Goodhew JoHon JO GOODHEW (National—Rangitata): Thank you Mr Chairperson.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I did not quite hear you call.Hon JO GOODHEW: Sorry. I was thinking that I might have had competition but in fact there is no competition at the moment.I begin my contribution this afternoon by acknowledging that I am a fairly new member to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and I am finding myself quite surprised by the breadth of what the committee handles. Certainly in this examination for the annual review we covered a lot of bases. I am enjoying it and suffice to say that at this time as evidenced by some of the comments that we have heard today my constituents are now more than ever asking me about New Zealand's reaction to the international situation. So I begin by acknowledging the Hon Gerry Brownlee's ascension to the foreign affairs ministerial portfolio. I am sure he will do very well particularly given his work as the Minister of Defence.But I also want to acknowledge cousin Murray McCully's role as the previous Minister and to say that whilst few of us would ever have seen Minister McCully with a happy smile on his face I think he probably can now look back with some sense of satisfaction on what he achieved—particularly as we have heard mentioned here and as the committee discussed during our time on the United Nations Security Council. It is something for New Zealand to be proud of and he played a major role in that.Today I want to spend a bit more time though on trade. I want to acknowledge our trade Minister Todd McClay. I want to do that also because of the importance my constituents place on trade. The seat of Rangitata of course is a primary production seat—[Interruption] Oh I am live and a whole lot louder now.Alastair Scott: Start again!Hon JO GOODHEW: It is OK. I am hoping that somewhere it is being recorded. I do want to say that what we heard about trade filled me with quite a lot of hope. So whilst we have had some success and some disappointment on trade negotiations the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) being one of those we caught up in the committee with what progress there was on the possibility of another trade agreement after the TPP—or lack of it. What we also talked about was non-tariff barriers. These are the barriers that are often legally—not always legally—put in place by countries where we already have a trade agreement. We asked Brook Barrington about those. What we were given was an understanding that there are now more people working in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade on no-tariff barriers and that also the Ministry for Primary Industries as I already knew has increased the number of people whom it has working in this area.But I want to bring to this debate this afternoon its answer to a written question about some actual examples of non-tariff barriers which having been dealt to were solved and what that means for New Zealand. One of these was the World Trade Organization disputes settlement panel ruling in New Zealand's favour—this is around 18 agricultural non-tariff barriers imposed by Indonesia. That is worth a stunning $500 million to $1 billion to New Zealand in beef exports and that was a non-tariff barrier that took a lot of time and a lot of resource to solve before that disputes settlement panel. But it was well and truly worth it to New Zealand.Another one: as we know New Zealand's wine industry is going gangbusters and in fact we have increased the amount of wine that we are selling now—I think I did have the figure down here but I cannot see it just at the moment—but we got an assurance from the Liquor Control Board of Ontario that it would not introduce variable pricing or flexible mark-ups. That is sort of a bit gobbledegook to me but the thing that really does resonate with me is the fact that that meant $60 million worth of additional revenue for New Zealand. So dealing with these non-tariff barriers is particularly important.I just wanted to finish with one example on how proceeds of crime funding has been benefiting Customs. Customs got $2.78 million through a contestable process. There was $7 million up for grabs. Initiatives from Government agencies were considered and we now have a Customs liaison officer in Hong Kong and a Customs employee in the International Targeting Centre in Washington. These are concrete examples of how that money is being spent in our customs environment. Thank you.