Prebble Richard: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Prebble Richard: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5153] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the ACT party—partly to respond to the remarks just made by Brian Donnelly of New Zealand First but also to say that ACT will vote to support the Hon Tony Ryall’s amendments. I think the case he has made against this bill is a very good one. 
My colleague from New Zealand First said I had accused his party of being economically illiterate. He then cited two sources to support his economic arguments. The first was Charles Dickens. I hate to be the first to break it to the member but Charles Dickens was a novelist and Oliver Twist is not a true story. 
Hon Member 
: Isn’t it? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: No! Shock horror!—it is not a true story. The member’s next source as an economist was Benjamin Disraeli. I hate to break this to him as well but Benjamin Disraeli was a Tory and he never ever voted for a minimum wage bill. It just shows how much difficulty we have when New Zealand First has as economists a novelist and a Tory Prime Minister. I say to the member that the evidence is overwhelming and that a great deal of research has been done on this matter. 
I heard the Minister imply that the fall in unemployment numbers was because his Government had lifted the minimum wage. If Government members opposite really think that why do they not lift it further? If they really think that lifting the minimum wage has resulted in more employment why are they stopping at the level they are? Even the Minister in the chair Mr Swain does not believe that. When he reads his own bill—and presumably he has not put a false document in front of us—he knows that his own officials have said that the effect of this bill will be to destroy jobs and training opportunities. 
I also make this point to the member: yes we can say that dole numbers have fallen but if we then look at the total number of able-bodied adults on benefits we find that that figure is going up. We have disguised unemployment occurring under a Labour Government. The Minister shakes his head. It is a great shame that Ministers do not know that and have to rely on the ACT party to tell them. If we look at the sickness beneficiary figures I would have to say to the Minister that the severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) has already reached New Zealand. Alternatively we need another explanation of why people are becoming more and more ill under a Labour Government. Of course it is disguised unemployment! 
I want to point out to members opposite that clause 3 is a measure of a centrally planned economy. It states: “The Governor-General may by Order in Council prescribe the minimum rates of wages payable …” and then follows a series of classes. That is a centrally controlled economy. We are having a group of Ministers sitting in the Beehive and deciding how much money people will be paid. That is the measure that this Government is putting forward. 
Then we have New Zealand First members saying to us that a small number of employers are exploiting their workers. Well we have free speech. I have asked Mr Donnelly to get up and name these scoundrels. Members opposite should let us know who they are. No they are not prepared to do that because they have not found any. They are making it up because it sounds a good thing to say: “Oh most employers are good but there are some scoundrels.” Well who are they? They are very odd scoundrels are they not? According to this bill they are actually providing young people with training opportunities and yet some members say they are exploiting young people. 
If we are going to pay a wage to people who are training then why is the Government not extending that payment to university and polytechnic students? Why are Government members not saying that those students are being exploited? They are not getting paid. Why is the Government applying a double standard?