Foss Craig: Ethical Investment (Crown Financial Institutions) Bill — First Reading 
Foss Craig: Ethical Investment (Crown Financial Institutions) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13007] 
CRAIG FOSS (National—Tukituki) 
: 
 In talking to the Ethical Investment (Crown Financial Institutions) Bill I say that Mr Grant Robertson is written up quite well as a future leader. He is a nice man and he may well win an election one day sometime in the future but he has let himself down here. 
I pick up from the previous speaker’s points. Perhaps this bill is aimed at distancing Dr Cullen from Labour as it is now or from the superannuation fund that the previous Labour Government set up and the directives for responsible and ethical investment that it put in place because it is a bit of an insult to those institutions that are already practising and have written and adhered to all sorts of various directions in ethical and responsible investment policies. In fact the New Zealand Superannuation Fund is very proud of its ongoing work and the way it measures its investments and makes sure its investments are looked after. 
Sue Moroney 
: Introduced by Labour. 
CRAIG FOSS 
: Well Labour National whomever—the point is whether the legislation is necessary to replicate something that is already being done. The explanatory note of the bill lists the Government’s five major financial institutions. There is about $45 billion to $50 billion in them. 
I note a ministerial direction from the Hon Dr Cullen to the Earthquake Commission in 2001—and this is online; I would not try and table it. I am picking up on reputation issues as the previous speaker mentioned. Paragraph 4 of that ministerial direction states that the commission must avoid: “prejudice to New Zealand’s reputation as a responsible member of the world community.” The direction refers to best portfolio management and all the financial things but then point No. 4 in paragraph 7 talks about: “ethical investment for avoiding prejudice to New Zealand’s reputation as a responsible member of the world community;”. 
So is it working now or is it not? If those members want to talk about this bill being on the books for a while it implies the failure of organisations already. In an Accident Compensation Corporation document I have here I see a whole series on ethical investment. It talks about activities repugnant to the laws of New Zealand and about guiding principles of the— 
Grant Robertson 
: Support the bill then. 
CRAIG FOSS 
: I am not criticising the fact that it is already there; I am pointing out that it is there so the need for this bill is redundant. 
I see that the New Zealand Superannuation Fund is in the Responsible Investment Association Australasia; it is a founding member. The United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment the United Nations Global Compact and the Carbon Disclosure Project are mentioned on page 1. I have here a section on responsible investment from the group that looks after $16 billion-odd of our superannuation. The document goes on to define responsible investment. Further on it talks about responsible investment policy meetings obligations and responsible policies for responsible investment. There is a diagram showing that the fund must engage with those the fund invests in and with to make sure it adheres to responsible and ethical investment and low and behold here is the New Zealand Superannuation Fund’s responsible investment practice. There are about 15 pages on responsible investment right here in this document which is bigger than this entire bill’s 4 or 5 pages. 
This bill is a typical leftie bill. It sounds good and it sounds nice and it will get a bit of public relations coverage for sure but in a practical sense it is already being done. Some of it is work in progress but the five financial institutions that look after the Crown’s financial assets are adhering to responsible ethical progress and management. If it is already working why would a member want his first bill to be pulled out of the ballot to replicate what is already being done? Perhaps it is all about job creation in the Public Service but if we do that and follow this bill through then we would have to lay off people in these other four or five institutions in order to follow through on the ethical progress. Perhaps the member would like to close the loop for us. 
As I said this bill is quite typical of the left. It sounds nice and it is very cushy and fuzzy and comfy but at the end of the day this would cost New Zealand taxpayers. The costs would go up as we would have to take out something the previous Government had already put in place and replace it with this bill. I say to Mr Robertson that it is a nice try but he could do better next time. Thank you. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Before I call the next speaker I remind members that when we are debating a bill on a members’ day and there are 5-minute speeches the bell goes at 4 minutes with 1 minute to go.