Auchinvole Chris: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeAuchinvole Chris: Employment Relations Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 05 June 2013. Volume:690;Page:10784. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National): Why is it that whenever we have an industrial relations bill those on the other side of the House—nice people individually in every sense and in every way—Mike Sabin: Oh don’t exaggerate.CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: No they are—they are. Why is it that they leap into a stereotypical transformation in a gang and assume the various unionist roles so aptly played by Peter Sellers in films likeI’m All Right Jack where the archetypical trade union shop steward had a nose-to-nose confrontation with the archetypical personnel manager played by Terry-Thomas? The trouble is that this was the 1960s when even I was young. Why do those members want to drag us back to the wicked old days of constant confrontation? The reason why—I can tell them why and they will not disagree—is that that is how unionists make their money.I cannot understand why they adopt this despicable attitude towards employers as if employers do not like in any shape or form the very people who work for them and who produce their profits their well-being and their continuance in business. I find myself—and this shows you the extent to which I have been moved by listening to those miserable speeches from the other side—agreeing completely with my colleague David Bennett.Hon Members: Oh!CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: Oh yes it has come to this. I am not so sure—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Order! The Speaker will not allow a person addressing the House to be drowned out. This is not a pub.CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: Thank you Mr Speaker—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I feel that it is only fair that you advise the member that he may want to withdraw and apologise for that last statement he made in his speech.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Chris Auchinvole.CHRIS AUCHINVOLE: I shall ignore the comment that came from the other side of the House because it is the best way to deal with the comments from that particular member and I am sure that on reflection he does not really mean what he says. But I am sure that I will also agree—and here is the member David Bennett—with my colleague Cam Calder who is yet to speak.I was intrigued though at Andrew Little’s example of each of us belonging to a union but saddened that even he a scholarly person dedicated to his profession—and yet so angry—is still in his own words locked in the time ofDownton Abbey and seeslabour relationships in terms of servility. I never saw labour relationships in terms of servility when I was a worker and nor did I when I was an employer. If Andrew Little is the leader of a trade union it speaks volumes in terms of attitude.This piece of legislation the Employment Relations Amendment Bill is good legislation but it will not be seen as such by Labour or indeed by New Zealand First which wants to keep everything the way it is at the moment. Labour wants to drag it back 30 years. I hesitate to say it but Labour views it through an old-fashioned pair of spectacles. I would encourage those members to freshen up and see the opportunities offered by this excellent bill.Just a final word for Andrew Little because he brought up the question—[Interruption] No listen to this bit. Andrew Little brought up the question of Air New Zealand workers wearing mufti. I cannot believe—think back a week—his temerity and duplicitous attitude in his approach. He was hailing them as heroes whereas when I in innocence wore my sleeveless jersey—60 stitches to the inch merino and alpaca hand-knitted probably by the women of Wānaka—who was it who objected? Who was it who raised the point of order to you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson in the Chair? It was Andrew Little. I was deeply hurt and offended. Thank you.