I call the Minister for the Economy, Gordon Lyons, to move the Bill.

Moved. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Members will have a copy of the Marshalled List of amendments detailing the order for consideration. The amendments have been grouped for debate in the provisional grouping of amendments selected list. There is a single group of amendments, amendment Nos 1 to 25, which are consequential amendments on parental bereavement and miscarriage leave and pay. Once the debate on the group is completed, any further amendments in the group will be moved formally as we go through the Bill and the Question on each will be put without further debate. If that is clear, we shall proceed.

Members will note that the Marshalled List was reissued. It is marked in red print on the front page that it is reissued. Members will have received printed and electronic copies of the document. Please note the correct order of amendment Nos 16 and 17, as per the revised Marshalled List.

Clause 1 (Parental bereavement leave)

We now come to the single group of amendments for debate. With amendment No 1, it will be convenient to debate amendment Nos 2 to 25. In the group, amendment No 3 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 2; amendment No 4 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 3; amendment No 7 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 6; amendment No 8 is consequential to amendment No 5; amendment No 9 is consequential to amendment Nos 2 and 4; amendment Nos 11 and 12 are mutually exclusive to amendment No 10; amendment No 13 is consequential to amendment No 3 and mutually exclusive to amendment No 4; amendment No 14 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 13 and consequential to amendment No 2; amendment No 19 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 18; amendment No 21 is an amendment to amendment No 20; and amendment No 22 is mutually exclusive to amendment No 20. Members may also wish to note that amendment No 15 is a paving amendment to amendment No 16.

I call the Minister for the Economy to move amendment No 1 and address the other amendments in the group.

I beg to move amendment No 1:

In page 4, line, at end insert—

“(2) Regulations under this Article may—

(a) specify conditions to be satisfied for the purpose of determining whether a person has experienced a miscarriage for the purposes of the regulations;

(b) provide that regulations under this Chapter also apply in relation to a person who satisfies specified conditions as to relationship with the person who experienced the miscarriage.”

The following amendments stood on the Marshalled List:

No 2: In clause 2, page 4, line 16, after “parent,” insert—

“and

(aa) that the person is in employed earner’s employment with an employer on the day on which the child dies.” — [Dr Archibald.]

No 3: In clause 2, page 4, leave out lines 17 to 24 and insert—

“(b) that the person is in employed earner’s employment with an employer on the day on which the child dies, and

(c) that the weekly earnings threshold is met (see subsection (4A)).” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 4: In clause 2, page 4, line 17, leave out paragraphs (b) and (c). — [Dr Archibald.]

No 5: In clause 2, page 4, line 30, at end insert—

“(4A) The weekly earnings threshold is met if the person’s normal weekly earnings for any continuous period of 8 weeks falling within the relevant window is not less than the lower earnings limit in force under section 5(1)(a) at the end of the relevant week.

(4B) In subsection (4A), the ‘relevant window’ is the period consisting of—

(a) the 8 weeks ending with the relevant week, and

(b) the 8 weeks immediately following that week.

(4C) The reference in subsection (4A) to a person’s normal weekly earnings is, in relation to any period after the date on which the child dies, a reference to the person’s expected normal weekly earnings for that period.

(4D) Section 167ZZ17(8A) provides for the calculation of a person’s expected normal weekly earnings.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 6: In clause 2, page 4, line 31, leave out “subsection (2)” and insert “this section”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 7: In clause 2, page 4, line 31, leave out subsection (5). — [Dr Archibald.]

No 8: In clause 2, page 5, line 6, after “has” insert “or (4A) to (4C) have”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 9: In clause 2, page 5, line 6, leave out “(b) or (c)” and insert “(aa)”. — [Dr Archibald.]

No 10: In clause 2, page 5, line 12, leave out paragraphs (d) to (f). — [Dr Archibald.]

No 11: In clause 2, Page 5, Line 15, leave out “26” and insert “8”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 12: In clause 2, page 5, line 18, leave out “26” and insert “8”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 13: In clause 2, page 5, line 37, leave out “(2)(c)” and insert “(2)(b)”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 14: In clause 2, page 5, line 37, leave out “(c)” and insert “(aa)”. — [Dr Archibald.]

No 15: In clause 2, page 9, line 26, at end insert—

“; but this does not apply to a person’s expected normal weekly earnings (as to which, see subsection (8A)).” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 16: In clause 2, page 9, line 30, at end insert—

“(8A) For the purposes of section 167ZZ9, a person’s expected normal weekly earnings are to be calculated in accordance with regulations; and such regulations may provide for assumptions to be made about the continuation of the person’s employment and the person’s earnings from that employment.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 17: In clause 2, page 10, line 27, at end insert—

“(2) Regulations under this section may—

(a) specify conditions to be satisfied for the purpose of determining whether a person has experienced a miscarriage for the purposes of the regulations;

(b) provide that this Part and regulations under it also apply in relation to a person who satisfies specified conditions as to relationship with the person who experienced the miscarriage.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 18: After clause 2 insert—

“Temporary provision for qualifying employment period for parental bereavement pay

2A.—(1) This section applies in relation to a person’s entitlement to payments of statutory parental bereavement pay in respect of a child who dies before the date mentioned in subsection (2).

(2) The date is the date that falls 30 months after Royal Assent and thereafter this temporary provision will cease to have effect.

(3) The provisions inserted by section 2 have effect with the modifications set out in subsections (4) to (7).

(4) In section 167ZZ9, for subsection (2) substitute—

‘(2) The conditions are—

(a) that the person is a bereaved parent,

(b) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with an employer for a continuous period of 26 weeks ending with the relevant week,

(c) that the person’s normal weekly earnings for the period of 8 weeks ending with the relevant week are not less than the lower earnings limit in force under section 5(1)(a) at the end of the relevant week, and

(d) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with the employer by reference to whom the condition in paragraph (b) is satisfied for a continuous period beginning with the end of the relevant week and ending with the day on which the child dies.’

(5) In section 167ZZ9, after subsection (4) insert—

‘(4A) In subsection (2) ‘relevant week’ means the week immediately before the one in which the child dies.’

(6) In section 167ZZ10, for subsection (4) substitute—

‘(4) The Department may by regulations—

(a) provide that section 167ZZ9 (2)(b) (c) or (d) has effect subject to prescribed modifications in such cases as may be prescribed;

(b) provide that subsection (1) of this section does not have effect, or has effect subject to prescribed modifications, in such cases as may be prescribed;

(c) impose requirements about evidence of entitlement;

(d) specify in what circumstances employment is to be treated as continuous for the purposes of section 167ZZ9;

(e) provide that a person is to be treated for the purposes of section 167ZZ9 as being employed for a continuous period of at least 26 weeks where—

(i) the person has been employed by the same employer for at least 26 weeks under two or more separate contracts of service, and

(ii) those contracts were not continuous;

(f) provide for amounts earned by a person under separate contracts of service with the same employer to be aggregated for the purposes of section 167ZZ9;

(g) provide that—

(i) the amount of a person’s earnings for any period, or

(ii) the amount of the person’s earnings to be treated as comprised in any payment made to the person or for the person’s benefit,

is to be calculated or estimated for the purposes of section 167ZZ9 in such manner and on such basis as may be prescribed and that for that purpose payments of a particular class or description made or falling to be made to or by a person shall, to such extent as may be prescribed, be disregarded or, as the case may be, be deducted from the amount of the person’s earnings.'

(7) In section 167ZZ11(1), leave out ‘(aa)’ and insert ‘(b) and (d)’.” — [Dr Archibald.]

No 19: After clause 2 insert—

"Temporary provision: qualifying employment period for parental pay

2A.—(1) This section applies in relation to a person’s entitlement to payments of statutory parental bereavement pay in respect of a child who dies before 6 April in the year that is specified under subsection (2).

(2) The Department for the Economy must by regulations specify a year for the purposes of subsection (1); and the year so specified must be—

(a) no later than 2026, and

(b) the same as the year specified in accordance with section 4(3) (application of miscarriage regulations).

