Scott AlastairALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): Thank you Madam Chair. I too would like to contribute briefly on this on the words Comprehensive and Progressive" because one has to consider all the work that was done prior to today in other bills to enable this bill to pass.It's not comprehensive—progressive yes because one step in the right direction is progress but comprehensive it is not. When we talk about this the Government had to pass to suit themselves an amendment to the Overseas Investment Act which did not allow foreigners to buy existing houses but did allow them to buy houses off the plan for example. So comprehensive this is not. If it was comprehensive it would have included those types of things in this bill.Trade is really important and it's really pleasing to see that essentially both sides of the House with a few exceptions are in support of removing tariffs and progressing free trade. Free-trade agreements as Mr Hudson has talked about increase GDP increase income and create jobs. That's really important. It's particularly important in these times given some of the barriers and tariffs that some countries are putting up to protect—or so they say—the jobs in their own economies. Thankfully we know here in this House on both sides that we're a trading nation and that we must continue to trade and enable greater access and freer access to all of the markets in the world to enable our small economy to progress.Even the larger economies that are supporting tariffs and barriers—in the short term it might appeal politically; in some places it does appeal politically. It's protectionist. You get a group of people who believe they are being protected. They do believe that their jobs are being protected in their own domestic economy but on both sides—I think I can speak because this is what we're talking about: free trade—we know in the medium to long term tariffs and barriers to trade do not protect jobs at all. They increase the cost of production in the domestic economy making those jobs uncompetitive compared to others. That is why we on this side—and I'm hearing from the Labour side—support free-trade agreements generally.So that's a good thing. So free trade is a good thing. So the "Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement"—which is what it was—those words are absolutely appropriate but comprehensive it is not. Progressive it may be in small steps which is excellent. Some people would say that we don't do enough here fast enough and soon enough and I might be one of those people in fact. But a step in the right direction is still progress and that is why we support this document. We will support even the title of "Comprehensive and Progressive" in the title because it's important that the bones and the substance of the bill is enacted for the benefit of all New Zealanders to increase incomes to increase the GDP and to support more jobs in the economy.I mean even a year ago we were doing around 10000 new jobs a months. That's what a growing economy gives. That's what free-trade agreements do.Hon Member: How many?ALASTAIR SCOTT: Ten thousand new jobs a month.Andrew Bayly: What are we at now?ALASTAIR SCOTT: Four or five thousand. So we've slipped. The economy's slipped. We can't blame it all on the global economy. The Government has to take some responsibility for a slowing economy for lack of confidence in the business community and a lower currency which reflects that—and that's not good. So the Government's got quite a lot of work to do to regain the confidence in the business community. They've got a lot of work to do to increase basically the trade-weighted index of this currency because it's weakened significantly in the last 12 months. So the Government's got a lot of work to do in that area but at least by ratifying this Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement we are taking a small step in the right direction."