Parker DavidClauses 1 to 14 and scheduleHon DAVID PARKER (Labour): I might just make a few introductory comments. I was not able to be present at the second reading when this passed through a five-party coalition including the Labour Party the Greens New Zealand First the Māori Party and the Hon Peter Dunne.This bill seeks to close a loophole that exists in New Zealand law but not in a number of overseas jurisdictions and that loophole is that in New Zealand it is possible for someone to employ the labour of someone working in New Zealand for less than the minimum wage. That is because in New Zealand the minimum wage applies only to employment relationships whereas in some overseas countries like the United Kingdom it applies to work rather than employees. The loophole has also been closed in countries like Canada although there they have used a dependent contractor alternative. I think that many people in this Committee know that there are some problems faced by the people who are at the bottom end of the employment market. They are powerless. They are feeling the sharp end of the fact that the percentage of the New Zealand economy—and indeed a lot of Western economies—that is going to labour is decreasing and the percentage of the economy that is going to capital is increasing. They are the people who suffer most from the increasing gap between high earners and low earners because they can be paid less than the minimum wage. They are being exploited. This bill is not a universal panacea. It does not give those vulnerable people holiday pay. They still will not get their ACC levies paid. They will not get sick pay. They will not get their tax deducted. They will not have remedies through the Employment Court for unfair treatment. They will not get double time and things like that on statutory holidays but they will at least get the minimum wage. I am sure that there will be other questions that arise during this that I am very happy to answer but the underlying thesis of this bill is that it is wrong that someone in New Zealand who is working should be able to be paid less than the minimum wage. I do not see it as controversial. Can I just talk on one thing about process. Can I thank the select committee members. I was given a very courteous hearing at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. I could see that the issue taxed some people and interested them. Can I say of Andrew Bayly that I could see him thinking through the consequences of what it is like and how it is wrong that we can create incentives for unscrupulous employers who are paying less than the equivalent of the minimum wage to be able to undercut people who do not embark on that unscrupulous behaviour. In the end I could not get Andrew Bayly across the line but I was grateful for the consideration that he gave it. Right at the end of the process we had actually had eight drafts of this legislation considered by the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee as a consequence of drafting that had been done at the request of the committee by the Parliamentary Counsel Office (PCO). It had responded to issues that had been raised by the select committee following hearing submissions in an effort to make this bill narrower so that it did not catch people who were close to paying people the minimum wage in contractual relationships—so we just really narrowed it down to the most vulnerable in society.Sadly in the same week that the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety castigated Labour members for not cooperating on the Easter trading bill to vote up amendments that were needed to that legislation even if we were opposed to it the National Party members on the committee then did exactly that. Rather than voting in favour of amendments that made the bill better which is what we are meant to do at the select committee even if we are going to vote the bill down they voted the amendments down which a lot of work had gone into. All of those amendments are before the Committee in the lengthier of the two Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) that are on the Table of the House in my name Supplementary Order Paper 203. I have also prepared a change-tracked version of this bill which I will now seek leave to table for the assistance of the members. Mr Chair if I could seek leave to table this.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection. It can be tabled.Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you Mr Chair. I have copies of a change-tracked version which I hope will assist members. Sometimes Ministers do this to show the effect of the Supplementary Order Paper with the tracked changes. Members will see that it is in fact a document that has been drafted by PCO that shows those tracked changes that were before us at the select committee. That is the effect of the SOP. There are a couple of changes to that form which I have marked in handwriting. I am happy to answer questions. I did it in handwriting so that people would be able to follow those changes that have been made. There is another Supplementary Order Paper Supplementary Order Paper 204 which is in shorter form that I anticipate some questions on as well. I look forward to this debate. I think it is an important issue. This bill is either going to up or down by one vote if the earlier votes on this bill are any guide. Whether it goes up or down I hope I have highlighted an ill in New Zealand which I think is the rising exploitation of vulnerable people in New Zealand. Thank you.