Ms Sarah Benson:

I will acknowledge that a consultation has been undertaken, which we fed into. We have also had bilateral meetings with some of the other stakeholders, as I mentioned. I think it is important for the success of anything like that to give the opportunity for all stakeholders to feed in. I would welcome the publication of the additional one. In doing so, I would be laser-focused on whether there is anything in there that has not already been articulated. If it has already been said, then we do not need to say it again. It is probably necessary to share that, but only from that perspective. I do not want to speak for or name any other organisations but we have met unions, employers and some employers' representatives, where one might think that concerns may arise. We have not found those concerns. What we have found is an openness and a willingness. When we think very practically about it, it is about maintaining productivity. It also represents an incredible pivoting of the employer. Unwittingly, in many cases, employers are a pressure point that is a tool of the abuser in a coercive controlling situation, where actually, in some cases, the express intention is to get the woman to give up work, because that makes her economically dependent. This legislation pivots the employer to being an ally. It costs very little. As I have said, the net gains that we have seen in other jurisdictions seem to be that employee confidence in their employers improves and they feel looked after. Their productivity is higher because they know that they have that safety net and they are not carrying all that pressure. We have found that when we have those conversations, there is not anybody who would not entertain it. Of course, we should ask whether there is anything different that we have not heard yet, and take it into consideration.