Wong Pansy: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
Wong Pansy: New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6266] 
PANSY WONG (NZ National) 
: 
 I get a bit worried when the Hon Peter Dunne of United Future expresses his support for the bill when he thinks it is still known as the Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand Integration Bill. The new name is the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise Bill. I guess there is an impression that it is not simply an amalgamation of two organisations—Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand. The changed name suggests to the public that the combined organisation will do more in terms of promoting New Zealand trade and the enterprise culture. 
First of all I support the change from the original name Industry New Zealand. When Industry New Zealand was first set up I was on the Commerce Committee and when we conducted a financial review of that organisation it seemed to be simply full of consultants advisers and contractors. Indeed Industry New Zealand is creating employment but for its own organisation. It is not encouraging any additional employment out in the public. Everybody has heard about the Sovereign Yachts saga. 
I congratulate the Commerce Committee on deleting the name “Industry New Zealand” from this bill but I support my colleague the Hon Tony Ryall’s proposal that it be known as the “Investment New Zealand Bill”. New Zealand needs to be internationally competitive; we need other international investors to know New Zealand and have confidence in us. So I think that “Investment New Zealand” would be a very good name if indeed the intention of this bill is to make sure that New Zealand creates an internationally competitive and attractive investment climate. 
The National Party supports the intention of the bill to combine these two organisations. We believe it is a good beginning but a very small step. The fact that we still have 32 organisations trying to assist business is in itself a worry; it is confusing the various businesses as to which one they should seek assistance from. This bill is a good start but it is a very small step towards those 32 organisations coming together to pursue a single objective which is to make New Zealand an internationally attractive investment destination. 
The Commerce Committee changed the name to “New Zealand Trade and Enterprise” and during the Committee stage National wants to see that the bill’s intention is to encourage the enterprising spirit. I will examine that in detail throughout the Committee stage to make sure for example that the compliance burden will be lessened because the aim of the new organisation is to champion a competitive business environment. Many many times have we heard complaints about compliance costs and the fact that the Resource Management Act is a barrier to the ability of various business organisations to grow and thrive in New Zealand. 
I think this bill is a good move. The coming together of Industry New Zealand and Trade New Zealand is first step. I compliment the Commerce Committee on deleting the name “Industry New Zealand” from the title of the bill because in its short duration Industry New Zealand has done nothing but create employment for bureaucracy within its own organisation.