Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Thank you sir and I thank Ms Ghahraman for outlining the Greens' position. I'll come back to it in a little bit more detail shortly but I'll just make the point that when she claims that the Green Party stands for progressive trade she hasn't yet—and nor have any of her colleagues—ever been able to find a trade agreement that seems to fall within that description and so they do seem to have a very consistent position in opposing trade deals which are clearly in our best interests and in this case I would still maintain are in the best interest of the signatories to it.As we are in the third reading of this Tariff (PACER-Plus) Amendment Bill I think it is appropriate to acknowledge the current and former trade Ministers who have brought it to this point the Hon David Parker and in particular the Hon Todd McClay who did much of the work in New Zealand's interests leading up to June of last year when the agreement was reached. I think it is also appropriate in this third reading to acknowledge our Pacific partners from the other 10 countries. They are Australia the Cook Islands Kiribati Nauru Niue Samoa the Solomon Islands Tonga Tuvalu and Vanuatu who are all with New Zealand signatories to the PACER-Plus agreement. As the Minister for Trade and Export Growth noted earlier this afternoon when he moved the third reading of this bill—and I completely agree with him—in time he very much hopes that the other Pacific nations that are not currently in a position to sign up will find it in their advantage to do so and I'm sure that they will be warmly welcomed.I'd also like to acknowledge warmly all the trade envoys and officials who have worked so hard to bring this agreement into being. This is the culmination for them of almost a decade of hard work and negotiation and so I think it's valid to put on the record that the negotiation of PACER-Plus was led for New Zealand by an inter-agency team from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. This team included officials from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and also from the New Zealand Customs Service. As this time last year I had the privilege of being the Minister of Customs I'm delighted in particular to acknowledge their contribution. I have the highest regard for the service of our customs officials. They make a huge contribution in a way that isn't so often seen. They are well known for the work they do in protecting our borders but they also make a huge contribution to our economy and so I thank them and note that other relevant agencies were also regularly consulted during the negotiations. It was very much a team effort and this is their day so let us acknowledge all the trade envoys and officials who have been so intimately involved.The Hon Todd McClay noted when he spoke earlier in this debate that New Zealand often finds ourselves at a disadvantage in trade negotiations both because we're a small nation and because of our geographical isolation. We're a long way from many of the markets with whom we wish to conclude trade deals. But in this particular instance as Mr McClay noted those challenges are even greater for the very small Pacific Island nations that are part of this agreement and for once New Zealand is actually a very large party in the scheme of things. So I want to repeat Mr McClay's observation that this should rightly be seen as the PACER-Plus Trade and Development agreement" because the development aspect of it is a huge part of the commitment that we've entered into.As New Zealanders we all feel very strong ties to the Pacific. So many people living here in this country are of Pacific origin. I understand approximately 296000—nearly 300000—people currently in New Zealand are of Pacific origin. So our commitment to them is one that we take very seriously and we enter into the PACER-Plus agreement honourably and generously and I think it's important to put that on record. Our Pacific neighbours are family. I truly believe that PACER-Plus will be in their best interests and will enhance their development and prosperity. I'm sure that all members in this House even the Green members who are opposed to it would agree with me in hoping that that will be so.Let me just go back for a moment to the Green viewpoint. As a member of the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee I've naturally had the opportunity to study their minority view and I'll just quote from it. In expressing their opposition they make the point that in their view "the PACER Plus agreement undermines efforts to promote Pacific regionalism reprioritises New Zealand's existing aid budget into problematic 'aid for trade initiatives' and burdens Pacific states with unfair export rules." That obviously was part of what Ms Ghahraman was trying to identify today.So let us just look for a moment in order to balance the record there at what the intended benefits of the PACER-Plus agreement actually are. If I could just read from a list here because I think it's important that these are clearly understood the intended benefits of PACER-Plus include: "a more predictable trading environment;"—and being able to predict with a degree of certainty is important—"more consistent and transparent rules throughout our region on sanitary and phytosanitary measures technical barriers to trade and customs procedures; more liberal and product-specific rules of origin; increased investment in the region in particular by New Zealand and Australian investors into Pacific Island countries;"—and our ability to invest in those nations is of huge importance to some of those very small island States—"greater certainty around tariffs for exporters; more opportunities for trade-related development assistance for Pacific Island countries;" and "a more mobile labour force in the region." So as I say those are some of the intended main benefits.And if I could just find where I was going with my notes we might carry on. As I say those are the overall objectives but since this is the third reading of the Tariff (PACER Plus) Amendment Bill I think it's also important to dig down into some of the detail. So I'd like to just quote from this much weightier tome—the national interest analysis of the PACER Plus Agreement—and look at some of its key features. Again if I could just write this into the record particularly for the benefit for those who are listening according to the national interest analysis which was concluded in June 2017 "The Agreement will be the first reciprocal trade agreement governing New Zealand's … NZD$654 million [worth] of goods and services exports to the Parties [to the agreement]". It will "assist New Zealand in [the Pacific] region where"—and this is a key point—"the majority of countries are not [World Trade Organization] members and therefore are not [subject] to any WTO limits on the maximum tariff rate that they can apply."So on average New Zealand exported around $376 million worth of goods per year to PACER-Plus parties—excluding Australia of course—between the years 2013 and 2015. Tariffs on New Zealand exports will be eliminated under this agreement over extended time frames of 25 to 35 years. But "At present New Zealand exports face an average ad valorem tariff of 6.8 percent and attract duties estimated at NZD$24 million annually …". Well "ad valorem" literally means "according to value" so it's a tariff imposed on the monetary value of the item.So the national interest analysis states that "PACER Plus will have negligible … revenue implications for New Zealand [importers]". According to the briefing that we on the Foreign Affairs Defence and Trade Committee received earlier this year from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade PACER-Plus differs from other trade agreements in that it has specific and significant development components. I'm running out of time but these include—well actually as I say because I'm running out of time I might leave it to other speakers to do this. The detail there is really important. This is an agreement—and I'll conclude with this point—that has been negotiated very carefully looking at the best interests of the Pacific Island nations. It's part of our commitment to them.As I mentioned at the outset it's very much my hope that those nations that haven't yet indicated that they wish to be a partner to it will in time feel that they can see the benefits as this comes into effect with others that they can see those benefits and that they'll realise that they would be better in than out. I firmly believe that that will happen. As I say I think that this is an important day for the Pacific a good day for those Pacific nations that are a part of it and I'm very proud of the fact that New Zealand has made its significant commitment here. I firmly hope that my comments will be borne out in time. I believe that they will be. I thank everybody who's been associated in concluding this important work and as today we conclude this third reading which is another important step in the journey I wish all the parties all the very best. I hope that we will see that in years to come it leads to everybody's improved prosperity and development."