Goff Phil: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Crown Entities Amendment Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: State Sector Amendment Bill Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) Crown Entities Amendment Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 09 July 2013. Volume:692;Page:11841. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill):The theory of what the Minister of State Services has just outlined is all fine and good; the practice has been something totally different. As introduced the legislation formerly part of the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill was actually opposed by the Labour Party. It was opposed because you cannot build a better Public Service by attacking the rights and devaluing the essential stakeholders in the Public Service the people who work in it.But to give credit to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and then to the Minister the problems that existed with the legislation as introduced were worked through by the select committee. Significant amendments were made and the Minister agreed to accept those amendments. I am going to just outline those in a moment but I do want to say that it does make a difference when a select committee is prepared to look independently at legislation and when a Minister is prepared to accept the results of its deliberation. That enables us to achieve much wider consensus within this House on pieces of legislation where we would hope there would be continuity between Governments because we do need a strong innovative and creative Public Service and we need the framework within which that can operate.When this legislation was introduced there were real problems with it in terms of diminishing the rights of people who might be made redundant. When a person is made redundant that means they lose a job through no fault of their own. They should not be further punished by denying them the right to redundancy compensation. There should be a proper transition when changes are made and we should not be disadvantaging those covered by a collective agreement as against those who are under individual contracts. We should not have a situation whereby the Government is able to make orders that unilaterally change the existing legal and bargaining rights that workers have.The Labour Opposition raised each of those points in the select committee and as a result we have a change in the redundancy provisions of the State Sector Amendment Bill that protect the existing entitlements of people who are working within the Public Service. There will be one situation where workers will not be entitled to redundancy payments and that is where they are provided with a job which is “no less favourable” than the existing one that they have. If a worker is in no way disadvantaged if the work is as convenient and if it provides the same rights and the same future prospects and opportunities then yes we accept that that is not a redundancy situation. But where a genuine redundancy situation exists workers should be appropriately compensated and the change in the legislation enables that to happen.There need to be proper transition provisions. This bill provides a sunset clause over agreements both collective and individual over the 3 years after the passage of this legislation. It puts people on collective agreements on the same footing as those under individual contracts. Finally what were called Government Workforce Policy Orders have become “statements”. They will ensure that existing legal and bargaining rights are protected and that is different from the legislation as introduced.I said before that we support a framework that encourages an innovative flexible efficient Public Service and we also support a framework that enables collaboration between the different agencies of the Government. Clause 5 of the State Sector Amendment Bill which inserts a new section 1A “Purpose” is a commendable clause in terms of setting out the principles of the State sector: about the spirit of service to the community; about the collective interests of the Government; about appropriate standards of integrity and conduct; about political neutrality; about workforce and personnel matters being provided for properly; about good employer-employee obligations; as well as about a culture of excellence—Debate interrupted.