Carter DavidRt Hon DAVID CARTER (National): Madam Deputy Speaker I'm sure you'll agree with me that it's disappointing when you get some symbolic legislation like this and a Minister of the Crown comes before this House to take the second speech by the Government and reads notes from the research unit. This is symbolic legislation. It's very symbolic for the Hon David Parker who from the time he entered this Parliament has shown a distaste for foreigners—Darroch Ball: Oh come on.Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: —a huge dislike of foreign investment and an absolute dislike for any successful business person who he terms wealthy.It is symbolic legislation for another reason. It is actually a piece of legislation that Labour New Zealand First and the Greens campaigned on and now they're in this House delivering it. They campaigned from the start to outlaw foreign investment. They failed to look at the history of this country over the last 200 years as to what's made it such a successful country as it is today. I note that Kieran McAnulty is at least listening without interjecting on this occasion not like his fellow parliamentary colleague the lightweight Darroch Ball.New Zealand First has opposed foreign investment from the time I first became familiar with the Rt Hon Winston Peters with the exception I might point out of the current owner of Bowen House. For some reason that I don't understand he's completely supportive of the foreign ownership of Bowen House but for any other foreign investor he rails against it. I give it to the Greens: economically naive that they are from the moment they arrived in this House they've opposed foreign investment. So I say to the voters this is what you get when you vote for a Government that opposes foreign investment and you will see the ramifications over the next 2½ years for this legislation. It was well signalled; it's now being delivered.I remind all members of this House of the dreadful attack by the Hon Phil Twyford on New Zealanders some of them three- and four-generation New Zealanders who happened to have a Chinese-sounding name—and Darroch Ball laughs. He thinks it was funny. Well he may not know many of these New Zealanders three- and four-generation New Zealanders who are totally—totally—offended to be accused of being a foreigner simply because they have a Chinese-sounding name.I remember also Mr Twyford and fellow members of the then Labour Opposition claiming time and time again that the reason for high residential prices particularly in Auckland was because 30 percent of them were being bought by foreigners. Quotable Value has released the data consistently. It was never 30 percent—never 30 percent—consistently 3 percent. Yet Kieran McAnulty thinks that 3 percent investment by foreigners into a residential market is enough to trend the market and significantly turn it up. He nods his head at that. That's the economic genius that we have on the other side of the House. Three percent doesn't significantly lift the price of housing.But what I say to that Labour Government particularly is the reason the Hon David Parker said he's introducing this legislation—and he repeated this time and time again through the committee stage of the House—is he wants to see the price of housing come down. I asked the Hon David Parker: by how much? He refused to answer. So I say to the Hon David Parker have a look at what's happening in Sydney and in Melbourne now: down 5 percent in the last 12 months and I believe we'll see a similar decline in residential prices here in New Zealand. If it occurs look out for the backlash from people who have invested recently with very high mortgage commitments.The interesting thing about the select committee process was we heard from 64 submitters. I don't recall any of them being in support of the legislation. They all came along to us and said We can understand why you're doing it. We can understand that the Government campaigned to do it. So do it but give us an exemption." That was the consistent message. The rest home sector wanted to be exempted. The telco sector wanted to be exempted. The supermarket sector and the mining sector asked to be exempted. Queenstown as an area said "Exempt us. It'll have a dramatic effect on our values." But there was one particular exemption that surprised me. It came from a Northland iwi called Te Ārai. In their case it was a private benefit—we were led to believe to the iwi because of a Treaty settlement; subsequently found out it was a private benefit to two wealthy people: one a New Zealander and one an American who has already invested in property in New Zealand. The advice we had to the select committee was you cannot provide a private exemption for that particular Te Ārai development. The select committee chair overrode that advice and presented the legislation back into this House to give a private benefit to one particular iwi in Northland. Who has close affiliations with Northland?Hon Mark Mitchell: Who was the chair of that?Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: The chair was Michael Wood. He defied the advice from the Office of the Clerk. But a better question to be asking is who has close affiliations with one particular iwi in Northland?Hon Mark Mitchell: Who is it?Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: I don't know. I don't know but the finger points very closely to the Deputy Prime Minister again. But—but—common sense prevailed. The Speaker got out Standing Orders and he very very correctly said it is inappropriate to deliver a private benefit in a bill such as this.The final point I want to make is around a sudden Supplementary Order Paper that appeared in the latter stages of the select committee process. What happened is that the Hon Shane Jones realised that if legislation went through it would stop his billion-tree per year programme in its tracks because the forestry industry is already 72 percent foreign investment in New Zealand. So there was an argument I believe in Cabinet—a big argument—the Hon Shane Jones versus the Hon David Parker. Which of the honourable members won?Hon Member: Shane.Rt Hon DAVID CARTER: Shane Jones. We know on this side of the House that Labour members don't want to admit it because they got their noses rubbed in the dirt—Shane Jones won. And in came a Supplementary Order Paper which not only allowed the status quo of 72 percent foreign investment in forestry but made it easier. This is a bill to stop foreign investment for everything except one sector: forestry. Why did it happen? Because Shane Jones beat David Parker.This is the sort of legislation that explains declining business confidence. This sort of legislation will stop dead the foreigners wanting to invest in housing and apartment development in Auckland. The Hon Judith Collins has said it's already happened. We had numerous apartment developers coming to the select committee saying "Our developments require pre-sales so we can go to the bank and get funding." Did the Government want to listen? No it didn't. Now with the passing of this dreadful piece of legislation apartment development which the Government claims it needs in Auckland will stall. Not only will that stall but so will this continued problem of business confidence. Darroch Ball continues to laugh every time I mention it but what will happen is employers will stop employing. When they stop employing the cycle gets harder and harder to stop. The winter of discontent has only just started."