McClay Todd: Shop Trading Hours Act 1990 Repeal (Easter Sunday Local Choice) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
McClay Todd: Shop Trading Hours Act 1990 Repeal (Easter Sunday Local Choice) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:659;Page:8425] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 The hour of debate before the dinner break and now this last 20 minutes have been interesting and I thank all members for their contributions. I start by saying on behalf of the people of Rotorua who for 19 years have been asking this Parliament for the right to have a choice that we respect all views in this House and of those people who have told us that they cannot support the bill. Indeed that is why it is important that it is a conscience issue: Easter trading and particularly trading on Easter Sunday is an issue that the House has had difficulty with for many many years and on all sides of the House there are very wide views. 
I shall pick up a couple of points raised. I must for a moment pay a compliment to the previous member of Parliament for Rotorua Steve Chadwick who held the Rotorua seat for 9 years. Mrs Chadwick on two occasions brought a bill before this House—a member’s bill and a local bill—to deal with this issue for the people of Rotorua. I commend her for that and I thank her for pledging her support for this bill today and for the people of Rotorua. I tell members that while looking at the bill before I put it into the ballot I did a lot of research read all the other bills and looked at what others had tried to do. I can say that Mrs Chadwick’s bill was probably the closest to something that I thought the House would be comfortable with. Indeed she herself has said that there are great similarities between the bill we face today and vote on and her bill. 
Mrs Chadwick spoke about worker protection and of course that is very important. I accept that workers must be protected. But I would argue to the House that the worker protection put into this bill is near-on compatible with and identical to that in Mrs Chadwick’s bill only a few years ago. At that time a number of Labour members saw fit to support the bill to the select committee so as to have the opportunity to debate to listen to people from all around New Zealand from all walks of life—union members church officials men and women in the street business owners workers—and to see what they think. If there is work to be done on worker protection then the committee is the very best place to do that. 
I challenge members opposite to think for a moment about the people of Rotorua the people of Wanaka and the people of any other part of New Zealand where people want a choice. I ask members opposite what is wrong with backing New Zealanders to have a choice. In fact let us go a little shorter than that and ask what is wrong with backing New Zealanders to come to this House to a select committee to put forward their views on what should happen to this bill. 
Mrs Chadwick is right to say that this bill has been around for a long time and I tell members that it will be back again. It is about local choice and backing local communities. I ask members opposite who say that they cannot support the bill to think about these Kiwis these mums and dads and these workers and to listen to them. I challenge them to stop listening to the unions and to listen to the workers and allow them to put forward their views to this House. There is quite some subtle difference. A union is represented by a number of people who have paid a percentage of their salary to the union. In Rotorua shopworkers in a number of stores pay 10 percent of their salary to the unions. If members are so worried about their rights they should give back some of that money. They should not be taking that 10 percent and then saying they are really really sorry that those people cannot work on a certain day. 
But it is worse than that. Members are saying they do not care what workers say they know better than workers. I ask the members opposite to back New Zealanders and to listen to workers. If people come to Parliament and say they do not want this legislation then the House will listen—it is a conscience issue. 
I will tell members one thing about Rotorua. I have known for a long time and Mrs Chadwick has known for a long time—in fact I heard her echoing this earlier—that the people of Rotorua have wanted this choice for a long time. Both Mrs Chadwick and I campaigned on this as most candidates in Rotorua have. We are both committed to working as long as we are in Parliament to bring this choice to the people of Rotorua. But I say to members that if this bill does not go to the select committee it will be because of a lack of support and understanding for the people of Rotorua on the opposite side of the House from Labour members who would rather listen to their unions than back people to come to this House so that after hearing from them we can make up our minds. 
I make a pledge on behalf of the people of Rotorua that if this bill does not go to select committee we will be back. Rotorua wants this provision and it has wanted it for a long time. But there is something that Labour members should not do in 2 years’ time. Labour members who have not supported this bill to select committee should not show up in Rotorua and ask people for their vote. It will be too late; it will be all over. People in Rotorua backed me a year ago to come to Parliament to fight for them. I will continue to fight for them. I commend Mrs Chadwick for going against the majority of her colleagues’ views on this issue by supporting this bill. But let me say on behalf of the people of Rotorua who have supported me to come here to ask Parliament for a choice and to send this bill to select committee that if this bill does not go to a select committee it will be the fault of the members opposite and they need not bother to campaign in Rotorua in 2 years’ time; there will be no place for them. I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.