Moroney Sue: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading)Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Moroney Sue: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading)Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:9324] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 In speaking on the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading) Amendment Bill tonight I acknowledge my colleague Steve Chadwick. She has done what a good local member does—and Steve Chadwick is no doubt a very good local member for Rotorua—and has brought forward an issue that is of concern to her constituency. She has done that in a way whereby she has worked with the Commerce Committee to make the required amendments so that the bill comes forward in the best possible state for this House to vote on. 
However I will be voting in opposition to this bill. For me it simply comes down to the fact that when I made my maiden speech in this Parliament not too long ago—about 18 months ago—I talked about work-life balance being one of the main issues that I wanted to address in my role as a member of Parliament. If I apply the test of the work-life balance to this bill then I find it does not pass muster. I cannot support this bill when it would do so much to disrupt the work-life balance of retail workers in particular and of distribution workers as well. As many members have pointed out the bill would also disrupt the one 4-day weekend we have available in this country. That is time that families can spend together: when family members can come from all the four corners of the earth where they now live and can travel from throughout New Zealand to gather together. The 4-day Easter weekend is a very important occasion because it is the only time when we have 4 days in which we can travel make those journeys and gather together. 
It has been very interesting to listen to the debate this evening because I have had a bit of a history lesson. I feel even more confident in opposing this bill knowing that Max Bradford once made a complete hash of the Easter trading legislation. I know Max Bradford as the man who tried to take everyone’s holidays away from them and to sell workers completely down the tubes. 
Peter Brown 
: Who stopped that? 
SUE MORONEY 
: I think it actually might have been Labour that campaigned against that. In fact the unions campaigned very strongly against it. The unions of course have campaigned strongly against the bill that is before the House at the moment. 
I feel very good about being able to stand up and voice my opposition to this bill on that basis but also because doing so allows me to pay homage to three particularly important areas in my life. Voting against this bill allows me to uphold the principles of my trade union activism which is a very strong aspect of my background. Voting against the bill also allows me to uphold the principles of the religious upbringing that I had. It is a great day for me in the House when with one vote I can please both sides of my background—both my trade union activism and my religious upbringing. May I say it is not the first time that that has occurred because the principles underlying both trade union activism and religious affiliation are very closely aligned. Opposing this bill allows me to please both sides. The third aspect that the bill also brings out for me is the issue of being very focused on family life. Those three issues—trade union activism religious affiliation and caring about families and the time that families have together—make absolute sense to me in my opposition to this bill. 
Earlier in the debate this evening the member for Piako Lindsay Tisch stood and talked about the submission that came forward from the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce. I want to talk to the House about that submission in more detail because I think it underlines one of the real ironies and perhaps one of the inequities in what the House is actually considering. What the member for Piako did not alert the House to is that although the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce wished for retailers in Cambridge to have the right to open and trade on Easter Sunday in fact almost all of them choose not to open on every other Sunday of the year. Although Cambridge retailers by and large do not trade on most Sundays of the year they have come forward and asked to have the right to trade on Easter Sunday. 
When we talk about fairness a level playing field and equity and equality in this situation I think we need to be really clear on what we are talking about. Cambridge is a town that does not have a particular event happening over Easter. No great numbers of people are flocking from elsewhere to go to Cambridge. But what Cambridge does have—as most small towns in New Zealand have—is lots and lots of traffic driving past on that weekend. That is what Cambridge is trying to capture. So those members who think that by voting for this bill they are really just focusing on the few places that have particular festivals happening at Easter should please think again. Cambridge—not the people of Cambridge but the Cambridge Chamber of Commerce—is asking for Easter trading. No particular festival happens in Cambridge but lots and lots of traffic drives past—as it does past most small towns in New Zealand. That is what will drive many of those communities to consider this measure; it will not be an issue of whether they have a significant event that happens in those communities. 
I also want to draw to members’ attention the issue of the 3½ days we have left in the year when it is not lawful for all of the shops in this country to open carte blanche. That is important. There is lots of work still to be done in this country; there are lots of issues still to deal with. But really the chance to shop on an extra 3½ days—is that really the most pressing issue that we need to consider in this Parliament? I would say it is not. I would say it would be a backwards step if we were to cut any further into those 3½ sacrosanct days. 
As I was considering this issue I noted that over the most recent Easter weekend we had the most fabulous weather. We had brilliant weather for people to get out and do things with their families. It struck me when I was spending time with my family on Easter Sunday that the location I was in had shops that opened illegally on that day. What I chose to do—and what lots of people chose to do with their families—was spend time walking along the beach with my family. I think that is a wonderful thing for people to do at Easter—and at other weekends as it happens. 
There are people in this Parliament who think that it is the right of anyone to open his or her shop doors at any time the person pleases and that the issue is about freedom. Freedom for whom? The freedom to shop until you drop? The freedom to do something that can be done on however many other days there are in the rest of the year? What is 365 minus 3½? I do not know; that is not my strong point. Whatever that number of days is that is when people can get to do their shopping. So what is it the freedom to do? And what freedom do the workers in the retail sector have? 
 I want to reply to those members who I think are very well meaning and who are interested in the worker protection provisions that this bill brings forward. I just remind them that in the real world and in the real workplace it is not easy for 16-year-old retail workers to point to a piece of legislation they do not even know about and to say to the boss that they have the right to refuse to work and to have those days off. That does not happen in the real world. In the real world all sorts of subtle pressures come on people to say yes they will work on those days—even though they will not necessarily be compensated any differently from how they would be on any other day of the year. Those subtle pressures include the action of the employer by right in offering to people particular rosters that may or may not suit them and the issue that has already been canvassed that when performance appraisals or promotions are coming up bosses may possibly be better disposed towards workers who agree to work on Easter Sunday than towards those who do not. Those are all the sorts of things that actually happen out there in the real workplace. 
In closing I bring forward a quote that really nails this issue for me. It is from the Catholic bishops of New Zealand. They talked about the role of this Parliament in ensuring we have a society that is humane. Their comment about bringing in Easter Sunday trading was that they believed that it would lead to a “society less human” and I agree with that statement. Thank you.