MPs across the political spectrum are fired up over the latest proposal to overhaul —under urgency— rules around pay equity.
The proposed law, which would lift the threshold of pay equity claims of gender-discrimination, is expected to have its third reading this morning.
Labour's Ginny Andersen told Mike Hosking the Government was boasting about savings.
She says the women in these jobs need to know their wages have been undercut to pay for the Government’s budget.
Mark Mitchell says it's not that simple.
He says taxpayers are the ones funding the pay equity system, and so they need to ensure it’s sustainable.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Politics Wednesday, Jenny Anderson's with us along with Mark Mitchell.
Good morning to both of you.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Morning morning, good morning.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Do you know have you heard about our new country
music station Ginny?
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Oh no, I haven't.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
It's on various frequencies around the country and it's on iHeartRadio.
We've launched all launching this Friday, a country music station.
Oh great, I'm in, I'm in, I reckon. I'm not
in between six and ninety listen to other times of
the day.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
But I'll tell my dad too, John, and we're talking
and help me in as well.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
Tell your dad, Mark. Where is GiB and mcskimming?
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Well, he's suspended at the moment, and I can't say
anything more than that.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
How long is he going to be suspended for?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, until the process is complete, And I'm afraid I
just can't say.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
No, no, I understand that. But why does it take
so long? Is there are very obvious once this all
comes out in the wash one way or another. Is
there an obvious reason why it's taken so long. He's
been suspended for months now, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
I think so. I just you know, these metters do
take the hit. They're taken seriously. There are process that
has to be followed. It can feel like it takes
a long time, but it's got to be done properly.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
Okay, Jenny, I watch here's the text for you. I
watched question Time yesterday as the nude I am as indeed,
I am. I'm interested if you ask Genny please, of
Labour's biggest concern in education at the moment is emails
being sent from Erica's Gmail address and that was Willow
jen Prime. Was that story a stitch up between your
party and Mikey Sherman.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
There is a concern. I mean, don't let's not forget that.
Clear Karen was prosecuted on this and ended up losing
your job as a result of not using.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
I think I think it was a coffee with Carol
Hirshfeld that did her in.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Well yeah, well, but the point is that we need
to know those things, and we get pretty strict briefings
from GCSB. And that's why guys and all of those
Internet safety people that it's a real risk to be
doing that and not to do it need to be upfront.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
I don't know, argued. No one argues you break the rules,
but you guys all broke the rules. We know that,
and that's why I can't work out. So was it
a stitch up? Was Willa Jeen Prime feeding Mikey Sherman?
Is this how this works?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
No? No, I think these information going everywhere at the moment.
There's lots of different people in the public who are
now saying that Eric Sinford has asked them to email
her at their address, So you.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Can I just say this thing. And I'm not a
technical expert, but my wife was explaining she is was
explaining to me like, We've got a number of email addresses.
I've got a number of email addresses, and depending on
how the email arrives depends on what thing it sends
it back in, and you may or may not know
what that address is. If that makes sense. Is it
possible that I write to Erica, Erica replies to me
(02:39):
and they go, right, that's on Gmail as opposed to
a ministerial account, and she may not have known that.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
No, that's not right. So the parliamentary system is secure
and it's encrypted in Gmail is not And no, I
know that.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
But if I wrote to her on Gmail, if I
looked up her address and saw it was Erica at Gmail,
and I wrote to Erica at Gmail, and she replied
on gmailers it's not her fault, wrote to.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Her, No, that I think that's the point that we
need to get to the bottom of that. The parliamentary
system is unlikely to allow that kind of a division
to be in place.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
Okay. Having said that, the picture question, surely, Mark, is
that there's there's a world of really big stuff going
on right now. This isn't one of it.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Yeah, so I can help Genny get to the bottom.
But quite simply, Erica Stanford is working extremely hard on
making our education system much better and much more friendly,
user friendly for both our teachers and parents to get
our kids back at school and get them learning again.
