Presentation to the - Bill Rosenberg CAFCA flew Bill Rosenberg to Wellington to present its submission orally to Parliament’s Finance and Expenditure Select Committee which was hearing submissions on the Overseas Investment Bill. The process was fraught with difficulty: because ten submitters had (according to the Committee officials) simply sent in the sample submission available on CAFCA’s Website, the Committee insisted that we all share a 30 minute slot. That was neither accurate nor fair: Some of the ten submitters had, in fact, added to the sample submission, and certainly intended to add further in their oral submission. However in the event, only one of them, Mike Waring from Nelson, made it to Wellington. Others were undoubtedly put off by the cost for such a restricted hearing. There were over 70 submissions in all, the vast majority being supportive of CAFCA’s position to one degree or another. I led by reading the supplementary submission (see previous article. Ed.). Questions followed for ten minutes, when they were cut off by the Chair, Labour’s Clayton Cosgrove. It was great to have the very respectable Mike Waring (retired pilot, deer farmer) sitting beside me at the hearing. He spoke with strength of feeling about the effect that the increasing overseas ownership of our assets had on him after his return from many years working overseas. He warned the Committee that many others in the community felt the same. Despite claims, it was obvious that most MPs on the committee hadn’t read the submissions. Only Green Co-Leader, Rod Donald, consistently asked anything but general questions, with one or two other exceptions. Few questions showed any knowledge of our submission. On the other hand the atmosphere wasn’t hostile. ACT’s lame duck, Richard Prebble, glowered at me as I made our oral submission and I glowered back. He left half way through the oral. Questions from New Zealand First’s Craig McNair (standing in for Party Leader, Winston Peters) and Labour’s Winnie Laban seemed friendly, and McNair seemed to have done some homework. Labour’s David Parker asked intelligent questions, though it was hard to pick his views. We clearly made the point that New Zealand had to have the right to "pick and choose foreign investment". Whether they do anything about it is another matter! There were video links to other centres – Christchurch and Auckland in this case. We watched other submitters on the video link. It was heart warming to see the number who had not only taken on many of the points in CAFCA’s sample submission but added substantially to them. The Weight Of Submissions Was Clearly In Favour Of Tighter Legislation In addition there were submissions presented (in no particular order) from
A very interesting written submission came from Mark Dunlop, a lawyer who had worked for the OIC. He was highly critical of the way the OIC goes about its work, and the huge gaps in the law and its enforcement. He adopted a number of CAFCA’s points, and made an oral submission the following week (see first article. Ed.). However, the in-principle decisions have already been made higher up the political chain, and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the bilateral free trade agreements imprison policy making. Thanks to all who contributed to this in whatever way. It will eventually have its effect. Non-Members:
|
 Return
to Watchdog 108 Index |
 |