Menéndez March Ricardo; White Helen; Pugh MaureenRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Tēnā koe Madam Chair. I don't know if I've had the chance to congratulate you on your ascension to this position and I also want to mihi to my colleagues around me who are also very eager to make contributions—substantive should I say rather than just asking for a vote. I wanted to follow up on the previous member's contributions around analysis in relation to this bill and specifically whether a child impact assessment was requested or had been considered at any point. The reason why I ask this is that a lot of the families that would have benefited from fair pay agreements are families with young children and the fair pay agreements would have had an impact on child poverty reduction and would have contributed to our child poverty reduction targets. And so in light of the evidence analysis—or as we're seeing lack of—I wanted to check what considerations had been given to the impact of child poverty that repealing fair pay agreements would have had or even any consideration around the benefits that fair pay agreements could have had in relation to our child poverty reduction targets.Many of the people who have spoken in relationship to this bill—whether it's of picket lines in the media etc. our parents who have spoken about balancing the needs of serving their children and attending work—and part of the reason for fair pay agreements was to set those minimum standards. So if the Minister would be able to illuminate us on the impacts of child poverty of this bill that would be great. I also wanted to check as well—and unpack some of the previous comments she had made in relation to young people. She referenced that level of flexibility and the fact that we have minimum standards but I wondered if the Minister had any reflections on the fact that we still have minimum wage exemptions for young people in place and whether fair pay agreements themselves would have helped young people actually be guaranteed those minimum standards as a result—so I guess whether she had done any analysis or had spoken to young people in relation to this bill particularly those who were workers and those who were in low wages. Thank you.HELEN WHITE (Labour—Mt Albert): Thank you very much Madam Chair. I wanted to talk to an amendment that I've put on the Table which is a new clause 8 and it talks about the repeal being subject to a view undertaken in three years' time of how terms and conditions for the workers—generally in early childhood education bus industries security industry cleaning and supermarkets and hospitality have changed or have they not also in comparison to the conditions now.Now the reason for that amendment is I've talked to the Minister before about the issue around hospitality workers and I've spoken in this House a lot about the issues around bus drivers—where I've seen real insecurity and a race to the bottom of those wages and they have these split shifts so that they spend four hours unpaid in the middle of the day. I've also been really concerned—in fact I was one of the early lobbyists for trying to get the first fair pay agreement and this is in the time before I was in Parliament—for the Recognised Seasonal Employer workers because they seemed a particularly vulnerable group.I wondered about these groups of workers who are much more obviously our vulnerable workers who are struggling to get their pay rates to a decent amount and I'd like the Minister's comment on whether she accepts that we have a problem in particular industries and whether she is open to a solution where we actually look at those groups that are particularly vulnerable and are particularly stuck in a kind of cycle of low wage work and whether we could in fact use this as an opportunity to at least review that work.Now my friend the Hon Phil Twyford talked about some of the issues around that recognition that there is a problem and whether there is another solution. One of the things I have identified really strongly is that we have almost no information about the majority of workers in New Zealand's working conditions. We don't collect the data that comes in from their individual agreements; we don't know what's in those individual agreements. We have absolutely no sight over them so anything could be in them—and it really goes to the point of whether there's been any analysis here how much of the problem—of low pay bad terms and conditions unsafe conditions—do we really know exists. If we aren't going to do an inquiry—and usually we would do that in a cost-benefit analysis—what are we doing here? How are we possibly establishing the safety of this decision to repeal?I also see an opportunity if some of these groups were carved out—and we've talked about that before. If we were allowed to actually look at those industries and see how they progressed—if they were saved from this sort of complete repeal then you could actually compare what happened under these conditions with what happens if you don't do them and you could see whether there were changes in productivity or changes in wellbeing or changes in terms and conditions.So these things are very much related to this proposed amendment as a way to go and I wondered whether you'd be open to that kind of review of these terms and conditions and whether you recognise that we have quite a deep-seated problem in these areas because I've certainly seen it.I also just wanted to comment on the difference I've seen in some of the industries that I've represented. So I've represented the Dairy Workers Union and the dairy workers have an incredible collective agreement. It is a really wonderful agreement and it has meant high wages in that industry and high productivity in that industry. It's actually extremely flexible—it has a set number of hours that take place over the year so that they can work the seasons they work the peaks and troughs. But I recognise that that industry is actually mainly quite confident male workers and they have actually been able to collectivise in a way that other groups have not been able to organise and collectivise—who tend to be our women and people with vulnerabilities. So we have a real problem where unionism does work.CHAIRPERSON (Maureen Pugh): The member's time has expired.