Roy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Roy Eric: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1922] 
ERIC ROY (National—Invercargill) 
: 
 I understand that the commencement date is quite specific. However there are some issues around that date that I think need to be noted at this time for the purpose of informing those people who found themselves out of employment. Just prior to Christmas some 260 people found that they could no longer be employed. Here we are passing a bill whose commencement date is upon its receiving the Royal assent which will be some time after this urgency. We had 260-odd drivers who found that— 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: 234. 
ERIC ROY 
: The number is 234; I stand corrected by the Minister for Land Transport Safety. Those 234 people had a long cold Christmas wondering about their future and here we are now starting to work our way through the Committee stage of this bill and considering its commencement date which is not until the Royal assent is given. I understand also that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee deliberated on this point throughout this year and that raises the first point. There was still time in my view to expedite this whole matter much much more quickly given the uncertainty for the 234 people who had found themselves out of employment. The select committee deliberated and completed its report last week. The House could have gone into urgency last week. I ask members to consider this: 234 drivers out there are wondering what is happening; they have no understanding of the— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Cut your speech short and we can get it passed. 
ERIC ROY 
: The member who is interrupting is also delaying the process. These points are relevant. I want it to be recorded in  
Hansard 
 that there was a lack of concern and a lack of earnestness and speediness by the Government in dealing with a matter whereby people because of a blemish because of a lack of consideration for something having occurred in a past era—given that this clause is the commencement clause—had lost their jobs. This House has not moved as rapidly as I believe it should have. 
So we await the Royal assent. The issue I would like to raise is that those people are out of pocket. The select committee should have been concerned about retrospectivity in terms of people getting some compensation. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: You can’t do that actually. 
ERIC ROY 
: We cannot actually do that? [ 
Interruption 
] The issue I think is the matter of compensation for people who found themselves out of work. I am not sure that the date of the commencement of this bill—upon the Royal assent—allows for full consideration of that compensation aspect. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: It would be an ex gratia payment by the Crown. 
ERIC ROY 
: I guess it is a matter that will be negotiated between the employers and those who lost their jobs. I am not sure that the clarity around the commencement date is sufficient to allow those people to seek the best opportunity for compensation. I know that the Minister had no intention of creating this situation whereby those people lost their jobs but it is a matter of taking responsibility. 
I just want to say that we are in urgency now. This bill could have been resolved last week. It could now have been enacted and those people could have been given the opportunity to get on with having themselves reclassified. There are 234 people to process. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
ERIC ROY 
: I would like to canvass one or two points in summary of comments about the commencement date. The Land Transport Amendment Bill really sets out to correct some anomalies that occurred because of a retrospective piece of legislation. It impacted upon people who were in work. It impacted on them because of events that had occurred up to 40 years previously. As we talked about the commencement date the Minister in the chair the Hon Harry Duynhoven became aware prior to Christmas of what the original legislation would do. That legislation came into force on 16 January. We have had time since then to correct it. I have to say that taxi drivers and bus drivers are not at the top of the wage tree. Over the dinner adjournment I have been informed of a number of cases in which people have had to go to Work and Income to find support. They have been in real hardship. If this legislation corrects legislation that had a retrospective impact the point I make to the Committee is that this commencement date should have a retrospective impact. That is the point I wish to make. 
The Labour Government wants to champion the fact that it stands for the working person. As I said before those people who are the drivers in these passenger services are not very far up the wage tree. The least we could do is give consideration to having a retrospective commencement date so that there can be a compensation element for the people who are able to pass through the hoops to be re-employed. I ask the Committee to consider that it is inappropriate to lock those people into a situation whereby they have been in hardship without any consideration for a remedy to that. So I suggest making this date retrospective.