Alison Johnstone for bringing that forward. In a previous life, I was involved in dealing with the terms and conditions of police officers, and that included maternity and paternity leave, putting into practice what had been hard fought for terms and conditions. That was dealing with a very male-dominated, particularly at senior rank level, and it required a sizable change in attitudes. Terms and conditions—this can be the case to this day—can often be seen as being PC trendy or downright frivolous. Many of those things that were seen as that way in the past are now mainstream in terms of protected duties and reasonable adjustments. I would have to say that things are far from perfect, but we have seen progress in the past few decades, and I hope that that can be moved forward. It is important to go hand-in-hand with that as there is knowledge and understanding. Parents of premature babies are not entitled to any additional maternity leave or paternity leave. My colleague Donald Cameron outlined what they are entitled to. The significant thing is that, with the additional burdens and pressures on everyone associated with that, the very commendable proposal at Westminster is to have additional. Dads, indeed, are currently entitled to two weeks' paternity leave. If there was any objective assessment of the impact of the bill at Westminster, it would be seen that the beneficiaries were not just simply the mother, the father and the child, but that it would extend to the siblings. The assessment would surely indicate that all of those require physical, mental and social support. It is also the case, and it is not a way that I would like to view this, but it is also the case that benefits for an employer, too. I also want to talk briefly on rurality. Many of the problems of delivering healthcare are compounded by rurality. That is a measure that would go some way to offsetting some of the challenges that are connected with that, which I accept, regardless of geography. Scotland rightly lodged the importance of child development. As I said, I wish that this move would be supported for the right reasons—the wellbeing of children and the wellbeing of parents in their premature child. All the evidence suggests that a positive approach to terms and conditions reaps benefits, as I say, for everyone—progressive employers, as well. We talked about the planned future introduction of shared parental leave and what that means for parents. That will bring challenges, too. I agree that Scotland needs to listen to the clear message that the campaigners are sending and find alternative, person-specific, because we forget at our peril that we are dealing with individual children who need parents with individual circumstances and ways of supporting those parents. As has been said, there will be benefit not just for the parents of premature babies, but if we can improve the lot for all babies in neonatal care. I also pick up on a comment that my colleague, Donald Cameron, made. I am reassured that Mr Cameron will share the content of the debate with colleagues, because I think that that is very important. I was very ready to intervene in Aski's position until he made that statement. It is very positive that there are a number of suggestions. I want to conclude by referring to an article that I had a quick look at when I was researching for this head-up. Mothers of premature babies also need care. It is a leader article in The Guardian last year by Joanna Moorhead who concludes by saying, It is not the time to fall apart. A little bit of support can make a lot of difference, and I think that this is a measure that could help many. I commend Alison for bringing it to us. Thank you very much, Mr Finnie. Paul Miles Briggs, Mr Briggs please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to congratulate Alison Johnstone on securing today's debate, and I am pleased to be taking part in it today. I want to begin by commending the excellent work undertaken by Bliss Scotland, whom I was pleased to meet with recently. As the motion sets out, around 5,800 babies are indeed born in Scotland each year, who need specialist neonatal care, with half of those being born prematurely. Bliss Scotland plays a very important role in supporting many families who have sick and premature babies, including in the Lothian region that Alison Johnstone and I represent. I would like to pay tribute to all those who work for and volunteer in this valuable charity, including as Kenny Gibson has outlaid today the Bliss champions who work in hospitals across the country. I recognise that parents of sick and premature babies who require extended periods of specialist hospital care will often experience immense worry and stress and face substantial extra financial pressures. Many parents in these circumstances talk about the difficulties of spending weeks or months in hospital unexpectedly when they had been looking forward to bonding with their new babies at home. The impact of that on parents' mental health is significant and is something that we also need to mention in the context of the debate. All of us will have genuine sympathy for parents in these circumstances. I am also very aware that many premature babies will have on-going health problems that make it more difficult for parents to return to work with many requiring repeated hospital appointments after