Bond RiaRIA BOND (NZ First): I am actually quite pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take the Committee of the whole House calls on the Care and Support Worker (Pay Equity) Settlement Bill. While we as a committee worked really hard to get our heads around a few of the challenging aspects of some of the clauses through the sector we did in the second reading acknowledge the hard work and the time it took to go away and come back and the hard work of the advisers as well. For me sitting there it was quite reassuring that we had I think the best advisers that we could possibly have had. I think that was really good.I want to address some of the comments that the Minister made in his address today. It was quite good actually that the Minister agreed to amend some of the sticky situations that could have seen employers and employees in positions that were unintended. I think it was really good that he addressed those messages especially around the contingency fund for funding provided for care workers in particular. It was equivalent I think he said to 2 days' worth.I want to mention the fact that when I looked at the title of this bill and I saw the words pay equity" it did throw me. I sat there and I did seek the advice of the advisers as to why the words "pay equity" were inside of the title. The advice I got back was that it related back to the historic Equal Pay Act of 1972 which subsequently saw some court proceedings take place. I kind of thought to myself that although I do acknowledge and accept the explanation I want to bring it back that this bill is specifically about a settlement agreement that will be in place and take effect on 1 July which will have pay bands attached to it with tiered qualifications for the care and support workers sector. I want to again say that I do not believe that the words "pay equity" should be inside of the title because in the original settlement agreement it is quite evident when reading it that this bill particularly is not about pay equity.I want to touch on some areas that I found quite relevant to bring to the debate today and one was about the vocational workers and the fact that they felt that they needed to be included in this bill and they felt that they were missing out. I think it was quite crucial that we had it explained to us that these vocational workers are actually taking up their own process soon and it was not appropriate to have them inside of this bill. I accepted that; I thought that was fair enough.I want to add how some of the submitters came to us and said that they were—and members have said this as well—concerned about the fact that from the get-go from 1 July every care and support worker will be champing at the bit and going from a level 2 to a level 4 qualification. Coming from the sector myself and having been part of qualification development and the process of workers doing that I knew that that would not be quite possible. I knew too that for this sector in order for it to have a sustainable workforce turnover rate it would need to be a given that the qualifications have a process that each worker would go through. Although I heard the submitters and how they were quite worried about that at the same time I did not completely feel that that was going to happen.I also want to talk about the importance of qualifications actually which is why I think that in the area of training and being recognised in your pay rate for your level of qualification it is really important that we in this country respect qualifications especially in this particular sector because I am told quite often that we are measured by how we take care of our most vulnerable in our society. So I think it is a really good thing that qualifications are attached to this particular bill. I think it will see towards our long-term sustainability to ensure that the care and support workers have a benchmark of qualifications as well. It actually adds to the professionalisation of the industry.On the note about overseas qualifications and how they will be recognised in New Zealand I think one of the members talked about why we are waiting until 1 July for this bill to take effect. I would like to say that having had experience in benchmarking with overseas qualifications in the sector that I came from that takes time. It takes time to make sure that the different standards are actually met and that they collaborate with each other and that they are in fact on an equal level playing field. I think it is important to recognise that yes this settlement bill does kick off on 1 July and I think it is really important that the ducks are aligned to make sure that the industry training organisation that is responsible for ensuring the overseas qualification matches ours in New Zealand—it is actually quite crucial.I want to say that I was quite pleased to work with this—"