Mallard Trevor; White HelenSPEAKER: I call on Helen White for her maiden statement. HELEN WHITE (Labour): Tēnā koutou katoa. It is an honour to be here. While I was preparing for this speech I was forwarded an email with helpful advice from a member of the judiciary. It reads as follows: Remind her what a special opportunity she has. She can say what she likes—the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act section 14. It is a privileged occasion—Defamation Act section 13. The ordinary rules of debate don't apply and the Opposition have no right of reply. Most new MPs do not realise the possibilities for anarchy and spoil it by talking about their ideals and what brought them to Parliament but she should not feel constrained by a lack of precedent." It is tempting. Likely to the relief of my party whips I will not be defaming anyone today. But it occurred to me that it was likely no accident that this call to anarchy came from a person at the top of my profession who had taken on public office at the necessary personal cost of being able to freely express the frustrations that long experience in the law gives rise to.I recognise the valuable opportunity I have been given to take partisan action drawing on my experience. I get to say plainly what I think and advocate to fix what I think needs fixing. It is what I saw in my 27 years of practising employment law that drew me here and will guide me. I will get to that in a minute but first I want to acknowledge that it is the wonderful leadership of the Labour Party right now that makes me thrilled to be here.I am delighted to join a team which is at once diverse and unified. When I stood in 2017 the Labour Party was languishing in the polls. Low polls often lead to division so I was delighted to find the Labour Party was despite this ridiculously unified. I have the greatest respect for the Hon Andrew Little the leader at the time because he is exactly that: honourable. So I put the unified culture down to good people leading with integrity. But I now think it was also the result of their unifying purpose which I saw simply as seeking to redevelop basic respect between people which is the essential building block of community. When we treat each other with dignity and respect we listen and we truly see each other thus we foster genuine connection. What I have witnessed in the last term of Government was the impact of applying that resolve.I consider that the Labour team from 2017 has successfully revitalised our sense of community. While it is a pity it didn't happen earlier it happened at a critical time in our history. The Government prioritised our vulnerable and this value guided the response to the pandemic—it still does. I am so thankful for it. It came after years of policies which ignored the interconnections between us and entrenched disrespect for those who were vulnerable. This approach led many of our citizens to become overwhelmed depressed and alienated. It shattered our sense of community. It gave rise to things like chronic homelessness. I watched the reality of the impact of the growing gap between rich and poor in my city and in my area of law.I grew up and stood in Auckland Central. I want to talk about why I'm committed to providing affordable housing in every community including expensive places like Auckland Central and Waiheke why while it is no wonder that houses in such wonderful locations have gone up I would like to see the older residents being able to afford to stay and for these places to once again become places where people can live well no matter what they earn. I share with many others a vision of a well-designed compact affordable city which allows this rebalance and I will work to this end.My parents came from Kawerau to Freemans Bay in 1971 when it was affordable—just. They were not from wealthy families; there was no inheritance. My father told me once about his parents camping a whole summer on a Gisborne beach with a young baby because no one would rent them a house as they had too many children. Eventually my grandfather lied about the number of children to solve that problem. Both my parents worked. While the inner city was more affordable and undervalued than other parts of Auckland at the time it was still a struggle for my parents to pay the mortgage. I remember the constant anxiety about whether we would be able to keep our house. As the value of homes in the area rose the leasehold and the rates went up and it was becoming impossible to pay the annual land lease. My parents bought the lease when the interest rates were in double digits. Everything they had went into keeping that house. This had nothing to do with astute investment—it is still the first place most struggling families put their money. But as house prices went up I watched most of the poorer families I grew up with in Auckland Central move out. When I went to primary school I was one of a few Pālagi kids at a Pasifika-dominated school. Many in the Pasifika community left Auckland Central during my childhood; most working class families did.My experience is that affordable housing is a major building block of healthy relationships with each other because it means we really know each other as neighbours and as equals. When there is an increasing gap between rich and poor it is very possible for people on different incomes to live in a physically separated world and they quickly lose empathy with each other. In the last decade I frequently heard talk of "losers" by those on high incomes when talking about poorer people. This language betrays a lack of empathy and it demonstrates how disconnection leads to dangerous contempt. During the campaign the Opposition complained that Labour's progressive income tax punished hard workers; this is plainly out of touch with reality. The reality is many low-income workers work the hardest of all New Zealanders and I saw that in my practice not to mention that many on lower incomes are doing jobs which help others rather than themselves. It is less likely anyone