Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) Amendment Bill

The departmental disclosure statement for a government Bill seeks to bring together in one place a range of information to support and enhance the Parliamentary and public scrutiny of that Bill.

It identifies:

• the general policy intent of the Bill and other background policy material;
• some of the key quality assurance products and processes used to develop and test the content of the Bill;
• the presence of certain significant powers or features in the Bill that might be of particular Parliamentary or public interest and warrant an explanation.

This disclosure statement was prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade certifies that, to the best of its knowledge and understanding, the information provided is complete and accurate at the date of finalisation below.

21 June 2018

 

 

                                                                                   

 

Part One: General Policy Statement

This Bill makes changes necessary for New Zealand to ratify the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (the CPTPP).

 

The CPTPP is a free trade agreement negotiated by 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific region, New Zealand, Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Singapore, and Viet Nam.

 

The CPTPP includes many of the elements that were negotiated as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (the TPP), but with some significant differences. On 23 January 2018, negotiations concluded and the participants agreed to suspend 22 items from the original TPP agreement. This means that some of the TPP-related outcomes havebeen suspended, including in the areas of intellectual property and pharmaceuticals.

 

The CPTPP was signed by Trade Ministers on 8 March 2018, in Chile.For an explanation of the similarities and differences between the CPTPP and the

TPP, see https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/tpp-and-cptpp-the-differences-explained/

 

The following legislation would be amended when the CPTPP enters into force for

New Zealand:

• Tariff Act 1988: Amend the New Zealand Tariff to include the CPTPP Parties as a group eligible for preferential tariff treatment and enable subsequent regulations to be made that give effect to this eligibility when ratification processes are complete and apply the preferential tariff rates agreed under the CPTPP; provide for the transitional safeguard mechanism required under the Trade Remedies Chapter of the CPTPP; and provide for the emergency action (safeguards) mechanism and associated procedures required under the Textiles and Apparel Chapter of the CPTPP:

• Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996: Provide a 60-day comment period on proposed technical regulations that will need to be notified to the World Trade Organization, as required by the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter of the CPTPP:

• Wine Regulations 2006: Introduce a standard that restricts the export of wine labelled as “ice wine” that is not made from grapes frozen on the vine as required by the Wine and Distilled Spirits Annex of the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter of the CPTPP. This amendment will come into effect 3 years after the CPTPP enters into force for New Zealand:

• Overseas Investment Act 2005: Provide a clear power to make regulations to implement higher investment screening thresholds for overseas investments in significant business assets in order to meet the requirements in the Investment Chapter of the CPTPP, and other related existing international agreements (being the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) obligations in New Zealand’s existing trade agreements with China, Chinese Taipei, Korea, Hong Kong, and the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (P4) Agreement with Brunei, Singapore, and Chile; as well as obligations under the CER Investment Protocol with Australia). Under the CPTPP and existing MFN obligations, the screening threshold for certain non-government investors will increase from $100 million to $200 million. The threshold for Australia is currently $516 million for non-government investors and $108 million for government investors:

• Patents Act 2013: Provide for the requirement to provide a 12-month grace period for patent applications:

• Copyright Act 1994: Provide new rights for performers; provide additional protection for rights management information; and extend the border protection measures to allow Customs to detain exports of suspected pirated copyright works where a notice has been accepted from rights holders and give ex officio powers to Customs officers to temporarily detain suspected pirated copyright works without a notice from rights holders:

• Trade Marks Act 2002: Provide authority to the Courts to award additional damages for trade mark infringement; extend the border protection measures to allow Customs to detain exports of suspected trade mark infringing goods where a notice has been accepted from rights holders and give ex officio powers to Customs officers to temporarily detain suspected trade mark infringing goods without a notice from rights holders; require the Courts in trade mark infringement cases to order the destruction of counterfeit goods except in exceptional cases:

• Legislation Act 2012: Ensure that New Zealand can promptly publish on a single website all central government subordinate instruments, together with an explanation of their purpose and rationale, to the extent required by New Zealand’s international transparency obligations in the Transparency and Anti-Corruption Chapter of the CPTPP.

