Tremain Chris: Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Tremain Chris: Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 February 2007. Volume:637;Page:7594. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 I rise to speak to this bill one of two Easter trading bills that were brought before the Commerce Committee of which I was a member last year. That committee was ably led by Katherine Rich. Both bills enjoyed support from across the House. We worked together with Maryan Street and Shane Jones to bring both bills before the House this evening. We are bringing two bills that I believe can be well debated and well considered as we go forward to try to solve the anomalies that have existed with this legislation over many many years. 
As I said there are two similar bills. The one I will speak to tonight is the Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill nicknamed the “Jacqui Dean Bill”. The second bill is the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading) Amendment Bill the “Steve Chadwick Bill”. The intent of the bill we are now debating is to liberalise shop trading on Good Friday and Easter Sunday as opposed to liberalising shop trading purely on Easter Sunday as provided for in the Steve Chadwick bill. The bill tonight provides for a partial exemption from the requirements under the Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal Act 1990 to be closed on Good Friday and Easter Sunday for shops located in two visitor districts—namely Tauranga and Wanaka. The bill specifies that the shops can open from 10 a.m. in the morning until 5 p.m. 
Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I see that this bill is set down in the name of the member Jacqui Dean who is present in the Chamber. I am confused as to why the member for Napier is speaking on this bill when it is in the name of another member. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Thank you for raising that. It should be obvious to you but Jacqui Dean was not here when the bill was called and any member can move it on her behalf. There will be no further comment on that thank you. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: I am always keen to take the opportunity to stand and speak in the House and I am pleased to continue at this point in time to make sure we debate this important legislation tonight. 
There was much demand from other regions around the country including from my own electorate Napier to be included in the Jacqui Dean bill and for their shops to be allowed to trade between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. As a result shops located in the district of a territorial authority specified in schedule 2 of this bill will be granted an exemption from the requirements in the principal Act to be closed on Good Friday and Easter Sunday. It was beyond the scope of the bill to provide a nationwide exemption and that is why we have allowed for the schedule and for all the territorial authorities to be provided for in the first instance. Each territorial authority is listed in the schedule and at a later date—either in the Committee of the whole House or by amending legislation—a territorial authority may apply to be exempted from that schedule. 
 The Steve Chadwick bill seeks to liberalise Easter Sunday only in the sense of allowing territorial authorities the authority to decide whether shops in their districts remain open on Easter Sunday. In that situation those authorities should be able to consult their communities on this matter using the special consultative procedure set out in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002. 
As I said the committee was ably led by our chair Katherine Rich and we had Chris Auchinvole Pansy Wong and indeed Jacqui Dean speaking on the bill. But in considering both bills we were also joined by Shane Jones Winnie Laban Charles Chauvel Gordon Copeland and Maryan Street from the other side of the House who sought to point out some common features in both bills particularly with regard to employee rights and to the leases applying to shops in shopping malls which may have been forced to open under a wider agreement. 
There are two strong sides to the debate which we saw in the submissions that came before the House. In submissions arguing for the bill we see the importance of tourism with advocates for the tourism industry saying that their industry operates 365 days of the year and that we need to account for that fact. There were arguments around economic opportunities. Businesses have invested a heck of a lot into their businesses and they need every opportunity to trade to make sure that the return on their investment is maximised. 
There were submissions from towns like Wanaka where employment opportunities were key to shops catering to overseas tourists or visitors working in New Zealand. People operating those businesses wanted to work over those weekends so they could service the community of Wanaka. There are regional events such as Wings over Wanaka whose organisers put in a submission arguing that local shops should be allowed to trade on that particular day. 
Another reason is the anomaly in the existing legislation. For instance down in Wanaka there was an exemption for some shops like those attached to petrol stations which could sell magazines quite legally but the Dymocks bookshop down the road was unable to do that. There are anomalies with regard to the location of shops within particular districts as well. In Wanaka again the back door of one shop was unable to trade on Easter Sunday but the shop was able to trade through its other door which is somewhat ludicrous. Also there is the anomaly of areas such as Wanaka versus Queenstown whereby in one situation shopkeepers could trade in Queenstown but just down the road in Wanaka shops were unable to trade. 
Another submission cited the ludicrous audit procedures from the Department of Labour. We had submissions coming in from some shop owners who had been audited and who had to go though and count particular items in an audit in order to list what had been illegally traded on that particular day. 
Lastly submitters supporting the bill did so through a straight-out belief in freedom of choice. Neither bill makes trading compulsory but right now shops have the freedom of choice to trade on 51 Sundays out of 52 in the year and by shops using that freedom of choice there are already many businesses that choose not to trade on Sunday because the people operating them want to observe Sunday for religious reasons and they choose not to trade on that day. They have the choice anyway and legally they are able to trade. 
The arguments against the bill came through pretty loud and clear as well. Firstly the submissions cited family community time. Given the number of days that shops are open now many families asked for that time to be protected and ensconced in law. The second point in submissions against the bill was the protection of employees. It was argued that employees have employment contracts and it was asked how if the law changed now they would they be able to fight for a right to not work on a Sunday if they did not want to work on that particular Sunday. So while working on this legislation the committee has spent a lot of time making sure that employees’ rights are protected so they can front up to the owners of their businesses and say they do not want to work on that particular day. 
A very strong theme in submissions against the bill was religious reasons. Many church groups oppose trading on the grounds of their religious beliefs and we have heard that throughout the submissions. 
I will now focus on a submission from Napier which is my own electorate. The Napier City Council put in a strong submission for the bill based on a number of key reasons and I will go through that now. Firstly tourism is a key industry in Napier and is continuing to grow in importance—[ 
Interruption 
]—as Dr Cullen would realise. Napier City Council is a part of many tourism events such as the concerts at the Mission which happen just around the corner from him. The art deco days are another tourism attraction. Tourism is becoming increasingly important particularly with the likes of British American Tobacco PDL Electronics and Medallion Foods closing down. It is important that we focus on tourism in our city. 
Napier’s inner city was one of the first regional shopping areas to introduce 7-day shopping each week. It is already very strongly supported as Dr Cullen knows. I am sure that quite regularly he goes into Emerson Street and enjoys a latte. I am not sure whether that is his coffee of choice but I am sure he goes there on a Sunday morning enjoys a quiet coffee and enjoys the fact that those shops are open. 
The other point Dr Cullen will be very aware of is the number of cruise ships that come into Napier now and cruise ships have come in over Easter and continue to do so. The member will know that the number of cruise ships coming into Napier continues to rise every year and the cruise ships are getting bigger and better each year. When we see 3000-odd people coming into the port on those days it is important that we show them a strong shopping centre that they can come and shop in. 
The other point the Napier City Council raised was about tourism services that are already able to open such as the swimming baths and the aquarium. There is an anomaly in that those services are able to open on Easter Sunday but on the other side of the coin many of the shops that support those businesses are unable to open. Again as Dr Cullen would be aware there is the anomaly between Taupo and Napier. Taupo shops are able to open on Easter Sunday but Napier shops are unable to. 
In summary there is strong debate between the two sides of the House on this issue. It has been before the House for many years and it is something I think will be brought to a head with this bill. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Would the member care to move on behalf of Jacqui Dean that the bill be read a second time. 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
 on behalf of  
Jacqui Dean (National—Otago 
): I move  
That the Easter Sunday Shop Trading Amendment Bill be now read a second time 
.