So that's number one. Number two, she used her Gmail,
she said, because she had to print some documents, totally
(03:39):
get it. Apparently ministerial services are fixing that. But so
the real is the real. So there's no big conspiracy here, Ginny,
it's just quite quite simply a minister is working very
hard trying to get the job done.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
She said.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Yes, it wasn't the perfect process, She's aware of it.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Now we all won't do it again, create absolutely, and
we go back to twenty eighteen Jenny, And this is
the end of it because I'm sick of it. But
you guys all did it. When I say you're not
you specifically, but there's a long list of labor and
piece who did it. I mean, it's just stuff happens,
that's life, it's admin move on. I mean, this is
not a scandal.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We just need to make sure that in this day
and age, when there's increasing risks around security of internet
and information, particularly budget information, that everyone's using the rules
as they are. And you know Marks before, he's a
big guy for the rules, loves them, must stick to them,
so that applies to all in peace, and we need
to be clearer that everyone needs to be using them.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Well before I forget Jenny Catherine Weed's thing on social media,
would you guys back that given act won't.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Well it's a bit funny, isn't it. Why have you
got the Prime Minister standing by a backbencher saying he
loves this as a member's bill. If he thinks it's
so cool, why doesn't he just make it a government bill?
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Would do it very cool? But given it isn't, why
don't would you stand behind it?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
We think it's pretty it's all right. I want to
take a better look at it.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Yeah, you had a better look at it in theory.
Would you would you back it in theory?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Good? But the problem we've got is implementation, and that's
what's Australia his head, exactly, that's great.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
How are you going to it doesn't work? Market doesn't work.
Have you told Catherine when it doesn't work?
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Well, look there in schools. Let's look at the I
go into a bunch of high schools. They've all got
their laptops out and you're missing in each other like
crazy on their laptops, not on their phones now because
phone's got been so like we need to look at
if it's implemented. Is it actually going to work and
make it safer or is this just a bumper sticker
that makes parents feel okay? For a while, and then
none of the army well.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
Said, well, Seed, I'm loving you more and more by
this segment goes on mark you so what Well?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
The first thing I'd say is, yes, the Prime Minister
supports all of his MPs, so seeing them about supporting
one of our caucus members is something that a leader
should do. Number two, it's somebody that Catherine feels very
strongly about as a mother, and and she's brought this
forward through our caucus, which is a process that all
of the parties use, and she's put it forward as
(06:07):
a member's bill, which is he.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
You're the government.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Government, you're the government.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
So Jinny, every single just bet, every single one of
our members of caucus has got a private member's bill.
That's the way I bring legislation through as well. And
it may turn into a government bill. That's not my decision.
That will be a decision with the Coalition. But at
the moment you've got a really passionate member of Caucus,
a member of Parliament and a mum that has brought
this forward. We know that, yes, technology has been very
(06:34):
positive for us, it's also got some serious negatives and
the way it impacts with our young people.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
All right, mark the pay equity thing. Frustration I have
with Brook van Velden in its purest form. You're never
going to be able to jerrymander gender when it comes
to work. So what is it you're trying to achieve?
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Well, he didn't.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
He fact checked himself into muting Boomer time. Jinny, Yeah,
I'm here, what's the matter? With them.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
I'm not sure. I think it's the chubby cheeks again.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I think it is. And he'll come back on in
a moment. You go, I'm here.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
Do I get to talk about pe?
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (07:12):
All right, you because I had a neck k.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
We want a system that's yeah, every.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Time music is he done again, he's done it again,
and he'll boom back anyway. The point is that, yes, yes,
just laugh.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
I was just I was just going to say that
at the end of the day, we want a system
that is equitable, fear and is sustainable.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Yeah, but you haven't got one and you're not going
to have one. That's my point this morning. You can't.