Part Two: Background Material and Policy Information

Published reviews or evaluations

2.1. Are there any publicly available inquiry, review or evaluation reports that have informed, or are relevant to, the policy to be given effect by this Bill?	YES
See Appendix 1.

Relevant international treaties

2.2. Does this Bill seek to give effect to New Zealand action in relation to an international treaty?	YES
This Bill seeks to give effect to New Zealand’s ratification of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement  for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) (“the Agreement”), done on 8 March 2018 at Santiago, Chile. The Agreement text can be found at www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/   The Agreement requires New Zealand to accede to the Berne Convention, WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT), and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). The text of these treaties is available at http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/.
2.2.1. If so, was a National Interest Analysis report prepared to inform a Parliamentary examination of the proposed New Zealand action in relation to the treaty?	YES
The CPTPP National Interest Analysis (NIA) was prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in consultation with other relevant government agencies. It was presented to the House of Representatives on 13 March in accordance with the parliamentary treaty examination process. A copy of the NIA can be accessed through the Parliament website and from www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/

Regulatory impact analysis

2.3. Were any regulatory impact statements provided to inform the policy decisions that led to this Bill?	YES
The NIA prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in consultation with other relevant government agencies is an extended NIA incorporating the regulatory impact statement requirements. The NIA can be accessed through the Parliament website and from www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements-concluded-but-not-in-force/cptpp/
2.3.1. If so, did the RIA Team in the Treasury provide an independent opinion on the quality of any of these regulatory impact statements?	YES
The Regulatory Impact Analysis Team at the Treasury (RIAT) has reviewed the National Interest Analysis for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership produced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and dated February 2018.   The review team considers that the RIS meets the QA criteria for National Interest Analyses. The likely impacts for New Zealand, both positive and negative, of the various provisions of the Agreement are systematically explained and the actions that will be necessary for New Zealand to implement the agreement are clearly set out.
2.3.2. Are there aspects of the policy to be given effect by this Bill that were not addressed by, or that now vary materially from, the policy options analysed in these regulatory impact statements?	NO

Extent of impact analysis available

2.4. Has further impact analysis become available for any aspects of the policy to be given effect by this Bill?	NO
2.5. For the policy to be given effect by this Bill, is there analysis available on:
(a)   the size of the potential costs and benefits?	YES
(b)   the potential for any group of persons to suffer a substantial unavoidable loss of income or wealth?	NO
See Appendix 1.
2.6. For the policy to be given effect by this Bill, are the potential costs or benefits likely to be impacted by:
(a)   the level of effective compliance or non-compliance with applicable obligations or standards?	NO
(b)   the nature and level of regulator effort put into encouraging or securing compliance?	NO

Part Three: Testing of Legislative Content

Consistency with New Zealand’s international obligations

3.1. What steps have been taken to determine whether the policy to be given effect by this Bill is consistent with New Zealand’s international obligations?

The CPTPP includes many of the elements that were negotiated as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), but with some significant differences. Participants have agreed to suspend 22 items from the original TPP agreement. This means that some of the TPP-related outcomes have been suspended, including in the areas of intellectual property and pharmaceuticals.   Parliament has passed the Trans-Pacific Agreement Amendment Act 2016 (“the existing Amendment Act”) to implement TPP obligations. However, this Act cannot enter into force unless TPP enters into force for New Zealand.   The Bill amends the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Act 2016 to allow the provisions necessary to ratify CPTPP to be brought into force by Order in Council.   MFAT worked with relevant Departments of the Public Service to identify the provisions needed to be brought into force in order to ratify CPTPP. MFAT considers that the policy given effect by the Bill is consistent with New Zealand’s international obligations, including for example arising from the WTO agreements and from ratifying the CPTPP.   MFAT has also considered how implementing CPTPP triggers most-favoured-nation (MFN) obligations in New Zealand’s existing trade agreements. As a result, the Bill amends the existing Trans-Pacific Agreement Amendment Act to allow for provisions amending the Overseas Investment Act 2005 to take effect. These provide for a power to make regulations to implement higher investment screening thresholds for overseas investments in significant business assets in order to comply with the Investment Chapter of CPTPP, as well as obligations in New Zealand’s existing trade agreements with China, Chinese Taipei, Korea and Hong Kong, and earlier agreements with CPTPP signatories, Chile, Brunei, Singapore and Australia. The existing Amendment Act, as amended by this Bill, also takes into account New Zealand’s MFN obligations under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.

