Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth): I move that the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill be reported to the House by 20 February 2018 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House despite Standing Orders 191 and 194(1)(b) and (c).The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member; I just have to take some advice on this. Can I just ask the member to read the amendment as required. He hasn't read the amendment as required. Hon DAVID PARKER: I move That the bill be reported to the House by 20 February 2018 and that the committee have authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting excepting during oral questions during every evening on a day where there is a sitting of the House and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting in the House and outside the Wellington area despite Standing Orders 191 193 194(1)(b) and (c).I want to explain to the House why we're seeking this earlier report back. In doing so I want to acknowledge that the principles of good parliamentary process generally require that there is a decent period of select committee consideration—a period that is long enough for about six weeks of public notification before submissions close. The reason for that is that you want people to be able to take advice. If they are organisations that have got a monthly meeting schedule they can get board approval or committee approval before they make their submission. Then you give plenty of time for the committee to consider submissions to hear departmental advice and to make considered recommendations back to this House. Through that process we have as close to perfect legislation as you can get. That is the normal process and that is the process that this House should normally adopt.There are exceptions to those normal processes. The most shortened of those is where the House takes urgency with no select committee process and there are occasions when that is necessary. Indeed it was actually thought until about a month ago that we were going to have to pass this through all stages because there was the prospect that the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (CPTPPA) would be signed by the parties by about now. Once that agreement is signed it is beyond the control of the New Zealand Government when it comes into effect because the provisions of that agreement now say—and this is one of many differences between this agreement and the old agreement—that a simple majority of the countries that have signed up to it have to ratify it before it comes into effect. So if there are 11 countries that sign up to it it takes only six of those countries to have ratified it for it to come into effect and that is beyond the control of this Parliament.We know from advice that we've had from officials and statements that the Government has made publicly that the changes that are proposed to New Zealand's investment screening regime have to be in place before the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) comes into effect in order for there to be the policy space for this Government or any future Government to have the effective ability to change screening rules.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Rubbish!Hon DAVID PARKER: Rubbish" the former Minister says from the other side. He still does not get it. He does not get it after all of this time—that what the prior Government was doing was signing away for ever the effective right for New Zealanders to change—Hon Gerry Brownlee: You can't talk about that. Narrow it up. Broaden it out if you like; we're happy to.Hon DAVID PARKER: Well I'm actually not attempting to broaden it but I am making the point that this is why—I'm very happy for it to be broadened because this is the debate that we are happy to have to show that this is an appropriate shortening of the period of consideration because otherwise New Zealand loses the ability to change these screening regimes in effect not just because of TPP but because of most favoured nation clauses that are common to various other trade agreements which take into the earlier trade agreements the provision of TPP. So CPTPP is dragged into the earlier agreements. If we do not—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Sorry to interrupt the member but the member cannot broaden the debate and it's a very narrow debate. I'm sorry for not pointing that out earlier but the member cannot do that.Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could the Speaker perhaps indicate to us the parameters of the debate?The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): OK. I refer to Standing Order 290(3): "Any debate on the question for a motion under this Standing Order is restricted to the special powers or instruction set out in the motion. It may not extend to the principles objects or provisions of the bill to which the motion relates."Hon Steven Joyce: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I don't often want to rise in support of Mr Parker but it's actually quite an important procedural issue that he is addressing which is the timing of the particular agreement which is his primary reason for bringing the bill back to the House early. Now I think that's something that does meet the test of being included in this debate. Members on this side will want to be able to address that in the debate because if that's the reason for taking the step that the Government is proposing to take well then it will be difficult to have the debate without actually addressing whether the reason is valid or not.Hon DAVID PARKER: Speaking to the point of order—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): No I just want to answer this one. In terms of making changes extending dates etc. the member can raise that in their speech. The expectation is that a copy of that will come to the Clerk after the member has spoken. I'll listen carefully and invite the member to continue and please keep the debate on the timing of the bill.Hon DAVID PARKER: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I'm going to agree with the Opposition on this occasion. With respect I think the purpose of this debate is to justify a shortened process. There are reasons that we normally have a more lengthy process. I've been involved in a number of these debates over the years in Opposition and we have routinely sought to either criticise or justify the length of period in relation to the circumstance that justifies the change. I think that the Hon Steven Joyce is correct in that regard.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): OK.Hon DAVID PARKER: I won't unduly prolong it sir. I will also make it clear that the exact date on which the TPP agreement is signed is not yet clear. It is at this stage expected to be in March next year. If it is March next year—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Point of order?Hon DAVID PARKER: This is not a point of order; I thought I was speaking in the debate again. The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I thought you were adding to your point of order.Hon DAVID PARKER: No—sorry sir.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): All I'm going to say is that I'll listen carefully to what members are saying and then if there are issues that arise members need to make sure that it is relevant to the motion.Hon Todd McClay: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It may be a point of clarification because the Hon David Parker has been speaking as to the reason he's speaking outside of the bill itself. I'm now unclear based upon your ruling whether or not the Opposition is able to speak to that. I actually agree with the Hon David Parker—today is the first time he's said something actually that is correct. But I do want to challenge some of the things in his speech so far because I don't agree with them nor do I think that they are reasons for us to be rushing back so soon afterwards. So if you could just clarify your ruling—it feels to me that what you've said is that you're going to take it on a case by case basis. It would be remiss of me not to raise this in case on a case by case basis you don't allow us to respond to the reasons David Parker has given that we are going to make people work so hard through the Christmas break.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I apologise to the members of the House. I haven't actually made a ruling; I'm just making a point of clarification. The timing of the TPP is relevant to the timing in so far as it's relevant to the timing of the bill—then yes you can speak to it.Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. At this stage it may be signed in February or March. This is a matter that is again beyond the control of the Government because it depends a bit on when other countries are ready to sign. We're ready to sign now. If it turns out to be March then it may be that towards the end of this February period we can extend the time of the select committee through the Business Committee if the interests of New Zealand are not undermined in terms of the legislation being passed before TPP comes into effect. It is also possible that because of this TPP deadline that there is a Supplementary Order Paper that may also—Hon Gerry Brownlee: What deadline? You just said there's no deadline.Hon DAVID PARKER: I said the deadline is when it comes into effect Mr Brownlee. I think I've explained this.If that is necessary we will endeavour to make the Supplementary Order Paper available to the select committee as soon as we are able but again that is subject to this deadline that arises from TPP coming into effect."