Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Brash Don: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:620;Page:15581] 
4.  
Dr DON BRASH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by her statement that the amendments to the Employment Relations Act 2000 “will enable unions to be more effective and thereby give a stronger basis for recruitment.”; if so how do the amendments give unions a stronger basis for recruitment? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes I stand by the full statement which was: “The passage of the forthcoming amendments to the Employment Relations Act cannot guarantee growth in union membership but they will enable unions to be more effective and thereby give a stronger basis for recruitment.” That is because Labour believes that more effective rules around collective bargaining do benefit workers. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can she confirm that the bill now before the House proposes a $10000 fine for breach of good faith where an employer offers terms and conditions to a non-union employee that are similar to those in the collective agreement; and can she tell the House what the objective of that provision could be if it is not to undermine completely the notion of voluntary unionism in this country? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: My understanding in terms of the penalty in the Act applying to a breach of good faith—a fine of $10000—is that where an employer’s bad behaviour also has effectively sabotaged the employees’ collective employment agreement and the only effective remedy is to set the terms and conditions of the agreement the Employment Relations Act can do that. Bad faith is viewed very dimly on this side of the House. 
Rod Donald 
: Why does the Labour Government support the right of New Zealand workers to bargain collectively when it is undermining those very same workers by negotiating a preferential trade deal with Thailand—a country that refuses to ratify ILO Convention 98 thereby denying Thai workers the same rights to organise and bargain collectively? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The Government does not accept for a moment that any trade agreement it enters into with the Government of Thailand will undermine workers’ rights there. 
Paul Adams 
: Can she confirm that the provisions in the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill that make it a breach of good faith for an employer to do anything that induces people not to join a union include paying non-union staff the same or more than union members? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I can only refer the member to the Minister’s statement yesterday that the select committee’s key recommendations clarify that employers can pay employees on individual agreements the same rates as are paid to employees on collective agreements provided that the bargaining has been carried out in good faith. 
Dr Don Brash 
: Can she confirm the announcement made by the Minister of Labour yesterday that in order to receive pay and conditions similar to those of their unionised colleagues the majority of New Zealand workers who have chosen not to be members of unions will now be forced either to join a union or to write out a sizable cheque to a union; if so does she honestly believe that it is consistent with voluntary unionism? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No I cannot confirm any such thing. The Minister’s statement which I have just read to the House is quite specific that there is nothing to stop people from being paid the same provided that good-faith provisions are followed. What I can confirm is that I heard on  
Morning Report 
 this morning that the business community is broadly happy with the Employment Relations Act—a statement made by Dr Don Brash. 
Rod Donald 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I believe that the Prime Minister misinterpreted my question. I made it very clear I was talking about the rights of New Zealand workers being undermined. She commented about the rights of Thai workers being undermined and I would like to give her the opportunity to answer the original question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I was pretty generous in allowing the question because it was right outside the scope of the original question. The Prime Minister did address the question however. 
Dr Don Brash 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has just told the House that she heard on  
Morning Report  
this morning evidence that the business community likes the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill. All the evidence that we have had before the select committee suggests that the business community does not like the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill. It seems to me that the Prime Minister has been quite misleading. 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I would be more than happy to table the member’s transcript from this morning where when the member was asked about the Employment Relations Act he said: “ Secondly we would review the Employment Relations Act. I think the business community is broadly happy with that Act.” 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister has attributed a statement to the Leader of the Opposition. If he disputes that the statement is his he is entitled to do so. 
Dr Don Brash 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This whole question has been about the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill or the amendments to the Employment Relations Act. I was asked on radio this morning what we would do with the Employment Relations Act and I said the business community is broadly happy with it. It is very unhappy with the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: That may well be so although of course its members did not say that at the time the bill was passed. The fact is that the Prime Minister in her answer referred to the Employment Relations Act. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well all I can say is this is a debatable matter.