Unions To Hold Budget Day Hui For Pay Equity
The union movement are today hosting a Budget Day Hui to fight back against the Government's decision to gut the Equal Pay Act and destroy decades of progress towards achieving pay equity.
The hui will take place from 1pm at Parliament and will feature speeches from workers who have been impacted by the pay equity changes.
'The Government is set to unveil a Budget that makes the wealthiest New Zealanders even richer, paid for by taking money from some of the lowest paid women,' said NZCTU Secretary Melissa Ansell-Bridges.
'Over the last few weeks, we have seen overwhelming opposition from across our society to the Government's cruel actions.
'Today workers, community groups and the public are coming together to send a message to the Government that they will not get away with effectively ending pay equity in Aotearoa,' said Ansell-Bridges.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Experts Warn Regulatory Standards Bill Threatens Future Public Health Laws
Article – RNZ One of the experts said it would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. , Reporter Public health experts are worried the government's proposed Regulatory Standards Bill will act as a disincentive for future law-makers to limit harmful industries. A group of scholars in health and policy have worked together on a briefing, titled 'Regulatory Standards Bill threatens the public interest, public health and Māori rights'. It's authors are Jonathan Boston, Michael Baker, Andrew Geddis, Carwyn Jones and Geoffrey Palmer. The Regulatory Standards Bill was introduced to Parliament in May, and is now being considered by the finance and expenditure committee. It would set up a Regulatory Standards Board to consider how legislation measures up to the principles. It was part of ACT's coalition agreement, and in putting the bill forward, party leader David Seymour said: 'In a high-cost economy, regulation isn't neutral – it's a tax on growth. This government is committed to clearing the path of needless regulations by improving how laws are made.' The bill wants politicians to show their workings, he said. 'This bill turns the explanation from politicians' 'because we said so' into 'because here is the justification according to a set of principles'.' But Baker said the bill had prompted a large number of concerns, not least from a public health perspective. He said it was problematic that the bill failed to mention public harm in its ethical framework, which was needed to balance out private benefits. Another issue was the 'takings or impairment principle'. The bill in its current form would allow commercial interests, such as the tobacco or alcohol industries, to seek compensation – paid with public money – if any future legislation caused them to lose money. Baker explained this would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. He said it would make it less appealing for governments to create any new legislation aimed at protecting public health which could negatively impact harmful industries, which might then seek compensation. This could include the denicotinisation of cigarettes, alcohol restrictions like sponsorship bans, controls on unhealthy food and drink such as limiting marketing to children, and clean air provisions such as mandating emissions reductions by industry. This bill would mean taxpayers paid to compensate these businesses for the money lost because of moves to protect public health. 'And that's going to make it very difficult for any groups – even governments – promoting new public health laws and regulations, that are intended to protect the public interest.' The briefing notes that, rather than this being a by-product of the legislation's overall goal, it 'appears to be the Bill's intention'. Seymour response Seymour accused Baker of 'alarmism'. 'What the bill actually says is that if a politician or government department wants to pass a regulation that infringes on your private property rights, they'll need to justify why. Inconsistency with the principles does not prevent any new legislation from being passed. All it requires is transparency to the taxpayer. That's not radical, it's democratic accountability. If a policy is justified, it will stand up to scrutiny.' 'The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back. It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens' freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve?' Seymour asked. 'What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?' 'This Bill turns 'because we said so' into 'because here's the evidence'.'