(3) The provisions inserted by section 2 have effect with the modifications set out in subsections (4) to (8).

(4) In section 167ZZ9, for subsection (2) substitute—

'(2) The conditions are—

(a) that the person is a bereaved parent,

(b) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with an employer for a continuous period of at least 26 weeks ending with the relevant week,

(c) that the person’s normal weekly earnings for the period of 8 weeks ending with the relevant week are not less than the lower earnings limit in force under section 5(1)(a) at the end of the relevant week, and

(d) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with the employer by reference to whom the condition in paragraph (b) is satisfied for a continuous period beginning with the end of the relevant week and ending with the day on which the child dies.'

(5) In section 167ZZ9, omit subsections (4A) to (4D).

(6) In section 167ZZ10(4)—

(a) in paragraph (a), for 'section 167ZZ9(2)(b) or (c) has or (4A) to (4C) have' substitute 'section 167ZZ9(2)(b), (c) or (d) has';

(b) in paragraph (e), for '8 weeks' (in both places) substitute '26 weeks'.

(7) In section 167ZZ11(1), after 'subsection (2)(b)' insert 'and (d)'.

(8) In section 167ZZ17, omit—

(a) the reference in subsection (6) to a person’s expected normal weekly earnings, and

(b) subsection (8A).

(9) Regulations under subsection (2) may make such transitory or transitional provision, or savings, as the Department considers necessary or expedient.

(10) Regulations under subsection (2) are subject to negative resolution." — [Dr Archibald.]

No 20: Leave out clause 4 and insert—

“Commencement

4.—(1) Sections 1 to 2A come into operation on the day after the day on which this Act receives Royal Assent.

(2) The first regulations under—

(a) Article 112EA of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, and

(b) Part 12ZD of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992, except section 167ZZ19 (application to miscarriage),

must provide that they are to apply in respect of children who die on or after 6 April 2022 or such later date, not being later than 6 April 2023, as may be specified in the regulations.

(3) The first regulations under Article 112EF of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 and section 167ZZ19 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992 (miscarriage) must provide that they are to apply in respect of miscarriages that occur on or after 6 April in such year as is specified in the regulations.

(4) Part 1 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) come into operation on such day or days as the Department for the Economy may by order appoint.

(5) Part 2 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) comes into operation on such day or days as the Department for Communities may by order appoint.

(6) An order under subsection (4) or (5) may make such transitory or transitional provision, or savings, as the Department making it considers necessary or expedient.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 21: As an amendment to amendment 20, in subsection (3), at end insert—

“(3A) The year specified in accordance with subsection (3) must be no later than 2026.” — [Dr Archibald.]

No 22: In clause 4, page 10, line 42, leave out “12” and insert “30”. — [Dr Archibald.]

No 23: In the schedule, page 14, line 14, leave out paragraphs 8 and 9 and insert—

“8.—(1) Section 172 (Assembly, etc. control of regulations and orders) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)(a), after ‘sections 167ZU to 167ZZ2’ insert ‘or sections 167ZZ9 to 167ZZ12’.

(3) In subsection (4), for ‘and (7A)’ substitute ‘, (7A) and (7B)’.

(4) After subsection (7A) insert—

‘(7B) The first regulations under section 167ZZ19 must not be made unless a draft of the regulations has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, the Assembly.’” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 24: In the schedule, page 16, line 1, leave out paragraphs 25 and 26 and insert—

“25.—(1) Article 251 (orders and regulations) is amended as follows.

(2) In paragraph (1A), after ‘112BAA,’ insert ‘112EA,’.

(3) In paragraph (1B), after ‘or 67FA’ insert ‘, and the first regulations under Article 112EF,” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

No 25: In the long title, at end insert—

“or who have experienced a miscarriage.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Now that the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill has reached Further Consideration Stage, we are so very close to securing this essential entitlement for bereaved parents. With the support of the House today and the continued support of the Committee in the weeks ahead, it is my intention to see parental bereavement leave and pay introduced no later than this coming April. That early introduction will be welcomed across the Chamber and by all sections of our community, including employers and trade unions, but especially working parents.

The Bill has not had an easy passage. There are lessons to be learned for all of us about we as an Assembly, with our Committees and ministerial offices, can best work together in order to advance legislation that benefits everyone. The will of the House was settled at Consideration Stage, and I am focused today on securing your support for my fixing amendments. In the interests of securing the April 2022 introduction date, I will also support two amendments from the Chair of the Economy Committee, although I realise that she has not tabled the amendments in her role as Chair. I am solely focused on ensuring that we secure parental bereavement leave and pay for our people here and now. The amendments to which I speak are complex, owing to the technical nature of the fixes that they seek to achieve, but they share a common purpose, which is to give effect to the will of the Assembly as expressed at Consideration Stage. Whilst each amendment is discrete and fixes a particular component part of the Bill, they should be considered as a collective, interdependent whole in order to ensure that we have cohesive Bill that progresses to Final Stage.

I shall now speak to each amendment. My amendment No 1 will extend parental bereavement leave entitlement in the event of a miscarriage beyond only the expectant mother so that it can include, for example, fathers, husbands and partners.

My amendment No 3 removes the reference to eight weeks' employment in relation to the lower earnings limit, which will help make entitlement to parental bereavement pay a day-1 right instead of having an eight-week qualification period.

My amendment No 5 ensures that parental bereavement pay can be conferred on those who may not have fixed hours, who may have only short-term contracts ending around the same time as a child dies or who may have a zero-hours contract. In removing the eight-week qualifying period in which the lower earnings limit would have been calculated, a mechanism had to be established so that employers could determine weekly earnings. For the entitlement to be a day-1 right, it must be available to people who may lose a child on the first day of their employment. They may not have fixed contractual hours and therefore may not have fixed earnings. They may not yet have a written contract stating their hours of work or weekly pay. They may initially have earned a lower amount of wages in the first couple of weeks but their hours and earnings were due to increase over subsequent weeks. The existing requirement to establish the lower earnings limit by looking at earnings over an eight-week period prior to the death of a child necessitates people to have worked for their employer for eight weeks before being able to avail themselves of the payment. That contradicts the expressed will of the House, which, in agreeing to remove the 26-week qualifying period, believed that it was achieving at least a week-1 entitlement, if not a day-1 entitlement. There are myriad circumstances in which some employees who may meet the lower earnings threshold could still lose out on entitlement to parental bereavement pay. Amendment No 5 fixes that issue, I believe, in all circumstances.

My amendment Nos 6, 8 and 11 through to 13 ensure that the new entitlement criteria and the calculations for the lower earnings limit are referred to in the correct places in the Bill. They are technical amendments that will also ensure that correct numbering and references appear.

My amendment Nos 15 and 16 deal with assumed earnings. The amendments facilitate the day-1 right and overcome the difficulties for employees with no fixed hours. They enable employers to rely on assumed earnings in order to confer the day-1 entitlement on employees with no existing pay from which to determine the lower earnings limit.

My amendment No 17 will extend parental bereavement pay entitlement in the event of miscarriage beyond only the expectant mother so that it can include, for example, fathers, husbands and partners.

My amendment No 20 will enable and facilitate the introduction of parental bereavement leave and pay on 6 April 2022. While it will also allow the Department to determine when miscarriage provisions apply to parental bereavement leave and pay, I acknowledge that that will be subject to Dr Archibald's amendment No 21, which will require miscarriage provisions to be applied by no later than April 2026.

My amendment Nos 23 and 24 deal with Assembly control procedures. They will allow for the first set of miscarriage regulations to remain subject to the draft affirmative procedure but, in the interests of pragmatism and in keeping with custom, will remove the draft affirmative procedure from any subsequent regulations.

My final amendment, amendment No 25, simply reflects the inclusion of miscarriage in the long title of the Bill.

