Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 11 February 2014. Volume:696;Page:15743. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]1.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to thePrime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “personally I’ve been of the view that transparency is a good thing. As Prime Minister I’ve tried to lead that charge…”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes I stand by that statement which was made in the context of discussing reform of MPs’ remuneration and travel privileges and transparency around expenses.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Could he explain to the country and the House how he is leading the charge on transparency in respect of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations when in his words—Hon Dr Nick Smith: It’s the same as China.Rt Hon Winston Peters: —exactly; that’s a communist country a one-party State thank you very much—“we do not know what is actually on the table and what is off.”?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: We are following the same process that has been followed for all other free-trade agreements including the China free-trade agreement.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why is he trying to keep the New Zealand public in ignorance of Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiating terms and details when the European Commission in a similar deal with the United States the Transatlantic Trade andInvestment Partnership is releasing both the proposed investment chapter and a layperson’s explanation for public consultation?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: For a start-off all members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership—all 12 countries—have agreed to keep negotiating text confidential. Secondly our negotiators are negotiating in the best interests of New Zealand. You would not think actually that we would go out there and want to give an advantage to the other countries we are negotiating with.Hon David Cunliffe: Is the Prime Minister aware of the likely date of the text being tabled in the United States Congress and can he confirm that that will be before the mid-term elections and well before it has the opportunity for ratification?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No one knows that date because the Trans-Pacific Partnership itself has not been concluded yet.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Why is the Prime Minister arguing for secrecy in negotiations when it is common practice in the World Trade Organization to release negotiating texts?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It is not common practice with the way that free-trade agreements have been negotiated in this country. The member is quite aware actually that we have a very thorough parliamentary process. At the point at which a text has been agreed then it will go through the full process including going off to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee for input from the public.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does ratification by Parliament represent transparency when by that time the public would have had and will continue to have no say in the negotiations; and what is in the negotiations and the discussions—[Interruption] Struck a nerve obviously. What is in the negotiations and the discussions that is of such—[Interruption] Mr Speaker I would like to try to get this question out. It is rather serious.Mr SPEAKER: The member has already got the first question out. He is actually asking a second supplementary question within it but it would assist the order of the House if the member could complete his question without interjections.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Thank you Mr Speaker. Does ratification by Parliament represent transparency when by that time the public would have had and will continue to have no say in the negotiations; and what is in the negotiations and the discussions that is of such concern to him and his Government that they presently want to keep it all secret from the New Zealand people?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: A few things. Firstly my advice is that the Trans-Pacific Partnership will require legislation so ultimately once it has gone through the select committee and the public have had their chance to have input and it has gone through all of those various stages the Government of the day will require a parliamentary mandate so by definition people would have had a lot of input. The second thing is that the consultation process undertaken by the Trans-Pacific Partnership is amongst the most extensive that a New Zealand Government has undertaken for any trade negotiations. Public comment on the Trans-Pacific Partnership was first sought in 2008 and has been invited since. Negotiators have conducted a proactive consultation process that has included regular meetings with business groups local councils the health sector and other representatives unions and other NGOs and other individuals and academics. Opposition parties have also been briefed on the negotiations as we go along. I think we all know that Mr Peters is opposed to free trade. This is the man who voted against the China free-trade agreement. Well good luck but they happen to be our second-largest trading partner and almost certainly will one day be our largest.Brendan Horan: Would the Prime Minister think there would be transparency in an entity submitting multiple Official Information Act requests in a made-up name suchas for example Bruce Bayliss and does he think such a practice would be transparent enough for a political party research unit?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have no evidence to support that Mr Bayliss is putting in Official Information Act requests under a pseudonym or false name but I am aware that Mr Bayliss is associated with and works for New Zealand First. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! A point of order has been called.Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There is emerging of late a tendency to get up and ask a supplementary question that has nothing to do with the primary question or any supplementary question or any answer that the Prime Minister might give that would give that member liberty to extend his question. I have got no idea who Mr Bayliss is.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The essence of the question was around transparency and related to the original primary question.