Belich Camilla; Williams Arena; Tuiono TeanauCAMILLA BELICH (Labour): Thank you Mr Chair. I would just like to carry on the train of thought that the Minister raised in her contribution there.Yes it is correct that you're able to take some personal grievances when you're in a 90-day trial. That is in fact the entire purpose of the Hon Ginny Andersen's amendment because I heard the Minister respond to a previous speaker to say that she didn't support this amendment because it goes contrary to the whole purpose of this bill which is not to allow any employee in a trial period to take a personal grievance. Well in fact the substance—Hon Brooke van Velden: That's not what I said.CAMILLA BELICH: Well I'm happy to hear a contribution from the Minister in due course. The substance of this provision is actually to allow the bill to exist with its purpose of not allowing unfair dismissal personal grievances to occur but inserting another clause in clause 103(1) entitled clause (l)" which essentially creates a new type of personal grievance which is a type of personal grievance that can only occur when an employee has been dismissed unfairly in a trial period.So yes an employee couldn't take a personal grievance for unfair dismissal during a relevant trial period. But if this provision was to go ahead there would be a new personal grievance that only applies to people who were dismissed unfairly—which is a different term to "unjustified" which is the common term used in relation to personal grievances in this Act. So it would create a new personal grievance for those who've been treated unfairly under a trial period.So I think it actually does two things. It doesn't just insert that section; it also goes back. If you can see in the Act at (1)(a) it also includes the reference to (k) in the primary Act as well. So it would make essentially two changes: one to the bill; which would then allow the bill to amend the primary legislation which is the Employment Relations Act inserting another—there's a whole list of personal grievances that are listed in section 103; it's one of the most important sections of the Employment Relations Act and it would add another one in there as well.So I think it's a very good provision. I support the inclusion of that provision and the reason that I do is I think it helps to mitigate some of the unfairness which has been discussed at length during this debate for individuals that are covered by a trial period. It would allow the trial periods to exist as the Minister intended with the introduction of this provision. But it would allow them if they were treated unfairly to take an additional personal grievance. And there are as the Minister knows and she's mentioned several exceptions to the overall ban on taking personal grievances. So the only one that is actually not allowed under the under the bill—Hon Brooke van Velden: Very glad you've discovered this since question time.CAMILLA BELICH: —is the unfair dismissal one and this creates a new one there as well.So I'm interested whether the Minister wants to reconsider her position in relation to this section. Given my professional opinion of this I think that may be something that she wants to reconsider. I think that it's very difficult to say to someone that you've got no recourse to justice—and this is about access to justice. Trial periods are serious in that they remove access to justice and this provision goes some way to restoring the ability for individuals to gain justice.I'm sure all members in this room if they ever have a friend or loved one who is dismissed under a trial period that feeling of frustration; that feeling of lack of justice; that feeling of unfairness that will just taint their entire life. I'm not overstating that. It is hugely serious and something that I think has been touched on a lot in this debate. Jobs are not simply a means of employment: they are self-esteem they are about how you identify they are about your place in the world.If people are not allowed to take action where they've been treated unfairly in something that is so important to them it is really important that we look at that we take it seriously and I think that this clause—as proposed by the Hon Ginny Andersen—goes some way into restoring dignity to those people covered by trial periods.ARENA WILLIAMS (Labour—Manurewa): Point of order. Thank you for the point of order Mr Chair. Mr Chair there is a convention that in committee members in charge of legislation should not take unfair advantage of a live microphone by way of interjection. Mr Chair I wonder if given that we're all a bit tired and I know the Minister is doing her best to observe those rules whether you would allow my colleague Camilla Belich another five minutes to finish her points that I missed because the Minister was interjecting throughout her speech—three times. I wonder if that would be the right way to move forward with that. CHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono): I mean I appreciate the point of order but the member could also take another call. But I do want to bring back the focus to this very specific clause. I do want to acknowledge the energy in the committee tonight and the commitment from members right across the Chamber in this graveyard shift. But I would ask members opposite in particular to focus on this particular clause."