Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill

I am enjoying the passage of this Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. I want to place on record from the outset my thanks to all of those parties in Parliament that are supporting this bill: to my Labour colleagues, the Green Party, New Zealand First, the Māori Party, United Future, Mana, and Brendan Horan. They have all pledged their support for this bill, and without it this bill would not pass through the House. It indicates several things: the popularity of this bill, the fact that it is common sense, and that it restores to ordinary Kiwis the 11 public holidays they expect to receive every year.

The bill has been universally popular since it was made clear that commemorations will still occur on the same days that they always have—that is, 6 February for Waitangi Day and 25 April for Anzac Day. The fact that a holiday follows on the Monday that follows a weekend occurrence of those days is what changes. We have a bill that makes sure that we have those 11 holidays every year. That gives those holidays the full recognition that other holidays have.

I would like the National Party to consider its support for this bill also. In some polls more than 80 percent of New Zealanders support this bill. In the only quantitative survey that has been done 87 percent of small and medium sized business owners are either in support of or neutral toward this bill. New Zealand knows that this is a fair idea. It makes sure that ordinary hard-working Kiwis get the holidays they deserve every year. So I want the National Party to get in behind this bill.

I want John Key to get in behind this bill. His suggestion today in Parliament that ordinary Kiwis could not be trusted to front on Anzac Day is a disgrace. It is an outrage. Millions of ordinary Australians turn out on Anzac Day year after year after year. Their turnout is increasing. Mondayising has worked in Australia; it should work here too. If ordinary Australians can turn out for commemorations, I want to think that ordinary New Zealanders can too. For the Prime Minister to suggest otherwise is an embarrassment. So just to be clear on that, for John Key’s point to hold he would have to think that Christmas and New Year would not be held in such high regard if they fell on a weekend. Does he not remember 2010? Did Kiwis decide on Christmas morning that they would not get up and open their presents? Or Christians that they would not go off to their church services, because there was a holiday 2 days later? I do not think so. I think that is a nonsense position to take.

Ordinary Kiwis will honour these days and commemorate these days because they are of growing importance to New Zealanders. They are about our pride and our identity as New Zealanders, they are of growing importance to all of us, and they should have the full recognition that other holidays have. As Marcus Lush said on the radio, you would have to be the Grinch to oppose Mondayisation.

I find it a little ironic that the member resuming his seat, Dr David Clark, is asking for the support of the Prime Minister, and then sets about beating him around the head with a frozen fish as to his rationale. It does exemplify what we have seen so often from the Opposition, which is “the beatings will continue until morale improves” approach to garnering support.

I think it is actually a very, very fine balance that is looking to be achieved. I certainly do respect the views of parties that are supporting this Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, and I can actually see why. I do not think we would have to go too far to find out why the honest Joe on the street is going to think that having another long weekend is not a bad idea. But I think for me where this discussion lands is really the significance and importance of those 2 days. Waitangi Day, the founding day of the New Zealand that we know, and Anzac Day, which has come to be a time of some sombre reflection and commemoration for those who have lost their lives in the service of the freedom that we all enjoy today, are things that as an ex-serviceman I feel very, very strongly about. I know that that is a view shared by many across the RSAs, many of those returned servicemen, but also their families and their loved ones around them, and that to me is where the balance needs to rest.

An argument has been raised around the fact that if Anzac Day, for example, fell on a Saturday, that would in no way be devalued by the fact that the following Monday would become a holiday. Well, I think the law of the jungle would suggest otherwise, and people would see the opportunity to lash the kayak to the roof rack, put the trailer on, and head for the beach and so on and so forth.

💬 Hon Annette King: Is that what you’d do?

I do not have to, Ms King; I live at the beach, so feel free to come and visit at some stage. I believe that that member’s caucus sometimes comes up to see what Northland is all about by having fish and chips at the Mangonui Fish Shop, having a few photos, and leaving again, so feel free to call in to my house just down the road when you do. You will notice that I do not need to lash the kayak on the roof rack, because it is already sitting there on the side of the beach.

But coming back to the bill—

💬 Hon Annette King: But why are other New Zealanders so dumb if that’s what they’re going to do?

It is not a question of New Zealanders being dumb. I think that the argument being run by the Opposition is a futile one. I think that the bill actually deserves a better discussion. When I think about the importance of those days, Anzac Day and Waitangi Day, and the significance of those days, as a member of Parliament for Northland, I can vouch for the importance of Waitangi Day, certainly to locals but, I believe, also to all New Zealanders. It is a day of significance. So the balance becomes whether this devalues those days. My belief is, when talking to servicemen, the people who fought for the country, that that is how they see it. If it is just simply because hard-working Kiwis deserve another day off, then I think that balance tips too far. No one wants to deny Kiwis the opportunity of a day off—

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: You do.

No, that is not the case. But it is around the context in which we are doing it and using these 2 most significant days for New Zealand as the meat in the sandwich to achieve that purpose. I do not believe that that balance has been met.

It was absolutely pointed to by the leader of that member’s party this afternoon at question time, when he questioned the Prime Minister as to why the tourism industry was so supportive of this bill. Why would tourism be so interested in supporting the bill? Because tourism is about holidays. Tourism is about relaxing, going away, and enjoying oneself. That very question actually points exactly to the argument that I believe we are advancing, that there is a very real risk that in Mondayising, we lose the value and the significance of the commemoration of those days. Are people seriously going to celebrate Anzac Day on a Saturday and then somehow—I do not know. What happens to the Monday? I do not think so. As I said, the balance becomes those who fought for the freedoms that this country enjoys and the founding of this nation. We should not devalue those days.

I will take a short call on the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill and will address the proposed commencement date in clause 2. The bill as introduced would have come into force “on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.”, and that—[Interruption]

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Order! Sorry to the member. I am trying to hear Brendan Horan.

