Tremain Chris: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Tremain Chris: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:651;Page:384] 
CHRIS TREMAIN (National—Napier) 
: 
 Having heard eight excellent maiden speeches I rise to address the second reading of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill.  
Just a month after the election Parliament is in urgency and we are putting through this legislation. We are delivering on the promises we made during the election campaign. Those promises were well canvassed throughout the election period and were I might add clearly part of the 100-day agenda that we took to the public and that is now being put through the House. It is excellent.  
As stated in clause 4 “Purpose” this bill introduces a 90-day grievance-free probation period. This proposal has been well canvassed around the country—particularly in 2006-07 when Dr Wayne Mapp first put forward the predecessor to the bill. This legislation will make labour markets a little more flexible and is part of the recipe that National proposed and is now implementing to lift economic growth.  
The Hon Lianne Dalziel formerly the Minister for Small Business made a very interesting point earlier in the debate. She talked about her pride and joy the Small Business Advisory Group. It is an important group that she selected and got up and running. That group put out a report about the key things that would help to drive small business across New Zealand. One of the top recommendations—in fact I believe that it was No. 1 or No. 2—was to introduce a 90-day grievance-free probation period. Funnily enough after that recommendation had been on the agenda for a couple of years the same group returned a report to the House on the performance of the Minister and the Labour-led Government with regard to those criteria and the Minister received a score of two out of 10 for the delivery of a number of key recommendations. I would not have thought that that was a great score but the Minister was proud of her achievements and was happy to move on.  
We are introducing this 90-day bill today. As I said the proposal was well canvassed in 2006 when Dr Mapp first brought the predecessor to this bill to the House. That bill has been watered down quite significantly but the proposal was again well canvassed during the election campaign. This legislation is opposed by Labour members in typical fashion as they seek to create myth upon myth about its possible horrendous outcomes. These myths are propagated to feather their own political nests. For example the Hon Annette King suggested earlier that businesses would stop growing once they had 20 employees. Please! I shouted across the floor to the member that people do not go into business just to stop when they have taken on 20 employees. They are passionate about growing their businesses; they put their heart and soul into them. If they are fortunate enough to have a successful business that grows and grows they are hardly going to haul on the handbrake because they have reached 20 employees. That is just insane and will not happen.  
The classic myth—the myth of all myths—is that employers who have had employees on board for 89 days will then sack them. Once again that myth has been propagated by just about every speaker on the other side of the House. It is unbelievable; it just does not happen. In the real world if employees are even half good employers wrap them in cotton wool and hold on to them because they add value to the organisation and help to take it forward. The last thing an employer would do is sack an employee on his or her 89th day.  
I really think Labour is creating a whole raft of myths to scare people about this legislation when in fact there is no need. People who start a small business invest a big chunk of their lives in it. They might mortgage their house or borrow money off their mum and dad to get into the business. They do the hard yards. They have to work as long as or longer than the politicians who work through urgency in this House. Once their employees have gone home they have to work on their tax returns their PAYE and their fringe benefit tax (FBT)—maybe from 12 o’clock at night until 2 in the morning. They put their heart and soul into their business. 
Hon Member 
: Oh rubbish! 
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: A load of rubbish? That clearly shows that members on that side of the House have had no involvement in small business. I have a lot of respect for the member but he should not go there with me. He says that small-business owners are not out there at midnight doing the hard yards.  
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: At least I built mine! You got yours off your old man.  
CHRIS TREMAIN 
: I say to Mr Horomia that for small-business owners who are on their own the only time they get to do things such as PAYE and FBT returns is after 5 o’clock when their shop shuts and sales are stopped. We need to be flexible; we need to provide a flexible labour market.  
Another former Minister Jim Anderton admitted in the House that by far the majority of employers are good employers. That was good to hear because it is true. By far the majority of small-business people are good employers. In my own experience of 16 years in business we wrapped people in cotton wool and looked after them. If we found good employees we were in good shape.  
To wind up my speech I say that if we are to grow the economy we need law that helps the majority of small businesses—we really do. That is what we need. In the first 100 days of our legislative agenda we need to pass law such as this that will drive our economy forward. I support this bill on that basis. Thank you very much.