SpeechHon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Thank you Madam Chair. In his opening intervention in Part 2 Minister Wood made some interesting comments about National's support for aspects of it as set out in the National Party view in the Education and Workforce Committee report. That is true but that doesn't mean we can support Part 2 in its entirety. One of the reasons for that is that it's largely redundant: it sets out a range of obligations that are already in law. The most obvious one of those is the Health and Safety at Work Act. The bill basically requires the parties to comply with the Act. Well we don't need another piece of legislation to say that the Health and Safety at Work Act should be complied with. Whether one is an employee a contractor an employer a host: they all form a part of the transaction in the Health and Safety at Work Act—as I'm sure the Minister knows because he's responsible for it.An obligation to comply with the Human Rights Act—well of course those are obligations. An obligation to act in good faith is actually set out in a wide range of contract law both black-letter law and judge-made law. So really when we look through Part 2 nobody can disagree that people shouldn't mislead or deceive that they should act in good faith that they should describe the nature of the relationship and embark on the responsibilities that are set out in Subpart 2.But this is kind of emblematic of this bill overall: it is a solution looking for a problem and the biggest problem frankly is the fact that the unions want to look after people who want to have it both ways: (a) the benefits of independent contractor relationships and the protection of employment if things go wrong which was the uncertainty that the film makers had in 2009 when they wanted to come and make the hobbit movies. So I say to the Minister—and he can take a call and disagree with me if he wishes but there is very little if anything in Part 2 that is not already set out either in case law or statute.Hon MICHAEL WOOD (Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety): I'm happy to take a call on those matters. My understanding is that in respect of the references both to the Health and Safety at Work Act and Human Rights Act obligations it was a particular request of the working group for these provisions to be reflected in the legislation so that it was crystal clear that they applied given that we are dealing with a relatively novel piece of legislation and a new set of employment relationships. It was their wish that these be in here. The member is right that those provisions would apply regardless—one can consider it to be belts and braces if we want to describe it that way—but that is why that is reflected here.It's a little bit different I think with the good-faith provisions in that it isn't the case that good-faith provisions would naturally apply to contractor arrangements. Good-faith provisions are embedded in employment law to guide relationships between employers and employees; they wouldn't automatically flow to contractors unless they are specifically embedded in the legislation as we've done here.Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National): Well I would make two points—I appreciate Minister Wood's response but I would make two points in that regard. One the very fact that a working group asked for something doesn't compel a Minister to grant it. Actually one of the roles of a Minister is to say Good idea—we're not going to do it because it's not necessary." I think again that's emblematic of a Government that seems to be led more by working groups than by independent thought and careful consideration. There is no need to reinforce the Health and Safety at Work Act in this bill or the Human Rights Act.As far as duties of good faith that's not entirely correct. A person can take a course of action for breach of contract for a number of reasons not the least of which could be misleading or deceptive behaviour in the contract negotiation process particularly if the courts deemed that to be harsh or oppressive behaviour or if there was misleading information. So again this is kind of belts and braces but it's wholly unnecessary."