Street Maryan: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — First Reading 
Street Maryan: Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1879] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the first reading of the Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill. I will speak for a moment about the kinds of balancing acts that are required in the development of free trade around the world and about the role that this bill plays in that regard. 
There is legislation that this bill modernises. Even since the 1987 passing of the Temporary Safeguard Authorities Act the world has changed substantially. The need to balance a Sovereign nation’s requirement to protect itself and its people with the requirements of open free and fair trade obligations under the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a responsibility that should properly fall to Parliament and it is doing so with the introduction and first reading of this bill. 
There are balances to be struck between how a nation protects its domestic industries and at the same time manages bilateral and multilateral relationships on a trade basis in a progressive and ongoing way. That balancing act needs to be updated and is updated somewhat by this bill. The most important thing this bill does is to bring our provisions for emergency measures into line with WTO requirements. That is imperative. We no longer live in a world where we can pull up the shutters and pretend other nations do not exist. Our very existence as an export-driven economy is dependent on the agreement of trade arrangements with other countries. 
We have been particularly successful in that respect in the last 9 years. Helen Clark Phil Goff and before that the Hon Jim Sutton have worked hard to expand our bilateral trade agreements. They have been enormously successful. Perhaps the most successful manifestation of that work was last year’s signing of the free-trade agreement with China. 
At every turn with these free-trade agreements New Zealand seeks to put in labour and environment standards. They are an essential part of our integrity in ensuring that free-trade agreements meet with standards that are acceptable to New Zealanders. We have in the past when New Zealand underwent huge economic reforms in the 1980s seen domestic industries particularly manufacturing go to the wall because of rapid tariff reduction. We are one of the most open economies in the world so there are very few protections in the way of tariff barriers remaining for our manufacturers. That caused a great deal of pain 20 years ago but a more vibrant more articulate manufacturing sector has emerged from that because of the need to find new markets and niches within those markets where New Zealand can produce and sell goods that are desirable overseas and that preferably have value added to them before they depart these shores. 
With the kinds of free-trade agreements we have been entering into recently—and we have just recently seen a multilateral free-trade agreement signed between Australia New Zealand and the 10 ASEAN nations which takes us into a different realm of free-trade agreements entirely—we need to be able to keep up with this kind of progress and I believe firmly that it is progress with suitable protection measures as and when required. They are temporary they are urgent and they are in the public interest as is stated in the provisions outlined in this bill. But more than anything else they are consistent with WTO requirements. 
Our bilateral arrangements are one thing and they are significant but we need our bilateral arrangements to be able to move into multilateral arrangements. The Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations that are under way at the moment which started off with Singapore Brunei Chile and New Zealand as the first four signatories and have now had the United States and Viet Nam added create a different kind of multilateral forum for us to market our goods. 
Where protections are required for the public good in New Zealand this bill provides for such safeguards. As I said they are temporary they are urgent and they must be in the public good and consistent with WTO provisions. We are not talking here about protectionism and it is important that members and the public understand the difference. This is not about protectionism; this is about temporary safeguards where an injury may be done to the public good or where a domestic industry needs some time to adjust to a tariff reduction. This is not about allowing dumping and it is not about importing lesser standards into our economy than we would tolerate for our own New Zealand workers; it is about engaging with countries on the international stage on a multilateral basis in order to achieve the kind of free trade and the exchange of goods that is necessary for this country to maintain the standard of living it requires. This bill brings us up to date in that respect. 
One other point I will make about the bill is about the work that went on prior to the Minister of Commerce bringing the bill to the House and prior to its introduction to the House by the previous Minister of Commerce the Hon Lianne Dalziel—that is the statement of consultation undertaken in order to enact these provisions. We must not ever overlook the stakeholder consultation that goes on in order to bring about this kind of progressive measure. There was consultation through a discussion paper with a range of New Zealand business groups and firms and also importantly with the Council of Trade Unions. Those consultative stakeholder representations give me the confidence we need in this Parliament to ensure that this measure enhances New Zealand’s standard of living and our progress in trade relationships on the international stage. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker.