McAnulty KieranKIERAN McANULTY (Labour): Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I'd like to start this reply by offering my sincere thanks to our coalition partners New Zealand First and our confidence and supply partners the Green Party for acknowledging the need for action in this area. In indicating support for this bill to send it to select committee the Labour Party the New Zealand First Party and the Green Party have sent a clear message to this country that exploitation of workers and treating them like commodities is not acceptable behaviour in this country.I want to acknowledge the FIRST Union and E tū union and the employers small and large and the groups that represent them that have met with me in preparation for this point in time where we have presented this bill to this House. The perspectives that they offered me throughout that process buoyed me and encouraged me because they acknowledged across the board that there is a need to stop exploitation of our workers in this country.So I was dismayed that the National Party stood in opposition to this. Despite the clear message that something needs to be done they have reverted to form and dismissed any attempt—any reasonable attempt—to look at workers' rights in this country and I hope when we get to select committee that the National Party will work constructively with us to find a mechanism that is fair for both employers and workers to try and stop this behaviour that is totally unacceptable in this country.Mr Woodhouse spoke about the case of Prasad v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd and what I took from that is that he thought the outcome of that case which was indeed celebrated as progress was enough to fix this issue. He couldn't be more wrong. All that case did was indicate that there is some need to try and address the issues that triangular employment arrangements raise.We also saw that Mr Scott's contribution to the debate this evening was simply to point out that he himself is an employer and to suggest that my colleague Marja Lubeck did not have an understanding of the issues because she did not know what it is to be an employer. It is an aside but I would point out that Marja Lubeck has indeed got experience as an employer. She understands both issues of the debate as I do and it is such narrow thinking as this from Mr Scott that brings down the integrity of this debate. Referring to prior experience as an employer as an argument simply creates too simple an opposition. You can as easily argue that it makes him blind to the issues but that isn't the case. Being an employer does not negate one's ability to understand that fairness is a fundamental right—that it doesn't have to be us versus them. Working productively means working together with respect showing dignity. Employers I have spoken to throughout have been thoughtful and alert to the issues which arise in triangular employment arrangements. I've spoken with employers right throughout this process and anticipate that they will participate very constructively in the next phase of this bill going through to select committee. They acknowledge the need for changing the law in this area.So to make this contribution that this bill is somehow not something that would be welcomed by employers is not based on any real engagement with this issue but I would suggest simply the National Party going back to form—one argument again that we hear so often from that party in response to a clichéd idea of what they see as the Labour position on all things.This bill provides an easy and effective way to address the issues that have been outlined today and it makes a clear right to seek leave to join a secondary employer to the right that we all enjoy that we all take for granted: that if we are treated poorly in the workplace we have a right to bring on a personal grievance.The fact is that in this country in 2018 we are still dealing with the issues that we were facing 60 to 70 years ago of exploitation and discrimination in an area where there is an absence of law here with triangular employment arrangements. All we are proposing here is to have a conversation at select committee to find that mechanism that will ensure fairness in our workplace. I thank again our support partners for backing this bill. I've heard so many examples that would prove the need for increased protections. It is right that those examples be heard and examined in this House through the select committee process. It is indeed to deal with this issue and treat it with the respect that it deserves. Thank you.