Jones Dail: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Dail: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21587] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 Having been drawn into the debate I could not resist a call and if I have a smile on my face it is because really the National Party just cannot understand what happens when people invest $50 or $100 million in New Zealand as the previous National speaker mentioned this afternoon. They invest that much money in New Zealand to take control of companies for the benefit of their overseas shareholders. They may export goods but they also export the profits. The profits do not stay in New Zealand. The profits go overseas. [ 
Interruption 
] Mr Carter and Mr Connell can laugh. Overseas shareholders want their money sent to them overseas. It is elementary. It is as simple as that but the National Party just cannot understand that situation at all. 
The National Party says “What about investment in New Zealand?”. New Zealand First supports New Zealanders investing in New Zealand products. The way we say that should be done of course is through the New Zealand Superannuation Fund—something the National Party opposed constantly and vigorously until it did one of its flip-flops and now supports it. But if we want New Zealanders to invest they have to save and one of the ways in which they save is through the superannuation fund. That is how one gets New Zealand investment in New Zealand businesses and how the profits are kept in New Zealand. What is bleeding New Zealand to death and will bleed New Zealand to death is that if the world economy changes all the money goes overseas in profits and does not stay here. We have seen it before in New Zealand on many many occasions in New Zealand’s fiscal history but the National Party just cannot see it at all. 
What we have here tonight is a clear example of the two old parties as Mr Prebble was saying searching for a coalition partner. When one thinks about it one realises that Labour’s best coalition partner on tonight’s performance is the National Party. I do not know why the commentators have not woken up to that. Mr Connell talked about the market reforms of the 1980s and the 1990s with the greatest enthusiasm. Those were the Labour reforms of the 1980s and the National reforms of the 1990s and now he wants to get in bed with the Labour Party. The polls show—and that is what he was looking at—that that is the only way the two of them can get into Government. One has to add up the two parties’ totals. If one adds either of them to any one total of the other parties neither of them can do it. Members know how much the Labour Party loves power and how much the National Party loves power and boy they will do just about anything to share that power or to have that power. 
Some of the commentators should look more closely at what is happening in this House especially on bills like this when members of each party talk about how successful the reforms of the 1980s and the 1990s were. Those parties are positioning themselves as they look at the way in which the leadership poll results change. Some people go up all the time and some people come down all the time. It is interesting to see how the National Party and the Labour Party are positioning themselves for a situation that might arise after the election. It is so important for the people of New Zealand to realise that if those two parties got together again as they did with the 1980s and 1990s reforms New Zealand will be in trouble. As I said the only way that can be prevented is by New Zealand First being two or three times stronger in this House after the next election. We were founded on the mistakes of the National Party and the Labour Party in the 1980s and the 1990s and I think that Mr Connell has given away the game tonight.