Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fenton Darien: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:672;Page:18644] 
9. 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development and Employment 
: Does the Work and Income NZ “Find a Job” website require all vacancies advertised to meet legal minimum employment standards; if not why not? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Work and Income tell me that to be advertised a vacancy must be a legal activity in accordance with the relevant employment legislation. 
Darien Fenton 
: Does she think that Auckland builder Colin Lane’s job vacancy which offered 6 weeks’ work with accident compensation levies GST tax sick leave and holidays excluded meets legal minimum employment standards; if not will she be advising Work and Income to review the job vacancies that it is advertising? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: My understanding is that the vacancy was for a contractor for 6 weeks. There are different rules as the member knows for those who are contracting and those who are on a weekly wage. Yes I believe that it was within the legislation. 
Darien Fenton 
: Is she aware that the Find a Job website is currently advertising jobs paying below minimum wage piece-rate work jobs being paid on a rate per square metre and even a job for a traditional Chinese medical practitioner at minimum wage; if so how does she think that this contributes to John Key’s commitment: “we want New Zealanders to have better jobs and better incomes”? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I suppose the difference between this side of the House and the other side is that this side thinks that any job is a good job. We do not always get to do our dream job. Sometimes we have to work hard sometimes we have to get a bit stuck in sometimes we have to prove ourselves to get promoted and sometimes we have to wash dishes in a rest home for a while or dig drains. But there are opportunities out there and that is a great thing. Work and Income currently has 5386 open positions and over the last 12 months it has listed more than 65000 positions on its website. I cannot guarantee that every single one of them is right but I think it has got the criteria pretty strong as much as they are. 
Darien Fenton 
: Is the advertising by Work and Income of unlawful jobs that pay below minimum wage or seek to avoid labour laws part of the Government’s plan to promote the 30 percent differential in wages between New Zealand and Australia as a competitive advantage? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: As I have quite clearly said we do not support unlawful jobs on the Work and Income website. Inappropriate businesses are also ruled out. The issue for the member is that Labour defines jobs for contractors as not being legitimate jobs. The member has certainly expressed that she does not like to see young people delivering papers and doing jobs like that. We actually support that sort of work and think that it is a good thing. 
Hon Heather Roy 
: Which of these two options would she consider better for an unemployed 16-year-old on the Find a Job Website: first a builder advertising an apprenticeship position for a young person paying youth rates of $10 an hour—that is $400 a week—or leaving that same young person on the unemployment benefit on $150 a week? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: We are always keen to see young people get into work and we see building apprenticeships as an important part of that. So we would certainly support that. 
John Boscawen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was a very simple direct question. The Minister was asked whether she would prefer option A or option B: a young apprentice builder earning $400 a week— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We do not need to have the question repeated. Does the Hon Simon Power wish to speak to the point of order? 
Hon Simon Power 
: The member may have missed it but towards the end of the Minister’s answer which admittedly did drift off slightly she said she supported that position. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: A point of order is being heard and there is an awful lot of noise which there should not be. I have allowed members to contribute to this point of order because the question was actually very straightforward. It did not contain any political innuendo. We traditionally do not ask Ministers always to give a yes or no answer or certain precise answers to hypothetical situations. But on this occasion because the question was very straightforward I invite the Minister to give a more straightforward answer to the question. It does not mean it will satisfy the member asking it but she should answer without deviation because the question was very simple. It asked whether the Minister would prefer someone to be in an apprenticeship on a youth rate—which is hypothetical I accept—at $10 an hour or to be on the unemployment benefit at some lower rate. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: I recommend looking back at the  
Hansard 
 but I certainly said I would love to see young people in a building apprenticeship. That is exactly the answer I gave before. 
John Boscawen 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was asked whether she would prefer option A or option B. She did not answer the question. A building apprenticeship under the current law has to be at the minimum wage. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not blame the member for raising his point of order. Let me interpret the Minister’s answer and if I am wrong she had better get to her feet and correct it. She preferred the first option. If I am wrong the Minister had better get to her feet and correct it. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: It was actually the second option. No sorry—that was unemployment. Now I am confused. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the Hon Heather Roy to repeat her question and we will start again. [ 
Interruption 
] I want to hear this question clearly. 
Hon Heather Roy 
: I think that might be helpful in the circumstances. Which of these two options would she consider better for an unemployed 16-year-old on the Find a Job website: a builder advertising an apprenticeship position for a young person paying youth rates of $10 an hour—that is $400 a week—or leaving that same young person to stay on the unemployment benefit on $150 a week? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I call the Hon Paula Bennett—[ 
Interruption 
]—and I want to hear this answer in silence. 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: Given a hypothetical choice between those two options I would always rather see the young person in work. The building apprenticeship sounds quite good.