Thank you. As I was saying, I would like to address the proposed commencement date in clause 2. The bill as introduced would have come into force the day after the Royal assent was given, and that is good. It is axiomatic that if Parliament enacts legislation, then it should be implemented. But although that is obvious, it does not always happen. The bill as reported back would come into force on 1 January 2014—9 months from now. On the face of it, that may not seem to be a problem, as the first occasion on which the law would have practicable effect would be on Anzac Day in 2015, but long commencement dates can have unintended consequences.

It has been the habit of previous Parliaments to write Governments of the day a blank cheque, but at least this bill is not open-ended. We have allowed Acts to be brought into force by Order in Council and yet not specified any default date. For example, part of the Summary Proceedings Amendment Act 1976 is still not in force, 37 years after Parliament passed the law. There are over 30 such Acts on the books, not in force and with an open-ended, indefinite commencement date. Things can go wrong with definite but long commencement dates. For example, the Criminal Procedure Act was passed in October 2011, yet may not come into force until October this year. That Act amends numerous other Acts, including the Chateau Companies Act 1977. That is fine and good, one might say, but John Banks came along and repealed the Chateau Companies Act 1977 using the Regulatory Reform (Repeals) Act in August 2012. So the left hand of National does not appear to know what the right hand of John Banks is doing, and it is amending a repealed Act. So long commencement dates are not, in general, a good idea.

This debate will conclude soon and the Committee will vote. My vote may be cast in person or it may be cast by proxy, and I acknowledge and thank the Greens for their support of democracy. Six other MPs may be in the same position as me, and it is good that they are able to participate as MPs, the equal of my and their 114 other colleagues. But there is a problem when it comes to voting on this bill, which is that we have a Prime Minister who thinks we should not be able to vote here. The only thing toxic is that we have a Prime Minister with contempt for democracy, and that clearly will not do. The Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill will pass, despite the Prime Minister’s toxicity, with the votes of Labour, the Greens, New Zealand First, the Māori Party, Mana, United Future, and me as an independent MP. I gladly support this bill.

I would just like to defend our Prime Minister today from that attack from the far corners of this Chamber, which was most uncalled-for. That member, Brendan Horan, should not be making those attacks in this Chamber. I am sure that members of this party would not want to see that happen in this Chamber.

This bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, was debated, questioned, and thought through at the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee in a very concise and meaningful way. I felt that the members of the select committee actually enjoyed this bill. I would like to pay tribute to David Clark, the MP who brought it forward, because I think he has done a good job on it. He has got a slight problem in his political career, in that he keeps on yelling out something about the worst 50 years in the political history of the Labour Party. But apart from that one line that he keeps on yelling out all the time, this bill is evidence of somebody who has some potential in Parliament, and we would hate to see it lost by that one line that will go down in history as what he is known for. He will not be known as the person who gave holidays to New Zealanders; he will be known as the person who can yell out one line in Parliament. That is a shame for somebody who had potential.

It is very disappointing too for someone coming from Dunedin, because Dunedin is a city that historically has had a large Labour representation in this House. It has had a history of great Labour MPs, I must say, like Pete Hodgson—those great Labour MPs who were here when I came into this House.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: We respected them.

We respected them. We did respect them. Michael Woodhouse has taken over that respectable role now. It is a shame that that current member from somewhere in Dunedin has not taken on that responsibility.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: That mantle.

That mantle has been lost. The National Party is very grateful for the opportunity to pick that mantle up, of course, but this is a bill that could have defined a political career. It could have been the start of a good political career, but it will not be, because that political career has been surpassed by his one line. That one line is what he will be known for in this House. That is a shame—

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: Is this why you’re voting against the bill?

The next member over there is Mr Iain Lees-Galloway. Do we need to talk about representation in Palmerston North now? That great city, which will fall to National at the next election, has had many great Labour members. I remember that great Labour MP who was the member for Palmerston North. What was his name?

💬 Scott Simpson: Joe Walding.

Oh, was that one of them? No, there was somebody else who is now involved with some university there. But Iain Lees-Galloway has not taken up that mantle, either, and that has been disappointing for me. I have been very disappointed to see how the Labour members have not delivered for provincial New Zealand. In provincial New Zealand people need that delivery, and it is not happening under those members. I say that just in recognition of Mr Clark, who did a fine job in the select committee with this bill but has lost it through the rest of his parliamentary career.

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: What a shambles.

Now Mr Iain Lees-Galloway is calling out again from the other side of the Chamber, and—

💬 Dr Cam Calder: Which faction is he in?

Which faction is he in? Somebody is asking which faction he is in. He is the Simon Crean of the New Zealand Labour Party. He will get the word from David Cunliffe. David Cunliffe will say: “Come to my office. Come and see me.”, and he will talk to him and tell him that the member needs to go out on the next holiday—on the next day that there is a holiday—and go to the New Zealand public and say: “I have a deal for you by lunchtime.” On the next holiday we will see this from the Simon Crean of the New Zealand Labour Party. He will come at the next holiday and make it quite clear what Mr Cunliffe is intending to do. But would you believe that Mr Cunliffe will actually hold “Mr Crean”, or Mr Iain Lees-Galloway—on the next holiday—to his word? No, you would not. You would not believe that, and that will be very disappointing for another member of the Labour Party.

This is a serious bill. This is a bill that the select committee took great time in looking through. I must admit that when we had people coming in and submitting on the bill, the arguments were very strong on both sides. You know, there were people who came in and said genuinely: “We respect what these days mean and we want to see them retained in that way.” Then there were other points of—[Bell rung] Mr Chair.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): David Bennett, 5 minutes on the bill.

Just as we start on the bill, I would like to pay tribute to Mr David Clark and his political career, which is known for one line and not for this bill. But, no, in all seriousness, when we did do this bill the arguments put forward by the proponent of this bill were very strong, as well. Nobody wants to deny anybody any rights or responsibilities in life, and I think this was a genuine attempt at a member’s bill. So I pay tribute to those who have supported this bill and to all those people—

💬 Darien Fenton: Patronising, as always.

