Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3686 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009 I cannot understand why the Labour Party cannot work out that existing, settled law is just that. Nothing in this bill can undo other laws. That is not possible. Poor old Darren over there is scratching his head and tapping his head; I assume he is trying to stay awake, but I am not sure. It is pretty darn simple. The transition authority, which this bill is about, gathers together the opportunities that exist for the creation of the new council. A third bill is coming, and I want to say very emphatically that this bill does not impose the new transition agency in the role of employer; it simply puts a duty on that authority to work with— Hon Darren Hughes: It does so! Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well, that is the point, is it not? We have written this bill over a long period of time and we understand it; that side of the Committee does not. It will be a sad day for Parliament if all existing law is to be somehow turned into a new part of this bill for the Committee to consider. It is an utter nonsense. It is a pathetic device, and it utterly trivialises the process of Parliament. It is sad to me that a party that went out to set up this whole process in the first place is now so desperate that it has to resort to these sorts of beltway tactics in order to make itself feel good. Are we going to see more of it? I suspect we will. I suspect that throughout the afternoon the statute book will come out and every little bit of law that relates to anybody’s activity anywhere— Hon Maryan Street: That’s our job. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —will somehow be written up into a new part. They are confirming it. Maryan Street is confirming it. That is the tactic. David Parker was right that this is a massive filibuster. The only thing I will say about Trevor Mallard is that he is probably going to get me out of a hole. He said the bill will be passed on Thursday, but I guess in the end it is our choice which Thursday. It is very, very sad for Parliament to see this sort of part accepted into this type of bill. It would be interesting to know where the connection is that has caused the concern and, I think, the mock outrage expressed by members of the Opposition today. This bill is about an authority that will gather up the other eight authorities in Auckland to work with them in order to ensure that the transition to the new one-Auckland council, which will not even be settled until September, is successful. It is an utterly pathetic effort. SUE MORONEY (Labour): Thank you, Mr Chair, for giving me the right to speak in this debate. Over the course of the last 3 days I have not had the opportunity to participate. The Government has been so keen to close down debate on this bill that— never mind the people of Auckland getting a say—as a member of Parliament, I have not been able to take a call yet. Hon David Cunliffe: We need longer. SUE MORONEY: We need significantly longer on all these parts. I have wanted to comment on many of them and, to date, I have not been able to. In regard to this new part in particular, I am pleased to rise and take a call to stop the Government from taking away the ability of employees of local body authorities in Auckland to have paid parental leave in the transitional period. If Mr Brownlee had read the legislation, he might realise this. Mr Brownlee’s speech was very important, because it reminded us of exactly why this bill should be going to a select committee. The Minister does not realise what occurred yesterday during this very debate on this very legislation. His own Government moved to withdraw a provision before the Committee, and in doing that it actually put at risk paid parental leave for women employees of councils. He has not even worked out that that clause—and if my colleague would be good enough to pass me his copy of the bill— Hon Gerry Brownlee: Clause 36.
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 3687 SUE MORONEY: Yes; clause 36(1). So he knows that the Government put forward an amendment to take this clause out. I will read out that clause, which the Government took out of the bill yesterday. Clause 36 is headed “Transfer of remaining employees”, and subclause (1) states: “Every person who is an employee of an existing local authority immediately before the close of 31 October 2010 becomes an employee of the Auckland Council”—that is the transitional body—“on the same terms and conditions as applied immediately before he or she became an employee of the Council.” I read that clause out because that is what the Government removed from the legislation yesterday. That is why we are putting forward an amendment, in the name of the Hon Steve Chadwick, to add New Part 12. We want to guarantee that women—and men, actually—who are about to have children can take paid parental leave. It is no surprise that National is trying this on, because every single time the issue of paid parental leave has been put before Parliament, it has voted against it. National has voted against paid parental leave on every single occasion. That is why it is the job of the Opposition to watch out for this, and to make sure that the Government does not slip in something like this. That is exactly why the people of Auckland—and, in fact, the people of New Zealand—should have the right to see this bill referred to a select committee. These are the very questions that need to be addressed. They are complex situations, and we do need to ensure that all the rights of these employees are protected. As I said, it is no surprise that National is doing this. Just last week, National also canned the Pay and Employment Equity Taskforce. So it is no wonder National members are trying to make sure that there are no rights for these employees going forward. National members have removed that provision from the bill. Hon Gerry Brownlee: That is utter rubbish. SUE MORONEY: No, it is absolutely true. They did it to ensure that the employment terms and conditions did not automatically transfer through to the transitional authority. This is a serious issue, because 6,300 employees are involved in these eight councils. They need to know—and they should have the right to ask this question—why the Government has taken out of this bill those workers’ right to have the same terms and conditions that they have worked many years to acquire. Why did National move to take that right away from them as it moves towards this sham of a transitional body? It is an important question, because the very act of creating that transitional body changes the employer and, therefore, the employment circumstances of 6,300 workers. This is an issue that will be important to the families of Auckland. If National members do not think that paid parental leave is important, then they are wrong. Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Economic Development): Now we understand what the deal is. It is right that yesterday clause 36 was taken out of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill. It was set aside because that matter will be dealt with in a successive bill. Two further bills will be dealt with before the Auckland Council is established. [Interruption] If members would just calm down, I will explain it all to them. Firstly, it is worth noting that this particular part, new Part 12, refers to the transfer of remaining employees. These are employees who are not part of the transition in the initial stages. It is important that they are protected. National understands that. Labour members wanted to muck around so much with the bill that they put up 8,000 amendments to this particular part. That is utterly absurd. National has said: “All right, a select committee can deal with this, and it will be included in a successive bill that deals with the Auckland transition arrangements.” The members opposite know that is how this works. Even today, they are putting up their own little part, and then they want to amend it. Here we have an exceptionally confused Opposition engaging in mock
Page 1:
First Session, Forty-ninth Parliame
Page 5 and 6:
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 69: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 103 and 104: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Tamak
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Index to 13 May 2009 (continued on
Page 145 and 146:
HIPKINS, CHRIS— Bills— Local Go
show all

Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?