Sowry Roger: General Debate 
Sowry Roger: General Debate 
[Volume:620;Page:15675] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (National) 
: 
 The Labour Party is in a real mess this week over the industrial relations legislation that has been reported back to the House. The mess is of its own making. The Labour Party went out there in the guise of one John Tamihere the Minister for Small Business. When he got the job he did an interview with the  
National Business Review  
on 26 March and said: “… we’ve got to be a lot more straight a lot less spin and smarm. Businesses will smell that a mile away.” I say to Mr Tamihere that businesses can smell it and they are smelling that sort of smarm a mile away. That is why this week every single business organisation every tourism organisation and every lobby group in the country bar the union movement has come out and said that this employment relations legislation is no good that it will harm business and employment and that it will cost this country in growth. Every business person has said that. One can only assume that to use John Tamihere’s words “Swainy and the boys” were going to take control of it and we would see what they could get up to once the girls were out of the way. I presume that “Swainy and the boys” got rolled in Cabinet by the girls yet again. The consequence is bad for business bad for New Zealand and bad for growth. 
The particular people who lose in this are firstly the workers. Anybody who is one of the over 1 million workers in this country who do not belong to a union will find that he or she gets a lower pay increase than those who do belong to the union. It started with the State sector with Mr Mallard giving a bit of a nod and a wink to the teachers union. It got an extra $500 for every teacher who happened to be a member of the union. It was tough on the rest. They are not as valued according to this Government as those who are members of the union. So when Mr Mallard goes into the staffroom does he say to the staff member who is not a union member: “You’re worth $500 less than those who are in the union.”? They all got a payment of $500 and the private sector can see that that is what is coming down the tracks for them as well. The unions will already be claiming extra money for those in the union movement. 
The law is now quite explicit: if an employer passes on that same wage increase and the union deems its position has been undermined then the employer will end up before the Employment Relations Authority. In fact we asked in the select committee how that clause would kick in. The officials said that if one union member leaves the union and goes on to a private contract then it will be deemed to have undermined the union position and the employer will be in the gun. That is what the officials said in the select committee. We know that this clause will be bad for non-union workers. 
The other thing this bill is bad for is small-business employers who will be dragged into multi-employment collectives. We will see small-business employers forced to pay the same wages and provide the same conditions as large-business employers. It was best summed up by Fisher and Paykel which appeared before the select committee—and Lynne Pillay’s head nearly nodded off her neck; she was so excited because they were saying nice things about the Government. Then that company’s representatives looked up and said: “But this bill is bad.” She got very nasty then. She did not like that. They went on to say: “We can cope with this bill but all of the small suppliers that supply us won’t be able to. It will make them less competitive. We may have to look to go off shore.” Heinz-Wattie said: “We wouldn’t bring the equipment here and manufacture and produce if this bill was law.” We know this is bad law.