Roy Heather: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
Roy Heather: Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15664] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the third reading of the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) on behalf of the ACT Party. I begin by congratulating the Minister the Hon Kate Wilkinson on this very good bill. The bill has three main components. The first component extends the 90-day trial period which currently is permitted for employers with 20 or fewer employees to all employers and workplaces. The ACT Party sees this as a very positive move. We are very pleased that the Government listened to the request of the ACT Party to enable this extension to occur. The second part to the bill makes changes to union access to workplaces as we have heard from previous speakers and deals with communications with employees during collective bargaining. The third component of the bill is the definition of the test for justifiability for dismissal or an action by an employer. This clarification by the Minister will also make a significant difference to workplaces. 
I again thank the Minister for listening to the ACT Party particularly in relation to the 90-day trial period component to this bill. The sky did not fall in when the 90-day trial period was introduced for employers with 20 or fewer employees. Nor will the sky fall in now that we have a level playing field and all employers are able to engage employees on the basis of a 90-day trial period. 
We heard a lot from members particularly from the Labour members and the Green member about fairness. I would like to take a moment to talk about fairness. Fairness means fairness for everyone—not just for employees and not just for employers but for everybody. For far too long particularly under the previous Government rights were heavily weighted in terms of employees. If the poor old employer had an employee who did not fit in or who was not able to fulfil the provisions that an employment opportunity might mean the employer still had to maintain that employee. This bill addresses that unfairness. 
We have seen already with the provision for employers with fewer than 20 employees to use a 90-day trial period that those employers are prepared to take a chance on employing somebody because they know that if it does not work out then they can come to an arrangement with the employee whereby he or she does not stay. That means that there are more not fewer opportunities for employees. Somebody who has had difficulty in getting work of any sort somebody who has had difficulty with previous employment but who has managed to turn their life round and somebody who might have developed skills in the interim since the last job will now have an opportunity because employers will be prepared to give them a chance under these provisions. 
We saw particularly with mum and dad businesses under the previous Government that a couple might have a very well-functioning business—it might be tootling along very well—but they were too scared to expand because it meant that they would have to take on employees and they were not sure what they would do if things did not work out. When we saw the initial bill which allowed small business employers to take on somebody with the opportunity of putting in place a 90-day trial we saw people willing to take that risk. That has been of huge benefit not just to employers themselves but to the employees to whom they have given a chance. 
For the most part those employees have stayed on. Why—and this was not explained in the Committee stage particularly when Labour members had every opportunity to do so—would employers get rid of employees who are doing a good job? The answer is that they would not. Employers want to have a well-functioning business they want to have a happy workplace and they want to have employees with skills and experience and who fit in. That is also important because it will give them the ability to increase their productivity. That is what the Opposition does not understand; it does not understand that productivity is important. This bill will help significantly those employers who have more than 20 employees. 
The previous speaker from the Green Party said the House is yet to see any sign that we on this side of the House the Government side have anything good to say about unions. Well I am yet to hear anything good said by the Opposition side of the House about employers. I am not quite sure who they think provides wealth in this country and who provides the jobs but if there are no employers with the ability to make decisions that will benefit their businesses why would anybody bother? Why would anybody take the risk? Why would they bother? 
This is a very good bill. It addresses the three measures that I talked about and the one that we have focused most heavily on is the 90-day trial period. The ACT Party is very proud to have made a significant contribution to workplaces in this country in that regard. We support this bill with great pride. Thank you.