Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Thank you Madam Speaker and it's my pleasure to speak on this bill. This legislation introduced today is not about fair pay; it is about the Government imposing mandatory union deals on Kiwi workplaces. Well let's not make any bones about this: there's no choice involved either for workers or for business operators. The misnamed fair pay agreements will be imposed on our workplaces.And we have this Minister opposite who has this dark view of the world—in the past 30 years since 1991 what we have seen in this country is a consistent reduction in unemployment from the high levels of the 1970s and 1980s when we had huge parts of the workforce unemployed in a rigid labour market situation and since that time New Zealanders have enjoyed a jobs boom and the opportunity to have employment to look after themselves and their families. And labour market flexibility has been one of the key elements of that success. So the key question for us is whether these mandatory union deals will make our economy stronger and our clear answer is no: it will make our workplaces less agile less flexible—at the very time when they need to be. More than ever. That's why National opposes this legislation why the overwhelming majority of business owners oppose this legislation and why I believe New Zealanders will be concerned when they learn about how this proposed so-called fair pay agreement works.Now this bill arrives at a time when New Zealand is facing very significant economic challenges—perhaps the biggest for a generation. I mean if we step back globalisation is in retreat if we look around the world with a rise of protectionism over the past few years amongst big trading powers those restrictions accelerated by the COVID restrictions over the past couple of years and turbocharged by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Globalisation and sadly democracy is in retreat. And what that means for a small trading nation like New Zealand remains unclear but our prosperity has been underpinned by relatively free trade. And so the risks to our prosperity right here right now are very significant. And that prosperity that we as a country have built over the past few decades is at risk. So now is not the time for economic complacency; it is the time when we should be focusing on building our economic strength so that New Zealanders have the opportunity to thrive and succeed.And we're also facing the highest inflation in 30 years where the price of goods are increasing at twice the rate of wages so New Zealanders are battling to stay still. We also see a net outflow of migrants to Australia already happening and that flow will increase significantly. So these are real substantial economic challenges. And what is the Government's response? Nothing but adding costs to New Zealand businesses with no concept of the implications for our competitiveness. And there's nothing major to say about impediments holding New Zealand back. We see a Government focused entirely on redistribution of our wealth through higher benefits through higher minimum wage through strengthening the unions through the mandatory union deals—all of which may have their place at times but they have nothing to say about how we grow the economy so that we can pay for it. And that is why middle New Zealand is worried and have very good reason to be.This bill is indulging an ideological wish list that this Government came into government with. The return to national awards and the move to strengthen unions—despite no empirical evidence whatsoever as to either the problem or the policy response. Let me quote directly from Treasury and what they had to say about these fair pay agreements so-called: There's been minimal identification of empirical evidence for the problem or the policy response." But they did note that the proposed system could make structural changes to the labour market and have negative effects on worker conditions employment and productivity. So the rationale for the mandatory union deals is as clear as mud. And that is what we're seeing from this Government. It's consistent with Labour's desire to centralise control and not trust New Zealanders to make decisions about themselves and what's in their own interests. It's certainly not based on evidence and certainly no evidence that it will increase New Zealanders' wealth living standards and prosperity.So a question I have for the Minister is how does a return to national awards across industries and occupations help New Zealand businesses become more agile more flexible and competitive in a rapidly changing workplace environment and in a rapidly changing global environment? How will it lift our national income? And we will never get very clear answers on that.So let's just go through the bill and what it does. Are you sure it brings in this framework for industry-wide or occupational-wide minimal-employment terms? So any eligible union can initiate the bargaining process if it meets a test of only 10 percent of employees in the proposed coverage or 1000 employees—but 10 percent yeah—or a public interest test based on low pay or bargaining power; so that basically could be it. So maybe you don't even have to make it to 10 percent I don't know.Then the chief executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment decides whether the process goes forward—so it can be either industry so it could be all I don't know transport workers perhaps or it could be all aged-care workers or an occupation—it could be all sales workers I don't know. So that's what we're going to find in the next little while. And if you happen to be minding your own business operating a cleaning business up in Hokianga with five employees you might not know anything about the process you might not know if it even exists—you're doing your own business trying to make a living and then suddenly whoomph you're part of a process and you just have to accept whatever comes out of the other side.Now if sides aren't represented by an eligible union or the two sides that are supposed to get down and do all this bargaining on a national level—there's supposed to be a union side and a business side or employer association. Now Business New Zealand told the Government to clear off—"We don't want to be involved in this and we don't want to be part of a thing that we don't agree with." And so two days after the Minister introduced this legislation that he's been working on for four years and has been something that he's dreamt about every night for a long time—two days after he introduced that he brings in a change saying "Oh well actually the bill that I just introduced didn't do the job and so here's a proposed change which is to bring in a backstop so if Business New Zealand or nobody else turns up on the employer side well we'll just go straight to the Employment Relations Authority and they'll make a determination." And so basically what happens if you do manage to find two debating sides they get together they argue they negotiate then it's put to a vote on both sides and if it loses that vote twice it ends up before the Employment Relations Authority. This by the way being an institution that takes about 300 days on average to come to a conclusion on any of its particular topics at the moment so it is hardly the most efficient organisation in the world. And so that's going to be interesting to see how they cope with this. They have enough trouble with personal grievances; just imagine how they're going to deal with the imposition of fair pay agreements.But anyway this organisation comes along makes a determination and that determination is binding on all businesses and employees who happen to be caught within it even though like I say the cleaning business up in Hokianga might know nothing about it have had no engagement with the process who had never heard of it doesn't even know what a fair pay agreement is and all of a sudden they have to have the same terms and conditions as everyone or else. Now there's some talk of regional variation but who knows what that means?And so we're left with this imposed fair pay agreement so-called what we would call a mandatory union deal imposed on the business and the workers on the workplace and there we go. And so the conclusion is well how's that actually going to help? How's it going to make people's lives better? Well we on this side of the House believe that it's best for people who are actually in the workplace who go to the job go to the business know what's going on in their community to make arrangements that suit them within the broad context of what we have which is already one of the highest minimum wages in the world lots of terms and conditions that have been set in order to protect the vulnerable. And New Zealanders as a long tradition have been concerned to do that. But this bill just adds another layer of mandatory control and rigidity which is the last thing we need as a country.So my final point is this is a time when New Zealanders need to be focusing on building our strength and instead what we're doing is adding costs and complication and rigidity to our system."