Moroney Sue: Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Moroney Sue: Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 February 2007. Volume:637;Page:7615. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 We are talking this evening about a conscience vote on two bills with regard to Easter Sunday trading and Easter trading—the Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill and the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading) Amendment Bill—and I have to say that my conscience has absolutely no difficulty with this vote. My conscience tells me that I will be voting against both these bills. There are several reasons why I will be voting against both these bills but let me start by saying that it was pretty ironic that both bills were drawn out of the ballot one after the other. Some might call it an act of God but I do not think so. The Commerce Committee had to try to deal with the issue of these two very similar bills being drawn out at the same time and the bills have come back to the House in a format that will make it quite difficult for members to deal with issues that are fairly similar. Some members may be voting for one bill and against the other or vice versa but for me it is absolutely clear: I will be voting against both bills. 
This is a moment for me where by using my conscience vote as a member of Parliament I can actually satisfy both my Catholic upbringing—yes I say to Mr Hide; I am a Labour member of Parliament with a Catholic upbringing—and also my trade union activism. Voting against these bills allows me to satisfy both of those aspects. In my maiden speech I talked about work-life balance with it being an issue that I had come to this House to deal with. If I apply that issue of work-life balance to this bill— 
Bob Clarkson 
: But give us choice. 
SUE MORONEY 
: Well the member can have choice but he cannot have work-life balance and that choice at the same time because for retail workers—Te Ururoa Flavell was quite right—there will be no choice. We can put as many worker protections as we like into these bills but there will be pressure put on workers for reasons of promotion for reasons of whether they will get the right shifts given to them in the future and for all of those reasons that are out in the real world. Those are the choices faced by retail workers out there. 
My colleague Darien Fenton spoke to these retail workers. She would be able to tell members opposite about that. [ 
Interruption 
] I notice that members opposite do not seem to know what retail workers think. They did not take the opportunity to go out and talk to them today but I can tell them that retail workers would easily be able to explain to members of Parliament the sort of pressure that is brought to bear on them to work particular days or shifts because of how their work life goes. 
Everyone seems pretty keen about the test of work-life balance because all the surveys will tell us that when New Zealanders are asked about the things that concern them the most guess what comes top of the list? It is work-life balance. Can people guess what does not even feature on that list? The list never features the sentiment: “Gosh there are 3½ days a week when we cannot go shopping. That is the most desperately urgent thing that we want fixed in this country.” That is not at the top of the minds of New Zealanders but they are concerned about the lack of time that they have to spend with their families they are concerned about family life and yes they are concerned about work-life balance. 
 These bills do not pass the test of work-life balance. They do nothing to enhance it. In fact they do things to make work-life balance worse in this country. It is not just for those retail workers and their families that work-life balance would be reduced through the passing of these bills but also for the rest of us. Because when the shops are open then maybe we might go to them. I think Peter Brown talked about this before. Maybe we might feel like we need some retail therapy on Easter Sunday. Well I tell Peter Brown that if he needs some therapy on Easter Sunday there are lots of other options. For me they are kicking a ball around with one’s kids or going for a walk. There are lots of things people can do if they feel they need therapy on Easter Sunday. People could even go to church on Easter Sunday if they wanted some therapy. But the sort of therapy that we do not need on Easter Sunday or Good Friday is shopping. We can do that on any other day of the year except for just those 3½ days. 
I want to ask the proponents of this bill about the other 1½ days that would be left if the bill in the name of Jacqui Dean was passed. What are the plans for the morning of Anzac Day from the members who support this bill? Is that up for grabs as well? Is that the next thing that those members want to go after? Is that the next commercial interest that will be put before the lifestyles of New Zealanders? Some of those members must be feeling quite disappointed about the revival that Anzac Day has had recently because I am sure some of the retail sector are concerned that that will put paid to their plans to open on the morning of Anzac Day as well. What about Christmas Day? Is that next on the shopping list of members who support this bill? Because gosh if these bills are passed we will still have 1½ days where there is not that freedom of choice that is so desperately sought by some members of this Parliament. 
Obviously at the top of everyone’s mind are those 1½ days that are left and how we are going to grab them—how we are going to get hold of them. But then of course members are listening to a member of Parliament who is a little unfashionable. Going to horse racing is one of my favourite pastimes and in most circumstances I would do anything to get a day at the races. Well I will not even go to Sunday race meetings because I object to the idea of Sunday racing. So yes I am a little old-fashioned in this field. Should the racing industry ever think that it wants to put forward legislation to start race meetings on Good Friday or Easter Sunday it would not get my support for that either. So I just put that on the record right here and now. 
It is a rare occasion that I can satisfy both my Catholic upbringing and my trade union activism with just one vote. It is a good day to be able to do that. I want to quote what the Catholic bishops had to say. Rodney Hide may think that Catholic bishops do not have anything relevant to say to New Zealanders today but I certainly believe they do. Those people who are voting in support of these bills may think that the Catholic bishops are out of touch with New Zealanders but— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley) 
: I think members just need to quieten down and show a bit of respect for speakers. 
SUE MORONEY 
: I would like members to pay some respect to what the Catholic bishops had to say because members opposite do not seem to want to know what they said. They said: “The importance of spending adequate quality time together especially for parents and children is vital for strengthening family relationships.” They talked about Cardinal Thomas Williams pointing out in an earlier statement—and this is important so I think National Party members opposite may want to listen to what the Catholic bishops had to say: “If profit is to take priority over people the outcome will be a society less human and more stressful for individuals families and the community at large.” I tell Mr Hide that that is why it is the business of this Parliament to discuss this issue. That is why we have something to say about shop opening hours. That is why we have something to say about workers’ rights. It is about a society that will become less human. They went on to say that when parents are forced to work long hours it is an expensive time. 
Debate interrupted.