Stewart Barbara: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStewart Barbara: Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13352. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BARBARA STEWART (NZ First): I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a call on the third reading of the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Amendment Bill. New Zealand First will not support the passing of this legislation. There is a grave injustice occurring here. Hard-working New Zealand tradespeople are being required to pay for something that was illegally taken from them by their industry’s board. Levies collected by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board come only from people who are registered under the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act. In respect of the fees set by the board the main point of contention is the disciplinary levy. This levy is set by the board to fund the cost of complaint and disciplinary actions against people who refuse to pay levies. The disciplinary levy imposed by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board was collected illegally. This bill aims to make that lawful.Experienced plumbers drainlayers and gasfitters have chosen to boycott the undemocratic process followed by the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board and have chosen to boycott those fees imposed on them. Industry members took their complaints to the Ombudsman because they considered that the board’s actions were not fair and that there was a total lack of consultation. The Ombudsman in his report on their complaints stated that the fee is not justified and also imposes a new form of tax on those experienced plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers. The Ombudsman has made two recommendations but only the first one was included in the ministerial officials’ briefing. The Ombudsman recommended: “To the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board that they together or separately make proposals to the Minister of Building and Construction concerning the desirability or otherwise of … legislation to validate the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board (Fees) Notice 2010 as it relates to the disciplinary levy;”.The second recommendation from the Ombudsman was not included in the briefing. That recommends: “To the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board (regardless of the outcome of 1 above) that it enter into discussions with representatives of persons registered under the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act 2006 to achieve a satisfactory arrangement with persons who have paid excess amounts of levy under the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board (Fees) Notice 2010 in respect of the disciplinary levy.” So it is very disappointing that the deliberations at the Government Administration Committee did not include the full recommendations from the Ombudsman. The Minister for Building and Construction has conveniently omitted this important part of the Ombudsman’s judgment. It is very clear in the Ombudsman’s words that this “is an unlawful levy a tax that the Board was not authorise to impose.” Further to quote the Ombudsman the board failed “to consult adequately before making the [continuing professional development] Notices.”The Minister for Building and Construction would have us believe that if this legislation is not enacted to secure the $600000 in levies the board will be bankrupted. This is a smokescreen. The board receives constant revenue from registration and licensing fees. What it is doing now through imposing these disciplinary levies and offences fees is driving registered plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers away from the organisation. They have lost faith in the board and the whole structure. That is not good for the industry and it undermines the whole profession. Passing this legislation will compound the situation and will drive an even bigger wedge between the board and alarge section of plumbers gasfitters and drainlayers. The Minister has not looked into other ways of finding a sensible solution that would appease all parties. This is a retrospective piece of bad legislation which New Zealand First cannot support.