This is the Labour Party saying “patronising”. That is the Labour Party of old. We are looking for the Labour Party of new, with the new “Simon Crean” from Palmerston North delivering the new Cunliffe of the day.

When we look at the submissions, I think they were very real. People did say that they would like to enjoy those holidays in some ways, as the promoter of this bill has been saying. But in some ways the Government has to make decisions, and when we have to make decisions we have to weigh up things. We have to weigh up, you know, what happens and the timing of these decisions.

One of the big issues around this bill—and I think that something I would like David Clark to take a call on is to actually go through the dates for the next time that this bill will apply. I think he needs to make that clear—

💬 Grant Robertson: Is this a filibuster?

—for all members of this Committee, including Mr Grant Robertson, and for all the members of the public who are listening. He may have to say the dates three or four times, because we have heard today that Mr Robertson has got some issues about remembering things and also understanding. David Clark may actually have to write it down in big print for you, so that you can pick it up. That would be interesting to see. What is the real effect of this bill? Is this bill merely talk or will it have a real effect?

💬 Chris Auchinvole: Will it walk?

Will it have a real effect, and will it talk, in the words of that immortal—immortal, I say—speaker from our party Chris Auchinvole, who is well known around the world now as one of the leaders in the marriage equality debate, and—

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: That’s later.

—he will be on later, I am sure, with another fine rendition of his great speech.

I would like Mr Clark to just take that time and say what this legislation is really going to mean for New Zealand workers this year. Will it deliver anything for New Zealand workers this year, if you are looking at a holiday? Will it deliver anything for New Zealand workers next year? Will it deliver anything for the next year? That is the question I want Mr Clark to answer. Mr Clark may be able to tell us when this bill might actually deliver the holidays that he intends for it to do, because I do not know whether Mr Clark has made clear to the public the effect of this bill in the next few years—the next 1 or 2 years. It is all right talking about 10 years’ time. It is like the Labour Party’s superannuation policy. We hear about that in 10 years’ time, but what we need to know is about the next 2 years. In the next 2 years, what will be the effect of this bill? I do not know what that effect will be until Mr Clark tells this Committee what it will be, because I think he understands the issues involved. It may be—

💬 Chris Auchinvole: Will he tell us?

No, he will tell us. I have got great faith in Mr Clark, because I have found him to be an honest individual.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: He won’t duck?

I do not think that he will duck from the question, but I do think that he is not to use the line that this is the best legislation in the last 50 years. No, he cannot use that line with regard to this legislation, and he cannot use the line about the next 50 years and talk about holidays over those years. We want to know about the next 2 years—just the next 2 years—to just before the next election. That is what Mr Clark should concentrate on, the time before the next election. Will this bill make any difference? I do not know whether he is going to find that this bill makes any difference to ordinary New Zealanders in that time. It would be disappointing if this House was spending time on a bill, and that member has staged his political career on a bill, that achieves nothing—a bill that achieves nothing in the next 2 years.

💬 Grant Robertson: This member would know a lot about that.

Is that what this member is going to talk about? Mr Robertson there says: “You’d know all about that.” Well, I would like to see Mr Robertson come to Hamilton and campaign. I want to see him come and campaign when we have got a $2 billion expressway going through our city that is going to be the best thing—

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Order!

Sorry, Mr Chairman. Mr Robertson distracted me for a moment there, and I would hate to be distracted on a bill like this.

It is a pleasure to take a call in the Committee stage of the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. David Bennett, the member who has just resumed his seat, has delusions of grandeur. I think he might think he is Simon Crean, or someone like that. I am not sure whether there is a comparison for Mr Bennett in either the Australian Labor Party caucus or, indeed, any other caucus whatsoever. He is a unique contributor to our House.

I wanted to pick up just one of the points that was made by Mr Bennett around when this bill is going to actually make a practical difference, and it is quite confusing listening to National Party members on this bill. It is either a bill that will destroy the fabric of our society as we know it or a bill that is going to have no impact whatsoever so why are we bothering, and both arguments are being run at the moment by the National Party. In fact, I think David Bennett may even have run both arguments during that speech—actually, possibly even in the same sentence. So I think we just need to clarify a few matters for the National Party on that point.

It is true that the next time this bill will have an effect is 2015, so that gives us plenty of time to get ourselves prepared for that to occur. The Labour Party in Government in 2015, assisted by others, perhaps, in the House, will celebrate the fact that when we come to 2015 this bill will come into force. Then it will have an effect in 2016, and then in 2021. So Mr Bennett can rest easy in his bed in Hamilton, knowing that this bill will have an effect in those periods.

The couple of points I just wanted to raise in this call are, firstly, a specific point, which is around the issue that has been raised from time to time about the cost of this legislation and the cost of this legislation to businesses. The reason I want to raise it is that early on in this debate the Prime Minister got himself very exercised and excited about the potential cost of this bill to businesses, and in the end the figures he was using sort of fell apart on him and were largely discredited. But I know that the Government is particularly attracted to the numbers that it gets provided by David Farrar. The numbers that David Farrar provides to the National Party are things that they take seriously, so I think we should note that he has done the calculation.

💬 Hon Member: They pay for them.

They do pay for those numbers—that is right. But the calculation he has done on this bill is that it would, if passed, add 0.12 percent to the wage bill of a company—0.12 percent. It is not a massive task.

It is interesting to note in the National Party’s polls that David Farrar actually supports this bill along with, I suspect, a large number of other National Party MPs. That is the really sad thing today. This House will, I hope, at the end of this Committee stage pass this bill through, and it will go then to the third reading. That will happen because a coalition of parties in this Chamber has come together around a sensible idea, an idea that is not actually—

💬 Louise Upston: It’s called a motley crew.

A motley crew, says Louise Upston, channelling her 1980s hair metal band. But, you know, we will not go into the history of hair metal bands. I would not want to offend the Chair in that regard, either. What we do know is that the coalition of parties other than the National Party and the ACT Party in this House is supporting this bill because it is a sensible bill. It is a bill that says we recognise the importance of Waitangi Day and Anzac Day to New Zealanders. We say that those days deserve full recognition.

