Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11572] 
MARK PECK (Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 Under the new Standing Orders this part of the debate is a little different. Essentially in dealing with clauses 1 and 2 we can assume that the matters around the title and the commencement date have been traversed in the course of the debate so it is an opportunity to sum up the debate and the issues. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: No! 
MARK PECK 
: Yes indeed it is. I suggest that the member reads his Standing Orders report. He will find that that is exactly what this part of the debate is about. 
First of all I thank members for engaging in the debate. It has been quite robust and has raised some serious issues. Indeed Opposition issues in respect of the way business will be treated particularly small business are matters that this Government has been concerned with and has dealt with in other legislative ways—in particular in the Construction Contracts Act which deals with the issue of progressive payments for small contractors. 
The Joint Insolvency Committee is still doing quite a bit of work in insolvency law and I am sure that as that committee progresses its work further announcements will be made to the House—be they in the form of reports or legislation. Of course that is a matter totally outside the ambit of my remit tonight. 
The contents of this bill are encapsulated quite well in its title. It will raise the priority status of redundancy payments under insolvency legislation and within the terms of the Companies Act in order to ensure that where a company goes into bankruptcy its employees have the protection of $15000—being their wages holiday pay and any component of a negotiated redundancy agreement. 
I want to thank the New Zealand First members for raising two principles in the debate the first being that a company should not enter into a redundancy agreement unless it intends to honour it—and New Zealand First is prepared to support the bill on that basis. Secondly they raised the point of the rights of workers in an industry. They outlined a number of industries in which redundancy has become a feature simply by the nature of change in the way work is done or the incredibly competitive nature of those particular industries as they have tried to survive. 
During the debate there has also been discussion about it being a sad thing when companies close. We all know that. We know about the disruptive effect of closures not only on employees their families and their communities but also on the business community. Closures impact on business confidence and they are something that all of us hope will never occur. Unfortunately in the nature of business they do happen. 
I am pleased to say that the bill has been well debated in the Committee stage. I think it is right that the commencement clause clause 2 provides that there is a period of grace for employers to get their heads around the new legislation. By virtue of the fact that the bill comes into effect on the 60th day after it receives the royal assent it will allow employers and their advisers to do their homework so that they are able to implement it in the way intended.