Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

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