Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Employment Relations (Film Production Work) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14962] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 I move  
That the motion be amended by omitting “now” and substituting “until the bill has been amended to remove clause 4 and insert a schedule of employee protections” 
. I think it is interesting as one has been listening to the first reading debate to hear the inconsistencies and the divisibility of the Crown being shown so quickly. We heard from the Hon Gerry Brownlee in question time today and in his speech an absolute assurance for the House that it was not a requirement of Warner Bros that this legislation be introduced. Then we heard the Associate Minister of Finance Steven Joyce very recently telling us that the legislation is a requirement of Warner Bros. 
I know that this matter has been rapidly arranged and is not properly organised but those Ministers cannot both be telling the truth. I am not going to accuse either of them of lying but both of them are fixed with knowledge both of them know what the facts are and both of them have been involved in the negotiations and what they said was diametrically 180 degrees opposed. I think that that is probably a symbol of the disorganisation that has been seen on the part of the Government on this matter over a long period of time—over at least 2 years. In fact if Gerry Brownlee had been properly preparing for his role as Minister for Economic Development he would have spent some time in the United States even before he took up that role meeting with people and developing relationships so that they could work together properly. But in fact he chose to neglect that relationship. 
We have been told that the world is falling apart and that under current industrial relations legislation it is impossible for films to be made in New Zealand. I have with me a list of 120 feature films that have been made in New Zealand in the last decade. I might say that it has been quite interesting to work my way through the list and work out that notwithstanding my becoming more interested in videos over the last couple of years—not like Mr Jones of course—there are still quite a few New Zealand videos of feature-length movies that I have yet to see. The point I am making is that those movies have been made. They have been made the system works and that shows there is no need for this legislation. 
I think the Government would be well advised to listen to the comments of my learned colleague Charles Chauvel. Mr Chauvel has a lot of experience working in an area very very close to this and is someone who has looked at these issues carefully. In fact I do not think it is revealing too much to say that he has been doing some policy work on behalf of the Labour Party on the whole question of dependent and independent contractors and the way the line should be drawn in that particular area. We heard from Mr Chauvel in the first reading—and we will hear more of this as we work our way through the legislation—the fact that the Government’s intention with regard to this bill will not be achieved by it. Some of that will be more a debate for the Committee stage and I am pleased at the earlier ruling that the Committee stage will be a wide debate. We are looking forward to that. But even in the narrow areas that Mr Chauvel will be focusing on that is the case. 
I think what we have seen is a Prime Minister who has been too relaxed in the running of his Cabinet. He is a person who has smiled at Gerry Brownlee as Gerry Brownlee tiptoes—well he hardly tiptoes— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Come on! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: —stumbles—through this area. We have seen a Prime Minister who has not been holding his Ministers to account for being on top of their portfolios. We have a Prime Minister who is not requiring regular reports on issues vital to New Zealand. It should have been obvious. Certainly in the time that I was Minister for Economic Development at our monthly meetings we would review items of importance to the portfolio; large-screen productions were always part of that and we stayed on top of them. We worked out whether any issues were emerging whether a phone call needed to be made whether people needed to be invited to New Zealand whether we needed to spend some time in the United States whether our consul-general in Los Angeles should make some phone calls or make some visits and when a Minister should be involved. It is just the ordinary stuff of the organisation of proper Cabinet government. It is part of the organisation of the executive. It is part of the role of the Prime Minister to ensure that the basic work of Government occurs. What we have seen with the approach of this Prime Minister is that he actually is not on top of that part of the job. This Prime Minister does very well on photo opportunities and frankly he takes a better photo than many of us. But what he cannot do and what he cannot keep on doing is ignore the basic job and be diverted on to the photo opportunities rather than focus on the job at hand. 
What happens then is what has happened now; we have policy and organisation that end up being run by Kevin Taylor who is known by Mr Brownlee and Mr Joyce as “Captain Panic Pants”. They get “Captain Panic Pants” Mr Kevin Taylor running the show and out of that we get policy and expenditure that is totally unnecessary. Because Gerry Brownlee Steven Joyce and Chris Finlayson—as Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage as well as Attorney-General—have not been doing their jobs properly we have a crisis that is manufactured in the end by Warner Bros. Warner Bros can see an opportunity. Warner Bros can see a Government that has not been doing its work. It can see Ministers who are not across the facts and who do not understand the way the movie industry works. They do not understand that when Warner Bros has put $100 million already into producing  
The Hobbit 
 in New Zealand the chances are that it will want to do it here. So what do they do? In their panic they start writing out cheques. 
Again I want to put on record that I am not opposed to the adjustment of the grants scheme. I adjusted it myself on three or four occasions after discussions to make it more appropriate to make it work for New Zealand to make it work for the film industry and to encourage movies to come to New Zealand. That was a good thing to do. But I do object to writing out cheques not for joint advertising or for the promotion of New Zealand but for the promotion of a particular movie. It is a direct subsidy; a cheque written out that goes straight into the profits of Warner Bros for work that it would have done anyway. 
There is a precedent for how Governments do this. When they want to promote New Zealand they use our promotion agencies such as New Zealand Trade and Enterprise and Tourism New Zealand. They leverage around the world off the premieres of these movies; we do that. It is absolutely inappropriate to do what the Government has been doing—that is throwing cash that we do not have a lot of according to Bill English at people not because it is necessary and not because it makes a difference but because the Government was not prepared to do the work that it should have done. The Government was caught with its pants down. John Key was caught with his pants down and Warner Bros took advantage of that.