Lack of debate fans pay equity fury
Across the country, New Zealanders protested the rushed changes to the Equal Pay Amendment Act. The changes tighten up parameters for claims, introduce more restrictions, and give employers more ways to ignore them.
Photo:
RNZ / Tess Brunton
Dumping 33 pay equity claims and telling underpaid workers to start again was always going to cause fury from those who stood to benefit from the claims - mostly women.
But the government's shock and awe approach to changing the legislation has fanned the flames of anger.
In a whirlwind 48 hours the law changed - no select committee, public meetings, opportunities for submissions or the usual processes laws go through.
It is far from the first time a government has used urgency - but this was fast even by usual urgent standards.
The Prime Minister has suggested the opposition, unions and the media have all been scaremongering on the issue.
But there has been no time for debate on it, which Newsroom senior political reporter Marc Daalder said did not give people time to discuss its merits.
"I don't think anyone was looking at this as an area for major reform, certainly not immediate reform," he said.
"It's something that the government hadn't really spent very much time talking about. We know that the [workplace relationships] minister, Brooke van Velden, has been doing a lot of workplace reform and a lot of that has been forecast in the coalition agreements and in public statements that she's made. And she now says this pay equity issue is something that right when she got the job, at the very start in late 2023, she told the Prime Minister she was interested in working on it.
"But it's not something the rest of us, or the public, had really known was on their radar."
The changes to the Equal Pay Amendment Act
made last week tighten up parameters for claims, introduce more restrictions and give employers more ways to ignore them.
Van Velden said in her announcement that all ministers have been asked to save money, and that is what the move would do. They are substantial savings - billions - and Act leader David Seymour said van Velden had saved the Budget. National has played that aspect down, but it will get a lot of liability off the government books.
That has paved the way for commentary that the savings have been made off the backs of women and made it harder for them to access economic justice.
No one has lost any money - wages are not being slashed. But the fairness that many women were hoping for has just become that much further away.
Daalder says Act and National MPs have now expressed concerns that many of the claims now cancelled were "basically bogus".
"Nicola Willis called it [a Trojan horse for] a billion dollar grievance industry by the unions... that yes there are some situations where particular lines of work that are dominated by women have been systemically undervalued due to sexism and misogyny, as compared to types of work dominated by men that require similar skills, qualifications, and levels of work and so forth.
"But that many of the claims that were currently being considered were not that. That they represented pay differentials for reasons other than sexism and misogyny. That's the heart of the argument from the government now ... the system was too loose, it was letting people make disingenuous comparisons between professions, and that there are professions that are paid less well not because they are dominated by women but for other reasons."
Also on
The Detail
on Thursday, Helen Roberts, who is a professor of finance at the University of Otago, talks about the differences between equal pay, pay equity and the gender gap.
She said we need to up our game on data gathering from employers so the situation is more transparent - and she uses the Australian example, the statutory body WGEA (Workplace Gender Equality Agency) as an example of what could be done here.
Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail
here
.
You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on
Facebook
or following us on
Twitter
.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
7 hours ago
- Scoop
The House: Parliamentary Week Achieves Two Out Of Three Goals
Sanctions against Te Pti Mori MPs were historic, but they weren't the only thing that happened in the house. , Editor: The House While Parliament's week was dominated by its final event – Thursday's debate on the report from the Privileges Committee into a haka performed in the chamber – the rest of the week focussed on other business that, while more mundane, was still worthy of note. The Government appeared to have three objectives for this week in the house. Crucial to the administration's continuance, the first goal was to successfully complete the initial debate on the budget. The long initial budget debate could no longer dribble on over weeks, so the house spent six hours of the week completing the second reading debate, which is the first debate a budget gets. The reading was accomplished and so the Government continues. This may sound silly, but a Government cannot survive, if the house votes against its budget. Agreeing to vote for budget and taxation bills are the 'supply' portion of the 'confidence and supply' agreement that is the foundation of any coalition agreement. The budget focus now turns to select committees and what is called 'Scrutiny Week', when ministers appear before various subject committees to defend their budget plans. Scrutiny Week begins on 16 June. Slow seconds A second objective was possibly not in earlier plans for this week – to finally polish off the bills originally slated for completion two weeks ago during budget week urgency. Then, the Leader of the House had asked the house to accord urgency for 12 bills the Government hoped to progress through 30 stages of parliamentary debate. The plan was ambitious and it did not succeed. Despite day-long sittings until midnight Saturday (when urgency must end), only two bills were completed, others were untouched, and 13 stages were unfinished or unstarted. This week's plan for the house had MPs returning to the well for more of the same. Just like last time, progress was at a snail's pace. After quite a few hours, the Government had slugged its way through just a few more stages. The plan was slowed to a crawl by bills' committee stages (formally known as the Committee of the Whole House). Committee stages are a crucial way for MPs to publicly interrogate the minister in charge of a bill. With patience, they can tease out a lot about both a government's development of legislation and its intended real-world impacts. Because the committee stage has no set duration, it is also a way for the opposition to make the Government really work for progress. The Government did achieve progress on the bills left incomplete from budget week, but again, it was probably not what was hoped for. They will need to come back yet again in three weeks to have a third crack. The Opposition is showing itself to be quite effective at the filibuster. The Government's third objective was to have the debate on the recent Privileges Committee Report on three Te Pāti Māori MPs done by the week's end. As Leader of the House Chris Bishop said in re-initiating the debate: 'My encouragement would be for everybody to finish this debate today. 'Have a robust debate, but let's end this issue once and for all, and deal with the issue and get back to the major issues facing this country.' That wish was fulfilled with apparent agreement from across the house. As 6pm neared, the MP who eventually moved that a vote be taken was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi. The frankly fascinating debate on the report will be reported separately.
