Ross Jami-LeeJAMI-LEE ROSS (Botany): Madam Speaker thank you very much. I noticed in Minister Little's commentary earlier today that he said there is going to be further policy work on foreign influence in elections and other policy options being put forward. So in that context I wish to say to the Government: congratulations on making a step towards amending our rules around foreign interference. I say a step" because it's actually only a small step—and one that I hope is built on in the future—but it is fair to say that this foreign donation ban isn't really a ban on foreign donations. It's simply a moving of the threshold where it was previously set at a $1500 restriction on foreign persons making donations and moving that down to $50. That is a good move in the right direction but it does not effectively ban foreign influence in our elections. I hope that the Minister's policy work is very thorough and I hope that the Minister's policy work comes up with a wide range of options to effectively ban foreign donations. I've heard a lot of commentary from other speakers in this House when they've talked about foreign influence in elections and foreign donations and asked why hasn't the Government put up a ban on corporations being able to make donations and why is that loophole still there. Most of those comments I've heard have come from my old friends in the National Party. I also found it interesting when my old friends in the National Party said the Green Party had the majority of foreign donations—"We didn't have any foreign donations." I have to say that the best example of a foreign donation that influenced a political party and a Minister of the Crown at the last election was the $150000 that came from Inner Mongolia. Members on that side will say "No that wasn't a foreign donation. It was done within the law." Yes but our law is wrong. Our law is wrong because our law currently—and will still do so after this bill is passed—allows for a Minister of the Crown to fly to China to meet an individual who then comes to New Zealand. That individual then says to the person—who's apparently in their capacity as a member of Parliament not as a Minister—who happens to also be the trade Minister "I want to make a big donation to a political party." That person then comes and sees another MP who is not Official Information Act request - able and asks that MP to contact the donor's agent. That MP—it happened to be me—contacted that donor's agent. That donor then decided that they would make a $150000 donation. That donation legally came from a New Zealand - registered company. That company is 100 percent - owned by a Chinese foreign national in Inner Mongolia. If that is not a foreign donation in the eyes of right-thinking people in "Public Land" then I don't know what is. Yes political parties you might be able to say "We haven't received foreign donations that are unlawful above the $1500." because a company making a donation is seen as a New Zealand person. But if we have companies in this country that are owned entirely offshore that are putting $150000 into the bank account of a New Zealand political party after meeting the Minister who's in charge of the policy area that the owner of that company is interested in that is foreign influence in our democracy and that is something that the policy that has been put forward in this bill does nothing to achieve. Chris Penk: You did it. JAMI-LEE ROSS: I did it says Mr Penk—I did it says Mr Penk. Yes I contacted the donor's New Zealand agent and translated for them the New Zealand donation laws. I have emails on that. I'll show it to you if you want Mr Penk. I'll show it to you at the next select committee when you guys are slowing things down. The fact of the matter is it is lawful for a Chinese national to own a company in New Zealand and make a $150000 donation. It is wrong. It needs to be changed. The only effective way to ban foreign influence in our elections is to restrict who can make a donation to New Zealanders who are entitled to vote. I say quite clearly—and I don't think it's controversial—if you're not entitled to influence an election by voting you should not be entitled to influence an election by donating. If a New Zealand company owned by a Chinese national cannot vote in an election they should not be able to make $150000 donations. This purity that we hear from other side about "The Government hasn't put up a ban on companies."—I suggest they put up a Supplementary Order Paper but they won't because drinking from the tap of foreign money is so beneficial when it comes to New Zealand - registered companies. It is an effective way for New Zealand parties to receive foreign money legally but it is wrong and it needs to be outlawed and I really hope this Government does something about it."