Tabuteau FletcherFLETCHER TABUTEAU (NZ First): If I could just start where the previous speaker Eugenie Sage left off and commend the Law and Order Committee that picked up this legislation. I would argue that it should have come to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and we would have had a full and robust debate and analysis of this bill. But actually I stand up not being a member of the Law and Order Committee and commend the chairman and the members for the work that they have done.Jonathan Young: Thank you very much.FLETCHER TABUTEAU: You read this legislation and it is tidy and it does what it sets out to do—and I am glad my compliments have made the evening of Mr Nathan Guy across the way there. It brings me joy.The point I do want to make though—and the Minister of Justice made a great contribution in her speech this evening. She spoke eloquently about the legislation but then she spoke of enhancing our international profile and that we cannot be complacent. The Minister of Revenue has spoken to this legislation in this House. I would like to quote from her first reading contribution. She spoke about money-laundering being the lifeblood of organised crime. She spoke about money-laundering enabling lifestyles and funding illegal practices and in so doing in the Minister's own words she said that we enable and ensure that legitimate businesses suffer. This was in the first reading contribution from the Minister of Revenue and I could not agree more strongly with words spoken in this House.Unfortunately for the Government the time line on this issue of money-laundering in New Zealand is a lengthy one. I speak specifically to 2003 when this particular problem was brought to New Zealand's attention and in fact subsequently we were struck off the UN's white list for financial integrity—although admittedly we were put back on as Mr Woodhouse is very wont to say. He did raise that with me when I brought it up in a debate some time ago and I acknowledge we were put back on to it. But then we had the Panama Papers and in the end we actually had the Shewan report that outlined comprehensively and in detail what the issues were with New Zealand's financial situation and what this Government—this National Government—has allowed in terms of money-laundering in New Zealand.Clayton Mitchell: Disgraceful.FLETCHER TABUTEAU: It is disgraceful and it has been a sad indictment on a Government that has been willing to say that this has been a problem for legitimate businesses in New Zealand—it has. The Government members have said it themselves. In fact if I go to the words of Minister McClay who was Minister of Revenue in 2009 when the Government came into power he spoke about the need for this legislation to be enacted and brought into the House and he spoke about the need to act. He said: This bill will ensure that New Zealand's laws against money-laundering and its laws to counter the financing of terrorism are up to international standards." He then said: "Well there is money-laundering in New Zealand." and it "comes from the illegal drug trade" and yes it is "too much and we must do much more about this."That was the Minister of Revenue in 2009 when National took power. This has been a problem since 2003. The Government has known about it since it took office and it has done nothing about it until now. So not only has that compromised New Zealand's business operation but what that has meant is that terrorism activities and the operations of illegal drug cartels for example have been enabled and—dare I say it—empowered by the lack of action from National and its unwillingness to act on an industry that its former Prime Minister described as a great cottage industry that was making a lot of money for the lawyers and the trust managers.So it is an indictment on the Government. It is a sad state of affairs that we are here only now. I get the impression that we are going to try to get it through this week. So at least we are here now and I do stand in support of it—in case that was not clear from the start. New Zealand First of course supports this because we have been speaking to this Government and to the public of New Zealand and we have been making it very clear that these lawyers these real estate agents accountants—not all of them of course but many of them—have been used to cover up illegal money exchanges and money activities and that has enabled illegal activity here and across the world. It is frustrating that we have got to this point only now. It has been a decade.By way of explanation a police report that was kind of forced to become public they did not want to release it outlined that accountants and real estate agents and lawyers have in their estimation enabled the laundering of as much as $1.6 billion per year—$1.6 billion per year of illegal funds through New Zealand. That is an absolute indictment on the non-activity the non-action and the non-performance from the members and the Ministers opposite. This is because it was not just the police report that suddenly made this issue clear; we and that Government have known about it from 2009. Then we had the Reserve Bank sector risk assessment outline a similar analysis to the thinking of New Zealand First. It outlined very much our thinking for over a decade now—that money launderers and terrorists and terrorist financiers having been using New Zealand lawyers accountants and real estate agents or shell companies and their trusts to circumvent our banking sector controls and thereby effectively use New Zealand to hide their money for subsequent illegal use.There have been good outcomes. This legislation is good. My analysis and the subsequent discussions with caucus have very much highlighted a positive piece of legislation that we do support. It will strengthen the anti - money-laundering countering financing of terrorism framework. It will ensure that New Zealand steps up in terms of its international obligations. There has been some discussion in the House—and there was discussion in the select committee—around the implementation time frame. At this stage it would be interesting to see what the Committee of the whole House brings—and the Minister mentioned a Supplementary Order Paper. But it will be interesting to see whether we settle on those implementation time frames because I have some sympathy with some of the industry players around their obligations for compliance.New Zealand First would support a discussion but at this stage the 12 months 18 months 2 years implementation for lawyers real estate agents and the Racing Board seems to be a fair mechanism for asking for compliance. New Zealand First does understand that there will be costs involved with that but we are talking about $1.6 billion worth of illegal money movement within this country and no one in this House tonight will—or will they ever—debate the fact that something strong needs to be done about that.With very limited time to go I do look forward to the Committee stage. There are some small minor changes that New Zealand First will recommend to the Committee. I do look forward to that debate. But absolutely we support this bill as written and support the Government despite the length of time it has taken to get to this point. New Zealand First will be supporting this bill to the House. Thank you."