Browning Steffan: Tariff (Free Trade Agreement between New Zealand and the Republic of Korea) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBrowning Steffan: Tariff (Free Trade Agreement between New Zealand and the Republic of Korea) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 24 September 2015. Volume:709;Page:7088. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STEFFAN BROWNING (Green): I rise to take a call on the third reading of the Tariff (Free Trade Agreement between New Zealand and the Republic of Korea) Amendment Bill. The Greens are opposing this bill. I spoke on it earlier in the Committee stage and said that we would like to have free trade that is fair trade. There is not fair trade in this bill. There are some advantages for some sectors out of this bill and they will be very very much appreciated. But out of this bill as well there are people in New Zealand—workers businesses and sectors—who will be disadvantaged. [Interruption] Sorry Mr Assistant Speaker—I have been affected by the interjections. I will carry on.The completeness of this agreement for New Zealand does not come through for 15 years when we get 97-odd percent of the different aspects that we are looking at in tariff reductions into Korea. They do not come through for 15 years—all of them come in by then. Some of them come in immediately—cherries for example. Kiwifruit gets a fairly early run. Dairy and beef and a number of other things do not. They come in in stages. But Korea gets carte blanche in 7 years. What is even about that?When I spoke about it last I was pointing out that if we had a better track record with trade with Korea maybe we would have got a better deal. So those on the Government benches who want to mock or consider this should think about the level of pesticide use in New Zealand which nearly cost us our beef market in Korea. We had a ship turned right round and back because of endosulfan contamination and we had another one where we nearly lost it as well. Then it suited our Environmental Protection Authority to remove endosulfan from use in this country even though people had been screaming for it to be removed because of the health risks—to the environment but even more to human health for women because of breast cancer and other things. But it suited that Government and Labour before it to carry on making use of that until it affected trade with Korea. That is when we got rid of endosulfan. People did not want it on their parks. They did not want their kids sliding over it. But it was trade with Korea—no wonder we are so far behind in the fairness of this trade deal when Korea looks at us and thinks we are pesticide city.We need to be getting those things out of that and working to our aspirational goal of a “clean green” “100% Pure” Aotearoa New Zealand which is the best brand. We know that 100% Pure New Zealand is a very good brand; we won an award with that. Is it true? It is not 100 percent true but it is aspirational and if we woke up to that trade deals like this would be better.However there is another aspect that is very concerning. There was another bill that was passed a little while ago. It was the “Anti-dumping bill” we may call it. What it does is create an early warning system for businesses to basically shed their staff and get ready for the fact that they will not have—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order!STEFFAN BROWNING: —a fair market. Thank you.