Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Tisch Lindsay: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:633;Page:5315] 
LINDSAY TISCH (National—Piako) 
: 
 The Employment Relations Amendment Bill is very important legislation. As my colleague Paula Bennett said in her address this bill is the 15th amendment to this legislation. When the House debated the previous amendment to the legislation we asked the Government why it could not get it right. Yet here we are again debating a bill that hits those people who make investments in our community—the business people. They are the risk takers. They put their money at stake to provide the jobs that communities thrive on. But this bill takes that away from them; it means if people take over a contract be it in catering or cleaning for example they will have to take on existing staff. 
One of the very important issues about employment and people being prepared to invest to grow the economy is that it is a win-win situation. But that will not happen if the environment is rife with employment law Resource Management Act issues Accident Compensation Corporation levies and all those matters that affect small business—and we are a nation of small business with 85 percent of all businesses employing fewer than 10 people. Small business employs 360000-odd people yet this bill will stifle that initiative. There will be absolutely no incentive for small business to grow because a lot of firms will retrench. They will say: “This is too hard for me.” and will downsize. 
I note an issue about contingent liability that did not come up in the Committee stage but is important to identify. If people want to sell their business there is a contractual arrangement between the purchaser and the vendor to do whatever. But with these contracts there is a contingent liability to take on the existing staff. No business will want to do that. If we value a business we will find there is absolutely no goodwill in it because of the contingent liability that a potential purchaser will have to undertake to abide by the legislation. 
Colin King 
: Who would take the risk? 
LINDSAY TISCH 
: My colleague Colin King asks: “Who would take the risk?”. He has been in business. He knows what it is like to be an employer of staff. If we want a growing vibrant economy in which there is investment opportunities for small business to grow and to invest in the community—to make it all work—this sort of repressive legislation does not do anything to facilitate that. Who misses out? At the end of the day it is the employees who miss out. The real people whom one would expect legislation would try to protect are the ones who miss out. 
This bill is very short-sighted. I note as someone who has been involved in employment for many many years that this is the sort of legislation that stifles initiative and makes things more difficult for those people whom we should be trying to help to nurture so that we get a win-win situation in a business environment. Then everybody can prosper with it. But as soon as restrictions are put on and things are made difficult for employers they will ask why they should bother. They will take their money and shoot through or put it into other investments that will not create jobs. They will be passive investments. They will probably put their money into real estate which has seen a boom. In the area where I come from median prices have gone up. There is a lot of capital gain to be made so businesses will decide not to bother about the risks of employing staff. They will move away from that environment and put their money where they know they have a safe return and do not have to worry about facing the employment challenges caused by the Government continually changing the rules and moving the goalposts. 
This legislation makes things very very restrictive for business and does not help the vulnerable workers whom the bill purports to try to help. It does not help them at all. Those people who do the employing those who make the investment want a return on it. We know there have been sharks out there but they have been sorted out. This bill will not allow people who want to build goodwill to do so. This is the 15th attempt at making changes. 
Economies with growth and productivity are economies where employers and employees can nurture the value of that investment. Be it capital on the one side or labour on the other it becomes a win-win situation. Legislation like this which stifles initiative will not work. Employers will be looking very closely at this; I can tell members that. They will not be taking on those sorts of contracts where vulnerable workers are likely to be working and we will find that there is a huge shortfall in those areas. 
This bill is not good law. It will not help the people it is designed to help. Employers as those who make the investment will be very disappointed with this legislation. It is short-sighted and it is very one-sided and that is why National is voting against it.