Jones Dail: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Jones Dail: Tariff (New Zealand - Thailand Closer Economic Partnership) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21399] 
DAIL JONES (NZ First) 
: 
 The previous speaker from the National Party John Carter raised the question that I had raised earlier about the insertion of the Treaty of Waitangi into this legislation. It was almost a speech I thought in opposition to the bill and I support everything he said. For the reasons given by him New Zealand First is opposing the bill. 
Next week the Rt Hon Winston Peters on behalf of New Zealand First will be making a speech about matters relating to the Treaty of Waitangi and I do not intend to take that aspect any further today at this stage. 
The point has been raised about horticulture. In the New Zealand First minority report attached to the partnership agreement we made the point that we were concerned about the submission from the New Zealand Horticulture Export Authority which indicated to the committee and I quote: “However new residue testing requirements proposed by the Thai government have the potential to significantly reduce the benefits from the agreement. These requirements are viewed by both the New Zealand export industry and Thai fruit and vegetable importers as a non-tariff trade barrier focused on reducing imports of Chinese fruit and vegetables. We are working with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to address this issue …”. That is the Horticulture Export Authority’s submission. 
I note that horticultural exports do not feature prominently in our exports to Thailand. The list I mentioned earlier on of New Zealand’s exports to Thailand which lists 20 products does not show horticultural exports at all. At the No. 20 level are exports worth $3 million so I assume that any horticultural exports must be worth less than that. But clearly they are in grave danger because of the trade agreement entered into between Thailand and China. In terms of that of course Chinese goods are allowed into Thailand. Since October 2003 Thailand has provided duty-free access for horticultural items from China as part of an early harvest package ahead of their full free-trade agreement negotiations. It seems that the Thai people are willing to enter into an agreement on the one hand but on the other hand start to put up barriers even with the Chinese. We are going to be caught up in their barrier with the Chinese; it obviously will affect us as well. It makes one question the worth of an agreement of that kind. 
Much has been made of the reduction in tariffs but we must look at what the existing tariffs are. I gave a couple of examples in New Zealand First’s minority report. Infant milk food formula was worth $34.9 million in 2003; the tariff goes down from 5 percent to zero not from 17 and 18 percent as suggested elsewhere. Wood pulp was worth $5 million; the change in tariff is from 1 percent to zero so that is not much of a drop. For what is a fairly small market as Dr Lockwood Smith said this is a poor-quality agreement overall. 
The services area is the one of vital importance to New Zealand and we know that it has not been allowed to be implemented. But the other way round it does seem to be working. I ask the Minister to explain why so many specialist Thai chefs and traditional Thai massage therapists are being allowed into New Zealand. Do they ever go back to Thailand? Why must we keep on bringing them in? What happens to them? How long do they stay here? Can we not at some stage train New Zealanders to cook Thai food? Indeed I had a very nice Thai chicken curry in a place just outside the building here at lunchtime. Surely we can cope with making a nice Thai meal after all these years. Why should New Zealanders lose out on jobs? Why must we always have Thai chefs? What is the need for traditional Thai massage therapy in New Zealand? Were we not able to survive and cope without traditional Thai massage therapy? Why do we need these types of people in New Zealand? Why not train New Zealanders so that they can get these jobs rather than our bringing in Thai people all the time to do them? 
Can a Labour Minister explain why the clothing footwear and carpet sectors and whiteware plasterboard steel and certain textiles must be placed at risk because of an agreement entered into by him? 
This is a sad day for the workers of New Zealand and I am wearing my red tie just for them today. Obviously no Labour Party member has worn a tie of that colour today.