Sowry Roger: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Sowry Roger: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11568] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 It is good to follow the United Future party. I note the member said it is the true centrist party and it is—it controls half a percent either side of the centre and long may it continue to do that. 
This bill is a terrible bill. We are debating Part 2 and all of it is new. The entire part was introduced at the select committee. It did not form part of the original bill. Mr Peck said that people did not come along to the select committee and argue and make submissions so on that basis we should put the bill through. I say to Mr Peck that the public and business sector at large did not believe that the Government would pass this bill. They did not think it would be as stupid as that. I challenge the Government to send this bill back to the select committee adopt it as a Government bill and tell the people out there who will be really hurt by this bill that the Government is prepared to listen to them. 
But the Government will not do that even though it knows that lots of small-business people stand to lose the shirts off their backs. That is the reality of this bill. Any small business that has paid out for goods or services and provided them to a large company that then becomes insolvent will go to the wall whilst the workers get their redundancy. That tells us what Labour’s priorities are. Its priorities are not about creating wealth. Labour does not give a fig for small businesses out there that are providing services to larger businesses. This bill offers them no protection—none at all. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: It’s not— 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: Rick Barker says that it is not designed to. That is fine. So small businesses will go to the wall? 
Now I come to New Zealand First. I cannot understand why that party is supporting this bill. It does not fit at all with the leader of New Zealand First who has championed small business during his time in Parliament. How does New Zealand First argue that this bill is good for a small business that is providing goods and services to a large business when it places it at risk? I cannot see how New Zealand First which normally claims a lot more common sense on these issues can support a bill that puts lots of small businesses at risk. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Rubbish! 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: That is an intelligent interjection from the member. Let us consider a rest home that goes into receivership. It happens. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: A who? 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: A rest home. Is the member aware of rest homes? The staff component is about 40 percent of the wage bill. The rest home has a redundancy agreement so that all the staff—all the nurse aides—walk away with a couple of thousand dollars redundancy. Who misses out? The suppliers do. The people who are owed money for supplying food security services checking alarm systems and all those personal services miss out—lots of tiny companies and small businesses. No Labour members have got to their feet to say they think that workers deserve more than small businesses. Why does Mr Barker think that all the little businesses that were providing services— 
PETER BROWN (Deputy Leader—NZ First) 
:  
I will try to answer some of the questions that have been raised in this portion of the debate. Firstly the Hon Richard Prebble gave the scenario of a manager who knowing the company is about to go belly up the next day signs up his own redundancy agreement which is capped. This bill includes holiday pay wages and redundancy. The $15000 cap does not relate just to redundancy; it relates to everything. If a manager is as desperate as that—and I do not know a manager who would be inclined to do that but I accept that the honourable member might know of somebody—then I am prepared as we are in the Committee stage to support an amendment to this bill that will address that concern and exclude directors and company managers who are likely to do such a thing. I am certain someone could work out a little bit of wording and New Zealand First will support a clause preventing a manager from ripping off the system. 
In terms of the point raised by the Hon Roger Sowry I say to that member that we are talking in the main about employees of large companies. Not many small businesses employ unionised workforces that have redundancy agreements but there are— 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: We’ll wait for the next bill. 
PETER BROWN 
: We will wait for the next bill but we are talking about this bill at this point in time and the member should not get confused. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Look ahead. 
PETER BROWN 
: The member has to be kidding. Does he think ahead? That is why Don Brash this morning or this afternoon was in Katikati. He blocked off the road and the car-parks for a paltry little crowd. Is that thinking ahead? 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: There were 600 people. 
PETER BROWN 
: I would not bet on that. [ 
Interruption 
] I do not mind those guys chipping in but it is a little bit disconcerting when they are seated behind me. Never mind they want to have something to say. 
We know that with many redundancy agreements signed up in this country the working people the employees have made some sacrifice to get a redundancy agreement. In essence it is like an insurance policy. We know that over the years things have gone wrong in many industries. I asked the library to research where there have been major redundancies. The library gave a summation of such a size it is hard to collate including the meat industry sharemarket industry clothing industry car industry airline industry and shipping industry as well as stevedoring. 
If the National Party wants to dismiss that information so frivolously and as Mr Connell earlier suggested that this bill was opposed by a number of submitters then I ask those members why they did not oppose it at the Commerce Committee. I ask National Party members why they signed up to this clause in the commentary on the bill: “We recommend that redundancy entitlements be included within the employee priority.” In other words the total contract is treated as one. “We consider that such entitlements form part of a contractually negotiated package for employees which may have included trade-offs in relation to wages or salary.” That is what National Party members signed up to at the select committee. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Were they actually there? 
PETER BROWN 
: That is a good question. But the document tells me there were two National representatives on the select committee: the Hon Maurice Williamson— 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Maurice Williamson would not have been there. 
PETER BROWN 
: —he might not have been there; the member thinks not—and their current deputy leader Gerry Brownlee. He might have had other things on his mind. [ 
Interruption 
] Well if that is supposedly the Government-in-waiting God help this country. If that is what those members do with one little bill like this—sign up to it not know what they are doing and not turn up at the select committee—then God help this country if they ever come to the forefront of it. If that is true that is a disgrace. 
This bill puts working people’s contracts to the fore and that is a fair way of handling things in the view of New Zealand First. We support this bill and will be pleased to see it go through the House in short order.