💬 Chris Auchinvole: Oh!

Mr Auchinvole is concerned about that, but when we look at Australia the evidence is that attendance at Anzac Day ceremonies increased when this law was put in place in the states that have it, and that is because it provides people with a focus around the period where it is a weekend, where they can ensure that they have their time off.

The other point to note is, of course, that Anzac Day is in fact a holiday during the week, and people do not suddenly disavow themselves of commemorating people because it is a holiday during the week. All this bill does is say that if Anzac Day falls on a weekend, New Zealanders will get the holidays that they deserve in the Holidays Act. It is by no means, in any way, an assault on Anzac Day. It is, in fact, a way of ensuring that New Zealanders can fully commemorate two very important days and have time with their families. It is an excellent bill.

Thank you very much indeed for the opportunity to speak on this particular bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, in the name of David Clark. I am put in mind of that grand Kiwi tradition during festive occasions, sports days, and picnic days—a good old-fashioned kids’ lolly scramble, because that is what this bill reminds me of. Is this really the way, one has to ask, to introduce oneself as a serious member of Parliament concerned with legislation for the country’s good? Is it?

💬 Darien Fenton: Habeas corpus.

The Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill is a very serious piece of legislation. It is a very serious piece of legislation that was accepted. I will be interested to see whether this gets the same vote. I agree with my colleague the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, David Bennett, that this is a member whom we had credited with having really good potential. We thought that this could be a David with a future in the Labour Party.

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is the Committee stage of this bill. I think it would behove the members opposite to at least address the content of the bill at some point.

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Well, the debate has certainly been quite wide ranging and actually quite humorous, I have to say, from both sides. I am monitoring it very closely. This is a time-limited debate, and if members want to waste their time in a time-limited debate, that is up to them, but I am keeping track.

There we go. Savaged by Iain Lees-Galloway—savaged and almost brought to silence. But let us just go on.

Think of this wrapped in gift paper by your new Labour MP David Clark. I think it is a pity to embark on a political career in quite that way. The politician concerned is, in my mind, a serious politician—a serious politician—and I just think it does not quite carry the significance of the day as a commemorative day to declare it a holiday. Anzac Day is very, very special, and here we go, making it a holiday. What happened to those sector groups that created picnic days? Do you remember the picnic days? The good old Auckland picnic days? They did not stay a picnic day for very long. They are just part of being a day off.

💬 Hon Member: Trade unions.

Trade unions—that is right. The emphasis changes when things are declared holidays rather than commemorative days. It was moving to hear Simon O’Connor reading from an Anzac diary during the second reading of this bill. It was moving. And it was disturbing to hear the criticism from the other side of the Chamber, and here we go again.

The process of this bill—members opposite would like me to talk about the process of the bill. I again share the views of Mr Bennett, the charismatic chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee—a charismatic chairman. He made some very gracious remarks towards the way this bill was introduced and the way it was presented, and I would concur with those, because it was well presented. It was spoken to well by people who came in to make submissions from both sides. I see a head shaking on the other side. I am speaking in favour of the presentation that we received. You should not be critical of your own member, but we understand that is a little bit of a difficulty for that particular party over there.

But then again, as my colleague said, was it a good presentation, or was it in fact flimflam? Is this a road to being a David with a future within the Labour Party? What is in a name? Well, if the name is David, one is part of a plethora, a whole clan of them. But does this differentiate David definitively?

How does the bill compare with National policies passing through the same committee? Let us think of what some of those might be. National introduced the 90-day trial period for new employees in small and medium sized businesses in 2009. What would that do, compared with this bill, which gives people holidays? That created 13,000 jobs—13,000 jobs. This committee had another piece of legislation go through, which members will remember, expanding the 90-day trial to all businesses in 2011. Research shows the Government’s 90-day trial period is encouraging businesses to take a chance—

It is a pleasure to take a call on this bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. I am delighted to see David Clark, the person whose name it is in, is the member in the chair.

The Greens absolutely support this bill, and I take exception to the comments of Chris Auchinvole, the previous speaker. He sounded so aghast at the thought of workers actually taking a holiday. It reminded me very much of the Christmas story, the Christmas tale, and Mr Scrooge. Workers do need holidays. Workers are working longer hours than they ever have before, and the reason they are doing this is that wages have been forced lower and lower and lower through this Government’s lack of action around developing proper jobs and a decent standard of living for workers.

If you compare what New Zealanders get in terms of public holidays and statutory holidays, we are falling below the OECD countries in terms of generosity for workers to have time to relax. This bill is a way of addressing that. This bill goes some way towards saying that workers actually deserve 11 days off—that it is feasible for them to take their 11 statutory holidays every year, instead of having to be short-changed every 5 years or so when Waitangi Day and Anzac Day fall on a weekend.

We reject the notion that by Mondayising both Waitangi Day and Anzac Day it somehow cheapens their commemoration. Other speakers have noted that this happens already if 25 December or the day after that day fall on a Sunday, and also if New Year’s Day or the day after that day fall on a Sunday. All four of these holidays are transferred, so it does not actually cheapen the event. In fact, the day itself is the day that people commemorate. Both Anzac Day and Waitangi Day are sacred and they will remain sacred wherever they fall in the week, as has already been noted, as well, by Mr Grant Robertson from the Labour Party.

If we think about what is coming up this weekend, it is Easter, and Easter is falling this week at the end of March. Easter never ever stays on the same days, because the timing of that holiday is attached to the moon. In fact, it is a lunar holiday.

💬 David Bennett: It’s not attached to the moon.

It is a lunar holiday. However, the fact that the actual days change does not cheapen the resurrection and death of Christ.

When this bill Mondayises both Waitangi Day and Anzac Day, it may well increase participation. Certainly, this has been the example in Australia for Anzac Day. At Waitangi Day we have seen many, many people turn up on both the day before and the actual day. When it falls on a weekend there is a lower participation rate, because people cannot attach the extra day to the weekend. Local businesses up there have said that when it falls close to the start of a weekend, it actually increases the amount of business that they have in their community.

