Davis Kelvin: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDavis Kelvin: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 25 August 2015. Volume:708;Page:6119. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): I would like to talk specifically to clause 229 “Approval of codes of practice”. I am assuming that a code of practice is a series of points that together basically lay out a blueprint to keep workers safe. If we took say an industry such as the meatworks or the freezing works—and I think in particular of the freezing works up north. Within that freezing works there are a number of different roles from administrative roles to people out in the stockyards to people who actually give a beast the lethal stun and through to the butchers the people who skin it the boners and everything. So there will be different roles within a single industry and I am wondering whether the Minister in the chair the Hon Nicky Wagner could answer the question: do each of those particular roles have different codes of practice to ensure that those workers are kept safe?I see that it says in clause 229(1) that “The Minister may—(a) approve a code of practice developed by the regulator for the purposes of this Act; and (b) amend or revoke an approved code of practice.” but the Minister may approve or revoke or amend only if he or she is satisfied that it has been amended or revoked or developed “by a process that involved consultation between—(a) unions; and (b) employer organisations;”. I think of the particular freezing works up north where the employer organisation absolutely hates unions and it is absolutely opposed to anything the unions do. It does not want to listen. If there is any form of negotiation it just likes to walk away from those negotiations and basically leave the unions and the employees dangling. So that is just one point there that the Minister may approve if there has been consultation.However if we move to clauses 229(5) and 229(6) basically the Minister is then able to make amendments without any consultation. It is basically saying that if a code of practice “corresponds or substantially corresponds to a code of practice…” then “The following may be approved by the Minister without carrying out the consultation required …”. I would like to know what “substantially corresponds with” means. Are we talking about 99 percent? Is that a substantial corresponding? Or 95 percent or 80 percent? Is it just a majority? So what does a code of practice that substantially corresponds to another code of practice actually mean?The Minister is able to make any minor or technical amendments to an approved code of practice on his or her own undertaking and yet that code of practice as I have said earlier needs to be developed in consultation with unions and employers. So to me it is a bit disjointed that in one case there needs to be consultation around the development the approval the amending or the revoking of a code of practice but on the other hand further on in that same clause the Minister is able to make basically unilateral decisions around that code of practice.Clause 229(6) says: “If the Minister approves any amendment in accordance with subsection (5)(b) the regulator must make reasonable efforts to notify any affected persons or their representatives of the amendment.” But that is after the fact while I believe that there should have been discussion dialogue or consultation before the fact before the Minister makes those changes. As I have said I believe that those two subclauses in clause 229 are a bit disjointed a bit out of sync there. It would be good if the Minister could just clarify exactly why it is that in one instance the Minister must listen to consultation between the—