Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill

I move, That the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill be now read a third time.

Can I, firstly, thank members across the House for their contributions in the debate this evening. I think that it has been a productive and generally well-mannered debate. As I said at the outset of my comments, the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill recognises an extraordinary contribution from a Sovereign who was New Zealand’s head of State for over 70 years. I by no means consider myself to be a committed monarchist, but it would be churlish for anyone not to recognise the extraordinary contribution, sacrifice, and dedication to duty that was exercised by Her Majesty over that 70-year period. I believe that any country that is worth its salt needs to have some understanding and recognition for the history and the traditions that have created it.

As I also reflected upon in that first reading speech, public holidays are one way in which we can, as a nation, pause for a breath, just for a short moment, in lives that are often filled with work, with business, and with other activities, to reflect on who we are and to reflect on a special moment in time. As we look around our country, Aotearoa New Zealand, other countries within the British Commonwealth, and around the world, and observe the enormous outpouring of affection, I think we would have to recognise that for many, many people this is a special moment in time that people are feeling quite deeply, and I am very confident that, with the establishment of this one-off holiday next Monday, many millions of New Zealanders will value the opportunity.

They’ll celebrate and remember Queen Elizabeth II in different ways. Some will attend the official memorial service at St Paul’s cathedral here in Wellington. I myself will be attending the service at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Auckland. Others will attend at churches and community halls around the country. In some cases, I imagine that families will simply gather in their homes and watch some of the coverage on the television or have a chat about it. Whatever way it is that New Zealanders choose to use this memorial day, I believe that for many people it will be a valuable time to express and share their sorrow at the loss of our Sovereign, to reflect on some happy memories, as we have heard around the House this evening, and perhaps also to talk a little bit about the future.

So I am very pleased that we have seen strong support for this legislation around the House, if not unanimous support, and I look forward very soon to the passage of this piece of legislation and the establishment of the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day next Monday, for all New Zealanders to experience in memory of Queen Elizabeth II, our Queen. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. We are sitting in urgency this evening for a once-in-70-year event in terms of a bespoke piece of legislation to honour, to commemorate, and to establish a one-off memorial day for our late sovereign lady, Queen Elizabeth II, who was laid to rest in London at Windsor Castle yesterday our time.

Like other speakers in this debate, I’m one who spent quite a lot of hours late into the night and into the early hours of the morning watching what I thought was a wonderful ceremony, an incredible show of affection, of gratitude, of appreciation by subjects of hers in the United Kingdom. And the measure of that was that today we know that there were literally billions of people who shared in watching those images from London and Windsor Castle last night. That’s a measure of the impact and the effect that this one woman had on so many lives.

As others have said in this debate earlier on, she has been a constant in our lives. We’ve watched her age. We’ve watched her family grow. We’ve watched her be stable and supportive during times of great good but also at times of great stress and trauma. It’s been a stable force in all our lives to have that calm influence upon us. Many of us, I think, will not forget her words during the COVID pandemic when the world was going into lockdown and Her Majesty was able to give assurance to—I think it’s not overestimating it—a fearful world that better days would come. It was that kind of stability and rock-solid determination in both her optimistic hope for a brighter future but also her personal faith as leader of the Church of England that I think led her steadfast through her 70 years and into her 71st year of reign as our Sovereign.

Many New Zealanders, hundreds of thousands—millions of New Zealanders—will have had the kind of experiences that I and others in this debate shared tonight, and that may have only been as a child sitting on a footpath waiting for what seemed like an interminable amount of time for a royal car to pass by and a gloved hand to be seen waving from the back seat of the car, or, in my own case, with my very patient mother taking my brother, sister, and I to sit for what seemed like, well, actually at the time it seemed like days that we were sitting on the footpath outside what was then the Mercury Theatre in Auckland and the Queen was on her way inside the theatre for a performance. But those are memories that many, many New Zealanders will have similarly. Here was a woman who, although we didn’t meet her, many of us—most of us—felt a connection with her.

I was struck this morning as I walked past our Reserve Bank on the precinct just diagonally opposite Parliament buildings here, to see the images that had graced our $20 notes over the years and how the images of Her Majesty had changed over those years. It was a very poignant visual display of the presence that she’s had in our lives. So it won’t come as any surprise that on this side of House, His Majesty’s loyal Opposition are supporting this piece of legislation. We do so, acknowledging the cost and impost that a small business and other businesses will have imposed upon them. But as I said earlier, this is a one-in-70-year event. It is a moment in time, a moment in history, and a moment for us as a nation to share, to ponder, to reflect on a life of dedicated service—the likes of which we, frankly, won’t see again in our lifetimes.

