Norman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNorman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 11 December 2013. Volume:695;Page:15475. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) to theMinister of Trade: Does he stand by the answer given on his behalf yesterday regarding the process for ratifying the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement that “the member misunderstands the process that these things go through. She suggested that Cabinet will ratify the agreement; Cabinet will not. In fact Parliament ratifies the agreement.”; if so why?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Acting Minister of Trade): The Minister for Economic Development as Acting Minister of Trade yesterday may have been a little imprecise in his phraseology on behalf of the said Minister of Trade. As a result the Minister of Trade has asked the Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment to act on his behalf and make the following clarification today: it was not strictly speaking correct to speak of Parliament ratifying the agreement per se. In fact Parliamentexamines the treaty and then considers any subsequent legislation that may arise from the treaty but it is the Government that finally ratifies the treaty once Parliament has given its consideration on the treaty and on treaty-related legislative matters.Dr Russel Norman: So when he said yesterday that Parliament ratifies the treaty not Cabinet he was wrong and in fact it was he who misunderstood the process not Julie Anne Genter?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It was not the Minister of Trade per se who misunderstood the speaker; it was the Minister who was speaking on the Minister’s behalf in Parliament yesterday who misunderstood the situation. He of course has been told by the Minister not to speak for the Minister today and that the Minister would get another Minister to speak on his behalf.Dr Russel Norman: So when Steven Joyce told the House yesterday that Parliament ratifies the treaty not Cabinet Steven Joyce was absolutely wrong?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: It is fair to say that Mr Joyce got it wrong yesterday. It is a very rare thing but it is Christmas. The Minister of Trade has had a strong conversation with Minister Joyce and Minister Joyce has undertaken to speak very nicely about the Minister of Trade in the House today.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Can the Minister of Trade confirm he has got something else wrong in that he has caved in to the United States over Pharmac which will now see affordable medicines for New Zealanders put at risk at the hands of big US pharmaceutical companies a sin he and his colleagues promised never to do?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: No. In fact the Minister of Trade was actually quoted on I think Radio New Zealand National this morning speaking from Singapore saying the following: “It will not end parallel importing. It will not involve higher prices of pharmaceutical products. That was never really the issue. The issue is to try and preserve the underlying Pharmac model. There’s been outstanding policy success for New Zealand under successive Governments and I am very confident that that will not be put at risk.” That is slightly at odds with Mr Peters—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Rt Hon Winston Peters: Well does he stand by his comment “I can give you a categorical assurance that New Zealanders will not be paying higher prices for their pharmaceuticals as a consequence of TPP.”; and if New Zealanders do end up paying higher prices for their medicines contrary to what he has just said will he do the decent thing and resign?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: On behalf of Mr Groser I have again perhaps been disloyal to him because actually Mr Peters is right. He of course went on to say exactly that: “I can give you a categorical assurance that New Zealanders will not be paying higher prices for their pharmaceuticals as a consequence of TPP.” I do not think he can be any clearer than that.Hon Phil Goff: Will the Trans-Pacific Partnership prevent Pharmac from buying lower-priced goods or generic drugs and will the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement make New Zealand vulnerable to being sued if it legislates in the public good in areas like the environment and health if that cuts across multinational profits?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The member is getting into a whole range of things that are of course part of the discussions that will be ongoing although I think it is very clear from the media coverage of what are purported to be leaks from the negotiations that New Zealand has been arguing its case very strongly and has been seen as doing that by critics from all parts of the spectrum. But I can only repeat in regard to the Pharmac matters what the Minister of Trade himself said on the radio this morning and I think that that has already been read to the House.Dr Russel Norman: Will the Minister make a commitment in this House that New Zealand will not sign up to the investor-State dispute provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership which would enable multinational corporations to sue the New Zealand Government in international courts if this Parliament were to pass laws that those multinationals did not like?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Again I cannot address those matters specifically because frankly we do not yet know where the various chapters of the Trans-Pacific Partnership will land. What this Government and this Parliament will get to see at the end of that presuming that the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement is successfully concluded is a whole range of things and we will have to consider those in the round in terms of whether we want to take up and participate in that agreement. The reality is this: if we can achieve an agreement that is of high quality and suitable for New Zealanders that would create great opportunities for growth and prosperity for for example the manufacturers that the member seems occasionally concerned about and for other people across New Zealand. We can achieve that with a high-quality agreement.Dr Russel Norman: Will he commit his Government to ensuring that Parliament has a binding deciding vote on whether New Zealand ratifies the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement if it is signed next year?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: We covered this in the answer to the first question. The process which was set up by the previous Labour Government is that Parliament examines the treaty and considers any subsequent legislation that may arise from a treaty but it is the Government that finally ratifies the treaty once Parliament has given its consideration on the treaty and on any treaty-related legislative matters. That is the process that the previous Government set up the process that was adopted for the China - New Zealand free-trade agreement and it is the process that this Government would anticipate taking place should the Trans-Pacific Partnership be agreed to.Dr Russel Norman: Is the Minister concerned that the public of New Zealand may be confused as to whether it is Parliament or Cabinet that ratifies the Trans-Pacific Partnership given that Mr Steven Joyce is confused as to whether it is Cabinet or Parliament that ratifies the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Mr StephenJacobi has been all over the radio confusing people as to whether it is Parliament or Cabinet that ratifies the Trans-Pacific Partnership?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I think we have uncovered a conspiracy of Stevens misbehaving and reinforcing negative perceptions! It is very clear and in fact the Minister of Trade and the Minister speaking on his behalf have today made the situation very clear. I could go through it again for the member if he so wishes. Parliament examines the treaty and then Parliament considers any subsequent legislation that may arise from the treaty but it is the Government that finally ratifies the treaty once Parliament has given its consideration on the treaty and on treaty-related legislative matters. I do not think I could be much clearer than that.Dr Russel Norman: Has the New Zealand Government made any commitments in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations to support the establishment of investor-State disputes mechanisms in any final Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The member is once again trying to get the Government to finalise the agreement today in the House which of course cannot be done because there has to be an agreement that is discussed between 12 separate countries. Again if an agreement is completed it will come before Parliament and Parliament will have the opportunity to examine it.Dr Russel Norman: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was about the position of the New Zealand Government. The Minister may say it is not in the publicinterest to answer that question but I would like an answer as to what the position of the Government is.Mr SPEAKER: You got an answer. The member may not be happy with it but the Minister was saying that because negotiations have not concluded the Government cannot make that commitment.