Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill

I move, That the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill be now read a second time. The question of whether to allow shop trading over the Easter period is a contentious one, considered by this House on numerous occasions. Those in support of Easter Sunday trading emphasise economic opportunities and the freedom of shoppers to choose, while those against it focus on the need for shops to be closed to mark a day of significance and for workers to be able to spend time with their families. The Government is eager to resolve this perennial issue.

The inconsistency in the present law is pretty well known, with shops in Queenstown and Taupō able to open on Easter Sunday but those in Wānaka and Rotorua not able to. Actually, it is not as clear as that; with the Pembroke Mall in Wānaka only stage one of that mall is actually able to open. Picton shops are able to open, but only if there is a cruise ship in town, as if that is the only centre that gets cruise ships these days. In my home city of Dunedin, the Carnegie Centre in Moray Place is able to open, but only for arts, crafts, and children’s toys—but books and toys can be sold only while performances are happening on the mezzanine floor. It is a ludicrous artefact of the law, when, to the best of my knowledge, the Carnegie Centre does not even open for retail trading any more.

The point is this: the law is a complete muddle. Although there have been successive attempts to change it, these have been defeated on personal votes that oppose such a change on the grounds of religious or union beliefs. I myself have opposed such a bill, but supported one in the name of the Hon Todd McClay, on whose bill this bill is modelled. It simply gives choice to the local community, through its territorial authority, to decide whether its retail stores should be able to open. The vote on this bill is likely to be deemed a personal vote, but the National caucus has agreed to vote in support of it at this and remaining readings. I want to thank members of the Commerce Committee, well-led by its chair, Melissa Lee, for their hard work, and also the submitters, who made thoughtful submissions on the bill.

The Commerce Committee spent a significant amount of time considering it, and heard from a range of submitters. Unfortunately, it has not been able to reach agreement on amendments that could be reported back to the House for consideration. That is a shame, because there were some useful improvements that could have been presented to members in order for them to decide in their conscience whether to support it. The role of the select committee in considering a bill that will the subject of a conscience vote is, in my view, to present the bill in the best shape for that vote, not to impose its will on the House. But Opposition members have voted against any amendments, and that course of action caused the vote on the amendments for consideration to be tied and, therefore, lost. I think that is a great shame.

It is a great shame that not only does the House not even get to choose what it should do and be the architect of its own destiny with a personal vote, but also the Opposition members cannot bring themselves even to support that very simple concept of democracy, which is the freedom to choose—the essence that is in this bill. I think that is a terrible shame. The amendments to the bill that were the subject of the committee’s deliberations were very good; I thought they had merit. So I have introduced Supplementary Order Paper 179 for the Committee’s consideration at the Committee stage. Supplementary Order Paper 179 proposes to change the mechanism by which territorial authorities permit shop trading on Easter Sunday from a by-law to a local policy. It also further strengthens the protections for shop employees who refuse to work on Easter Sunday.

The bill makes two key changes to the shop trading restrictions regime. First, it allows communities to have a choice to determine whether shop trading can take place on Easter Sunday and, second, it grants employment protections to employees, ensuring they have the right to refuse to work on Easter Sunday.

💬 Dr David Clark: Yeah, right!

Local communities will have the ability to choose whether shop trading—see, there is the “Yeah, right!”. Labour members do not even believe employees have a right to choose. They do not even believe that they should be able to choose to say no, to choose whether they want to earn income on that day. They just shut it down. I think that is a terrible reflection on the Opposition. Territorial authorities will be required to consult with their communities. Their communities will choose—another choice the Opposition does not want the public to have—on any proposal to permit shop trading on Easter Sunday.

Some had suggested the bill will further confuse and complicate shop trading restrictions, but, given the descriptions I made earlier in my speech, I think the only way, really, is a pathway of clarity. It is simply a yes or no to the opening of retail stores on Easter Sunday. Authorities cannot impose any additional shop trading rules under this amendment. Territorial authorities, in consultation with their communities, can determine whether shop trading should be enabled and whether it should occur in an entire district or in parts of it. It is a pragmatic solution to an issue that has been constantly debated in this House.

The bill provides shop employees the right to refuse to work on Easter Sunday. Shop employees can refuse to work on Easter Sunday without providing a reason. An employer cannot compel them to work. If a shop employee is compelled to work or is disadvantaged for refusing to work, the employee can take a personal grievance against the employer in accordance with the Employment Relations Act 2000. The personal grievance mechanism is the appropriate recourse. This is in line with the dispute resolution mechanisms in place for other issues concerning unjustifiable actions by employers. The Employment Relations Act 2000 provides for free mediation and low-cost dispute resolution via the Employment Relations Authority, and the authority could send the parties to mediation first, as they do with other employment relationship issues.

The bill clearly requires employers to ask employees to work on each Easter Sunday, and sets out the employer obligations relating to this. This agreement must be sought each year; it cannot be part of an employment agreement. Any such provision in an employment agreement would be unenforceable. The right to refuse to work on Easter Sunday will be extended to all shop employees on Easter Sunday under the bill. This includes employees who currently work in garden centres, petrol stations, dairies, and so on. It is a pragmatic and well-balanced approach that provides choice for local communities on whether or not to allow shop trading on Easter Sunday while also giving protections to all shop employees on that day. I commend it to the House.

This is a crap bill. The Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety has failed to ram zero hours down people’s throats, and here he is trying to undermine the rights of working people once more. He says that people could get on the phone, get their lawyer involved, and take a personal grievance. Well, not everyone has Ken Whitney on speed dial. Many people feel they are under pressure from their employers, and they do not have the luxury of a Panama Papers lawyer to give a quick bell to sort things out and to make a bit more money.

People in New Zealand are feeling the pressure. The Government has produced very little for middle New Zealand in the Budget. They are feeling the strain. They are working, they are trying to keep their employers onside, and this makes it a little bit harder for them to spend time with their friends and families. This is one more step down the road to a complete squashing of the rights of working people in New Zealand. That is why I will be standing to oppose this bill. I do not think it is in the long-term interest of New Zealand to continue to squeeze the rights of working people.

The Commerce Committee received a letter from Caritas during the proceedings when we heard submissions, inviting members of the committee to attend a meeting on Easter Sunday morning. Its staff kindly said to us that the meeting would be at 10.30 on Easter Sunday morning at Hill Street in Thorndon, Wellington, and although they themselves had plans to be with family, the community, and church on that day, they were willing to sacrifice that to help members of the committee understand the impact of having to work on Easter Sunday. As best I am aware, not one member of the select committee wished to take them up on that offer. I think that illustrates the point. We have, in this House, people willing to make rules that they themselves are not interested in following.

Debate interrupted.

The House adjourned at 6 p.m.