Commerce Commission (International Co-operation, and Fees) Bill

In the absence of being able to speak on the important Part 1, I will take a call on Subpart 2, “Amendment to Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003”. All these amendments here in the application of the Commerce Act relate back, of course, to Subpart 1, where we have provisions relating to the acquisition of information from a foreign jurisdiction and our obligation through reciprocity to provide information to the relevant regime in that country.

The issue is—not only in relation to the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act but, in fact, in relation to any piece of legislation—what we will be obliged to provide and what we will be trading off. It said in one of the provisions, new section 99H(2)(c) in clause 6, that “the provision of the information or assistance will not significantly prejudice New Zealand’s international trade interests.” We have to assume that the Commerce Commission is satisfied that New Zealand businesses are not compromised in any way.

It is all well and good to have such an arrangement and a reciprocal arrangement, but I have to say with some pride that there are not many countries around the world that have such sound, such ethical, and such consistent systems as we do here in New Zealand. I think that is something that each and every one of us can be proud of. The problem is that if we are dealing with other jurisdictions and we are obliged to provide information, be it on the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act or any other, then we may in fact be compromising the trade obligations and objectives of this country. So I would ask the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Commerce, maybe to clarify whether in the event that we are asked for such information, be it under this particular Act referred to in Subpart 2 or any other Act, the Government will make a call in the best interests of New Zealand. I have to say we can look around for examples of where the Government stood up, where it thinks it might want to protect New Zealanders. Take, for example—and it does relate to a situation that might arise through Subpart 2—the Government having to make a call—

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Part 2, not Subpart 2.

Sorry?

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): We are on Part 2, “Fees”—clauses 12 and 13—not Subpart 2.

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I appreciate your guidance there. I would like to say that if the Government is prepared to make a call, then it probably would have done so on the issue of pork importation. I know it is a bit of a stretch, but the question is whether the National Government will make the calls that uphold and protect the rights of New Zealanders in arrangements of reciprocity with other jurisdictions. I think that most people in this House come to Parliament because they want to do the best thing for New Zealand, and although we have trade obligations, we need to ensure that we do the right thing. As you know, Part 2 relates to fees, and this Government has been—

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Rabid.

—rabid, I would say is the best word, on fees and costs, claiming that it is reducing them across the board. The reality is that it has pretty much pushed up fees and costs on every single part of central government jurisdiction.

House resumed.

The Chairperson reported the Crown Entities Reform Bill with amendment, and that the Committee had divided it into three bills, and progress on the Commerce Commission (International Co-operation, and Fees) Bill.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.