Robertson Grant: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:15035] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 As ever it is a pleasure to follow a life member of Northshore Toastmasters Cam Calder although the club might withdraw his life membership after listening to that speech. It is good to see Government members actually taking some calls because they have not been taking many calls up until now. 
We have not yet heard a justification for clause 4. Tau Henare told us about his appearance in the film  
Mesmerized 
. The problem for us is that we had to sit through the sequel “ 
Dazed and Confused 
”. But we found out a little bit about the movie  
Mesmerized 
 which Tau Henare was in. The movie  
Mesmerized 
 is summarised as: “The ultimate price is paid for a young girl’s loss of innocence.” That is the movie Tau Henare was in. Fortunately we did not get a full— 
Hon Annette King 
: Was it a blue movie? 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: Who knows? We did not get a full summation from Mr Henare about his role. He said it involved him going from point A to point B. That is all I will say. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Again I do so reluctantly. Discussions of dirty movies at this point I think are well out of order and although this matter was touched on by Tau Henare extending it in the way that my colleague is doing is I think inappropriate. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I think the member has the message. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: Thank you very much Mr Chair. 
One of the things that Mr Henare and Cam Calder have just said is that this industry is worth $2.8 billion to New Zealand. That is right; it is a very significant industry for New Zealand. One hundred and twenty films were made during the term of the fifth Labour Government. We got in there and supported the growth of this industry. 
If members on the other side of the Chamber are serious about supporting the film industry why did Gerry Brownlee sit there and do nothing for 2 years when everyone else in Wellington knew that because of the problems that Warner Bros was having in Hollywood there was a risk about the 
 Hobbit 
 film. He stood up on the other side of the Chamber and said the Labour Party likes just going to the cocktail parties. No—what we did when we were in office was to keep a relationship going with Warner Bros. That is the issue here today. That is really the reasoning behind this legislation. It is a fact that this Government let the relationship with Warner Bros slide ended up in a crisis and then opportunistically out of that crisis put forward the legislation that is before us today. That is why we are here. 
We are told by Tau Henare that the specifics of clause 4 are a simple matter. If one is a contractor one is contractor; if one is an employee one is an employee. But it is not as simple as that. Sometimes when people come in and sign up to be a contractor they do that because they want that position. They want that job; they want that work. But what happens over time—as it did for Mr Bryson in the case we have been talking about today—when things change when the nature of the relationship evolves? Why should Mr Bryson not then become eligible for all of the protections that would come from being an employee? 
The Supreme Court said that if there was a change in the way that an employment relationship develops then that is a legitimate thing to bear in mind. Things do not remain completely static in every employment relationship. So that is why— 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: They should then renegotiate. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: The point I say to Dr Mapp is that the certainty was there. The case was done in 2005. Gerry Brownlee keeps talking about this urgent matter this festering sore but  
Avatar 
 has been made since then. Lots of movies have been made since then. The situation was absolutely settled in law. This legislation is a complete fiction. 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: The word “boycott” changed things. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: Dr Mapp mentions the boycott. The boycott was over I tell Dr Mapp. Everybody knows that. Everybody knows that the boycott was over yet this Government has opportunistically brought in this legislation to carry on its attacks on the workers of New Zealanders because the Government knows— 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Fiction. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: What were the thousands of people saying outside Parliament last week? They know that this Government is attacking workers’ rights in New Zealand. The 90-day bill extension is an example. 
That is why we on this side of the Chamber do not have trust and confidence that this legislation is not the beginning of a wider set of employment law changes around the status of contractors. Why could this not end up being extended beyond the film industry? It is already extended in clause 4 to the video game industry. When did the video game industry ask to be part of this? Why is the cleaner at two of the really successful video game - making companies in Wellington suddenly brought under this sets of rules? No one on the Government benches has explained how the video game industry came to be caught up in this. 
This is shambolic legislation. If the Government was true to its word it would have been referred to a select committee. It has not and this law should not proceed.