Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Mr Chair. I don't imagine that I'll need a full five-minute call to note a couple of points in relation to the title and commencement but thank you for the opportunity to do so however.The bill is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill. My eye was actually caught by the acronym in brackets after those words Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement" because it caught my eye that the acronym was in fact not the same as the words that preceded it. Suspecting that there might be a typographical error I had a look and realised that in fact actually it's perfectly correct because of course what the drafters of the legislation are saying in their wisdom is that it's amending the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement—that is the TPP—and it's doing that by way of bringing this new thing a Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership into our law. So far so good.As far as the date of the amendment Act as it will become—2018 of course—that's not usually a debate point. The date of a piece of legislation passing—that much is actually very much automatic. However I just do note and bring into the debate quickly that between 2016 and 2018 in a way much has changed in those two years in the political positioning of parties opposite—or at least two out of three noting the consistency of the Green Party position—but not very much has changed as far as the nature and content of the agreement which as I say on this side of the Chamber we regard as no bad thing.Moving on quickly the commencement of the Act—well it will come into force the day after the date of Royal assent. It is in that way an executive Act. "Executive Act" I suppose is a bit of a tautology but as discussed before with the constitutional implications of the executive not only the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Trade the Minister himself—and I mean Minister O'Connor but also Parker and following in the footsteps of Ministers Groser and McClay. It is their Act that this House will be allowing to take place to be ratified to be confirmed so to speak. That wording "[to come] into force on the day after the … Royal assent." is the legislative equivalent of a.s.a.p. You can't really have much sooner than that. It would be the day after the Governor-General signs it and that's for two reasons I think and actually Minister O'Connor touched on both of those himself. One I would call symbolism which is to say the benefit of being proactive and upfront and I think in his words being one of the first if not the first to ratify the agreement is viewed as a good thing in the sense that it shows that we are committed in word and in deed to this agreement.The other is—again as touched upon by the Minister in the chair—that the benefits will flow only once the agreement is ratified and in force. So New Zealand's part in that now—or this Parliament's part in it more precisely—is to give effect to that. That is what this amendment bill will do. That is why we continue to support it on this side of the Chamber. We acknowledge others who have been involved in the process to date and thank you sir for the opportunity to make these points regarding the commencement and title."