Following Consideration Stage and the expressed will of the Assembly to remove the 26-week qualifying period and to extend provisions to encompass miscarriage, I instructed my officials to bring forward fixing amendments to give effect to that expressed will. In working towards bringing forward the amendments and giving effect to the will of the Assembly, my officials discovered fundamental operational flaws in some of the amendments that were passed at Consideration Stage. The complexity of my fixing amendments stands testament to the problems that those amendments created. Working intensively over the Christmas and New Year period, my Bill team was able to arrive at solutions that fixed the flaws in the amendments from Consideration Stage. Had those amendments not been fixed, such was the wording of provisions in them that entitlement to parental bereavement pay would have extended only to a woman who suffered a miscarriage and not to the father, husband or partner.

My amendments fix that oversight by creating the power to extend entitlement to include fathers, husbands and partners.

The intention behind the Committee amendment in removing the 26-week qualifying period was to create a day-1 right, but, due to the complexities that it encountered, the Committee had to settle for the rather unsatisfactory week-1 right. Further illustrating the inherent risks of legislating without due consideration of the wider implications, the amendments also overlooked the eight-week period in which the lower earnings limit is determined. Members will be aware that the lower earnings limit is inextricably linked with benefits and statutory entitlement payments. By failing to remove the eight-week reference period, the amendments had the effect of removing the 26-week qualifying period whilst effectively replacing it with an eight-week qualifying period. Replacing a 26-week qualifying period with an eight-week qualifying period is not, I believe, what Members voted for at Consideration Stage, but it is what we were given by that amendment.

My amendments remove that eight-week qualifying period but also go further. They improve the Bill by making the entitlement a day-1 right. I was able to achieve the day-1 right through a careful dissection of the Bill and all of its intrinsically linked component parts. It has not been easy, but a legislative mechanism has been devised through which any employee or worker who meets the lower earnings threshold will now be eligible from day 1 of their employment to parental bereavement pay. Therefore, my fixing amendments extend miscarriage entitlement to fathers and partners, remove the eight-week qualifying period left behind and remove the week-1 qualifying period by securing a day-1 entitlement. The fact that those complex issues remain to be resolved is indicative of how tightly woven the Bill is and how the amendment of even one small and seemingly obvious part may not achieve the desired effect because of the many underlying, unseen and interconnected constituent parts.

The safety net provided by Further Consideration Stage is exactly that — a safety net. Beyond that, any more changes and unforeseen effects cannot be rectified or corrected. That is why I ask you to consider the positive impact of my amendments on the Bill and how my amendments improve on and fix the flaws in the Consideration Stage amendments. We have Further Consideration Stage to correct such mistakes. If we repeat those mistakes, we will not have the same safety net. My amendments have been carefully considered and crafted. They deliver and, more importantly, improve on the amendments that the House voted for at Consideration Stage. They do exactly what they say they do, and I ask the House not to risk accepting further amendments at this late stage that will again risk unravelling the Bill, because, this time, it will carry an even greater degree of risk because those mistakes cannot be fixed.

I appreciate that amendments will be moved by Dr Archibald, and, in the interests of securing passage of a complete, coherent Bill and to ensure that parental bereavement leave and pay is in place for April 2022, I will support Dr Archibald's amendment Nos 19 and 21 and urge all Members to support those two amendments alongside my supporting amendments. My amendments to clause 2 are intrinsically linked. For the Bill to remain legislatively sound, all my amendments to clause 2 must be voted in today. Dr Archibald's amendment Nos 19 and 21 will help to facilitate the introduction of parental bereavement leave and pay by April 2022 and will help to secure its extension to miscarriage by no later than April 2026.

For the reasons that I have outlined, I ask the House to support my amendments and amendment Nos 19 and 21. I understand that other amendments may not be moved, and that would significantly change the outcome of the Bill. I thank Members for their time and for the work that was done to ensure that the Bill can proceed. I recommend my amendments to the House.

I thank the Minister for his contribution.

On behalf of the Economy Committee, I will speak briefly on the further amendments tabled by the Minister.

The Committee had relatively late notice of the amendments, having only received them late on the evening of Tuesday 18 January, prior to the Committee meeting on the morning of Wednesday 19 January. The Committee Stage was already completed, and the Committee published its report on the Bill on 15 November. However, the Committee asked officials to brief members on the amendments, and they attended the Committee's meeting on 19 January.

As officials outlined to the Committee, these complex amendments required detailed work from officials and liaison with HMRC and other bodies. Members raised the issue of the 26-week qualifying period for paid leave being temporarily reinserted into the Bill without an end date. Members expressed some concern that the change of the qualifying period from 26 weeks to one week was linked to the introduction of the extension of the Bill's provisions to those who have suffered a miscarriage; neither of those with a year for commencement. One of those amendments — the amendment to reinsert the 26-week qualifying period — has not been selected for debate. It remains the case, however, that the Committee simply did not have adequate time to consider the amendments and therefore could not arrive at a position. Additionally, the Committee did not see the amendments tabled by Dr Archibald, and therefore there is no Committee position on those either. I will only add that the Committee is extremely keen to see the Bill complete its final stages before dissolution in order that these important entitlements can be put in place as soon as possible.

I will now make some brief remarks on behalf of the SDLP. As you will understand from my remarks as Deputy Chair, because the amendments came in relatively late, there is relatively little that the Committee will say on an official basis. I joined the Economy Committee relatively late in its scrutiny of this really important Bill. Members will agree that it is an extremely important Bill, but it is complex. I felt at times as though I had walked in three quarters of the way through a very complex movie and had to try to pick up the plot.

At Consideration Stage, as the Minister said, there were amendments that the Committee had wanted to get in around ensuring that this was a day-1 right, if possible, and extending provision to people who had suffered miscarriage. We had an extensive and, at times, lively — to put it euphemistically — debate at Consideration Stage. I am pleased to say that, as a result of that, those provisions went into the Bill. I recognise that that caused significant work for the officials, some of whom are here today, and, indeed, the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC) and others to make those work, as it were. That proves that the legislative process, when done right, works. The argument was made at Consideration Stage that we have a Further Consideration Stage in order to tidy up some of the loose ends and drafting issues, and we have done that.

Briefly, there are lots of amendments to be debated today. I am sure that, after I speak, Dr Archibald will give an account of her amendments. I welcome the meeting that I had with her and the Bill Office earlier and the fact that departmental officials came to the Committee last week to brief us on the intent of their amendments. It appears to me as of now that, by the end of today's debate, we can have a Bill to take to Final Stage that provides new day-1 rights and extends provision to those who have suffered miscarriage.

Dr Archibald's amendment Nos 19 and 21, which it sounds as though the Minister supports, address the question of, as it were, holding the Department to a deadline for ensuring that the provisions that we asked to be inserted at Consideration Stage are not simply open-ended. They give what I think is a generous date of 2026. We have had specific engagements multiple times at the Committee and at a meeting in the Department — the Chair and I — at which it was made clear that the Department needed time and that there is a customer relationship with HMRC, which has particular processes that need to be gone through. It is clear to me, on behalf of my party, that amendment Nos 19 and 21 should be more than generous in giving the Department the time to implement those logistically.

I recognise that many of the amendments that the Minister is moving today are a necessary and sensible tidying-up, in drafting terms, of the Bill, so I will support them. In broad terms, I look forward to hearing Dr Archibald's account of what her amendments do. The Minister has given us a clear indication of what his amendments do. I hope that we are on the same page by the end of the day. Given where we were at Consideration Stage, I will say gently, in parentheses, that it looks as though we might get there eventually. The officials might not agree with that. Some the predictions of chaos at Consideration Stage have perhaps been avoided and we have got to a stage where those rights are now in the Bill and will be implemented in a timescale that is deliverable and reasonable for officials.

With that, I close my remarks. We are broadly supportive of the amendments that the Minister has outlined today and the necessary ones that Dr Archibald has tabled on ensuring that the provisions around miscarriage are not delayed for long and, indeed, no later than 2026.

