Commerce Bill hearings

Press, 3 October 1985, Page 6

Commerce Bill hearings

PA Wellington The Federation of Labour wants provisions protecting employment included in the Commerce Bill. Only “lip service” had been made to employment aspects under existing legislation, said the F.O.L. Companies had been able to state “great intentions” knowing there was no real obligation to put them into practice, the F.O.L. said in a submission to the parliamentary select committee studying the Commerce Bill. The bill, replacing the existing Commerce Act, aims to promote competition in markets in New Zealand.

It revamps the Commerce Commission, and deals with restrictive trade practices, mergers and takeovers, and price controls. It also does away with existing provisions relating to strikes and lockouts deemed contrary to the public interest. The federation said activities covered by the bill would have substantial impact on employment in particular industries or enterprises and conglomerates.

“It is not acceptable to the Federation of Labour for employment interests to be ignored in this bill,” it said.

The impact of mergers and takeovers on employment was often immense.

It believed that applicants, under the bill, should be required to give firm assurances on their employment intentions - such as redundancies, rationalisation and technological innovation and the Commerce Commission should be obliged to impose appropriate conditions. The federation said it particularly supported the repeal of the anti-strike provisions.

The provisions were contrary to accepted international conventions on trade union rights and were one of the principal impediments to New Zealand’s ratification of International

Labour Organisation conventions 87 and 98. It pointed out that the provisions had proved to be largely inoperative and had acted as an irritant to the industrial relations process.

The F.O.L. was aware of only one case which had been brought under the act, it said in its submission, but representatives could not give details to the committee.

The Motor Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association told the committee it believed its industry’s structure would be changed if the bill was passed in its present form.

Price would become the over-riding criteria at the expense of quality and service, it said.

Not only would the level of service to customers at the retail level suffer, but in a retail-led price discounting environment there would be no opportunity or incentive for the manufacturer to strive for excellence.

The quality of products and service may be expected to suffer as well, the association said.