Mapp Wayne: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Employment Relations (Breaks and Infant Feeding) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:18184] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 In starting my speech I note that I found my colleague Dr Worth’s speech very apposite to the occasion. I said by way of interjection a bit earlier that the Government was tired and arrogant and the Minister in the chair the Hon Trevor Mallard denied that. I assume he denied it because of the conjunction of the terms I used: that it is both tired and arrogant. Perhaps he thought that if we described the Government as being tired and out of ideas then that might be legitimate or conversely if we simply described it as being arrogant and out of touch then that might also be appropriate. But to tie the two terms together was seen by the Minister as being perhaps a little unreasonable. 
There is a reason why I have started on that point. It is that we see an abuse of procedure whereby a fundamentally new part of the bill has been inserted today. The Minister in the chair the Hon Trevor Mallard knows full well that his views on the KiwiSaver issues around employment have generated a great deal of controversy. The Employers and Manufacturers Association (Northern) Inc. has taken particular issue with the Minister on that very point. The reason it has done so is that the Government is once again cutting across the freedom of employers to be able to negotiate fairly and reasonably with employees. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You mean to cut wages. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: The Minister says that and it is a typical response is it not? He displays no understanding of the concept of total remuneration whatsoever by that interjection. Why can employees not choose either to have more cash in their pockets or to join KiwiSaver? People could have that reasonable choice. What is wrong with that? I would ask the Minister what is wrong with people exercising choices around their remuneration. That is why the Minister of Labour is in so much trouble on this issue. It is just redolent of this Government to take a controlling approach to things. 
I just say to the Minister that I was phoned today about political correctness. I said the single feature about political correctness—and it followed Sir Brian Lochore’s speech actually—that really upsets New Zealanders is the way that the Government thinks it knows best. In relation to any social or economic issue it thinks the proper approach is to legislate in order to tell people how to think. The environmentally friendly light bulbs are a case in point; this bill is another case in point. Here the Government is basically saying to employers and employees that only one approach is possible. We can forget about freedom of contract. We can forget about people saying that they want cash rather than KiwiSaver contributions—they do not have that choice. That is the truth of the matter. 
We on this side of the Committee are voting against the amendments on Supplementary Order Paper 229 in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard. The Minister knows full well that we are supporting the bill as a whole and there are very good reasons for that. We understand that in appropriate circumstances employees need legislation in this area. Some of us are aware that there has been a little abuse in this area in some sectors so we think it is reasonable for there to be some legislation on this matter. If the Government had kept the legislation to that issue only then we would have no problem with it. The fact that the bill was introduced into— 
Sue Moroney 
: Yeah right! 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: The Labour junior whip says “Yeah right!”. I need to remind her that National is actually voting for the legislation so her Tui ad reference hardly makes any sense. Members know what people say about “Yeah right!”: it means the answer is actually no. I say to the junior whip that in this instance the answer is actually yes because we are voting for the legislation. But we are voting against this particular Supplementary Order paper in order to express our concerns about the way that the Government thinks there is only one solution to the issues of KiwiSaver and so forth. 
I would say that will be one of the fundamental tests of this Government. One of the fundamental reasons I suggest that the public will generally be voting against this Government is the way it has consistently said there is only way: the Government’s way. This Government’s pattern of behaviour is that it says it is either its way or the highway. I say to the Government that I suspect New Zealanders will say in a few weeks’ time: “Frankly it is the highway. Out with you!”.