Barker Rick: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Barker Rick: Status of Redundancy Payments Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:615;Page:11570] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister for Social Development and Employment) 
: 
 Peter Brown had some very good advice for the National Party and the people it claims to represent. It is very simple: “If you don’t like it or agree with it don’t sign up for it.” It is as simple as that—even Richard Prebble would agree with it. But if they sign up for it and agree with it then they should be bound by it. 
There was a very interesting presentation given recently by Mr Roger Sowry. I note Mr Sowry is the previous chair of the Commerce Committee. This bill has come back from that committee but do I see any dissenting report on it from Mr Roger Sowry? 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. It is true I am now the previous deputy chair of the Commerce Committee and I want to thank Labour members for voting for me for that role. But in fact I was not on the committee at all when the bill was before it. I wish I had been because National would have opposed it. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Point of order— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No that is not a point of order and we will not get into a debate on it. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I should be protected from spurious points of order and that is a debatable point. 
Anyway I want to make the other point. The deputy chair of the Commerce Committee was Gerry Brownlee that outspoken bombastic deputy leader of the National Party. He speaks out volubly on Maori affairs. He does not know anything about that area but that does not stop him from speaking out on it. But when it comes to this very key heartfelt issue for the National Party what do members see from that party? Silence. I cannot find a dissenting opinion at all. 
That does not surprise me because I listened to one of the presentations by Roger Sowry before and he talked about the Lakeview Farm Fresh meat-processing plant being in Dannevirke. Well I have news for Mr Sowry; it is in the Otaki electorate. No wonder he was not elected but defeated time after time. He does not know where these places are. Has Mr Sowry ever visited the electorate or does he just put his name on the ballot paper? 
Hon Member 
: He’s passed through it. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: I am reliably told that he has passed through it three times while going to Auckland. He might have stopped for a cup of tea at Levin. Anyway I say to Mr Sowry that Lakeview Farm Fresh is at Lake Horowhenua in the Otaki electorate; it is not in Dannevirke at all. How does that give credibility to Mr Sowry’s opinion? 
But he asks a fair question: “What about small business?”. Well what about small business? I say to members that this is not about being anti - small business pro-this or anti-that. What this is all about is that a long time ago for the amount of money guaranteed for wages and holiday pay which is owed—which Brian Connell said was not worked for and not earned but I will put that aside for the moment—the bar was set much higher. It was the Tory party that cut the level back. The Tory party did that—but it is nothing unusual. The Tory party cut penalty rates for workers did it not? It had gone around before the election and said there would be no cuts to penalty rates. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I tell the member he has had more than half of his time and it would be nice if he would come to Part 2 of the bill. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Given that your predecessor has on many occasions ruled that parties have to be called by their correct names I would appreciate your upholding the same ruling in this Committee. The name is the National Party and we are proud of that. The Tory party is in another part of the world but unfortunately the member does not seem to understand that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member for that. 
Hon RICK BARKER 
: Part 2 is very interesting because it talks about priorities and allocation. When we talk about priorities we can see what National Party priorities are about. Those members want to maintain the boundary so that when there is a diminished amount of money left over to pay out most of it to goes to business. They want most of it to go to banks. They do not care about the ordinary working people who have sweated and slaved over those jobs. 
When a business goes broke people not only lose their income; they lose their livelihood. Their life’s work could be put into those businesses. In the example of a rest home which Mr Sowry talked about a supplier like a butcher might turn up and put over a few shanks of meat but that butcher will be serving many other rest homes. But for people working in the rest homes their jobs are their full-time jobs and their only jobs and their livelihoods are at stake. 
We say the bar that was reduced by the previous National Government to a miserable $6000 should be increased to $15000. As Peter Brown put it very well: when someone has signed up for a redundancy agreement we believe in the sanctity of that contract—unlike United Future members who say that it does not matter what has been signed. We say we must honour the sanctity of the contract; if the employer has agreed to it and signed up to it the deal should stick. 
We are very happy to say that working people should have redundancy payments holiday pay and annual leave protected to a maximum of $15000. That is what the bill is about and we are very happy with that. If the National Party wants to take more off workers we are not surprised because when it comes to the matter of 4 weeks’ annual leave what have those members said? They will abolish it. We have said 4 weeks’ annual leave but the Tories want to cut it to 3 weeks’ annual leave.