Mallard Trevor: Holidays Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Holidays Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:15490] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 That was a spirited attack from the Hon Sir Roger Douglas. It is the sort of attack that we see from him after dinner. It is interesting that the attacks on the Labour Party have come from the ACT Party and the pet former union official Tau Henare formerly known as Raymond. That member came into the House for two reasons. One was his venerable surname. But more important the second reason was that he came in on the back of Winston Peters. Tau Henare’s first promise when he came in here was that he would never go into Government with National. What did he do? In 1996 his was the swing vote that decided to go into Government with National. That is what that member’s word is worth. He broke his word at the first opportunity. His word was not worth much as a union official either. 
Then when Winston Peters—who was the reason that the member was here—had some integrity and walked away from the then National Government Raymond stayed with it because he was in National’s pocket then. He was taking National’s coin; he would not resign his position as a Minister. He stayed with Jenny Shipley because he had no principles then just as he had no principles when he was a union official and went around bottling his colleagues. That was Tau Henare. He has not changed in all those years. 
It will be interesting when we come to Darien Fenton’s amendments to give people the right to have an extra holiday when Easter and Anzac Day clash. I agree with a number of members that Anzac Day is a sacred day and that its observance should not be shifted but I tell members that there is nothing in my religion that says Easter Monday is sacred. There is nothing sacred about Easter Monday at all and in my opinion shifting the observance of that day is no problem whatsoever. Some people who have no idea about religion will stand up for Easter Monday. Who on the other side of House will say that Easter Monday is a religious holiday? 
David Bennett 
: Who cares about your opinion? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Yes David Bennett will say that. David Bennett has not had the courage to get on his hind legs and debate this part. The chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: The member cannot say another member does not have courage. The member should know that. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member opposite who chaired the select committee cannot find the inclination to get on his hind legs and make a contribution to the debate. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Aw! 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: We hear moaning from over there. “Aw!” says Tau Henare. We have the pet of the National Party the tame member whom the party leads along and lets out— 
Jo Goodhew 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. In amongst all the personal abuse of members on this side of the House I find any mention of the Holidays Amendment Bill distinctly lacking. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: I am the judge of that. We have 1 minute 30 seconds to go and I will take that into consideration. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The point I am considering as we debate Part 1 of the Holidays Amendment Bill and look at the “Proof of sickness or injury” provision is why Tau Henare wants west Auckland health centres to be overrun. Why does Raymond Henare want west Auckland health centres to be overrun with people who do not need medical certificates but who are trying to get them? That member does not care about the sick Maori kids. He does not care about the pregnant mothers who will be infected by the people forced to go into those health centres. He is an uncaring member but he is the pet of the Tories. They let him out every now and again. They let him off his leash and he is allowed to have a go. 
What about Michael Woodhouse? He at least understands the legislation—well maybe he does not. I ask members where he comes from. He comes from Dunedin South. No Michael Woodhouse does not understand the bill at all but he understands it better than Tau Henare does. I would like to know why Tau Henare cannot take a decent look at the amendments and tell the Committee what is wrong with them instead of attacking unionists all the time. The amendments are very very carefully focused on trying to make this legislation work in a way that is appropriate. But I will make it clear to the Minister that although Labour is encouraging her to pick up a few of these amendments and support them even if she does that Labour will be unable to support the legislation. 
I think it is fair to say the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee has done quite a lot of work to try to improve this legislation. I think it is fair to say some of the changes have improved it but some of them have made it worse. I will focus in particular on the deletion from new section 28A inserted by clause 10 of subsection (2)(a) because in the bill as it was introduced there was a requirement for requests made under subsection (1) to be “informed and voluntary”. In making a request a wage earner and salary earner had to be informed and the request had to be voluntary. The implication was that the request could not be made under duress. I ask members what happened to that in the select committee. The National Government used its jackboots to take out the requirement for workers’ consent—for the request to be voluntary and informed. One of the amendments that is sitting on the Table—one of several hundred amendments that are being developed to sit on the Table—will put that back in. Labour believes very strongly in that. 
I say to Sir Roger Douglas that I enjoyed his speech but I ask him whether he believes in that kind of consent. No his speech was entertaining. It was entertaining in the way that horror movies are. Does Sir Roger Douglas believe that workers’ consent should be informed and voluntary? There is not a word not a whisper not a whimper from him. He was full of fire earlier on but when some of the ACT principles come back at him—the right to be informed and the right to make a voluntary decision—he shuts up. He will wander along against ACT principles into the lobbies with his old mates from National. Every now and again there is a coincidence of view between the Labour Party and ACT and there are small parts of this legislation and some amendments where we do have the same view. But does Sir Roger Douglas have the ability to stand up and say he will act on principle join the Maori Party the Green Party and the Labour Party and do what he thinks is right? No he does not. 
I reckon that 20 years ago Sir Roger Douglas would have acted on his principles. I reckon that at that stage he was someone who had principles. He says he has forgotten what it was like.  
Hon Member 
: Thank goodness. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No I think it is sad because although I used to disagree with Sir Roger Douglas much more often than I agreed with him we used to know that when he said something and he believed something he would act accordingly. We know that he thinks that these requests should be voluntary. Members know this because he told us that workers should have the right to request this but that it should be voluntary and it should be informed. He said that earlier and I want to know whether we can take Sir Roger at his word. Is he prepared to stand up for what he believes in or is it the case that when the Government says he is to go into the lobby he will ask how quickly? 
That is the approach that the ACT Party appears to be taking now. It is taking the Rodney Hide line. It is all right for the Maori Party every now and again—less so—to take the Tariana Turia line rather than the line of principle but in the case of ACT it appears to be happening all the time now with National. Rodney Hide says “Go this way.” and Sir Roger says “How quickly?”. I think it is sad that someone who used to have principles that I know he felt very deeply is not prepared to have workers make their decisions voluntarily. He is not prepared to vote for workers to be informed and I think that is a sad comment on the end of a political career.