Consistency with the government’s Treaty of Waitangi obligations

3.2. What steps have been taken to determine whether the policy to be given effect by this Bill is consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi?

See Appendix 2.

Consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

3.3. Has advice been provided to the Attorney-General on whether any provisions of this Bill appear to limit any of the rights and freedoms affirmed in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990?

YES

The Ministry of Justice has considered whether the Bill is consistent with the rights and freedoms affirmed in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and has provided advice on this to the Attorney-General. The Advice provided to the Attorney-General, or a section 7 report of the Attorney-General, is generally expected to be available on the Ministry of Justice's website upon introduction of the Bill. Such advice and reports are accessible on the Ministry's website at: http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/constitutional-law-and-human-rights/human-rights/bill-of-rights/

Offences, penalties and court jurisdictions

3.4. Does this Bill create, amend, or remove:
(a)   offences or penalties (including infringement offences or penalties and civil pecuniary penalty regimes)?	NO
(b)   the jurisdiction of a court or tribunal (including rights to judicial review or rights of appeal)?	NO
3.4.1. Was the Ministry of Justice consulted about these provisions?	N/A

Privacy issues

3.5. Does this Bill create, amend or remove any provisions relating to the collection, storage, access to, correction of, use or disclosure of personal information?	NO
3.5.1. Was the Privacy Commissioner consulted about these provisions?	NO

External consultation

3.6. Has there been any external consultation on the policy to be given effect by this Bill, or on a draft of this Bill?	YES
See appendix 2

Other testing of proposals

3.7. Have the policy details to be given effect by this Bill been otherwise tested or assessed in any way to ensure the Bill’s provisions are workable and complete?	NO
While no specific testing has been completed, the negotiation of the obligations in CPTPP was conducted by an inter-agency team led by MFAT.   MFAT worked with relevant Departments of the Public Service to assess the policy details to be given effect by this Bill and to ensure the Bill’s provisions are workable and complete.

Part Four: Significant Legislative Features

Compulsory acquisition of private property

4.1. Does this Bill contain any provisions that could result in the compulsory acquisition of private property?	NO

Charges in the nature of a tax

4.2. Does this Bill create or amend a power to impose a fee, levy or charge in the nature of a tax?

YES

Clauses 16 to 21 of the Bill insert provisions into the existing Amendment Act to make further amendments to the Tariff Act 1988 (Tariff Act).   The provisions inserted by clauses 16 and 17 will enable Orders in Council be made under the Tariff Act to declare a country to be a specified CPTPP party for the purposes of the Tariff Act and to modify tariff rates in relation to that country.   The provisions inserted by clauses 18 to 20  will enable the Minister for Commerce and Consumer Affairs, following an investigation and determination of serious injury to an industry, to apply a transitional safeguard or emergency action measure against goods imported from CPTPP parties, which may be in the form of a duty.

Retrospective effect

4.3. Does this Bill affect rights, freedoms, or impose obligations, retrospectively?	NO

Strict liability or reversal of the usual burden of proof for offences

4.4. Does this Bill:
(a)   create or amend a strict or absolute liability offence?	NO
(b)   reverse or modify the usual burden of proof for an offence or a civil pecuniary penalty proceeding?	NO

Civil or criminal immunity

4.5. Does this Bill create or amend a civil or criminal immunity for any person?	NO

Significant decision-making powers

4.6. Does this Bill create or amend a decision-making power to make a determination about a person’s rights, obligations, or interests protected or recognised by law, and that could have a significant impact on those rights, obligations, or interests?	NO

