McClay Todd: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
McClay Todd: International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 25 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5619. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak on this bill the International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill. I want to make a couple of points as to why this is important and then I will touch on the issue raised by the last speaker Mr Parker around whether regulation-seeking powers should be in place or not. 
The bill itself amends the International Finance Agreements Act of 1961. That Act of Parliament allows the Government to meet its obligations as a member of various financial institutions and in this case we are talking about the IMF—the International Monetary Fund. What that means is that New Zealand is a part-owner of that fund—it is a part-owner of that bank. The bank does very important work around the world and during the last few years as the global financial crisis has affected many countries not only New Zealand—and thank goodness we have got the Government we have to help shepherd us through these difficult times—but in many other parts of the world—[ 
Interruption 
] People watching television cannot see but heads were vigorously nodding up and down on the other side of the House then! In many parts of the world they have not been so fortunate and the IMF has had to step up and provide important funding and financial instruments to other Governments to keep them going to keep them working. 
New Zealand has not had to request anything like that because of the sound financial management of our Minister of Finance and the stewardship of our Prime Minister. However as a part-owner of the bank we have obligations to that bank and therefore to other countries of the world. Therefore within that what this piece of legislation does is recognise a change that has been made in the terms of ownership—if we would call it that—of the IMF. It is a way that New Zealand recognises that and it enters into force. 
Mr Parker said that these issues should always come before the House but in effect it happens anyway. What happens is the Government is part of the negotiating process it is agreed by all IMF members and when it is signed by all those members—New Zealand has signed it—and when it is ratified by a certain number or percentage of those members then the new agreement enters into force anyway and the obligation is upon us. 
 So actually what has happened here is that the Government has negotiated. It has negotiated through the ministries it has that represent us overseas. An agreement has been reached between all of the countries and in this instance it is to share out that ownership or the obligation to provide funding by way of loans to the IMF to on-loan to countries that have issues in their economies. It is shared out more fairly and more equally and in this New Zealand has its ownership its part to play. So whether or not this was to come before the House the agreement enters into force and obligation is forced upon New Zealand. We canvassed the issue widely with advisers and others in the Finance and Expenditure Committee but reached the conclusion that the most appropriate way to deal with this was for it to be done in the way this bill now proposes. And of course it is up to Governments and Cabinets to decide what is in the best interests of New Zealand. 
We will be able to delve into this in much greater detail in the Committee stage but I commend the bill as it stands to the House.