So all around the nation, people will have an opportunity on Monday, 26 September to use the day that this piece of legislation will create for that kind of personal reflection, maybe with their families, with their neighbours, and with other community members. Not only will there be a service of commemoration here in Wellington at St Paul’s cathedral—and I for one am greatly looking forward to attending that both in a personal capacity but also in my capacity as the member of Parliament for Coromandel representing the tens of thousands of people in the Coromandel who I know held the Queen in such high regard and respect—but there will be other services around the countryside, because during her reign, let’s not forget that Her Majesty visited our islands 10 times and she visited 46 towns and cities.

Over recent days, I’ve found it quite interesting to watch some of the file TV footage to reflect on some of the media coverage from those early visits, particularly that first one very shortly after her coronation—that she should come to New Zealand and spend a very long time here with us on that occasion. It was that first visit that, I think, actually etched an indelible relationship between Her Majesty and the people of our nation. So notwithstanding the cost that will be an impost upon business, we on this side of the House know that the vast majority of business people will understand the reasons for it—as do we as citizens.

Therefore, we support the legislation. We do so, acknowledging that the special nature of the circumstances surrounding this legislation mean that it has been passed under urgency without the scrutiny of select committee or the advice from officials or advisers. But this is a special occasion, and it is an occasion where it actually is right and appropriate to use the provisions of urgency that is the prerogative of this House to do on occasions that are very special, and this is one of them. On Monday when those of us who attend the service at St Paul’s and those others who attend other ceremonies or just take a few minutes to reflect quietly to themselves or with their families, it will be a period of time that they will remember, as my colleague the Hon Michael Woodhouse said, probably for the rest of their days. We acknowledge that; we accept it; we are humans, and we feel the commitment and passion that Her Majesty had for us in our own individual ways. So, Mr Speaker, thank you very much. The National Party and His Majesty’s loyal Opposition support this legislation.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. The year was 1990, Sesqui was a failure, and I was in the fourth form in Christchurch. And I got to meet the Queen—very briefly, and with some very cheap supermarket-bought flowers, but I met her and it was a wonderful moment. And I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to contribute on what is, I think, a very—well, it’s a memorable day. I think many of us were up until the very early hours of this morning, watching what, I have to say, was pageantry to end all pageantry. I don’t know why anyone else bothers to do it, the way that the British can do it. It was unbelievable. I was determined that I was going to get a decent night’s sleep, but, in the end, I chose to continue to watch this amazing send-off for an amazing human being, because that’s who the Queen was.

She was also, by the way, the representative of the Treaty partner to tangata whenua. So when I hear her and who she represents disrespected in this House, I am disgusted. I like, instead, the respect that I expect will be shown by other members of this House towards this very gracious person.

Ninety-six years old—that’s older than even you, Mr Speaker, and significantly older than the senior whip I’m sitting behind! It’s also, by the way, 70 years of service. Honestly, I don’t even think that departed member from this House Winston Peters could even compare to that. Seventy years of receiving bouquets, of saying the right things, of asking questions, of being briefed, of being able to bring happiness to people—what a wonderful thing to do—and to bring unity to people, and we’ve seen that over the last 10 days of mourning before her funeral. What a wonderful thing for her to have done. And never giving up. I just think she’s one of the most amazing people of my lifetime and of many others.

She is the only monarch that we have known, all of those of us in the House—the only one that we have known. I had a quick check, before I said that, through the ages of our MPs. She’s the only one. And one day—one day; we shouldn’t begrudge that should we? I feel for the businesses who feel that every single thing coming out of this Government is another impost on them, another cost for them, another obligation for them, but I also know that many of those business people will feel exactly the same way that most of us here do: that if we’re going to have a one-day, one-off public holiday in recognition of service, it is for this monarch, because, as my colleague the Hon Scott Simpson has said—and I agree with him—if there’s another one who ends up with 70 years of service, into their 71st year, then we can have another holiday then too.

This is not our holiday, by the way; this is the Queen’s recognition from this country, because we are happy recipients—well, most of us are anyway—of being part of a constitutional monarchy that is above politics; that can always be relied on to speak to the people, without fear or failure; that can always be relied on by her Prime Ministers of all ilks to give them the best advice—certainly in Britain, anyway—that she could and to listen to them.

I thought some of the speeches that we’ve seen on this matter have been some of our best. I also think that some of the speeches that I’ve seen in the British Parliament, in Westminster, have been unbelievably good. As Theresa May said, it was one of the few meetings she had which she knew would not be briefed against to the media straight away. Isn’t that true. To have someone of that experience who, as Boris Johnson said, sent off her 14th Prime Minister to be followed by her 15th, and then she passed away, you know, a couple of days later—what an outstanding contribution. The way in which she kept the Commonwealth together and showed the way through to accepting peoples right across the globe—with, yes, some common heritage but also quite a lot of discord, but to bring them together with a common purpose. What a wonderful contribution, and to continue to do that until, essentially, the day that she died.

Surely, if anybody is worthy of a public holiday in this country, a one-off public holiday, surely it is she. Surely it is the Queen that we have known all our lives—surely it is her. I can’t think of anyone else who would be better qualified for it. When we’ve seen her send-off and we’ve seen—I’d love to be able to tell the story that Glen Bennett has said, in which he gave some flowers to the Queen; I didn’t get to do that, but wouldn’t that have been wonderful?

Like the Hon Scott Simpson, I remember getting to wave at the Queen as a little child. I remember very well being taken on school trips to do that. One of the reasons was the wonderful unifying factor she is, not only for this country but for all the countries of the Commonwealth. At a time when there has been so much disunity in the world, she was the one who has been able to stand like a beacon. Some of us were brought up to listen to the Queen’s speech each Christmas. I always enjoyed that, primarily because there’d be only little tiny moments of personal reflection. Mostly it was about us, the people, and just occasionally would have this little moment where she would reflect a little bit on her own year.

But she made some very smart decisions. Number one: she never gave an interview to the media, something I wish we could do without. Wouldn’t that be a joy? That would bring us all together, wouldn’t it? It would be a delight. She always stayed above that, and I think that is one of the great things. But the other thing is we saw her as a mother, as a wife, as a grieving widow when her husband, Prince Philip, died and having to sit alone because of the COVID restrictions. And didn’t she do it with dignity? Everything she did was with dignity. She didn’t go sobbing all over the place, telling her stories to tabloids, attacking anybody else on their personal situations. She just rose above it every single time. When I think about what she did in her work with forming a relationship, a bond, with the Irish people, that was a very smart but brave thing to do and the right thing to do. These are the sorts of things where we’d look at Queen Elizabeth II and think, “Of course that’s the right thing to do.” Why did no one ever think that she wouldn’t do that? Because she would. It was her family who stood by and assisted her to do that.

I am a constitutional monarchist—like Sir Tipene O’Regan, who I thought spoke terribly well, actually, about that—and the reason is because the monarchy does us no harm, which is always good, but, secondly, represents a Treaty partner. It also represents a culture that many of us feel connections to and have connections to, but it actually represents our history and our present, and, I would say, our future. Having met His Majesty King Charles when he was Prince of Wales, and having met the current Prince of Wales, I think we are in good hands. They are grieving. They are doing their job. They are doing their duty, and I would expect nothing less.

So thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution. I hope that those who are having to pay for the public holiday, the businesses, will reflect on the fact that they have lost a champion for democracy in the Queen, but they have a new one in the King.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m looking forward to marking the occasion on Monday with a lot of other New Zealanders who’ll be taking time out to think about what the royal family means to them, what the future of New Zealand looks like, and about the life work of the Queen.

Nothing pleases me more than having seen our delegation fly to England to be there for that occasion, seeing our Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern sitting next to the Māori king, King Tūheitia; sitting next to Tā Tipene O’Regan; sitting next to Dame Kiri Te Kanawa; standing next to Willie Apiata—actually, one of our heroes of New Zealand. It has been brilliant to see that representation of our high level.

I support this bill and I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to take another short call on the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill, which the Green Party is supporting primarily for the reason of believing that at this point in our history, our people need a holiday and actually deserve it. We are very happy to be supporting this at this time.