I welcome the opportunity to contribute again to this really important debate on the legislation to introduce the statutory right to leave and pay following the death of a child or a stillbirth. At Consideration Stage, the Assembly supported amendments tabled by the Economy Committee to extend the right to leave and pay to include those who suffer miscarriage and to make it a day-1 right.

I welcome the amendments that the Minister has tabled to achieve what the Committee intended, which was to allow the provision for parental bereavement leave and pay for parents whose child dies or who suffer a stillbirth to proceed while further work is done in relation to the introduction of miscarriage leave and pay and to allow for the development of systems by HMRC. I welcome the commitment from the Minister that that will go ahead for April 2022. The Department has indicated that the work in relation to miscarriage leave and pay and to remove the 26-week qualification period will take until 2024, which is longer than what was allowed for in the Committee's amendments. Therefore, I support allowing for that longer period.

I have a number of amendments listed on the Marshalled List, and I want to set out my intention in relation to those for Members. The Deputy Chair of the Economy Committee and I met the Minister and officials following Consideration Stage to discuss how the process was moving forward and, through that discussion, ascertained that the Department was working to table amendments at Further Consideration Stage. The officials, however, set out, as part of that discussion, a challenge in relation to the time frame, as HMRC imposes a deadline for any changes being requested of about a year and a half in advance. That deadline has passed for the implementation of changes for 2023, which is what we had envisaged in the amendment proposed by the Committee at Consideration Stage. The earliest date that changes could come into effect was April 2024. They also informed us that it would be the same with the removal of the 26-week qualification period, which we had intended to come into effect immediately, potentially through a manual process. However, there were also complexities with HMRC in relation to that. We reported that back to the Committee and corresponded with the Minister that, subject to seeing the amendments, we were content with the approach of having both the provision of miscarriage leave and pay and the removal of the 26-week qualification period come into effect in April 2024.

The Further Consideration Stage of the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill was scheduled for today, and, since the end of Christmas recess, the Committee, via the Clerk, has been pressing the Department to see and to be able to consider the amendments in advance of the deadline for submission. I appreciate that the amendments were complex, but, when we had not received them by the Friday before the deadline, I engaged with the Bill Office and instructed it to draft amendments to achieve the outcome agreed by the Assembly as a contingency. As I have alluded to, that was a complex process, but the Bill Office did it anyway, and I record my thanks for the quick turnaround by it late in the day.

The Committee then got sight of the Minister's proposed amendments late on the evening before the deadline for amendment submission. I considered the amendments. I still had some questions about them, so I submitted my own in advance of the deadline. The Committee was then briefed by officials later that morning, and, following that, I requested that the Bill Office draft late amendments, which were accepted by the Speaker and are listed on the Marshalled List.

To be clear about my intentions, I intend only to move the late amendments, and I will set out why. I am content with amendment Nos 1 and 17 in the name of the Minister, which provide for miscarriage leave and pay and specify the conditions to determine that a person has had a miscarriage. They also provide for a person in a relationship with a person suffering a miscarriage to access statutory paid leave. I support the Minister's amendment Nos 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12 and 13 on the calculation of the entitlement to pay and amendment Nos 15 and 16. The amendments tabled by the Minister will insert into the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 the method of calculation of the minimum earning threshold that applies to other statutory family benefits that can be recouped by employers. That puts qualification by earnings for the statutory paid entitlement on the same footing and will allow for it to become a day-1 right, which is what the Assembly set out to achieve. The amendments that cover those changes are more appropriate than the alternative amendments drafted in my name, so I will not move amendment Nos 2, 4, 7, 9, 10 and 14, and I urge Members to support the amendments in the name of the Minister. To be clear, the amendments, as described to the Committee by an official, are not designed to disqualify but to allow a worker the best chance of being entitled to statutory pay, and they will benefit not only new workers but those on zero-hours contracts who may be paid differently in different weeks.

I will not move amendment No 18, as, having been briefed by departmental officials, I appreciate and accept that they are working to implement the provision for miscarriage leave and to remove the 26-week qualification period by April 2024. There is a deadline of November 2022, however, for informing HMRC of the intention to make those changes by 2024. If there were additional complexity or unexpected circumstances and the November deadline were missed, it would be April 2025 before the changes could be initiated.

Amendment No 19 reinserts the 26-week qualification period but sets a deadline of April 2026 for ceasing the temporary provision and ensuring that the entitlement becomes a day-1 right. The deadline for the provision to cease, as set out in amendment No 19, is generous but appropriate to allow for any unexpected occurrences. I reinforce my view that the provisions should be made as quickly as possible and reiterate that officials have told us that they are working towards April 2024. It will obviously be for a future Economy Committee to hold a future Minister to that. I urge Members to support amendment No 19.

I propose to insert the same time frame into the Minister's amendment No 20 on commencement via amendment No 21. That amendment links the removal of the temporary provision in amendment No 19 with the commencement of the provision for miscarriage leave and pay. It is therefore appropriate that the same time frame apply. At Consideration Stage, the Assembly expressed its support for a time frame to be applied to the provision of paid leave for those suffering miscarriage. That is achieved through amendment Nos 19, 20 and 21.

Amendment No 22 will not be called if amendment Nos 19, 20 and 21 are made, but, for the record, I will not move it.

I support amendment Nos 23, 24 and 25 in the name of the Minister.

I put on record my appreciation for the work of the Committee team that guided us through the Bill and for the constructive and cooperative approach of my fellow Economy Committee members throughout the consideration of the Bill. I thank the departmental officials for their work and for setting out the challenges and for the approach that they took to get to where we are today. I thank in particular the Bill Clerks for their support in achieving what, I hope, will be a positive outcome today.

As I have said, this is important legislation in its own right. The Bill will provide support for workers who find themselves in the awful circumstances of the death of a child or of a stillbirth. The amendments made by the Assembly at Consideration Stage and today's amendments, if they are supported, will provide for rights to statutory leave and pay for workers suffering a miscarriage from day 1 of employment. Those are important steps forward. The intent is to ensure that workers in those terrible circumstances have the right to compassionate support from their employer from the time that they enter employment.

The amendments show the benefits of devolution. Employment is fully devolved to the Assembly; we have the ability to set our own policy, and, in the Bill, we have utilised that. We are standing up for workers, and the amendments would make us a leader across these islands in ensuring that workers suffering miscarriage will have access to paid leave — that they, along with workers who suffer the death of a child, will have the right to paid time off to seek support, to deal with the practicalities or simply to grieve. Moving forward with the Bill and the progressive amendments to it is something of which the Assembly, which does not always get the best of press, and we as MLAs collectively can be proud.

Listening to the debate, I think that there is a strong possibility of consensus breaking out in the Assembly. As I do not want to risk the erosion of that consensus in any way, I will try to keep my remarks fairly brief in case I accidentally disrupt it.

Like the Deputy Chair, I came to the Committee when the process had already started, and I tried to pick up the threads of the movie plot. Extending that analogy, we can look at the difference between Consideration Stage and this stage. At Consideration Stage, there was a bit of a divergence of opinion. To be fair, it was not on what we were looking to achieve but on how we achieved that, and there was some cut-and-thrust debate and disagreement. Today, perhaps, represents the slightly duller sequel but one that is based on a more harmonious outcome, and, hopefully, today's legislative process will have a happy ending, which is, I believe, particularly important. Across the board, it is vital that we get the legislation right and ensure that it is broadly welcomed.

We should always remember that there is no greater tragedy in life than families who lose a young loved one and parents who suffer that bereavement. All of us who have buried a relative know of the pain that occurs, but, when a parent faces that bereavement — the loss of a child —there is not only the great pain of losing a close relation but a sense that it runs against the natural order of things. Therefore, the work of the previous and current Ministers to bring the Bill on to the statute book has been vital. The approach that has been taken to the Bill will ensure that the rights that were initially set out — we will come to the amendments that relate to making additional adjustments — will be brought in as soon as is conceivably possible and will take effect from April 2022.

