Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): If ever there was an occasion to dramatically and starkly demonstrate the philosophical and ideological differences between the old-fashioned Labour Government that currently holds a majority in this Parliament—but not for much longer—and this side of the House it is this piece of legislation. It is fundamentally flawed. It is bad for New Zealand. It is bad for New Zealand business. But what's worse is it is bad for New Zealand employees and workers. They will be the people who are worst off as a result of this piece of legislation.I want to make it very clear at the outset of my contribution in this third reading debate that a re-elected National-led Government will as a priority repeal this piece of legislation. We will do it because it is the right thing to do.For 30 years in New Zealand we have had the benefits of a nimble flexible and exciting industrial environment. We have all benefited from that. All New Zealanders have benefited from that.Here we have today on the anniversary of the five years of this Government—and remember: this was a piece of legislation that the Minister said was a manifesto promise and I recall it was supposed to be implemented within the first hundred days. Well five years of failure later it is finally being achieved by the force of brute numbers in this Chamber. That's the way it works in this Parliament: brute numbers. But it's not about taking New Zealanders with you. This is a Government that seems now to have a complete disregard for ordinary New Zealanders and what they think—so out of touch so out of step with the thinking of a modern progressive and interesting world that will create a brighter more bold future for all New Zealanders. With this piece of legislation they want to take us back to the 1970s.Now I'm one of those in this Chamber—and most of my colleagues can't remember it but there are a few on the other side who can—who remember how bad those days were. I remember how bad it was when the trade unions dominated the New Zealand economic situation. There's a reason that that history was rejected by New Zealanders it's because it's old-fashioned it doesn't work and the world has moved on.Now what we know from this piece of legislation is that this is really not about fair pay agreements; it is about mandatory union deals. My colleagues over the last couple of days have been arguing the detail of this legislation through the committee of the whole House and have been literally tearing holes through it. The Minister was unable to answer questions about the detail about how it's going to work because the structure no longer exists because we're in the 2020s; we're not back in the 1970s. Those structures do not exist.What happens now is a Minister is going to have a piece of legislation passed using brute numbers in this House that will be repealed probably within 12 or 18 months—probably less; maybe earlier if they don't last the full mile. Then what will happen is that New Zealand businesses and employees are going to have to go through this whole process of change where secret deals are done between lord knows who on behalf of the business side of the table because there is nobody standing up wanting to be party to this new scheme and the deal will be done with big unions behind closed doors. The only difference between now and the 1970s will be that those rooms behind closed doors won't be smoke-filled—thank goodness! But the same ideological and philosophical approach will be taken.This removes an opportunity from New Zealanders New Zealand employees and New Zealand employers to negotiate terms conditions and arrangements that suit them—that suit them. They don't want to have imposed mandatory deals thrust upon them by unknown faceless people who have no understanding of the individual imperatives that make businesses work.If it was just as easy as arbitrarily legislating for things to be true in the area of industrial relations then it would have been done years go—but it was done years ago and it didn't work; it didn't work and it doesn't work. Overseas countries have looked with envy at the New Zealand industrial relations regime and our environment over the years and they've said Those New Zealanders have got it right—they've got it right." They look at us with envy. Here we have a Government full of course of union acolytes and failed delegates and what have you who come back to this House to represent the political interests of the trade union movement.Most members in this House certainly forget the history of the trade union movement. When it was first established back in the 1800s there was a need and they decided pretty quickly that what they needed was political representation. So all around the world in countries like ours Labour Parties were formed and they became the political wing of the trade union movement. So we know on this side of the Parliament that those connections are historic they're political and they are of course—Hon Member: They get the money from them too.Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: —financial. It's "follow the money honey."What's happened over the last 30 years since the employment contracts legislation came into effect? New Zealanders have voted with their feet many many times.Hon Michael Wood: Point of order. It is well-established in Speakers' rulings that suggesting that any members of this House are under the influence of an external body and subject to money as the member just implied is out of order.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Thank you for that. The member will withdraw and apologise.Hon SCOTT SIMPSON: I withdraw and apologise. The history is well-known—the history is extremely well-known. New Zealanders up and down the countryside know that when they have freedom of choice when they have the ability to negotiate their own terms and conditions with their employer or when the employer has the opportunity to negotiate those terms with individual employees things get done and they don't want to have the involvement necessarily of a trade union. What's happened is that trade union membership over those years has plummeted. It's plummeted because they are not relevant to most New Zealanders. Most New Zealanders know that they don't need to pay $600 or $700 a year or whatever it for a union that actually won't help them. Who knows where that money goes? Most New Zealanders do know where that money goes.So this is a piece of legislation that is designed to boost union influence and union membership in the New Zealand economy just at a time when we are under the most severe economic stress that this economy has had in several decades. What's happening? We now have massive inflation we have inflation at a 30-year high we have a crisis of cost of living and we have all kinds of issues that are confronting this Government. What is their number one priority at the moment? It seems to be that their number one priority at the moment is to boost union membership. That's really what it's all about. It's about boosting union membership.In New Zealand small businesses particularly will pay a price for this piece of legislation. It won't be the big businesses because they can actually work their way around the increased impost of cost that will come on as a result of this change. It will be small business up and down New Zealand who are already under immense pressure who have suffered over the last couple of years in ways that two or three years ago businesses could never have imagined that they would suffer and they are hurting. This will provide further pain and anguish for them.Treasury advice was very clear. I want to quote from the Treasury advice. It says "there has been minimal identification of empirical evidence for the problem or policy response" that this legislation seeks to achieve. Absolutely damning criticism. What it means is that this is a Government that cares more about their philosophical and ideological agenda and the relationships that they have with their support organisations than it is about anything to do with fair pay or agreement.What it means is a party that is true to stripe: old-fashioned socialism—old-fashioned socialism. While some of them over there still deny being socialists actually they are. They're old-fashioned socialists. There are several of them who are going to be finding themselves back in the workforce very quickly because New Zealanders don't want this piece of legislation.I want to finish where I started off. If ever there was a piece of legislation that dramatically showed the ideological differences between this side of the House and a socialist old-fashioned Labour Party Government it's this piece of legislation. This is a piece of legislation that at the first possible opportunity a re-elected National-led Government will repeal and we will do so because it is the right and proper thing to do on behalf of New Zealand citizens on behalf of New Zealand workers on behalf of New Zealand employers and on behalf of "New Zealand Incorporated". Taking us back to the 1970s is simply not a credible proposition even from a Minister who himself came from the trade union movement. This is a thoroughly bad piece of legislation. We will repeal it."