Bradford Sue: Holidays Bill — Third Reading 
Bradford Sue: Holidays Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10741] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party welcomes the passing of the Holidays Bill into law a week before Christmas 2003. Although we are disappointed that 4 weeks’ leave for all workers will not actually happen until April 2007 we know that at least it will happen—finally bringing New Zealand into line with the modern world and in particular with our closest neighbour Australia. 
Four weeks’ holiday a year is a base minimum to ensure that workers have time with their families and time to rest and recuperate from the world of work. Many workers these days work more than 40 hours per week. Many work 6 or 7-day weeks and shift work is common. Those patterns of work inevitably entail a heavy impact on the health and well-being of staff and give less time to spend with friends and family. In addition an extra week’s leave per year will not only benefit employees but also employers who will profit from improved job performance greater productivity higher job satisfaction and better levels of physical and mental health among their staff. 
The eventual introduction of 4 weeks’ holiday for all will also bring to an end the ridiculous situation whereby those at the lower end of the labour market are less likely to be entitled to any more than the statutory minimum in the way of leave. There is a strange notion abroad that if a person is in a highly paid professional job that person is subject to far more stress and deserves far more leave than someone who might be doing something like cleaning packing retailing or driving for a living. In fact people who carry out the less well-paid but just as vital tasks needed by our society and economy deserve and need just as much leave as anyone else—if not more—given the stress they face in working for much lower pay and often in doing a job that does not provide the kind of personal satisfaction expected as of right in the higher echelons of the labour market. 
As I have pointed out elsewhere on numerous occasions the Green Party shares with Matt Robson and with workers and unions a substantial measure of regret that 4 weeks’ leave for all is not being established for the next year or the year after. However we congratulate the Government on at least being willing to compromise by legislating for 4 weeks’ leave in the next term of Parliament. I doubt that National ACT or United Future will be willing to go into the next election campaign promising voters they will repeal the 4 weeks’ leave provisions in this bill. If they do let it be on their own heads—much as I dislike the way in which this element of the legislation can be taken purely and simply as an election promise. 
Moving on to the rest of the bill I say that on the whole the Green Party has been and remains right behind this bid to clarify and strengthen the laws relating to leave and holiday eligibility. We support the provision of a guaranteed 11 public holidays per year the clear separation and establishment of minimum bereavement and sick leave entitlements and the provision of guidelines for calculating payments for all types of leave. 
Our major disappointment with the bill—apart from the unnecessary delay in the implementation of 4 weeks’ leave for all—was the Government’s decision during the consideration stages to lower the period from five successive calendar days to three after which an employer can require proof of sickness or injury. This was a retrograde step especially given the cost of going to a doctor these days. I believe employers can and should manage problems around people taking sick leave without good reason through means other than the blunt instrument of a medical certificate—which can cost up to $50 a pop even if a person does not require any actual treatment. 
Also in relation to sick leave the Green Party would eventually like to see a separate and distinct provision for domestic leave so that workers who need to take time off to care for sick or injured dependents can do so without cutting into their own sick leave entitlements. With a vast number of parents of both genders now in the workforce and with a culture that says even solo parents should go out to work as soon as they possibly can we need as a society to reassess how we treat workers who also have a primary obligation to look after young children and the sick or frail elderly who may be in their care. I hope that the next Holidays Act conceived by the New Zealand Parliament will be one that truly recognises the dual role that many workers play as both parent and employee and that will extend leave provisions so that domestic leave becomes separate from sick leave and carries with it an entitlement in its own right. 
Meanwhile at least we have taken several big steps forward with the bill we are passing today. I acknowledge and thank everyone who has played a part in the process of bringing our holiday law into the 21st century. This bill is a Christmas present for New Zealand workers even if the full benefit of the gift is subject to a rather lengthy lay-by arrangement.