As we reach this point, I thank the Minister for the constructive and flexible approach that he has taken since Consideration Stage to make sure that the will of the House — what it wanted to be in the Bill — was able to gain currency in terms of what was fit for purpose in the final legislation. As indicated, the legislation is complicated. In piecing together that legislative jigsaw, the Minister needed to ensure that what was there was legislatively and operationally fit for purpose. Furthermore — this was a hurdle for the Minister and his officials to overcome — so that we were not providing a particular right but then creating major problems for those who will benefit from it, it needed to be compatible with HMRC.

I commend Dr Archibald's similar approach to her two amendments. She has reciprocated the Minister's constructive approach and will not move other amendments. That enables a broad consensus to be reached.

The amendments deal with three principal issues. First, it is right to make an adjustment so that the bereaved mother is not the only one to benefit. Both bereaved parents will benefit directly, whether the father is a husband or partner. It is important for all members of the family to benefit. It is right that there is not an inadvertent focus on one parent — the mother. It is right to acknowledge that the depth of loss is felt by the father and the mother. Therefore, the corrections that have been proposed in the amendments are right and proper.

Secondly, there was a difficult squaring of the circle in trying to make sure that the will of the Assembly, as expressed at Consideration Stage, that there be a day-1 right was carried out. In the appalling circumstances where someone starts work on a Monday and, later that day, finds out that their child has died, that eventuality is covered. The Minister's amendments in relation to that qualification period showed a creative approach. There were practical difficulties with HMRC in reaching that qualification point. The approach that has been taken is not simply to project the level of wages, because that figure cannot simply be plucked out of the air. It is retrospective, as it covers the previous eight weeks, but it also projects ahead to the following eight weeks to determine the level of wages. That is the best possible solution. Further work will need to be done on bereavement, miscarriage and day-1 bereavement in order to make secondary legislation through regulations.

Whatever our differences at Consideration Stage, we shared across the House a determination that, in order to meet them, those complex requirements should not become an obstacle to those for whom the original Bill sought to provide. Therefore, we were able, with those exceptions, to put in place in 2022 what could immediately kick in. That was the right approach.

I have a slight reservation about the time limit, which I indicated in Committee. We need to ensure that, as we project ahead to the cut-off point, which is the date by which this must happen, it should not become a point of which it is said, "We do not need to move until that point". To be fair, assurances were given by officials that it is the Department's feeling that the measures have to coincide with the tax year and that the earliest possible date would be April 2024. That is the aim, and no barrier to it should be put in place. I understand that, where something is left open-ended, it leads to concerns that it is simply being pushed into the future. Dr Archibald's approach in amendment Nos 19 and 21 to having a date in 2026 when the payments will be brought in is not unreasonable. I am happy to support those amendments too, and I look forward to the Bill becoming groundbreaking legislation.

It is an odd situation. I wish that no one in Northern Ireland had to benefit from the Bill, because I am sure that it is the fervent wish of us all that no mother or father should lose a child, but, sadly in life, we are faced with circumstances where there is family bereavement. It is important that we give help to those who are in that place. Through this process, we have reached a situation where the Bill legislatively, practically, operationally and for a host of other reasons, is fit for purpose. All who have contributed to it in whatever way can look back on it with a sense of pride and see families benefit from it.

I am happy to support the amendments.

I speak on behalf of the Alliance Party and as a member of the Economy Committee.

It is vital that we support the passage of the Bill through Further Consideration Stage. I thank the Chair of the Committee. I also thank the Minister for the amendments, as the Minister has indicated, to help, clarify, tidy and amend as appropriate, given the will of the House at Consideration Stage. I also thank the Chair of the Committee for her amendments, which she tabled not as Chair of the Committee but in her capacity as a Member of the Assembly. I acknowledge, as she said, that there are amendments that she will not move because the work that the Minister has done through his officials meets the needs and concerns that have been expressed by Committee members and, as Mr Weir and others said, were discussed broadly in the Committee. I thank the Minister for the way in which that has been done and Dr Archibald for her two amendments, which are crucial to the passing of the Bill.

It is important to see that both compromise and collaboration have been the hallmarks of where we have been in the last few days on the Bill, and I welcome that in the amendments that have been tabled by the Minister and by Dr Archibald.

It is incredibly important and welcome that parental bereavement leave and miscarriage leave will become a week-1 right, and that that is a central focus for the Minister. I thank the Minister for that.

Many of the amendments are built on the work and discussions that took place in the Committee. I appreciate that some members joined the Committee part way through the discussion, while, for other members, the conversation has been going on since the Bill's introduction and the consultation on it. The consultation was important because it highlighted the missing piece, which was miscarriage. It was vital to highlight that and take it forward through our Committee considerations. The Bill has come a long way since its inception. The amendments deal with many of the issues that came to us as we worked our way through it.

I will pose a question to the Minister on the pay threshold. I have a concern that those who fall under the threshold will not be covered by the legislation. Although that might be very few people, the circumstance may, nevertheless, be the same for them as for others in the event of a miscarriage or a bereavement. I am concerned for those who fall under the weekly limits, but I hope that the Minister will be able to clarify the situation.

Another concern, which Dr Archibald deals with in her amendment, was that the Department did not table an amendment to include a commencement date. Compromise, good consideration of the situation that we are in and the Minister's acknowledgement that it would be practical to have a date are, however, very welcome.

I thank the officials for their incredibly hard work through all of this. In our discussions, they indicated that they could deliver by 2024. Allowing an amendment that takes us to 2026, however, will give sufficient room for the Department and, after the hiatus that an election will cause, a new Minister and a new Committee to take all of that forward. My colleague Kellie Armstrong will want to talk about the consultation on those proposals, so I will leave that space for her.

Again, I thank those who contributed to the amendments at Committee stage. I also thank the Minister for making his changes, which are technical and complex; I do not believe that we could have done that work on our own. The collaborative approach that has been demonstrated in, I hope, bringing the stages of the draft legislation to a close should serve as a template for the Assembly's work. It is not a competition; it is about delivering for people and, with this Bill, for those who may be or are in highly distressing circumstances. It is vital that, today, we are demonstrating that, when we work together for the common good, we achieve much in this place.

I will not delay the House very long, but it is worth putting on record that this is a good day — or, if not a good day, a good moment — for devolution, because we are giving effect to our principle of consociational working. It is a good day because the Department, clearly, has listened to the Committee and to the will of the House, expressed during the Bill's Consideration Stage, and reacted accordingly and appropriately. It is also a good day because the Chair of the Committee has reciprocated by reacting in kind to the amendments that have been tabled at Further Consideration Stage. I am very happy to support a Bill that states that those leave and pay rights are not just for mothers but for fathers or partners, who will potentially be equally devastated by what has happened.

As MLAs, we all employ people at constituency level. It is unconscionable to me that we could allow the possibility — although I know that this is a million-to-one shot and a horrible thought — that you could have two employees who lose a child, one of whom who would be entitled to leave and pay because they had worked for more than 26 weeks, and the other who would not be entitled, simply because they had not clocked up those few hours. That does nothing to recognise equality of grief. I am therefore very happy to support the amendments, including the Chair's amendments.

That is all that I have to say as our engagement with the Bill comes to the end, except to say that that does not end our engagement with employment rights and bereavement. I recognise the Coalition for Bereaved Workers, which wishes to see leave and pay rights extended beyond the provisions that we are making in this Bill to make sure that there is leave and pay entitlement for anybody in employment who loses a close relative or a partner. That is work, however, for another mandate, for another Committee for the Economy and potentially for another Minister.

I welcome the opportunity to speak about and express my support for the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill. Parents who experience the loss of a child deserve to be supported, and they need compassionate leave from work so that they can mourn. No worker should feel compelled to return to work following the loss of a child. Workers should not face financial penalty for taking necessary time off during what is possibly the most difficult time of their life.

