Financial Markets (International Money Transfers) Amendment Bill

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s great to stand up and talk to the Financial Markets (International Money Transfers) Amendment Bill, and I congratulate the sponsor, Arena Williams. I also want to follow in her tribute earlier on the late, great Sir Barry Curtis, long-time Mayor of Manukau City from 1983 to 2007—24 years of building Manukau—one of our great civic leaders in Auckland and someone who leaves an incredible legacy behind. Condolences to Sir Barry Curtis, aged 87, who lived a very full life of community service. For those of us that remember, in the 1990s and 2000s, getting around Auckland—as you would, Mr Speaker; I’m not trying to age you—Sir Barry would recite his introductory comments and greetings, every Pasifika greeting that ever existed, as part of his repertoire. Here’s to Sir Barry Curtis.

The National Party won’t be supporting this bill, and I’ll take you through that shortly. I’m pleased that it is going to be referred to the Governance and Administration Committee by the sounds of it, and I want to also acknowledge the Governance and Administration Committee deputy chair, Tim Costley, and the whole committee that today launched a parliamentary inquiry into Fire and Emergency New Zealand’s (FENZ’s) fleet issues. That was following a motion, a very proactive motion, that was put on the Table by Tim Costley earlier, deputy chair and member up the Kāpiti Coast. Well done, Tim. I wish the committee all the best with its endeavours on its parliamentary inquiry into FENZ.

As the previous sponsor’s already articulated, the financial markets amendment bill—let’s just call it that—proposes to amend the 2013 Financial Markets Conduct Act, claiming to require greater transparency of international money transfers. It requires of financial institutions fair-conduct programmes to ensure that customers are provided with full disclosure of fees and costs associated with international money transfers. I don’t think anyone would disagree with more disclosure and more transparency around fees and costs pertaining to international money transfers.

I come with good news—I come with good news. Help is already on the way, and many members will recall that we are in the process of passing, through this Parliament, three bills regulating our financial services sector—a trifecta there to ensure that they are more effective. Our Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill, I think, has had an interrupted second reading. It’s certainly gone through select committee, and that will address and provide the architecture to more closely scrutinise and regulate, and provide oversight to, the issues that the sponsor has outlined. That bill, the one that’s halfway through Parliament, has got a focus on improving outcomes for consumers, and, importantly, it simplifies and clarifies minimum requirements for fair-conduct programmes. It aims to modify the conduct of financial institutions (CoFI) regime to streamline compliance and strengthen the Financial Markets Authority’s (FMA’s) oversight. Of course, this bill comes in over the top of this piece of legislation, and it comes in 12 months—only 12 months—after CoFI has taken effect, on 1 April 2025. So 12 months on and with a bill already in the House, we don’t see the need for this. I’ll speak further to that.

The financial services and banking sector remains on notice—frankly, it remains on notice—and you may have seen, and you may have read about, a 16-month banking inquiry, and we’ve had a six-month follow-up since then. We made about 19 key recommendations—14 which were unanimous. There were a range of issues—and I want to pay tribute to Arena Williams for being at the forefront of that inquiry and never missing an opportunity—and never missing an opportunity. That work continues. The banking inquiry is a live document. We reported back later last year, and we are having those six-monthly come-to-Jesus moments with our banking sector, our non-deposit takers, and others—fintechs as well—as to how it is working. You might have seen, today, from the Hon Scott Simpson, more progress and more push as we open up, and regulate, our open banking system.

The Financial Markets (Conduct of Institutions) Amendment (Duty to Provide Financial Services) Amendment Bill, otherwise known as the “Woke Banking Bill”, is another piece of legislation that sits with the Finance and Expenditure Committee and that Mr Foster is the sponsor of. We’ve given Mr Foster an extension of time re: that conduct bill for him to report back and see if we can come to an agreement and if there’s anything that we could get through the House. In good faith, Mr Foster continues to do that work on the “Woke Banking Bill”.

The CoFI is also under way and leading the charge on reviewing the insurance sector and all the costs that it faces. That is something that CoFI’s been assigned to do and that our Cabinet has agreed to, and it will report back on the insurance sector in ways that, perhaps, we can add more accountability, more transparency, and, perhaps, even more cost-effectiveness to the insurance sector in the coming months.

Three bills streamlining the financial services are going through this Parliament, and there was a banking inquiry that went on for 16 months and came with a number of key recommendations that we continue to monitor, and the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill, which is sitting at second reading, will simplify and clarify minimum requirements for fair-conduct programmes. It does aim to modify the CoFI regime, which is only a year old, to streamline compliance and strengthen FMA oversight. We are very confident, in the National Party, that, frankly, there is a lot of work going on and there is a lot of sunlight being shone—as they say, sunlight is the best form of disinfectant—on the banking sector and on the financial services sector as far as transparency around costs, fees, and pricing.

With that work well under way, with three bills before the House, with one inquiry completed and another still to report back, we are confident that we have got all the oversight that we are ever going to get as far as costing and prices on this. Ongoing reforms are already addressing what the sponsor is trying to achieve here, and the bill that’s before the House is already clarifying and simplifying the obligations of our financial institutions. The bill that is being promoted today would separate that out and run in direct conflict with the legislation that is there and the regulatory tools that already exist and that we are looking to strengthen and put more transparency and accountability around.

I commend the sponsor on her member’s bill and congratulate her on having it drawn, but, again, we’ve got so much work under way in this space and we can’t afford to be distracted with this member’s bill. We wish her all the best, but we won’t be supporting it. Thank you.