Groser Tim: Tariff (Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Groser Tim: Tariff (Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2151] 
TIM GROSER (National) 
: 
 I rise to support the bill. Of course my party the National Party supported the expeditious passage of this bill through the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee. I also rise in complete astonishment that this is now I think the sixth or seventh time in fewer parliamentary working days than that that I have been asked to make a speech about the same issue. Unfortunately I have not changed my mind at all on any of the fundamental thoughts so the challenge is to work out some novel way of putting across the same proposition fulfilling my responsibilities to my chief whip and maintaining at least a minimum of consistency. 
In doing so I am beginning to think that this is rather like the existentialist play written by Jean-Paul Sartre called  
No Exit 
 which puts forward a secular view of hell. The secular view of hell according to this philosophical school is that there is no such thing as fire and brimstone but that hell is what one does on earth—except one does it forever. So I am beginning to wonder whether my ultimate fate will be to make speeches like this one for eternity without the matter ever coming to the vote. But I hope at least on this occasion this will be the last time I will bore you Mr Assistant Speaker quite apart from boring myself. 
I think the fundamental point here is that we are following a strategy that has been in place in this country essentially for about 13 years whereby we pursue opportunity for New Zealand exporters across the board simultaneously in the multilateral bilateral and plurilateral tracks. To maintain some degree of coherence behind that there has to be some buy-in to the underlying principles. The most important of course is that we accept modest progress forward because that is only politically realistic. But all our main sectors must be included in the framework for the agreement. That is the first fundamental principle and the agreement passes that all-important test. 
Some criticisms could be made about the pace but I think that is of secondary importance because at the end of the day we live in a world where our exports often fall into the most sensitive category and it is only realistic to expect the progress forward to be relatively modest. In the end all those agreements add up only to opportunities. That then links back the external strategy to what is in fact internal economic policy and there we have some problems ahead of us. 
I think it has become more widely recognised in the past year or two that New Zealand is not doing as well on the external front as many people would have us believe. People tend to say that we are a small but great trading nation. Unfortunately that is not a correct statement. We are a small trading nation but we are relatively mediocre in terms of our export performance by the standards of other small developed countries. If I am not mistaken 15 of the OECD countries have a population of 10 million or below and we are at the very bottom. It is quite natural that larger economies—starting perhaps with Australia with roughly 20 million people—have a lower export-to-GDP ratio than small countries and that is certainly the case with giant countries such as the United States. So we are performing only at barely acceptable levels. 
The second thing that becomes a little more apparent when one looks into the linkages between the opportunities an agreement like this puts forward and the internal economic challenges facing New Zealand is that participation in the external environment—and this agreement will certainly assist in a very modest way; it is part of the overall jigsaw of assisting our exporters—is absolutely linked to increasing productivity in this country. It is absolutely no coincidence that we have only one sector that has outstanding growth of total factor productivity. That is of course the sector that is deeply involved in the international economy: the agriculture sector which has an average annual rate of growth of a little under four times the growth of average total factor productivity for the economy as a whole. 
We have to ask ourselves why. I think the reason is that in spite of the agriculture sector being the sector of the economy that has had opportunities choked down on by the system of international protectionism that is now in the process of being unwound this sector—and this sector alone—is involved in a process in which the domestic market is merely an afterthought. On average our major industries sell maybe 10 percent of their output to the domestic market. For them their real market where they sell 90 percent of what they produce—90 percent of the sheep meat 90 percent of the dairy products—is the global market. To maintain their position in that market involves a commitment to a continual cycle of innovation and that is the critical difference. So I believe there is a move forming in this country whereby the essential agenda is becoming identified with a little more precision. 
It is very similar to what Trade and Enterprise put before the select committee in its public documentation today. It talked about connecting New Zealand business to the global economy. I think that is as good a way of putting it as any and I think both sides of the House are strongly behind that effort. I think where we do differ is when we discuss some of the linkages back into hard policy levers here in terms of deregulation and of what is the next phase of economic reform. But when it gets to the frontier we are following a common policy. This agreement will of course be part of that process and I support it strongly for that reason. 
I have been advised by the whip that unlike last night it is enough just to get up and make a speech without necessarily filling the time slot entirely. So to sum up I am pleased this agreement is now in its final stages in the House. I think it is a modest part of but it is totally consistent with a positive strategy for New Zealand and its place in the global economy.