Webb Duncan; Williams PotoDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker tēnā koe. There's been a lot of talk and a lot of to-ing and fro-ing about U-turns and what have you and I was glad to see Mr Macindoe get his hurt feelings off his chest from earlier this morning. I hope he's feeling a lot better. But you know what I did and you might think I'm a sucker for punishment? I got this document—it doesn't seem to be 6000 pages—and I read it. What I want to speak about today really is two things. There's two things I want to do: one is to talk about why we need to enter into this agreement and the other is to touch on some aspects of this agreement which haven't really been mentioned but are probably the greatest merits of it. Because it is a detailed document—that is why it's called comprehensive. And there are some really fantastic clauses in there which we absolutely need as a trading framework.That brings me to my first point which is that at this time we absolutely need to have a trading framework which isn't based on whim it isn't based on knee-jerk reactions; it's based on rules because we can see not too far away what happens if we have a trading framework based on whim. People enter into trade wars. They enter into discussions. They get hurt feelings and all of a sudden we have tariffs going up around the world. So what we need is a comprehensive and progressive trade framework and that's what we have.We also need multilateralism. We need to make sure we bring in as many people as we can into this because one-on-one arrangements don't work in the long run. We've got to have a comprehensive approach to it. Bring in as many people as many State parties as we can because unless we do that we'll have a plethora of agreements which may or may not be consistent and we'll be doing it for ever and a day. That's why we need to do this.Now this document has been pitched largely as a tariff reduction measure. To my mind that's one of the least important aspects of it. It's true that tariffs will reduce and that will increase our national income but what it also does is put a rule-based framework around how we trade and what we trade in. And once we get an even playing field I am confident that New Zealand can compete on the international stage. All we need is for equal treatment. Ms Ghahraman talked about ceding sovereignty. I don't see it that way. Having an international agreement an agreement where State parties agree on a common framework has been with us for hundreds of years. That is what international relations and international law is based upon and that's what we're doing here.If you go through the agreement as I have you'll see a whole lot of really useful and important rules there. One that sprung to mind was the rules of origin where State parties have agreed that we need clear rules of origin—that when we send our goods overseas we want to be able to say that this product is made in New Zealand. And we want to do that on an even footing so that if someone wants to buy our product because it's from New Zealand there's not some deceptive Kiwi cuvée that looks like it's come from New Zealand and puts itself out there as if it's come from New Zealand but in fact hasn't. So rules of origin is just one of those things.The other thing that this comprehensive agreement addresses is non-trade barriers customs cooperation. What I'm going to go to in fact because this is a time-limited debate is focus on chapter 23 on development because this is what is progressive about this agreement. It recognises that it's not all about income. It's not all about cash flow. And if you look at this chapter—chapter 23—it recognises the importance of trade to foster development. So chapter 23.1 clause 2: we need more inclusive economic growth and that includes a broad-based distribution of the benefits of economic growth to the expansion of business and industry the creation of jobs and the alleviation of poverty. That is a real step forward in international trade and if you look over the page to article 23.4 that clause deals with women in economic growth. The parties recognise that enhancing opportunities for women in their territories including women workers and business owners to participate is important. That is something you wouldn't expect to see in a trade agreement but here we have State parties around the Pacific committing to this kind of progressive approach to trade and I applaud it.We can look at the environment chapter recognising the role of State parties within trade to protect the environment and what's more explicitly the conservation and sustainable use of fisheries. So again something that is absolutely critical to New Zealand—we now have Pacific nations coming along with us in the preservation of our fisheries.Chapter 26 deals with anti-corruption. Chapter 29 deals with labour including the recognition and preservation of the right to collective bargaining. That's progressive. So we heard a lot of submissions and one of the reasons I read this document was because I was concerned I was missing something. So many people were coming out—and I accept the Green Party's point that many people came and turned up to select committee and opposed it. So I read it and most people hadn't. And they were wrong in many of their assertions.So I commend this bill to the House. I thank the members of the public who made those submissions and I recognise the work that was done by the National Party and now what we have is a truly comprehensive—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! I apologise to the member. The time for this debate has expired.Motion agreed to.