McClay ToddHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): It's a very important piece of legislation; you wouldn't assume so—anybody listening in—from the way that Duncan Webb just started his speech. He's lucky he is an MP because as a comedian he would be actually looking for the wage subsidy! The reason I say that is that this House hasn't had enough opportunity to celebrate high-quality trade deals in the four years that Labour has been in Government. This is the first one actually that really has been concluded that has had any real negotiation by the Government—or that was started before they were there. The other one of course was that one that they campaigned against and held signs against—the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)—and they changed the name and then accepted it when they came to Government. I'm glad that the vast majority of members of the House support this because New Zealand is a trading nation—600000 jobs; all of the produce that is made manufactured and grown in New Zealand. We are not a country that is wealthy and without good access to foreign markets we would be much much poorer for it.We'll hear in this debate as we did in other stages that the agreement could have been more and in some areas probably should have been but we'll recognise how challenging it is to negotiate a multilateral agreement as this is across a number of countries. The very good news is although we haven't heard it from members opposite that the majority of the members of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) we already have trade agreements with many of which are better than this—some of the TPP members the ASEAN countries and so on. But every piece of agreement negotiated that actually moves New Zealand forward opens a door—even if it is only slightly—for New Zealand exporters gives them assurance and creates a rules-based system is worthwhile.I want to caution though those who trade with India and have listened to the debate the Minister previously in earlier stages and then members of the Government now when they talk about India. They say they want to welcome India back to a fast-track system; it will not happen. The reason it will not happen is because actually the only way that New Zealand will have a trade deal with India of any worth is a bilateral one. There have been many many negotiating rounds because there is a trade agreement with India on the table. It is a bilateral agreement. It is not an agreement with many other countries involved. It is not the TPP. It is not RCEP. It is a bilateral trade agreement. There will be more than nine rounds. It is very difficult and very heavy going. That is now where the Government should put its effort and its emphasis: a bilateral agreement with India. The reason for that is: if India was to come back to RCEP we would get some gains but they will not be the same gains as we get as a bilateral agreement. When we hear that they are looking towards the UK India and Australia it would be extremely bad for our exporters if Australia or the UK had a trade agreement with India before New Zealand does. So it is one thing to say Well it's a shame they've gone away." as the Minister said reading his speech in a previous debate "The door is open for India". We're not a large country. An economy like that does not need a trade deal with New Zealand as few countries in the world do. The only way we've ever had trade deals presented to us is from Ministers getting on planes or Zooms at the moment and going and continuing to return and make the case of why a high-quality free-trade agreement (FTA) bilaterally is good for both sides.That is why there was a FTA announced in principle with the United Kingdom today because when the UK announced that they were looking to leave the European Union do you know who the first country to turn up there was? It was New Zealand—New Zealand Ministers. And New Zealand Ministers went again and again and again to make the case as they had under the previous Government to the European Union—spent more time overseas than in New Zealand in the interests of New Zealand exporters to make sure we got a free-trade deal with the UK because every single country was knocking on their door. So today is a good day for New Zealand exporters and it is a good day for New Zealand consumers for New Zealand workers and for our economy because a deal that was started under the previous Government and has continued under this Government with the United Kingdom has been landed. It won't be perfect but it is a very good step forward. The next one has to be the European Union and then finally the Government should also be able to do two things at once: they should be talking to India and putting every single effort in they can.As far as RCEP's concerned I am very pleased that Indonesia is part of this. New Zealand started a trade dispute formally with Indonesia I think in 1993 2003/1993 with Indonesia over the export of some horticultural products particularly fresh vegetables and beef. Our exporters were treated very badly. Our beef exports to Indonesia were about sometimes second highest of any country. They diminished quite quite significantly because of barriers that Indonesia put in place. We took the issue to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and at every step of the way the WTO found in our favour. What this agreement now means is we have a rules-based system—as well as the WTO which doesn't always work effectively well and is very slow—to address concerns we might have with a country like Indonesia. I had the opportunity to visit there a number of times as trade Minister to make the case to allow them to you know let our beef come back in there. It is a country of younger people who are starting to get educations who will grow in wealth very very quickly—maybe not the same wealth we see in other trading nations of Europe and so on but it will grow quickly. It is a very large population. They will want the protein the goods and some of the services that we produce in New Zealand and they will want them in abundance. We will only be able to rely upon Indonesia as a market so that New Zealand companies will invest effort and time and the resource into growing relationships with other companies in Indonesia if there is a fair rules-based system to be applied there. If the WTO hadn't worked as well for us or as quickly as we'd wanted RCEP is a step in that direction. But I would encourage the Government and the Minister to do much much more in this space. We are only as good as our last trade deal. We now have a new one today which is better than RCEP because it was bilateral started by the National Government continued and finished by a Labour Government. It is good for New Zealand. That Minister now must use the UK agreement as the framework as the benchmark as the minimum that he seeks from other countries. The negotiation with the European Union must be as good as the UK one otherwise we have missed an opportunity with the EU. As far as India is concerned it is a very good place to start with that negotiation because when the UK goes to India and says "We want a free-trade deal as well." they will talk about the deal they got with New Zealand. As a starting point we should do the same thing. If this Government can deliver a high-quality deal with the European Union and with India in the last two years before the election they will have done a good thing for New Zealand exporters they will have done a good thing for the New Zealand economy and the country our exporters would start to forgive them for the hollow protest they made over TPP for many years holding up signs saying that it was a bad deal and the moment they got to Government they changed one word in the name and they accepted it.The final point I'd make to the last speaker Dr Duncan Webb is around the Treaty of Waitangi clause. It is good that it is there but the Government shouldn't take responsibility for that because it has been in every single deal that New Zealand has signed for some period of time. Irrespective of the Government when we go through a negotiation we explain our special position when it comes to meeting obligations under the Treaty. It doesn't give us the opportunity to break free-trade deals but it does give us the opportunity in our own way to meet any obligation we may have through the Treaty. It has been negotiated in all those deals and should be in future. It is a good thing it is there. It is not a surprising thing it is there because actually it now becomes a mainstay of the agreement New Zealand negotiates.This is good that we are supporting this because it is good for our exporters. It opens a door just a little bit further for us on the world stage particularly when it comes to South-east Asia a market of growing importance to New Zealand. But we shouldn't rest on our laurels and congratulate ourselves too quickly or too often or too much in this House; you've got to move on to the next trade deal which has to be the European Union and it has to be India and I'd love to hear from the Government where to after that. Thank you."