Health and Safety at Work (Volunteer Associations) Amendment Bill

This bill, the Health and Safety at Work (Volunteer Associations) Amendment Bill, calls to question a very important principle: should those who work as employees be protected, in terms of health and safety, through legislation? This side of the House says absolutely they should, and it should be a universal right for everyone that works, that they should be protected, that there should be rules and regulations and legislation in place that ensures that, to the best of the employer’s ability, those who work for a living are protected while they are at their job. And so let’s look at the general policy statement here in this bill.

“Volunteer associations play an important part in New Zealand.” We agree. “There are a range of volunteer associations which employ a limited number of employees, usually for very specific tasks.” Again we agree. Then we get to the bit that we struggle with: “This bill amends the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 to allow volunteer associations that employ a person or persons for not greater than 100 hours per week to be excluded from the definition of a person conducting a business or undertaking [otherwise known as] PCBU.”

The Labour Party opposes this bill because we believe that all workers in all organisations have a right to a safe and a healthy workplace. It’s not too much to ask. Every worker that leaves their home to earn a living should be doing so in a safe environment. And just because they happen to work for a volunteer association should not exclude them from the right that the rest of us enjoy. The argument, of course, is that volunteer associations find it difficult to comply with health and safety standards. I understand that resources are limited for those that are voluntary organisations, but for something as fundamental as the health and safety of their staff, there is no way that this side of the House can agree that this—of all the potential provisions that an organisation that employs people would wish to be excluded from—above all should be one of them.

There is little evidence that the bill will achieve its stated purpose of making it easier for voluntary associations to comply with the law. There is also very little that shows that it will make it easier for volunteer associations to attract staff. Now, I’ve been involved in volunteer associations and I know how hard it is to attract staff. I know how hard it is to attract volunteers. But making the workplace that they are going to be part of—[Interruption]—is not going to make it easier.

They make noises, as they often do on the other side of the House. But when you look at the organisation that I was most recently involved in, the New Zealand fire brigade, an organisation that is fully reliant on volunteers, it is, in many ways, potentially the most dangerous job that anyone could undertake, particularly from a volunteer basis. Now, an organisation like that, if it tried to avoid its responsibility to the people that they employ or the volunteers that participate in that activity, they would definitely have trouble attracting people into what is such a dangerous activity. Now, I know people might say that these sorts of organisations are not necessarily that dangerous, but in any working environment, if the provision of health and safety is not seen as a priority, that puts people’s well-being and lives at risk.

We as a Parliament have a responsibility to ensure that the people of this country are safe in any activity that they undertake. All of us work for a living. All of us should do it in a safe environment. And while this Government has made much progress in terms of ensuring the health and safety of our workers in this country, New Zealand actually has to front up. Historically, we have an appalling record of health and safety for our workers, and excluding those that just happen to work for voluntary organisations is not the way to send the message that we prioritise them and we prioritise their well-being. This side of the House will be opposing this bill.

Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. Kei te kōrero ki te kaupapa i te wā.

[Greetings, Madam Assistant Speaker. I will speak to the current matter.]

That matter is the Health and Safety at Work (Volunteer Associations) Amendment Bill. I would like to refer to New Zealand First’s contribution as we find ourselves here in the second reading. I was on the select committee and listened intently to the first reading of this bill and Clayton Mitchell’s contribution, where not only were New Zealand First intending to support this, and so they did in the first reading, they were intending to add to the bill—not just support it but add to the bill. So he talked about it in very detailed ways, even talking about safety equipment and surf life-saving and small salaries and all sorts. I’m reading from Hansard here on how they were going to support the bill. But here we find ourselves very possibly—we hope it’s not the case but there is the very likely possibility that New Zealand First might not support this at the second reading passage.

In the committee report, here’s what New Zealand First says: “New Zealand First accept the principle of the bill”—interesting—“and have only withdrawn support at this stage”—“only”—“due to assurances from the Minister that these concerns will be addressed in a wider body of work.” Well, New Zealand First, how is this clear for you? When are those assurances going to come along? Is it the Health and Safety at Work Act review in 2020? Where’s your assurances? What form is it going to take? New Zealand First, have you heard anything so far? The only thing that we’ve heard so far in workplace relations is the far reaching and business-stopping employment relations amendment legislation. We’ve got the triangular bill next. That doesn’t sound like the kinds of assurances that New Zealand First are going to be looking for and wanting.

Now, meanwhile we’ve got the other side of the House going on and on about how this would put a handbrake on voluntary associations. Did they actually sit on the select committee and listen to submitters? Because I and others of us—my colleague next to me, Nicola Willis—heard very clear, in person, from voluntary associations such as the chair of a cat welfare trust in the South Island dealing with feral cats, trapping—doing a really important job for the community. She said, “We should be able to employ a low number of staff and not be captured by health and safety. If we get grants for work, we don’t want to be put into the PCBU category, because we keep applying for grants but we’re handbraked from doing that because we’ll be captured by the legislation.” Who is this lady? Here we go, a quote: “I work for a union. I really believe in health and safety, don’t get me wrong, but this is not the way to go. We have a handbrake on what we’re doing as an organisation.”

One more example: former All Black Matthew Cooper for Sport Waikato. He came in. Not only did he come in to submit, but he also has a petition going. So listen up, because the idea from the other side of the House that this was a one-sided argument and was not supported by voluntary organisations is complete rubbish. They were asking for it and you’re just chucking the baby out with the bathwater. And New Zealand First is a big part of that.

Tēnā koe, Madam Assistant Speaker, and thank you for this opportunity. I rise to speak on the Health and Safety at Work (Volunteer Associations) Amendment Bill. And if I can, I want to acknowledge the sponsor of the bill, the member of Parliament Harete Hipango, because I truly believe her passion in this particular space shone through as she attempted to liaise and communicate with members right across the House to promote her bill.

Now, the speaker who has just finished her contribution to this debate, Denise Lee, talked about the number of submissions that were made on this particular bill. Now I have the honour and great privilege of being the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, and in my time up and down and across the country from the Far North to the deep South, I’ve had the good fortune of meeting with many community organisations and discussing with them many of the challenges that they face whether they be a large organisation or a small organisation. And I can hand on heart say that this one doesn’t appear on the radar. There are other significant issues that are currently confronting community and voluntary organisations up and down the country, and this one isn’t in the realm of top priorities or, dare I say, even a blip on the radar.

I think too that that is displayed in the number of submissions that were received on this bill—34, if I recall correctly, and the vast majority of them oppose this bill. Now, what I know about the community and voluntary sector is it’s based on integrity—integrity. In a voluntary or community organisation, the minute that the trust or integrity is broken between the particular organisation and the community at large, we’ve got a problem. Why? Because what that means is our people, the communities of Aotearoa New Zealand, don’t consider the organisation to be one of integrity. Therefore, as is the Kiwi way, we withdraw our support. So therefore, based on that premise with integrity being at the forefront, should a volunteer that actually spends their time in what we call sweat equity given to a particular kaupapa or particular charitable cause—should that integrity be broken, we’ve got a problem.

And what we’re talking about here is the right for that volunteer, or a worker in any work space, to actually go to work or go and volunteer with an organisation and come home safely. Let’s be honest: in this particular country, Aotearoa New Zealand, health and safety in the workplace is a serious problem—a serious problem. One only needs look at the forestry statistics of members of the public, those who work in that sector, who haven’t gone home to their families—who haven’t made it home after a hard day’s work.

The fear too, in the wide-ranging scope of voluntary work in this country, is that that could be a possibility as well. “Not on our watch.” is what we’re saying—not on our watch. While we appreciate the intent of this bill, the hard-core reality is that when I travel up and down the country and meet with these organisations, they make it very clear that integrity is a key part.

Should a member of a voluntary organisation all of a sudden find themselves injured seriously in their undertaking of their voluntary work and for some reason this House passed a bill that says “Well, we’ll waive or we’ll turn a blind eye to a certain number of hours.”, I’d argue that challenges the integrity of the sector and makes it even harder for the likes of myself and communities far and wide to support the charitable efforts of many charities in this country.

There are a number of other issues that have been canvassed with this particular bill, and I also—if I can—just touch on the words of my colleague Kieran McAnulty, who talked about the ability to go and undertake voluntary work and to return home safely to your families. That is ultimately what we want for our citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand: to make sure that when the thousands and thousands of volunteers in this country head out to make sure that they add value and they contribute to the well-being of their community or their particular kaupapa, they have the right to make it home safely to their families.