they come home. While statutory maternity leave of 52 weeks across the UK, parents who have been employees with the same employer also have the right to a separate entitlement of parental leave of 18 weeks unpaid per parent per child up to a child's 18th birthday, for which four weeks can be taken in one year. I am aware that some employers who are to be commended already try to be as flexible as possible with parents of premature babies offering extra compassionate leave, sick leave or use of annual leave, but I accept that parents and that the lists and other charities want to see more than just these informal arrangements and that we need to look at extension to formal maternity and paternity leave and statutory maternity pay. As Donald Cameron has said, those are matters clearly within the remit of the UK Government and in light of today's debate and ahead of the second reading of the member's bill on the subject in the commons next May, I will be writing to the UK Government asking for them to take account of today's debate and ask if they will be conducting any further review in this area. While we must consider carefully the financial consequences of extending statutory maternity pay and the potential impact that this may have on business, especially small businesses in Scotland, there are strong arguments that more can be done and should be done, and I am done to support specific needs and requirements of parents with premature babies. To conclude, Deputy Presiding Officer, I congratulate my colleague Alison Johnson on bringing this important issue to Parliament today, and I hope that we can make further progress in the new year. Thank you, Mr Breaks. Mr Balfour, I can give you two minutes if that is all right. That is all that I have left, right? Oh, sorry, Deputy Presiding Officer. I had it in the freezer with my son. Thank you very much for that, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank Alison Johnson for her comment. I want to make just a few brief comments. As someone who has experienced the care that we have been talking about here in Edinburgh, our experience of the symptoms here in Edinburgh was exemplary. We were fortunate to have twin girls who were born at 34 weeks. It came as no surprise that we were going to need to be born early, but when they were taken away, rushed away into special care, the loss and the fear that came with that was great. However, the care that they received and we received as a couple was exemplary. I also want to congratulate the work of Bliss and the work of the Simpson hospital for the support that they give many parents. As Alison Johnson and Kenneth Gibson and other members have mentioned, often after a child is born prematurely, the mother will suffer greater postnatal depression. I think that there are many good organisations across Scotland that offer support. Here in Lovians, since 2015, Juno has been offering volunteer support. Mothers who have suffered in that condition have had that condition and gone on to support other mothers in that. I think that those types of organisations need to be welcomed and supported. Clearly, the birth of any child is the highlight of most parents' lives. To have that support and that help is so important. Like my two colleagues in front of me, I, too, will be writing to the minister to ask him to look up the issues that have been raised today. I am glad that I managed to get you in. I call the minister, Jamie Hepburn, to respond to the Government's seven-minute speech. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I begin by joining others in thanking Alison Johnson for bringing forward this debate. I thank those who have contributed today. I also join Alison Johnson in welcoming those to the gallery who have come specifically to witness today's debate. At the outset, I recognise the importance of this particular area that we are debating this afternoon. I doubt that any of us in the chamber are not aware of a family that has been touched by the experience of premature birth. In Donald Cameron's remarks, he spoke of his experience as a father. Indeed, Kenny Gibson spoke about the experience, the early experience of being a father and the early contact with your children. I am a father as well. I know how important that was for me, and I think that those who are denied that experience—our hearts, of course—go out them. It is incumbent on us to consider how we can better support such individuals. The motion presented before us is in two parts, one referring to the smallest things campaign to which I will turn to, and the other to the proposed legislation before the House of Commons, the maternity leave premature birth bill. I understand that the second reading had originally been scheduled for last week. Of course, there was a debate on the Istanbul convention on that date, and my understanding is that, when it was originally scheduled for that, it will now take place in March of next year, which is something that I will be watching with considerable interest. Clearly, we have not seen the full detail of the bill. I can say to members that the Administration here is very sympathetic to the general fair work focus inherent within it. I also welcome the smallest things campaign in the research that has been undertaken by bliss, which recognises the specific extra challenge that parents of premature babies