Bond RiaRIA BOND (NZ First): I am proud to rise on behalf of New Zealand First and actually on behalf of my colleague Fletcher Tabuteau to speak to the third reading of the Trade (Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties) Amendment Bill. When the bill was first read we in New Zealand First made it clear that we would support this legislation only to go into the select committee process and that was because New Zealand First had major concerns about how this bill put up by that National Government would ultimately in the end make New Zealand made products vulnerable to unfair predatory pricing by international companies.This bill will affect the innovation of small businesses. Kiwi businesses actually have to compete around the world globally and this is no easy platform for our Kiwi businesses. What this Government has done through this legislation is add another hurdle into the mix which will cause more risk and more uncertainty. Not only will our small businesses in New Zealand suffer through this but so will our manufacturing and export sector.Let us talk about the public interest test or as Minister Jacqui Dean said last night the consumer interest clause. I want you to listen up. I want you to listen up National members on the backbenches today—Chris Bishop: Oh righty-o.RIA BOND: I want you to listen carefully Mr Bishop. The public interest test is the most damaging clause in this legislation—Chris Bishop: This'll be good—trade expert Ria Bond.RIA BOND: If you Government members had bothered to understand this Mr Bishop and actually listen and do some homework yourself then you would have known by your research that this actual clause—and it is clear as crystal—gives foreign companies and Governments that are considering dumping into the New Zealand market a green light. The protection that should be there to protect our New Zealand market which would have had the ability to kick-start a protection mechanism to alert foreign companies and Governments considering dumping is simply not there. It is not there in this bill. Ultimately sanctions against us are actually weakened.This is the reason New Zealand First supported this bill to go into the select committee process. The reason why was so that members on the Government side of the House could actually hear the submitters hear their voices and hear how this bill will affect the market which this bill presumably is meant to protect. What I am talking about as other members have also said in this House today and what was overwhelmingly obvious from the submitters like Horticulture New Zealand Business New Zealand New Zealand Steel Foodstuffs and many more—what we heard was that ultimately this bill would be no good for them. At that stage as other members have also said we in the select committee did work really hard on this bill. We looked through all avenues and looked at the risk we sought the advice of advisers and the bill was returned to this House with no changes.At that point that should have indicated to the Minister that there was a real issue here. There should have been an indication. The Minister should have pulled this bill—as other members in this House have already said—and taken it back had a look at it and actually given careful consideration as to the limitless risk that this bill would put the New Zealand market through. Did that happen? No it did not. It did not happen at all and the Government kept pushing this bill through. What this bill will do—and I am going to repeat myself I am sorry—is tilt the level playing field of dumped or subsidised imports rather than support local producers and local jobs.The submitters categorically told us that this bill was bad for them and bad for New Zealand. The public interest test—it was an absolute risk that the Government actually even had it there. Submitters wondered why—and other speakers have said this already—the Australian Government tried twice to have a similar type of regime to this and both times it had listened to its businesses. It listened to the people who actually help import and export into that country. It listened to the risk that the small business owners faced—like the Kiwi business owners; the people whom we know in this country—and it said Uh-uh no deal here." and it flicked it off.What we wanted to know—and what we have heard throughout the calls taken in this House—is why the Government is still supporting this. Why are the Government members still supporting this bill? Why are they still supporting the public interest test which is almost like a bit of a cannonball that is going to come right through our market and shatter it over time?On this side of the House the Opposition did put forward a minority view and what we did was we outlined the absolute risk involved in this bill. Actually it could not have been any plainer. It could not have been any more crystal clear why this bill is not good for this country and why this bill should have been taken away taken back and amended significantly to put the best interests of New Zealand first. But that has not happened.I also want to say that the Minister produced a Supplementary Order Paper yesterday. I went through that Supplementary Order Paper and I was absolutely astounded that that Supplementary Order Paper only makes this bill worse. It only makes this bill worse. I sat there and I thought: "What is this Government doing? What are you doing to your businesses here in New Zealand?". I thought "This is absolutely crazy." and I kind of sat here and thought: "I know automatically that this bill and the Supplementary Order Paper will actually take New Zealand businesses backwards." It will take them backwards not forwards. Someone with half a brain would have known that straight away.New Zealand businesses are unnecessarily and radically—through the Supplementary Order Paper without principle—materially weakened. It has absolutely weakened the anti-dumping regime. It is a move away from the World Trade Organization (WTO) rule and it will cause significant risk to all business closures and jobs.I want to touch on what other members have actually mentioned throughout the time of the passage of the bill through the House. One of the members Dr David Clark summed it up nicely last night when he said that this bill is tragic. The solution undermines the New Zealand domestic producers. It undermines New Zealand businesses and their competitiveness. He also said that it also moves away from the WTO guidelines. That is why I sat there and I was astounded and New Zealand First was absolutely astounded when we saw that Supplementary Order Paper.Other members also said I think from memory—we have all mentioned the fact that the Australian Government had the good sense to realise how bad the public interest test was and it got rid of it because it did not want to create uncertainty in its market or have a crippling effect on the Australian market in terms of anti-dumping and countervailing. I have to say and we say on this side of the House that National cannot deny that there will be pressure put on the Government that there will be all sorts of threats from around the world and that flak will actually happen. As Mr Parker outlined earlier we have seen evidence of it here already in recent New Zealand history.I have got about 2 minutes left and I want to talk about the fact of the general feeling about this bill. From the time that it came through the House for the first reading through the select committee process the second reading and the Committee of the whole House last night New Zealand First has not shifted its position. This is an absolutely appalling bill to this New Zealand country which has been put forward by this Government. This bill will actually create absolute uncertainty throughout our market. It will not support local New Zealand businesses and it will not support local people who need jobs in this country. It will actually cause mass job losses. New Zealand First absolutely does not support this bill."