Sepuloni CarmelCARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston): I just want to refer back to the member Simon O'Connor's comments when he said that the National MPs have not been whipped to vote in one particular way on this issue. I think that member needs to be conscious of that fact that they do not have a collective conscience on this issue because there have been different voting patterns in the past. Hon Michael Woodhouse: What about Labour?CARMEL SEPULONI: Actually previous National MPs who have spoken on this bill have made it known in this House that in fact they have been whipped on this particular issue to vote in favour of this bill Mr Woodhouse. We have not been whipped on this side of the House; we just happen to all agree on this side of the House. However they have stated really clearly that they have been made to vote in one particular way. If we reflect on the four other times in the past 10 years when similar bills have come to the House we see that there are current National MPs who are being forced to vote in a way that does not reflect the way they have voted in the past. So who are those MPs? We have got Bill English who three times in the last 10 years has voted against similar bills; Gerry Brownlee who two times in the last 10 years has voted against similar bills; Nick Smith two times against; Chester Borrows two times against; Chris Finlayson one time against; Alfred Ngaro against; Tim Macindoe against twice; and Sam Lotu-Iiga against twice. And today unfortunately the National Government even though it talks about choice has taken the choice away from its MPs to exercise their conscience in respect of this issue. So I think that needs to be the place where we start—just a few facts to start this debate off. Can I just reflect for myself on an experience I had yesterday talking to about a hundred Victoria University students about what it is like to be a politician and talking about the realities of being a parent and a politician. At the end of my speech we had questions and answers and one of the questions that came from the floor was: How do you have any time with your family and with your children? It must be so difficult being a politician and being able to spend time with them." I said: "Yes it is. But actually it has become increasingly difficult for all New Zealanders to have time with their families." Unfortunately it is not just us as politicians who struggle with that. It is our people who are out there working the grassroots jobs in the factories sometimes in two or three jobs a week who have no time with their families. The reality is we are a time-poor society and here this National Government is promoting a bill that will take away one of the very few days when families get to spend that time together. I think that that is shameful. When we look at the days that we do have dedicated to spending time with families when there are a few days where our stores our shops cannot be open all we currently have are Good Friday Easter Sunday Christmas Day and the morning of Anzac Day. Iain Lees-Galloway: How long will that last?CARMEL SEPULONI: And how long will they last—all 3½ of those days? That is all we give to families. That is all they can be assured of with regard to time they can spend with their families and now today we are about to pass a bill that will remove one of those days. As I have said before that is shameful. We keep hearing from the other side about choice. We heard Brett Hudson talk about the choice of councils because the Government is passing the buck here. Knowing that it would not have the numbers to do it in the House the Government is passing it on to councils to make the decision so those members are saying it is going to be the choice of councils. Councils are saying they do not want that decision. The Government is saying it is about choice for businesses and it is saying it is about choice for employees. Well actually it will not be the choice of employees. How will an employee be able to go to their boss and say—particularly think of the person who might be on a 90-day trial period. How can they go to their boss and say: "I'm sorry I know you want me to work on Easter Sunday but actually for religious reasons I am not going to do that."? Will they make it past the 90 days if they say that to their boss?Iain Lees-Galloway: Good question.CARMEL SEPULONI: Good question—no they will not. This bill does not protect vulnerable workers. This makes workers more vulnerable. I think it is shameful that the Government has taken the right away from its members to vote on this very important matter. We will not be supporting this bill on this side of the House not because we have been whipped to vote in one particular way but because we do not agree with what the National Government is proposing here."