Baillie ChrisCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party to speak to the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill. The bill seeks to address the issue of pay inequities in early childhood centres with kindergarten teachers by giving the early childhood centres the opportunity to get a slice of a $170 million pie if they agree to paying staff what the Minister says.Currently it's obviously an unfair system; everyone knows that and it needs to be fixed. If you're doing the same work with the same qualifications it makes sense you receive the same pay. But business owners also need the flexibility to pay some staff more and some staff less if they want to; it's their business. Not all employees are the same and contrary to popular thinking some work harder than others and actually deserve more pay. ACT supported the bill in its first reading because we know the great job that the early childhood centre teachers do. We all have examples of how good teachers can make a huge difference in a child's life and ultimately their future often doing the job of a busy working parent whose life makes it impossible for them to be there.It became obvious during the select committee process that things weren't quite as straightforward as was being presented and that there might just be an ulterior motive at play. The short time frame for submissions was a concern expressed by a lot of people and the timing of the hearings and a number of more technical details regarding the wording and the motives. Overwhelmingly the early childhood centre owners said they agreed their employees deserve to be paid more. Like all businesses they value their employees. They train new ones; they care about their welfare. It's in their best interests to have a happy workforce as well as the employees'. This is something that a Christchurch early childhood centre owner wrote: I want to be able to give increases to my teachers many of whom have been with me for many years. They're looking forward to it. They deserve it. The wage gap between unqualified and qualified experienced staff has eroded away due to minimum wage increases and the recent wage increase for newly qualified staff. We're going to lose many qualified and dedicated teachers from our workforce if we can't make pay parity work. And it will happen soon. They've waited too long."Most submitters said the consultation process was flawed as in there was none. It reminds me of when I was working for the police a few years ago and we had a consultation process—until it was explained to us that police's definition of "consultation" was to fairly inform; in other words to tell you what's going to happen but tell you nicely. Anyone reading the Ministry of Education document about this bill would assume that this definition is pretty appropriate for these changes. The Minister has said the extra funding must be earmarked for wages but the wording of the amendment makes it clearly obvious that it leaves a lot of scope to make any sorts of other rules. "That is not my intention" rightfully doesn't give anyone confidence that this power will be used for other employment-related matters.I'd like to read from the Early Childhood Council's CEO: "The Minister told the committee 'I have no intention of telling centres how to run their business.' They sought and received assurances from the Ministry of Education and between then and now there have already been two amendments rules that the Minister is imposing. One is the centres will be required to implement a process that mimics the conditions of the kindergarten teachers. The second is centres will be required to implement a process defining how a teacher's prior experience is measured. These weren't mentioned in the initial briefing." He also goes on to say "We support and welcome the commitment to teacher pay parity but our fear is that bringing the kindergarten teachers collective agreement into the picture would lead to new conditions and increased compliance burden on centres and a push to unwanted collective agreements across the sector. The fears appear to be well founded. Our members are deeply concerned about what they consider underhanded efforts by the ministry to dictate the employment responsibilities of independent businesses all without consultation." These businesses are really hard-working businesses and they already have as he mentions 303 pieces of compliance for every minute that they're open.Almost all of the submitters said that they agree with the sentiments of the bill but that the funding for what it is asking for just isn't enough. If the Government is going to impose conditions and dictate terms they must fund it appropriately. From an early childhood centre in Auckland: "Funding for us covers about 20 percent of the additional cost in salaries." Everyone that they speak to is coming to similar conclusions. The figures just don't add up and make most early childhood centres unviable. All of the owners said if they were to survive they would have to increase fees and have higher ratios of students per teacher. Again from an early childhood centre owner in Auckland: "The only option we have is increasing our fees. I've calculated a minimum increase of 10 percent is required across the board to cover the additional cost. However that becomes unaffordable for parents." And another one from Christchurch: "Two of the ways that the Ministry of Education measures quality of a centre is if a centre has low adult-child ratios and also if it has a low turnover of teaching staff. This funding model rewards the exact opposite. It makes it good to have high numbers of children for each adult and good to employ staff who have only recently qualified and registered."These are unintended consequences of rushed legislation and poor or non-existent consultation. It's another example of the Government making public sector businesses run their businesses the way that the Government wants them to and we've seen a constant attack on small businesses over the last wee while trying to make a living and employ New Zealanders. I'll mention again the minimum wage raise the 90-day trials the ridiculous compliance the regulations and the list goes on. It's the attitude that "I know how to run your business better than you do" and an unfortunate ignorant but all too common sentiment that if you can't run your business with these conditions we impose on you then you shouldn't have a business. There's a bigger picture.I will end with another quote from a submission which describes the plight of most early childhood centre owners: "On the surface it sounds good. The general public and our teaching staff think it is a great idea and a done deal; however when I do the numbers it is hugely disappointing because the funding increase is nowhere near enough to support the steps. As a director I cannot jeopardise the viability of the company by knowingly doing something that makes it unprofitable. I don't want to go bankrupt. In its current format it is not workable but neither is the current situation of inequity."Like I said at the start things need to change but this bill deserves a thorough review consultation that is listened to adequate funding and solutions that respect both the hard-working owners of the early childhood centres and their hard-working employees. This hasn't happened and for these reasons ACT opposes the bill. Thank you."