SpeechRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): At a time when the economy is in serious trouble it is shameful that this legislation is being rushed through this House in urgency. While I've been waiting for a chance to have a speaking slot on this legislation I've picked up a press release from Stats NZ that's just come out. In April job losses amounted to 37500 people—37500 jobs were lost last month alone. That is the largest fall for a month that we've seen in this country in over 20 years. So what is the Government's response to that statistic? To put in some legislation that's going to make it harder and harder for struggling businesses to survive.We have all been back in our electorates up and down the main streets—Hastings as Lawrence Yule mentioned Westport Greymouth Wānaka and Queenstown. We know that businesses are struggling and some of their only hope is to sell or perhaps to go into a partnership and that partner may be an overseas investor. But this Government is xenophobic. It hates foreign direct investment. I'd expect it from the Greens; they've argued against foreign direct investment for ever. I'd expect it from New Zealand First; Winston Peters campaigned only two or three years ago to stop a failing meat company from surviving. Silver Fern Farms was in trouble. Mark Patterson went up and down the country saying Don't let foreigners invest in that company." He was unsuccessful. Silver Fern Farms did get foreign investment and now we have two very strong South Island - based meat companies where we would have had only one.So I don't expect New Zealand First to ever change its xenophobic nature. But the Labour Party used to be a respected political party and on issues of free trade and foreign direct investment that party had principles. But as we approach the election that party—the Labour Party—has sold its principles down the drain to support New Zealand First. And what we're seeing is this legislation being rushed through in urgency simply as a means of stopping distressed businesses from having a chance of surviving. That's the effect of this legislation and the process around foreign direct investment from the very day this Government was formed has been nothing but shambolic.I recall the first Overseas Investment Amendment Bill—the one whereby they were going to stop apartments being bought in Auckland. Suddenly at the very last minute after the select committee process there was an amendment moved and we were going to allow free sales to the Chinese. Most of these apartments were being built by Conrad Properties and then subsequently we found that Conrad Properties had given thousands of dollars to New Zealand First. I'm not going to draw any link but I leave it for other members to think about. Then in that same piece of legislation suddenly the New Zealand First members realised they were making it harder to reach the target of a billion pine trees being planted. So what they did was without any logic at all they changed that legislation and said "If a sheep and beef farm is up for sale and an overseas buyer wants to buy it to keep it in sheep and beef production we'll stop it. But if a sheep and beef farm is up for sale and the overseas investor wants to put it into trees we're going to make it easier. They can buy a thousand hectares without going through Overseas Investment Office approval." There isn't much logic.Then the Government introduces a second bill the No. 2 bill which they've done no work on at all. And they bring this bill in the Overseas Investment (Urgent Measures) Amendment Bill take it to the select committee and as the select committee does work on it the officials say to us "We know we haven't got it all right but we're going to have a third piece of legislation—the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill (No 3)—and we'll fix up mistakes in this one in the third bill. Don't worry." That's how much logic has gone in to satisfy the xenophobia of the New Zealand First Party.I want to give the example of that struggling motelier in Greymouth—maybe 20 units really up against the wall. The bank says "I'm not lending you any more money." If the bank was to lend any more money it's actually foreign direct investment because the bank is likely to be an Australian-owned bank. But that doesn't figure on Mark Patterson's radar. He hasn't quite got through to that yet. The chance for that motelier to survive is perhaps a partnership with an overseas investor. That now is a relatively small investment. It's not a strategic asset. Maybe the motel of 20 units in the main street of Greymouth according to Mark Patterson is a strategic asset. Let him take a call and tell us whether it is. I don't think it is. I'd rather see that guy recapitalise one way or the other with a partner. If the partner lives in another country let him come in. But no this bill means even that investment has to go before the Overseas Investment Office and if they want to have any concerns about it it gets advanced upstairs to probably the 6th or 7th floor of the Beehive to one Hon David Parker. The sole decision-maker as to whether that investment can take place is a Minister called David Parker. It's just wrong Mr Patterson and you know it.Now I'm not arguing there should be no foreign direct investment regime at all but there's a good one that exists in the legislation now and it's worked for a long long time in this country whereby we have a national benefit test. So if there's to be an investment and it reaches a threshold of $100 million it goes before the Overseas Investment Office and they consider whether that investment brings national benefit to New Zealand. If it doesn't don't let it take place Mr Patterson but that's the law that exists before you put this rubbish into Parliament under urgency. So there's plenty of protection for that.Now the reason the Government members say we're doing it is because the world's been hit with a health pandemic COVID-19 and therefore there could be a prying nation out there travelling the world looking for strategic assets that they can snap up at bargain prices. Mr Patterson the motelier in Greymouth is not a strategic asset and I doubt whether some Chinese statesperson has rushed over here—if he can get into the country—and is running down the main street of Greymouth looking at that investment as a strategic asset. It is just not logical. If you'd left the threshold where it was at $100 million—I'll ask the member a question: tell me what strategic asset in New Zealand we should worry about that you're likely to buy for less than $100 million.Mark Patterson: What about Tīwai Point David?Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: He says—which one?Mark Patterson: They're sitting on a $250 million liability.Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: The member says Tīwai. If the purchaser can buy it for less than $100 million put in some legislation and drop the threshold to $20 million if you want to. But don't get it to the stage where the motelier in Greymouth has to come over the Hon David Parker's desk. That's where it's wrong.This legislation driven by the Labour Party is a sop to New Zealand First who for 25 years have stood proudly against foreign direct investment in this country. They failed to understand the basic economics that if you get businesses you get jobs and it's little wonder to me that on the day they're rushing this legislation through Parliament we have record unemployment—we have 37500 New Zealanders who have lost their jobs in April."