Simpson Scott: Illegal Contracts (Unlawful Limitation on Regulators’ Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Simpson Scott: Illegal Contracts (Unlawful Limitation on Regulators’ Powers) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 25 July 2012. Volume:682;Page:3941. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise and speak in this debate as it draws to a close. The Illegal Contracts (Unlawful Limitation on Regulators’ Powers) Amendment Bill in the name of the Hon Lianne Dalziel is as my colleague Todd McClay said earlier a worthy and justifiable piece of legislation to be introduced except that as with many things in politics timing and luck are actually quite important. This is a piece of legislation in its draft bill form that has in fact had its time and has been and gone. What has emerged in the time since the meltdown of ING is that this John Key - National Government has in fact taken a very strong position in determining that our capital markets should be strong and that the regulatory environment in which our capital markets operate should be strong and well respected. Indeed we have seen two pieces of legislation introduced into this House in the last 48 hours or so that have gone further to strengthen that position. Strong capital markets are indeed important to us all. 
The current law is sufficient to deal with the legitimacy or otherwise of the legal settlements. Indeed the mover in her opening introductory comments said—and I just wrote them down as she said them—that the need for this bill has diminished. Well I would suggest to you that in fact the need for this bill has diminished to a point where it is absolutely no longer required at all. She went on further to say that the bill may not be a perfect answer. I would suggest indeed that she is quite right; it is not a perfect answer. Indeed it is an answer that is no longer required at all. 
To the extent that the bill was drafted in response to a particular situation which arose as a result of the ING frozen fund situation it caused a great number of New Zealand investors enormous concern and heartache at the time. Indeed the whole financial crisis of the time created a situation for many New Zealanders where their life savings were diminished and in some cases completely done away with. Of course that is not a situation that anybody would want let alone a Government. So how did we respond to that as a responsible coherent and caring Government? Well we introduced legislation that ensured that our regulatory environment would be protected and strengthened. As part of our 120-point economic plan we have been focused terrifically on these sorts of matters. It is our priority to of course build a more competitive economy a bolder brighter and stronger economy. What we have done is ensure that everything is put in place and we have attempted of course to provide restored confidence in the financial sector because it is restored confidence that will give New Zealand investors an opportunity with real strength of confidence to invest again. They have not had that for a long period of time so we are very focused on that. 
We have tightened the oversight of those working in the financial market sector and they now operate in a regulatory regime that is going to be very very strict in terms of what they can do and how they process their transactions. One of the things that we have done is remove the barriers to trans-Tasman business and progressed legislation that will enable us to meet our single economic market achievements with Australia. We have rewritten a 33-year-old securities law leading to the Financial Markets Conduct Bill. Those are just some of the measures that we have taken as a responsible and caring Government to ensure that our regulatory environment is robust and strong and that is one of the reasons why we will not be supporting this first reading.