Beaumont Carol: State Sector Management Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Beaumont Carol: State Sector Management Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 09 December 2010. Volume:669;Page:16300. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CAROL BEAUMONT (Labour) 
: 
 I join my colleagues in speaking on Part 3 of the State Sector Management Bill and I wholeheartedly endorse the comments made by Grant Robertson and Steve Chadwick in relation to the importance of Archives New Zealand and our concern about what this legislation will do to the independence and robustness of our information-keeping service. Many of the same concerns applied to the discussion on the National Library. The independence of records and the ability to maintain them so that people can analyse and consider our history to reflect critically on what was or was not done and to be able to look at for example how we are governed is a fundamental right and a fundamental necessity in a democracy. So we are very concerned about this. Although as others have said new section 12 in clause 41 states that the Chief Archivist is to act independently we do not believe that that goes far enough. The provision is constrained in that it states the Chief Archivist “must act independently in exercising his or her professional judgment;” but we are not confident that that independence of the Chief Archivist will be maintained when the role is that of an employee and a third-tier manager. 
The people who work in places like Archives New Zealand and the National Library are professional people who are absolutely committed to what they do. We know here from dealing with the Parliamentary Library just how committed the people who work in this kind of role are to doing the job properly to ensure that they act in a way that is open and transparent and that applies equally to those working in Archives New Zealand. Those people do that work because they are passionate about maintaining records and having those records accessible to New Zealanders. The reality is that reducing the independence of the Chief Archivist will have flow-on effects on everybody who works in Archives New Zealand. I would like the Minister in the chair the Minister of Internal Affairs to respond to some of the concerns that members on this side of the Chamber are raising. 
My colleague Moana Mackey talked in the debate on the previous part about the provisions for the transfer of employees of the National Library and compared them with the transfer provisions in Part 1 for those working in the Ministry of Research Science and Technology and the Foundation for Research Science and Technology. I want to make similar comments in relation to the transfer of employees of Archives New Zealand. Effectively this bill is very limited and we want some confidence that the provisions outlined in clause 59 “Transfer of Archives New Zealand employees to department” actually do cover all the areas covered in the provisions relating to the transfer of Ministry of Research Science and Technology and the Foundation for Research Science and Technology staff which seem to be comprehensive. Those provisions refer to people being covered by their collective employment agreement and ensure continuity of service and importantly make the clear distinction that these people are not new employees for the purposes of either KiwiSaver or more important the Employment Relations Act. If that was the case as Moana Mackey and I have said previously they could be fired at will without reason and without recourse to any justice. We want to know precisely what the provisions in clause 59 do guarantee to people who work in Archives New Zealand. 
I had a quick look at sections 30E 30F and 30G in the State Sector Act which essentially relate to issues such as technical redundancy. In other words if people are transferred they will not have access to any sort of redundancy payment. I would like the Minister in the chair to come to the party to give us some reassurance on that matter to perhaps get some advice from officials and to tell us precisely what that means and give us some confidence that employment rights for these workers are protected. As I say the people who work at somewhere like Archives New Zealand are professional people who want to do a good job and concentrate on the issue of managing our information.