Hughes GarethGARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora Madam Deputy Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. Look if you needed a reason to vote against the legislation using simple common sense and logic you would just simply listen to that member—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Actually I wouldn't do that. Don't bring me into the debate.GARETH HUGHES: —to the member Brett Hudson—because he raised this conspiracy theory that people are going around Fieldays taking photographs. It absolutely undermines his argument because the whole point of this legislation is doing something which back in the 1970s used to be called petty patents. It's the idea of a lower-level patent to make it easier.Essentially what this member's bill does is reduce it from the current inventive" level down to the "advancement" level. So those people supposedly out there taking photographs trying to steal people's intellectual property—it's exponentially easier to steal that intellectual property under this member's bill because previously there used to be an "inventive" step; now there's simply an "advancement" step. All you have to do is take a photograph copy it and do a little tiny change to it so it fundamentally erodes their argument.I heard the previous National speaker Andrew Bayly say the problem with patents is the cost and the problem with patents is the time it takes. That is the whole point of patents. You've got to do something novel. You've got to do something inventive. And you've got to be able to put your money where your mouth is to protect it. What that party wants to do is weaken it so far that you'd make an absolute mockery of the patent system because the Opposition—I keep saying "the Government"; the Opposition—say they want to support small business but in fact this legislation is bad for New Zealand business because what we know and what we've heard from New Zealand businesses is that this is simply going to encourage patent trolls. It's simply going to encourage people going to court instead of going to the lab and inventing new products.We've heard from New Zealand businesses that the biggest problem they face is from patent trolls and this proposal opens up the door to patent trolls to come and mess around with our intellectual property regime in New Zealand. Their arguments are further eroded by the simple fact that they had the chance to fundamentally review our 1950s patent legislation and they didn't do it. It was amended only five years ago and they didn't do it.So look I'd like to acknowledge the member Parmjeet Parmar. I believe her intentions are good. I think everyone in this House wants to see New Zealand become a more innovative economy. It's been called the "New Zealand Paradox" in the economic literature: why ostensibly despite our economic settings we've got such low productivity and earnings. And the problem of course is that we're in the bottom half of the developed world for our spending as a percentage of GDP on R & D. We patent four times less than equivalent overseas countries.And I guess the last reason that I want to say is that the Opposition's arguments are the reasons why we're voting against it. They said "Oh there's dozens of countries voting for this." They didn't name them though did they? The countries doing it are all mostly developing economies in a fundamentally different innovation and intellectual property regime from us. The US doesn't do it. The UK doesn't do it. The European Union doesn't do it. I mean Belgium and the Netherlands are moving away from it. Australia is moving away from it. I mean if I can quote the Australian Productivity Commission they said categorically that the second-tier patent experiment has failed. The low innovative threshold has proven more harmful than helpful including perversely for small and medium enterprises. It's encouraged a multitude of low-value patents and has created uncertainty for other innovators who I'm sure would be infringing for another party's patent.So what we've heard is that it didn't work it was a failure it was bad for businesses and it provided uncertainty. Those aren't the things we're going to do to provide a more innovative smarter New Zealand. So look I'm proud to be opposing this legislation. [Interruption] I support having a review—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Come on guys.GARETH HUGHES: —of our intellectual property regime. Look the Government's got a fundamental review of our copyright legislation. This is how we can really promote those creative industries going forward. I know the member's got the right intentions with this legislation. I think we should review the 2013 patent review to make sure it is working but look let's not do as one commentator said "an absolutely horror show of legislation." That's why we're voting against it tonight.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can I just say to the member who has been interjecting quite often: she does get the last say of this debate.Hon Kris Faafoi: No we do!DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. That's not particularly helpful."