Tinetti JanJAN TINETTI (Labour): I'm delighted to actually take a call here in this particular bill because I'm a bit concerned about some of the material that I've heard coming from the other side. I've had concerns about this bill from the word go because I believe that we've got to be completely concerned in our country about the health and safety of all our workers—not just some but every single worker in this country—whether they are working for large organisations or whether they are working for small organisations or whether they are working in small voluntary-level clubs.We've heard a lot that we've had 34 submissions. We've heard that from every single speaker so far but we also heard that the 22 against were from mainly large organisations. Well one of those organisations was Volunteering New Zealand. Volunteering New Zealand is an umbrella organisation which represents a number of volunteers and a number of volunteer organisations feed into it. I know that because the fishing club that I'm a member of which is quite a small fishing club is actually one of those clubs that will go to Volunteering New Zealand to seek out their volunteers. Now in our fishing club we actually employ staff. As a member of the club I would be horrified to think that any of those staff members were not as worthy of the health and safety regulations as any other paid staff member of any organisation in this country. It is vitally important that we protect those.We've heard tonight that New Zealand does have a woeful reputation on health and safety at work and the premise of this bill the way that I could see the whole way through is that this bill undermines the whole concept of health and safety at work. It creates—and we heard this in the submissions from a health and safety adviser—another tier of a second-class worker. So if you are someone that is employed by a volunteer association this bill almost made it seem that you are a second-class worker in that situation and I can't see that there is any way that we can condone this in this House.The Health and Safety at Work Act in the first place as we've heard from our Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety here this evening was and is a very good piece of legislation. It is a piece of work that we are working on and extending all the time. That came from both sides of the House so it surprises me that one side of the House here with this particular bill wants to water that piece of legislation down wants to make it less than what it is and wants to give people less rights than what they currently have. Now yes we did hear from those eight small organisations who were in favour of the bill. One of their main concerns around wanting this piece of legislation was that they felt that it was onerous and a burden on them and they felt that that was hard when trying to get volunteers into their associations or into their organisations. I think there's a wider conversation that needs to be held there.I think the nature of volunteering has changed somewhat in this country and that maybe organisations—and I know that I have gone through this in my own clubs and service clubs that I am a member of. We need to relook at what we're meaning when we're saying volunteering". We need to look at whether there are alternatives and ways that we can make things different for those people to encourage different people to come in to help volunteer. I do not believe for a moment hearing those organisations speak in the select committee process that the health and safety Act is completely—or is at all even—behind why they are not getting the number of volunteers into their organisation. I think that as I said a different conversation actually needs to happen there.I think though for me this is the big point that I took out of the whole of the select committee process: the advisers said to us that they considered that the bill as introduced presents a risk that it could extend the exclusion considerably wider than intended. So as it was written in that particular bill this didn't or could be interpreted that it didn't just go towards looking at those small volunteer associations. Our advisers told us that it could be interpreted quite differently and that's where we could have a big risk to education.We had some people who came in to present to us on education: people that were representing sole-charge schools representing kōhanga reo playcentres who do have a large volunteer base or are actually based on a volunteer base—mainly volunteers—but could actually employ someone for under the 100 hours.Now in those situations our advisers did say to us that there is a chance that that could be considered and interpreted under this particular bill—that they would come and this exemption would apply to them. I struggle with that when you're working in an education setting that you wouldn't have the same rights and health and safety rights as anyone else. I think that was the point for me where I thought that really this cannot progress and I know that for a lot of members on this side that that is when they felt exactly the same.We heard from the member opposite Harete Hipango who put this bill forward that in the first reading it talked about business as usual and this wasn't business. I think there is probably a little bit of a misinterpretation of the phrase "business as usual" there because for these organisations health and safety is the business of keeping their workers safe. It is absolutely critical that they are keeping their workers safe so that we are not creating that second tier of worker. It is that business. To interpret that statement as business as in the business realm is a little bit—well not quite as it was intended in that first reading. So this should be business as usual. It is really important that we see health and safety in every single organisation in this country whether it is a paid big organisation—as I've said right at the beginning—or whether it is a small volunteer organisation. It is critically important that we see health and safety as central to that business or that organisation and it is business as usual.We heard from organisations such as as I've said Volunteering New Zealand who very much said the whole way through the organisation that the workers and the volunteers should not be subjected to a lower level of protection at all. We heard from the National Council of Women who believe that the health and safety of every New Zealander is equally important regardless of their employment status. We heard from the New Zealand Nurses Organisation who also oppose this bill Mr Assistant Speaker and I ask your indulgence that I read this particular quote out which states "this bill undermines fundamental principles of a coherent and consistent approach to health and safety at work and would compromise the health and safety of volunteers."Many of our people that actually presented to the Education and Workforce Committee and presented orally to the select committee weren't just concerned about the health and safety of the paid staff; they were concerned about the health and safety of the volunteers as well. One last quote that I'd ask your indulgence that I read out here Mr Assistant Speaker is from the Cancer Society of New Zealand. They said "Excluding certain volunteer-involving organisations goes against the principles of the [Health and Safety at Work] Act that workers have the right to go home safely after work (the pay scale is irrelevant) and the cost of compliance cannot be more important than the health and safety of the workers." That is the crux of it. Every single New Zealander wherever they work is important to this country. We need to take it really seriously here in this House that we keep their health and safety paramount. Thank you."