Hutchison Paul: Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hutchison Paul: Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 February 2007. Volume:637;Page:7727. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this very important Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill. There is no doubt that this is a very important bill to the disabled community and also to Ruth Dyson personally. I acknowledge that both the Disabled Persons Assembly and the disabled community have put considerable thought and effort into the bill—as for that matter has the Minister herself. 
This bill is important not only to the disabled community but to their relatives to their friends and of course to the wider community. It is based on the philosophies behind the New Zealand Disability Strategy and  
Pathways to Inclusion 
 and National supports those philosophies. Where we are concerned is that this bill is being pushed through when inadequate preparation has been made for its practical application. That is of great great concern. 
The Workforce Auckland submission to the Social Services Committee stated: “Workforce Auckland has consistently supported the repeal of the DPEP Act to the extent that some opponents of the repeal have accused us of trying to rush through the repeal.” It went on to state what is absolutely important about this bill which is the reason why National is opposing it at this stage: “We are concerned about the failure to work through the practical arrangements to replace the DPEP Act and the lack of consultation.” I understand there has been some considerable consultation since but there certainly have not been adequate practical arrangements to ensure the smooth transition of this bill. 
In fact I had a call from the chief executive officer of Workforce Auckland Joy Ottaway only tonight. She said the Department of Labour came on site yesterday and said there was a change in the policy guidelines coming up but it did not know when the change was coming up. Clearly that is of huge concern for New Zealand’s largest sheltered workshop where 170 disabled people are very gainfully employed. In fact I might say that having visited Workforce Auckland one can be nothing but inspired by the tremendous activity that goes on there and by the satisfaction the disabled people get through having the choice of being employed there. 
Workforce Auckland also asked whether it would get any extra support to see in the practical application of this bill. Apparently the ministry said Gordon Pryde had asked Mrs Dyson for more money but that it would not hear about it until April. How can a large organisation like Workforce Auckland which has 170 disabled people working there plan ahead when it does not know about the policy guidelines just a few months before the bill is due to be enacted let alone whether it will be adequately compensated? Apparently someone asked about the single core benefit that has been promised for the last few years by this Labour Government. The ministry did not know about that. That is yet another reason a practical reason why it will be so difficult to implement the transition clauses to this bill. 
Apparently someone else asked the ministry whether it could guarantee that disabled people would be no worse off and the ministry said it could not guarantee that. That is of great concern. It is for that reason that I have put in a Supplementary Order Paper. The very sincere amendment will ensure that there will be a much smoother transition when the time is right. Basically this amendment requires the enactment of the bill to be extended from 30 June 2007 until 2009. But it gives the Government a chance. It states: “… 30 June 2009 or the time by which the Government has defined the taxation/benefit arrangements so that no disabled workers are adversely affected fiscally from their current status nor are employers fiscally disadvantaged whichever is the sooner.” I put it to members that only yesterday we had first-hand information from the largest sheltered workshop that clearly the ministry has not put in place a practical transition for this bill. That is why this amendment is so important. 
I had very much hoped that the Maori Party and United Future would support this amendment. I understand that New Zealand First is supporting it and I am delighted that it is. It was New Zealand First United Future and ACT members who expressed reservations around compliance costs and the practical implementation of this bill. Hopefully we will get from the Minister in the chair Ruth Dyson some explanation as to why the ministry and the Minister are so inadequately prepared. The Government has not sorted out or defined the taxation and benefit arrangements or employer support measures; it just has not done that at this stage. 
As I say the implications for disabled people are extremely serious. Many of the sheltered workshops are saying that their viability will be seriously threatened once the exemption from minimum wages is removed. Some disabled employees may lose their jobs and some may be worse off due to the attrition of their benefits through high effective marginal tax rates. In my view it is negligent that the Labour Government and the Minister have not sorted this out. National remains opposed to this bill in its present form and regards the amendment that I have put out as essential to the interests of both disabled people and employers. Obviously it would be ideal for all people with disabilities to be able to gain work in open employment where practical but sheltered workshops provide an atmosphere that many people with disabilities and their families value enormously. That choice is very very important and it is very very important that when this bill is eventually implemented there is a smooth transition that does not adversely affect disabled employees who so much enjoy their jobs. 
There is no doubt that the choice available to disabled people through sheltered workshops is one of huge import. As Peter Fraher from the Abilities Group on the North Shore said disabled people go there by choice. They go early for work. They often stay late for work. Some of them even go in the weekends. After the holiday period some were actually lining up very early in the morning because they were so looking forward to going back. This Government is prematurely making it extremely difficult for workshops such as Abilities Group on the North Shore to be able to operate. In fact the workshop is saying it may have to close unless sensible practical provisions are made by this Labour Government. 
So I ask the Minister to take a call and hopefully detail some of the things she is putting in place. I understand that $4 million was allotted in 2002 to help the transition but that almost entirely went on the community participation scheme. One of the disabled people from the North Shore said about the community participation scheme replacing work: “It’s a waste of money.” I would not agree with that entirely because it has been a mixed experience.