Henare Tau: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Henare Tau: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14974] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 Let us be quite clear in the second reading of the Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill. I will quote John Armstrong that great resident—although he has not got his citizenship yet—in the  
New Zealand Herald  
today. He said: “The Government has made the right decision for the film industry and for the wider economy.” So why are we not happy? We should be happy. Do members know why? Because there are thousands of jobs being created by none other than John Key and Warner Bros sitting down and seeing whether they could not work through the issues. There will be the promotion of this country around the world with the help of people who know what they are talking about when they make movies—that is Warner Bros. That is a great thing. 
Another thing that we should be happy about is that there will be at least $700 million going into our economy. That is not a maximum; that is a minimum. A minimum of $700 million will go into our economy and who sneezes at it? The Greens and Labour. 
Kelvin Davis 
: We’re sneezing at this dumb law. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Oh that is right. That was from the member from up north somewhere. Basically what he is saying is that the workers do not count. In the last couple of days the union movement and Labour went and scabbed on their own members. They went and scabbed on workers in this country and all the ex - union officials know what I am talking about. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take offence at the use of the word “scab” in relation to the Labour Party. We may be many things but we are certainly not that. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I am reflecting on that word. I am uncomfortable with it so I ask the member to desist from using it. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Oh well I am not allowed to say— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am going to ask you to be a little stronger on that word. It is a word that has been ruled out and people have apologised for it in the past. To be absolutely clear for members of the labour movement it is an extremely offensive term. I think you need to look at the face of the member who used it to see that he knows that. 
Chris Tremain 
: Throughout yesterday the Opposition particularly Mr Iain Lees-Galloway and the member across the House Kelvin Davis used the term “bent over” which is exceptionally offensive particularly because that party claims to look after women’s rights and gay rights. I have to say that that was particularly offensive. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I happened to be in the Chair at that time and I asked that member to desist in much the same way as the member has been asked on this occasion. It is a robust debate as one would expect. I have said to the member to not use the word again and I will stand by that. I understand what other members have done but this a robust debate. I ask that the word not be included from this point on. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to try to get this one right because I cannot remember whether there is still a list of proscribed words but there certainly used to be a black book to which Speakers went that had a list. That list included the word “scab”. The problem that I have is that previous Speakers have repeatedly ruled it out. It now appears like you are saying that it is not something to be withdrawn and apologised for when previous Speakers have ruled in the opposite direction. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member will know that I have been here for some time as well and I have quite a good memory. I am trying to recall any circumstances surrounding this word. I agree that it is an inappropriate word to use in this House. I have been looking at Speaker’s ruling 55/7 which states a word or phrase is inappropriate if it will bring disorder to the House. I have simply ruled out the word. From this point on it is not a word that will take place in this debate . I stand by that. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: If I am not allowed to use that word how about— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you are aware that notwithstanding the unfortunate nature of your ruling he is not allowed to refer to it. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: The member ought not to have referred to it as being “unfortunate” on my part as well. We will put this word and any acknowledgment of it completely away. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Not a problem. “Rogered” is another word— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If we go back to just the first three words that the member used we see that they were a comment again on your ruling. I think there is a matter of being able to take an instruction from the Chair rather than to comment on the rulings the Chair has been making. Thank you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: I think it is now time for the dinner adjournment where we shall all partake of some sustenance and reflect on our good behaviour in the House. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Before the dinner break I was told that I should not use a certain word. I am asking for clarification. Am I not allowed to use the word full stop or only in— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am not aware of the word. At this stage we are starting a new session after dinner so I ask the member to continue. It depends on what the word is. If it offends somebody or someone sees it as a personal reflection under Standing Order 116 they can object to it and take offence. Let us move on. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Every word has a genealogy or a whakapapa of where it comes from. The word that I am not allowed to use— 
Jacqui Dean 
: What word? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: It is like “fink” “informer” “canary” “nark” “rat” “snake” “snitch” “squealer”— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: This is a “Tau”. It’s self-definition. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I do not get upset by those members. They know what they are and they know what they and their mates them and that mob from Australia did to workers. “Mob” is not a derogatory word; in fact the Aboriginal people use it as a word for a group of people. The mob from Australia came over then Helen Kelly and that Malcolm woman conspired. They thought they were conspiring. I suppose one Robyn Malcolm did it because she really wanted  
The Hobbit 
 to be made in New Zealand although I have my doubts. As for the others I say that Helen Kelly would not know what time of day it was over this issue. She fell for the trap that was put there by the Australian guy—what is his name? Steven Fibs? 
Hon Member 
: Simon Whipp. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Simon Fibs. 
Hon Member 
: Whipp. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Simon Whipp. I am sorry; those Australian names are hard to pronounce. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Those f’s and w’s. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: That is absolutely right. I will continue: “snitch” “squealer” “tattle-tale” “weasel” “whistleblower” and this one to round it all off: “blackleg”. That is a really nasty one. They all come from the word “scab”. That is right; I have said it. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We had quite a long discussion with the Chair previously and it was made clear that that word could not be applied in the House. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I thank the member for that. I watched that interchange before the dinner break. The member cannot use the word “scab”. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Thank you. This is nothing more than a failed attempt by the Australian to do what? I do not know. To ruin the film industry? I say congratulations to our Prime Minister. The members opposite say that it cost us. I say to them listen it cost us nothing. It cost us nothing because we will get thousands of jobs in return and $700 million at a bare minimum will go into the economy. 
What we are doing here tonight is not about railroading workers’ rights or taking away rights; it is about saying that if someone signs on as an employee then that is what they are; but if someone signs on as an independent contractor then that is what they are. That is what we are doing tonight. To say that we are in the hands of Warner Bros and all that sort of Cold War stuff is really old socialist Commo red pinko rubbish. It harks back to a golden age when some of this House followed some naughty people from around the world who were communists and Trotskyites. It is really hard case to listen to some of the speeches from the other side of the House. It really does hark back to a golden age for them but this country and this House have moved on. 
We want to see a thriving film industry. By doing what he did the other day John Key has saved the film industry. In fact—and I might finish on this point—he took away any chance although it was very slim that the Labour Party had of winning the next election. He took it away. Now what we see in the House tonight are some kids who are really really disappointed that they have had their little toy their little dummy taken off them. That is what we have.