King Colin: Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:637;Page:8081] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take the opportunity to speak on Part 2 of the Disabled Persons Employment Promotion (Repeal and Related Matters) Bill. It is very interesting to see that we are debating something rather noble here but that is not the major point of concern. Nobody would dispute that enabling everybody to reach their potential is a noble gesture to aspire to and that is no doubt the core motivation behind this bill. However I was very disturbed to find at the report back to Parliament after the hearings of the Social Services Committee that there were major and practically unanimous concerns from the other parties—namely the National Party New Zealand First the ACT party and United Future—over the actual practicalities and methods that have been designed to implement this policy. 
I must say that I am convinced by the arguments of the very good members on this side of the Chamber— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Name them. 
COLIN KING 
: Dr Paul Hutchison. 
Dr Richard Worth 
: An excellent member. 
COLIN KING 
: He is an excellent member. Sandra Goudie the member for Coromandel has wonderful argumentation. I also acknowledge the member of the Maori Party Hone Harawira who said he saw a lot of wisdom in this matter being progressively implemented. 
I have huge concerns that when we look at the grand plan around Part 2 we see that it is very complicated. The fact that Minister Dyson has capitulated in the last hour and extended things out to 30 November 2007 is a sign that she was losing her nerve when speaking earlier about the noble expectations of the New Zealand strategy moving forward. We are dealing with some very vulnerable situations here. We are dealing with people who are vulnerable. We learnt about the expectations of those people from Sandra Goudie the outstanding member for Coromandel. She encapsulated the satisfaction that is achieved by people as they reach their thresholds and are then nurtured through to do greater and better things. That is one of the vulnerable aspects in this whole thing. 
One of the other vulnerable aspects I see as I look at Part 2 is the organisational structure and goodwill that is there at present. I see that goodwill going out the window to some degree because of the climate we are expecting these organisations to compete in. An enormous amount of community goodwill goes with these organisations. When I was given the responsibility to get to my feet and speak on this bill—I had not been on the select committee—I immediately rang home to Blenheim to check out just how things were going. I was saddened to see that a lot of the people there did not know what was going on and I was directed over to Nelson. On that basis I was not able to get too many answers. I had to ring somebody at home to get a bit of an idea—one of those people who come on board and support the community. That person supported those people and was very committed to a number of families. 
We are talking not only about a fundamental move forward on a noble aspiration of a minimum wage but also about maintaining the infrastructure and value that presently exists inside these organisations. There are a lot of unmeasurables. We do not know the consequences of implementing what could be described as a noble gesture. It involves measurement of the value and worthiness of a person to receive the minimum wage or a percentage thereof and of the obligations that that puts on the whole system of things—the smooth running of the operations and the requirement for calling in extra support when there are difficulties inside these establishments. I am hugely concerned about the exemption of organisations. The system will be wide open to abuse. We have to think carefully about this.