You can't go rest home, working mechanic. It's not real.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah, it's it's ridiculous that the lowest paid women in
New Zealand are going to have it worse under this legislation,
and then they're boasting about it.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
You've got David c.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Can because you lower it, you make it harder, you
make it more difficult. How you change it from seventy
percent to sixty percent paratis seventy, You change the comparators,
how it's compared, You make those wait ridiculous, you make
those listen, though, you make it ten years before they
can go back and have it reviewed. All of the
(08:27):
thirty three claims that were underway are wiped out.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Make it does not stop. Pay equality claims from the ones.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
That have been in training for all that time are
being wiped out. Thirty three have been absolutely wiped out
by that legislation. You have David Seymour boasting that he
has saved your budget by saving millions of dollars. Those
millions of dollars belong to women working hard and jobs
that should pay them more. The listeners to this radio
station will have women in those jobs and they need
(08:55):
to know that this government has undercut their wages in
order to pay for their budget.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
You got are you guys right behind it? I mean,
I get that this is a very act ideological thing.
I get that. Are you guys in boots and all?
Speaker 3 (09:08):
Yeah, we support it because at the end of the day,
the system, the way that Laboured set it up, was
not sustainable for us as a country. And what Jenny
fails to members, fails to mention it's all those women
out there that are also is tax payers paying for it.
So we have to make sure that so we have
to make sure that it is sustainable. It's not government
money you can't afford to work, it's tax payers money.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
And it's not taxpayers money, it's wages of private businesses. Also,
it's a whole range.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Because a lot of people are avoiding the public service.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
So is Mark actually not all though? Are you actually
saying Mark that it is not sustainable for this government
to pay the lowest paid women workers a fair wage.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
It's not sustainable for this country with the settings that
you changed, and that is why and said, that's absolutely,
and that is why we have made the changes. And
that is why.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Is when you say people are worth more, who decides
And you've decided that mechanics are the same as rest
home workers, which is absurd, So that needs changing. But
what you know, some job work is worth what it's worth.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
The comparators are ludicrous.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
So that's fine if you want to fix that, we're
happy to have a debate, but do not eradicate thirty
three claims and do not make it.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
Those claims are on old rules, so if you're changing
the rules, you can't have them some on the old
rules and some on the new rules, because that's not
a level playing field.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Those claims still come forward, They can still come forward.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Talks about I think.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
You tell me that those claims can't progress. Is that
what you're saying?
Speaker 1 (10:40):
They progress under a more difficult set of circumstances.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
Resetting to what's what the settings were before and in
line with the bill that we brought forward because we
wanted to make sure that as a national party that
we were recognizing dealing with p equity. We recognize it's
an issue, we want to deal with it. We've all
got mums and daughters and everyone else we want. We
want it to be fear and we want it to
and we will.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
It's great, isn't it. It's an excellent geney. It's an
excellent contest of ideas. I get your view, I get
mark few. It's a good contest of ideas.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Fix the comparators don't.
Speaker 3 (11:15):
And the reason why is because you keep referring to
women and enjoving to women.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
And that's right.
Speaker 3 (11:24):
That's right. But you gave an eye roll when you
when you said that we care just as bit about that,
just as much as you do. Not use they're actually
believe it or not.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
One thing one soon as well.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Just condescending. It's just.
Speaker 3 (11:41):
It's not condescending at all. The labor putting labels on
people submitted, you lose the debate. You try to put
labels on people you completely consistent. It's not condescending. It's
quite simply the fact that as a country we're trying
to be really responsible and allow system to be that's
sustainable into the future. Everyone can, they have access to it.
Every We should all be driving towards play equity and
(12:03):
this is what this change does.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
All right, Bree, Okay, guys, appreciate it. Mike Mitchell, gy Ands,
now tell you what I'm interested in is whether it
moves the needle politically, because it's a hot potato, as
they say, ins and Mike Mitchell for another Wednesday.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news Talks. It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Politics Wednesday, Jenny Anderson's with us along with Mark Mitchell.
