David Campbell Bannerman, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr. President, it seems odd that only the ECR Group seems to recognise that Australia and New Zealand are different countries with separate trade deals, and not one nation as this debate suggests.

I would not advise calling an Australian a New Zealander, nor a New Zealander an Australian, especially not if they play rugby for the All Blacks, but I do welcome doing free trade agreements with both these great, independent and democratic trading nations. It is well overdue.

Now existing bilateral arrangements and regulatory cooperation make the case for a deeper agreement to be negotiated relatively easily. I note that the New Zealand deal may be based on around 80% of the recent Canada or CETA trade deal, which is considered to be a gold standard.

My group does take issue with two key points in the report though. Firstly, the inclusion of a sanctions-based mechanism on the trade and sustainable development – or TSD – chapter. This is an ineffective approach which discourages goodwill and damages engagement in negotiations.

Secondly, the exclusion of the so-called ‘sensitive’ agricultural sectors from the report. Australia and New Zealand have the right to promote their agricultural exports, and it is a sorry state of affairs when the EU embraces protectionism.

Our partners have made it clear that they would enter negotiations with an open mind and it is a shame the European Commission is not doing the same.

(Applause)