Powers to make delegated legislation

4.7. Does this Bill create or amend a power to make delegated legislation that could amend an Act, define the meaning of a term in an Act, or grant an exemption from an Act or delegated legislation?	NO
4.8. Does this Bill create or amend any other powers to make delegated legislation?	YES
Clause 6 of the Bill replaces section 2 of the existing Amendment Act. The new section 2 would allow provisions in the existing Amendment Act (other than those listed in new section 2(3)) to be brought into force on a date or dates appointed by the Governor-General by Order in Council. The Bill explicitly prevents the bringing into force of provisions related to obligations that are suspended in CPTPP (these are those listed in new section 2(3)).   Clause 14 of the Bill amends the regulation-making power under the Overseas Investment Act 2005 inserted by section 61A of the existing Amendment Act.   Clauses 16 and 17 of the Bill amend the regulation-making power under section 7A of the Tariff Act (see 4.2 above).

Any other unusual provisions or features

4.9. Does this Bill contain any provisions (other than those noted above) that are unusual or call for special comment?	NO

 

 

 

Appendix One: Further Information Relating to Part Two

Published reviews or evaluations – question 2.1

 

On 23 January 2018, the 11 countries negotiating the CPTPP announced the successful conclusion of negotiations. On 8 March 2018, CPTPP was signed by Ministers in Santiago, Chile.

 

The text of the TPP has been available since January 2016 on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s website. Since 11 November 2017, the specific suspensions from the TPP which were under negotiation were also listed, along with an outline of the provisions of the CPTPP itself. A plain language guide to the suspended elements and what they mean for New Zealand was added on 29 November.

 

On 21 February 2018, ahead of the signature of the CPTPP in Santiago, the National Interest Analysis along with the text of the new Agreement was proactively and formally released, including to the Ministry’s website. This was accompanied by a plain language summary of the CPTPP, as well as an elaborated explanation of the suspended elements and what these mean for New Zealand. www.mfat.govt.nz/cptpp.

 

MFAT commissioned an external study to estimate the economic impact of CPTPP, focussing on New Zealand.  This study found that CPTPP is expected to increase New Zealand’s real GDP by between 0.3 percent ($1.2 billion) and 1.0 percent ($4.0 billion). If CPTPP goes ahead without New Zealand, the modelling estimates a $183 million decline in our GDP. This study has been released and is available, with further detail at https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Final-Report-CPTPP.PDF

 

 

Extent of impact analysis available – questions 2.5(a) & (b)

 

(a) the size of the potential costs and benefits?

Cost/benefit analysis of CPTPP is included in the NIA, which can be accessed from

http://www.mfat.govt.nz/cptpp

 

(b) the potential for any group of persons to suffer a substantial unavoidable loss of

income or wealth?

 

The NIA comprehensively assesses the impact for New Zealand of meeting the Agreement’s obligations (including as met through implementing legislation). No group of persons is identified as likely to experience any substantial loss of income or wealth as a result of the Agreement. The Agreement is estimated to result in a net economic benefit for New Zealand. There may be, however, a degree of variance between different sectors of the economy. For example, the elimination of the remaining tariffs on imports from other CPTPP countries, and extension of the copyright period. The extent of these is assessed in detail in the NIA.

 

The NIA notes (Section 7.1) that in the short term, it is possible for the sudden removal of import barriers – such as tariffs – to lead to adjustment costs as resources are diverted from that particular sector to other areas of the economy. This can be accentuated in sectors where a country has maintained particularly high barriers, although there are ways to minimise sudden changes in an FTA (e.g. through phase-in periods and the ability to impose a transitional safeguard measure if, as a result of the tariff elimination under the CPTPP, a sudden increase in imports causes serious injury to a domestic industry). These effects tend to be minimal for New Zealand, however, given our already largely open economy.

 

 

Appendix Two: Further Information Relating to Part Three

Consistency with the government’s Treaty of Waitangi obligations –

question 3.2

 

During the negotiation of the Agreement, MFAT engaged with Māori through a number of mechanisms in addition to the wider stakeholder activities. Further details on all consultation is set out in the following section.

