Connell Brian: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Connell Brian: Land Transport Management Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 01 July 2008. Volume:648;Page:17044. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 Thank you for your very well-considered judgment. I initially was not going to take a call on this debate when I came to the House because like my colleague Maurice Williamson I thought I was coming to listen to a very reasoned debate on the Land Transport Management Amendment Bill. But I have sat through these proceedings and I have to say that I am absolutely appalled by what is transpiring here. As I said in the point of order that I raised it is a delicious irony that it is a National member of Parliament who is standing up to defend the rights of workers in this country. I pose this question to the House: what is the most often trumpeted core business of the Labour Party? 
David Bennett 
: What is it? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: It is supposedly looking after the rights of workers. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Does it do that? 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Well it did not do that. Here we have a test of Labour’s integrity a test of whether it will actually put its money where its mouth is and protect the workers. At the last hour—in fact at the last moment—we have in this House a Supplementary Order Paper trying to protect the superannuation entitlements of Toll’s workers because the Government in its haste to buy this organisation forgot about a fundamental principle the protection and the rights of workers in this country. My colleague Pansy Wong not only stated that the Government had forgotten about the rights of New Zealand workers but also claimed—I think not quite rightly—that it had actually looked after the rights of Australian workers. I take issue with that because it did not even look after the rights of Australian workers—only of Australian shareholders. This money has gone straight into the pockets of Australian shareholders and the Government says to hell with New Zealand workers. That is what I am so appalled at and why I felt compelled to get on my feet and take a call. 
My colleague Gerry Brownlee also gave some background as to why this Supplementary Order Paper had been introduced to the House at the eleventh hour. Simply the Government had valued the rail network at something like $10 billion. The board of Toll must have looked at their business and asked what type of return on asset it was getting in New Zealand. The answer would have been with that asset backing a very poor return. So the decision at board level would have been to try to sell the business. But I can imagine the conversation then going along the lines that it was all very well to want to sell the business but they just would not find anyone silly enough to buy it. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Mr Connell you have had almost 4 minutes of introductory remarks. I will say again that this is a procedural motion and it is a narrow debate. The only matter under debate is whether the Committee should have the power to examine and adopt this Supplementary Order Paper. It is not about the rights or wrongs of superannuation and it is not about the purchase of KiwiRail. Those matters can come into it in a small way but the thrust of your argument which is undermined a bit by the willingness of the Opposition to actually support this motion should be why the Committee should not have the power to examine this Supplementary Order Paper. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: I thank you for your guidance Mr Deputy Speaker. In my defence I say that I wrote down points that were raised in the debate. I was really just expressing some opinion on those points which you have actually already ruled on. So I think without questioning your decision that I am within the Standing Orders in raising some of these issues. 
With your agreement Mr Deputy Speaker I will just finish the point I was making then address this issue in particular. My issue was whether the board could find an organisation that would buy Toll. I think the debate that must have gone on in the Toll boardroom was that they thought they knew a party that might be gullible enough to do so. When that proposition was put to the Government I think it was in such haste to sign up that it forgot about the fundamental rights of the workers in this country—that is the protection of their entitlements which for 15 years had been enshrined in legislation. I think that is fairly fundamental. 
I raise this issue because I think it goes to the heart of public confidence in the Government. I say that for this reason: if the Government purports to have as its main platform the protection of workers and workers’ rights and then falls at the first hurdle I ask what confidence the people of New Zealand can have in a Government that would do that. 
With those things said my contribution was simply to make those points. As I said earlier I was appalled at what I was hearing. I thank you for the opportunity to make those points because I think another member of the National Party had to get up and argue to protect the rights of workers because the Government has been found woefully lacking on this particular issue.