New Zealand National 25; ACT New Zealand 8; United Future 8; Independent: Awatere Huata., Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill

Procedure

I seek leave that all remaining stages be taken as one debate.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: The bill has to go into Committee, because there are some amendments. I think the member will find it is OK. We will proceed accordingly.

Second Reading

Second Reading

I move, That the Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill be now read a second time. I would like to thank Mr Tisch for his assistance there, because it is the desire, I believe, of every party in the House to have this bill passed into law as soon as possible. However, I suspect that 20 minutes today will not be quite enough time.

It is somewhat of a bittersweet moment, because the bill has had an extraordinarily long gestation—unfortunately, so long that it is no longer able to achieve its immediate objective of protecting the jobs of the hundreds of volunteers who served in East Timor. That was the actuating reason for the bill. It is worth noting that emergencies like that in East Timor occur only every few decades, and the service people who are volunteers need the protection then. It is unfortunate, perhaps, that the bill was not passed within, say, a year of its introduction. That would have been acceptable, and at least two final deployments to East Timor would then have benefited.

It is, after all, worth recollecting the time line. The bill was introduced in September 2000, approximately a year after the first deployments. As it turned out, there ended up being six deployments, in total, over 3 years. If the bill had been passed within, say, 1 year, the final two deployments—or at least the final one—would have benefited from it. That would have been appreciated. Having said that, I want to acknowledge the assistance of the Minister and Defence Force officials. I acknowledge the Minister’s office, the Defence Force, and, in particular, Brigadier Tim Brewer for the role they played in improving the bill. There is no doubt that the bill we are dealing with today is a superior bill to the one introduced nearly 4 years ago.

💬 Hon Ken Shirley: Four years?

Nearly 4 years ago.

It is worth remembering that when we deploy servicemen in the circumstances of East Timor, we ask a heavy commitment of all our service people, be they regular forces or territorial forces. On every occasion that occurs, there is a solemn debate in this House. That particular deployment had the support of every party. We need to recollect that we ask individual people to make major sacrifices for the common good, and this bill acknowledges that, as part of that, the employers of those people should keep their jobs open for the period of the deployment. As was pointed out to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, that of itself would then be asking something of particular employers that others were not bearing.

I want to acknowledge some of the changes in the bill since it went through the select committee. The first change is that the drafting itself has been improved. More substantively, there is now established a mechanism whereby employers will get some recompense for their particular commitment in holding the employment open for the service person. I think that is right and proper. The rest of the community has a shared commitment in that regard. The second point I want to note is the establishment of the Employers Support Council. That will be hugely important in building the acceptance and understanding of service, and the value of it—not just to the individual service person, not just to the community at large, but actually to the employer.

I want to acknowledge the person sitting beside me tonight, Captain Richard Worth OBE, a senior member of the Royal New Zealand Navy reservists. He himself would know the importance of the training that people receive, in terms of self-confidence, capability, planning, and so forth. I think that is acknowledged by a large number of people. As the number of reservists has gone down, and as the number of employers who have had experience of military service has reduced, that understanding, frankly, is less than it used to be.

I note at this point that the territorial force of the Army is now down to 1,800, and probably only 800 are efficient. When I was in the Territorial Force, some years ago now, the number was 7,000, and large numbers of employers understood the value of it. The situation was different. The irony is that as the numbers of the Territorial Force reduced, the requirement for their commitment increased. I hope this bill will play some part in turning that round.

I give personal testament to all those service people who served our country in East Timor under considerable hardship and away from their families. They were serving this country and building peace for the people of East Timor—and, in fact, for ourselves, not just East Timor; they were doing it for the region itself. It was an altruistic activity by New Zealand, undertaken by particular individuals; but we in the region all benefit from that.

Finally, I am pleased we have got to this stage tonight. I appreciate that the bill will now be passed into law, probably, by 24 March, but better late than never. I look forward to the Committee stage, when the Supplementary Order Papers will be introduced, and then to the third reading.

Second Reading

We do indeed have every reason to be immensely proud of all our service personnel for the work they are doing and for the reputation they continue to build for New Zealand and New Zealanders, and—I agree with Dr Mapp—nowhere more so than in East Timor. It gives me pleasure to rise in support of the second reading of the bill.

This Government has made it clear through its defence policy framework, its defence statement, and its long-term development plan, and, of course, the major acquisitions announced as a result of those three documents, that it is committed to a Defence Force that is equipped and supported to a standard that can match the high level of skill, dedication, and, indeed, courage constantly displayed by our personnel.

