When the Education and Workforce Committee reported back on Camilla Belich's Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Bill and recommended that it not be passed, I'd assumed it was doomed. The right-wing coalition government supports employer exploitation of workers, and certainly doesn't see why intentionally and systematically conspiring to not pay them or demand free labour - an actual business model for some employers - should be a crime, or why the current law which views employers as "persons in special relationship" towards their employers, but not vice-versa - could be considered unfair and asymmetrical. So I was quite surprised when, last night, NZ First voted for the bill, getting it over the line to its second reading.
During the debate in Parliament, NZ First MP Mark Patterson said his party hadn't been part of the select committee that investigated the bill, but had listened carefully to both sides....Which suggests that this isn't actual support, but just a weapon in some internal coalition power-play. Still, maybe they're pissed enough at ACT or National to support it all the way, if they get a token amendment to let them claim a victory. Which would be well worth doing if it doesn't further gut an (already pathetically weak) bill."It is the view of the New Zealand First caucus that this bill is not without some merit," he said.
But he wasn't guaranteeing support all the way through.
"New Zealand First will be supporting this bill through to the committee of the whole House stage.
"We, however, have listened carefully to the concerns on this side of the House. So there are some things that we want to see examined further through that committee stage."
But if it passes, this bill will establish a principle: that wage theft is theft. And it means that a future government can then amend it to actually treat it as such, with an identical penalty.
