7. Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) Minister for Economic Development) Link to this
to the Minister for Economic Development
Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No 8 yesterday?
Hon DAVID CARTERIs the Minister aware that the total trade deficit with China since his Government came to office is $4.6 billion?
No; I do not have that figure with me. I am aware that trade exports to China have grown from $2.3 billion to $5.5 billion since 2008, and that is a remarkable rate of growth, of around 140 percent. It is an absolute success story.
Is the investment balance with China positive or negative, or, in other words, every year is China buying more of New Zealand than New Zealand is investing in China?
I know that the member is totally opposed to foreign investment. What I was talking about yesterday was the performance of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise in raising the amount of exporting by New Zealand companies to China. It has been remarkably successful—something that the member does not seem to be prepared to accept.
Mr SPEAKERBefore I call the honourable member, I say that the question had no particular political content. The question simply asked, if I recollect correctly, whether the investment balance between New Zealand and China was positive or negative, or whether China was buying more—I cannot remember the exact words. If the Minister did not have those particular figures, that is one thing, but then to criticise the questioner in the way he did, by saying that the member does not like foreign investment, is not acceptable. I invite the Hon David Parker to repeat his question.
Is the investment balance with China positive or negative, or, in other words, every year is China buying more of New Zealand than New Zealand is investing in China?
The projections in the Budget show the current account deficit getting worse every year, from here on, and New Zealand’s net investment position getting worse every year, from here on, so both deficits are expected to worsen; does this not show that the China beachhead board resignation is indicative of a wider problem for New Zealand?
No, it does not. The resignation by the beachhead board occurred simply because there was a significant clash of personality between the management of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise in China and the beachhead board. The beachhead board delivered an ultimatum to New Zealand Trade and Enterprise stating that if the board was to remain as the current board, it would require a change of management staff of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise in China. The chief executive of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise was not prepared to accept that ultimatum, and therefore the board resigned en masse.
Did a member of the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise board cause or contribute to the mass resignation of the China beachhead board; if so, who was that board member?
I am not aware of any board member of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise causing the resignation of the beachhead advisory board. What happened, as I have just explained to the member, is that the beachhead advisory board was attempting to decide who should be the management personnel of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise in China. It is not appropriate for an advisory board to attempt to manage the operations of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise.