Hodgson Pete: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6901] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Labour—Dunedin North) 
: 
 I would like to start by acknowledging the comments of the Hon John Carter when he said in his introductory remarks to the Remuneration Authority Amendment Bill that every day New Zealand families are under pressure. I thought that was a good thing to say. Furthermore I think that John Carter who comes from Northland where very few people are on the salary of $131000 that I am on would get a sense that that was a good idea. Indeed there are very few people in Dunedin where I come from who are on $131000.  
But unfortunately some of the actions of the Government have not been consistent with that sentiment and Trevor Mallard has laid one of them out. As from 1 January 2010 the entire executive as long as they do not live in Wellington or as long as they in the words of Trevor Mallard “pretend to live in Dipton” will be able to pocket up to $375000. That is unless of course they own their own house in which case it is $30000. The point is that it is a reduction in transparency.  
When I am in my motorcar going to the airport or wherever I must maintain a logbook. If I were a Minister and indeed I was and there were to be any expense incurred then it would have to be an actual and reasonable expense. I would have to get the docket. There would be no refund without the docket. This was the position until Mr Key came along and said: “Oh let’s give them the money and let it go.” Every member of the executive irrespective of their costs irrespective of whether they are or are not staying with their second cousin at a cost of 150 bucks a week will be able to pocket $37500 minus any expenses. That is not good. It is not good because it means there is not only a reduction in transparency but also an increase in the well-being of those who are best off. Cabinet Ministers are well paid. That is a reflection of this Government. On 1 April the one and only bunch of tax cuts the Government will ever put in place for the next little while went almost entirely to the well paid. Here we are making sure that the chances are that a politician’s wage rise in December will be modest or zero and that is a good thing and Labour will be voting for this legislation. But at the same time as the Government speaks in favour of that it ensures that anyone who is already rich gets a tax cut and that from next year any Minister gets 37500 bucks minus actual expenses incurred—and not a receipt in sight. It goes straight into the back pocket. That is not good enough.  
What else is not good enough is that in times of economic constraint and this legislation is predicated on the idea of economic constraint the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Earlier this week we have seen the corporate fat cats pocket big money and we have seen unemployment go up by another 2000 jobs this week. The majority of the people who have lost their jobs were already in low-paid jobs. They have moved from low pay to no pay or from low pay to an unemployment benefit if they qualify. When times are good there is the possibility of closing the rich-poor gap. It seems that when times are bad the Government has abandoned that idea. That seems to me to be sad. When we are tucked up in bed tonight people will come into our offices and clean our rooms and some of those cleaners will be on $12.55 an hour. They will get up in the middle of the night strap a portable vacuum cleaner on their back and go around and clean the offices of people who are on $131000 a year or in the case of the Minister of Finance on twice that plus whatever he is pocketing—and all for $12.55 an hour. We ought to be reflective of the fact that in harsh economic times much as we want to congratulate ourselves on signalling that we do not want a pay rise this year the poor are getting it in the neck anyway.  
There is something else I want to say. The Hon Bill English the man who has been the centre of attention this week and last week and who will be when the House resumes went to the Public Service yesterday and said: “You guys are not going to get a pay increase for years; not for years. Don’t even think about it.” Some of those people who work in our public facilities who work as public servants in our schools and hospitals are on something approaching the minimum wage already and he is saying that that is all they are going to get. He is saying that to some of our public servants who are known to be in short supply. We know that some health professionals for example are still in short supply yet he is saying: “I don’t care. Prices will be frozen.” The Minister of State Services Tony Ryall has been caught telling polytech chief executives and councils not to negotiate pay increases even in circumstances when negotiations were under way. If there is anything that contradicts the provisions of our industrial relations legislation it is that sort of heavy-handedness. In fact I can report to the House that I know that the Minister of State Services himself of an evening rang certain individuals in the polytech sector and said in the middle of industrial negotiations “zero increase”. 
Chris Hipkins 
: That’s outrageous. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: That is outrageous. It is overstepping the mark. It is exceeding authority. That same Minister will from 1 January next year pocket $37500 of taxpayers’ money minus any expenses he incurs. That is a salary that some people would like to have. An amount of $37500 is more than many people in the State sector earn in a year in total.  
It is important that we support this legislation but it is also important that we do not do so unctuously. There is inequality in this country. The inequality is growing in this economy. The tax legislation earlier this year caused an increase in inequality in this country. The pocketing of ministerial expenses from 1 January next year will cause an increase in inequality in this country and the activity of the Minister of Finance yesterday saying to all public servants including those on very low pay: “Don’t even think about a wage rise.” will create further inequality in this country. We need not be too pleased with ourselves. The poor are getting it in the neck and we are not. The poor are being moved out of work and we are not. We come up for our job interviews in another 2 years. Some of those people are going out of work now—2000 a week.  
Let us be careful here. Let us be sure that although we vote for this legislation and support this legislation we had better be clear that we do not have any moral authority in this matter—at least the Government has no moral authority in this matter. The Government has been looking after itself or its senior members extremely well and it has been using the economic downturn to make sure that low-paid people stay low paid. It is not good enough. I think we ought to be careful as we proceed with this legislation but proceed with it we must.