Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): Thank you Madam Chair. I rise to take a brief call on—particularly speaking to and seeking the Government's support for Supplementary Order Paper 272 in my name which is looking to make an amendment to create a review of coverage of the Act. To give some context to this this is about the fact that our current labour market—a visible feature of it is fragmentation and employers seeking to reduce their costs through contracting people rather than employing them. It has been a concern for the Green Party right from the beginning of this process that the fair pay agreements are only providing coverage for employees and that there's a potential risk of employers deciding to contract people instead of employ them to reduce their costs.I want to acknowledge that the Government has had a working group looking at how we can as a country create more stability and certainty and reduce that fragmentation. That has been the Tripartite Working Group on Better Protections for Contractors and there are recommendations that have come out of that group and that reported at December last year. The Greens were hoping that some of those recommendations the work from that would have been able to be integrated into this piece of legislation to protect against that concern of increased fragmentation. What we've got in the bill is Subpart 3 which has already been covered about where there are penalties—there's a specific part in the Fair Pay Agreements Bill that says An employer must not engage a person under contract for services if—(a) the real nature of the relationship is that the person is the employer's employee; and (b) the employer engages the person under a contract for services rather than as an employee to prevent the person being in relation to a fair pay agreement a covered employee." So it's a specific prohibition against doing that and there are penalties that have been established in the bill. I acknowledge that. However that's—in effect my understanding is that is a restatement of our current law as people should not be doing that and it's making that specific to the fair pay agreements.However we know that we have widespread problems of employers contracting out already. I think the Uber decision yesterday which is so fantastic—and I do note that you know at the heart of this and while I heard from a member from the ACT Party yesterday saying every Uber driver he's ever spoken to has wanted things to remain the same the fact is these Uber drivers went to court because their arrangement denies them the minimum wage holiday pay protection from unjust dismissal KiwiSaver contributions and the right to unionise and collectively bargain. Sounds like a great deal to me! Not. And that's why we want to protect against more people being put in those precarious situations rather than having the protection of employment law and the protection of fair pay agreements.If we want us to be lifting everybody up we actually want to make sure that we are getting the right people under the cover. So our Supplementary Order Paper is kind of a midway point really. We haven't got the ability to do all the policy work to integrate the tripartite working group into this piece of legislation but what we're suggesting is that the department after three years do a review to consider the effect the fair pay agreements have had on sectors where there is a significant proportion of employees that are under contract for services. So it's a specific commitment to look at the impact of this and make sure that that concern has not been realised."