Also, I do just want to echo that this is an opportunity for reflection and, for the Green Party, our recommitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and He Wakaputanga. We’re just really talking, I guess, to the opportunity of thinking about the vision of our constitution and the reflection on our relationships, and all support for those who are grieving and reflecting at that time, but also for those who maybe fomenting peaceful revolution or planning how we have constitutional transformation as mapped out for us in Matiki Mai.

I do also just want to quickly reflect on the commentary around pageantry to end all pageantry in what we have been seeing over the last few days. I’d just ask people, having had that experience, to reflect on where that pomp and that wealth came from and what our world would look like now if that wealth had remained in the countries that it was taken from, and on how much better our future collectively could have been if that wealth had not been transferred into the pomp of the British monarchy.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is a great privilege to rise on behalf of ACT for the third reading of the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill. I grew up in a family that supported the Queen and the monarchy and, although sometimes it was a topic of debate, I’ve always, always respected the royal family and appreciate the influence they have had on our lives. I’d suggest that I have more respect and understanding of the importance of the role of the monarchy than many people in this House. But everyone loves a day off, and it doesn’t surprise me at all that this holiday is being pushed through, even though it isn’t necessary. I really believe, despite the umbrage taken by Minister Wood, that Queen Elizabeth II would not have approved.

New Zealanders are feeling the loss of the Queen, a true leader who served the Commonwealth every day of her life, but is having a day off at enormous cost to children and patients the right way to honour a woman who worked all her life? We don’t think so. Having a day to pay tribute to such an incredible leader is fair. But businesses should not have to pay the cost, our health system shouldn’t grind to a halt, and schools should be free to choose how they recognise it. It should also be within an appropriate time frame of the event we’re commemorating; not on the first day that suits the Prime Minister’s schedule.

This holiday is unprecedented. Never before in our history has it been deemed appropriate to give everyone a holiday so they can grieve the passing of royalty. I’ve heard a number of speakers today say that it is appropriate for a holiday, but I’ve just got to ask why. As David Seymour pointed out: King George VI, 1952, a 15-year reign, no holiday; Edward VIII, a one-year reign, no holiday; George V, a 25-year reign, no holiday; Edward VII, a nine-year reign, no holiday; and Queen Victoria, a 63-year reign, no holiday. Although 63 years isn’t quite enough for Michael Woodhouse; he’ll only settle for 70 years. What is it about the entitlement attitude of today? Are we really that more united than previous generations? I think from some speeches we heard tonight, I don’t think we are. Unfortunately, it’s pretty obvious for those employers and hard-working employees that it starts at the top.

There were smarter and fairer options available. A couple of ideas: for those willing, everyone sing God Save the Queen in unison around the country at the same time for one last time; a minute’s silence; a minute’s applause; or an unpaid public holiday. The precedent has been set for forcing costs on to employers, so surely you can force costs on to employees too. You can guarantee unions around the country are grinning away, just waiting for the chance to fight for the next public figure to be acknowledged with a day off. We’ve heard some suggestions tonight. Watch this space. Or there could be an optional public holiday with each business to decide for themselves. We could have had an optional annual leave day today, after the funeral. Employees pay for it themselves if this is important to them. I do wonder how many people called in sick today because they watched the funeral all night—another cost to employers. We could have met in the middle with a half-day public holiday in the afternoon, allowing businesses to start early if they needed to get their work done, or hold a public holiday in memorial on a Saturday or a Sunday.

Holding a full-day public holiday at such short notice and one week after the Queen’s funeral is nuts and is unfair to businesses, especially after a nightmare 2½ years through COVID measures, another week’s sick leave—Andrew Little told us that that won’t affect us much because it’s only $2 billion—another public holiday, domestic violence leave, rapid increases in the minimum wage and inflation, and closed borders. This Government constantly pats itself on the back, but it’s easier to spend someone else’s money, and they’re experts. The $450 million for this holiday will cost businesses, not the Government. Michael Wood disputed this figure, but I believe Treasury—I know it’s only selective when he wants to believe them.

Grant Robertson told The AM Show that businesses won’t suffer that much because people will be out spending. That’s great: “The Queen’s memorial—everyone go to the mall.” The insincerity of this holiday is obvious to everyone. I heard him today tell the people that he looked after businesses during COVID. The wage subsidy looked after employees, and rightly so. The small business loan is a loan that has to be paid back—but, Mr Robertson, I suppose that if you keep repeating something often enough.

