Finlayson Christopher: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14954] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage) 
: 
 The Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill is a very simple bill. It clarifies existing film industry practice and provides greater certainty for producers investors and workers and I am very pleased to support it. 
I was rather disappointed in the contribution from Mr Locke a fair-minded chap who tries to look at both sides of the issues. I was not at all surprised by the response of the Labour Party but Mr Locke at least tries to look at both sides of the issues. He raised a couple of points about the interference of foreigners in New Zealand. I had hoped that he would at least try to be consistent in his outrage about all forms of foreign interference in our film industry and I will read into the record just a couple of comments that I think need to be read in as part of the permanent record of this House. On Monday 11 October Helen Kelly of the Council of Trade Unions attended a meeting of actors in Wellington representing the position of Actors Equity a body that says it is independent of Australian unions. It is worth quoting from an article on Screen Hub written by someone attending that meeting. Asked at the meeting why New Zealand Actors Equity had not taken a full board vote before inviting international guilds and unions to bring pressure to bear on the production Ms Kelly reportedly told the meeting: “Your Australian leaders have been acting in your best interests.” Asked why local actors were not being afforded the chance to sort out any dissatisfaction about terms and conditions via their local representatives Ms Kelly responded that international unions have more muscle. 
Today some people are claiming that the unions have said that there would not be any industrial action on  
The Hobbit 
 so all this is unnecessary and that they simply could not understand why a studio that is investing many hundreds of millions of dollars in New Zealand—in New Zealand jobs in New Zealand’s future and in our film industry—may have some reticence about taking the unions at their word. One needs look no further than the statement from Actors Equity on Radio New Zealand just last Friday: “We’ve been trying this with local productions for a couple of years. The difference with  
The Hobbit 
 was that we did have some support from outside unions. We didn’t encourage them to bully Peter Jackson. They came on board and supported us of their own accord.” 
Another myth perpetrated by the unions is that the industrial relations dispute had nothing to do with money but was about terms and conditions of employment. On 27 September the Australian unionist Simon Whipp told the  
Otago Daily Times 
 that the issue was all about the payment of fees. Last Friday Robyn Malcolm was quoted in the  
Dominion Post 
 as talking about securing financial benefits for those involved in the production. Is it any wonder that investors are reluctant to take the word of the unions in this matter and have sought that the matter be clarified? 
When Simon Whipp told  
The Hollywood Reporter 
 that union success with  
The Hobbit 
 would pave the way for unionising other productions in New Zealand and Helen Kelly told Newstalk ZB that her primary focus was to “unionise the film industry what was the problem with that and that Peter Jackson was a spoilt brat” is it any wonder investors get nervous about the unions’ true intentions? 
What is most revealing is the point made by Mr Hide and Mr Brownlee: “What do the workers think about all of this?”. One need look no further than Labour Day which is the day set aside for workers when thousands of people marched up and down this country against the unions—on Labour Day of all days. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: In their thousands. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: They marched in their thousands as Mr Henare said. Thousands of people cheered that great New Zealander Sir Richard Taylor in Civic Square. 
Earlier today a true worker in the film industry Mark Harrison stated he did not have any concerns about the proposed legislation. He said this is an area that has needed clarification ever since the Bryson case. It should have been changed by the Labour Government. But was there any chance of that given that Mr Chauvel who is a member of the Labour Party acted for the Council of Trade Unions as an intervener in the Supreme Court? 
I think it is pretty clear that the Labour Party once again is shown to be more concerned about the unions than the economy. That has always been the case whether it was the Waterside Workers Union in 1951 the Seamen’s Union in 1970— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: And the boilermakers. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: —the Boilermakers Union over the BNZ building or Actors Equity in 2010. The unions come first; the economy comes second. All I want to say is that I very much look forward to next year’s election in the marginal seat of Rongotai when Annette King—the self-proclaimed “MP for Weta”—and I can discuss some of these issues.