Baillie ChrisCHRIS BAILLIE (ACT): I rise on behalf of ACT to take a short call in opposition to this bill. The saying Flogging a dead horse" springs to mind but there are a couple of things that I'd just like to mention. This bill has definitely divided people into two camps: those who think businesses can afford all of the new added costs they've had to endure over the last few years and those who just know they can't. I've read and listened to those on the other side of the House say that if businesses can't afford it they shouldn't be in business. That sort of lack of understanding comes across quite strongly.Just last week a business on Oriental Parade had to close its doors after 16½ years in business. On the door was pinned a note that said "Government policy has seen our costs go up significantly over the last year and we expect this to continue."The submitters to the Education and Workforce Committee were definitely divided into two camps. We had business owners who put themselves on the line taken the risk and employed people. They were concerned that they just wouldn't be able to afford these additional costs. The employees who submitted were varied. Some thought they needed four weeks' sick leave; not just two. A number of employees submitted and said that they supported the bill but that it wouldn't really affect them as they had a great relationship with their employers. What is the problem that we're actually trying to solve here?The mention of pro rata was just brushed off as if it meant nothing but it is a very real argument. If I employ one person every Sunday they are entitled to 10 days off—10 weeks off. That's just a fact—that's just a fact. The suggestion that employers may just watch who they employ a little bit more carefully was dismissed. It was suggested the other day that that's going back 60 years which is pretty close to when fair-trade agreements were around.The suggestion that employees might abuse the extra leave and just treat it as annual leave was just brushed off as well. But that shows an amazing inability to understand how business works and it shows that members opposite actually don't speak to business owners. We compare ourselves with other countries when it comes to minimum wage but ignore the most important factor—that is New Zealand has much much lower productivity than all of the countries we compare ourselves with. I haven't actually been able to find the research that Minister Wood talks about that shows there is a higher productivity. I'd be interested to see it because I can't find it. To think that paying people more giving people more holidays and increasing sick leave will increase productivity shows a poor understanding of business.Employees were looked after during COVID and rightly so. Businesses were assisted in getting a loan if they needed it. Businesses had to go into debt in order for employees to have a job. This was the support that they got.The timing for this bill is very poor. Obviously union-initiated and pushed through under the cover of COVID—a solution looking for a problem. Businesses need a break and at least some security in what's going to happen next. ACT opposes this bill."