Faafoi KrisKRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I feel a need to calm things down because this debate has been very heated so far. So in a relatively short contribution can I just say that I think the Government's position on this bill is a little confused because it did bring some legislation to this House around the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). It had the numbers in the House to pass that and so it had the majority to see that legislation through this House.What this piece of legislation does—removing all the emotion and specificity around a trade deal or a climate change treaty that we may be part of—is to make it standard practice that if a Government of the day was to sign up to something like a trade deal or a climate change treaty it would come to this House it would be debated in this House the merits or negatives about the treaty or the deal would be taken to the public through the select committee process and this House would get to vote on the specific treaty or not.The Government has done it on one piece of legislation and if it is confident that it has the numbers in this House then it should be able to get it through. If it is confident enough to have gone out and signed a treaty or signed a deal and it has the majority in this House what is wrong with a little bit of transparency on behalf of the public to make sure that there is a benefit to the treaty or the deal and that those benefits or some of the disadvantages of a specific deal that we may have signed up to can have some scrutiny from the public?I was not a member of Parliament at the time when the China free-trade agreement was signed and went through this House but I understand that that is the process Phil Goff and the last Labour Government went through to make sure that there was some public scrutiny and there is a good story to tell around the China free-trade agreement.The Government has an opinion on the TPP. It brought that legislation to the House. Unfortunately there was a change in international circumstances that means that the deal as it stood is now no longer able to be done but it did bring some legislation to this House. What this piece of legislation that the New Zealand First member has proposed is saying is that if we have a similar deal why not bring it through this House as a standard procedure?I guess the members opposite need to ask why we would do it for the TPP but we are not willing to commit to it for any other future deal that might get done in the future. I am saying that not necessarily to a particular kind of Government—a National Government or a Labour-led Government. But if a Government either sees fit to commit us to some commitments around climate change or sees the economic benefit of a trade deal why not let it be a standard procedure that this House gets to debate it and the merits and the disadvantages of it?I think the Government needs to figure out where it stands. Does it need to bring the deals to this House and get public support for them or will it answer questions around sweeping it under the table or doing a bit of a sneaking it through quickly" deal if we do sign up to these treaties or trade deals and then pay the public price for that too? So I think this bill should go to a select committee to enable a public debate about whether or not as a standard procedure this is something that Parliament does to make sure that the deals that we sign up to as a Government are scrutinised by this Parliament and by the public of New Zealand. Thank you."