Employment law is devolved, so we can shape legislation to fit the needs of workers and families. Throughout the COVID pandemic, we constantly heard the phrase, "Things cannot go back to what they were like before". If that is a truly heartfelt belief, we cannot continue with the policies that have failed so many in our society in the past. I therefore fully support the amendment to make bereavement leave available to workers who have started a new job or have gaps in employment. There has been much debate about whether that leave should be a week-1 or a day-1 right, but the most important aspect is to ensure that people are not excluded from paid leave if they have started a new job or have gaps in employment. Bereavement can occur at any stage and is not time-bound. If the focus is on empathy and support for workers in the most difficult of circumstances, there is no room for exclusions on the basis of employment status or qualification periods.

The reality is that many workers in the North are on precarious contracts, particularly those who are on zero-hours contracts. Those workers experience breaks in employment and irregular periods of service. We also know that agency workers often have to serve a 12-week qualification period before they can avail themselves of the most basic pay, pension and annual leave entitlements. Those who are not defined as employees are left with fewer rights and entitlements, regardless of whether they fulfil the same roles and responsibilities as employees. We have the ability to tackle those inequalities through the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill. It is therefore important that that amendment be supported and that no qualification period be applied to that type of leave. The implementation of a qualification period not only would exclude some workers but might deter workers from seeking new employment if they felt that they would not have sufficient support.

I am also happy to see that the amendment to include leave for parents bereaved by miscarriage has been included. We as a party have stated from the outset that those who suffer miscarriage should be paid the same rate and given the same length of leave as those who experience stillbirth or the death of a child. There is a real gap in support for parents who suffer a miscarriage, despite the fact that miscarriage affects around one in four pregnancies. Maternity leave entitlements do not apply to mothers who have a miscarriage during their pregnancy but do apply to mothers who have a stillbirth.

This legislation provides an opportunity to support those who have had little to no support in the workplace in the past. The Miscarriage Association found that there is a lack of specialist support and recognition for parents who experience a miscarriage. Parents surveyed by the association have expressed how they felt under pressure to return to work before they were ready. The Assembly should support the amendments and give women the leave that they need to grieve following a miscarriage. Through this legislation, we have a real chance to change the experience of workers who suffer the death of a child. I suggest that we use the powers at our disposal to shape the legislation to make it inclusive. All workers need to be given the help and support that they deserve. Women who experience a miscarriage need to be shown compassion. I hope that those points will be considered and implemented as the Bill progresses.

I support the Bill, which was introduced by Mrs Dodds, the then Minister for the Economy, on 1 June 2021; the amendments that have been tabled by the Minister; and amendment Nos 19 and 21, which have been tabled by Dr Archibald. The Bill's emphasis is on ensuring that working parents who experience stillbirth or child death are afforded the same employment rights as parents in GB. The Department for the Economy hopes that the Bill can be completed by April 2022, during this mandate.

In June 2020, the Department for the Economy opened a consultation, which ran from 15 June to 10 August and received 36 responses from a variety of stakeholders. Significant work and scrutiny was also carried out in Committee.

I welcome the amendments from the Minister for the Economy to extend parental bereavement leave entitlement in the event of miscarriage beyond only the expectant mother, so that it can include fathers, husbands and partners, and so that it is a day-1 right. Sadly, many parents carry the burden of miscarriage alone. It is felt not only by the mother; it also affects the father of the child. Each miscarriage causes pain and grief and can have a devastating effect on both parents. I urge employers to always consider what is best for their employees, depending on their specific circumstances. Some employers have their own policy on parental leave, for which I commend them.

We had discussions in Committee, and, I think, in the House prior to that, about breaking parity. We must always remember that there is a risk to the Northern Ireland Executive Budget, although the indication from the Department of Finance is that there is a low risk. I accept that it is a low risk, but it is still a risk and is worth mentioning.

I welcome the work that the Minister has done to address the House's concerns, and the amendments that have been provided by him and Dr Archibald. I thank you both for that. I also thank the Minister's officials for coming to the Committee and trying to explain some very technical points. I think that there were some bewildered faces at times — not only mine — but we got there eventually. In addition, I thank the Bill Clerks for the work that they did.

I support the Bill and the amendments, as discussed.

I support the amendments that have been tabled by the Minister and Dr Archibald. As has been said by a number of Members, this legislation, if it passes Further Consideration Stage — I suspect that it will, given Members' comments — will make a real difference to people's lives. Those people will be in some of the darkest moments of their life. As I was listening to the debate, I recalled the Second Stage and some harrowing stories from Members who had lost children or loved ones as a result of stillbirth, miscarriage or childhood death. It brought home the reality of what we were trying to achieve: we are trying to help people who are in a very difficult place.

When Minister Dodds introduced the Bill, I think that she was acting in an honourable way and was bringing forward a positive change and support for people, but the role of Committees and the Assembly is to scrutinise legislation and expand on it, within our remit, if we believe that we need to do so. The amendments that have been brought forward are correct and were needed to ensure that the Bill fulfils its purpose. I commend the Chair of the Committee for her role in steering the Committee through what has been a very complex discussion. I commend her as a member of the Committee and a Member of the Assembly, in bringing forward the amendments to the Bill to fulfil its purpose, which is to assist and support people.

It is the role of devolution to work for and assist the needs of the citizens whom we represent. Although, for the reasons that Caoimhe outlined, we have to be conscious of parity because of the possible financial consequences to the Executive Budget — we cannot simply ignore those — it is right that devolution, under the guise of the Good Friday Agreement, works for the citizens whom we represent. It is absolutely correct that we strive to achieve day-1 or first-week rights.

Interestingly, as we saw in the Committee's scrutiny of the Bill, moving from policy or proposal to legislation is not done in a straight line. It can be very difficult. I commend the work of departmental officials, who achieved that goal and worked over the Christmas and new year period to achieve it. It proves that we, as legislators, can legislate where there is the will to do it and the pathway is clear.

On the issue of workers being employed for 26 weeks before they are entitled to rights, there is a wide raft of legislation that needs to be changed in that regard, because workers deserve to have rights when they become employed. There are particular concerns about zero-hours contracts etc, but that is a debate for another day. As Mr Nesbitt said, other legislation is required on support for bereaved workers in times of need. I commend the amendments to the House. Hopefully, the Bill will pass Further Consideration Stage this evening.

I welcome the opportunity to speak at the Further Consideration Stage of this important Bill. Indeed, a considerable amount of work has been undertaken throughout its legislative journey, including since the Consideration Stage at the end of November last year. The tabling of the Bill in the first place follows the introduction of parental bereavement leave and pay legislation by the UK Parliament in April 2020, through the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Act 2018, which, as has already been said, creates a statutory entitlement to leave and pay for working parents who suffer the traumatic experience of the death or stillbirth of a child. What a traumatic experience that must be for any individual or family to have to go through.

I join others in acknowledging the significant amount of work that has been undertaken by the Minister and his departmental officials to get us to this advanced stage and to deal with the technical complexities of the various amendments to the legislation. It is important that we get it right. It is, as others have said, a welcome step forward. It is important that we keep the focus on what was the original intention of the Bill when it was first introduced: that parental bereavement leave and pay are in place for April 2022, which, of course, is now only a matter of weeks away. We do not want to see any further delays in working parents getting the support that they rightly deserve. For bereaved parents, who have already suffered so much trauma, to have to wait any longer would be regrettable and totally unacceptable.

That is why I will support the amendments that have been tabled by the Minister, as well as Nos 19 and 20, tabled by Dr Archibald. I believe that they will ensure, importantly, that the Bill can proceed. They will also ensure that fathers, husbands and partners can also, rightly, be entitled to parental bereavement pay. I welcome the amendments, including Nos 15 and 16, that will ensure that employees who are on zero-hours contracts or do not have fixed contracts are not disadvantaged by the legislation and will be eligible for parental bereavement leave and pay. I look forward to further progress being made in the days ahead.

I start by thanking the Minister and his officials. I stood in the Chamber when the then Minister for the Economy, Minister Frew, said that, no, miscarriage could not be included. As others have said, it has been shown that, through Committee work and working together, this place has turned that around and included it.

