Brown Peter: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Brown Peter: Parental Leave and Employment Protection Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16570] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I thought a Government member was going to take a call to explain why Labour members are supporting this bill but clearly I cannot rely on them. I thought that sooner or later one of them would stand and say that he or she fully understands this bill and what it is all about. What a guilt trip United Future and the Greens have had. What a guilt trip! Those members spent at least half their speaking time apologising for not supporting the self-employed being covered in this bill. I say to United Future members and they should take this on board that when Judy Turner made her contribution she spoke as if this was a new bill—a new concept. But this legislation came in 2 or 3 years ago. It just increases the entitlements and makes a few more people able to receive them. But the bill ignores the self-employed. We were promised 2 or 3 years ago that the case for the self-employed was a good case and it would be addressed forthwith. How long do we have to wait? Nobody told us—not one single person—mentioned how soon— 
Shane Ardern 
: It won’t happen under this Government. 
PETER BROWN 
: I tend to agree with the member; it will not happen under this Government. Part 2 comes in on 1 December next year. Will the self-employed be covered by then? 
Shane Ardern 
: No. 
PETER BROWN 
: No I do not think they will. Yet the Minister says the Government will give urgent priority to the case for the self-employed. 
Georgina Beyer 
: That is correct. 
PETER BROWN 
: Well give us a time frame. We have been sitting waiting for 3 years. New Zealand First would have supported this bill if it covered the self-employed. They pay their taxes they work for this country they are the backbone of this country in many many respects and they are entitled to be covered by this legislation. 
Lianne Dalziel during the 1 minute she spoke or it might have been 1 minute 10 seconds—I do not want to take anything away from the member—said that the reason self-employed people are not covered is that some of them will want to work. Well so do employed people. If employed people work and do not want the parental leave they do not get it. That is the same with the self-employed I would assume. I would assume that that is fair—if one works one does not get the leave. I cannot imagine a woman on $200000 or $300000 a year taking paid parental leave. But she would be entitled to it although a self-employed person on a modest wage is not. 
So the argument might be that the Government does not have the money. Well let us have a look at that. In 1999 the total tax take was $33.1 billion. 
Craig McNair 
: Surely not! 
PETER BROWN 
: It was $33.1 billion in 1999. Guess what it was in June this year? 
Craig McNair 
: How much? 
PETER BROWN 
: It was $45.9 billion. That is an increase of nearly 40 percent but the Government cannot afford to give a little bit back to the self-employed. This is a benevolent Government? Like hell it is. I tell those members over there that they should be ashamed of themselves. Worse still if United Future and the Greens had stuck to the principles they espoused in this House and said: “If the self-employed are not in we’re not with it.” we would have got the self-employed covered. We would have got the cover if they had come across and said: “We will not embrace this bill unless it covers the self-employed.” We would have achieved that target. 
Craig McNair 
: They are lapdogs. 
PETER BROWN 
: As my honourable friend says they are lapdogs. [ 
Interruption 
] But that is not our only concern. Let me enlighten members a little further—the members who know so much about the bill they cannot take a call to explain what they know. 
I have a letter written to the Minister of Health Mrs King from a young lady doctor and I will read a paragraph. “I am a doctor. I have worked full time within the public hospital system since graduation—5 years. I have recently come to Wellington from Whangarei. Prior to this I was employed within the Auckland region by both the Auckland District Health Board and Counties-Manukau District Health Board. From Wellington I’m being sent to Christchurch in December.” If that lady gets pregnant she does not qualify for paid parental leave because she will not have served the appropriate time under one district health board. In other words every health board is regarded as a separate employer. She is sent from one health board to the other but she does not qualify for paid parental leave. 
Is that the way this Government operates? No not for teachers and it is stated in this letter: 
 “I understand that teachers from most public schools are employed by the Department of Education and are therefore still eligible for parental leave even when they have chosen to change schools.” The doctor who is sent from one hospital to another from one district health board to another does not qualify. The teacher who goes from one school of his or her own choice to another does qualify. Is that fair I ask members over there? 
Shane Ardern 
: Definitely not. 
PETER BROWN 
: It is definitely not fair. That is why New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill. We support the concept. We supported the first bill 2 or 3 years ago and we were looking forward to supporting this bill. However we will not be part of the discriminatory-type regime that this Government is imposing. It is playing favourites here—favourites to its supposed friends and it is leaving out other people quite unfairly. The people I am referring to all pay tax in fair measure. 
Shane Ardern 
: They don’t pay union fees. 
PETER BROWN 
: The member says that they do not pay union fees. I think that doctors do pay union fees. [ 
Interruption 
] I cannot argue that point. I do not want to put this argument on the basis of union versus non-union. This is selective legislation by the Government. Where it thinks it will get votes it will push it through. 
United Future members are silly enough to vote against their principles. They know they can stand firm. Many many times they have stood in this House and said that they support the self-employed and how important the self-employed are to this country. It is not just farming people but the small-business person who runs a garage runs a shop or whatever. They are the people whom United Future said it supports. But what do United Future members do when they have to front up to a bill like this? They roll over and say: “Never mind Government. We’ll take care of them in 1 2 3 4 5 years. Just let them keep paying taxes so that other people can benefit from it.” 
This legislation is totally unfair. It would not be so bad if it were a first attempt. New Zealand First lived with the first attempt to exclude the self-employed. That was in 2001 or 2000. The first bill was introduced about 3 years ago. It has taken the Government 3 years and it still cannot get there. I say Mr Speaker that New Zealand First can fix it. You might have heard this before and I think you have by the smile on your face. New Zealand First can fix it and it will. It will fix this legislation to make it fair for every New Zealander who should qualify. We are ashamed that this legislation will go through tonight in the way it is and that is why we are voting against it. 
If the Government had only listened to my honourable colleague Bill Gudgeon’s amendment and taken it on board it would have been a different kettle of fish. We would have been very very supportive. However the Government refused point-blank to give any consideration to the self-employed and the issues concerning doctors that have been covered tonight by myself and the complaints from nurses raised by Muriel Newman. 
This is poor legislation when it comes to New Zealanders and I am ashamed that this Government is pushing it through like this. New Zealand First will not be supporting it and I say that with a heavy heart. Basically it is the sort of legislation that we should be providing for all New Zealanders not just a selection of them. I rest my case.