Costley TimTIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): Thank you Madam Speaker. There's been a lot of thankyous and accolades across the House so I won't join with them—too many—though I would like to just make one minor correction to my contribution to the first reading where I thanked all of those in the Belgium embassy in particular for their work with the EU and I thanked Emma twice but Andrea not at all so I would just like to acknowledge Andrea.What I would like to do—rather than focus just on the benefits of the free-trade agreement which has been well covered by many speakers so far—is just capture one of the key points of discussion that came up through the select committee process and that was around enforcement provisions. We heard from organisations like the Dairy Companies Association of New Zealand and the New Zealand Specialist Cheesemakers Association and we heard their concern that perhaps the enforcement provisions might go above and beyond what was required by the free-trade agreement and their concern that that would not just add layers of bureaucracy but could ultimately end up punishing New Zealand farmers New Zealand growers New Zealand fishers and New Zealand producers. It was a topic of a lot of interest and debate during that select committee process and we certainly pushed officials on that in response to those submissions that we heard. It was great to give those people the opportunity to be heard and to consider those issues more carefully. What we heard was from Ministry for Primary Industries that this was the most effective and efficient way that this could be resolved using food safety officers but giving them the ability not to create a new position and bring in another whole army of inspectors that would go on to farms and into factories but to also give them the additional title of a Geographical Indication officer (GI officer). Those staff are already in businesses for a range of reasons and this gives them the extra provision so that we can meet the requirements of the free-trade agreement without burdening Kiwis that we want to see get ahead. We can we must we will meet the provisions particularly—we're talking about article 18.38 of the free-trade agreement and ensuring that there are appropriate administrative and judicial steps" in place. But the concern was that perhaps this was going above and beyond and it could be just left to the courts. We heard from officials that it can't be solely left to the courts that we have to have this additional measure but it has to be done in the most efficient—I want to be careful with words like minimalistic—but to meet the intent of the free-trade agreement ensure that we're letting Kiwis get ahead get their best competitive advantage. Indeed as we pressed the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment on this—you know that ultimately their role is to ensure New Zealanders get the best competitive advantage from this without being burdened down. That's how we get ahead. We don't want to see extra jobs in Wellington; we want to see the growth on the farms and the factories. That's what this is about. It's about growing our trade sector and in particular the benefit to the primary producers is a significant part of this free-trade agreement.So I do want to just record here that we did consider that. The intent behind this is to meet the requirements of the free-trade agreement but not to burden ourselves with regulation with whole teams of people. In fact we were told that it could be done at effectively minimal additional cost. I think that is an important point to remind ourselves with. So without going into the additional benefits the millions that we're going to gain for Kiwis it is a fantastic thing to see this free-trade agreement come into force. I think we have got the best of what we could get from this process and through this select committee process and so I commend this bill to the House."