Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Tēnā koutou katoa. It is my pleasure as a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee to debate the report prepared by that committee on the international treaty examination of the PACER treaty. I think a lot of people are wondering what PACER stands for. It actually stands for Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations. It relates to the 16 Pacific Islands Forum countries of which New Zealand is a member with Australia. I'd like to just read who else is involved in this particular agreement. It is the Cook Islands Kiribati Nauru New Zealand—sorry I've said New Zealand—Niue Samoa Solomon Islands Tonga Tuvalu and Vanuatu who have signed the agreement. The Federated States of Micronesia Palau and the Republic of the Marshall Islands have completed their negotiations so we're waiting for them to sign the agreement. Another four forum members Papua New Guinea Fiji French Polynesia and New Caledonia have the option of joining.So this particular agreement was first committed to in Nauru on 18 August 2002 and essentially it is a development and trade cooperation agreement. Over the last eight years a process of negotiations has been entered into and I do want to acknowledge the former trade Minister Todd McClay because it's true that this agreement was finalised in April 2017. In preparing for my contribution I thought it'd be really interesting for people to know what the benefits challenges and way forward was for PACER-Plus and this was released by the Institute for International Trade in its final report in June 2008 which is essentially when we started the process of negotiations. What it said was that what this PACER-Plus agreement provides is actually a framework for an optimism for the future for Pacific regional collaboration. At that time in 2008 then Prime Minister Rudd from Australia announced that they would be investing in what they called a Pacific Partnerships for Development programme. There was a huge focus on an increase in labour market access and specifically for Pacific workers into the Australian and New Zealand markets which is actually seen as the most beneficial outcome for this agreement to the Pacific Islands. What does that currently equate to from a New Zealand perspective? That's $40 million every year in remittances that goes back to the islands because Pacific Island workers have access to New Zealand as employees.What did they also focus on? They focused on increased investment particularly in agriculture and fishing and I too would like to acknowledge my colleague the Hon Shane Jones who in his previous role was very much focused on that agriculture and fisheries development to increase capacity to increase productivity and to increase infrastructure development opportunities that would then facilitate trade-related capacity development for our Pacific Island whānau. But it was also to build a job base at home in the Pacific Islands. So yes one part of it was providing work opportunities here in Aotearoa but the other part of it actually is providing work opportunities in the Pacific. I think from all of our perspectives it would be a much better option for Pacific people to have high quality well-paid jobs in their own countries as opposed to coming to New Zealand and being dislocated from their whānau for periods of time to then send money back.So this PACER-Plus treaty this trade agreement actually was trying to ensure that our Pacific Island brothers and sisters have opportunities that in their own words must not see them left behind because of economic globalisation. So for people to suggest that the Pacific have not been fully engaged in what has been now an over-17-year process in the fruition of the PACER-Plus free-trade agreement—I think they're actually undermining a lot of the work that has been done from a lot of people over a long period of time.I did also want to highlight particularly that part of this arrangement has seen the opportunity for our Pacific whānau involved in this PACER-Plus agreement to apply for funding. So we created a $7.7 million fund that allowed for jurisdictions to prepare legislation to enact this—what will be a piece of legislation. We also provided money for public awareness campaigns so people understood the benefits of the PACER-Plus trade agreement.The other part of this arrangement—well there are two more parts that I think really emphasise that this is not just a trade agreement; that it is about Pacific development—was the implementation of a $25.5 million fund to look at priority trade and related needs. And I think that we should really focus on what that means because actually for most trade agreements we would say What's in it for us?" But actually what's in it for us is the collective well-being of the Pacific region that we are proud to be a member of.And the other part of the agreement that needs to be emphasised is a commitment that we will spend 20 percent of our aid for trade. So 20 percent of our total official development assistance spend will be committed to the implementation of this PACER-Plus agreement. And I know my colleague the Hon Gerry Brownlee has been speaking quite a lot in our Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee meetings about what aid is versus what development is and I think that this provides a really good context for why and how we should spend money in the Pacific. It does create I guess a bigger opportunity for a conversation about how that then is going to interfere possibly with our current funding allocations but if that means that this provides a bit of a motivation and an impetus to look at whether or not we're spending enough in this area then I think that's a good thing.I also wanted to highlight that this PACER-Plus agreement also enables us to fulfil some of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and I do want to highlight those because the SDGs are about alleviating poverty. They're about increasing living standards. They are about helping support the United Nations in its quest to make the world a better place for everybody and not leave anyone behind. So this agreement particularly will give effect to SDG 8 which looks at decent work and economic growth and I think I've outlined how that will happen both in opportunities for Pacific workers to come to New Zealand but also for us to help create that base for that decent work in the Pacific. There's also a commitment through this investment for support for affordable and clean energy which will help us—or help the Pacific—achieve SDG 7. And there is also an SDG goal around industry innovation and infrastructure. The last of the goals actually is a focus on women's economic empowerment. So SDG 5 is all about gender equality. I suppose if there was one thing that I'd like to see from the agreement it is specific opportunities for women because I believe through the interactions that I've had that our capacity in the Pacific particularly through our Pacific Women's Parliamentary Partnerships programme—you know we've heard and interacted with Pacific women who talk about the continued use of their mātauranga their knowledge and their cultural practices around crafts and utilising their natural resources to continue to have trade in that area is incredibly important. So what I would hope to see from this PACER-Plus agreement into the future are in fact those opportunities and how we can help sustain that cultural practice to make sure that that cultural practice has a trading base. And obviously we've got the Pasifika Festival in Auckland later this week and I know that there will be a lot of artists who will come over from our Pacific Islands to participate in that. So I see a lot of opportunity for the PACER-Plus agreement and as a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee it's been a pleasure to speak on this. Kia ora.Motion agreed to."