Williamson Maurice: General Debate 
Williamson Maurice: General Debate 
[Volume:620;Page:15684] 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga) 
: 
 There can be no area of Government policy where the differences are so stark between the left and the right than that of labour relations. I say to this House that in 2000 just after the Labour Party won the election at the end of 1999 it introduced one of the most draconian disgraceful pieces of industrial legislation this country had ever seen. 
Darren Hughes 
: Don Brash likes it. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I tell the member that I will deal with that but he needs to hear this first. The Labour Party introduced one of the most disgusting draconian and outrageous pieces of labour legislation this country had ever seen. During the course of 2000 we went through what is now well known in political circles as the winter of discontent to the point that by the end of that year—I still have the date: 8 November—a Colmar Brunton Television One poll showed the National Party ahead of the Labour Party which had cleaned us out at the election the year before. That result was down to one piece of legislation—Margaret Wilson’s obnoxious Employment Relations Bill. 
So what did Helen Clark the ever-vigilant “knowing I am going to stay in power at all costs” leader do? She moved in and gutted the legislation. What was finally passed at the end of 2000 bore almost no resemblance to the bill that had been introduced. Businesses breathed unbelievable sighs of relief. Up and down this country business people were falling on to their leather couches saying: “Thank God! All the evil bits have gone. In fact we actually think that what has been left—it ain’t much—of the ERA is pretty OK.” I heard that up and down this country from that point on. I have heard it for the last 4 years. 
What was fascinating at the select committee hearing was that the first comments of nearly all the businesses that came one after another to submit on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill—that is right an Act that had been working brilliantly since 2000 somehow then had to be amended—were to ask why we were doing that. They said: “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” They said that employment relations in this country were as good as they had ever been strikes were almost not heard of wages were growing faster than the consumer price index and the unemployment rate was down to the lowest it had ever been so why were we considering the amendment bill. If I had a dollar for every business that came before that committee and said: “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” I would have made enough for my retirement. Good companies—decent companies that were trying to get on with their jobs—sat there looked through the legislation and said: “This smacks of  
The 
Empire Strikes Back 
.” 
Margaret Wilson had the absolutely obnoxious elements of her bill gutted in 2000 but she has wheeled them back in as her swansong for departure—for depart she will. She did not get the vice-chancellor’s job at Waikato University even though—[ 
Interruption 
] Well she was down to the shortlist but they said they could not afford to have that. I know she is going. She has gone from the labour relations portfolio already. She was got rid of because of the unpleasant odour the business community felt was in that portfolio. But as a dying shot she thought she would bring in those obnoxious bits of the legislation—plus a bit actually. This amendment bill is the old employment relations legislation’s obnoxious stuff on steroids. It has all the bad bits plus a few more. 
Let me tell members what a couple of decent companies said to the select committee. A young Maori man from NgaiTahu who was running the Shotover jet operation in Queenstown—a really first-class well-educated lawyer who was making a phenomenal success out of a business; a Maori this country should be proud of—asked why we needed this amending legislation. He was another one who said: “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.” He said there would be real implications for his company when he employed casual or part-time labour and brought staff in and out. He said: “Please don’t do it.” 
Opposition Member 
: He pleaded. 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: He pleaded. Do members know what Labour members on the committee did? They sat there and laughed and they did not answer him. Then what was really interesting were the submissions of Dunedin’s best restaurateur the man who runs Bell Pepper Blues. He said we could go to his restaurant later on that night. We all paid our own bill so there was no scandal like that of the Kermadec or anywhere else— 
Opposition Member 
: Did the Labour people pay? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I think even the Labour members paid but what might have been put in their dinner was probably what they did not like. That man said: “Look I run this fabulous little restaurant. My greatest asset is staff and this bill will gut my company.” 
The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.