Jones Shane: Westpac New Zealand Bill — Second Reading 
Jones Shane: Westpac New Zealand Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:633;Page:4807] 
SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to take a short call in relation to the Westpac New Zealand Bill. I had the pleasure of chairing the Finance and Expenditure Committee that dealt with this bill. Yes we did form a view that consultation regarding every nook and cranny was not necessary. Yes we were conscious of the time exigencies related to this bill. We sought and took quality advice from helpful agencies including the Reserve Bank. 
I refer in particular to a point that the honourable member Mr Hide made. Although he made a very good point I rather fear that the one or three members of the public who might be interested in listening to this debate—which is actually rhetoric in inverse proportions to the content of the bill—may be left with a mistaken assumption. The bill most certainly provides for safeguards in relation to the construction and presentation of a proposal to enable the transfer of assets to take place. 
Earlier Mr Hide reflected his deep anxieties that because the Minister and not members of this House or some other organ of the House was dealing with the proposed transfer there might be a weaker accountability. Part 2 deals with the vesting of designated assets and liabilities and in clause 6 the Governor-General on the advice of the Minister after he or she has received the recommendation from the Reserve Bank of New Zealand will or shall consider and may approve a proposal. That proposal not only specifies the appointed day but also describes the designated assets and liabilities. Along with Mr Gordon Copeland our committee was left with no doubts about the quality of judgment and the expertise of a prudential nature in the Reserve Bank to provide a high-quality stream of advice to the Minister. 
Yes this is a massive enterprise. Yes there are many savers and employees and the sums of money are large but it is based on an important principle. The principle is that in the event that there was a failure of a systemic nature and it had Australasian dimensions then those assets and those aspects of Westpac’s business that are domiciled here in Aotearoa New Zealand must not cannot and should not be spirited away to solve other problems in the massive network of the Westpac bank. 
 Of course that is a subset of a large issue and the issue is between the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Reserve Bank of New Zealand. Given the development of closer relations in our Australasian interests how are we to ensure that the very banking system that we rely on to provide the lifeblood of day-to-day business and the smooth functioning of the economy remains under adequate prudential oversight? I followed with considerable interest over the last couple of years whether the role that our own Reserve Bank of New Zealand might occupy in that prudential exercise is to be as an adjunct or subservient to the Reserve Bank of Australia. 
In the course of consideration of the bill the side issue of whether our Reserve Bank of New Zealand would be capable of fulfilling this role was discussed very briefly. We were told that not only would it have the ability to discharge its role in relation to prudential oversight but also that we and the bank would not be surrendering an unnecessary level of control to the Reserve Bank of Australia and that there would be more news and developments on that matter. But it is a key point that goes to the nature of our status and the ability for us to rely on political or governmental sovereignty when we make laws to ensure that we are not surrendering far too much to the Reserve Bank of Australia. So for those who are doubting Thomases and are bothered as to whether our Reserve Bank has the ability to fulfil the task I feel and said so at the time during the course of the Finance and Expenditure Committee’s considerations and discussions that those fears are misplaced. 
This is a big enterprise. The bank is looking forward to us dealing with it expeditiously. The committee I feel dealt with it in a very professional and thorough manner and like all matters of a technical nature one relies on the quality and the integrity of the advice. That came from other places yes but predominantly from the Reserve Bank of New Zealand and I have not a sliver of doubt about the quality of the advice we received.