Curran ClareHon CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): Madam Assistant Speaker tēnā koe and very responsible of you. Look thank goodness that last speech is over. There is a lot of rhetoric and balderdash—that's a great word isn't it?—Kieran McAnulty: Poppycock.Hon CLARE CURRAN: —poppycock and drivel etc.—that gets uttered in this Chamber. Unfortunately for the watchers and the listeners out there in New Zealand the last speech unfortunately epitomised that and I'm really sorry to the people of New Zealand for that.First of all I really want to say thank you to Kieran McAnulty from the Wairarapa and also to Darien Fenton who is continuing to represent the working people of New Zealand in the best way possible on the shop floor. I really do pay tribute to her for that and for the incredible work that she did while she was in this Parliament and what she is continuing to do in the workplaces of New Zealand to ensure fairness and representation and rights for people who really do need that representation.This bill is an important step forward in ensuring that the rights of working people are upheld and particularly for people who are working under vulnerable conditions. The triangular employment arrangements do put many workers in this country despite what you just heard in the last speech in places that are vulnerable. Many of those people are our recent citizens recent residents immigrants to our country who may not have English as their first language who require work and are prepared to work but who end up working in conditions that put them at a disadvantage. That party over there has swept all that under the carpet glossed over it and refuses to acknowledge that it's an issue and in fact in my belief a travesty. The Employment Relations (Triangular Employment) Amendment Bill that has been brought to the House by the member sitting next to me Kieran McAnulty is as I said an important step forward.I want to make a couple of comments about the departmental report on this which talked about the reason for removing parts of the bill; there are very valid reasons for that which was the part of the bill that said around the collective agreement provisions this would add complexity to the labour hire model for employers and controlling third parties. I just want to make a comment about the controlling third parties which is a technical term and for most people listening at home tonight they probably wouldn't really understand what that means. I'll outline what that is. A controlling third party is a person who has a contract or other arrangement with an employer under which an employee of the employer performs work for the benefit of the person; and who exercises or is entitled to exercise control or direction over the employee that is similar or substantially similar to the control or direction that an employer exercises or is entitled to exercise in relation to the employee."Now that sounds a bit like gobbledygook but it's one of those things in Parliament that we have to have in legislation to clearly explain in legal terms what that relationship is. Essentially what that means is somebody who works who is employed by a labour hire company who then goes to work for another company and that primary relationship is with the labour hire company. Therefore they are—and I think the member Kieran McAnulty explained that to the House when he talked about the woman who was essentially dismissed because she was pregnant and she had no rights and she had to fall back on the relationship with that labour hire company. By removing the collective agreement provisions this was because—and there were a lot of submissions; I think there were 170-something submissions weren't there and most of those submissions supported the bill but the ones that raised the issues around the complexity of the labour hire model which means that there needs to be more work done on this. I think everyone in the House—well on this side of the House—would agree that there needs to be more work done on this in how to provide more surety and protections for people in those situations.The thing that I do have a problem with though in the departmental report was where it was said by officials that they weren't aware of strong evidence that supported the argument that labour hire workers were exploited or underpaid in large numbers or more so than other types of working arrangements. Listening to the National Party tonight you would think that there was no issue out there—Kieran McAnulty: It's all hunky-dory!Hon CLARE CURRAN: —and that everything was hunky-dory. On 31 August last year Burger King's parent company Antares Restaurant Group—don't know if I pronounced that correctly—was barred from hiring migrant workers for a year following accusations of underpaying staff. A Burger King worker wasn't paid for extra hours during the shifts essentially getting below minimum wages.Nicola Willis: This bill doesn't have anything to do with that! Stick to the bill! Speak about the bill.Hon CLARE CURRAN: Excuse me Madam Assistant Speaker the issue is around the fact as to whether or not there is an issue in this area. In October last year 73 Chorus subcontractors entered into urgent talks with the labour inspectorate.Tim van de Molen: Give her some notes McAnulty!Hon CLARE CURRAN: Maybe if you listened you might learn something? Excuse me Madam Assistant Speaker; that's not referring to you. Seventy-three subcontractors in Auckland failed to keep employment records pay the minimum wage or provide employment agreements. The majority—vast majority—of them are immigrant workers. Labour hire firms that perform a legitimate role—there is no doubt about that in our country. The question is: are they performing that role legitimately? And that means there is a lot more work to do on this issue.I'd like to give a shout out to FIRST Union which is the largest union representing labour hire workers which last year announced that labour hire firm Enterprise Recruitment had signed on as the first company to be an ethical employer in the labour hire workplace. An example is being shown perhaps and there is more work to do legislatively in this area but at least there is one labour hire company that is demonstrating some standards and a commitment of five core principles which were that workers should be treated appropriately and not as day-by-day workers; that labour hire workers should not be contracted out in a way which undermines their rights under the Employment Relations Act; that workers should be entitled to a relevant and fair rate of pay pertaining to the work they're performing; that labour hire workers must have the opportunity to contribute a collective voice; that appropriate resources should be allocated to ensure worker and industry standards are maintained; and that training education auditing and enforcement health initiatives skills development and recognition in appropriate company standards ranking systems must all be adequately resourced to give labour hire workers access to a safe fair and engaging working environment.This is about fairness. The personal grievance provisions in this bill are a major step forward. There is more work to do. That side of the House isn't committed to that never has been and that is a great shame."