Origin Declaration Korea-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement

0

Currently, we import refined oil, cars, electronic equipment and machinery from South Korea, and we export industrial products, metals, organic chemicals, forest products, dairy products, beef and lamb, kiwis and pumpkins. It seems to me that this agreement with Korea has four major macroscopic advantages. First, we are getting better access to a target market of 50 million people for New Zealand trade and investment. Second, we have a number of framework conditions that we can put in place policies and with which we can work together: the framework for resolving trade and investment issues and the framework for resolving trade and labour issues, trade and environmental issues. We also receive support for New Zealand`s broader business interests in strengthening our economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region. As we have heard, 98% of current export tariffs will decrease over time. The member of New Zealand First asked what was good for Northland in this agreement. What`s good for Northland? What is Northland, but a productive part of our country? Northland produces the goods and services that are shown around the world. It produces the forest products we export. It produces the dairy products that we export.

It produces the meat products we export. It produces the food we export to all of our major ports in New Zealand. It is the northern economy that has the most to gain from this free trade agreement. China Customs may request the necessary documents to confirm that the products comply with the rules of origin. This evidence could contain commercial documents such as the commercial invoice and a bill of lading. The New Zealand-Korea Free Trade Agreement is a high-quality comprehensive agreement that brings significant trade benefits to New Zealand exporters. The agreement was signed in March 2015 and came into force on December 20, 2015. The reality is that they are not necessary to reduce barriers to trade. Investor-state litigation mechanisms have nothing to do with removing trade barriers.

They have everything to do with protecting large multinationals from being regulated by other governments, and that is a huge problem for democracy. It is a huge problem for all of us in the world — the people of Korea, the people of the United States, the New Zealanders who want real action against environmental degradation, who want to see real action against climate change, and who want to protect the public health of companies like the tobacco companies that benefit from it. , of course, and they profit from selling misery to people. It should be the democratic right of citizens to develop policies that protect public health and the environment. Each country has the right to environmental protection measures, but if it does, it must ensure that it is not discriminatory between nationals of that country and those who try to act in that country, such as Canada. In reviewing some of these decisions and, I think, reviewing the minimum standards of treatment used by companies to prosecute countries – Bilcon and Canada was a striking example – we found that an investment tribunal for the North American Free Trade Agreement explained in its decision what is the standard of the problem that must be the complaint to be successful when an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism has been used.