Jones Shane: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Jones Shane: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 04 April 2012. Volume:679;Page:1659. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora ano tatou. Mr Speaker tena koe. Today we have focused on the unhealthy relationships between key members and leaders of the Government and sectors in the community and I want to talk about the Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill as a consequence of not having had the opportunity in the last few days. However it does pertain to New Zealand’s largest exporter. There are two tensions in this proposal. No. 1 is whether or not competitiveness will continue to exist and No. 2 is whether or not this is serving up to the corporate barons of New Zealand’s corporate world a new opportunity to further colonise the most important and most successful institution driving exports out of New Zealand.  
We should claim credit as my colleague David Parker articulated because after all it was the Helen Clark Government that took the brave step to actually create this monolith but also provide opportunities for competition. But what we fear is that you do not need to go more than half a dozen figuratively speaking paragraphs into the commentary before finding the guts of the bill where it says that this is a contribution to the New Zealand capital markets. This is the day that that party is rewarding the big end of town. Do not for a moment doubt that once this legislation finds feet and takes root in the legislative landscape of New Zealand—and we will continue to oppose it unless there are suitable safeguards and thresholds put into it—farmers will rue the day that they surrendered the opportunity to John Key Mark Weldon Henry van der Heyden and a host of other shadowy characters for the actual unravelling of Fonterra. This is where such debates should be held: the highest court in the land. When the large end of town openly boasts that it is a short step before the Fonterra shares are openly traded on the New Zealand sharemarket—openly boasting—then you know that it is one-way traffic. The deep Taiwanese pockets and the deep pockets of a host of other investors from overseas will flock like bees to the honey hive.  
Is that good or bad? Does it mean that we should put up a barricade and stop all international capital flowing to our country? It is too late for that. We are aware of that happening every day as a consequence of the loss of our banking sector to Australasia. But some things are worth fighting for. It is worth fighting to ensure that this key institution remains an indelible and ineradicable feature of New Zealand’s economic sovereignty. This is not just about land. This is about the creation of a new platform a new derivatives unit—derivatives trading which is what I am calling it. This will represent up to 40 percent of the value of Fonterra shares inevitably being traded. Fonterra shareholders Kiwis will never match the spending power of international competitors. That is a fact of life. So there has to be a host of strengthening mechanisms a host of safeguards to ensure that this key institution does not disappear.  
Why is the Government pitting its two constituencies against each other? At one level the farmers seem to believe that this is a new opportunity for them to grow brands internationally without realising that the place where the money is going to come from is corporate raiders knocking at the door. Secondly the farmers are slowly working out—a number who have been to see us anyhow—that this could be bad for the long-term prospects of the ability of farmers to control this particular institution which was finally legislated into existence through the Helen Clark Government. But on the other side are the corporate very powerful highly organised forces that actually are now preparing to operate in such a fashion that it is against the farmers’ interests. So I predict that over the next couple of years indeed over the next couple of months you are going to see the tension between those who can now see that this represents potentially the diminution of farmer control over this institution and others now that they are able to feast upon the carrion of State-owned enterprises that are soon to be hocked off. Up to 49 percent is to be sold apparently to strengthen the capital markets and it is an indictment that we have to sell our own assets in order to resuscitate the capital markets. Secondly our largest most successful exporter over time will be gobbled up where control moves away from New Zealand. Some things are worth fighting for. Why not fight for something akin to the Temasek Holdings model whereby the Singaporeans value their own economic sovereignty? It is a shame that this Government is asleep at the wheel on that issue.