Sabin Mike: Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Sabin Mike: Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 19 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8628. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MIKE SABIN (National—Northland) 
: 
 I think the previous member the Hon Phil Goff was following the philosophy that if you say it loud enough it must be true. He also alluded to the fact that this bill the Minimum Wage (Starting-out Wage) Amendment Bill is a disgrace. I will tell you Mr Chair what is a disgrace. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! Do not bring the Chair— 
MIKE SABIN 
: I am telling you Mr Chair what is a disgrace. What is— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No no you must not bring the Chair into the debate. 
MIKE SABIN 
: I will say to members and also the Chair what is a disgrace and that is making members of the New Zealand public beholden to the Government to ensure that it can make its way to the next election and secure itself a place on the Government benches. That is what happened across 9 years of the Labour administration. 
We have also heard words coming from the other side about punishment and about discrimination. This is not a disgrace it is not punishment and it is not discrimination. This is about creating opportunity. If you go out there and talk to employers they will tell you that they want to employ young people. But they will also explain that when you consider the total remuneration of any employee it is not about just the hourly rate. It is also about sick leave it is also about annual leave and it is also about ACC levies. When you consider all of that in the mix there are a number of businesses that simply cannot afford to take on a young person who has low skills and a lack of experience and arguably there is a disconnect between them and what is required by the employer. That has cost some 9000 jobs since 2008 when the youth minimum wage was removed—over 5 years a 42 percent reduction in the number of 15 to 19-year-olds in employment. That is what is a disgrace here. 
What this bill sets out to do is actually challenge that and find the settings that will marry employers and employees back together in particular those in the youth area who we know if they do not find their way at that age into some form of training or meaningful employment have a very high likelihood at the age of 18 of transitioning on to an adult benefit and likely staying there for some period of time. 
This bill is specifically aimed at ensuring that employers have the settings that they need to take a chance on the young person. Certainly even yesterday in my constituency office two people came to me literally pulling their hair out wanting to employ local people in particular young people and give them a chance. But they cannot get those young people. They cannot get those young people because those young people are disconnected from a work ethic. They are disconnected from the sorts of skills—[ 
Interruption 
] This is what they are telling me. If those members want to come and sit in my electorate office and listen to employers in Northland who want to employ young people local people they will hear this for themselves. Those young people are disconnected from what employers need. It is not that the employers are not trying to reach out to them. This bill is about providing the appropriate incentives and platform for employers to seek out those opportunities with the young people. It is not compulsory; it is an arrangement between the employer and the employee and it is over a 6-month period. 
We have heard comments about the fact that this will displace other workers. Well I can also tell you that employers very quickly identify the value in an employee and those employees are valued by the employer. There is an intrinsic relationship in a successful business between the employer and the employee. Good employees who show initiative who are given a chance and who demonstrate ability advance their way through that business. The business relies on good employees. So this is not about displacing; it is about providing opportunity and an entry point. That is the distinct difference. 
But time and time again we hear in particular from the Labour Party that this is about punishment it is about discrimination and it is disgraceful. Well it is the entire opposite to those things because when members here actually take the time to step out from behind their parliamentary desks and talk to employees and employers what they will find is that it is about providing the opportunity and backing these young people and giving employers a chance to see whether or not those young people can make the grade. It then goes to the employee to show that they can but they need the chance. Nine thousand jobs across 5 years is unacceptable.