Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill

It is unfortunate that a bill dealing with trade, which is the lifeblood of our country, each time it is debated is relegated to the latest hours of the evening. One might ask whether that is a deliberate strategy of the Government because of its embarrassment regarding the circumstances in which this bill, the Trade (Safeguard Measures) Bill, has been debated and has been delayed.

💬 Dr David Clark: All of the bills are embarrassing.

It is just another embarrassment, as the member says. Actually, Labour supports this bill. It supports the new safeguard measures, which are designed to ensure that the trade is fair. It is consistent with the World Trade Organization rules, and it promotes a more efficient decision-making process.

This bill was introduced in 2008 by Lianne Dalziel when she was Minister of Commerce. Labour supported it then, of course—it was in Government—and Labour supported it at the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. The real question we have to ask is why it took 5 years—5 years—for this bill to come back to reach this stage of progress in the House. I cannot think of almost any other bill on this Order Paper that has taken 5 years to progress. There were just five submissions. There was support for this bill. It had been well consulted on. Why did the Government hold up this bill? That is the question I would expect the Minister of Commerce to direct himself to.

Well, I have a couple of theories on why it has taken 5 years. My first theory is this: that the bill, for a period of years, was in the hands of the Hon John Banks. Now, the Hon John Banks had some problems, and they were memory problems. You know, he could not remember the helicopter ride. He could not remember visiting one of the biggest mansions in the country. He had forgotten all about the oversized German entrepreneur whom he met there—

Order! [Interruption] Sorry, the member’s time has expired. The member must confine the comments in the Committee stage to the content of the bill. Other things are erroneous. [Interruption] Is this a point of order? [Interruption] No, I have called Jami-Lee Ross.

I move, That the question be now put.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This has just reached the Committee stage. We had less than 4 minutes on it at the last session.

No, no. There have been 19 calls on this part. You have already had three calls yourself.

I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I understood that Mr Goff was still partaking in his call when the other member sought the call—

No, he had finished. [Interruption] Order! I stood because the member’s time had expired because he had 1 minute and 30-odd seconds to speak. The Hon Phil Goff has had three calls on this. The next call went to the Government member. The Government member moved a closure motion. I am putting the closure motion.

Motion agreed to.

The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 17 in the name of the Hon John Banks and Supplementary Order Paper 409 in the name of the Hon Craig Foss to Part 1 be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Part 1 as amended agreed to.

Part 2 Miscellaneous matters