 

Departments have undertaken analysis of the nature, extent and relative strength of the Māori interest in implementation of the Agreement in the context of designing a strategy for engagement with Māori about implementation. Departments have come to the view that the majority of legislative and policy obligations agreed to in CPTPP are of a general commercial nature (for example tariff rates and customs requirements) and will have no particular impact on Māori interests whether under the Treaty of Waitangi or otherwise. Furthermore, most of New Zealand’s international obligations under CPTPP are already met by our existing domestic legal and policy regime and therefore will confirm rather than change current legislative and policy settings. Some of these obligations under CPTPP may require New Zealand to commit to maintaining these existing policy settings in the future. Policy-lead departments consider it unlikely that Māori interests will be specifically impacted by this type of commitment.

 

Departments recognise that the Agreement contains a number of provisions that are of specific interest to Māori (for example, Article 29.6 of the original CPTPP agreement incorporated into CPTPP by Article 1.1 of the Agreement – the Treaty of Waitangi exception discussed further below), and have identified a number of other areas where Māori interests are or might be affected by implementation of the Agreement, such as certain intellectual property obligations.

Opportunities for Iwi/Māori, as the Treaty Partner, to raise their interests and concerns directly with the Crown is being provided

 

Section 7.3.1 of the NIA addresses the content of the Agreement in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi. In summary, the main obligations in CPTPP have been designed to ensure legitimate public policy is not undermined and that governments can continue to regulate in the public interest. This approach helps ensure that the Government is able to take measures that are in the interests of Maori. In addition, the Agreement, as with all of New Zealand’s other free trade agreements since 2001, includes a Treaty of Waitangi exception that states:

 

“TPP Article 29.6: Treaty of Waitangi

1. Provided that such measures are not used as a means of arbitrary or unjustified

discrimination against persons of the other Parties or as a disguised restriction on trade in

goods, trade in services and investment, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the adoption

by New Zealand of measures it deems necessary to accord more favourable treatment to Maori

in respect of matters covered by this Agreement, including in fulfilment of its obligations under

the Treaty of Waitangi.

2. The Parties agree that the interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, including as to the nature

of the rights and obligations arising under it, shall not be subject to the dispute settlement

provisions of this Agreement. Chapter 28 (Dispute Settlement) shall otherwise apply to this

Article. A panel established under Article 28.7 (Establishment of a Panel) may be requested to

determine only whether any measure referred to in paragraph 1 is inconsistent with a Party’s

rights under this Agreement.”

 

The Treaty of Waitangi exception in CPTPP applies to the entire Agreement. The exception ensures that successive governments retain flexibility to implement domestic policies that favour Maori without being obliged to offer equivalent treatment to overseas entities.

 

For the sake of completeness, although not included in the Bill, New Zealand will need to amend the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 in order to comply with the obligation under Article 18.7.2 and Annex 18-A of the original CPTPP Agreement incorporated into CPTPP by Article 1.1, within three years of entry into force of CPTPP, either to accede to the most recent 1991 version of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV 91), or under a New Zealand specific approach, implement a plant variety rights system that gives effect to UPOV 91. When implementing this obligation, New Zealand would be able to adopt any measure that it deemed necessary to protect indigenous plant species in fulfilment of its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. The Bill does not implement this obligation. The  amendments to the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 would be enacted by passage of implementing legislation after the Agreement enters into force for New Zealand.

 

More generally, there are commercial benefits for the Māori Because of their over-representation in the primary sector, Māori exporters face some of the highest protectionist barriers. The agreement will deliver significant tariff reductions and improved market access for primary industry exporters, which will enable Māori exporters to be more competitive in CPTPP markets.

 

External consultation – question 3.6

Consultations during negotiation of TPP

 

In addition to the release of the text of the agreement before it was signed, along with the NIA, extensive public engagement and outreach has been undertaken on the CPTPP. These meetings involved as wide a range of stakeholders as possible, including business, Maori and civil society more broadly. Some non-traditional mechanisms were used to raise awareness about and provide information on the new treaty, including through a Minister-led Facebook live session, active Facebook updates and tweeting to encourage attendance at CPTPP-related public events. Additional specific consultations were undertaken with Maori. List one which follows sets out the public engagement meetings held on CPTPP since early November 2017. List two sets out the engagement undertaken since the commencement of negotiations for CPTPP earlier in 2017. 