I guess if we are to think about Anzac Day and Waitangi Day as days that we should commemorate, then we should also think about the fact that we need to allow workers time to celebrate them. Whether it falls on a Sunday, or whether it falls on a Friday, for that matter, or a Thursday, the fact remains that each of these days is special and workers do participate in the celebrations and the commemorations around them. It is not onerous for businesses for this to be brought to fruition. There is a 2-year run-in for them to plan for it, and other speakers have already told you about the minimal cost that it will bring for small businesses.

This—[Interruption] I was just having a small holiday there. This bill is supported. This bill is definitely supported—

On behalf of New Zealand First I would like to take a brief call on this very important bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. This bill is really important. We know that Anzac Day and Waitangi Day are days that are really significant to us as New Zealanders and we will not stop commemorating them. They are very, very special and we always like to treat those days as such. But what we in New Zealand First believe is that the rules for these holidays have to be the same as they are for Christmas and New Year if they fall on a Saturday or a Sunday. It is absolutely essential. We want to recognise our special days. We do not want them being treated as second-rate holidays, and we believe that this is happening at this point in time. So we are happy for this particular bill to go through.

It was interesting to hear that the tourism industry absolutely supports this bill because it knows that people will travel further into New Zealand if there is a day off on the Monday when the Saturday or the Sunday is Waitangi Day or Anzac Day. I have had a lot of people saying to me—even the taxi driver when I came into Parliament this particular week said that he thinks we should have the Monday off when it is a significant holiday. People support this change right throughout New Zealand. But I think it is worth saying that 6 February and 25 April are still going to remain as the days that we commemorate and observe Anzac Day and Waitangi Day. What this bill means is that if these days fall on the weekend, then a holiday on the Monday can be observed.

The importance and the recognition of these days is absolutely essential. We like to compare ourselves with Australia. Australia has implemented this Mondayisation very successfully and, as New Zealanders, we can do the same. They are the people whom we like to measure ourselves against all the time. Even the Prime Minister measures us against that country.

We were quite interested to hear that the first date that will actually be affected by this change is in April 2015—25 April. I think it is worth mentioning that this is the 100-year anniversary of Gallipoli, and what better way to celebrate. It is very, very important. The first time that this affects Waitangi Day is in February 2016. So we can see that it is not going to happen instantly, but it is going to happen over a period of time. I think it will affect us for 2 days every 5 years, which is not significant.

What is the cost to employers? Well, we have heard that it is going to be only 0.12 percent. This is not going to put an undue financial burden on the Government or on taxpayers, mainly because it is going to happen only occasionally. In New Zealand First we like to see some consistency across our public holidays. The inconsistency that we currently have is quite problematic and it can be quite confusing for families, employers, and employees alike. So we need to ensure that all public holidays are treated the same.

It is worth stating too that this bill is going to be excellent for provincial New Zealand and those in the tourism sector. It is time that we stood up for this group in this Chamber. The cycleways—the great tourism development—do not appeal to a large majority of the population, because we are never ever going to use them, but in some way this small change, by Mondayising Anzac Day and Waitangi Day, will inevitably benefit families, communities, and many businesses right throughout New Zealand. It is for this reason that New Zealand First is firmly in support of this bill.

I am pleased to support the Committee stage of the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. I wanted to start by saying a couple of things—first of all, to the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, David Bennett, who talked at length about disappointment. Actually, I think if anyone deserves sympathy when it comes to disappointment, it is that member, who has been in this House for several years now and must be feeling very disappointed about the way his Government is treating him. In fact, we say “David Bennett for Minister”. And we would vote for you, David, if we had the chance. And then to Mr Chris Auchinvole, who also talked about disappointment, I have got two words to say to that member, the two words being “habeas corpus”. If we have ever had so significant a member’s bill passed in this House, it was today with the Habeas Corpus Amendment Bill, as we heard earlier.

I wanted to point out to the members opposite that on Anzac Day and Waitangi Day, every year apart from every 5 years there is actually a holiday. It is a public holiday. So what happens is that people get the day off. Some of them—many of them, these days—go off to the Anzac Day ceremonies in the morning, the commemorations first thing in the morning. Some people on Waitangi Day go off to celebrate Waitangi Day. Some people do not, but it is a holiday. So this idea that somehow, because this bill gives people a holiday once every 5 or 7 years, it is cheapening those days is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

I also wanted to respond to the member Simon O’Connor, who spent his 10 minutes—

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Who?

—Simon O’Connor—in the second reading of this bill reading out the diary of a Gallipoli soldier who did not come home. I have to say, Mr O’Connor, that I found that incredibly offensive. I thought it was using the deaths of working-class men like my grandfather who went to the war. I say to Mr O’Connor to have a look above the next time he comes out of the National Party caucus room at the shield for the Peter Fraser Government, and he will see a photo of my grandfather, who fought in the First World War, who came home, and who joined the Labour Party—who joined the Labour Party—to fight for justice for working people. I know he would not begrudge the provisions in this bill. He would not. I thought it really cheapened the memory of the people in my family and the people in everyone’s families to have done that. I thought that was disgraceful.

The other thing that has been very interesting in this debate is that the Government seems to have forgotten its own legislation. In 2010 it passed legislation that would enable public holidays to be transferred to another day, including Waitangi Day and Anzac Day—including those precious days. But in 2010 the Government did not think they were precious enough to stop them from being transferred. In fact, in its legislation introducing the Holidays Amendment Bill to the House, the bill talked about it. An example it gave in the explanatory note said: “For example, if Waitangi Day falls on a Wednesday, an employer and a group of employees who work Monday to Friday may agree to observe Waitangi Day on the Friday.” So what happened to the preciousness of Waitangi Day? Another example used in the bill was Anzac Day. This Government cannot have it both ways. It cannot stand up in this Chamber and say this is all about disrespecting the memory of Gallipoli and the people who have gone before us who fought for freedom and democracy, and at the same time forget that it has passed legislation that actually undermines the recognition of those important days and, in fact, makes it more difficult for many workers to actually have the day off on pay.

