Groser Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Groser Tim: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:389] 
6.  
TIM GROSER (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Trade 
: Can he confirm the $2 billion trade deficit between New Zealand and China referred to by the Minister of Foreign Affairs at APEC last week and what steps are being taken to address any trade deficit? 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Minister of Trade) 
: 
 All countries run trade surpluses with some and deficits with other trading partners as the member of course knows well. New Zealand has a deficit in merchandise trade with China but a surplus in services trade. Trade with China through Hong Kong also runs at a surplus. The negotiation of a free-trade agreement with China and the recent opening of the New Zealand Focus centre in Hong Kong are two examples of the steps being taken to increase New Zealand exports to China. 
Tim Groser 
: Given the statement made by the Prime Minister: “The Foreign Minister by necessity is often a point of contact with other Governments” did the Minister of Trade expect the Minister of Foreign Affairs to outline the Government’s position on a free-trade agreement with China when he met China’s Foreign Minister at the APEC meeting last week notwithstanding New Zealand First’s well-known opposition to such agreements? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: If I recall rightly the Minister of Foreign Affairs pointed out to the Chinese Foreign Minister that he was dealing with foreign affairs and that my colleague Jim Sutton and I were dealing with trade. 
Dianne Yates 
: What impact would a free-trade agreement with China have on merchandise trade and why? [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: The deputy leader should listen to this; he might learn something. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the Minister answer the question. 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I am just waiting until the interjections stop. Modelling indicates that New Zealand exports to China would lift by something between $260 million and $400 million per year while imports from China would increase by between $60 million and $100 million per year. As China’s tariffs are much higher than New Zealand’s tariff removals on both sides would clearly benefit New Zealand exporters more. 
Tim Groser 
: Can the Minister tell the House in the light of the somewhat more cautious statements made by the Prime Minister last week regarding progress towards a free-trade agreement with China what he regards as a reasonable time frame for such an agreement to be reached? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I do not think I would characterise the Prime Minister’s statements as being more cautious; in fact they are entirely consistent with what she has said since she first reached agreement with President Hu from China to enter into these agreements. My advice from officials is that the negotiations which are entering their fifth round at the end of this month are on track. They are about where we would expect them to be. The Prime Minister has indicated that she is always reluctant to put a time frame on these things. We are as the member knows the first OECD country to enter into free-trade negotiation with China and therefore anything we decide will be a precedent for the future. That means that both sides will be relatively cautious in negotiating this arrangement. 
Dianne Yates 
: What is the largest component of New Zealand’s imports from China and why have imports from China been growing? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: Interestingly the largest single component of imports from China and the one that has grown most rapidly is computers. Imports from China have grown overall because it has produced merchandised goods that are attractive to New Zealand consumers and at cheaper prices than New Zealand can import those same goods from other countries. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Has the Minister seen a column in the  
New Zealand Herald  
this week 
written 
by Audrey Young and referring to events at APEC which stated: “Under a private agreement between Peters and Labour the only person who can supersede Peters is Clark. But Goff came close this week in substance if not form”; and can he please give the House details of this agreement which sets the rules for dealings between the Government and the Minister of Foreign Affairs? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I have not seen that column but from what the member has quoted it is wrong on all counts. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Has the Minister seen the statement attributed to his ministerial colleague Mr Peters who told a  
New Zealand Herald 
 reporter at APEC: “Mr Goff has just called me to say that what you wrote in [today’s]  
Herald 
 was a load of ‘inventive bullshit’.” and can he please tell the House what he said to Mr Peters that would have caused such an outburst? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: I of course would not repeat such language in the House but I think that was a generally accurate account of what I had told Mr Peters. 
Hon Murray McCully 
: Has the Minister seen an assessment of the APEC meeting by the President of the New Zealand First Party Mr Dail Jones who said: “If the situation has destabilised with New Zealand First then people like Phil Goff would hope to be the winners.” and can he tell the House whether this in any way helps to explain his actions at the APEC meeting? 
Hon PHIL GOFF 
: If I were not replying in the House I would use the same terms that I used about the  
New Zealand 
Herald 
 reporter.