Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 07 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:88. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
8. 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he have confidence in the decisions of all of his Ministers who were involved in the process for the sale of the Crafar farms? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. I am confident that the two Ministers involved—the Minister for Land Information and the Associate Minister of Finance—exercised their duties fairly and impartially under the Overseas Investment Act 2005. 
Hon David Parker 
: Was it within the discretion of the Minister for Land Information to decline the approval of the Crafar farms sale— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: You approved every one that went before you. 
Hon David Parker 
: —under the Overseas Investment Act? No I did not.  
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: The advice that I have seen is that the Ministers have to give due regard to sections 16 and 18 of the Act. If they are confident that sections 16 and 18 of the Act have been appropriately met then they do need to accept the application. That was the view of both the Overseas Investment Office and the two Ministers. 
Hon David Parker 
: Did the Prime Minister say in 2010 that his Government’s changes to overseas ownership regulations “increased ministerial flexibility to consider a wider range of issues when assessing overseas investment in sensitive land”; if so why did the Ministers not exercise that flexibility and decline the overseas sale of the Crafar farms? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Yes that is absolutely correct; that is what I said in 2010. There was a wider range of issues but in fact the bid met the conditions and criteria set out in the Overseas Investment Act. The truth of it is the Act did need tightening up and the number of regulations needed expanding because when David Parker was the Minister for Land Information between 2006 and 2008 he actually approved the sale of 410000 hectares of farmland. That is four times the total amount of land approved for sale under the last 3 years— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Prime Minister see a difference between an applicant like James Cameron moving here living indefinitely here with his family working here and paying taxes and the largest-ever sale of the multiple Crafar dairy farms to a foreign-based company with future profits going overseas; or does he agree with Mr Williamson that opposition to the Crafar farms sales is bordering more on racism? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I believe that both of the bids met the law as it was written by Labour in 2005. In 2005 Labour did not have a condition that you have to live here. Labour did not campaign on that condition in 2011. Interestingly enough David Shearer did not know his position on the day that this came out last week because he had two positions in one day.  
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Prime Minister think it is a good outcome for New Zealand that the previously New Zealand - owned Crafar farms—until now operated by private enterprise—will now be overseas-owned and farmed by a Government company?  
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Firstly those farms were in a very bad state of repair. I would have thought that as somebody who has argued about environmental issues David Parker actually would want those farms to be more environmentally sustainable. The second thing is that I suppose the way I would sum this up would be to make the following statement. Then we have New Zealand First which is opposed to any purchase by any foreigner of any asset investment— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You and I both know that he cannot do that. He should be told to desist and get back to doing what he should be doing: answering the question.  
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: In answering a question any Minister can surely refer to a learned piece of advice for the House.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the point that the Rt Hon Winston Peters makes is fair enough. The question was asked by a member of the Labour Party and to bring another political party into an answer is not the wisest thing to do. It is going to lead to disorder. We saw it lead to disorder. The honourable member got to his feet at the same time that I did because I could see what was going to happen. I think it is unwise to do that. I would ask the right honourable Prime Minister to please not bring another political party which has not been involved in the questioning into the answer.  
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Let me continue in this way then. In 2005 when the law was established by Labour in a third reading speech in this House Clayton Cosgrove said of it: “As the Minister pointed out that is totally illogical.”—the ability to stop a foreigner from having any investments in New Zealand. He went on to say “The last one out switches the lights off if we call a halt to any international investment in land in this country.” You see in Government Labour members say one thing and on the populist track in Opposition they say a completely different thing.