12. SUE MORONEY (Labour) Link to this
to the Minister of Women's Affairs
Was she consulted over the Government’s decision to “discontinue” pay equity investigations for social workers and school support staff?
Hon PANSY WONG (Minister of Women’s Affairs) Link to this
As I advised the member in my answer of 3 March to her written question, no.
Does the Minister recall why a previous National Government got rid of pay equity legislation as soon as it took power in 1990? Was that also because of an economic downturn, or was there a different excuse then, although with exactly the same outcome?
I am proud to tell the member that it was a National Government that in 1972 introduced the Equal Pay Act.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The Minister failed to address the question that I had asked her, which was about legislation that National got rid of in 1990. Sunday was International Working Women’s Day, and I believe that New Zealand women deserve—
Mr SPEAKERWhy did the Minister ignore a protest on this issue by school support workers in Hamilton on Friday, and then, just minutes later, tell the Hamilton International Women’s Day Symposium that the gender pay gap was too large in New Zealand and she wanted to do more, when her Government is actually guilty of doing less?
I hardly ignored the handful of protesters in Hamilton. I actually told them to please take care and not get too wet.
Amy AdamsA National Government passed the Equal Pay Act in 1972. It made it illegal to pay a woman less than a man for the same work. After 30 years there remains a gender pay gap in New Zealand. The causes of it are complex. The Ministry of Women’s Affairs and I are looking at and addressing the various issues contributing to it, which include occupational segregation, educational qualifications, time out of the workforce to undertake caring responsibilities, and employment practices.
Hon Ruth DysonCan the Minister explain the difference between pay equality and pay equity; if so, could she give the House the benefit of this wisdom that she has very recently acquired?
I believe that I addressed that in my last answer, if that member had cared to listen carefully. If one adds up all the men and women on either side, one finds that the pay gap is largely to do with occupational segregation, qualifications, etc. But I just want to add that if the previous Labour Government believed that pay equity was such a serious issue, why did it take it 7 years to start two pay equity investigations?
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My point of order is, no doubt, obvious to you and the rest of the House. My question was very simple. I asked what the difference is between equality and equity, and if the Minister understood the difference, to share that wisdom with the House. The Minister failed to address the question.
Can I just check with the honourable member whether she, in fact, asked that question, or whether she asked the Minister to explain the difference. If my memory serves me correctly, the member asked the Minister to explain the difference, and the Minister gave her explanation.
I asked whether the Minister understood the difference, and if she did, could she explain it. Neither point was addressed by the Minister.
As the member knows, where there are two parts to a question, and one part seeks an explanation, I think that the explanation that a Minister gives may not be, in the member’s view, a very good explanation, but it is still an explanation. That is the dilemma with that kind of supplementary question.
Which of the following quotes does the Minister believe most closely resembles the aspirations of New Zealand women: that of the Hon Tony Ryall, who, in scrapping the pay equity investigations, said they “generate an additional form of remuneration pressure that is unaffordable in the current economic and fiscal environment.”; her own quote, when she said: “it is inevitable that New Zealand women will be hugely affected by the recession.”; or that of President Barack Obama, when he said: “Making”—[ Interruption] I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.
I think it is clear what the honourable member’s point of order is going to be. It was not possible to hear the last part of the question. Although I accept that it was a longish question, we have had some longish answers today. It was a single question; the member was asking the Minister which of several things was correct. But we do not want the list to go on for too long. If the member could repeat the third—
OK. Or that of President Barack Obama, when he said: “Making our economy work means making sure it works for everybody, that there are no second-class citizens in our workplaces.”? He said that when he was—
I am sure that the only woman the member quoted said more than that it was “inevitable”. My aspiration is that women exercise choice in their lives. I back women all the time, so I am backing the woman who was quoted.
I seek leave to table a document that I am disappointed to see has not made it on to the Department of Labour website yet, because it is a good piece of work. It is the Report on the Pay Investigation for Special Education Support Workers, which has not been published on the websites of any of the Government departments that produced it.