SpeechSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you very much Mr Speaker. I'm going to cut to the chase: National will support this bill though we're slightly confused—and this is not throwing stones at the Minister. We're sort of slightly confused by when in many ways going through quite a fulsome process that may have been able to be sorted through a statutes amendment bill or somewhat but we can raise that in select committee and that's again not throwing stones. I think this is a good bill; it's certainly a necessary bill. So I just want to reiterate again National's support. It's a very small bill that takes up four pages in total particularly if you include the schedule and with no offence to the Parliamentary Counsel Office had they formatted it slightly differently it would only be two pages of actually substantial legislation. So there's not a lot in it. But you know we're in Opposition and therefore I'm going to see how long I can talk on this which is me attempting to be generous to the other side of the House.Hon Aupito William Sio: Come on!SIMON O'CONNOR: Look it's a bill that's come about—and William Sio is optimistic I'd run out then but no sorry I have not. This is a situation where law changes have had unintended unexpected and certainly unanticipated consequences. As the Minister who's sponsoring this bill—Hon Nanaia Mahuta who has just resumed her chair—has pointed out there's something called the Public Finance Act of 1989 which sets out strangely enough the use of public finances and in particular what the Crown can and cannot do. There were changes in 2013. I was in Parliament at the time but well I'm a straight-up honest man; I can't remember anything about it. But clearly—clearly—it made changes which had flow-on effects. So I'm trying to introduce some humour into basically—and a very bad attempt. But in 2013 there were some legal changes to that Act which have then had flow-on effects into the space of consular loans. So for those at home or anyone in the House who is still listening it's always been the practice that New Zealanders be you a citizen or a permanent resident—or it should be added another person who is attempting to assist a permanent resident or a citizen—our consulates our embassies are able to provide loans. Really important to stress that word. It is a loan; they are not gifts. I think it will actually be interesting for the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to inquire more out of curiosity how large these loans can be on what terms they are given and to be honest it would be interesting to know what does or doesn't happen if they are not paid back. But in practice these loans have been given out.But it was in 2020 that officials—and it will have been I strongly suspect because of the COVID dynamics and people desperate to get home finding it very very difficult and certainly expensive—realised that actually these consular loans being given out were being done illegally. So this piece of legislation is in effect doing two things: one making it legal once this gets Royal assent to give out loans and unusually for parliamentary practice it also looks backwards and so it's going to validate loans that have been given out since 2013 as I say. That retrospective legislation as you know is relatively rare. I think all of us—well most of us; I can't speak for the Green Party—don't like to see retrospectivity but I think in this case it makes a lot of sense.For the legal beagles—the likes of Christopher Penk and others—I'm sure they have read the Public Finance Act 1989. I did take the time to do so. Every good MP has done so; I haven't. You can read into that what you want but no section 65K is what's effectively the offending part which has caused a lot of these problems—again not intended. Section 65K says the Crown must not lend money except under statute. Except as expressly authorised by any Act the Crown must not lend money to a person or an organisation. As people will know in the House we pass legislation all the time to authorise the Crown to be able to spend loan give money so social welfare health defence—you name it. Obviously what powers are given to the Minister of Finance to borrow you know like billions of dollars a day—that's all explicitly done in statute. So where we've ended up with these consular loans it was not explicitly written into legislation and therefore the Crown ipso facto has not been allowed to do such loaning. So this is a good bill. It's going to ultimately allow the Public Finance Act of 1989 in area 65K to be honoured correctly and again to make it expressly authorised via this Foreign Affairs (Consular Loans) Amendment Bill to make it very very clear that the Crown can lend money in these circumstances and once again introducing a retrospectivity to ensure that those loans done in the past are legal. So to begin finishing up there—I mean I've noticed I've only spent sort of five minutes; I could start the speech again. But no in all seriousness thanks to the officials—obviously the likes of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade I assume—who had detected this and have brought it to the Minister's attention to acknowledge the Minister as she's going to shepherd this through the Parliament. As I indicated right at the start the National Party all humour aside—well attempt at humour—is going to be supportive of this. We look forward to it coming to the select committee and as I say it's only a small curio or a curiosity. It would be interesting in the initial briefing to get some sort of sense of these consular loans how often they are given what sort of amounts are given out and as I say how quickly they are repaid or otherwise. I just again want to stress that particularly to the Minister or her officials listening that's not to block the bill or anything. It's just I have to say a curiosity from this member at least. So it gives me great pleasure—seven minutes in; now I feel OK with the whips. And William Sio's laughing; all is well in the world. I commend it to the House.