Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): It's fascinating after listening to the Budget speeches from the Government and supporting parties that the very first bill that we see under urgency in support of the Budget is one to stop a flow of capital into New Zealand. We heard the other day the Rt Hon Winston Peters talking about that ever since 1882 and refrigerated shipping New Zealand's been a trading nation. We've also been a nation that has been built off the back of foreign investment on our shores. That is an undeniable fact and here we have today a Government that is making it harder for foreign investment to come into New Zealand because somehow it's being portrayed as a big bogey that takes things away from people. Well it has contributed an enormous amount to what New Zealand is today to this point. I think the speech we just heard from Deborah Russell was interesting. It was almost a continuation of the theme that we heard at the COVID select committee a couple of weeks ago which was that if businesses are undercapitalised they just fail—tough luck. The comment here that if a distressed business was somehow sold at a fire sale price that's a terrible thing to have happen—it misses the point that if that business maybe wasn't sold it might fail and if it fails who loses? New Zealand's local investors lose. The people who have their jobs there lose. The value of that business inside the chain of activity in the economy is lost. So there you go. It would seem that we have a Government that wants on the one hand to say they're friendly to business but on the other it wants to bring in as many rules as possible to prevent individuals making their own choices inside the economy. This bill puts it all back on one Minister. It's a bit like that section 11 stuff yesterday—it all goes back to one Minister. It is a theme coming through strongly that under the cover of doing things for the protection of New Zealanders from the evils of COVID-19 and all its unintended consequences then we'd better have total Government control on all aspects of New Zealanders' lives. So we don't like this bill and I am looking particularly at the bill that talks about the national security interests. We were told about this bill earlier today and the SIS and the GCSB have said Well we need to give you a briefing on it." But guess what? Not till tomorrow morning—not till tomorrow morning. So the aspects of that can't be considered by us when we're debating this bill today. It's quite an unreasonable position to be put in. Earlier in the day we got the notification of what the urgency motion would contain. I thought "That's great. The Government's being right up front with us for a moment and a little bit transparent." But then what did we get? A completely different list. Right now we were told we'd be debating a bill that was going to effectively make one Minister in charge of all the infrastructure spending—all the Resource Management Act consent stuff that the Government's talked a lot about that Winston Peters today congratulated the Minister on. But where is it? Not here—not here. Something that might actually practically do something to get consents on projects to move them forward—can't see it not here. And we know why—we know why—because the Government in its entirety across its coalition doesn't have the numbers. So what do we do? We come up instead and put up a bill followed by another bill that's entirely determined to for a period of time they're saying—just a short period of time—close down some of the opportunities for foreign capital to assist businesses through a very difficult time. It's not hard for anyone to work out that in a time like this for many many companies around the world and many individuals around the world the concept of capital protection will be very much to the fore in their minds. That's where they'll say "Well where do I invest? Where is a place that is safe to invest?" and the Prime Minister gave the answer to that today in her speech in the House. She said that New Zealand will benefit from being a country that dealt so decisively to the COVID-19 threat and that New Zealand's trade will be enhanced by the COVID-19 threat response. Well so will New Zealand's reputation for being a safe place to invest capital and—I've circled back to where I started—the capital that has built this country over decades since 1882 and before. So we're very disappointed that the Government is bringing in these measures. I don't think there's too much need to say an awful lot more. We want to see it go to a select committee so that some of the foible of it can be exposed as it is discussed by those who submit to that committee. It's only a very short time—incredibly short time—but as we've learnt it's an unusual thing for any bill under this circumstance to go to a select committee. So what I would say is that we will support it to that select committee but with very severe reservations and deep concern that at the one time when New Zealand might have been wanting to make it a little easier for some companies to bring in—some companies. Remember when we say "companies" for some employers—some places of New Zealanders' work—to be able to get the capital to maintain those jobs and to maintain the trade that goes from the productive output of those jobs could've been made a little bit easier. This does not do what the bill claims in its purpose to do."