Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations (Probationary  Employment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations (Probationary  Employment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:635;Page:6749] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to take a call on this very important legislation which is based on the premise that if we are to have successful businesses grow the economy and have productivity in the economy then we have to have a skilled and competitive workforce compliance costs that are within reason and some assurance that people in business are prepared to invest and get a return on their investment dollar. When we look at business as a whole—and members have heard me speak on other occasions about the importance of business in our communities and the role it plays in our GDP—we see some very important facets in which in our view this Government has not performed. Labour members are under the misapprehension that all employers are wrong and are guilty unless proved innocent. They believe that employers will try to rip somebody off just for the sake of doing that. We have heard that tonight. 
We have to build a very strong base for business so that there is some certainty and continuity. Businesses are built on customer bases. They are built up because somebody is prepared to buy or use the service that a business will deliver. Everything is driven by the market so if we do not have a strong customer base then we do not have a business. Some of the experiences that I have had of restructuring businesses over the years have occurred because of the fact that although many businesses are started not many of them succeed unless the owners have done the homework and the preparatory work to set frameworks in place. One of the statistics that is always used in relation to trying to gain new customers is that it costs six times as much to try to get a new customer as it does to retain the customer one has in the first place. 
So it is with employment. If somebody is making a contribution and is going to add value to a business the employer will be prepared to put time and effort into that person—through training seminars and other incentives such as superannuation mileage allowances or whatever—to retain that person. Good employees in a business often become frontline staff and they can be a real asset to the business. 
But so many businesses these days are saying that it is not worth the risk. They are not prepared to take on anybody extra because too many facets of compliance cost make it more difficult for them and it is not really worth the effort. Business owners may then say they will run their businesses themselves with their existing staff or they may even cut back making it easier for them to control their operations. 
In looking at business growth I have here a dossier put out by Business New Zealand. It talks about the seven pillars of growth one of which is specifically about a business-friendly environment. It talks about New Zealanders wanting growth and what they need now to achieve that. A number of important bullet points follow. One that is highlighted is for a grievance-free probation period to be put into the Employment Relations Act. You see one of the things that employers or prospective employers do when they invest in staff is make sure they have the right people to start with. Many I have talked with over the years especially those who have been unemployed say that it is very difficult to get jobs because employers are reluctant to take them on. Those people are just asking for a chance for an opportunity to get their foot inside the door and that is the opportunity provided in Wayne Mapp’s bill. 
The bill talks about giving people a 90-day probationary period. Earlier on I was an advocate for a 180-day grievance-free period. In fact that is common overseas. New Zealand is the only country that does not have that probationary period. If we want to grow the economy—if we want to have the productivity that everyone talks about—then let us make it easy for employers to get staff and train them. Taking somebody on is a big investment; it does not just happen. Employees have to be trained up in order to deal with the most important person in the business—the customer. Employees may well be in a workshop environment but they still have a role to play in making sure that the quality of the goods the business produces is up to par with whatever the market expects and with whatever the competition produces. 
I have some figures here that talk about the main sources of compliance in relation to employment. A pie graph shows countries with high employment areas yet with compliance costs that are very low because they have adopted the sort of provision I am talking about. Austria Belgium Finland and Sweden are countries that have provisions allowing for growth in their economies. 
Agenda 2010 is a document I have talked about before in relation to the Commission of the European Communities. When I was in Germany last year—[ 
Interruption 
] The member might like to listen to this because I was a guest of the Bundestag where I learnt that while unemployment is high in Germany its productivity is three times greater than New Zealand’s. The document says that in respect of the challenges relating to employees labour markets and skill shortages—the challenges we have here—the other countries of the European Community are asking how to create incentives for businesses to grow and take on staff so they can contribute not only to their local communities but also to their regional communities and ultimately to the benefit of their whole country. 
Agenda 2010 actually sets out provisions for the employment of staff. It talks about taking people on for a grievance-free period in order to give them skills. In fact it goes so far as to state—which we are not advocating—that if employers employ fewer than five people then regardless they can be dismissed at any time. We would never go to that stage. But in terms of being able to take somebody on and give them a chance when we know there are sectors within the community that are disadvantaged Wayne Mapp’s initiative in this bill is pretty significant. If we want entrepreneurial enterprise if we want investment in the economy and if we actually want to grow those things that are important then this measure is the sort of measure that becomes important. 
It is interesting that we have opposition from members on the other side of the House. They have never invested a dollar in business nor employed anyone. They would absolutely not have a clue what we are talking about. They have never been risk-takers. They have a lot of theories but they have never invested a dollar to say: “This is how it works.” and been prepared to take a risk. They have all come from one side of the fence. They believe that employers are all wrong and are trying to rip everybody off. 
Well that is not the case. If there is no investment or no employers then people have no chance to get a job. We are saying that the legislation advocated and promoted by Dr Mapp—and we have had feedback from around the country—is a measure to allow people to get a foot inside the door. If this Government is going to say that it will not allow that then woe betide it because in 2 years’ time when those members are out and down the road—because we will be the Government—we will remind them about that. This is a Government that is anti-business and anti-employer. It does not understand what makes the world go around. In 2 years’ time—it might be less than that; it might be next year—we will say that if we want productivity if we want to promote entrepreneurs risk-takers then this bill is the sort of measure that will make it work 
Along with getting rid of those other provisions we will lower taxation sort out accident compensation and reduce the Resource Management Act consent process—those sorts of things. They are the challenges that face business and I commend Dr Mapp and those members of the National team who have spoken in the House on this bill. This is good legislation. It goes to the heart of growing the economy and giving ownership back where it belongs—to those people who are prepared to invest and make sacrifices. That is good for the economy and that is good for employers and their staff. We welcome it. In fact this Government by not voting for the bill will be held to account in less than 2 years’ time.