Brown Peter: Holidays Bill — Second Reading 
Brown Peter: Holidays Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10459] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealanders are in the main hard-working friendly and of flexible disposition. 
John Key 
: Not all of them. 
PETER BROWN 
: In the main. On one of the few times I have gone back to the UK since I have been here—I think it is well known in the House that I originated in the UK—people have said to me: “We like New Zealanders here. They are hard-working they are flexible and they will turn their hand to anything.” 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: Except that member. 
PETER BROWN 
: This will stun the member over here: the last time I went back there they said to me: “We like your people over here.” They put me down as a New Zealander. That member will be silenced forever. I felt very proud and very privileged. 
 Matt Robson spoke to me one day and said he was going to promote this bill. I reacted pretty warmly as did my caucus colleagues. We wanted to support the 4 weeks’ holiday provision. Basically—which became quite clear to the members of the select committee—it is only the low paid the young and the casual employees who are on 3 weeks. 
It is all very well for Gerry to stand up here— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 6/1 (Supplement). The member should refer to a member by his or her full name. 
PETER BROWN 
: Goodness me I do not want to offend 6/1! It is all very well for members of the National Party to stand up here and say that 4 weeks will send the country into oblivion. Listening to the honourable Mr Brownlee one would have thought that the sun would not rise in the morning if we supported 4 weeks’ leave. I bet he cannot remember a recent time when he was on less than 6 or 7 weeks per year. [ 
Interruption 
] Before that he was a schoolteacher and they get plenty. 
Brian Connell 
: That’s a low blow. 
PETER BROWN 
: It is a low blow. I believe and New Zealand First believes— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I was momentarily distracted. I wonder whether the member could repeat his comments. It would be unfair for me not to be able to enjoy them. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: That is not a point of order. 
PETER BROWN 
: We believe that low-paid people young people and casual employees in this country need to have some of their working conditions addressed. We know we cannot raise their wages to the level that Australia or the UK pays but their holiday conditions should be of a similar type. They certainly should be of a similar type to the rest of New Zealand’s population. We believe that it is wrong unfair and unreasonable for our economic well-being to depend on the low-paid having 3 weeks’ holiday whilst the rest of us enjoy quite a lot more. We will definitely support the provisions for 4 weeks’ holiday in the Holidays Bill. 
The New Zealand First caucus debated the bill at length but we are in a dilemma. The select committee did a good job. Its members listened to the New Zealand First submission about casual workers double-dipping which has been amended and also to our concerns about sick leave which were shared by many submitters. Those provisions have also been modified but we still believe that the Holidays Bill is business unfriendly. Should we hold back from supporting the progress of this bill? It can be modified by Supplementary Order Paper in the Committee stage. New Zealand First had a special segment of its caucus discuss the issue and the debate was pretty torrid frank and tense. We say to the country that we believe that the bill has to be positively addressed. At this point in time we say that it is business unfriendly but we cannot go on saying that for ever. We will look positively at it. 
Despite what Mr Matt Robson said earlier New Zealand First is longer in a dilemma. We will support the bill. We might put a few amendments in at the Committee stage but we will support its progress. We will not vote against it at this stage. In fact we will vote for it. We are not prepared to have New Zealanders treated as second-rate on a world basis in their own country because they are well-received overseas. To employers who will no doubt make representations to us we will say that we will support increasing workers’ leave but we will look favourably at some sort of tax concession when we become part of the Government after the next election. 
We believe that New Zealanders are entitled to a fairer go than they are currently getting and we will push for that. We will say to working people that we know that they can get better conditions elsewhere in the world but that we do not want to see our young people in particular going permanently off shore. New Zealanders have always gone off shore for their OE trips—for 2 years or whatever—but now many of them want to go permanently. That is partly to do with the situation they find themselves in with student loans but it is partly to do with employment conditions here. If this bill can make it more attractive for young people in particular to develop their careers here—although it is not just aimed at young people—we will certainly support its progress. 
This legislation has been a long time coming. When Max Bradford was the Minister responsible for the Department of Labour he went too far to the right. He wanted to sell everything and got nowhere. As I recall it was New Zealand First when we were part of the coalition Government that stopped that proceeding. We said that was going too far in the wrong direction. This bill has gone slightly too far to the left but it is trying to make things fairer for the average working person. 
I warn the Government now that probably some—if not many—employers will look at this legislation and say that because of it they do not want to employ people in permanent positions. They will say that they would rather stick with casual employees. There is an incentive here to employ more people on a casual basis. New Zealand First believes that and we sincerely hope the issue can be addressed. We will be looking at advocating tax relief particularly for people who employ permanent employees. 
In summary we have always supported 4 weeks’ holiday. We listened carefully at the select committee and there was nothing that changed our minds on that. We are not a party that wants to see people queuing outside post offices to collect their dole. Basically we believe that people in this country have to be treated fairly and when we treat them fairly and they get a fair return for a day’s work they perform. Holidays are an important part of employment conditions. We also believe that the main part of the bill as I said earlier is business unfriendly but that that can be overcome. We believe that some of the flaws in it have been taken care of and that we can perhaps take care of a few others in the Committee stage. New Zealand First supports the progress of this bill.