can face, which has been touched on by virtually every member. Members have spoken of the review of maternity and neonatal services, which was announced by the Minister for Public Health in early 2015. Bliss was, of course, part of that review, which examined the choice, quality and safety of maternity and neonatal services in light of current evidence and best practice in consultation with the workforce, the boards and, of course, those who have been patients and utilised such services. Mr Gibson asked if I had sight of the report. I can confirm that I have not had sight of that report, but I know that health ministers will continue to update Parliament in due course in terms of where the report goes. As the members have rightly reflected, the Scottish Government does not have responsibility over an entitlement to maternity leave or statutory maternity or paternity pay. Of course, we do not let those things inhibit us in trying to make improvements. I have referred to the review of maternity and neonatal services. We also want to utilise some of the newly-revolved social security powers that are coming our way. We have set out that we will be putting in place a best start grant to replace the current sure start maternity grant, which will provide increased financial support to those eligible families with young children at key points throughout the early years of a child's life. That will lead to significant improvements in support for young families. It is starting in two pilot areas from the first of January and across Scotland from summer 2017. Every single newborn in Scotland will receive a baby box of essential items. That will include clothes, nappies, bedding, books and baby care items. That is informed by the experience of other countries across Europe. That ambition to take forward the baby box project is informed by the experience of Finland, which has seen significant reductions in infant mortality, largely related to such an initiative. Of course, we have other actions as well. One in the area that is not our responsibility yet but which will become our responsibility in due course is the area of tribunal fees. We have seen information provided from the Ministry of Justice that shows a near 76 per cent reduction in the number of pregnancy maternity-related discrimination cases brought to tribunals over the July and September period this year, compared to the same period in 2012, when there were no fees. I am not sure whether that counts constitutes a failure of policy or, indeed, a success in policy, depending on how you might view the motivation of the UK Government in introducing it. Of course, we disagree with that direction and we have committed to abolishing fees for employment tribunals when we are able to do so. We will also seek to influence areas not in our control. One example is, of course, the area of pregnancy maternity discrimination, where research from the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the Department for Business Innovation and Skills found that around one in nine mothers reported being either dismissed, made compulsory, redundant or treated so poorly, they felt they had to leave their job. That is why I am chairing the working group that we set up to identify. Alison Johnstone, I appreciate that it is a reserved matter, but just for absolute clarity, does the minister agree that, as a matter of equity, maternity leave and pay should be extended for parents of premature babies and those who are in neonatal care? Of course, that is not our area of responsibility. I believe that it should be our area of responsibility. I have already set out that we will be looking very closely at the legislation that has been taken for by Mr Reid in the UK Parliament. Of course, the devil is always in the detail, but in terms of the broad direction of travel, if I was not clear enough in setting out my sympathies with that direction, then, hopefully, Alison Johnstone's intervention has allowed me to rectify that matter. You are in your last minute, minister. Indeed, I am, Presiding Officer. I was referring to the present maternity discrimination working group that we set up with a range of partners that I will be chairing to take forward further work. I think that that gets to the nub of the issue in terms of us not being moaning, as we are all often accused of doing. We are moaning the fact that we do not have power over certain areas. We do not have power over employment. We do not have responsibility for areas around paid maternity leave. However, we do have an agenda that is embedding a more flexible approach from employers. That is why we fund family-friendly working Scotland clearly in this area, and many others would want to see employers taking a flexible approach. Miles Briggs rightly says that some employers are good at doing so, others are not. We will continue to push them on that agenda, but I can ensure you, Presiding Officer, and other members of the chamber, where we have responsibility, we will do all that we can to make improvements, where we do not, we will do what we can, but we will also always be willing to explore those matters with the UK Government and make sure that this Parliament's voice is heard, where they have responsibility. Thank you very much. That concludes this debate. There will be a short pause before we move on to the next item of business.