Delahunty CatherineCATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Tēnā koutou Te Whare mō tēnei wā. I just want to start by saying that members' bills are certainly a mixed bag. Some of them remind me of the Ōtara Millionaires Club—How Bizarre". Some of them are ridiculous. For example the lost luggage bill was ridiculous and the medals and decorations bill is pretty marginal but this one is ridiculous and insidious whereas some members' bills are just ridiculous. So this one is actually insidious as well as ridiculous which is a sad achievement on behalf—Clayton Mitchell: Ridiculously insidious.CATHERINE DELAHUNTY: Or ridiculously insidious as the member says.It is interesting why one would bother filling up the ballot biscuit tin with this kind of rubbish because that is what this is. The bill is not just rather bizarre and ridiculous; it has the opportunity to undermine some important employment law and the important commitment to human rights in employment law which is why I have called it insidious.The bill is based on some really interesting assumptions. I think the last speaker was more honest than most in saying that it is really about saving money from his point of view and saving court time. If that is what is driving it—I think it is clear that it is also about helping the employer. So let us just be honest about this bill. It has got nothing to do with protecting human rights or creating options and choices for working people and everything to do with making sure that employers can have more certainty and perhaps avoid the risk—protect themselves from being challenged about a personal grievance.But actually that is not why we are here in this House. We are not here to protect people who are employing people. Even if those people are earning 150 grand that does not mean they do not have their human rights as working people. It does not mean there is a level playing field either so that when someone is employed they can be manipulated under this bill into getting a lawyer and signing a contract that takes away their right to take a personal grievance case. They may be either pressured or innocent enough to believe that sexual harassment could never happen to them. After all they are earning according to this bill $150000 so sexual harassment could never happen to them. Racially charged discrimination—racism as we should call it—that could never happen because I am earning all that money. But that is funny because I am a parliamentarian earning more than that and I have still experienced discrimination and sexually discriminatory comments even in this job. So do not tell me that people do not need their human rights just because they are earning that kind of money and that having a contract that allows them to lose those rights is justifiable in any sense of the word because it is not.This is really a bad bill really a waste of time and it really reinforces a rather unpleasant meme because it is pretending to offer choice to people who are not on a level playing field. So it is pretty disappointing all round. Certainly the idea that power is equal there is a level playing field and that it is optional for that person—I am not going to use the word "bollocks" because I got told off by the Speaker and I am not allowed to use it. But really it is one of those examples of a bill that should not be in the ballot should not have had the luck to have been selected from the ballot does not need to be before the House and it undermines really good relationships between employers and employees.We have enough trouble without this kind of legislation. We have enough inequality in this country without this kind of legislation. We have enough duplicitous and manipulative statutes that no one understands without pretending that this is in the interests of people to sign away their human rights. Why would somebody put it up? Why would anyone support it? No one has justified it. No one has marched on Parliament and called for it. There has been no petition. I bet the unions have not gone: "Yes this is what we want." No one wants it. It is just a waste of space which poor Scott Simpson has inherited. We do not need it. The Green Party is really really proud to oppose the bill. The human rights of people in the workplace no matter what they earn must be protected including their right to take a personal grievance which as we all know is about a whole lot more than just their employment status. I am really proud of us for not supporting this bill. Thank you very much."