Kedgley Sue: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Kedgley Sue: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12875] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 A previous National Party speaker said that this particular bill had caused considerable consternation or— 
Paula Bennett 
: Angst. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: —angst within the National Party with quite a lot of division and debate. I think in truth the National Party is embarrassed; certainly many members are embarrassed that they are opposing something as basic and as simple as the right of employees to request flexible working hours. I am quite certain that many members of the National Party—and I can think of a few like the women’s affairs spokesperson Dr Jackie Blue and Katherine Rich—strongly support this light-handed legislation and are deeply embarrassed that their party is opposing it. 
I believe that the only reason National members are opposing the legislation is that Business New Zealand approached them and asked them to oppose it. I say that because as I mentioned before the leader of the Tory party—the Conservative Party—in England espouses this legislation and is one of its great advocates so it seems curious to me that in one country a Conservative leader is embracing it and back here in New Zealand the conservative party in Parliament—the National Party—will be opposing it. It does not seem to make a lot of sense. 
It is interesting that on this very day Gordon Brown the leader of the Labour Government in England has said that he is extending the British legislation on flexible working arrangements. He has indicated in the Speech from the Throne that the Government will extend the legislation to cover basically the same people we cover in this legislation—that is all persons with caring responsibilities. He is doing so because he said that this right has proven so popular and the legislation has had such a positive effect in helping to change the workplace culture in England and make it more flexible which is of course the intention of this legislation in New Zealand. 
The Green Party will support new clause 8 which we are talking about. This clause will enable a judicial review to take place. We need to remember that the reason the original amendment was put in place by Ruth Dyson the previous Minister of Labour was that she was trying to bend over backwards to accommodate the concerns of employers. She was trying to limit the process by having disputes resolved at the lowest possible level and that is why she came up with this provision. However the Government sought a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act assessment and the Ministry of Justice strongly recommended that there should be provision to allow an employee to take a dispute to judicial review. That is what this amendment will do and that is why we would expect it to be supported by all parties in this Chamber. 
To put this legislation in context we need to remember that we are addressing a particular problem here in New Zealand where we have some of the longest and most inflexible working hours in the world with a fifth of our employees working more than 50 hours a week. The time that parents are able to spend with their children has declined steeply and trying to balance those competing demands of paid work and raising a family has become one of the most acute sources of stress in New Zealand. That is what we are trying to address here. 
 New Zealanders are in danger of becoming a nation of wage slaves with no time for children or for community work. Survey after survey shows that employees are feeling overloaded tired and chronically stressed. I think that we as a society are just starting to appreciate the huge price we are paying for these long and inflexible working hours in terms of children not being able to see their parents in terms of parents not having time for their families and relationships in terms of workplace health stress and in terms of our economy. We know again from many many pieces of research that in workplaces where there is more flexibility employees are more productive and motivated. So passing this legislation which creates a right and encourages more flexible working hours will help to create I believe more productive workplaces in New Zealand. 
Just to conclude on new clause 8 I thank the new Minister of Labour Mr Mallard for putting forward his amendment seeking to rectify a concern of the Ministry of Justice and making sure that the bill complies with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Who could possibly oppose that? I think Supplementary Order Paper 160 is very straightforward. Its explanatory note explains its purposes the main one being to enable judicial review. But I repeat that the intention is to try to resolve at the lowest possible level any disputes that may arise first of all by the Department of Labour inspector then if that does not resolve the matter by a mediator again at no expense or cost to the employer. Only then would an employee be able to go to the Employment Relations Authority. 
National members I am sure will be very pleased to know that we are trying to limit the grounds for litigation in the courts. After all the intention of the legislation is to give employees the right to request flexible working hours to give employers a statutory obligation to seek to accommodate those requests as much as they can without undermining their business to try to encourage good employment relations and to resolve any disputes in an amicable and low-level way. It is not the intention to clog up the courts with disputes and I do not believe that employees would seek to do that. After all what we are talking about here is a very modest right which is simply the right to request more flexible working hours. 
It is amazing that the National Party which claims to be so in favour of families and of supporting families would oppose one of the pieces of legislation that seeks to accommodate the needs of families by lowering the stresses that families are facing today. And it is arguably the most light-handed piece of legislation that has come before Parliament certainly in the few years I have been here. So I think the National Party is embarrassed to be opposing the bill; I know that some of its members are. 
In conclusion I want to say how pleased I am that virtually all other parties in the House are supporting the bill. Once again I thank the previous Minister of Labour Ruth Dyson for her very constructive amendments and the present Minister of Labour Mr Mallard for his amendment. Thank you.