Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Kia orana Madam Chair thank you. I note from the regulatory impact statement (RIS)—and thank the Minister for providing the cover sheet of that—that where it relates to clause 4 option three in the RIS looking at paragraph 64 it talks about the fact that fewer than 20 employees [would] represent around 89 percent of [businesses]". So this extension effectively would extend by 11 percent. In light of the fact that we haven't had a select committee process to hear from either the 89 percent or the 11 percent of businesses—not to mention the employees who might be affected by this—I have an amendment in my name which seeks an amendment in clause 4.Clause 4 itself as members will know seeks to insert a new section 67A that outlines the process for a provision of a trial period of 90 days set within that. The amendment in my name seeks to insert a new section 67A(3) in that a valid trial provision must state a couple of things. I'm interested in the Minister's views as to perhaps whether she thinks these should be included or if not why they shouldn't be included. The first is the genuine business reasons based on reasonable grounds for inserting a trial period in the employment agreement and that relates to providing some weight around the genuine nature of the concerns that might be expressed by an employer but more specifically the reasonable grounds that exist for placing that condition within the terms of the employment agreement—that's the first one. The second one is around where a trial period is used to dismiss the employee to provide the process for advising the employee as to why their employment is ending in that way. And I think Minister—we've already heard from other members in the Chamber that there are many people who are employees who just want to work and perhaps are not au fait with legislative provisions or what particular aspects in an employment agreement might be. And it's all good and well for people to say "Well they should just know that before they sign it." But when someone is on the bones of their backside and they need a job; they need work—many will do what it takes in order to secure that. And so that provision really does provide for an opportunity to advise the employee—the person for whom this has the significant impact—on why their employment is ending but in particular what the process is: the process for advising. Not the process that might take place but the process for informing or advising an employee why their employment might be ending in that particular way.We've heard a wee bit about the power imbalance and I think what would be helpful to hear from the Minister is considerations around process and how there is going to be an acceptance or a guarantee that those employees who might be subject to a process in this particular manner will be made aware of not just their obligations but what the process means for them. And remembering that the decision by an employer to effectively dismiss an employee is a pretty significant one. It is a pretty serious one and so I think members on this side of the Chamber—and certainly myself—are interested in hearing from the Minister around what provisions either exist in the legislation or why she won't support the amendment in my name to ensure that there is a process in place for employees who may find themselves in a situation where the end result is one of being dismissed.Much has been said about the parent Act itself and the provisions of the principle of good faith and so the amendment that I put forward—and I've got a couple more that we'll deal with perhaps later—really does lend itself to ensuring that the good-faith principle which is the overarching consideration here is actually available not just to the employee but also to the employer so that the employer is aware of what the process might be if they choose to engage that functional aspect of dismissal and then to be able to provide the employee with the opportunity to understand why things are taken in a particular way. So I'd appreciate the Minister addressing those."