Muller ToddTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you Madam Chair and I very much appreciate being able to talk this afternoon in my first call to the Employment Relations Amendment Bill. And if there ever is a bill that talks to the fundamental philosophical divide that exists in this House it is this bill. And when you think of the language that we've already heard from the Government's side framing up our current economic conditions that exist in this country the current employment law that exists in this country through the lens of righting historical grievances and wrongs and the massive power imbalance that exists in this country—it defies belief when you actually consider the reality of this economy that in one breath they're extolling its virtues its strengths and its position in the OECD yet somehow in this piece of legislation we are on the verge of a precipice of collapse because the power imbalance is so woefully apparently in the employer's favour.And it does make me wonder when I reflect upon their perspective how many of them have put their capital at risk to start a business? How many of them have actually worked through the issues of actually trying to develop a good or a service and take it to the market and need people to work with them? There's very few. Most of them are looking at the ground because they come from a theoretical perspective. Now the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety's contributions thus far I have found fascinating because he's clearly decided that the way to try and usher this period of debate that we're having through the House is to lower the tone of his voice and to be above all else reasonable. What it strikes me as is that this is a strategy of talk softly but carry a big stick" because this bill is the big stick. It's the big stick on New Zealand employers. It's the big stick actually on provincial New Zealand who have a whole series of small to medium sized businesses—often mum and dad businesses—trying to make their way in the New Zealand economy and through that the global marketplace. This is the big stick that he's wielding. But he thinks that perhaps if the language is softened in terms of his response the image that he will portray through those watching is one of eminent reasonableness.Well actually the area that I'd like to talk about particularly clauses 13 and 14 and the conversation that we've already started this afternoon about forcing employers to enter into multi-employment collective agreements if one or two of their employees would like that to be pursued I think has real risks in constraining growth and investment across regional New Zealand. Now I represent an area which is going exceptionally well. It's the area of Tauranga the wider Bay of Plenty. I represent an area which is very strong in terms of its kiwifruit as a sector and I know that there is significant concern that this legislation is going to—incrementally perhaps at first—roll across the sector a whole lot of obligation in terms of a collective union approach and I think that is a very porous impact for a region that is doing exceptionally well.We are doing extraordinarily well in the Bay of Plenty. Where is the need for such regressive legislation? I don't see it and I am a strong supporter of this very considered Supplementary Order Paper 114 in the name of my colleague Dan Bidois that talks to essentially this challenge. His suggestion of course is to delete clauses 13 and 14 and I think if that happened that would give some of the employers in my region who are part of an industry which is one of the fastest growing in the country some comfort that actually the Government has heard them and that there is no need to force such radical change into the employment arrangements of New Zealand. And I found it very telling the comments of the Minister when he reflected on the Port of Auckland and said they don't have a collective agreement at the moment. He sees no reason why they would rush to that. He didn't suggest in any way that this legislation would prevent that—of course far from it; it encourages it. But then right at the end the sting of the tail he said "But hopefully the Ports of Auckland will consider that the benefits—[Time expired]"