Shearer David: Annual Review Debate — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeShearer David: Annual Review Debate — In Committee[Sitting date: 13 April 2016. Volume:713;Page:10530. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert): I would like to pick up a little bit on that line I think but I would like to speak about reputation and about New Zealand’s reputation—our reputation in the world. Although we are a small country we have a reputation for fairness for transparency and for honesty and that counts for a lot. For a country of only 4.5 million people amongst many of the larger countriesit counts for a lot that we are held in respect and listened to. That is exactly what happened when we were voted to be on the Security Council. We were able to beat overwhelmingly the other larger countries of Turkey and Syria because we were seen and respected for those very values which we hold very very close.I was up in New York a couple of weeks ago and had the opportunity of being able to sit in on the Security Council deliberations that were going on at that time and we were held in high regard. I pick up what Mark Mitchell was saying just now about our work on the Syrian file—on the humanitarian aspects and access and on the sanctions to stop terrorism being funded—and also about our ability to bring a fresh approach to the Security Council in challenging the older established members—the Permanent Five. I went and saw the Russian ambassador who said to me “Look we think New Zealand is doing a good job but we wish it could agree with us a bit more.” then I went and saw the British ambassador who said “I think New Zealand is doing an excellent job on the Security Council but sometimes we wish that it could agree with us just a bit more.” and I thought that actually we have probably got it about right if that is the case.What is really sad about this story and the great work being done by our ambassadors and Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade staff up there is the fact that none of that filters back here to New Zealand. Of the many people who are listening to this debate I can guarantee that almost all of them will not have heard one bit of news about the great work we are doing on the Security Council. I think that is a real shame and I point the finger directly at the Minister for not taking those stories and making them more public. He seems to be sitting on that and in a sense saying: “We can do it. We know all about it. We don’t need to involve you.” He is taking a leaf out of the Tim Groser book. When he was negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership he did not feel that it was necessary to talk about what he was doing with anybody in New Zealand. It was that arrogant smug rather out-of-touch approach of saying: “We know what’s best for you and we don’t need to tell you what we’re doing.”I think most New Zealanders are fed up with that approach—that smug that arrogant that out-of-touch type of approach that is dominating the National Government so much more now and no more so than what we have seen with the Panama Papers over the last week. This is the Prime Minister standing up and undermining our very reputation which I was just speaking about and saying “There’s nothing to be seen here.” and denying that there is any problem. All of last week that is all Mr Key did and this week suddenly he has decided to change his tune because what he saw through his banker’s eyes was not cutting it with New Zealanders on the ground. He had to turn 180 degrees and say that he would set up an investigation.There is something to be seen here. There is a problem and as one economist said foreigners can set up untaxed trusts in New Zealand without disclosing their identity or the details of what they are being used for and because of that we are seen as a soft touch and as a tax haven. That is destroying the very reputation that we have built this country on. It is one of the reasons why we have slipped from being in first place under Transparency International down to fourth and we will continue that slide. Our response has been solely inadequate for dealing with what is going on.That money that is being squirrelled away by corporations individuals and leaders across the world could have paid for more taxes to go into education and into health. It is estimated that $1 trillion has been taken out of developing countries.