As many of you know, I, unfortunately, belong to that club of people who have been through miscarriage — unfortunately, multiple miscarriages. The whole way through my adult life, I have continued to work to protect those parents who have been through such a bereavement. The loss of a child in pregnancy before 24 weeks is often hidden; it is often ignored. I just want to say a huge thank-you to all in the House, because you have, at long last, recognised that those of us who have lost children in early pregnancy do count, we do grieve and we do need time. I would love to give the Minister, in his summing up, the opportunity to confirm to all those people that, when he is developing the regulations that are referenced in amendment Nos 1 and 17, and could well be referenced elsewhere, with respect to miscarriage, they will be developed with medical professionals, miscarriage support organisations, such as the Miscarriage Association, and bereaved parents, and will be brought to the House for final agreement.

I thank the Member for giving way. I was never against miscarriage amendments. Sometimes, it was unfairly thrown at me and previous Ministers that that was the case. It was to do with timings and making sure that it was done properly, and I will come to that later. One thing that I wanted to do and to leave time for was consultation. It is important that, for the very issues that the Member raises, we actually speak to people about it. Now that we have a little more time to do this means that we can consult and make sure that those issues are addressed appropriately.

I thank the Minister for that. I ask him just to confirm, so that we have it on the record for all those parents, that they will not be treated as those who are hidden behind the door — the ones behind hospital curtains who are hidden away from everyone else. One thing that the Bill brings forward is that, for the first time in Northern Ireland, parents who have suffered a bereavement through miscarriage will be considered on an equal footing to those who have lost a child through stillbirth or whose child has passed away after birth, maybe much after birth. Absolutely no one wants to qualify for this leave and pay. If you qualify for this leave and pay, my heart goes out to you, because you have suffered one of the worst things that you will ever go through in your life.

In the past, harm has been caused to parents who have miscarried. They have been left out and left behind, and, because they do not get a death certificate when it happens before 24 weeks, they are excluded from many considerations. I give a huge thanks for the inclusion of those parents in this legislation. This is more than just legislation coming from the Department for the Economy. It will go a long way to allowing those parents to know that their child is recognised and their grief is understood. One in four pregnancies ends in miscarriage. That is many, many people in Northern Ireland going through that — mothers, fathers and partners — as is mentioned in the Bill. The Bill helps to look at the taboo of miscarriage and moves it slightly out of the shadows. It starts to allow parents who have miscarried to actually have time to grieve. That will have a massive impact, not just on the person but on our workforce, for them to be able to get their head straight and be allowed to grieve, and for people to recognise that grief.

I know, from when I was a bereavement counsellor for miscarriage, that one of the things that harmed people the most — mothers and fathers — was that their loss was not recognised. It was hidden away. Minister, this goes a long way to progressing the grieving process. I appreciate that it is about day-1 rights and labour and workforce things, but, to be honest, it is a huge step forward, and I really thank you for that. It is not very often in the House that we sit down and think, "My goodness. We have done something very good". Once this Bill goes through, Minister, you will certainly have helped an enormous number of people who I have spent time with, in my life, maybe having a bit of a wet shoulder, as they cope with a very severe loss. This is compassion in legislation. Thank you.

I call the Minister for the Economy to make a winding-up speech.

I thank everyone for their comments today. Mr O'Toole said that, in the previous debate, we had quite a lively debate. Certainly, there was a frank exchange of views, although I thought that the tone of the debate was right. As a Chamber, we conducted ourselves in the right way, recognising the gravity of the situation. Members will be aware that I had significant concerns about what took place at the Consideration Stage. During that stage, we put at risk what we had originally intended to do when the Bill was introduced. When the Bill was introduced, it was Diane Dodds's intention to make sure that we brought Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the UK and that parental bereavement leave and pay be in place by 2022. I do not think that it was the intention of the amendments at that stage. However, the amendments would have meant that that would not have been possible. The parental bereavement leave and pay that we had worked for for so long would have been put back. Thankfully, as a result of the amendments that we can make today, that has now been fixed, and I believe that we will get that in on time.

An awful lot of reference has been made today to officials in my Department. Members of that small team had an lot of work to do on the Bill over many months, and I place on record my thanks to them.

I am glad that we have reached the stage of fixing so many of the issues that arose the last time that we were in the Chamber debating the Bill and that we are moving to a position to which we all want to get. That required a move on the part of some people and a change in their positions, but I welcome the fact that that took place.

It is not just my team that was involved in extensive work. Extensive work was carried out with HMRC, the Office of the Legislative Counsel (OLC), the Departmental Solicitor's Office (DSO), the Department for Communities, the Bill team and your office, Mr Speaker. I place on record my thanks to all those who made sure that we got to this place today. It was very tricky at times, but I am pleased that we have been able to get to this position.

A couple of references were made to the late notice of amendments from my Department. In fact, that was simply because of the complex nature of the amendments that we needed to draft. It took us right up to the deadline to provide those so that we can put into effect what we have in front of us today.

I do not intend to go through each individual contribution because, broadly speaking, we are all on the same page. I will just make a few comments.

Stewart Dickson specifically asked me to address those who do not meet the lower earnings threshold. For low earners who are also in receipt of universal credit and whose earnings are reduced in any given period, their universal credit will be reassessed and raised. I hope that that addresses his point.

Kellie Armstrong asked specifically for a commitment to be given that we will consult and speak to those who often feel left behind. I cannot force anybody to talk to us as a Department, but one of the commitments that I made at Consideration Stage, and what I wanted time for, was consultation. There was quite a bit of pushback on that. Some people were offended by the thought that we wanted to have a consultation, but I think that it is absolutely essential that we do so in order to have the opportunity to listen to what others are saying.

I will touch on one thing that Jemma Dolan said. She mentioned the impacts on women. She was absolutely right to raise that issue. However, we have to recognise that husbands, partners and others are affected as well. I am sure that it was not her intention, but it is important that we recognise that miscarriage does not affect only women, which is why I tabled that amendment.

Again, I do not think that it was the intention of the Committee to extend parental bereavement leave and pay to mothers and fathers but to allow miscarriage provisions to extend only to expectant mothers. It is important that that is addressed and that we recognise that the loss of a child in the womb or afterwards is still a horrendous experience, and we want to provide support where possible.

I welcome the comments from other Members. Although the work was considerable, I am glad that we have reached this position today. However, I do not think that such an exercise should be repeated in the future. We were under pressure because of the mandate coming to an end. However, it is important that, when we table amendments in the future, we need to ensure that we recognise the potential repercussive consequences of all those amendments.

Thankfully, because of the hard work of my team, we have been able to correct some of the issues that arose at Consideration Stage. Importantly, we now have a Bill that can proceed to the next stage, and we can say to parents who have lost a child that we have listened to those concerns. As an Assembly, we recognise the horrendous experience that it must be, and we have put in place a support to provide for them during that difficult time. We have made good progress: the Bill is a good next step. I encourage Members to support the amendments that will be moved by Dr Archibald and, of course, the amendments that I have tabled.

I thank the Minister and all Members for their contributions.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2 (Parental bereavement pay)

Amendment No 2 not moved.

Amendment No 3 made:

In page 4, leave out lines 17 to 24 and insert—

“(b) that the person is in employed earner’s employment with an employer on the day on which the child dies, and

(c) that the weekly earnings threshold is met (see subsection (4A)).” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

I will not call amendment No 4 as it is mutually exclusive with amendment No 3, which has been made.

Amendment No 5 made:

In page 4, line 30, at end insert—

“(4A) The weekly earnings threshold is met if the person’s normal weekly earnings for any continuous period of 8 weeks falling within the relevant window is not less than the lower earnings limit in force under section 5(1)(a) at the end of the relevant week.

(4B) In subsection (4A), the ‘relevant window’ is the period consisting of—

(a) the 8 weeks ending with the relevant week, and

(b) the 8 weeks immediately following that week.