The deployment of our Defence Force to East Timor drew into public focus the role of our personnel, in a way that has not happened for many years. It also highlighted the important role played by the men and women in the territorial forces and reserve forces, many of whom, as Dr Mapp mentioned, served in East Timor, and, indeed, continue to serve in operations today. I will use the term “Territorial Force”, but it does include volunteers and reservists from all three services.

In the past, Territorial Force personnel were recruited and trained to give New Zealand the ability to expand its defence forces to meet a serious threat to national security. With increasing demands for peace support operations around the world, and the need to use defence resources in the most efficient manner possible, the Territorial Force must be able to contribute to the things the Army is most likely to do. Where extra personnel are needed, as in East Timor, the enhancement of New Zealand’s ability to utilise volunteers provides a cost-effective solution.

As part of the Government’s initiative to enhance the pay and conditions of service for the armed forces, there have been a number of improvements to conditions in the Territorial Force. For example, its personnel are now paid the same as regular force personnel, as indeed they should be. To ensure that the Territorial Force is able to contribute effectively to Defence Force deployments, service in the Territorial Force needs to be more attractive to volunteers and their employers. I think all parties in this House agree about that.

The Volunteers Employment Protection Act of 1973 was enacted at the same time that national service was abolished. It currently protects the civil employment of the volunteer members of all three services but only when they undergo their initial or annual training. It was extended under the Defence Act of 1990 to cover the deployment of the members of the Territorial Force and reserves when called up by proclamation for an actual or imminent emergency involving overseas deployment of our forces. It has not been systematically reviewed previously, it is fair to say, and, frankly, it is quite out of step with modern employment legislation. It does not cover members of the Territorial Force who serve overseas voluntarily, and, as Dr Mapp indicated, it was the major deployment to East Timor, just such a deployment, that really drew this into sharp focus.

This bill was initially a member’s bill sponsored by Dr Mapp in order to protect the employment of volunteers and to provide support for employers. As he said, it was introduced in August 2000. It was then referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee, which heard public submissions to the effect that the bill needed to go further than its original scope. Substantial work was undertaken by committee members and myself working together, and I also acknowledge Brigadier Brewer and a number of other members of the Defence Force who put in a substantial amount of work; their support was excellent. With the full agreement of the select committee, and with leave of the House, a Government Supplementary Order Paper has been introduced for consideration by the Committee of the whole House.

The Supplementary Order Paper significantly expands the scope of the protection available to volunteers in the Territorial Force for all three services, both when called up by proclamation for continuous service, whether or not in New Zealand or overseas, and when serving voluntarily for fixed periods, when that service is declared to be in the national interest.

It provides for a workable mechanism for volunteers in the Territorial Force to serve voluntarily for such fixed periods. As far as possible, it aligns the procedures and practices for volunteers’ leave with those established under the Parental Leave and Employment Protection Act. It brings the Volunteers Employment Protection Act up to date with present employment law. It also empowers the Governor-General in Council to make regulations to compensate employers when their Territorial Force volunteer employees serve in a situation of national interest. It provides for the appointment of a Territorial Forces Employer Support Council to promote service in those forces and to advise the Minister of Defence on matters relating to those forces.

The bill was reported back from the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee with the recommendation that it be passed with amendments, and I am pleased tonight to stand to support the progress of the bill.

Bill read a second time.

In Committee

In Committee

I seek leave for the Committee to take the provisions of this stage as a single debate.

In Committee

Leave has been sought for that course to be followed. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. It will be taken as a single debate.

Clauses 1 and 1A, Parts 1 and 2, and Schedules 1 to 4

Clauses 1 and 1A, Parts 1 and 2, and Schedules 1 to 4

I take the opportunity for a very short call to explain the additional Supplementary Order Paper and amendments in my name. The passing of the Holidays Act of 2003, which comes into effect on 1 April 2004, necessitates some minor amendments to this bill as reported back. The opportunity therefore is taken to correct a minor typographical error; divide the bill into two bills to amend the Volunteers Employment Protection Act and the Defence Act respectively; and provide that the bill will come into effect at the same time as the Holidays Act. There is a further amendment to clause 5, consequential to the renaming of the Higher Salaries Commission as the Remuneration Authority.

Progress reported.

The House adjourned at 9. 56 p.m.

Before I report the bill so divided, I want to congratulate Mark Peck on taking a member’s bill through the Committee.

Bill reported without amendment.

Volunteers Employment Protection Amendment Bill

Procedure