When the president of the Council of Trade Unions said in an interview last week that “It’s only one day.”, employers around the country despaired. It just confirmed who the tail is that wags the Labour dog, and I’m amazed to hear a couple of speakers from National say the same thing tonight.

Has anyone thought about our kids and their education? What a brilliant teaching opportunity this day could have been. Students could learn about our history, where our fantastic democratic system came from, and the reason this country is so great today. New Zealand history is so rich and varied.

Schools have had unprecedented disruption over the last few years. Truancy has gone through the roof, academic results are down the drain, mental health issues in schools are having a huge effect on our young people. Young people just want some stability in their lives and a reason to get out of bed. Kids will expect a day off if they feel sad, and why shouldn’t they? The precedent has been set. It would be very naive to expect otherwise.

You shouldn’t have to own your own business, be a teacher, or have kids to understand the damage that has been done to this country over the last 2½ years. Unfortunately, student politicians, union organisers, and those who have a sadly flawed and unrealistic ideology just don’t get it.

We don’t need this holiday. Businesses will suffer, young people will suffer, and sick people will suffer. If someone is serious about a memorial, they could have used one of their four weeks’ annual leave to mourn in their own special way. The only justification I’ve heard is that “Australia’s doing it, so we have to.”, and I don’t think that’s a good enough reason.

To suggest that we don’t care or are being churlish is just silly. ACT is the party for the people—employers, employees, young, old, and sick—and because of this, ACT opposes this bill. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, we’re nearly there. I seek leave for the House to adjourn at the conclusion of the debate on the third reading of the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill.

Is there any objection? There is no objection. That shall be the case.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I commend this bill to the House.

Nicola Grigg—David Seymour.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It took a moment but you’ve remembered my name.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ah, no. Sorry, Mr Seymour—

DAVID SEYMOUR: You’ve called me, Mr Speaker, and I have the call.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Oh, sorry. I call Nicola Grigg.

DAVID SEYMOUR: Well, she sat down.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I actually called Nicola Grigg, so the member will sit down. Nicola Grigg.

David Seymour: Point of order, Mr Speaker.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Seymour, you will sit down. I called Nicola Grigg.

David Seymour: Mr Speaker, it’s a point of order; you have to take it.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, Mr Seymour. Just take it easy. All right. Now, your point of order.

David Seymour: Mr Speaker, with respect, if the member has the call, then you have to let them take the call.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: I actually gave the call to Nicola Grigg, and so the member will sit down. Nicola Grigg has the call.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Look, I have just a couple of comments to make in acknowledgment of this bill, the Queen Elizabeth II Memorial Day Bill. I think that it is right and proper that New Zealand take a day to commemorate the reign of our former Sovereign. We’ve seen from the enormous turnout across Britain and, indeed, the billions that tuned in to the television service of her funeral, that this is an extremely significant event in world history, not just Commonwealth history, and it is right and proper. The National Party does support this bill, and we commend it to the House.

I commend this bill to the House.

I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s with great pleasure that I take a call on this bill to pass on our thanks to the late Queen for her tremendous service to this country, to the Commonwealth, and to the people of the UK.

We are all in this room to serve. Whatever party we come from, we come here to make it a better place for future generations and people that are here, now. We only serve for a very small period of time. I think the average politician serves for six years. To think of someone that served for over 70 years as a world State figure, through tremendous trials and tribulations of her country and the Commonwealth, through personal trials and tribulations, and she always stood there with the integrity and honour of her leadership—she deserves the respect of this Parliament. And it deserves a day off for our people to understand what it means to be in service.

There’s so many people out there that serve our communities in the very smallest ways—whether they help someone going to a cancer treatment, or they help their neighbour, or they’re in Parliament—and we need to thank those people. That’s what it’s about: it’s about the legacy of what she leaves behind. I won’t stand for parties in this House that are trying to make political gain out of that. This is about a tremendous woman that was a woman in leadership at a time when we need to celebrate that.

There’s no perfect history in any world. There will always be debates about that. But she stood there with integrity and honour, and she tried to do the best for the Commonwealth and our country, so I think she deserves the respect of this House. I thank the honourable members for the chance to pay our tribute and respect to her.

I commend this bill to the House.

The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.

The House adjourned at 10.03 p.m.