Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk on Part 5 of this bill. I want to look at clause 92F in particular which is around entitlement and the obligation to represent covered employers. So what happens—and I just want to remind people who are just tuning into this debate—with what we think is a grossly undemocratic initiating process is that a fair pay agreement process gets under way. It might have only taken a thousand employees out of 200000 in a sector or an industry. That tiny little minority has decided they want it; therefore it's happened and it's under way. And then regardless of whether they want to or not the two sides the employee side which is the union that started the whole process and the employers—the employers have to try and get together and decide on who to represent the employers. They may not in which case it goes straight off to the Employment Relations Authority for them to decide.But if they do decide then I suppose a couple of questions arise then. How on earth does any employer group represent the views? Because there is an obligation in here in clause 92F for the firms to represent—well let's just read it. The employer bargaining side is entitled to represent and must use its best endeavours" to represent the collective interests of all covered employers whether or not each employer is a member of the association. OK all right. So it's got to do its best endeavours. Well that's not the highest hurdle in the world. Dr Duncan Webb: Well actually it is quite high.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well yeah well let's just see. So you're up and again if we take the example of the cleaner down in Haast—a two-person operation. Do we really think that the large cleaning operations that dominate the market who presumably will have the most say when it comes to the organisation that emerges on the employers' side—how practically are they going to engage and understand the interests of that little operation down in Haast?Or if we were to take another example—if we were to take the example of the superette owner in Hokianga for example who I have referred to. So if the fair pay agreement was on checkout operators for example and a group was set up to represent the employers I just have this worry or this concern that it will be the big operators that dominate the employers' group. It's natural and they will do it. And it's interesting because we have on the one hand the Government this same Government who spends a great deal of time going on and beating its chest saying "We're going to get tough on the supermarket duopoly for example and we've got the Commerce Commission focused on that and we're going to do all sorts of stuff that are going to make life difficult for them and we're going to show them what's what and we're going to be tough because we're on the side of the consumers." OK well that's all very well and good. And then at the same time it's bringing in regulations and rules such as this which I have no doubt whatsoever will help the same big players vis à vis the little ones that they're supposedly trying to help on the other. Because if you think for a moment that regulations which are costly time consuming and require an enormous amount of management effort to get your head around—what on earth is all this about what's going on what do we want to have in terms of conditions how are we going to organise this—do you really think that the small little operator in the Hokianga with two employees and a superette is going to be focused on that and contributing and that his or her voice is going to be paramount in how this is all shaped up and developed? Or do you think it will be the vast team of people in Progressive Enterprises or Countdown—how do you think that distinction will work?So what you'll have which is typical of all regulation is that mostly regulation supports the big players. It's in the interest of the big players and usually makes it more difficult for small businesses to compete because the more cumbersome they are the more difficult it is to deal with. The more management expertise that is required to handle it the bigger the systems that are required to manage it. The more regulation there is the more the big organisations do well and they manage it—they complain about it; it doesn't mean they don't complain about it. They'll always complain about it but actually it suits them vis-à-vis the small person the small operator who is just scrambling trying to figure out who's going to be on the checkout because so-and-so is sick today and the other one's not available and they're scrambling around trying to just keep the business going and they're trying to sort of come up with and deal with these regulations. Then secondly it's not only just dealing with the regulations; it's also who shapes them and for whose benefit because it doesn't again take very much imagination to think that an organisation that has 10000 employees may well be able to cope with—we'll come later to all the mandatory things that have to be included in the fair pay agreement. And you know it's all around our penal rates. It's around this that and the other thing: leave entitlements and health and safety requirements—all sorts of things that an organisation with 10000 employees might be able to cope with. It might be all sorts of rules around tea breaks and how often you have to do this and how often you have to do that. If you've got 10000 employees you might be able to cope with it well; if you've got two employees it would be an absolute total nightmare and very difficult to deal with. So what we have is on the one hand this Government says it's going to get tough on the big guys and we're going to break up the duopolies and we're going to bring in more competition. On the other hand they're passing legislation every month—every month—that actually makes it easier for the big guys vis-à-vis the little ones. If you wanted another example and I pray the indulgence of the chair for a moment it would be how the COVID regulations worked for the supermarkets. For example the supermarkets kept going and all their little competitors the fruit and veggie shops are shut down and just about go bust. And so "Oops there's an issue but anyway we'll come back and we're going to get tough on the supermarkets and we're going to be tough on competition." So the complete muddle-headedness of their approach to regulation when it comes to competition consequences is laid bare in this. So what I'm getting round to is I'd like to hear from the Minister what thought if any he gave to the competition consequences of this because I'm sure he would have got a lot of advice on this and he would have thought very carefully about it. How do you design a system in a disparate occupation or industry level which you know again thinking of it in those examples of checkout operators which spans from the big supermarkets massive well-organised industry through to tiny little shops mum and dad operations who have their little EFTPOS machine and they've got a couple of casual employees. You're trying to come up with a system that suits all of them and you've got a cumbersome expensive system with lawyers and QCs and everything like that trying to organise how they're going to set up the system. And you've got under clause 92F the obligation to do "best endeavours to represent" the collective interests of all these employees. I don't think for a moment that the collective interests of all those little players scattered around the country are going to be represented at all by them and the "best endeavours" will be a joke. They can't be anything other than a joke because it's just too hard and not practical. So I'm keen to hear from the Minister as to how he has thought about that implication and it would take a bit of a mind-set shift for him to think about that. But I'd be interested to know what advice he's had and whether he'd given thought to particular ways that he can deal with that particular issue that I'm raising in terms of entitlements and obligations and the best endeavours that need to be taken."