The Minister made the point that those employees who have dependants are likely to be the big beneficiaries of this legislation. As a parent myself, I can well recall having to take the occasional day of sick leave when my own children were not well, but that obligation falls disproportionately on employers who employ people with dependants. The perverse net outcome of this piece of legislation is likely to be that in a candidate interview scenario where a new job is being created or a job being is being filled, and there are, let's say, two candidates with equal skill and ability and background and competency but one of those candidates has no children and one candidate has a number of children—I put it to the Minister that in many cases it will never be stated by the employer, but the employer is going to be thinking, "What is the risk to my business of taking on the candidate who has a number of children?" Because, effectively, what this piece of legislation is doing is asking employers to underwrite the good health of their employees' dependent children. I don't think that's a good basis for making legislation, and I don't think it's a good basis for encouraging job creation. I don't think it's a good basis for encouraging economic growth. I think it will have, actually, the perverse opposite impact of what the Minister is looking for. 