would think such things if their neighbours proved otherwise.In my work in the same time I saw that there had been a personal grievance procedure meant to protect the rights of blue-collar workers that had become prohibitively expensive for those very workers. I have seen the exploitation of our most vulnerable workers by the side-stepping of employment law through the adoption of a contracting model. I was frustrated that those who took a case seeking reinstatement had to settle it because they feared a costs award against them and had to trade their job for whatever compensation they could get often so they could pay their lawyers. I saw wages get lower and work get less secure. Most importantly as a result I saw good people who had done nothing wrong and their families break under the pressure.I have been given more outlet for expressing and acting upon my frustrations than most lawyers. A highlight was taking an important case about collectivity in front of a full court thanks to Maurice Davis and the wonderful Amalgamated Workers Union NZ here today in the gallery. It reinforced the value of unions in a society that seemed to have forgotten them. I also recognise that I have been working in a field that has had many redeeming features including fantastic colleagues and judges. I am aware other areas of the law have been more extremely impacted by the lack of affordable access to justice. One of the most positive changes I experienced in employment law was the introduction of an expectation of respectful treatment in the interactions between employers and employees—what we call good faith. Good faith was introduced by the Rt Hon Margaret Wilson in the Clark Government. It was introduced after a decade of the application of an individualised contractual model. My experience was everyone including employers breathed a sigh of relief when good faith was introduced. Combat is exhausting. Most of us will know from our private lives that it simply does not work in any long-term relationship.What I learnt from this was the power of good legislative change. This standard of respect may be frequently broken but it is a standard that Parliament set and it has shaped the values and guided those who genuinely seek to be good employers and employees. I do not discount the many injustices that still harm many New Zealanders in our workplaces; I wouldn't be here if I did. But the legislative change that successfully engendered greater respect between people in the workplace was us.In the first COVID shutdown workers and employers faced a frightening experience together. There was no real precedent for what to do when a business is severely curtailed by factors beyond the control of either employer or employee. I was surprised at how many employers and employees came to practical compromise over payment and hours. I think that is a testament to the good-faith relationship. However it also proved how unrealistic a system is which relies on individual negotiation in large workplaces. Is it really practical for 7000 workers in one workplace to attempt to negotiate individually with their employer over a dramatic pay cut in 48 hours? Does it really work for the employer or the employee? Isn't it time for us to recognise the value of a good longstanding relationship between such employers and a union?Many have clung to their dislike of unions by considering they are anti-competitive. All that has been achieved is the depression of wages and a greater gap between rich and poor. I want to see competition fostered where it will reinforce growth including income growth—for example to see a more certain and concrete prohibition of restraints of trade in employment agreements of low-paid workers. Our law already says that restraints of trade are prima facie illegal but herein lies the value of my practical experience in the law. Restraints are habitually included in individual agreements for workers on wages close to the minimum wage. The poorer the worker the more unlikely they are to challenge them. The possibility of litigation is too frightening. This means low-paid workers are afraid to go and set up their own cafe or move to the competition who might offer them a pay rise. It stifles their capacity to move from say $20 to $25 per hour. It means their employer has no incentive to pay them more because they do not fear losing them to a competitor.It is time for me to thank those who have worked their socks off to get me here and who have given me wonderful support. I will never get over the generosity of those willing to actually work for no self-gain. I would like to make special mention of my parents both of whom are here today. I am so proud of them. My mother Carol was the first co-principal in a secondary school in New Zealand and during that time she welcomed the Tampa refugees into her school. They in turn had of course been welcomed by the Clark Government. Those people were better off for the care she showed them and other New Zealanders took of them after a traumatic experience. She set up several creches which flourish today—her first in Kawerau so I could go there. She is a brave and clever woman I much admire.I would also like to thank my incredible children Max Eva and Imogen. Eva lost her job in recruitment due to COVID and immediately found work in a drive-through testing station then as a medical receptionist. She is now back in her chosen career but I acknowledge that she and many others like her had a really hard year. My brother Gabriel also lost his job as an English-as-a-second-language teacher. Despite this they have both helped me enormously at every turn and I'd like to thank them. I would like to make a special shout-out to Archie and my family in the UK who are having a pretty challenging time in lockdown there too.Finally I would like to thank all those who love me despite disagreeing with me. You have brought me so much happiness and it is never boring. I have been very lucky to have you all in my corner and I couldn't be prouder. Thank you.[Applause]"