Williams Andrew: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11437. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First):I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First on the Companies and Limited Partnerships Amendment Bill. Can I say that we are disappointed that the first reading of this bill was on 24 July 2012 and that we are now in July 2013 with this debate being done under urgency. One would wonder why it has taken 12 months for the bill to be back in the House when 12 months ago—and I am readingHansard from 12 months ago here—all parties were basically in agreement with the bill and saw this as being a requirement that should not be held up by the Parliament.The whole process including the select committee process has been very slow. That is somewhat disappointing because we also heard a year ago that as a result of New Zealand not taking action in these areas we had been dropped off the European Union white list. The white list is a list the European Union keeps basically to ensure that those countries on it keep up a certain level of corporate governance oversight. New Zealand was dropped off that white list.We were warned a year ago that this bill had already taken 2 years from first sight in Cabinet to come to the House. As a result that did affect our standing with the European Union. It is most disappointing that now 12 months on we are looking at the second reading and we still have some way to go. In actual fact the only good thing out of this would be to get the bill through in its entirety so that corporates operating in this country and also international corporates operating here are under stricter controls.We do note that the bill as reported from the Commerce Committee includes the recommendation to drop the requirement for a company to have a resident agent living in New Zealand although a director resident in New Zealand is required. We do wonder whether that is the right way to go. We feel that it still leaves loopholes and avenues for certain operators to perhaps flout the law. However certainly the requirement for a company to have a director resident in New Zealand does go some way in that regard.There have been activities with window companies and shell companies operating here and certainly as a result of that New Zealand has perhaps been taken for a bit of a ride on occasions and that has affected our integrity in terms of the way we operate here. We certainly do not want to be seen as some sort of cowboy market for unscrupulous operators from offshore.The bill gives the ability for the public to be warned about suspect entities by way of a note in the Companies Register. That again is a good thing. The public can be warned about anything that is perhaps of concern and a red flag can be raised in terms of some of the activities of an entity that might be operating here. In that regard in terms of criminalisation for breaches of certain directors’ duties this bill allows for imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or a fine not exceeding $200000. Thatsends the right message that if you are going to operate within this country you could face a significant term of imprisonment if you break the laws in this regard.This bill basically tidies up a lot of administrative errors in terms of some of the commerce matters under the Limited Partnerships Act and other similar Acts to do with commerce and commercial acts. It is a positive move. New Zealand First has said before that we will support good policy that helps to tighten up the laws in this country. We have always been the vanguard and the champion of good legislation that ensures that New Zealand operates at the highest level in terms of corporate integrity and that our Companies Act is at the highest level of company standards.New Zealand has a good reputation in terms of corruption. I think we are something like No. 2 after Finland in terms of a world ranking for perceived corruption in terms of both government and companies. It is a good thing that we keep that standard. We want to maintain the highest level. This bill certainly goes a long way to tidying up many areas and tightening up a lot of the loopholes. Therefore New Zealand First will certainly continue to support the bill as we did 12 months ago but again we urge the Government not to just sit on its hands with this for another 6 to 12 months. Every month that goes by—and the Minister would take cognisance of this—leaves a potential loophole for unscrupulous activities to take place in this country. The sooner we can close those loopholes the better and the safer it is for our country our sovereignty and the people of this country.