Peachey Allan: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Peachey Allan: Employment Relations (Flexible Working Arrangements) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:642;Page:12498] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I appreciate the opportunity to speak again on Part 6AA of this proposed legislation. I want to refer back to a speech addressing new Part 6AA given by the Labour trade union list member Ms Fenton. That member made the big claim on the floor of this Chamber that she is in possession of thousands of letters. I have already invited that member once to table those letters. It seems to me that she has an obligation to do so for two reasons: one to actually substantiate the claim she has made in this Committee; and two we would actually like to see them. The invitation is there. 
I am addressing comments that that member made when speaking to Part 6AA of the proposed legislation. Will she table those letters so we can read them? Apparently not. 
I ask that that member be mindful of the extravagant claim she made in this Committee tonight that she has thousands of letters. Do members think that if I invited Mr Brown to table his certificate I would have more success? Actually I would love to see Mr Brown’s certificate. I have never seen one of those before. Why does he not show it to us? 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I would be delighted to bring along to this Committee my master mariner ship’s captain—not ship jumper—certificate. I obviously do not carry it around with me. I could also bring along my certificate signed by a National Minister of Immigration and if I can find it the letter of welcome stating how delighted they are to have me here and what have you. I challenge those members over there because I am a New Zealander by choice; they are New Zealanders by accident. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Thank you Mr Brown. Although the member does not object to the references made to him other members should not make those references. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: I assume Mr Chairman that your instruction was to the member who just spoke not to myself. I want to take just a moment to speak to the employers of New Zealand. Goodness knows what those good men and women must be thinking listening to the debate in this Chamber. 
 The member from—I think—Hamilton West Martin Gallagher wants to take New Zealand back 60 70 or 80 years. If members listened to what he said—and the employers out there would have been listening—they would have heard that it was consistent with the little Englander argument that has been running through this debate all night. 
When I listen to members opposite trying to justify new Part 6AA I find time and time again that the only thing they have to come back to is “They do it in England.” I thought it was 50 or 60 years ago that we stopped doing things in New Zealand just because they do them in England. 
I want to say to the employers in New Zealand that National members respect them. We do not have a dim view of the way they approach things. We on this side of the Chamber understand how important employers are to the economy and to the people who work for them. We understand that and we understand that efforts by that Government over there—and I hear one of its Ministers squawking in the far distance—will impose onerous and expensive obligations on the very men and women in this country who create the opportunity for wealth for all. 
Coming back to new Part 6AA of the bill—and being mindful of the difficulty of concentrating with that babble coming across from the other side of the Chamber—I ask members to be very clear on it. The provisions and clauses in new Part 6AA are an extension of the nanny State that is unnecessary in the lives of New Zealanders. We find in one of the clauses reference to inspectors—more inspectors.