Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mallard Trevor: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:668;Page:14923] 
1. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: What factors did the Prime Minister take into account when he agreed with Warner Bros executives to change employment legislation in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 That is not the question Mr Speaker. Point of order. My apologies Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is the Minister OK now? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes. The— 
Hon Member 
: Cut! 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well there is a huge amount of public sentiment out there in favour of the Warner Bros films being made in New Zealand—the two  
Hobbit 
 films. I noticed that Labour has said that it will have a bloody battle in the House today to try to prevent the legislation going through that will facilitate the films. I am wearing my red tie so that no one will see that blood on my shirt. I noticed the member asking the question is wearing his brown corduroy trousers. I ask him what he is worried about. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There was a little humour at the start but the question asked what factors the Prime Minister had taken into account when he agreed with Warner Bros executives to change employment legislation in New Zealand. There is nothing political about that question. OK a member interjected; it was a reasonably humorous interjection and the member responded with some good humour and then indicated one reason. If that was the only reason that is fine but the question did not justify the rest of what the Minister was saying. But if the Minister feels that he has answered in terms of the factors that is fine. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: There were a number of factors including the uncertainty of the legal status of independent contractors in the film industry. The legislation will clarify the distinction between independent contractors and employees as it relates to the film production industry. It was also evident that assurances from the Council of Trade Unions although offered in a genuine way were caveated by the call for a collective agreement on the  
Hobbit 
 movies. That served only to exacerbate the confusion around the status of contractors and that is what the Government intends to clear. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was a reduction in protection for film workers designed to encourage investment in  
The 
Hobbit? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I completely reject any suggestion that any change to clarify the employment status of people who are engaged to perform tasks in the film industry is a reduction of protection. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Does he characterise the removal of the right to collectively bargain as an improvement or a reduction in the rights of the workers? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I will take my lead from the thousands of workers who turned out on Labour Day to protest against the position that the  
Hobbit 
 movies should be subject to collective agreements. I therefore cannot agree that it is a reduction in their rights. 
Keith Locke 
: Did Warner Bros require that changes to our industrial legislation be passed this week therefore requiring urgency in Parliament today? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Warner Bros did not put any requirements on us to do anything. The New Zealand Government has recognised that there were employment issues that needed to be sorted out and we are going to move to clarify those. We think that the last 7 weeks have been shameful as far as the support for the film industry is concerned and we are going to urgently move to fix that situation. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Which agencies gave him advice on this issue? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: When it came to advice on whether there was an issue around employment relations the Government sought opinion from Crown Law. It confirmed there were a number of anomalies that might need to be cleared up. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was the Prime Minister cognisant of clause 4 of article 1 of the Chinese free-trade agreement which states: “The parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by weakening or reducing the protections afforded in domestic labour laws regulations policies and practices.” when this decision was made? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes and I believe that on each of the points the members likes to raise we have acted opposite to the way he is suggesting. 
Keith Locke 
: Does the Prime Minister agree that in order to be sure about its consequences changes in employment law should be informed by public submissions particularly from employers union representatives and lawyers; if so why is he rushing an employment law change under urgency today? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am not speaking for the Prime Minister but I can tell the member— 
Hon Members 
: You are. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No I am not. The question is to the Minister for Economic Development. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This question was as I am sure you are aware addressed to the Prime Minister and was transferred to the Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not strictly a point of order at all. The Government is at liberty to transfer questions to appropriate Ministers and the Minister on this occasion is answering as the Minister for Economic Development; he is not answering on behalf of the Prime Minister. The Minister was quite correct: he is not answering on behalf of the Prime Minister. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I can only point the member to a recent news poll that suggests that about 75 percent of respondents polled think that this was a good idea and 25 percent think that it was not. That seems to me to be about right according to the way we observe public opinion on this. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question asked about a public submission process not about an opinion poll of what people might have thought. That is different from a parliamentary submission process. The Prime Minister did not really answer that question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Actually it is the Minister for Economic Development. Because of the time lapse from when the member asked his question—there was a point of order intervention—I will allow the member to repeat his question so that we all hear it accurately. 
Keith Locke 
: Does the Minister agree that in order to be sure about the consequences changes in employment law should be informed by public submissions particularly from employers union representatives and lawyers; if so why is he rushing through an employment law change in urgency today? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: In most cases but not in this case. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Was the Government aware through various news reports or directly from Warner Bros that Ireland was the main alternative to New Zealand for filming  
The Hobbit 
? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That is not the information we understood. 
Keith Locke 
: Can the Minister confirm that later today New Zealand’s sovereign Parliament will be sitting under urgency to pass a new law at the request of a foreign multinational corporation? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I choose to answer the latter part of that question and the answer is no. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Did the Minister read the reports in US newspapers which indicate—[ 
Interruption 
] Mr Speaker are you a loser? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will just ask his question. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Did the Minister read in the  
New York Times 
 and other US newspapers that Ireland was the main alternative for Warner Bros for the filming of  
The Hobbit 
; if so was he aware that the Irish Government agreed on 27 September this year to extend collective bargaining in Ireland to actors for the first time? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No. I do not have as much time on my hands as the member to be able to read foreign newspapers. But I also say that the member’s supposition is simply incorrect. 
Hon John Boscawen 
: What role did the various political parties in Parliament play in helping secure this deal? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Central to the success of keeping filming of  
The Hobbit  
in New Zealand was the need to clarify and create certainty in respect of some aspects of our industrial relations law. It became apparent that change to the law to clarify the status of employees versus contractors was necessary. I thank the ACT Party for the very prompt way and very helpful way in which it understood that problem and chose to support that course of action. In the same vein I thank the leader of United Future for his support and today I am advised that the Maori Party will also support this legislation and I want to thank it for that. All the Government parties support this legislation because they know the value of the 
 Hobbit 
 films being produced in New Zealand; they know that this is a good decision for workers in the film industry.