Brown Peter: Third Readings 
Brown Peter: Third Readings 
[Volume:635;Page:6821] 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I do not think that I will take a long call because New Zealand First was not on the Commerce Committee but we did follow the legislation as best as we could with some interest. When the legislation first came to the House it was entitled the Energy Safety Review Bill. The select committee clearly worked very hard and was very conscientious and by all accounts every member cooperated with every other member which is an amazing feat in itself. The select committee split the bill into two bills fairly early on in the piece I gather and formed the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Bill. Since then the residue of the Energy Safety Review Bill—if I can put it that way—has been split into four other bills: the Electricity Amendment Bill the Gas Amendment Bill the Health and Safety in Employment Amendment Bill and the Ministry of Energy (Abolition) Amendment Bill. So all in all this one Energy Safety Review Bill has turned into five bills. We are debating here all five bills and I understand that there will be a vote on each individual bill at the end of the debate. When this legislation came to the select committee we were guided by the explanatory note at the beginning of it which clearly outlined some concerns about these trades. 
The other amazing fact about this legislation is that the National Party members have had a complete change of heart; an absolute change of heart. When the bill came to the House initially— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: It’s called a flip-flop. 
PETER BROWN 
: Well it could be called a flip-flop but I want to give those members a little bit of credit—they are having a bad day today so let us give them a little bit of credit. 
When the bill came to the House initially National members were saying that it was bureaucracy gone mad or more red tape—something along those lines. The Minister nods. They were quite scathing. I have listened to the National Party members here and I compliment them on their speeches. The chairperson of the Commerce Committee Katherine Rich clearly recognised that there were some major concerns within these trades as did the member Chris Tremain who spoke with some passion on the legislation. I thought that that was amazing. When the bill first came into the House the National Party members were totally opposed to it and they now recognise that there were some major concerns. 
Mr Copeland who was on the select committee indicated in his speech that it sounds as if the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board was completely out of touch with the industry—so much so and I listened with amazement that Dr Michael Cullen instigated a ministerial review headed by Hazel Armstrong to look into this whole issue. The board—if I understand Mr Copeland correctly—was sacked in its entirety. That is how deep the problem was. Anybody who doubts that plumbers—again Mr Copeland illustrated it very well—play an important part in society need only go through the experience of having a septic tank overflow to know just how important plumbers and drainlayers are. I can tell members that it happened to me once in my life and I worshipped the ground that the drainlayers and plumbers walked on when they arrived. 
Brian Connell 
: The member’s still in it! 
PETER BROWN 
: Brian Connell has got well out of it. I think the member over there might be in it. This bill has turned out to be not only important to this country but also absolutely essential. Dr Pita Sharples told us that there is a shortage in the industry of close to 1500 people—and by industry I mean plumbers gasfitters electricians and their apprentices. This country needs these folk and we need to support them. 
The second page of the commentary—and this concerned me when I read it—says: “We are very concerned that only 11 percent of the national certificate holders who sat the plumbing registration examination in 2005 passed.” Eleven percent passed and at that point in time we were doing nothing. That should have been a warning signal—well it was and I compliment the Minister Harry Duynhoven. It was a warning signal for the Minister. But it should have been a warning signal for all of us. 
One thing that nobody on the select committee has mentioned is the review of the legislation. The commentary on the bill states: “We recommend requiring the administering department to review the operation of this legislation three years after it commences and report to the Minister who will present the report to the House.” That is how serious this is. The select committee members had to say that it may not have got it right yet that they wanted a review of this legislation and they wanted the Minister to report it to the House. So we might be in a comfort zone but we are not there yet from reading that. 
This bill has turned out to be essential for the benefit of New Zealand and New Zealanders. New Zealand First will support the five bills that were formerly part of the Energy Safety Review Bill.