Carter John: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Carter John: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21409] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I want to follow up the issue my friend and colleague Lockwood Smith has drawn to the Committee’s attention in regard to Part 2. In particular the Committee needs to look at new section 15F(1) inserted by clause 7 which states: “The Minister may decide to apply a transitional safeguard measure if he or she makes a determination as a result of an investigation by the chief executive … that goods … (b) are causing or threatening to cause serious injury to an industry producing a like or directly competitive good.” That really needs to be given a thorough interpretation. I wonder what it means exactly. I would be interested to hear the Minister comment on that aspect of this part if he would be so kind. 
Under New Zealand regulations—occupational safety and health for example—and the laws of the politically correct system under which we work we now have such stringent rules that we restrict the public and our industries from doing all sorts of things in a way that is not thought of in other countries. I wonder whether that section means that we are taking the opportunity to put up trade barriers against the spirit of a trade agreement. Is this some sort of backyard deal that allows us to worm our way out of our obligations? If we are signing a free-trade agreement with another country then there has to be free trade. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: What a sad speech. 
JOHN CARTER 
: That member will be sad when he is not back in Parliament after the next election so if I were him I would not worry about being sad now. If I were that member I would be happy to be taking calls because they will be amongst his last—which will be a blessing to Parliament. 
I ask the Minister what new section 15F(1) actually means. A free-trade agreement on my understanding of the situation means free trade. I know that people like Keith Locke do not agree with that. That is fair enough; he states his case. But the point is that signing up to a free-trade agreement means that we can put our goods into a country and it can put its goods into ours. We should not need barriers because of different rules and regulations within the countries yet surely that is exactly what that section states. I think that issue is absolutely important and I look forward to the Minister explaining to us what that section means. 
I want to go back to an issue I have raised already on which the Minister has not satisfied me and certainly I believe will not have satisfied any of the listeners to this debate. It is the issue around the Treaty of Waitangi. Again I ask the Minister to tell the industries involved—because they are the ones that are directly affected—what the agreement means in referring to the fulfilment of our “obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi”. What does that mean with regard to this trade agreement? I do not understand; I do not know what it means. That phrase is just parrot words unless we have some understanding of what those obligations are. I know that the Minister like his fellow Ministers when they are asked questions will ignore that question which is unfortunate. But if he is going to ignore it why was that phrase put in the agreement at all? Some bureaucrat at some stage will be asked a question about it and he or she will then be obliged to spend hours and hours on trying to figure out what it means—because the agreement states that someone will have to. It is likely that that person will get it wrong or after doing hours of research he or she will not be able to find the answer either. 
It is a serious matter when we have legislation and treaty articles that refer to things that are not defined and that people cannot understand. Quite honestly they end up being meaningless. Particularly in trade agreements that we arrange with other countries we should know what absolutely every word in a treaty means and know what impact an agreement has on our country and on the country with which we are making it. In this case the Thai people have every right to be able to understand the phrase. In fact it amazes me that they have not asked for an explanation.