Bayly AndrewANDREW BAYLY (National—Hunua): It is a pleasure to be talking on this bill. It has been fascinating listening to the debate. I have got to say at the outset that I think Mr Parker has been very genuine in bringing this bill to the House and I think no one in this House would disagree with the general intent that any worker in New Zealand should be entitled to fair remuneration and pay. That cuts across everything and everyone in this House—including National members who stood behind it—believes in that same principle. However how this bill has been framed I think has some issues and I think one of the things—and it has been a very confusing debate partly because we have had a number of members talk tonight who have not been party to the ongoing discussions around the nature of this bill. I have heard some very confusing arguments particularly in relation to what it means to employees. Actually what those members mean in terms of contractors and vice versa what it means for contractors when in fact they are employees and that is a very important part of this debate and I think—that lack of clarity around what we are dealing with. So broadly we have three categories: we have employees; we have contractors who are basically in full-time employment contracts; and we have the temporary or semi-permanent contractors working on a part-time basis. To sit here and hear that National is not worried about all of this and that we are uncaring and all that sort of stuff is simply codswallop. It is codswallop because from this Parliament and this Government we have passed a number of changes to the employment and contracting relationships but the most recent one of course is that we have passed the bill around stopping zero-hour contracts. We do want to strengthen the relationship and to make sure that we do have a fairer system between employers and employees and contractors and also some of the things we have done around the employment rights are very important. I absolutely dispute—dispute—the allegation that we do not worry about the minimum wage because since this Government has been in power since 2008 I hasten to add that without exception every year we have pushed up the minimum wage by 50c up to $15.25. [Interruption] And now I hear a member over there saying: Whoop-de-doo!". Well that is the issue because one it is about making sure that employees and contractors get fair reward but also it is about making sure that employers are still prepared to offer the jobs and that balance is the critical part of what we are talking about tonight. So where to settle on the issue about vulnerable employees? I think there is a point about it and that is what we have been talking about tonight. But what I find staggering is that since the time we started discussing this in our Transport and Industrial Relations Committee a lot of the discussions were around people delivering mail and newspapers and all that sort of stuff. Well of course I found out tonight that that has been deleted. And then we have got new provisions in the existing ones that I just ask you to reflect on. Why are we worrying about truck drivers and services delivering goods and why are we worrying about market research and telemarketing? That is one of those 12 that are in schedule 2. I just put it to you that we have come up with a list and I am not sure about the logic around some of that list. But I cannot understand why—we have actually dealt with probably the most potentially vulnerable workers who are the ones out delivering the pamphlets. The question is this—and this is what we talked about in the select committee. Those people—and they did come to our select committee the newspaper people. The people who often deliver those are the younger people—and I now know that the bill excludes under-16-year-olds but it also does not deal with the issue about older people and I heard my colleague talk earlier about the older person who cannot walk as fast as the younger person. And we also heard about the people with disabilities—again we have not mentioned that tonight—and part of this is about creating opportunities for jobs for them. What this bill does—it has two things that really cut across the gybe and one is how the State is basically interceding between two parties namely contractors and employers. I heard about the argument about—"