Thank you for the question.
Regardless, you are going to be entitled to your 15 weeks. That's established in the Employment Insurance Act. Right now, you can take only eight weeks prior to your due date, and the remaining seven weeks have to be taken after your due date. That's the way the current legislation is. My proposal is to give women the opportunity to take all 15 weeks prior to the due date if, as you described, they end up in those circumstances.
The government, through its budget, is proposing to allow 12 weeks instead of the 15 weeks. The reason why they chose to do that, in my opinion, was that a woman's due date might not actually be when she delivers. So if her due date is June 8 but she doesn't end up delivering until June 15, for example—I'm just using my own wife's experience—then she might end up running out, because she has taken her full 15 weeks before the date when she thought she was going to give birth, but she ends up giving birth a week later. This gives a bit of a buffer. That's just my interpretation of it.
You might also recall that the Speaker said that this bill would require a royal recommendation because its second part, in particular the part about EI, so this would avoid and mitigate that, or remove the offending conditions. I think this is a great compromise to eliminate the requirement for a royal recommendation and that it would support women, because they will get the increase from eight to 12 weeks. Then the study, which is the first and major part of the bill, will go to address a lot of the other questions you had, such as “Why aren't they getting more time?” Ultimately, you are correct. They should be receiving more time, in my opinion.