I just want to finish, if I may, with a very interesting quote that we heard in Parliament today. This comes from our Prime Minister: “Mondayisation, I know, I don’t agree with that. I mean, I think in the end this is an issue which, you know, fair enough, I don’t think, you know, our—we’re opposed, but we’re not vehemently opposed.” That was the Prime Minister of New Zealand, John Key, who cannot make up his mind, who instructed the chair of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee to oppose it. And that is why those members have, because they have no basis for that.

I would like to acknowledge Dr David Clark for having a member’s bill before Parliament. It is well done. Anzac Day, 25 April—25 April: a day of respect, a day of commemoration, a day of reflection, a day of significance, and a unique day that marks the sacrifice of generation after generation. Allow me to paint a picture for you. The place is Pukekura Park, New Plymouth. A young boy, 3 or 4 years old; the first time he had heard a band with the kettle drums; the first time, probably, he had heard a pipe band and felt that curious tingling at the back of the neck that anybody with antecedents from Scotland always feels when they hear the pipes; long lines of men and some women snaking into the ground; at the back the school cadets; and before them—it is shortly after the Korean War—quite a few Korean War veterans, the larger majority of World War II veterans, and a smaller number of World War I veterans. But the smallest group—the smallest group; very, very small—probably fewer than a dozen frail older men, with their medals clacking, the poppies on their chest, was walking at the head of the parade into Pukekura Park in New Plymouth.

Among those men was my grandfather Harold Morley Thompson. These were the men, the last men, a few of the New Zealand Mounted Rifles who had gone to South Africa to serve in New Zealand’s first overseas campaign. Almost 6,500 New Zealanders served in that campaign. I guess that was the first time I felt that sense of pride in the fact that my grandad was there. And, sitting on his knee and listening to his stories of that campaign, I became aware of what it meant to serve King—or at that stage Queen—and country. I remember him being enormously proud. I remember him being enormously proud to be part of it, to be there on Anzac Day, and I remember hearing some of the stories. If I could be indulged by the Committee, I remember him telling a story that somehow he committed the unwritten crime—well, it is not unwritten; it is quite clearly written down—of not having the rifle that you have been issued with. He was a mounted rifleman but had no rifle—he had a carbine. Unfortunately, the carbine has a much shorter range than a rifle. He was engaging the Boer at some 500 yards. His commanding officer heard the crack as Thompson engaged the enemy, and recognised that it was not a rifle—he recognised that it was a carbine—and said “Thompson, 200 yards forward.” He survived that unfortunate brush with the increased proximity of the enemy, and lived to come back to New Zealand and have a very long and successful life.

Some years later I was leading my own platoon of school cadets in the Anzac parade in the same place at Pukekura Park and I venture to suggest that all the students—even though we were all young, at 13, 14, 15, and 16—on that parade were very cognisant of the sacrifices made on their behalf by those who were not there with them on that Anzac Day parade. A few years later, as a member of the Otago University Medical Company, “the Blue Berets”, I attended many a Dawn Parade in Dunedin, met the veterans, heard their stories, and was introduced to the notorious Dawn Parade rum coffee.

More recently I have been honoured to attend the Dawn Service at the Manurewa Cenotaph. I see a colleague across the Chamber from me today whom I remember being there a couple of years ago. The colleague I have just mentioned and another colleague from the Labour Party had arrived without a wreath, so, in the spirit of the day, I gestured to them to come up, and we laid the wreath together as local MPs in the area. It was an indication of the special, unique nature of the day. I just want to leave—

I am tempted to respond to some of the sillier things that National members have offered in this debate this afternoon, but I do not want to waste my time on that, except to say to David Bennett that if he thinks that I am the Simon Crean of the New Zealand Labour Party, then I call him the Ken Wyatt of the New Zealand National Party.

The wafer-thin arguments that we have heard from National members this afternoon against this bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, represent the very poor opinion that National members of Parliament have of the people of New Zealand. For some reason, those members of Parliament think that New Zealanders, given the opportunity of a long weekend when Anzac Day is commemorated on a Saturday or a Sunday, will all charge off to the beach and forget the solemn respect they have for the day, the people, and the sacrifice that they made. That was the argument that Mike Sabin made, that all of a sudden—

💬 Mike Sabin: That’s right.

“That’s right.”, he says. He has so little confidence in New Zealanders that he believes that, given half an opportunity, they will walk away from Anzac Day. Well, ladies and gentlemen, people who are listening to this debate and watching this debate, mark that. That is what Mike Sabin and the National Government think of you. That is what he thinks of New Zealanders, that they have so little respect for Anzac Day, for our armed forces, for our veterans, and for the sacrifice that they made for our freedom that they will walk away from Anzac Day if they have a long weekend.

Well, I have experienced a perfect example of how people can easily deal with this. Anzac Day commemorations are held up and down this country. If families choose to do that outrageous thing of spending a few days away together, they can go to an Anzac service in the place where they go on holiday. How hard is that—how hard is that? Communities up and down New Zealand, large and small, all commemorate Anzac Day, and if people are away from home, they can simply go to the Anzac Day commemoration in the part of the country they go to.

I did this when I was a student association president. We had university games held on the weekend that Anzac Day fell on, and all the student association presidents realised that it was important for us to go and respect and acknowledge the day in the place where we were at. It was very easy to organise and it was very easy to do.

The second ridiculous argument that the National Government has proposed is that this will cost businesses more than they can afford. Well, as David Farrar pointed out, this will cost businesses around 0.1 percent of their wage bill. That is how much their wage bill is going to increase by—0.1 percent. That is not of their total turnover; it is of their wage bill. Well, if National has done so much damage to the New Zealand economy that a 0.1 percent increase to their wage bill will put businesses under, then that is a sad indictment on this Government’s failure in economic management.