And that point I hope isn’t lost on this House in this entire debate. Like I said, we understand the intent from the member Harete Hipango in this bill. But I take it, having read the report and discussed with colleagues on the side of the House, that there is an undertaking to have a serious look at this and, more widely speaking, health and safety regulations that relate to paid employment and voluntary paid employment and volunteers.

Just in closing, can I say that, as I’ve already mentioned, I have the honour and privilege of being the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, and we do appreciate all of the work that volunteers do across this country. That work is the sweat equity, the billions of dollars in productivity in this country. All hinge on the fact that the integrity of that sector is intact. Once we lose that integrity, I’m afraid that the view that this country and the communities have of this particular sector and volunteers at large will be seriously affected, and that will have a negative consequence on our communities. I stand to oppose this bill.

Kia orana, Madam Assistant Speaker. Tēnā tātou katoa e Te Whare. Could I begin just by saying, for the benefit of those who may have been watching on television, that the speech of the Hon Peeni Henare was not speech 12 of 12—or indeed, if it was, this is now speech 13 of 12. It is my understanding that I am the tail-end Charlie in this second reading debate, and sadly, as it would appear, I’m actually the tail-end Charlie for the consideration of this—

💬 Hamish Walker: Best saved till last.

Thank you, Mr Walker. What a perceptive young man you are. You will go far. But, sadly, this would appear to be the end of the debate altogether because it has become clear that New Zealand First has changed its position, and, while the numbers originally were for the bill to pass, that is no longer the case.

So let me start on a positive note by congratulating my excellent colleague Harete Hipango, the MP for Whanganui, for her success in having had her bill not only drawn from the ballot but getting through its first reading, being referred to a select committee, and returning to the House for a second reading. That’s a very rare achievement for an Opposition member of Parliament. For her to have done that in just outside her first year is particularly remarkable. One of her colleagues who is now in his 11th year hasn’t ever got anywhere near that and is feeling insanely jealous. But, anyway, I do share her disappointment at the change of heart of the New Zealand First Party, because it would appear that the bill is about to be stopped in its tracks.

I want to acknowledge Clayton Mitchell, who spoke around about four weeks ago, when we began the second reading debate. I think he made a reasonably valiant attempt to explain his party’s flip-flop, but I came to the conclusion that even though he was trying to suggest it was from a point of principle, it really struck me that it was far more likely to be as a result of coalition discipline and that his party was being pulled into line.

As the Hon Alfred Ngaro, who is a former Minister for the voluntary sector, noted when he spoke at the start of the second reading debate, this was a bill that originated in the community sector. It would do well for the Hon Peeni Henare, who is now in that role, to reflect on that fact. Mr Ngaro was a fine and widely respected Minister for the voluntary sector, and it is extremely disappointing, therefore, given the origins of this bill, that it seems set to be defeated.

I’m not going to speak for a long time, because, clearly, the die is cast. But the Government’s decision to vote down this bill is an attack on our voluntary sector. There is no question that volunteering is an essential element of our society. I’m sure that all members of the House would acknowledge how utterly dependent we are on voluntary efforts in a whole range of organisations and provisions of services the length and breadth of this country. I acknowledge and thank every one of them for the fine job that they do. Probably most New Zealanders at some stage in their lives have had an opportunity to do some volunteering, and it’s hugely rewarding. New Zealand has more than 97,000 non-profit organisations which contribute 2.6 percent to GDP, and that number increases to 4.9 percent—virtually 5 percent—of GDP, when you take into account the volunteer labour contribution, and is similar to the contribution of the entire construction industry. That’s how significant it is.

So for the Government to be showing a lack of concern for those volunteers and suggesting that they will at some stage in the near future—which seems to be drifting into the never-never—undertake a review of their own which might or might not lead to something similar to protect those volunteers who are in organisations where they just work a limited number of hours—and, after all, it’s only a small group who are in this category—shows that, actually, they don’t really care. They pretend to care, but they don’t really care about the sector. This was a bill that would have really enhanced and respected the work of those volunteers in our community sector. I am very disappointed it’s being voted down. I urge New Zealand First maybe to have one more think in the 30 seconds before they vote. I won’t hold my breath about that, but let’s hope that one day this is a measure that will come back to the House and will be enacted.