Hudson Brett: Overseas Investment (Protection of New Zealand Homebuyers) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Overseas Investment (Protection of New Zealand Homebuyers) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 25 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11320. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): I rise in opposition to this Overseas Investment (Protection of New Zealand Homebuyers) Amendment Bill. As my colleague Mr Yang has pointed out this is a cynical bill from the Opposition member seeking to perpetuate his fundamental approach as was evidenced just a few months ago that he believes that public policy in New Zealand should be driven by the sound of people’s surnames. It is an absolute disgrace for New Zealand. It is certainly a disgrace for the history of the party that he is a member of.But I would like to set that aside. He made a lot in his contribution this evening about his measure being all about stopping foreign speculators from distorting the New Zealand market but then he refuses to accept—perhaps because it is an inconvenient truth—the reality of the data that illustrates that non - tax-paying resident foreigners were not a major purchasing driver of homes in New Zealand and particularly in Aucklandin the last 6 months. You see what that data shows us is very clear. Mr Twyford points out a very large amount that is—[Interruption] Why? Because it is not speculation; it is primary residences. And who is the largest group? Tax residents—tax residents.So the member now has an issue with people paying tax in New Zealand to fund our infrastructure to fund our schools to fund our roads to fund our essential services—they should not be allowed houses as primary residences. When you look at that data if the member was following his own contribution the area of concern for him and which his bill should address is that of non - tax-paying residents—people who are not contributing to the infrastructure and public services of this country non - tax-paying residents buying a second property third property or more.The data on that is absolutely crystal clear: that across New Zealand non - tax-paying residents making investment property decisions make up less than 3 percent. In Auckland where the member would have us believe it is something like 40 percent or more it is actually 4 percent.Phil Twyford: Why did you exclude company trusts?BRETT HUDSON: I will tell the member what was excluded—primary residences and tax residents. Why? Because we value people paying tax in New Zealand and funding our infrastructure and funding our public services.Phil Twyford: Why did you exclude overseas companies and trusts?BRETT HUDSON: If people who are contributing to New Zealand in taxation Mr Twyford wish to buy a property here that is perfectly fine. Instead what we have is as Mr Yang has pointed out a mere continuation of an anti-foreigner approach trying to frame a small group as responsible for the ills of the country—so much so that he would have under his approach to public policy Ms Lee unable to buy a house because of course she is Chinese. She tells me she is from the province of China called South Korea—they do not like being referred to as Chinese.The public could be excused for actually wondering with a bill such as this which is targeting a group that the data shows is not actually a distorting factor and that is a continuation of informing public policy by the sound of a surname whether perhaps Mr Twyford is making a play for the leadership of the New Zealand First Party. It certainly is not the sort of thinking that should inform good public policy in this country. It is not the sort of thinking that should inform a good member’s bill. All he would really do if we were to permit this to pass is address a tiny tiny percentage of the current property purchases.We are a Government that welcomes migrants and welcomes foreign investment. People are going to come and form company structures. If they are going to undertake taxable activity in New Zealand—whether they are paying PAYE or whether they are coming here with foreign direct investment helping to fuel growth in New Zealand—if they are going to pay tax in New Zealand and if they are resident here for taxation purposes they are paying for the essential infrastructure and services that benefit all New Zealanders and we do not mind where their country of origin is.In fact New Zealand is a far better place for the diversity that has grown in this country over the decades and it is so obvious today in any major metropolitan centre. That is the sort of thing that we on this side applaud and welcome. We do not believe that we should be setting public policy on the basis that we do not like someone’s surname. We do not believe we should be a New Zealand that is trying to exclude people and exclude diversity. We oppose this bill and we call on all parties to oppose it.