Joyce Steven: Debate on Prime Minister’s StatementText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeJoyce Steven: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement[Sitting date: 09 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8767. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development): Mr Deputy Speaker firstly may I say that I hope you had a good summer break. I hope it was relaxing. Mine was thank you. I rode a horse grew my vegetables and went to the Wairarapa and to the Hawke’s Bay and Coromandel. I went up north last week—pretty relaxing up there. I had the launch of the Tai Tokerau Northland Economic Action Plan. We had a visit from the occasional visitor to Northland the current MP Mr Peters.I also had it is fair to say a reasonably well-reported experience with an unmanned aerial vehicle. It was an interesting day indeed at Waitangi. I have been thinking about that day on the odd occasion since and I have been thinking about the protesters. I have been thinking about them because they have had obviously a lot to say—and fair enough too; it is the nature of protest.A lot of what they have had to say has been very interesting. Primarily they have accused this Government of not opening up and giving information. I think the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is very important. I think it is one of the political fault lines about whether we are going to be forward-looking as a country embracing the opportunities that the world provides to us in an open competitive environment which gives our exporters and farmers a chance to succeed; or take a backward-looking defensive position where the world is out to get us and we should just try to crunch down and hope the world goes away which is what some of the other Opposition politicians promote.So I would like to devote a small amount of time this afternoon to making a few points about trade and the TPP. I would like to make the point that trade access is hugely important for a small country like New Zealand. It is not just important; it is hugely important. Without fair and equal trade access we cannot sell as much of our goods we get less for them and that means fewer jobs and lower incomes.In particular it is about jobs in regional New Zealand in our small farming communities like those in the far north that I visited last week who are rightly looking for opportunities for their young people to be employed. It is about the people who know it is really hard selling meat into Japan with a 38.5 percent tariff over what the locals are able to sell it for. It is about the people who are trying to sell kiwifruit or ice cream into TPP countries. I heard the Leader of the Opposition pooh-poohing the dairy benefits of the TPP today. Well there is a small ice cream company in the Hauraki Plains that has been started by international investors and is providing jobs to those people who would appreciate the opportunity to sell ice cream into the US and Japan.I am told by the protesters about investor-State dispute resolution provisions. Well that is hugely more likely to help New Zealand than hinder it. We already have an independent justice system that protects the legitimate activities of all sorts of companies including large multinational ones which if they feel wronged can go to court in this country. Nothing will change for us unless we start doing something like nationalising companies at I do not know 5 percent of their value—and then we would have other problems anyway. But the investor-State dispute settlement provides opportunities for New Zealand companies in countries where the court system is perhaps not quite as independent.Some people have been really loud in this debate but reject the whole concept of trade. Why would you listen to Jane Kelsey if you are actually interested in trade? Give Jane her due; she hates trade agreements. She would roll back the China free-trade agreement she would roll back the Korea free-trade agreement and she would roll back the South-east Asia free-trade agreement—any one of them. So why would you get advice from her? She is hardly likely to provide advice that is reasonable and balanced. I would like to point out that without the China free-trade agreement we would have been a quiet country after the global financial crisis a country that would be able to afford far fewer of the medicines that those protesters claim to be concerned about having access to.Then there are others who say that they support free trade but not this deal. They try to say “This one is worse.” but yet they cannot point to why it is worse. They keep talking about all sorts of things. It was negotiated by the same officials—including Tim Groser who used to be an official—who negotiated all the other deals. It has similar trade-offs similar clauses—and it is just not good enough apparently. Perhaps they are grumpy that their lot did not sign the deal. I do not know. But that is a ridiculous way to approach the arrangement.Then there are those who say it sacrifices our sovereignty. I had an experience as we know with somebody who said that—well not quite in those words—last week. How can that be so? We have the sovereign right to withdraw from any trade deal at any time—any trade deal at any time. I understand that with the TPP it is 6 months’ notice then you are out. We never do withdraw but why not? Because we would have to give up the benefits as well as the costs and every single Government has said that the benefits are worth having and they have not walked away.Then there are those who even say it is anti-democratic though the current Government has been elected—I do not know once twice three times on the TPP and the elected Parliament has to approve the legislation. That is democracy. I have got an idea: if it is about democracy why do the protesters not persuade the guy who is trying to sound like he agrees with them to actually go to the country in 2017 with a commitment to pull out of the TPP a commitment to leave the TPP? He should stop waffling around and wander out there and say: “I’m with you protesters. I agree with you. I’ll pull New Zealand out of the TPP.” Then we can have a further democratic test about the future of this legislation.The most important point I want to make today is the reason why this Government is doing this: because everyone on this side of the House cares about the future of this country. We want to provide good jobs for our people security for our families and a big enough national income so that we can afford the best health care the best education services and so on which my friend the toy-thrower was worried about. It is our sincere belief that this agreement will help do this for this country otherwise we would not be here.So I say to Andrew Little: at least the protesters have the excuse that they maybe do not know all there is to know about the agreement but if you have been in this House and if you have been in the debate you should be prepared to stand up for your country. He can stand up either way. He can stand up in favour or stand up against but enough of this mealy-mouthed going out—he spent half his speech nearly saying how much he hated the TPP but on the radio this morning he was saying that he would support it and would not withdraw from it.Well I say that if you really want to show any sort of leadership then step up and say you will pull out sunshine because your rhetoric does not match what you are actually doing. You are playing politics with the future of New Zealanders. His colleagues know it and it is not good enough.This will be an important year for New Zealand. They all are but this is an important one. In this year this Government—the John Key Government—will focus on building the opportunities for New Zealand growing the skills growing the innovation building our infrastructure improving our natural resources allocation attracting investment in this country and most important providing export access to our farmers and to our businesses to be able to sell overseas. That is crucially important.So for any naysayer on the other side who has a speech-writer trying to write up stories about this Government having a vision I say: look in the mirror it is you who is playing politics and who has no vision for this country. Thank you.