Good morning to both of you.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Morning morning, good morning.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Do you know have you heard about our new country
music station Ginny?
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Oh no, I haven't.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
It's on various frequencies around the country and it's on iHeartRadio.
We've launched all launching this Friday, a country music station.
Oh great, I'm in, I'm in, I reckon. I'm not
in between six and ninety listen to other times of
the day.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
But I'll tell my dad too, John, and we're talking
and help me in as well.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
Tell your dad, Mark. Where is GiB and mcskimming?
Speaker 3 (00:33):
Well, he's suspended at the moment, and I can't say
anything more than that.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
How long is he going to be suspended for?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, until the process is complete, And I'm afraid I
just can't say.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
No, no, I understand that. But why does it take
so long? Is there are very obvious once this all
comes out in the wash one way or another. Is
there an obvious reason why it's taken so long. He's
been suspended for months now, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
I think so. I just you know, these metters do
take the hit. They're taken seriously. There are process that
has to be followed. It can feel like it takes
a long time, but it's got to be done properly.
Speaker 1 (01:05):
Okay, Jenny, I watch here's the text for you. I
watched question Time yesterday as the nude I am as indeed,
I am. I'm interested if you ask Genny please, of
Labour's biggest concern in education at the moment is emails
being sent from Erica's Gmail address and that was Willow
jen Prime. Was that story a stitch up between your
party and Mikey Sherman.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
There is a concern. I mean, don't let's not forget that.
Clear Karen was prosecuted on this and ended up losing
your job as a result of not using.
Speaker 1 (01:36):
I think I think it was a coffee with Carol
Hirshfeld that did her in.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Well yeah, well, but the point is that we need
to know those things, and we get pretty strict briefings
from GCSB. And that's why guys and all of those
Internet safety people that it's a real risk to be
doing that and not to do it need to be upfront.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
I don't know, argued. No one argues you break the rules,
but you guys all broke the rules. We know that,
and that's why I can't work out. So was it
a stitch up? Was Willa Jeen Prime feeding Mikey Sherman?
Is this how this works?
Speaker 2 (02:05):
No? No, I think these information going everywhere at the moment.
There's lots of different people in the public who are
now saying that Eric Sinford has asked them to email
her at their address, So you.
Speaker 1 (02:16):
Can I just say this thing. And I'm not a
technical expert, but my wife was explaining she is was
explaining to me like, We've got a number of email addresses.
I've got a number of email addresses, and depending on
how the email arrives depends on what thing it sends
it back in, and you may or may not know
what that address is. If that makes sense. Is it
possible that I write to Erica, Erica replies to me
(02:39):
and they go, right, that's on Gmail as opposed to
a ministerial account, and she may not have known that.
Speaker 2 (02:45):
No, that's not right. So the parliamentary system is secure
and it's encrypted in Gmail is not And no, I
know that.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
But if I wrote to her on Gmail, if I
looked up her address and saw it was Erica at Gmail,
and I wrote to Erica at Gmail, and she replied
on gmailers it's not her fault, wrote to.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
Her, No, that I think that's the point that we
need to get to the bottom of that. The parliamentary
system is unlikely to allow that kind of a division
to be in place.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
Okay. Having said that, the picture question, surely, Mark, is
that there's there's a world of really big stuff going
on right now. This isn't one of it.
Speaker 3 (03:18):
Yeah, so I can help Genny get to the bottom.
But quite simply, Erica Stanford is working extremely hard on
making our education system much better and much more friendly,
user friendly for both our teachers and parents to get
our kids back at school and get them learning again.
So that's number one. Number two, she used her Gmail,
she said, because she had to print some documents, totally
(03:39):
get it. Apparently ministerial services are fixing that. But so
the real is the real. So there's no big conspiracy here, Ginny,
it's just quite quite simply a minister is working very
hard trying to get the job done.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
She said.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Yes, it wasn't the perfect process, She's aware of it.