Thirdly, there is the argument that this bill will have no effect until 2015. Well, that, again, sums up the National approach to politics—that if it does not do something before the next election, it is not worth doing. [Interruption] That kind of short-term thinking is what has got us into the position that we are in, Mr Bennett. That is why this country is in such a deep depression, because this Government is more interested in politics and results before the next election, and it has no long-term plan for this country.

The arguments we have heard, and the hiding behind the stories of the commemoration of Anzac Day, of the sacrifices made at Gallipoli, at Passchendaele, at Afghanistan, at Timor-Leste—in places all around the world—are nothing but pure cynicism and National cloaking itself in all of those stories to hide the fact that it just does not want to give New Zealanders a few more days off. That is all it is. It is thinly veiled, it is cynical, it is sickening, and it should stop now. National will rue the day it voted against this bill.

It is a pleasure to rise and talk to this bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. I want to acknowledge the member David Clark for the work that he has done on this bill and, although I disagree with the bill in premise, the dignity that he has brought to the approach.

Unfortunately, though, I have found the accusations—those hecklings and interjections a week or so ago—disturbing, and even more so today. Once again it has been brought up in this place about raising the topic of Anzac Day, bringing up the story, without comment—that is really important—unlike other members today who have tried to put words into the mouths of the war dead. I stood up, I only read a war diary, and I allowed those words to speak for themselves. The howls and the cries! I repeat what I said that day: how dare members opposite act with contempt when the words of the war dead are spoken—the words of an Anzac trooper are spoken—when we are discussing Anzac Day. You do not have to agree with it. You can interpret it in whatever way you want. It was left free—it was left free. But to rage and rant about someone daring to talk about Anzac Day—if someone dares to talk about Anzac Day and to put a bill down, we might put it in context. We might put it in context.

I have been struck since that speech by the number of phone calls, emails, and letters that people have sent expressing their support for that position, expressing support for their own people—war veterans, like a member who spoke earlier, who also had people who served. They were proud as Kiwis to have the voice of an Anzac trooper spoken in this Chamber. It might pay for members to note, of course, that this Chamber is a war memorial. In this very Chamber of a war memorial, they have yelled and cajoled the very fact that we might talk about Anzac Day when discussing a bill about Anzac Day. That is very, very striking.

I noted a week ago, and I want to note it again today, that Anzac Day is not a holiday, and that Anzac Day is not an excuse for a holiday. I made it clear the other time and I want to do so again. If we want to talk about more holidays, if we want to talk about workers’ rights, then we can find an opportunity to do that and discuss it. The moment you take a day of commemoration and turn it into a holiday, you have changed the nature of the day. That is why we call something a commemoration and that is why we call something else a holiday.

We have heard from Opposition members who say: “Oh, this is the same as Easter. This is the same as Christmas.” That is just ignorance. Those are days that are holidays—holy days—days of festival and celebration. Anzac Day is not; it is a day of commemoration. It sits on a very particular day. That is why we celebrate it.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: So Boxing Day’s a holy day? Tau Henare might think that.

We do that in that way. We can see that Mr Mallard is back in the Chamber. We celebrate different days in different ways, and, once again, this Parliament does a disservice by trying to make everything absolutely the same. We heard someone from New Zealand First, I think it was, saying: “No, we need to call all the days the same. It doesn’t matter if it’s Christmas Day, Boxing Day, Easter, Anzac Day—let’s just make them all the same, make them all a holiday.” We heard the Leader of the Opposition’s attempted attack today, when he continued talking about tourism and how it is good for business and so forth. Listen, Mr Chair and others, to the rhetoric, and you will understand that this is about taking a day off.

But there are a couple of other things that we need to point to. There have been discussions about what the Australians do. Well, that is all well and good, but I think it is nice to note that I am a proud Kiwi. I do what I think is right for Kiwis and do not always follow what the Australians do. The other thing, too, is that people are noting the attendance on Anzac Day and that it is increasing. Well, I actually want to put the challenge to the Committee that attendance is returning to the way it used to be. Attendances over the years have dropped off in some generations in some cities represented in this House—certainly not in mine. Younger people and my generation are coming back to Anzac Day, and that is an important distinction.

So I want to return to what has been a theme of my approach to this bill: that Anzac Day is not a holiday. It is not an excuse for a holiday. I welcome the opportunity to talk with the member, or anyone from the Opposition, to find other excuses, but leave this day of commemoration, this Anzac Day, to be just that—a commemoration on the day of the 25th. It is a day of commemoration for which Parliament can stand up with confidence and pride in this war memorial, and allow the words of a New Zealand trooper to be spoken and not taken out of context and shamefully and contemptuously dealt to.

I would just like to make a final contribution on this bill, the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, and just repeat that Anzac Day is a day of respect, a day of commemoration—

💬 Barbara Stewart: It always is.

—a day of reflection—I agree—and a day of significance. It is actually unique. It marks the sacrifices of generation after generation. It is a special day. If Anzac Day falls on a weekend and there is no extra holiday, then so be it—so be it. If anything, that underscores the extremely special nature of that day. In fact, if you think about it, it is a very small price to pay—a small price to pay—for New Zealanders of today, given the ultimate sacrifice made by the servicemen and servicewomen of yesterday. I oppose this bill.

I take a call on the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill. I was not intending to take a call, but I will, having heard some of the comments of the National Party members on the other side. I take a call in response to the previous speaker, Simon O’Connor, as I am one of the very few members in this House who can say: “I lost my brother in the Viet Nam War.” I am absolutely appalled at the comments that were made by that member in relation to that. I have got every right to speak in this Chamber when I have lost a very loving, dear one myself, in terms of him falling on behalf of this country.

