Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill

Thank you—

💬 Dr Wayne Mapp: Talk about the Employment Relations Act.

Dr Mapp has tempted me to talk about an area that is very, very close to my heart. Dr Mapp knows that he should not encourage me to do so; he knows that I know a little about the Employment Relations Act. It is good that the main change in the bill is around the Employment Relations Act—it removes the provision that excludes the armed forces. I was really proud when, in 2000, we included under the Employment Relations Act measures against discrimination on the grounds of not only gender but also race. That was a first. Although we have had structural discrimination on the basis of gender and race for many, many years, I think that this Government has made a lot of progress on that.

I was very taken by the speech made by my colleague Tim Barnett too, because I think that the human rights declaration is one of the most important treaties that nations have ever entered into. If any members have not read it lately, they should get on the Internet and look at it. It still stands very firmly today—

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich): I am sorry to interrupt the member, but we are debating Part 2.

OK—and if I may continue, I see the human rights declaration and other treaties as being absolutely relevant to the Employment Relations Act 2000, because they relate to addressing discrimination on the grounds of gender and race, and to addressing all other forms of discrimination. The issue is not just about discrimination in the armed forces and the combat forces.

There have been significant issues in the past of discrimination in the armed forces. Some of them have made headlines, and they have not been very pleasant headlines. I think that the defence forces have made an extra effort over many, many years—well, over recent years, in particular—to deal with that. I have met some of the officers in the armed forces who are responsible for equal employment opportunities and for dealing with matters of discrimination. In fact, as I have mentioned before—I am referring to discrimination and the issues of discrimination under the Employment Relations Act—the Equal Employment Opportunities Trust gives prizes to various organisations in relation to their dealing with and tackling of gender discrimination and other forms of discrimination, and the programmes to address discrimination in the armed forces have won those prizes. I have met the leaders of those organisations, who are very, very committed to dealing with discrimination.

Going back to the Employment Relations Act, I tell members that we still have to deal with many, many issues in relation to discrimination around gender. I mentioned in my earlier speech the issue of pay equity, which is an issue that is still with us today. Seventeen years after the National Government did away with the legislation that we had in place—which was very progressive—we are still dealing with the effects of that discrimination.

💬 Dr Wayne Mapp: Is that 7 years?

Seventeen years—17 long years, but we are catching up. There are years of work to catch up in order to remove the gender discrimination that was caused by the removal of the Employment Equity Act by the National Government in 1991. So when we talk about discrimination in terms of the Employment Relations Act, we have to remember that, and also to remember that this Government is doing its very, very best, and has put in place programmes to deal with pay equity. We see women in employment slowly catching up, in terms of their pay.

I also want to mention one of the things that is important to the Employment Relations Act 2000 and the amendments that have subsequently flowed from it—which I hope is within the scope of this part. One area that I see the National Party has vowed to do away with, should it ever become the Government—God forbid—is the area of vulnerable workers. If we are talking about discrimination, we are talking about gender discrimination. We are talking about low-paid workers in the service industries, like cleaners, who need that protection. If we are serious about doing away with discrimination, that area cannot ever be repealed. In fact, it needs to be improved.

💬 Dr Wayne Mapp: Oh, rubbish!

Well, I say “Come on!” to that member. Let us hear his views on this issue, so I can tell all our friends around the place. Let us hear exactly what his position is on this area, as well.

The changes to the Employment Relations Act are really important in relation to this bill. I think, as other people have said, that they are a very important step in the progress of human rights in New Zealand. This bill is a very important step for New Zealand.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to rise, however briefly, in support of Part 2. In the wider context of this legislation, I think it is clear that everyone in the Committee supports the bill. It is delightful to see that we have such unanimity, which is so unusual. But it is unanimity around an issue that is so important in terms of the human rights of New Zealanders. However, I must observe that in terms of the industrial legislative framework, one cannot escape the delicious irony that in respect of this provision there is a degree of inconsistency on the opposing benches in relation to the funding agents.

Progress to be reported presently.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Immigration Advisers Licensing Bill with amendment and progress on the Human Rights (Women in Armed Forces) Amendment Bill.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.