Ross Jami-Lee: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8520. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 I rise to speak as my colleagues have in opposition to this bill the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill for a number of reasons. But before I go over those reasons can I just assure those in the gallery and those watching at home that I know there is an important debate you are waiting for and I can assure you that the timing is such that we will get through that full debate after I have finished. 
The National Party is taking full calls on this piece of legislation because we are opposed to this piece of legislation for some serious reasons. They are serious reasons. I think when New Zealanders out there really think about Anzac Day and when they really think about Waitangi Day and what those days mean to them they will come to the conclusion—and I do not think it is a controversial conclusion—that actually they are not holidays; they are days of commemoration. To treat them solely as holidays I believe denigrates those days. I believe it takes away from the specialness and from the importance of those days. 
When Parliament has previously considered how it should legislate for Anzac Day and for Waitangi Day it has specifically decided in previous years that it will do so in such a way that will not lead to those days being Mondayised because Parliament knew at the time that those days were very important to New Zealanders. To simply Mondayise them to simply treat them as just another holiday is in poor form and it is something that this side of the House does not support. 
I would say that the RSA which is a very important body when we come to consider Anzac Day is a body from which we should take the lead on Anzac Day. It has quite strong views on Anzac Day. It did not make a submission to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee I am aware of that but it has put out statements on the bill and I think it is important that we do read those out for the record. The RSA represents those people who have served this country it represents those people who have put their lives on the line for this country and it represents the people who went to war so that we could sit in this House and debate these very issues. 
What does the RSA say about Mondayising Anzac Day? It says: “Where the commemoration falls on a weekend the RSA does not support the granting of a Monday public holiday in lieu of Anzac Day … The RSA is concerned that putting a three day holiday weekend in place could take the focus away from its primary Anzac Day purpose to the disadvantage of the commemoration itself.” That is from the national president of the RSA on 1 March. If we go ahead and Mondayise Anzac Day then in the eyes of the RSA we are disadvantaging the commemoration itself. 
Dr David Clark 
: Not all RSA members. 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Mr Clark disagrees but I am reading out a statement here from the national president. I mean if the national president is wrong Mr Clark take it up with him but that is the position of the RSA. 
Later in the year he put out another statement specifically on the bill that Mr Clark put forward. He said: “we are seriously concerned that to allow a holiday long weekend when Anzac Day falls within a weekend will take the focus away from our most solemn day of commemoration in memory of the sacrifice of New Zealanders for their nation and instead turn attention towards the holiday itself.” I say that that is what the Labour Party that is what the Opposition is doing with this Mondayisation bill. It is not treating the day as the commemoration it should be treated as and we say that that is appalling. 
I want to turn now to the costs to business and the costs to the New Zealand economy because we have to recognise that there are costs to the New Zealand economy. 
Grant Robertson 
: What about the benefits to business? 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Well there are costs to the New Zealand economy. The Labour Party members want to interject. They disagree and they do not accept that there are costs to businesses but we have to recognise that whenever we make decisions in this Parliament that affect businesses and affect the economy it has a cost for everyday New Zealanders. Let us remember that it is not the Government that creates jobs it is actually the people out there who are putting their money on the line as an investment to keep businesses operating. By Mondayising these days we are actually leading towards a cost for those organisations. 
The select committee did hear some submissions from business representatives organisations: Business New Zealand the Employers and Manufacturers Association— 
Dr David Clark 
: Tourism association—what did Martin Snedden say? 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Yes yes the tourism industry. It likes it because it will benefit from it but actually it is able to pass many of its costs on to its customers. 
Let us take the Meat Industry Association. I think that is pretty specific and along the lines of what David Clark was talking about. It made a pretty good point about tourism. It stated: “It is noted that the tourism industry supports the Bill. The tourism industry stands to benefit financially from the bill and in large part possesses the means by which to pass on the additional costs associated with the Bill’s operation. … The meat industry like other export industries is not so well-positioned.” And here is the important bit that Labour and the Greens should really think about: “Being price takers in the international marketplace there is very little opportunity to recoup the increased costs of production …”. 
At the moment the Labour Party and the Green Party have this big inquiry which they have set up on their own about manufacturing about the cost of exporting for New Zealanders. We have got a very big representative organisation here mainly exporters that is saying that the costs that the Labour Party is putting on to New Zealanders—the cost that the Labour Party and the Green Party through this legislation will put on to New Zealanders—will be to their detriment. 
I want to turn to what the Employers and Manufacturers Association had to say because that association is an important representative body too. What it had to say was that this bill sends absolutely the wrong message. It sends a mixed message in fact. We have spent a lot of time in this Parliament talking about how we can create jobs. We have spent a lot of time in this Parliament talking about how we can reduce unemployment. [ 
Interruption 
] They do not want to hear it— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! Even I am having difficulty listening to the member. [ 
Interruption 
] I would like to remind the members on my left of Speakers’ ruling 60/5—“Interjections … are out of order unless they are rare … reasonable;” and witty in the words of the late former Deputy Speaker Geoffrey Braybrooke. So I ask members to remember that. 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I actually do not mind but I have to agree with the Speaker—they were not actually that witty. If they are going to try— 
Brendan Horan 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Sorry my microphone does not appear to be working. I can hear him very clearly from back here so I am happy to swap positions— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Order! That is a frivolous point of order and the member is trifling with the Chair. The member has been warned. 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: Thank you very much to Mr Horan for that great impact on Parliament. It was appreciated. 
Let us go back to the Employers and Manufacturers Association and what it is saying about things because it said: “On the one hand we hear pleas from Parliament about creating jobs costs of living issues and a general empathy with the difficult times everyone is experiencing. On the other hand proposals are being made that not only do nothing to assist those issues but [actually] exacerbate them.” So the employers out there are telling us that by putting an additional cost on to businesses that is going to exacerbate some of the issues we are talking about. 
We know that the Labour Party has a very different view from us about creating jobs. Every time we have put forward proposals to create jobs it has opposed them. Every time it has put forward proposals such as this which would be a cost to business that could potentially lead to jobs being lost we have opposed them. Some of the other comments being made by industry organisations are along the lines of: “Potentially we will see more businesses shutting their doors for these particular days.” More businesses shutting their doors for these particular days means actually less employment on those particular days. 
The costs themselves are not insignificant. The Labour Party likes to think that this will actually cost nothing but the costs are not insignificant. The cost that we have had reported to us—and yes there is a bit of dispute about it—is that it would cost the New Zealand economy roughly $200 million for every day that is Mondayised. Those members shake their heads but they have never actually come up with an alternative number. They have never come up with an alternative number. 
We know that these days are important to New Zealanders. We know that these days should not be treated just as holidays. These days are important days of commemoration. Anzac Day is about the people who fought for this country. Anzac Day is about the people such as the RSAs and what they think about that and how that is an important day for them. This is also about Waitangi Day and about remembering New Zealand’s history about commemorating the day that New Zealand became the country that it is. This is not about taking those days away from New Zealanders by just treating them as holidays and Mondayising them costing businesses a lot of money and sending mixed messages to the business community and to New Zealanders about what this Parliament thinks is important. We oppose this bill for those very reasons and I would urge the Opposition to really reconsider what it is doing here. How much of a benefit will this be and what is the impact on New Zealanders? What is the impact on these very important days for New Zealanders? We disagree with what it is doing. It should be opposed.