Logie Jan: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLogie Jan: Health and Safety Reform Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee[Sitting date: 19 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:6012. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAN LOGIE (Green): I am very pleased to be able to take a call on this Health and Safety Reform Bill. It is the first call I have had an opportunity to take on this bill. After being present last night to hear the members of families who have lost people due to workplace deaths I feel the weight of responsibility in debating this issue and the privilege of being able to speak and to try to in some way convey their concerns particularly around this part of the bill. Although counter to what the Minister seems to be suggesting this is at the heart of what needs to happen. Worker engagement is essential to ensuring safe workplaces.What we see in this part is in effect a gutting of the recommendations from the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy and The Report of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety which was promoting a model very similar to the Australian model of health and safety law which is big on worker participation. It has provisions for elected health and safety representatives health and safety committees training for health and safety representatives and for health and safety representatives to have powers to enforce health and safety on the job. What this bill and this part do really guts that which means that the intent of the royal commission and the pain that those families have been going through—in their own grieving as well as standing up and advocating and sharing their experiences with us as a Parliament and with the rest of the country—are to be for nothing if we pass this part of the bill as it is.We have heard from the Minister that they have considered these issues and have decided that this is balanced. Well you know the words of the family were that balance means nothing if there is going to be another death. To them balance is not worth the loss of their families. I think it was Bernie Monk who said that it will feel as if the deaths were for nothing; that there will be no legacy or resolution for their advocacy and working through of that grief if we do not ensure that there are strong provisions for all workers in this country.The fact is that a limit has been set on 20 workers in a workplace when we know that 97 percent of businesses in New Zealand have fewer than 20 workers and that is where the whole small business strategy in this country sets out that 97 percent have below 20—Hon Ruth Dyson: Just says 87.JAN LOGIE: Eighty-seven was it? Sorry—the document I read said 97 percent. Maybe the numbers have changed in recent times.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Oh 25—25.JAN LOGIE: But it is—well I think we are really quibbling to be arguing that point Minister Woodhouse and I think you are really missing the point if you are going to argue that. Then to have a separate section to say “OK well we’re going to identify the high-risk industries as the exception to that.” when we do not have that in legislation where it is going to be a debatable point outside of this Chamber is again not doing honour to the advocacy of those families.I was very privileged to sit in on some of the submissions and there were a huge number that the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee heard on this bill. We heard from I think the Forest Owners Association which was saying that it had no issue with worker participation and that it had very good worker advocacy on its sites. That was in direct conflict I think to Helen Kelly’s presentation where she talked about the reports on her office wall of forestry deaths where there was no worker voice in any of those reports.Our employers are saying “Yes we’re doing these things.”—probably according to the provisions of this bill—and yet there is no worker representation or voice when it comes to those death reports. I think it tells us something about the need to have it down clearly in legislation so that there is no ability to kind of muddy the waters and say “Yes we’re doing this we care.” when actually the overriding interest is the short-term dollar.