 

Following the conclusion of TPP negotiations, in March and August 2016, and prior to the commencement of any discussions towards CPTPP, the government held 18 face-to-face consultation events on TPP across the country. These included nine consultation hui specifically with Māori as follows:

(a)              Christchurch hui, 9 March 2016

(b)              Wellington hui, 10 March 2016

(c)              Rotorua hui, 6 April 2016

(d)              Auckland hui, 13 April 2016

(e)              Whangarei hui, 20 April 2016

(f)               Nelson hui, 10 May 2016

(g)              Hastings hui, 15 July 2016

(h)              Hamilton hui, 22 June 2016

 

This meant that in May 2017, when the parties agreed to try to capture the benefits of TPP between 11 countries, the government was in the position of having recently sought the views of New Zealanders, including Māori, on the TPP and was able to take this information into account when determining its strategy for the negotiations towards CPTPP.

 

 

List one: Public Outreach and Engagement on CPTPP since November 2017

TPP11/CPTPP: 11 November 2017 – Agreement reached on the ‘core elements’ of the CPTPP in the margins of the APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Da Nang, Viet Nam. Information on the outcomes, including an explanation of the differences to TPP, made available in media, social media and through the MFAT website.

• 16 November (Rotorua): Federation of Maori Authorities
• 16 November (Wellington): NGO Chief Executives
• 29 November (Wellington): Iwi Leaders’ Forum
• 29 November (Wellington): New Zealand Council for Trade Unions
• 1 December (Christchurch): Business
• 4 December (Dunedin): Public
• 5 December (Auckland): Waitangi Tribunal claimants
• 5 December (Auckland):  Public
• 6 December (Tauranga): Public
• 7 December (Hamilton): Public
• 12 December (Wellington): Health professionals
• 12 December (Wellington): New Zealand Council for Trade Unions

CPTPP: 23 January 2018 – Negotiations substantively concluded. Legal verification and translation commences.

• 8 February (Wellington): Public
• 12 February (Wellington): Waitangi Tribunal claimants
• 14 February (Wellington): Waitangi Tribunal claimants
• 16 February (Wellington): Māori health professionals and researchers
• 19 February (Christchurch): Public

CPTPP: 21 February 2018 – Following legal verification and translation, the full CPTPP text is released together with the New Zealand Government’s National Interest Analysis (NIA).

• 26 February  (New Plymouth): Public

CPTPP: 8 March 2018 – CPTPP is signed by Trade Ministers in Santiago, Chile

CPTPP: 13 March 2018 – Foreign Affairs, Defence, and Trade Committee (FADTC) call for public submissions CPTPP by 18 April as part of parliamentary treaty examination process. (FADTC finalised its report back to Parliament on 24 May.)

• 13 March (Nelson): Public
• 14 March (Napier): Public
• 20 March (Wellington): Business
• 22 March (Kaikohe): Waitangi Tribunal claimants
• 22 March (Whangarei): Public
• 26 March (Wellington): Federation of Māori Authorities
• 27 March (Palmerston North): Public
• 26 April (Invercargill): Public
• 14 May (Timaru): Public
• 16 May (Rotorua): Public / Waitangi Tribunal Claimants
• 30 May (Gisborne): Public

List two: Outreach and Engagement on CPTPP since the commencement of negotiations in late May 2017

CPTPP: June - October 2017 –. Updates provided through media, through MFAT’s website and through targeted email (pānui) to iwi Māori.

• 3 June (Christchurch): Academia
• 20 June (Auckland): Public
• 22 June (Christchurch): Public
• 23 June (Christchurch): Business
• 26 June (Wellington): Public
• 4 July (Wellington): Business
• 16 August (Christchurch): Business
• 27 September (Hastings): Iwi Leaders
• 16 October (Auckland): Business

 

Consultations on Bill

 

This Bill amends the existing Trans-Pacific Agreement Amendment Act which was designed to implement TPP obligations. CPTPP does not impose any additional obligations beyond those contained in TPP, and 22 elements are suspended including in relation to intellectual property. The majority of the legislative amendments required to implement the TPP Agreement did not require significant policy development before they could be included in the Bill.