Scoop
6 hours ago
- Scoop
Aotearoa Palestinian Deported From Egypt, Other Kiwis Carry On March To Gaza
An Aotearoa Palestinian woman has been deported from Egypt today, while other New Zealanders and Tāngata Whenua have entered Egypt as part of the Global March to Gaza to try to deliver aid to starving Palestinians. Thousands of humanitarians are making their way in convoys from all over the world to Palestine's Gaza border with Egypt, the Rafah border, to bring desperately needed aid and calling for an end of Israel's illegal blockade, which is a war crime and causing conditions of starvation and death. In an Instagram video published today in Egypt, William Alexander from Ōtautahi/Christchurch urged the public to email Winston Peters requesting the Foreign Affairs Minister communicate with the Egyptian authorities to ensure safe passage for the Aotearoa participants of the peaceful aid convoy to Gaza's southern border. Communities in Aotearoa are proud of our brave local activists who have made the journey to join the March to Gaza. Next week in Tāmaki Makaurau peace advocates will hold a vigil while the march to Gaza is occurring, calling for the urgent opening of Gaza's border and unhindered delivery of food and supplies to starving Palestinians. Date: 16th June, 17th June, 18th June, 19th June Time: Monday 5pm - 8pm Tuesday 5pm - 8pm Wednesday 5pm - 8pm Thursday 5pm - 8pm Location: Aotea Square, Queen Street, Tāmaki Makaurau/Auckland In the past three days, journalists have barely managed to send messages to the world reporting the daily massacres by Israeli drones, quadcopters, bombs, as Israel has again bombed the internet services in the Gaza Strip, making internet access dangerous and leaving Palestinians reliant on E-Sims donated by people internationally through initiatives such as Connecting Humanity. The Samoud (Perseverance) convoy has made its way from Tunisia through Algeria to unite in Egypt with activists from all over the world for a concerted effort to stop the genocide in Gaza occuring through Israel's illegal blockade and intentional starvation of 2.3 million Palestinians, half of whom are children.
Scoop
6 hours ago
- Scoop
Experts Warn Regulatory Standards Bill Threatens Future Public Health Laws
Public health experts are worried the government's proposed Regulatory Standards Bill will act as a disincentive for future law-makers to limit harmful industries. A group of scholars in health and policy have worked together on a briefing, titled "Regulatory Standards Bill threatens the public interest, public health and Māori rights". It's authors are Jonathan Boston, Michael Baker, Andrew Geddis, Carwyn Jones and Geoffrey Palmer. The Regulatory Standards Bill was introduced to Parliament in May, and is now being considered by the finance and expenditure committee. It would set up a Regulatory Standards Board to consider how legislation measures up to the principles. It was part of ACT's coalition agreement, and in putting the bill forward, party leader David Seymour said: "In a high-cost economy, regulation isn't neutral - it's a tax on growth. This government is committed to clearing the path of needless regulations by improving how laws are made." The bill wants politicians to show their workings, he said. "This bill turns the explanation from politicians' 'because we said so' into 'because here is the justification according to a set of principles'." But Baker said the bill had prompted a large number of concerns, not least from a public health perspective. He said it was problematic that the bill failed to mention public harm in its ethical framework, which was needed to balance out private benefits. Another issue was the "takings or impairment principle". The bill in its current form would allow commercial interests, such as the tobacco or alcohol industries, to seek compensation - paid with public money - if any future legislation caused them to lose money. Baker explained this would have a "chilling effect" on public health measures. He said it would make it less appealing for governments to create any new legislation aimed at protecting public health which could negatively impact harmful industries, which might then seek compensation. This could include the denicotinisation of cigarettes, alcohol restrictions like sponsorship bans, controls on unhealthy food and drink such as limiting marketing to children, and clean air provisions such as mandating emissions reductions by industry. This bill would mean taxpayers paid to compensate these businesses for the money lost because of moves to protect public health. "And that's going to make it very difficult for any groups - even governments - promoting new public health laws and regulations, that are intended to protect the public interest." The briefing notes that, rather than this being a by-product of the legislation's overall goal, it "appears to be the Bill's intention". Seymour response Seymour accused Baker of "alarmism". "What the bill actually says is that if a politician or government department wants to pass a regulation that infringes on your private property rights, they'll need to justify why. Inconsistency with the principles does not prevent any new legislation from being passed. All it requires is transparency to the taxpayer. That's not radical, it's democratic accountability. If a policy is justified, it will stand up to scrutiny." "The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back. It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens' freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve?" Seymour asked. "What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?" "This Bill turns 'because we said so' into 'because here's the evidence'."
