Nash StuartSTUART NASH (Labour—Napier): For me there are two issues with regard to Mr Shewan's report. The first one is the integrity of our tax system and the second one is New Zealand's global reputation. Mr Robertson and Mr Little have talked about the integrity of our tax system which is incredibly important to our global reputation but it also matters around what is fair. It plays into the very narrative of who does what with whom—who pays tax when and how. One of the things Mr Shewan noted in this report is that New Zealand is committed to integrity openness and transparency; ensuring that its legislation and enforcement activities meet or exceed global best standards; taking a leadership role on these initiatives; [and] acting to address and rectify issues of concern". That is what our global reputation is on tax issues. I would argue strongly that in fact we have fallen behind in maintaining the integrity of our tax system to the point where the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) said with regard to base erosion and profit-shifting measures that we are not even going to be able to meet our international obligations. In fact there were early adopters in this space then there were countries who said they would do things on time; and our recommendation to Cabinet was that we were actually not even going to meet the timetable—we were going to be a year late. I am not too sure whether this is because the Minister is not over his portfolio I am not too sure whether this is because the IRD is overworked or I am not too sure whether this is because the Government just does not care. Whatever the reason is it is wrong.The fact that John Shewan put a chapter called "New Zealand's Reputation" in his report shows that he understands the effect of this on our global reputation. What is this reputation worth to us? Well in 2005 the then Ministry of Economic Development tried to quantify the value of this and it came up with the figure of $20 billion a year. There is an organisation called Transparency International. Their index ranks countries on a scale from one to 100 based on external surveys and assessments from 13 reputable international organisations. These are not Kiwis who come up with this measure these are international arbiters that determine whether New Zealand has a reputation worthy of the past or what is happening to it. In 2012 we were No. 1—we were No. 1. In 2015 we are now fourth. The countries from No. 1 down are Denmark Finland Sweden and then New Zealand. I am the first to admit that fourth out of a hundred and however many countries is not bad—but the thing is that we trade on this global reputation. It is what we go overseas with it is what our companies take as one of their main tools in their bag of—I was going to say tricks—unique selling points. We come from New Zealand—that means something and if it fails to mean something then we are in big trouble. Then what happens is that we become just another small economy hawking commodities to an ever-competitive global world. At this point in time being from New Zealand means something.What Mr Shewan said about our drop in Transparency International's rankings was: "While it is not clear what caused this drop the downward move is regrettable and demonstrates there is no room for complacency." Yet it appears that complacency is the very thing that this Government has got in spades when it comes to this. This is a big issue—and not just for the integrity of our tax system but for the integrity of our global brand. The press around this was damning of New Zealand. In a way reputation is about perception and often as we all know perception does not take account of facts. If the Australian Financial Review writes "While New Zealand's tax laws are a major plus for foreign investors it is not the only attraction. They also come to use New Zealand's good reputation." and if it also says "the papers held by ICIJ show how Mossack Fonseca bragged to clients how easy New Zealand laws make it for foreign investors to hide their tax-free profits" then we have a reputational problem. Whether this is true whether we are a tax haven or not—and John Shewan actually does say "It might be argued that the foreign trust regime is a preferable tax regime and this is sufficient to make it a tax haven."—whether that is the truth or not does not really matter because if the global community has the perception that New Zealand is in some way corrupt is in some way an easy target allows criminals to hide money is anything but squeaky clean or is anything but how we market ourselves overseas then we are in real trouble.So this whole issue is not just about the integrity of our tax system. This whole issue is not just about the reputation of our tax system. This whole issue cuts to the very quick of what it means to be a New Zealander what it means to be a New Zealand company going overseas and what it means to be a small New Zealand company going overseas and standing on what we believe our global unique selling point is—and that is a reputation for being upfront for being honest and for doing things the way that things should be done.There is one way to rectify this now—because the damage has been done—I think the way we can get this under way and mitigate the risk is to get this legislation before the House as soon as possible. Amy Adams you heard her say—I just failed to see a sense of urgency there and this is the Minister of Justice. We have got the Minister of Revenue who I think now finally understands the scale of the problem—whereas in the past I would argue that even he failed to grasp the severity of this not only for our tax system but our global reputation. But I do believe he now understands it and I hope like hell that this report has been a wake-up call because John Shewan is a man of integrity—of that I have no doubt. John Shewan has made his reputation—Hon Member: Better speak to your boss then. STUART NASH: No no—John Shewan is a man of integrity. Hon Member: Tell your boss that.STUART NASH: No he is a man of integrity. But John Shewan also understands the fact that his reputation his business and his unique set of skills are also dependent the reputation of this country. So Mr Shewan knows that if we do not get this right if we fail to address this in a manner that meets the expectations of the global community then not only does his reputation suffer but the reputation of this country and the reputation of our tax system suffer.I think that the only way forward for this is to get legislation in front of the House as soon as possible. It does need to go through the select committee process—I absolutely agree with that—because we do need to hear what the submitters to this report said; MPs need to hear that. We also need to hear what other players in this game think but we need to get this legislation into this House we need to get it passed as soon as possible and we need to rectify the situation.The global tax system is in trouble at the moment: it is called base erosion and profit shifting. This is about large corporates not paying their fair share. We know this is a major issue and we are trying to deal with this at this point in time through the OECD process. It has to be done in a multilateral way but this is just—I was going to say an unwelcome distraction but that is actually belittling what this is—an issue we need to deal with immediately. But unlike base erosion and profit shifting we are the only ones who can deal with this. We do not need an OECD mandate to do this—all we need is the legislation to be passed to correct it. I hope like hell that the day the Minister got this report—and I am assuming he did not get it yesterday but let us assume he did—the first thing he did was he called his officials in and he said: "I want legislation drafted now that is going to implement every single one of John Shewan's recommendations. I want it done under urgency it is the No. 1 priority and we must get this in front of the House as soon as possible." Because the damage is now done—the damage is now done. All we can do is mitigate it.I just want to reiterate that there are two points there: the integrity of our tax system must be upheld; but most importantly the reputation of our tax system and the reputation of our country is now on the line. Let us do the right thing let us get this through now and mitigate the risk that is already out there. Thank you very much."