Ryall Tony: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Ryall Tony: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6282] 
Hon TONY RYALL (NZ National—Bay of Plenty) 
: I also want to compliment your chairmanship of this Committee and the very extraordinary way you sensed that the Opposition had moved a number of very sensible amendments to this part. It was appropriate that we had another call. I have moved a significant number of amendments to Part 1 of this bill and I will require my colleagues to take a call in order to explain some of those amendments. Just to refresh members’ memory of where we are at this is a bill that seeks to amalgamate the Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand business support functions. The Opposition has made a very coherent point that there are at least 32 different grants and funding organisations that provide support for business incentives in New Zealand. It is our view that those authorities and agencies should also be incorporated in this bill. We believe there would be significant savings to taxpayers. Members will be surprised to know that it totals about $800 million worth of various funds and support available for business and commercial development in New Zealand. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Does that include Te Mangai Paho? 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: That does not include Te Mangai Paho. So it might be $900 million of support—it is probably more now because this figure of $800 million is 2 years old—that is available through either the science or commercial incentives that this Government offers. The point we are making is that all of those supports should be available through a one-stop shop. Mr Carter makes a good point. That money should be in the pockets of taxpaying New Zealanders who are probably best able to do something about it. We believe that lower taxes and less regulation are the things that will encourage business in New Zealand. 
 The National Party is the one party that has done something about that when we were the Government. We brought in lower taxes for working New Zealanders and less regulation. But this bill does nothing about those two matters. So we have proposed a number of amendments—first of all to the purpose clause. We want to make it quite clear that this bill is the first step in a plan that a National Government in power would have—that is to incorporate a number of other funding agencies within an authority called “Investment New Zealand”. We want to make sure this bill provides for those other agencies to be put into the legislation. 
We are also concerned that some of the corporate disciplines that private enterprise benefits from and which private enterprise people would bring to an organisation as proposed by the Government are weakened by parts of this bill—particularly Part 1. The use of the word “member” lessens the commercial imperatives on those who are on the governing body of this new authority. They are “directors” and they must be in no doubt that there are requirements on them consistent with those they would have under the Companies Act. Although it might be a subtle change it is important to send those who are controlling Industry New Zealand a very clear message that they are to behave in a commercial way. We also want to make sure that the opportunities for intervention by Ministers are minimised and we have moved a number of amendments. The very point we on this side of the Chamber are making is: why stop with only these two agencies? 
Hon David Carter 
: Yes. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: As Mr David Carter mentioned there is $130 million worth of grants and $45 million worth of administrative overheads. It does not take a lot of brainpower to realise that if one could spread that administrative burden over a different level of granting structure or change the structure in order to reduce the administrative overhead one would get a lot more money which could be used for either returning to taxpayers through lower taxes or through better-targeted company support. 
John Carter 
: That’s the point. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: That is the point we have been making. There is a multiplicity of agencies. I quoted in my first call the experience of a major business leader in New Zealand who talked about the sheer duplication at present. He sometimes has representatives from at least five or six Government agencies knocking on his door offering to give him money. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: No to give him his own money back. 
Hon TONY RYALL 
: To give him his own money back—basically to give him the money of hard-working diligent New Zealanders. We say that that is not efficient.