Young Jonathan: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeYoung Jonathan: Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2015. Volume:704;Page:2296. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth): Thank you to our two previous speakers—the Hon Michael Woodhouse and the Hon Annette King—for the comments that you have made. I think they are very important and I do concur with the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety on what he has just shared regarding the level of responsibility—which is quite different from his responsibility—of chief executives of major Government departments who work very hard for the benefit of the public. We know that the Remuneration Authority (Members of Parliament Remuneration) Amendment Bill has come to the House because the Remuneration Authority chair John Errington referred specifically to the criteria set out in legislation as the reason behind the increases. As the Hon Annette King just referred to the authority was doing its job as the legislation directed it to.There come times when the parameters and the requirements that have been set need to be reviewed. That is the job of Parliament. This is what has happened. The time has come. It is due season that we look at this because the resonance of that increase that the authority recommended be put in place in due diligence of its job was not perceived by the general population nor by members in this House to be appropriate. We live in a climate where the inflation rate is 0.8 percent. The authority by due determination of all the difference factors that it has considered says that the increase to come to members of Parliament to Ministers to the Prime Minister should be 3.6 percent when the Government itself is saying to our employers and certainly to the public sector that what we need to see are restrained increases over the years to come—not lacking generosity but being responsible being prudent knowing the situation of our recovery.As I said in my first reading speech it was not long ago when this country borrowed $300 million a week to continue the services that New Zealanders needed during that time. Since then we have come through to a modest surplus but we have built up debt. It is not just a matter of a surplus; it is also a matter of the solvency of our country which is incredibly important and so this country needs to be prudent in terms of its growth and its progress. It was deemed that the example being set by members of Parliament in terms of the remuneration they were about to receive was counter-culture and against every conventional wisdom that we have been articulating regarding wage increases in our economy at this present time. So this is how this bill came to pass. The chair John Errington and those who are supporting his decision made that decision specifically according to the criteria set out in the legislation as the reason behind those increases. So it is prudent and proper that if this Parliament wants to see a change—a change that we believe to be needed—then this Parliament needs to determine the criteria which is what this bill is about. Thank you.