Macindoe Tim; Tolley AnneHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Malo e laumalie Madam Deputy Speaker. Thank you. It seems particularly appropriate to commence this speech on the second reading of the PACER-Plus bill given that we are in Tongan Language Week but—Matt Doocey: That's right—keep going in Tongan. Hon TIM MACINDOE: I probably won't carry on in Tongan Mr Doocey but thank you for the encouragement. I wouldn't wish to upset my Tongan constituents by murdering their language. I would however like to wish talofa lava kia orana—and I would say bula vinaka" but of course the Fijians are not part of this agreement—and warm Pacific greetings to all who are parties to the agreement in what is a very important measure for all the parties who at this stage have committed to signing up to it. At some stage in the future it is certainly my hope that many more from throughout the Pacific region will feel encouraged and welcome to do so. I am conscious of the fact that there is always a danger when readings have been interrupted of a degree of repetition. In fact this second reading commenced several weeks ago and it was interrupted at that point. It then recommenced before the dinner adjournment when I was not able to be in the House so I apologise in advance if anything that I say repeats some of the information that is critical to the consideration at the second reading but I do think it's important to get some facts on the table. I have to say that there is a certain irony in having so much enthusiasm from the Labour Party and the New Zealand First Party for a free-trade agreement when those of us who are on this side of the House who were on the other side of the House just a year ago remember that this agreement was at that stage being concluded—or rather the negotiations were coming to a conclusion—in June of last year under the fine leadership of the Hon Todd McClay and we had just emerged from a period of sustained belligerent opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement from those parties opposite. At that stage it seemed that they hadn't a good word to say about free trade. Now suddenly they're on that side of the House and they've become converts and I do welcome their conversion but as I say there's a little bit of irony in it. I do think it's therefore important to give credit where credit is due and say "Malie Fakafofonga." I apologise if I've got that wrong but I understand that means "well done" "bravo" "a brilliant effort" and I want to say that I won't say it again to the Hon Todd McClay but he and his partners throughout the Pacific did a very good job. It is naturally something that we would all hope will be of mutual benefit to all the parties who are concerned. And I have to say to the Green member who's just resumed her seat it's always fascinating to hear Green arguments on topics of this type because listening to Ms Davidson you would assume that there was not a single benefit to any of the Pacific partners who have at this stage committed themselves to PACER-Plus.Simeon Brown: What have they been vaping?Hon TIM MACINDOE: I shall leave that question to the realms of being a rhetorical question Mr Brown but still happy to have written you into the record for asking it. In all seriousness I say to the Green Party: do they seriously believe that all of the nations that have gone through a very detailed consideration of this topic who have had the benefit of expert advice who have had the benefit of trade commissioners and others going to their countries talking them through in detail what the opportunities would be showing them that it's not only trade but also services that can make an enormous transformational difference in many of their countries—are we seriously meant to believe that at the end of all of that they would say "Well there's no benefit to us in that. That's absolutely predatory. We will be seriously disadvantaged but hey we'll sign up anyway."? Because that is the logical conclusion of the argument that is being put forward: "There's no benefit to us in any of this but we'll sign up anyway." Well I want to suggest that that is a fairly farcical—Alastair Scott: Patronising.Hon TIM MACINDOE: I wouldn't go so far as to say "patronising" Mr Scott but I thank you for your assistance. I would nevertheless describe it as a farcical conclusion. So I just want to refer to some of the documentation and in particular draw the Greens' attention—now this is presumably not new to them but there is a very detailed national interest analysis that has been produced on the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations the PACER-Plus agreement. Now admittedly this is for the New Zealand tradespeople but nevertheless we read it and we look into it to see—well what does it tell us of the national interest for each of the member nations who are a part of it? There is no question that there is a very significant economic cooperation package being made available as part of the PACER-Plus agreement and this is being made available to help Pacific countries to meet their obligations and realise the benefits of the agreement. Now New Zealand and Australia have offered to provide more than $55 million in direct and indirect trade-related support for the Pacific through PACER-Plus and associated initiatives. So that's one commitment. "PACER Plus will leverage New Zealand's Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) investments to increase regional trade investment and labour flows." and New Zealand has committed to investing at least 20 percent of its total official development assistance in Aid for Trade in the Pacific for the first five years after the agreement comes into force. Now previous speakers have drawn attention to the Government's commitment to the Pacific reset. I would make the point that much of that work was already under way under the previous Government but I acknowledge the fact that they have taken it a stage further. They've put some more money into it and I think it's fair to acknowledge that and I think there's pretty broad agreement in this House on the fact that we have a strong not just a sense of obligation but almost a family tie to our Pacific neighbours and we have a very strong desire to be of assistance to them. While New Zealand tends to think of ourselves as a small country when it comes to Pacific matters suddenly we become a very large country and I'm pleased that as a country we are stepping up to acknowledge that and to do our best to help. So you read in the national interest analysis that "PACER-Plus seeks to facilitate trade in services between New Zealand and Pacific Island Forum countries by building on current commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the Pacific Island Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA)"—which is a Trade in Services protocol—and "It covers all service sectors and modes of supply with exceptions which preserve services supplied in the exercise of government authority government procurement subsidies and air transport services." Now that all sounds fairly wordy but when you look down the list of how some different countries can be affected by this these include the following sectors: taxation services to Tonga; veterinary services in Samoa; services provided by midwives nurses physiotherapists and paramedical personnel in Tonga and Vanuatu; computer and related services in the Solomon Islands; research and development services in Tonga; real estate services in Tonga; rental/leasing services without operators in Samoa and Tonga; advertising services in Samoa—and I'm only not quite halfway through a list in this particular assessment. So the point that I'm making is that this is comprehensive in its application. It is designed to ensure that there is very real benefit for all the parties that take part. I don't see why on earth the Greens would think that there is absolutely no benefit in that and of course they haven't been compelled to sign up.There are a number of Pacific nations that at this stage are staying outside PACER-Plus and looking to see whether there will come a point when it might be more attractive to them. I hope that in time it will be and we'll—certainly in New Zealand I'm sure—be keen to ensure that and I wish the current trade Minister who's in the House well in his efforts to do that. I'm sure he'll represent us very well in reaching out to those Pacific nations because as I say we take our obligations to our neighbours seriously and as I say the very important point to note is that this is an agreement that has real benefits to all the parties involved. Inevitably when there is a trade agreement there are things that have to be compromised. There is a bit of give and take. That's in the nature of negotiation but to suggest as the Greens are doing that this is a horrific agreement where there is no benefit whatsoever to the Pacific nations is to my mind absolutely farcical and completely refuted by reference to the facts. I do suggest to any member of the public who may be interested to have a look at the national interest analysis. By all means agree that you're reading our particular analysis through New Zealand eyes but also reach out and see how this will have attractive benefits for many other nations.So I am absolutely delighted to welcome this particular bill that will see PACER-Plus advance to the next stage in the process in the House tonight. I'm sure that from this point on the Government will be keen to ensure that we complete the remaining stages fairly soon. I will be pleased to take another call at that point. I commend the Government for the work that it's doing and the National Opposition is very happy to support it.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This next call is a split call."