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Scoop
The House: Parliamentary Week Achieves Two Out Of Three Goals
, Editor: The House While Parliament's week was dominated by its final event - Thursday's debate on the report from the Privileges Committee into a haka performed in the chamber - the rest of the week focussed on other business that, while more mundane, was still worthy of note. The Government appeared to have three objectives for this week in the house. Crucial to the administration's continuance, the first goal was to successfully complete the initial debate on the budget. The long initial budget debate could no longer dribble on over weeks, so the house spent six hours of the week completing the second reading debate, which is the first debate a budget gets. The reading was accomplished and so the Government continues. This may sound silly, but a Government cannot survive, if the house votes against its budget. Agreeing to vote for budget and taxation bills are the 'supply' portion of the 'confidence and supply' agreement that is the foundation of any coalition agreement. The budget focus now turns to select committees and what is called 'Scrutiny Week', when ministers appear before various subject committees to defend their budget plans. Scrutiny Week begins on 16 June. Slow seconds A second objective was possibly not in earlier plans for this week - to finally polish off the bills originally slated for completion two weeks ago during budget week urgency. Then, the Leader of the House had asked the house to accord urgency for 12 bills the Government hoped to progress through 30 stages of parliamentary debate. The plan was ambitious and it did not succeed. Despite day-long sittings until midnight Saturday (when urgency must end), only two bills were completed, others were untouched, and 13 stages were unfinished or unstarted. This week's plan for the house had MPs returning to the well for more of the same. Just like last time, progress was at a snail's pace. After quite a few hours, the Government had slugged its way through just a few more stages. The plan was slowed to a crawl by bills' committee stages (formally known as the Committee of the Whole House). Committee stages are a crucial way for MPs to publicly interrogate the minister in charge of a bill. With patience, they can tease out a lot about both a government's development of legislation and its intended real-world impacts. Because the committee stage has no set duration, it is also a way for the opposition to make the Government really work for progress. The Government did achieve progress on the bills left incomplete from budget week, but again, it was probably not what was hoped for. They will need to come back yet again in three weeks to have a third crack. The Opposition is showing itself to be quite effective at the filibuster. The Government's third objective was to have the debate on the recent Privileges Committee Report on three Te Pāti Māori MPs done by the week's end. As Leader of the House Chris Bishop said in re-initiating the debate: "My encouragement would be for everybody to finish this debate today. "Have a robust debate, but let's end this issue once and for all, and deal with the issue and get back to the major issues facing this country." That wish was fulfilled with apparent agreement from across the house. As 6pm neared, the MP who eventually moved that a vote be taken was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi. The frankly fascinating debate on the report will be reported separately. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.
RNZ News
14 hours ago
- RNZ News
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer on the longest suspension in Parliament
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii This week, Parliament took the unprecedented step of suspending both Te Pāti Māori leaders - Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi - for 21 days. Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke was suspended for seven days - but had also been punished with a 24-hour suspension on the day over a haka all three had performed in Parliament, against the Treaty Principles Bill, in November. It is against the rules of the House for members to leave their seats during a debate - which all three did. Ngarewa-Packer told Saturday Morning that the 21-day suspension, which was seven times harsher than any previous sanction an MP has faced, was not proportionate. "I think the backlash from the public, nationally and internationally, validates that," she said. Previously, the longest suspension for an MP had been three days, given to the former prime minister Robert Muldoon for criticising the speaker in the 1980s. While New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said the duration of the suspension would have been lessened if the Te Pāti Māori MPs had apologised, Ngarewa-Packer said that was never requested by the Privileges Committee. "What we have here is a situation where, and some are calling it Trumpism, we've been a lot more specific - we have an Atlas agenda that has not only crept in, it's stormed in on the shores of Aotearoa and some may not understand what that means, but this is just the extension of the attack on the treaty, on the attack on Indigenous voices. "We made the point the whole way through when we started to see that they weren't going to be able to meet us halfway on anything, even a quarter of the way, on any of the requests for tikanga experts, for legal experts when we knew the bias of the committee." Ngarewa-Packer added that the Privileges Committee process was not equipped to deal with the issue. "We hit a nerve and we can call it a colonial nerve, we can call it institutional nerve... "I think that this will be looked back on at some stage and say how ridiculous we looked back in 2025." Ngarewa-Packer also added that the language from Peters during the debate on Thursday was "all very deliberate" - "and that's what we're contending with in Aotearoa". "Everyone should have a view but don't use the might of legislation and the power to be able to assert your racism and assert your anti-Māori, anti-Treaty agenda." Peters had taken aim at Waititi on Thursday as "the one in the cowboy hat" and "scribbles on his face" in reference to his mataora moko. Rawiri Waititi. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii He said countless haka have taken place in Parliament but only after first consulting the Speaker. "They told the media they were going to do it, but they didn't tell the Speaker did they?" Peters added that Te Pāti Māori were "a bunch of extremists" and that "New Zealand has had enough of them". "They don't want democracy, they want anarchy," he said. "They don't want one country, they don't want one law, they don't want one people." Winston Peters. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
