Brown Peter: Employment Relations (Breaks Infant Feeding and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Brown Peter: Employment Relations (Breaks Infant Feeding and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 02 September 2008. Volume:649;Page:18205. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I listened to Wayne Mapp’s speech with quite some interest. I was genuinely taken aback—amazed—by his statement that the National Party has changed and now wants to be fair to people in the workforce. I do not doubt that the member himself is genuine but I could not help asking myself what some of his colleagues at a convention would say to a man with a tape recorder—probably if they did not know he had one. But I welcome the National Party saying it wants to be fair because as Wayne Mapp has implied it has been a long way short of that in the past.  
This bill is a very simple bill. I think it will go through the House with total support. In the first instance it encourages employers to provide breastfeeding facilities for women in the workforce where it is reasonable and practicable. What is wrong with that? It is very sensible and very fair. 
Hon Mita Ririnui 
: They don’t like it. 
PETER BROWN 
: I suspect that some of those members do not like it but they tell us they will vote for it.  
We think that that is quite a big step forward for society. This bill goes on to formalise the requirement for employers to provide employees with meal and rest breaks. I have to say that before the bill came up I thought it was mandatory for an employer to provide for meal and rest breaks and I was quite amazed to find that it is not written into legislation. Obviously if it is written into employment contracts it gets acted upon. When the bill was before the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and we heard in particular the young man from Hamilton telling us his story we had to think that we do need legislation like this to ensure that people do get their meal breaks and rest breaks. 
David Bennett likes to throw a spanner in the works. During the Committee he implied that the workers who received longer rest breaks or meal breaks than this legislation provided for could lose those breaks. Is that correct? Have I understood the member correctly? 
David Bennett 
: Yes. 
PETER BROWN 
: The member was on the select committee was he not? 
David Bennett 
: That’s why they changed it. 
PETER BROWN 
: Well let me read out new section 69ZG(1) to be inserted by clause 5: “This Part does not prevent an employer providing an employee with enhanced or additional entitlements to rest breaks and meal breaks (whether specified in an employment agreement or otherwise) on a basis agreed with the employee.” That provision was amended by the select committee. 
David Bennett 
: Exactly! That’s what I’m saying. 
PETER BROWN 
: Well why did the member not make that clear when he addressed this Parliament a few moments ago? 
David Bennett 
: I did. If you check the  
Hansard 
 you will read it. 
PETER BROWN 
: Well I might well check the  
Hansard 
. That change is clearly written into new section 69ZG. 
The final part of the bill that has upset the National Party to some degree amends the KiwiSaver legislation to give further encouragement for people to save. New Zealand First has been a strong advocate of people in this country saving. We were saying that when the party was formed in 1993 and we are still saying it. This is a move in the right direction. Unfortunately it will capture some genuinely reputable employers and they will have some difficulty implementing this change over a reasonable time frame and changing from the total remuneration package to this package whatever it will be called—there is probably a name for it. But the change will present some difficulty for some employers. I know one employer who will move heaven and earth to get this rectified but it will take a bit of time. I am hopeful that that time will be given. 
This part also protects employees from the situation outlined by Sue Moroney. I did not know that that was occurring and Sue outlined it very very clearly a few moments ago. That sort of situation obviously creates a need for us to amend the current legislation pretty promptly. That is being done by way of a Supplementary Order Paper that is outside the scope of the main bill and that has been put forward as National members have said more or less at the last moment which perhaps puts a question mark over it. We debated this amendment long and hard in New Zealand First and we decided that the issue had to be addressed and had to be addressed speedily. So we are supporting this bill totally.