Mitchell ClaytonCLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): It is great to see everybody back here after an extended holiday over the Christmas period. Certainly those people who live outside of Wellington look like they have got a bit of a tan—you are included in that Mr Deputy Speaker. A couple of Wellingtonians are looking a little bit pale so let us just hope the summer picks up in the capital and they can actually start enjoying it like the rest of the country has certainly started to do.On a brighter note I just also want to congratulate the Prime Minister—although this is not my response in reply to his statement today—on three appointments that he made last year. I have already spoken to those people but it is great to see the Minister Hon Alfred Ngaro sitting here. The new Minister certainly deserves his position—also Mark Mitchell and we have also seen David Bennett appointed. It is going to be good to see how they perform in the House. Although I have some sort of scepticism here—it could be a little bit like moving Waldorf and Statler from the ranks of The Muppet Show who seem to chortle away quite a bit to themselves over in the corner. I notice that they have separated you from the Government benches there Mr Ngaro so you might be able to work your way back together. But certainly congratulations—I look forward to working with you.The Charities Amendment Bill which we are here to speak about tonight is very innocuous. I have to say it has got only three points and they have been articulated on both sides of the House this evening so I will not spend too much time delving into those three points although I will touch on them.The Hon Ruth Dyson does correctly point out that New Zealanders are a very giving people. We do give our time and we do give our energies and our support to the plethora of charities that are around our communities and time is probably one of the most precious things that we give. But the reality is that there is a minor problem within that in so far as not all charities could be said to be there necessarily for the right reasons. I am going to touch on that a little bit later on as I go on through my speech. There are a couple of elephants—certainly one elephant and potentially a ginormous hippopotamus in the room—that I will touch on.The first of the three clauses that we have got amendments for in this Charities Amendment Bill amends section 16 of the Charities Act 2005 so that if a person has been charged with tax evasion if they have been bankrupted or if they have been convicted of tax fraud they are not eligible to hold a position as an officer within a charitable organisation which makes complete and utter sense. Why would you allow people of low standing to hold a position within an organisation that does not pay any taxes and that is there to look after its community for the benefit of the people whom it is there to support? We completely support that.However with the tax evasion conviction there is a fine line—and I mean a very fine line—between tax evasion and tax avoidance. Of course one is completely legal and one is completely illegal. It has been mentioned in the past that we have this line that we can clearly see that people are pushing across. I think when you look at the number of multinational businesses operating in this country that do not pay their fair share of taxes through tax avoidance that this is one of the elephants in the room. This fact alone is costing New Zealand taxpayers billions of dollars of lost revenue that would go a long way to helping those very charities that we are talking about here this evening.The second section that this extended—removed from the Statutes Amendment Bill—Charities Amendment Bill affects is to do with the timely coming up with information to the Inland Revenue Department or other Government departments within a 20-working day period or face losing your charitable status for your organisation. That again makes absolute sense. What have these charities got to hide? If they cannot get that information quickly enough then it would certainly question how well those organisations are being run and New Zealand First certainly again as a good gesture supports that part of the bill.The third and final clause that the bill has—it really is just a one-pager—is a small change in wording: the minor draft change with the replacement of the term chief executive" with the word "board". So it is pretty self-explanatory and very very positive for the charities organisations around the country to have this and certainly for the greater good of New Zealanders as I have already talked about—one of those elephants in the room.I would also like to talk about the other aspect. This is the hippopotamus in the room.Clare Curran: Elephant.CLAYTON MITCHELL: No we have had the elephant. Now we are on to the hippopotamus. This is the fact that the statutory definition of charitability arises from the Statute of Charitable Uses which is the 43rd Statute of Elizabeth I dating back to 1601 can you believe. Tracey Martin: Wow!CLAYTON MITCHELL: That is right—1601. It sets out four categories: for relief of poverty religion education and other purposes of benefit to the community. That is what it does—right—the Statute of Charitable Uses the 43rd statute. There have been a large number of cases that developed the law around this and some statute law as well especially concerning the registration of charities under the Charities Act back in 2005. That Act contains a limited definition in section 5 but there has not been for New Zealand a comprehensive redefinition of the purposes that will be accepted as charitable purposes and the Statute of Charitable Uses back from 1601 still applies.This is absolutely ridiculous. New Zealand First is saying that it is well and truly outdated it is not fit for purpose and it needs revision immediately so that there is a far better clarification around the purposes of charitability in the circumstances and it is suitable for the 21st century and not some loophole that some multinational and big city businesses exploit for their own benefit. This is the hippopotamus in the room and I think the New Zealand taxpayers are absolutely sick to the back teeth of seeing this exploitation of our charitable nature and it is certainly costing as I have said already New Zealand taxpayers billions of dollars of lost revenue which could be going towards beneficial things within our communities. Thank you."