Lees-Galloway Iain; Tisch LindsayIAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): Members and the people watching the debate today will know that I fully support and endorse this legislation as I covered in my first and second reading speeches. But with this being the Committee stage when we look to examine the detail I want to address one of the issues that I am a bit concerned about and that the Government has failed to address.In Part 3 we deal with Funding of employers and miscellaneous provisions" and clause 18 deals with the funding amounts. Let us have a look here—clause 18(1) says: "A funder must pay an employer with whom the funder has a funding agreement additional amounts over and above the amounts required by the funding agreement towards offsetting the additional costs faced by the employer as a result of this Act." In other words district health boards ACC and the Ministry of Health will have to top up providers if the funding for the settlement package provided for by the Government is not sufficient to cover the additional costs that employers will face as a result of this legislation.Members who were on the Health Committee heard from employers that they do not believe that the Government has got its sums right. They said that the Government has failed to address things like relativity it has failed to address backfilling training days and it has failed to address holiday pay issues. For a variety of reasons the employers—quite legitimately I think—came to the select committee and said that the Government's funding package will leave them short.Of course what this legislation provides for is not that the employers will be left short but that the district health boards will be left short—district health boards that are already struggling to provide the services that the community needs them to provide. They are district health boards that have been starved of cash by this Government to the tune of $2.3 billion—$2.3 billion is what the health system needs just to be able to provide the services it was providing back in 2008 because this Government has failed to cover population growth demographic change and inflation in the health system.So our district health boards which are already literally full to bursting—in my own city of Palmerston North the hospital is literally full. There is no room at the inn you cannot get in and there are 15-hour waits for people in the emergency department all because this Government has failed to fund it properly. It has failed to keep up with population growth and now because the Government has failed to adequately fund this settlement district health boards will be facing yet another cost and will face that impossible task of trying to balance funding—trying to cut here grow here and figure out what they are going to have to cut back on—in order to fund this settlement. I do not blame anybody other than the Government for sitting down at the table and pretending it was going to fund this settlement properly. It is shameful—absolutely shameful—that the Government sits there and takes credit for this when it is being done against the Government's will and then fails to fund it adequately and is going to put more pressure on district health boards as a result. That is shameful.We in Parliament cannot address that issue. We in Parliament can only pass this legislation. We do not get the power to set the appropriations. Only the Government can do that and I have not heard one Minister or one member of the National Government stand up in this Committee and tell this Committee how they are going to ensure that the budget is available to properly cover the costs that are associated with this bill. That is an abrogation of their responsibility. This is a good bill it is doing the right thing but it needs the funding to be done properly. I think that it is an absolute shame that not one member opposite—not the Minister in the chair not the Minister responsible for the bill not one National Party MP—has explained how this is going to work. I fear for the pressure that is going to be put on district health boards as a result.I want to speak briefly to Jan Logie's amendment and I want to speak in support of it. I see this as a bit of a belt and braces approach. I do not believe that an employer can unilaterally reduce an employee's agreed hours but let us just make it clear in the legislation. This is not going to take away anybody's rights it is not going to damage the law in any way whatsoever; it simple restates what is in our employment law: that no employer can unilaterally reduce the hours of a worker. That is something that people are concerned about: that as their pay rates go up the employers might reduce their hours. Let us just underline in heavy heavy heavy ink that that is not appropriate and we do not accept it. There is no reason to vote against that amendment. It does not do any harm it does not undermine the bill it does not undermine our employment legislation. There is absolutely no reason to vote against this so I encourage members from around the Committee Government and Opposition—everybody can vote for this legislation knowing that it is simply a signal to employers about what our expectations are for employees after this bill is passed.I look forward to the third reading I look forward to celebrating this bill but let us not pass this bill without acknowledging where the Government has stuffed it up.Hon Members: Mr Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We have a time limit on this debate and I cannot interrupt the member speaking so unfortunately we have to move to the vote now."