Smith Lockwood: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Smith Lockwood: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16192] 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 In speaking to the title of the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill there are two particular issues that I would like to cover in these few minutes. I simply want to make sure I have the chance of expressing in this Chamber my concern over how these issues will impact on businesses in New Zealand. The two issues I particularly want to focus on are the provisions relating to the restructuring of a business and bargaining fees. I will deal with the first issue. 
I hope the Government as it seeks to pass this bill through the Committee stage today realises what it is doing to businesses. Surely the Minister in the chair Paul Swain can recollect the year 2000 when this provision was previously before the Parliament. It came into this Parliament as clause 66 in the original Employment Relations Bill. Such was the outrage expressed by businesses throughout New Zealand that the Government backed off. It was a huge issue. I know that Willie Jackson was a member of this Parliament at the time and he felt quite strongly about supporting clause 66. He was on the Employment and Accident Insurance Legislation Committee and the chair of the select committee at the time Graham Kelly had to knobble him. I was there at the time. It was in July. I have the notes from the meeting where it happened. Sue Bradford said in this Parliament the other day how she continued to fight for it. She withdrew her motion at that select committee meeting. She claims she continued to fight for it. She withdrew her motion. 
This was a huge issue at the time. Now the Government has brought it back despite the fact that business has continued to argue that this will devalue certain businesses hugely for obvious reasons. Think of situations where staff have to be taken over with their employment conditions intact. Think of when Air New Zealand bought Ansett. The Government now owns Air New Zealand which it had to buy as a consequence of this arrangement. Air New Zealand because of Australian industrial law could not restructure the employment arrangements in Ansett. Air New Zealand basically had to take on Ansett with all the existing employment arrangements in place. Air New Zealand thought it could change them. It could not and it darn-near destroyed Air New Zealand. It destroyed Ansett and darn-near took Air New Zealand with it. 
I invite the Minister in the chair to reflect on that. A company as big as Air New Zealand had to have the Government bail it out partly because of industrial law similar to this. I am not saying it is the same but it has a similar effect. Air New Zealand could not change the employment arrangements of all the staff of Ansett in Australia. Consequently it sank Ansett was destroyed and almost without Government intervention Air New Zealand would have gone too. That is what is going to happen to businesses in this country. This Labour Government ought to think very carefully before it does that. So that is the first issue I want to emphasise. 
The second issue is the bargaining fees. I have had many years’ experience working with two of the biggest unions in the country the teachers’ unions. The Hon Mr Trevor Mallard will know these unions well. Far from non-union members having to pay bargaining fees I would argue that the unions should have to pay non-union members for constraining their ability to get decent pay arrangements. The big unions in this country stifle our most skilled people. Our most skilled teachers do not get paid anywhere near what they are worth because of the union. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Of course they do. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: They do not! Our most skilled teachers deserve far more but the union always protects the poor at the expense of the good. Far from those who are not part of a union having to pay bargaining fees it is the unions that should pay compensation where non-union members are not allowed under Labour’s laws to be paid better than union members. They cannot be offered better deals than union members. So some of our most skilled people especially in those big areas like teaching do not get paid what they are worth and it is outrageous.