Faafoi KrisKRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): New Part 5 of this bill is a fascinating part and I want to concentrate on clause 15. But before I do that I would like to just pay tribute that we are into the 13th hour of this debate and it feels a little Telethon-like because when you are doing something for the benefit of the whole country it feels like fun and I think at the end of the day everyone will benefit especially if Part 5 becomes part of this legislation.Part 5 clause 15 looks to insert new sections 17A and 17B into the Overseas Investment Act. Section 17 in the said Act is titled Factors for assessing benefit of overseas investments in sensitive land". There is in clause 17A which we would like to insert into that Act some criteria for approval of overseas investments in residential property. I do not want to dwell too long on clause 17A but I think it is relevant for me to pass through them quickly just so people get a flavour of what kinds of criteria there will be.Clause 17A(1)(a) is a good character test. Clause 17A(1)(b) is essentially an immigration test to make sure that the people who could potentially invest in residential property would meet Immigration Act criteria. But the interesting thing with clause 17A(1)(c)(iii) is that "the overseas investment will or is likely to increase the supply of housing in New Zealand as determined by the relevant Minister under section 17B." Before I get to section 17B I do want to point out what that says: "increase the supply of housing in New Zealand".Pointing to some of the concerns of the Hon Michael Woodhouse around the relevance of Part 5 to this piece of legislation I think it is quite simple to say that if you are increasing the stock of housing in New Zealand if you are an overseas investor and you are looking after that in a systemic way then you are helping housing affordability. So that is why I think section 17B is quite fascinating and should be something that any Government that wanted to have a comprehensive housing plan should have in place because 17B does again set out criteria for overseas investors in residential supply in terms of increasing the housing supply.One of those criteria for investment in clause 17B(2)(a)(i) is that "the overseas investment is in vacant land and the relevant overseas [person] is committed to building premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence:". In plain English that is an empty plot of land on which that person who is investing in that from overseas is going to build houses for people to live in whether it be themselves or someone else or both of those that would increase the housing stock here in New Zealand which would be a good thing for housing affordability. If the Hon Michael Woodhouse cannot see the sense of that—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! There was a point of order on which there was a considered ruling and the member—I should have pulled him up earlier—cannot go back to relitigating that area.KRIS FAAFOI: Thank you. But if the Government cannot see how that would be good for increasing the supply of housing for housing affordability then I think it may need to rethink its plan.The second one in clause 17B(2)(a)(ii) is that the overseas investment is in premises already existing and "[the relevant overseas person] is committed to redeveloping that site to contain a greater number of places of residence:". Again in English that might be that someone might buy a property that is a singular house they may invest in that and they may turn that into five or six flats or subdivide that area and build more houses therefore increasing the supply of housing which again is good for housing affordability.The third criteria under clause 17B(2)(a)(iii) is that the overseas investor is investing in "existing premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence that is not currently suitable for habitation and the relevant overseas person is committed to redeveloping that site to make it fit for habitation;"."