Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:667;Page:14559] 
12. 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for Land Information 
: When Rt Hon John Key said on  
Breakfast 
 TV yesterday “we’ve changed the Overseas Investment Act to include 19 different criteria” had he advised the Prime Minister that 17 of those criteria were inherited from the last Government and two new criteria have not yet taken effect? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (Minister for Land Information) 
: 
 When the National Government made the decision to review the overseas ownership rules under the Overseas Investment Act it was decided that the criteria in place under the Labour Government and set in the 2005 Act were not satisfactory. The Government made a decision to add two new criteria—the economic interest and the mitigating factor—and not only did the Prime Minister not need to be briefed on that but he played an active part in the decision to introduce the two. 
Hon David Parker 
: Given that following the review the Government left the 17 criteria and added two does the Minister think his Government was coherent or incoherent when having embarked upon a review of the overseas investment rules with the stated ambition of simplifying and liberalising the rules after 18 months of polling-induced indecision it announced neither? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I think it is fair to say that when we did the review we found that it would be impossible to liberalise the rules any more than they already had been under Labour. So we went about the changes and added two new criteria which we think will have an impact. 
Hon David Parker 
: Was the Government coherent or incoherent when at the start of that review the Deputy Prime Minister said he wanted to get rid of the strategic asset test because “I do not understand it.”; if so was that same person being incoherent in keeping that same test at the end of the 18-month review? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I think everything the Government has done in this field has been very coherent. 
Hon David Parker 
: Was the Minister for Land Information being coherent or incoherent last week when in answer to a question on notice that asked: “Will the changes to overseas investment rules mean he will decline more overseas purchases of New Zealand farm land?” he replied that he could not say given that he later admitted he had not declined even one farm sale under existing rules? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: In answering that question last week I made it clear to the member that it was not possible to answer a hypothetical question. He had asked how many applications would be declined in the future and until we know how many we get and then until we know how many do not meet the new criteria that we have put in place it would be absolutely misleading the House for me to make out I knew the answer. 
Hon David Parker 
: Did the Minister advise the Prime Minister to put out the media release yesterday afternoon accusing others of an incoherent overseas investment policy; if so was that to highlight the incoherent nature of the Government’s own statements and policy or was that poor release hastily made on the advice of the Prime Minister’s own head spin doctor whom Gerry Brownlee and others in the Beehive describe as “Captain Panic Pants”? 
Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON 
: I think we need to get the coherent position strapped down. Labour put the rules in place in 2005 and since those rules have been put in place huge tracts of farmland have been sold to foreigners. So the National Government decided to add extra criteria to the Overseas Investment Act to give Ministers a better chance to make that determination. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That brings to a close questions for oral answer. I must say that the very last question of the day hardly helped in terms of good order. But today is today; tomorrow will be another day. Beware the Speaker will be keen to see a rather different question time.