Fenton Darien: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Fenton Darien: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:12876] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I want to just make a few brief comments if I may in relation to the Supplementary Order Papers and new clause 8. Sue Kedgley has already mentioned some of these things and I totally agree with what she said in terms of the efforts of the previous Minister and this Government to bend over backwards to accommodate employers’ concerns. I was on the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee and we listened very carefully to what employers said. If members look at the EMA Central website they will see that one of the concerns raised there is that the bill imposed unnecessary legislation that would bring increased compliance costs and legislative loopholes and was likely to give rise to additional litigation. We certainly took that on board. In fact this is extremely light-handed legislation as the member said and I do not think it will surprise members to know that in fact I would like to see it much stronger. 
I think that it is very very good that we have improved this bill and it is great that we are leading the way in terms of whom it applies to. I am glad also that the new Minister has proposed a provision that will allow for judicial review. But let us just get real here: we are talking about the right for someone to request flexible working hours—the right to request. 
John Hayes 
: You don’t need a law to do it. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: National says it supports that but is not prepared to have any framework or anything around it that will make it a reality. 
Employers were given a year. We put the legislation on hold for a year and employers were given a year to prove that it could be done by education. What happened? Not a lot! At the end of that time a survey was done by the Department of Labour that showed that people are still crying out for flexible working hours. The member Sue Kedgley referred to our long working hours and our problems and it is the No. 1 issue that comes up. 
I return to new clause 8 and say that the Committee needs to understand that this is probably the only employment legislation I am aware of that has such limitations on the right for people to go to the Employment Relations Authority then to the Employment Court then to the Supreme Court. This is our effort in terms of trying to make it work for both employers and workers and I think we have bent over backwards. 
I make just a final comment in case National members have not understood who is behind this bill. We are talking about Rural Women New Zealand the National Council of Women the Parents Centres the Federation of Business and Professional Women the Young Women’s Christian Association of Aotearoa Grey Power—the list goes on and on. They support what is being done in this legislation today and I look forward to the third reading. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 160 in the name of the Hon Trevor Mallard to proposed new clause 8 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 153 in the name of the Hon Ruth Dyson be agreed to.