Burns Brendon: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Burns Brendon: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21116] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I am going to completely ignore—completely ignore—the previous speaker Michael Woodhouse because that is what his speech deserves but I do want to pick up on the comments of the member responsible for the Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill Tau Henare. I acknowledge that in response to a comment from one of my colleagues that Tau Henare was the worst union delegate secretary ever in the history of the country he stood up and said that that was not true and that it was Fintan Patrick Walsh. That was the comparison he made for himself. That is what he told us. We have the “Black Prince” who I acknowledge was worse than Tau Henare as a union delegate secretary. He was the “Black Prince” who worked with the employers against the interests of workers in issues like the 1951 waterfront lockout. So to make that comparison rather underscores the comments made by my colleagues. 
Mr Henare also referred to bullying tactics but he talked hardly at all about this bill which I think rather underscores the futility of it. We have had people who have been union representatives and who have overseen ballot after ballot say to the Committee that it is the practice—and I as a former union member can confirm—that ballots are almost always held in secret. I contrast this bill with the previous bill the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill where the Government was not prepared to allow compulsion in respect of student union membership. But suddenly this following bill says that secret union ballots must be compulsory. What a contradiction in terms that is. That is the contrast there. 
Mr Henare also made an extraordinary comment that many members of the National caucus have been union delegates. I found that to be an extraordinary comment and I would like to see any member opposite stand up and confirm his comments. I wonder whether he was referring to people like David Carter who perhaps represents the “Union of Multiple Farm Owners” or maybe to Wayne Mapp who must represent the “North Shore Workers Union” or maybe he could have been referring to Maurice Williamson the well-known union delegate and representative for the “Pakuranga Geeks and Related Trades Union”. That would be a union that I am sure would never want to see a compulsory ballot because they would want to do it on their iPads. They would not want to have compulsory ballots; the “Pakuranga Geeks and Related Trades Union” would want to have their votes taken by iPad which is rather different from walking into a trades hall or a conference centre to give a vote. I wonder whether Tony Ryall— 
Moana Mackey 
: Title. 
BRENDON BURNS 
: I will come back to the title of the bill which relates to the Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill. I say thank you to my colleague Moana Mackey for reminding me that we are debating the title of this particular bill. Following on from that this bill is about trying to enforce what is already the practice in union ballots today which is to have a secret ballot. The situation is not one where one size fits all. The point has been made in respect of a decision by shareholders to lock out workers that they should be given the same requirement. If we are to have equity across this issue then surely this bill should extend to shareholders in a company. Where shareholders in a company have made a decision to lock out workers who have decided to take a strike because of the ballot they have taken—almost certainly in secret—then they should be compelled under the same legislation that Tau Henare has brought into the House. 
I find it absolutely extraordinary that we have this member’s bill. It is clear that there has been an instruction to the National caucus to find a member’s bill; it does not matter whether or not it is of no consequence at all. We have the Military Manoeuvres Act Repeal Bill and we have this bill. These bills are an indication that the National caucus has been told to get a member’s bill up. I will take the word of colleagues who have been in the union movement—like Darien Fenton like Lynne Pillay like Carol Beaumont—that the practice is there but there has to be a choice for workers to make their decisions in respect of these ballots. We can see the potential for this bill to be used as a weapon against workers not as a tool to protect their rights in the workplace. That would be very much in line with the anti-worker sentiment of this Government. 
Sandra Goudie 
: Mr Chair— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: I will give the call to Sandra Goudie but before I do so I say that the Chair is desirous of having some debate on the title which is actually what this debate is about. I just caution the Committee that we actually should be debating the title and I would prefer that we do that. Then we can make some progress.