Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
Peck Mark: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:606;Page:4044] 
MARK PECK (NZ Labour—Invercargill) 
: 
 I thank members for their contribution to the debate. First I shall deal with Roger Sowry’s point that National started it and yes perhaps I should acknowledge that. It is not being disingenuous. It was good work that—[ 
Interruption 
] That is life but at least I have an opportunity to repair it so I thank Mr Sowry for that. 
I say to Mr Dail Jones that I am aware of the history of workers compensation. Indeed one of the solicitors in my town was one of the best exponents of ensuring that workers got the justice they deserved when they were injured prior to our having an accident compensation Act. I would hazard a guess that in the situation where a person was made redundant it would be most unlikely that that person would be on workers compensation. In fact if we did the figures we would probably find that the number of people in that situation was zero. But the speech was interesting and I did enjoy it. Certainly he raised some important points that will need to be examined by the select committee. 
I say to the United Future member that I understand his position. I would ask that he come along to the select committee with an open mind. Let us hear the submissions because I am mindful of the issues raised by my colleague Jill Pettis and which I raised in my speech about how people feel at the time they are made redundant. Until one has been through it oneself one just does not know. Going home fronting up to one’s family and saying “I’m sorry but I can no longer pay our mortgage or put food on the table for the family.”—whatever gender the worker might be—is just the most— 
Jill Pettis 
: Gut-wrenching. 
MARK PECK 
: That is the word. It is the total loss of economic power to look after one’s family. All that I ask of that family-friendly party is that its members on the select committee think about that because it is a matter of some real concern. 
I thank Sue Bradford for her comments and I assure her that we will put in the work. 
Rodney Hide raised three questions—the cost who pays and the trickle-down effect. Those issues will need work. I hazard a guess that the cost will probably be zip but the trickle-down effect is an important one. The bill will have an impact. It is quite clear that if money is put into redundancy payments then it must come from somewhere else. That is work that does need to be done and I am looking forward to submissions on that. 
I have a couple of comments to make to John Key who is obviously a rising star in the National Party. 
First I say to the member that it is useful to use correct statistics when quoting them back. Just sitting here and using my own “Peckometer” I have worked out it is highly unlikely that there are 400000 people on a benefit. [ 
Interruption 
] It is a debatable point. The member has made his speech. There are 4 million people in New Zealand and of that 4 million probably a good third are not of working age and then there are senior citizens. If members are looking at those on a benefit then I think they really need to do the figures as to the number on an unemployment benefit. 
An Hon Member 
: It’s 125000. 
MARK PECK 
: I will accept that figure as a more empiric figure and say to the member that it is in fact the lowest unemployment level we have had in a long time. [ 
Interruption 
] Fifteen years actually. I am hopeful that the bill will not be needed. 
Furthermore I acknowledge that any reform in this area does have an effect on companies. But I say to that member that my experience of 16 years as a union official taught me that businesses of the size he is talking about with fewer than five employees will not have redundancy agreements anyway. 
Shane Ardern 
: That’s right; they lose their jobs. 
MARK PECK 
: The member is interjecting; he should let me finish the point I am making. I am taking this point seriously so let me come to what I want to say about it. In those situations those companies do close and when they close the employees get nothing. 
It has been a good debate. I thank members for it and I am looking forward to the debate at the select committee.