Hipkins Chris: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21126] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I will refer back just to what Michael Woodhouse was saying. I think one of the key things that he is missing about the Employment Relations Act 2000 which is the principal Act being amended by the Employment Relations (Secret Ballot for Strikes) Amendment Bill put forward by Tau Henare is that the whole principle behind the Employment Relations Act 2000 is one of good faith. 
I think National has always—has always—struggled to come to terms with what “good faith” actually means and one of the things that the bill does is to undermine that notion. It says that unions cannot be trusted. That is one of the key messages that regularly comes out of the National Government when it comes to dealing with unions—that the unions cannot be trusted—and that therefore the good-faith provisions do not mean anything. 
Well I think that the good-faith provisions do mean something and when it comes to dealing with secret ballots I think that the unions by and large act in a way that exhibits good faith. They act in a manner that is transparent they act in a manner that is accountable and I think that there is absolutely no need for the bill whatsoever. In fact questions will be raised later in the debate about whether the bill goes wide enough and why if we are to insist on this provision of secret ballots employers should not have to have a secret ballot of their shareholders for example. That is something we will canvass later on in the debate. 
Ultimately in a good-faith environment the bill is totally unnecessary. In an environment where there is goodwill and good faith between employers and employees the bill is unnecessary and it undermines that. It undermines the central principle behind the Employment Relations Act 2000. Were the bill necessary and to be effective one of the things it would do for example is guarantee unions the right to access in the workplace so that they could conduct the secret ballot. Under the bill where secret ballots are required there is no guarantee that unions will in fact have access to the workplace. Oh goodness me! I think we have just stepped off the reservation now. 
I would really like the member in the chair Sandra Goudie to take a call and espouse what in her mind are the central principles behind the Employment Relations Act 2000 the principal Act that the bill amends. I think that members all around the Chamber—in fact people all over the country—would love to hear Sandra Goudie’s opinions on the Employment Relations Act 2000. We know that Sandra Goudie embodies the views of the National Party when it comes to workers’ rights. She is absolutely dedicated to the National Party cause. I would like her to take the next call and explain to us why she believes that the bill furthers the principles of the Employment Relations Act 2000. I will happily go and get her a copy of the Employment Relations Act 2000 if she— 
Grant Robertson 
: That might be necessary. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: I think it would require more than a copy of the Employment Relations Act 2000 actually to get Sandra Goudie to produce something coherent. It would require an act of divine intervention to get a coherent call from Sandra Goudie but we live in hope. We are optimists on this side of the House and in fact I can see that Sandra Goudie has a copy of the bill. She is prepping up there— 
Grant Robertson 
: That’s a start. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: That is a start. There is always hope. I would very much like to hear what Sandra Goudie has to say on this. If it is as lively as the contribution we had from the member in charge of the bill Tau Henare earlier on it will be a sight to see. We would very much like to hear what members opposite have to say about the bill. 
What we know is that the bill is the first of many amendments to the principal Act that will be coming if National is re-elected. Of course those members will not tell anybody what those amendments will be. It will be just one of those things. John Key has gone out there and said: “Oh well we want to make more changes. If we are re-elected we will make more changes.” He will not say what they are but what National will do is turn round after the election and say: “We have a mandate now. We have been re-elected. We said before the election that we would change it.” Therefore— 
Hon Member 
: No more kicking the tyres. 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: They have kicked the tyres. Therefore they will make all of these extra changes to the Employment Relations Act 2000. This is the first of many. I am absolutely devastated that Sandra Goudie is leaving the chair and will not have the opportunity to contribute although she could still take a call from her seat up on the backbenches and espouse to us why she believes that these changes to the principal Act the Employment Relations Act 2000 are necessary.