Hayes John: New Zealand-China Free Trade Agreement Bill — In Committee 
Hayes John: New Zealand-China Free Trade Agreement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:648;Page:17350] 
JOHN HAYES (National—Wairarapa) 
: 
 I have heard some nonsense talked in this Chamber and that speech was a significant contribution in that sense. My colleague from the Green Party Keith Locke talked a load of nonsense. 
But before I climb into that I would like to acknowledge the officials who are here today particularly my ex-colleagues from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade who are led by David Walker. I would also like to publicly thank Simon Murdoch for his leadership in this process. What has been really good about the process is that it has involved officials from across a whole range of Government departments. It is good to see our departments working together in the same way that we in this Chamber are working across political divides this afternoon. So I extend my congratulations there. 
I was particularly interested in the freedom and latitude you gave the previous speaker Madam Chairperson because clearly he was not in any sense talking about Part 1. Part 1 talks about removing tariffs and amends the Tariff Act 1988. As I said in the House last night—obviously our Green colleague did not hear me—there is no fairer trade than free trade. Mr Locke talked about one of the arguments brought to the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee and I can talk about a group called New Zealanders with a Conscience that gave us a four-page submission outlining their concerns that the Government would get less income because it was going to drop tariffs and that the Inland Revenue Department would fall into deficit. 
That is a particularly serious problem that our committee addressed and the submitter argued that small businesses would close down as a result of these tariffs being reduced. On page 2 of its submission the group says that the agreement “would cause a great drain on the Government purse”. I really have to say that the select committee members across all parties disagreed that that would be the outcome. The point is that as a select committee we decided that this bill—which I think is the most significant piece of legislation to pass through this Parliament in the last 3 years—will contribute to making New Zealand an open and competitive economy and will give us strong links to the rest of the world. China is showing other countries that it too is prepared to engage more strongly internationally by dropping its trade barriers. 
Trade liberalisation policies go back at least 25 years in this country and the moves that we made with the CER agreement 25 years ago have enabled our economy to be in the strong position it is in today to make these tariff adjustments without having a significant impact on companies that operate in our community. I think that the removal of most tariff and other trade barriers with China as foreshadowed in Part 1 will improve resource allocation in New Zealand contribute to economic growth and also lower prices for consumers. 
My Green colleague has gone but the point about free trade is that no buyers pay more for a product than they want to because if they are asked to pay more and they do not want to pay then there is no transaction. That is a fundamental point not understood by New Zealand First not understood by the Green Party and not understood by the Maori Party and it is really important that the community understands that point. For the same reason the economic adjustment faced by industries will be small compared with those adjustments that would have been required when import licensing existed 30 or 40 years ago—when our economy was protected by high tariffs. I have been around many businesses in my community and of the 20 or 30 people I have talked to only one person has said that bringing tariffs down and allowing cheap Chinese machinery imports is going to be a bit of a problem and have an impact on his business. I am thinking now of Rob Saxton in Greytown the town where I live. He is the Stihl agent and his products are quite highly priced but they are of high quality. Consumers choose whether they go that way or go to Bunnings warehouse and spend $10 or $15 on an instrument that is perhaps less robust. This is what free trade is all about.