Speaker 1 (04:00):
Now we all won't do it again, create absolutely, and
we go back to twenty eighteen Jenny, And this is
the end of it because I'm sick of it. But
you guys all did it. When I say you're not
you specifically, but there's a long list of labor and
piece who did it. I mean, it's just stuff happens,
that's life, it's admin move on. I mean, this is
not a scandal.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We just need to make sure that in this day
and age, when there's increasing risks around security of internet
and information, particularly budget information, that everyone's using the rules
as they are. And you know Marks before, he's a
big guy for the rules, loves them, must stick to them,
so that applies to all in peace, and we need
to be clearer that everyone needs to be using them.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
Well before I forget Jenny Catherine Weed's thing on social media,
would you guys back that given act won't.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Well it's a bit funny, isn't it. Why have you
got the Prime Minister standing by a backbencher saying he
loves this as a member's bill. If he thinks it's
so cool, why doesn't he just make it a government bill?
Speaker 1 (04:54):
Would do it very cool? But given it isn't, why
don't would you stand behind it?
Speaker 2 (05:00):
We think it's pretty it's all right. I want to
take a better look at it.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
Yeah, you had a better look at it in theory.
Would you would you back it in theory?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Good? But the problem we've got is implementation, and that's
what's Australia his head, exactly, that's great.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
How are you going to it doesn't work? Market doesn't work.
Have you told Catherine when it doesn't work?
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Well, look there in schools. Let's look at the I
go into a bunch of high schools. They've all got
their laptops out and you're missing in each other like
crazy on their laptops, not on their phones now because
phone's got been so like we need to look at
if it's implemented. Is it actually going to work and
make it safer or is this just a bumper sticker
that makes parents feel okay? For a while, and then
none of the army well.
Speaker 1 (05:38):
Said, well, Seed, I'm loving you more and more by
this segment goes on mark you so what Well?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
The first thing I'd say is, yes, the Prime Minister
supports all of his MPs, so seeing them about supporting
one of our caucus members is something that a leader
should do. Number two, it's somebody that Catherine feels very
strongly about as a mother, and and she's brought this
forward through our caucus, which is a process that all
of the parties use, and she's put it forward as
(06:07):
a member's bill, which is he.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
You're the government.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Government, you're the government.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
So Jinny, every single just bet, every single one of
our members of caucus has got a private member's bill.
That's the way I bring legislation through as well. And
it may turn into a government bill. That's not my decision.
That will be a decision with the Coalition. But at
the moment you've got a really passionate member of Caucus,
a member of Parliament and a mum that has brought
this forward. We know that, yes, technology has been very
(06:34):
positive for us, it's also got some serious negatives and
the way it impacts with our young people.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
All right, mark the pay equity thing. Frustration I have
with Brook van Velden in its purest form. You're never
going to be able to jerrymander gender when it comes
to work. So what is it you're trying to achieve?
Speaker 3 (06:52):
Well, he didn't.
Speaker 1 (06:56):
He fact checked himself into muting Boomer time. Jinny, Yeah,
I'm here, what's the matter? With them.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
I'm not sure. I think it's the chubby cheeks again.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I think it is. And he'll come back on in
a moment. You go, I'm here.
Speaker 2 (07:10):
Do I get to talk about pe?
Speaker 3 (07:11):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (07:12):
All right, you because I had a neck k.
Speaker 3 (07:15):
We want a system that's yeah, every.
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Time music is he done again, he's done it again,
and he'll boom back anyway. The point is that, yes, yes,
just laugh.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
I was just I was just going to say that
at the end of the day, we want a system
that is equitable, fear and is sustainable.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Yeah, but you haven't got one and you're not going
to have one. That's my point this morning. You can't.
You can't go rest home, working mechanic. It's not real.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
Yeah, it's it's ridiculous that the lowest paid women in
New Zealand are going to have it worse under this legislation,
and then they're boasting about it.
Speaker 3 (08:04):
You've got David c.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
Can because you lower it, you make it harder, you
make it more difficult. How you change it from seventy
percent to sixty percent paratis seventy, You change the comparators,
how it's compared, You make those wait ridiculous, you make
those listen, though, you make it ten years before they
can go back and have it reviewed. All of the
(08:27):
thirty three claims that were underway are wiped out.
Speaker 3 (08:30):
Make it does not stop. Pay equality claims from the ones.
Speaker 2 (08:34):
That have been in training for all that time are
being wiped out. Thirty three have been absolutely wiped out
by that legislation. You have David Seymour boasting that he
has saved your budget by saving millions of dollars. Those
millions of dollars belong to women working hard and jobs
that should pay them more. The listeners to this radio
station will have women in those jobs and they need
(08:55):
to know that this government has undercut their wages in
order to pay for their budget.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
You got are you guys right behind it? I mean,
I get that this is a very act ideological thing.
I get that. Are you guys in boots and all?
Speaker 3 (09:08):
Yeah, we support it because at the end of the day,
the system, the way that Laboured set it up, was
not sustainable for us as a country. And what Jenny
fails to members, fails to mention it's all those women
out there that are also is tax payers paying for it.
So we have to make sure that so we have
to make sure that it is sustainable. It's not government
money you can't afford to work, it's tax payers money.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
And it's not taxpayers money, it's wages of private businesses. Also,
it's a whole range.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Because a lot of people are avoiding the public service.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
So is Mark actually not all though? Are you actually
saying Mark that it is not sustainable for this government
to pay the lowest paid women workers a fair wage.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
It's not sustainable for this country with the settings that
you changed, and that is why and said, that's absolutely,
and that is why we have made the changes. And
that is why.
Speaker 1 (10:01):
Is when you say people are worth more, who decides
And you've decided that mechanics are the same as rest
home workers, which is absurd, So that needs changing. But
what you know, some job work is worth what it's worth.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
The comparators are ludicrous.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
So that's fine if you want to fix that, we're
happy to have a debate, but do not eradicate thirty
three claims and do not make it.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
Those claims are on old rules, so if you're changing
the rules, you can't have them some on the old
rules and some on the new rules, because that's not
a level playing field.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
Those claims still come forward, They can still come forward.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Talks about I think.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
You tell me that those claims can't progress. Is that
what you're saying?
Speaker 1 (10:40):
They progress under a more difficult set of circumstances.
Speaker 3 (10:45):
Resetting to what's what the settings were before and in
line with the bill that we brought forward because we
wanted to make sure that as a national party that
we were recognizing dealing with p equity. We recognize it's
an issue, we want to deal with it. We've all
got mums and daughters and everyone else we want. We
want it to be fear and we want it to
and we will.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
It's great, isn't it. It's an excellent geney. It's an
excellent contest of ideas. I get your view, I get
mark few. It's a good contest of ideas.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Fix the comparators don't.
Speaker 3 (11:15):
And the reason why is because you keep referring to
women and enjoving to women.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
And that's right.
Speaker 3 (11:24):
That's right. But you gave an eye roll when you
when you said that we care just as bit about that,
just as much as you do. Not use they're actually
believe it or not.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
One thing one soon as well.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Just condescending. It's just.
Speaker 3 (11:41):
It's not condescending at all. The labor putting labels on
people submitted, you lose the debate. You try to put
labels on people you completely consistent. It's not condescending. It's
quite simply the fact that as a country we're trying
to be really responsible and allow system to be that's
sustainable into the future. Everyone can, they have access to it.
Every We should all be driving towards play equity and
(12:03):
this is what this change does.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
All right, Bree, Okay, guys, appreciate it. Mike Mitchell, gy Ands,
now tell you what I'm interested in is whether it
moves the needle politically, because it's a hot potato, as
they say, ins and Mike Mitchell for another Wednesday.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to
news Talks. It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com