5. Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership—Market Access Gains and Environmental ProvisionsHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) to the Minister for Trade and Export GrowthComprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership—Market Access Gains and Environmental Provisions5. Hon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: What additional market access gains has his Government achieved in the revised Trans-Pacific Partnership?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Trade and Export Growth): I presume the member is referring to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) which is a different agreement from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)—[Interruption] SPEAKER: Order! I know there's been some debate about this matter but I think we'd like to hear the answer to the question.Hon DAVID PARKER: Thank you. I presume the member is referring to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership which is a different agreement from the TPP and for example doesn't include the USA. Changes to market access were not on the table but during negotiations there were repeated attempts by larger countries to pare back our market access. We strongly rebuffed those attempts and emerged with market access intact while making significant improvements in other areas. We've narrowed the ability of overseas corporates to sue the New Zealand Government in overseas tribunals. Perhaps the most significant changes that we have ensured this Government and any future Government retain the right to restrict the sale of homes to overseas buyers.Hon Todd McClay: Does he still agree with Andrew Little when he said The deal on dairy is hopeless … and the rest amounts to not much"; and if not why didn't he try harder to improve market access for New Zealand exporters?Hon DAVID PARKER: It is true that the prior Government were limited only in their excess in their efforts to improve dairy access a view that I think is not just the view of Mr Little but is the view of Fonterra. Unfortunately by the late time that we became involved in these negotiations market access issues had already been closed. What we were successful in doing was doing a far better job than the prior Government in respect of investor-State dispute settlement clauses and protecting the right of New Zealanders to control who owns our homes.Hon Todd McClay: Given that New Zealand market access remains exactly the same in the revised TPP as in the original agreement does he agree with the Prime Minister when she said yesterday "We pushed hard and made good gains—massive gains"?Hon DAVID PARKER: The member is quite incorrect in that. For an obvious point of clarification the new agreement doesn't include the USA.Hon Todd McClay: Does he agree with the Prime Minister—Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I wonder if you would allow Mr McClay to ask the question again because clearly the answer given by David Parker was not the answer intended for that question. To simply say that market access has been expanded by the removal of the US is an absolute nonsense and even he wouldn't agree with that.Rt Hon Winston Peters: You'll recall the meeting at Skycity where all 12 parties signed an agreement where the United States was included. That apparently has escaped Mr Brownlee's knowledge.SPEAKER: I think we'll just carry on with supplementaries.Hon Todd McClay: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that the TPP has the highest level of environmental protection of any trade deal New Zealand has signed?Hon DAVID PARKER: Yes. I acknowledge the former Minister's solid efforts at advancing the CPTPP but I also note his failure to address New Zealanders' concerns about overseas buyers of homes which he was happy to waive and sign away for ever—we're not willing to do that.Hon Todd McClay: Why then did he agree to water down environmental provisions in the revised TPP in Vietnam in November—in particular in the trafficking of endangered species.Hon DAVID PARKER: This agreement makes absolutely no derogation from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and the other agreements in respect of trade in endangered species. In respect of other aspects of environment it has the first enforceability mechanisms that we've ever had in a trade agreement—for example against illegal fishing and subsidies of unreported fishing.Hon Todd McClay: Does he agree with his co-protester and trade expert Professor Jane Kelsey that "There is virtually nothing I can find that"—SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. The member will ask a question that does not have extraneous matter in it and I think the member knows what part of that did.Hon Todd McClay: Thank you Mr Speaker. Does the Minister agree with trade expert Professor Jane Kelsey that and I quote "There is virtually nothing I can find that is a significant concession. Basically it's the same deal. Labour has effectively agreed to a text that it said initially it would not support the ratification of."?SPEAKER: I'm going to let the Minister answer it but I am going to say to the member that he should be careful about including matters that are the subject of debate or argument as a fact at the beginning of his question.Hon DAVID PARKER: If it was the same agreement there wouldn't be a full treaty examination process nor new legislation nor a new national interest analysis. The member is being disingenuous."