Katene Rahui: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Katene Rahui: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1876] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I have always been amused by the concept of dumping. That is because when I was growing up in Nelson “dumping” had a particular meaning. According to my uncles and aunties when they were children it was the site at which the sweetest juiciest fishbones would be found. But as I drill further into the concept in the Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill which we are looking at today there is hardly a fishbone in sight. There are definitely some fish-hooks but there is a sad lack of fishbones. 
The dumping in question in this bill is to do with the situation where goods are exported at a price that is lower than the price charged in the home market of the exporter. The concern is that the dumping of imported products may create a threat to the growth and survival of an industry. Dumping has been registered as becoming of increasing concern across the globe with the World Trade Organization secretariat recently reporting a sharp increase of 39 percent in the number of new anti-dumping investigations between 2007 and 2008. The products most frequently dumped are base metals textiles chemicals steel and plastics. 
So today we have legislative amendments. They are intended to provide temporary protection to a domestic industry as well as to support the industry to adjust to the threat of increased competition from increased imports. There are matters that must be considered when determining whether the application of a safeguard measure is in the public interest. It is in the public interest that the decision-making process is about enhancing certainty and transparency. 
Currently investigations will be initiated if there are reasonable grounds that increased imports will cause or threaten serious injury to a domestic industry. This bill deals with the processes around the safeguard investigations. It puts in place the means by which investigations can be undertaken by the Ministry of Economic Development including the process of addressing delays in investigations. The bill provides for the Minister of Commerce to impose a provisional safeguard duty for up to 200 days. The bill also extends the time frame for completing safeguard investigations from 30 working days to 75 working days. 
Up until this point it all sounds very good—the processes are clarified the base for safeguards is established and protections are in place. But this is where the fish-hooks start to show. We must care about the environment for trade and the position it leaves our New Zealand market in. Yet no matter how positive this new legislation is the remnants of one too many free-trade agreements are there for all to see. The trade liberalisation agenda has been perpetuated in Aotearoa by the means of a whole stock of trade agreements which has opened the door to the dumping of copious imports from overseas. 
All existing bilateral trade agreements have some form of exemption. The New Zealand - China free-trade agreement stipulates that either party may exclude imports of goods from a global safeguard measure. There is a similar clause in the New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership Agreement. In both the  
Agreement Between New Zealand and Singapore on a Closer Economic Partnership 
 and the Australia and New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement neither party can impose a global safeguard measure against goods from another party. 
This is why this legislation is so bizarre. We have the introduction of safeguards designed to adjust to the impact of increased competition. We have initiatives to clarify ambiguities in the Temporary Safeguard Authorities Act 1987. But at the same time we have free-trade agreements that counter all of this progress. Under the free-trade agreement with China although China is able to set a maximum volume of agricultural goods imported from New Zealand each year New Zealand does not have the ability to set similar maximum volumes on goods—agricultural or otherwise—imported from China. If New Zealand did set a customs duty to try to prevent too much competition in a particular market our Government would need to compensate China for doing so. It does not really seem to make much sense. 
This issue concerns the Maori Party greatly. We believe that decisions should be based on a rigorous and thorough analysis of potential costs and benefits. Such an analysis should be subject to an independent and contestable process and we should be ever mindful of the need for focusing on results having an eye on the outcome and making sure that those outcomes reflect the full range of social cultural physical financial and spiritual consequences of a particular course of trade. 
The news today revealed that the terms of trade have dropped further. Statistics New Zealand has released information showing a 0.9 percent drop with export prices dropping further than import prices. This is the economic bottom line that dominates our thinking when we look at trade agreements and safeguard measures but we need to also consider the need for scrutiny and oversight of the total picture—the complexities that come with our increased import dependency. 
We need to understand how the quest for corporate profit maximisation has affected workers. We need to be asking what happens to the New Zealand market when our trade agreements allow imports in without safeguard measures. How many people will be fired before we say there has been an injurious effect on an industry? If sales are reduced we should ask what kinds of sales they are. These are just some of the issues that need to come into the broader discussion. 
The Maori Party will support the referral of the Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill to the select committee today as a matter of principle. We want to see what the critics commentators analysts and advisors say about some of the issues we have raised and we want to know their views on the virtues or otherwise of this bill. So we will not be dumping this bill just yet.