What I can say, further to some of the comments made in this Chamber, is that there are people who travel around this country to go to Anzac Day services and to be with their families, who have lost people, and go and see the very memorials of their own loved ones. In my particular situation, my loved one has his memorial in Waipukurau in Hawke’s Bay. I happen to live in Auckland. I would very much like, perhaps on a long weekend, to be able to travel down to Waipukurau in Hawke’s Bay, spend the weekend there, go to the Anzac Day ceremony, and enjoy seeing some of his old comrades and his old friends in Waipukurau, but you cannot do that if Anzac Day falls, for instance, on a Wednesday or a Thursday. It is a 1-day trip all the way to Hawke’s Bay for that. But I can tell you that the next time there is a long weekend I would dearly love to be able to take that time and that opportunity to go and do that.

Likewise, around New Zealand I am sure there are many elderly people—many elderly people—who would enjoy having their family visit from afar. So many people these days have moved from the regions to the likes of Auckland, leaving their elderly family in provincial areas around the country. What better opportunity for them than on an Anzac weekend, a long weekend, to be able to say: “We will go home and visit mum and dad or go and visit grandma and grandad. We will go to the Anzac Day ceremony with them and spend a long weekend with them.” I certainly know that my sons and daughters would love to do that with their grandparents who are living in Taupō. They would love the opportunity to go down and spend an Anzac Day weekend down there and take in Anzac Day in Taupō.

I have heard so much drivel from this National Party that it is unbelievable. A few years ago I was in Australia with my wife, and we happened to be there on a weekend when Anzac Day was being celebrated. We were in Sydney and we were absolutely astounded by the turnout in Sydney. The parade went on for something like 4 hours in Sydney, around the central city streets. Hundreds of thousands of people were watching the parade, and it was a wonderful long weekend—and not only that; the Australians celebrated as well. It was not just a sad occasion; it was also a celebration of their nation, remembering the Anzacs, remembering those who had fallen but also celebrating their lives.

Over that weekend there was a lot of celebration and also remembering what those young men and women had done in the name of their country. I think the people on the Government benches just need to absolutely wake up and think about this for a change. They should think about humanity for a change, think about the people of New Zealand for a change, and stop being like lemmings being led over the cliff by their leader, John Key. They should stop being taken down a road because they have all been whipped into action and told what to say. Have some thought for yourselves, have a mind of your own, think for yourselves, and think of what your constituents are saying. And your constituents, Mr Bennett, in Hamilton—

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Order! You are bringing me into the debate.

David Bennett should ask the people in Hamilton what they think. The previous speaker, Mr O’Connor, should ask the constituents in Tāmaki what they think. I do not think the members have asked their constituents, because most certainly good, honest, hard-working Kiwis—good, honest, patriotic Kiwis—who want to see a fair go for all Kiwis would say: “Stop being miserable. Stop being Grinches. Do not be the Scrooge of Christmas. Look at this sensibly and say that New Zealanders deserve this when it comes around. When Waitangi Day is on a weekend and when an Anzac Day is on a weekend, let us celebrate those public holidays and make them into proper national celebrations. Don’t be miserable National Party Grinches.”

I am not quite sure what the previous speaker, Andrew Williams, was going on about. If he could possibly send me a text at 2 o’clock in the morning, I will take time to look over it. Coming back to the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and ANZAC Day) Amendment Bill, I just want to acknowledge David Clark and the work that he has done on this. Although I am new to the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee, I also acknowledge the select committee and just reflect on the fine balance that I think is reflected here. I have listened very carefully to the contributions from across the Chamber, and mine, as I spoke to previously, does reflect very much my view that the servicemen, in particular, on Anzac Day tip that balance in favour of voting against this bill. That is certainly where my position comes from, and from the reverence and importance of that day in commemoration. I wholeheartedly endorse the comments of Simon O’Connor in that regard.

I actually believe that members across the Chamber—certainly the Labour Party—also share with us in that. I just want to reflect on a couple of points from former Labour Party members of Parliament. One Minister of Māori Affairs, Matiu Rata, said: “Like Anzac Day, New Zealand Day is not to be Mondayised. It is the significance of the occasion that is important rather than the fact that it is to be a paid public holiday. It should not be regarded as merely an extra paid holiday,”. That was one Matiu Rata who made that comment. Another former Minister of Internal Affairs, one Hon Mr Henry May, said: “The Government believes the Mondayising of New Zealand Day … would detract from the importance and significance of the event it commemorates.” Another former MP, Mr Rēweti, said that the committee considered that it was justified in declaring that Waitangi Day should not be Mondayised, because the Labour Party had gone to the electors in 1972 on the policy that Waitangi Day would not be Mondayised. Those were the heady days of the Labour Party—the working man’s party—that we remember, but I do not necessarily believe that they are represented in the Chamber here today.

We go on. Another former MP, one Mr Marshall, said: “I believe that it would greatly detract from the observance of the New Zealand Day for it to be Mondayised and turned into just another long weekend.” I think it is quite clear that there is a shift in the modern Labour Party, if I could call it that, from the traditional values that were held. I believe that those traditional values are actually held across the country and are something that we should reflect on in this Chamber. Certainly, I do so in being quite happy to oppose this bill.

We go on. There are actually other consequences to this bill, and those are consequences of a financial nature. Although there may be some in tourism who would welcome it, there will be many other businesses that are in a position where they are actually losing on the deal, if you like. Again, it is about a balance and being fair and reasonable, but also understanding that businesses have to make a dollar and it is a tough environment in which to do that. The member introducing this bill is the same member who would have us have a minimum wage of $15—the same member would have us have a minimum wage of $15. There are many businesses that would start going to the wall in that circumstance. We also look at this party, which would cancel the 90-day trial period that has been so successful. I just wanted to comment on the context around the financial constraints and the fact that this bill, as it stands, will have a financial implication, which should be considered in the mix. Although the member introducing it, as I said, would like to see a minimum wage of $15—and let us throw a capital gains tax or two in there, just for good measure—it is not something that will be missed in 2015 when this bill comes into play first of all.

I just want, lastly, to reflect on those veterans who have served this country. We should all be proud of them, and lest we forget the contribution they have made to this country and to the world we live in today.

Clauses 1 to 8 and schedules 1 to 3 agreed to.

Bill to be reported without amendment presently.