Newman Muriel: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Newman Muriel: Holidays Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:614;Page:10539] 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN (ACT) 
: 
 This bill is the bill that Treasury and the Department of Labour have estimated will cost this country $700 million a year. Clauses 15 to 65 are all about holidays sick leave and bereavement leave provisions. The bill in clarifying all those things is needed but the problem is that the workers the employers and the people of New Zealand do not actually need the bill in its present form. This bill is a fraud on the business community. The way that the whole of the 4 weeks’ holiday a year provision was introduced was sneaky. It was done by a back-door method using a member’s bill. That meant that when the whole idea of 4 weeks’ holiday was put before a select committee the submitters did not treat it as seriously as they could have because the Labour Government had given a pre-election promise that 4 weeks’ holiday a year would not be— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for the dinner break. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Dr MURIEL NEWMAN 
: This measure was brought to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in a fraudulent manner in that it came in as a member’s bill and the Government later picked it up. That meant the submitters on this bill did not have a chance to talk about the 4 weeks’ leave provision. 
Interestingly the Prime Minister did promise before the election that she would not bring in a provision for 4 weeks’ holiday a year but I guess the fact that we are now debating provision of 4 weeks’ holiday in this bill is just an indication that one cannot trust the Prime Minister—particularly a Prime Minister I suppose who forges paintings. It is a deceptive way to introduce changes to employment legislation. 
The reality is that right now with the different types of workplaces we have we need diversity in employment law. Today we have workers who want to start early and finish early and we have others in the same workplace who want to start late and finish late. There are others who want time off for school holidays and many people now are looking at the option of working from home. All of that tells us that the workplace is becoming more and more diverse and what we need is flexibility in labour laws—labour laws that allow negotiation and agreement between employers and employees. What we are doing right now is pass a bill that provides more prescriptive law and that really puts a straitjacket on any discussion and arrangement that can happen between employers and employee. This bill denies workers and employers the opportunity to sort out deals that are in the best interests of the workers and of the organisation. In other words instead of creating a win-win situation this type of legislation creates a lose-lose situation. 
I had a look at what some of the submitters were saying. They were horrified by the provisions in this bill particularly the 4 weeks’ holiday provision which was done in such a sneaky and dishonest manner and particularly given that the provision does not come into force for 3 years and 4 months for goodness’ sake—April 2007. But that is just long enough for Labour to use it to buy the next election. The submitters said that as a result of this legislation some of them would have to sell their businesses downsize their businesses or close their doors. They would increase their employment of part-time workers and casual workers and decrease their number of full-time workers. The employers would have to work longer hours—up to 16 hours a day. Of course the Labour Party members who are opposing what I am saying now do not know that because they have never owned or operated a business. The employers said that they would need to call in their families to open for fewer hours to have fewer customers to provide fewer services and to increase prices to provide for the extra costs. 
Overwhelmingly many employers said that what they would have to do as a result of this legislation was change the Government and get rid of the Labour Party. Well I totally agree with those sentiments. The Labour Government is passing laws simply to suit its union backers—the people who give it the money to be able to win elections. The union movement right now is simply after more power and more members. Or course we all know that there is a rake-off to the Labour Party for every member who joins the union. This bill is disgraceful.