Prebble Richard: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Prebble Richard: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16159] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the ACT party to say that we have a slightly different view from the National Party on this. No we do not support either course of action. If it were up to the ACT party we would have just employment contracts and if there were something wrong with them people would go to the court. The problem we have here is that the Government and I am afraid successive Governments have been setting up all these commissions and we have a mighty grievance industry. One of the questions that came up in the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee was one asking the Law Society how many lawyers were involved in this sort of business 14 years ago. The answer it gave me was that there were almost none. It is now a large part of employment law. 
Either in the last 14 years we have suddenly started to discriminate against everyone or alternatively we have highly sensitive young ladies such as the one just mentioned. Of course as an employer I know that that is so. One good story deserves another. I was asked as the director of a small company whether I would come in for a cup of tea when a person who had been on a 3-month contract was about to leave. I was told that she had not done a very good job but the company still wanted to say goodbye to her. I went along and made some nice noises and the following Monday we received a letter from her—she had been on a 3-month contract—saying that it was wrongful dismissal and also threatening because she happened to be Maori to take us off to the Human Rights Commission. 
Judith Collins 
: Why? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Because we should have continued with the 3-month contract. There was never any understanding that it was to be more than 3 months. It is illegal to do this so I will not name the firm. 
 One of the secretaries there was so outraged that she rang the person who had provided the superb reference she had and was told that it was part of a settlement of a previous case. She had three references and so rang each referee to find that each time part of the settlement was that the employer had to write a letter saying what a wonderful woman this was together with the money. 
Shane Ardern 
: I have experienced that. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: The member says that he has experienced that. I do not know whether members opposite know about this but I guarantee that everyone on this side of the Chamber who hires any number of people knows that under this Government these references are now being produced and by law we are not allowed to ring up because it is contrary to the Privacy Act to see whether it was actually a shotgun reference. We refused to give her a shotgun reference and against the legal advice—I have to say mine as well; I said to settle as it was cheaper—we contested that. She was outraged and could not believe that anyone could oppose her because she had—I understood later—already done that four times. I say to the Minister that this part does not do anything about that problem. That is why I hope we will discuss this because this is the first opportunity we have had to do so. This is a rort. 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: The ACT party knows all about rorts. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: It is a grievance industry and Mr Benson-Pope is quite happy to tell people he does not have lists of projects in front of him. He cannot see that point and that is why he cannot see that what he is doing here is putting out a licence for fraudsters. He is corrupting people. That young woman might have started off as a reasonable person but under Mr Benson-Pope’s law she was told by the Government that she could extort money legally. That is what this legislation does and the Government is saying that it cannot be done twice so it is wonderful! I say that people should not be able to do it once. If people have a real case why not take it to a real court? I say to Mr Mapp that I do not accept that these mediators are doing a great job. The only reason it is a great job is that it is cheaper than going to court. To heck with that! I do not support the legislation. I do not support any of these commissions—I think they are a whole load of rubbish. I can still remember the 1990s when we did not have one of them and I personally think that New Zealand was a better country. 
Hon David Benson-Pope 
: Richard from the rort party. 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: Well I can recognise a rort and I am saying to the member that this is a rort. Is the member saying that these things do not happen? He is not prepared to say that because he cannot because he has never employed anyone with his own money in his whole life. Well we should not hold that against him because neither has anyone else in the Labour Party.