(4C) The reference in subsection (4A) to a person’s normal weekly earnings is, in relation to any period after the date on which the child dies, a reference to the person’s expected normal weekly earnings for that period.

(4D) Section 167ZZ17(8A) provides for the calculation of a person’s expected normal weekly earnings.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 6 made:

In page 4, line 31, leave out “subsection (2)” and insert “this section”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

I will not call amendment No 7 as it is mutually exclusive with amendment No 6, which has been made.

Amendment No 8 made:

In page 5, line 6, after “has” insert “or (4A) to (4C) have”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

I will not call amendment No 9 as it is consequential to amendment Nos 2 and 4, both of which have not been made.

Amendment No 10 not moved.

Amendment No 11 made:

In page 5, Line 15, leave out “26” and insert “8”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 12 made:

In page 5, line 18, leave out “26” and insert “8”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 13 made:

In page 5, line 37, leave out “(2)(c)” and insert “(2)(b)”. — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

I will not call amendment No 14 as it is consequential to amendment No 2, which has not been made.

Amendment No 15 has already been debated and is a paving amendment to amendment No 16.

Amendment No 15 made:

In page 9, line 26, at end insert—

“; but this does not apply to a person’s expected normal weekly earnings (as to which, see subsection (8A)).” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 16 made:

In page 9, line 30, at end insert—

“(8A) For the purposes of section 167ZZ9, a person’s expected normal weekly earnings are to be calculated in accordance with regulations; and such regulations may provide for assumptions to be made about the continuation of the person’s employment and the person’s earnings from that employment.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 17 made:

In page 10, line 27, at end insert—

“(2) Regulations under this section may—

(a) specify conditions to be satisfied for the purpose of determining whether a person has experienced a miscarriage for the purposes of the regulations;

(b) provide that this Part and regulations under it also apply in relation to a person who satisfies specified conditions as to relationship with the person who experienced the miscarriage.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

New Clause

Amendment No 18 not moved.

New Clause

Amendment No 19 made:

After clause 2 insert—

"Temporary provision: qualifying employment period for parental pay

2A.—(1) This section applies in relation to a person’s entitlement to payments of statutory parental bereavement pay in respect of a child who dies before 6 April in the year that is specified under subsection (2).

(2) The Department for the Economy must by regulations specify a year for the purposes of subsection (1); and the year so specified must be—

(a) no later than 2026, and

(b) the same as the year specified in accordance with section 4(3) (application of miscarriage regulations).

(3) The provisions inserted by section 2 have effect with the modifications set out in subsections (4) to (8).

(4) In section 167ZZ9, for subsection (2) substitute—

'(2) The conditions are—

(a) that the person is a bereaved parent,

(b) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with an employer for a continuous period of at least 26 weeks ending with the relevant week,

(c) that the person’s normal weekly earnings for the period of 8 weeks ending with the relevant week are not less than the lower earnings limit in force under section 5(1)(a) at the end of the relevant week, and

(d) that the person has been in employed earner’s employment with the employer by reference to whom the condition in paragraph (b) is satisfied for a continuous period beginning with the end of the relevant week and ending with the day on which the child dies.'

(5) In section 167ZZ9, omit subsections (4A) to (4D).

(6) In section 167ZZ10(4)—

(a) in paragraph (a), for 'section 167ZZ9(2)(b) or (c) has or (4A) to (4C) have' substitute 'section 167ZZ9(2)(b), (c) or (d) has';

(b) in paragraph (e), for '8 weeks' (in both places) substitute '26 weeks'.

(7) In section 167ZZ11(1), after 'subsection (2)(b)' insert 'and (d)'.

(8) In section 167ZZ17, omit—

(a) the reference in subsection (6) to a person’s expected normal weekly earnings, and

(b) subsection (8A).

(9) Regulations under subsection (2) may make such transitory or transitional provision, or savings, as the Department considers necessary or expedient.

(10) Regulations under subsection (2) are subject to negative resolution." — [Dr Archibald.]

New clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 4 (Commencement)

Amendment No 20 proposed:

Leave out clause 4 and insert—

“Commencement

4.—(1) Sections 1 to 2A come into operation on the day after the day on which this Act receives Royal Assent.

(2) The first regulations under—

(a) Article 112EA of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, and

(b) Part 12ZD of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992, except section 167ZZ19 (application to miscarriage),

must provide that they are to apply in respect of children who die on or after 6 April 2022 or such later date, not being later than 6 April 2023, as may be specified in the regulations.

(3) The first regulations under Article 112EF of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 and section 167ZZ19 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992 (miscarriage) must provide that they are to apply in respect of miscarriages that occur on or after 6 April in such year as is specified in the regulations.

(4) Part 1 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) come into operation on such day or days as the Department for the Economy may by order appoint.

(5) Part 2 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) comes into operation on such day or days as the Department for Communities may by order appoint.

(6) An order under subsection (4) or (5) may make such transitory or transitional provision, or savings, as the Department making it considers necessary or expedient.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

As amendment No 21 is an amendment to amendment No 20, we need to dispose of amendment No 21 before returning to amendment No 20.

Amendment No 21, as an amendment to amendment No 20, made:

In subsection (3), at end insert—

“(3A) The year specified in accordance with subsection (3) must be no later than 2026.” — [Dr Archibald.]

Amendment No 20, as amended, made:

Leave out clause 4 and insert—

‘Commencement

4.—(1) Sections 1 to 2A come into operation on the day after the day on which this Act receives Royal Assent.

(2) The first regulations under—

(a) Article 112EA of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, and

(b) Part 12ZD of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992, except section 167ZZ19 (application to miscarriage),

must provide that they are to apply in respect of children who die on or after 6 April 2022 or such later date, not being later than 6 April 2023, as may be specified in the regulations.

(3) The first regulations under Article 112EF of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 and section 167ZZ19 of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits (Northern Ireland) Act 1992 (miscarriage) must provide that they are to apply in respect of miscarriages that occur on or after 6 April in such year as is specified in the regulations.

(3A) The year specified in accordance with subsection (3) must be no later than 2026.

(4) Part 1 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) come into operation on such day or days as the Department for the Economy may by order appoint.

(5) Part 2 of the Schedule (and section 3 so far as it relates to that Part) comes into operation on such day or days as the Department for Communities may by order appoint.

(6) An order under subsection (4) or (5) may make such transitory or transitional provision, or savings, as the Department making it considers necessary or expedient.’ — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

I will not call amendment No 22 as it is mutually exclusive with amendment No 20, which has been made.

Schedule (Further amendments to do with parental bereavement leave and pay)

Amendment No 23 made:

In page 14, line 14, leave out paragraphs 8 and 9 and insert—

“8.—(1) Section 172 (Assembly, etc. control of regulations and orders) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)(a), after ‘sections 167ZU to 167ZZ2’ insert ‘or sections 167ZZ9 to 167ZZ12’.

(3) In subsection (4), for ‘and (7A)’ substitute ‘, (7A) and (7B)’.

(4) After subsection (7A) insert—

‘(7B) The first regulations under section 167ZZ19 must not be made unless a draft of the regulations has been laid before, and approved by a resolution of, the Assembly.’” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Amendment No 24 made:

In page 16, line 1, leave out paragraphs 25 and 26 and insert—

“25.—(1) Article 251 (orders and regulations) is amended as follows.

(2) In paragraph (1A), after ‘112BAA,’ insert ‘112EA,’.

(3) In paragraph (1B), after ‘or 67FA’ insert ‘, and the first regulations under Article 112EF,” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

Long Title

Amendment No 25 made:

At end insert—

“or who have experienced a miscarriage.” — [Mr Lyons (The Minister for the Economy).]

That concludes the Further Consideration Stage of the Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill. The Bill stands referred to the Speaker.

I thank all Members for their very well delivered contributions. Will Members please take their ease for a moment or two?

(Mr Principal Deputy Speaker [Mr Stalford] in the Chair)