Power Simon: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Employment Relations Law Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:16136] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure to make a contribution on Part 1. Although many of the remarks that have been made on the bill to date have had an edge of flippancy to them this is very serious legislation. It is very serious and very draconian for several reasons that I will turn to shortly. But I shall say this in advance of those comments: the only people in New Zealand society who will benefit from this legislation are the lawyers. They will be the only people in New Zealand who will gain any real financial gain from this legislation. 
When one reads through the confused clauses that make up Part 1 and the sloppy drafting the Minister has allowed to get to this point it is almost embarrassingly transparent to see how this legislation has been designed essentially to do only one thing—that is to continue a steady stream of funding to the New Zealand Labour Party via what can only be described as legislation intent on driving this country back to an industrial relations paradigm that is stricter and offers less freedom and choice than many of its predecessors including the Industrial Relations Act of 1987. When a Government is so miserable as to deny a group of people an exemption certificate for compulsory unionism when specifically asked to do so then that is not reflecting the wishes of workers in New Zealand; it is reflecting an inbred prejudice against those workers in New Zealand who choose of their own free will not to belong to a union. In fact we are talking presently about 83 percent of working people in New Zealand. After the introduction of the Employment Relations Act in 2001 only 17 percent of New Zealand workers have chosen to belong to unions. 
Call me old-fashioned but the question has to be asked—why is it the case with the Employment Relations Act in place that only 17 percent of workers in workplaces choose to belong to unions? The answer is simple. The unions do not do the job of representing workers’ issues well decisively and fairly. National contends that the only group of people unions are interested in protecting the rights of are those in the unions themselves not the workers those so-called unions purport to represent. 
The Minister is allowing legislation into this House that effectively says to 87 percent of working New Zealanders: “No we’re not going to let you 87 percent of New Zealand workers choose not to belong to a union. We’re going to bring to this House legislation that essentially picks up all those pieces of the Employment Relations Act that were stripped out under the winter of discontent in 2000 and 2001 and rehash in a new Margaret Wilson - Ross Wilson type of provision with “Swainy and the boys” being sent out the front to market it.” Margaret Wilson would not show her face in any environment other than in a union annual general meeting held at Victoria University Wellington during the week that this House is sitting. What was not realised is that “Swainy and the boys” are as much under the thumb of the unions and Helen Clark as Margaret Wilson was. To be fair to Margaret Wilson at least she had the gumption to front the thing in an honest way. “Swainy and the boys” did not.