Lees-Galloway Iain: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — Second Reading 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:678;Page:1448] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the Labour Party and speak in support of the Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill. As with many trade bills this is a bill that has received bipartisan support from across the House. In fact it was originally introduced by the Hon Lianne Dalziel during the last Labour Government. I think that does require a comment to note that it seems to have taken an awfully long time for this Government to progress the bill because it was introduced by the previous Government and 4 years later here we are at just the second reading.  
The purpose of the bill is to replace New Zealand’s current safeguards regime with a new regime that is consistent with World Trade Organization rules. The new regime will be a more efficient transparent and objective investigative and decision-making process. Safeguards are emergency measures applied at New Zealand’s border usually in the form of a duty and facilitate adjustment by a domestic industry to competition from increased imports. That is I suppose a flowery way of saying it is a response to the practice of dumping large quantities of often low-quality and low-cost goods on a particular market. This is the regime by which New Zealand will be able to defend its borders against such exercises.  
The existing Act the Temporary Safeguard Authorities Act 1987 was subject to review under the Labour-led Government which included wide public consultation and the bill is the result of that work. I note that a lot of the work a lot of the consultation and a lot of the activities that take time in preparing a bill were carried out by the previous Government and again the question remains when this is such an important piece of legislation to support the work of small businesses and large businesses across New Zealand to support our own local economy and to safeguard our own local economy why on earth it has taken this Government such an astonishingly long time to progress the bill to the point where it is at—that is its second reading.  
The bill not only ensures compliance with World Trade Organization rules it streamlines the process of responding to allegations of dumped or subsidised goods on the New Zealand market—something that will certainly be welcomed by New Zealand manufacturers and New Zealand producers. It removes the requirement to establish temporary safeguard authorities and it enables the existing expertise of the Ministry of Economic Development to be utilised instead. It is a cost-effective measure too and we are all supportive of that. 
 The bill is timely as it is important that at the time when domestic spending is constrained in New Zealand we have the right tools to protect our businesses from the impacts of globalisation and increased competition where appropriate. This is of course one part of ensuring that the New Zealand economy is able to compete fairly in the world market and it is great that we are able to put these measures in place to protect and support New Zealand manufacturers and to protect and support New Zealand producers. But what those manufacturers and producers will really be looking for is a real plan a real economic plan from this Government—not 120 points of nothingness not a 14-point this and a 6-point that and goodness knows what other plans and bullet points will be introduced by this Government as it seeks any opportunity it has to try to convince New Zealand that there is a plan.  
We do not need bullet points; we do not need statements. What New Zealand actually needs to make our economy stronger to ensure that we can compete internationally to ensure that our exports are of value and recognised and valued by markets overseas is an economic plan from this Government. And I think it really is reflective of how sluggish and how lamentably poor this Government has been at driving our economy out of the recession that it has been in that this fundamental piece of trade legislation has languished for such a long time—4 long years if not more since it was first introduced. It was introduced by a Labour Government it was progressed by a Labour Government but it all came to a grinding halt once National got into power.  
Some significant changes are certainly proposed by the bill. I have mentioned the safeguard interventions which will be undertaken by the ministry rather than by independent temporary safeguard authorities. The extension of the current 30-working-day time frame for the completion of a safeguard investigation will now be extended to 75 working days or in fact even 85 days if provisional safeguard duties are requested. The bill provides that after receiving the chief executive’s report about the safeguard investigation the Minister may take one or more of the actions in relation to imported goods if the Minister is satisfied that a range of criteria have been met.  
Given that this is the second reading it is worth reflecting on some of the amendments offered up by the select committee. The first of those is around the “Provisional safeguard duty—termination or reduction”. The commentary on the bill states: “As introduced clause 15 of the bill would provide the Minister with a wide-reaching discretionary power to terminate or reduce a provisional safeguard duty.” The select committee considered that this power was “too wide and should be subject to a ‘parameter of compliance’.” and recommended “an amendment to clause 15(1) to limit the Minister’s discretion to terminate a provisional safeguard measure by requiring that the Minister be no longer satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the conditions that justified imposing a provisional safeguard duty are met.” The select committee also recommended “an amendment to clause 15(1) to limit the Minister’s discretion to reduce a provisional safeguard duty by requiring that the Minister be satisfied there are good reasons for doing so.”  
The select committee also made amendments on the types of safeguard measures that are available and recommended “the deletion of clause 17(d) which provides that a safeguard measure can consist of ‘any other action the Minister considers appropriate’.” The select committee considered that the “types of safeguard measures in clause 17(a) to (c) are comprehensive; and likely actions other than those provided for in the bill such as the monitoring of particular imports by the Ministry of Economic Development would not require legislative authority.” The select committee also recommended “an amendment to clause 17(b) to delete the words ‘or an exemption from any duty’ because there is no case in which a safeguard measure could be an exemption from a duty under the Tariff Act 1988.” 
 It is a reasonably technical bill as often these trade bills are. But as is so often said in this House with trade being so fundamentally important to our economy as a small nation reliant on primary produce and manufacturing we are getting these technical bills around trade and ensuring that where possible we are consistent with the World Trade Organization. They are fundamentally important to the growth and development of our economy and our ability to compete internationally.  
The National Government talks a good game on this stuff but the fact remains that a bill like this has been allowed to languish for so long and we are in the second term of this Government. It was not a bill that was introduced by this Government; it was introduced by the previous Government. This Government has had plenty of time to progress a technical bill like this which is just so fundamentally important to ensuring that the New Zealand economy is robust. In fact it would have been extremely useful. In times of low spending and in times of recession in New Zealand it would have been very useful for this bill to have been implemented 2 or 3 years ago. I think producers and business people in New Zealand would have appreciated that but no because this Government can talk a good game on business but when it actually comes to getting on with the job of being in Government it fails again. New Zealand businesses are starting to wake up to this. They are starting to realise that this is the second and final term of this National Government because quite simply it does not have a plan for our economy.