Rich Katherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Rich Katherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:629;Page:1667] 
9.  
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Small Business 
: Does she stand by her reported comment that: “Unfortunately one of the main reasons why many very small businesses ones with no employees won’t take on staff is because they’re frightened of employment issues and of being subjected to professional grievance claims.”? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Minister for Small Business) 
: 
 Yes although I suspect that the journalist wrote the word “professional” when I was referring to personal grievance claims. 
Katherine Rich 
: What specific changes to employment law will she be promoting this year to assist small-business people who will not take on new staff because they are frightened of employment issues and of being subjected to professional grievance claims? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I have yet to meet with the Small Business Advisory Group in order to discuss the fact that it has included its recommendation for a personal grievance - free period in the second of its reports. I have already told the group that I will not advocate for that solution. 
Katherine Rich 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. My question asked the Minister what specific changes in employment law she would be promoting this year. She did not address that in any way. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister did address it through her answer that she would be talking about that question with the group concerned. 
Maryan Street 
: Did the Small Business Advisory Group include any other recommendations on employment issues apart from the recommendation of a personal grievance free - period; if so what was the Government’s response? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Yes. Recommendation five requested that a complete checklist of issues to be considered when hiring an employee be made quickly and cheaply available to small businesses. The Government has through the Department of Labour produced a  
How to Hire Guide for Employers 
. As I reported to the House yesterday the Small Business Advisory Group gave the Government 10 out of 10 for this response. 
Katherine Rich 
: Can the House take her previous answer to mean that she will be doing nothing in this area and was she correctly reported on 21 November 2005 in an article stating: “Ms Dalziel says the employment arena has developed to a point at which decent employers who have dealt with difficult employees perfectly appropriately are being taken to the cleaners by employees”; if so what specific changes to employment law will she be promoting this year to make a difference to those small-business people? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I know that some people think it is OK to sack someone without warning without reason and without an opportunity to meet the employer’s requirements. I do not. I have made it absolutely clear that I will work with the Small Business Advisory Group to find other solutions as I am not prepared to advocate for that option. 
Peter Brown 
: Is the Minister concerned that there are organisations encouraging the promotion of personal grievance claims on a “no gain no pay” basis; if she is concerned what plans does she have to address the issue? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: Yes. I have made a number of comments about the concerns I have that there are employment consultants in this country who work on a contingency basis who say “no win no pay” and who are not interested in the worker getting his or her job back and in working with the employer to get a good result in mediation. All they want is enough money so that they can take their share—a fifty-fifty split or whatever they can get. That is not in the interests of small business and it is certainly not in the interests of this country. 
Maryan Street 
: Does the second Small Business Advisory Group report state that the only solutions to the problems it describes are the ones that the group proposes? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: No the report states that the group recognises that they are not the only solutions. However the group thinks they would prove to be effective ones. My concern with the personal grievance - free period is that it takes the focus off the employment relationship and especially that access to mediation which is often so successful is lost. I again express the view that mediation is undermined when employment consultants working on a contingency basis work to obtain a high financial settlement rather than repairing and promoting an ongoing relationship. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Is the Government aware that Business New Zealand in its publication just last week entitled  
Skills Perspectives 
 has said that New Zealand should have a probationary period for employment law in order to encourage businesses to employ groups with untapped skills; and how will she deal with that concern? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I am well aware that that member and others have expressed the view that this will help new migrants young people with few qualifications and people re-entering the workforce. If that is help I would like to see hindrance. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Why will the Government not allow a full select committee consideration in order to examine all the arguments of the Employment Relations (Probationary Employment) Amendment Bill which is a member’s bill so that these issues can be properly considered instead of the cavalier approach that the Minister is apparently taking? 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: My understanding of parliamentary proceedings is that it is the House that decides whether a bill is referred to a select committee.