I'm referring to members here. Obviously, our staff enjoy the same social security benefits as everyone else, and there's a standard public sector package. Indeed, Jo—she's on my right, but I'm not sure where you see her—is about to enjoy the benefits of that package in a few weeks, so she can speak to it more.
In terms of members, because they're not employed, they don't get maternity leave in the form of a different salary arrangement or a time in which they are expected to be away, but we do have, for demographic reasons, increasing numbers of members who have children while they are members, and their parties effectively grant them something they refer to as maternity leave. I'm cautious about using that phrase, because it isn't the same as the leave their constituents get. It is both more advantageous in that they make their own arrangements, but also less advantageous in that they may feel they have to continue with some of their constituency duties very soon after giving birth. It is noticeable that most of them will go away for a short period after the birth before returning to Westminster.
We recently had a minister—and in fact, it's not the first time; it occurred in the last Parliament as well—who had her first child, so she has been given leave. I believe she continues to draw—and you can ask her—her ministerial salary, but someone is substituting for her in her ministerial role while she is away. That is, as it were, an informality. It's not a statutory form of leave.