

Currently released so far... 12478 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AU
ASEC
AE
AF
AORC
AEMR
AMGT
ABUD
AFFAIRS
APER
AS
AMED
AY
AG
AR
AJ
AL
AID
AM
AODE
ABLD
AMG
AFIN
ATRN
AGAO
AFU
AN
AA
ALOW
APECO
ADM
ARF
ASEAN
APEC
AMBASSADOR
AO
ASUP
AZ
AADP
ACOA
ANET
AMCHAMS
ACABQ
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
APCS
AGMT
AINF
AIT
AORL
ACS
AFSI
AFSN
ACBAQ
AFGHANISTAN
ADANA
ADPM
AX
ADCO
AECL
AMEX
ACAO
ASCH
AORG
AGR
AROC
ASIG
AND
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AC
AUC
ASEX
AER
AVERY
AGRICULTURE
BL
BR
BO
BA
BD
BM
BK
BG
BU
BB
BH
BTIO
BY
BEXP
BP
BE
BRUSSELS
BF
BIDEN
BT
BX
BC
BILAT
BN
BBSR
BTIU
BWC
BMGT
CA
CASC
CVIS
CM
CH
CO
CU
CD
CWC
CI
CS
CY
CMGT
CF
CG
CR
CB
CV
CW
CE
CBW
CT
CPAS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CJAN
CODEL
CIDA
CDG
CDC
CIA
CTR
CNARC
CSW
CN
CONS
CLINTON
COE
CROS
CARICOM
CONDOLEEZZA
COUNTER
CL
COM
CICTE
CIS
CFED
COUNTRY
CJUS
CBSA
CEUDA
CLMT
CAC
COPUOS
CIC
CBE
CHR
CTM
CVR
CITEL
CLEARANCE
CACS
CAN
CITT
CARSON
CACM
CDB
CAPC
CKGR
CBC
EC
EG
EPET
ECON
ETRD
EFIN
EIND
EMIN
ENRG
EAID
EAGR
EUN
ETTC
EAIR
ENIV
ES
EU
EINV
ELAB
ECIN
EFIS
ELTN
EWWT
ECPS
ECONOMIC
ENGR
EN
EINT
EPA
ELN
ESA
EZ
ER
ET
EFTA
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EUMEM
ETRA
EXTERNAL
EI
EUR
EK
ERNG
ENGY
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ENERG
EINVEFIN
ENVR
ECA
ELECTIONS
ETC
EUREM
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EURN
ECINECONCS
EEPET
EXIM
ERD
ENVI
ETRC
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ETRO
EDU
ETRN
EAIG
ECONCS
ECONOMICS
EAP
ECONOMY
EINN
EIAR
EXBS
ECUN
EINDETRD
EREL
EUC
ESENV
ECONEFIN
ECIP
EFIM
EAIDS
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUNCH
EINVETC
IZ
IT
IR
IS
IN
IC
IAEA
IO
ICAO
IWC
ID
IV
ISRAEL
IAHRC
IQ
ICTR
IMF
IRS
IDP
IGAD
ICRC
ICTY
IMO
IL
INRA
INRO
ICJ
ITU
IBRD
INMARSAT
IIP
ITALY
IEFIN
IACI
ILO
INTELSAT
ILC
ITRA
IDA
INRB
IRC
INTERPOL
IA
IPR
IRAQI
ISRAELI
INTERNAL
ISLAMISTS
INDO
ITPHUM
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IBET
INR
IEA
IZPREL
IRAJ
ITF
IF
KDEM
KU
KPAL
KNNP
KCRM
KZ
KN
KS
KJUS
KTFN
KSCA
KV
KISL
KPAO
KPKO
KIRF
KTIA
KIPR
KFLO
KFRD
KTIP
KAWC
KSUM
KCOM
KAID
KE
KTDB
KMDR
KOMC
KWBG
KDRG
KVPR
KTEX
KGIC
KWMN
KSCI
KCOR
KACT
KDDG
KHLS
KSAF
KFLU
KSEO
KMRS
KSPR
KOLY
KSEP
KVIR
KGHG
KIRC
KUNR
KIFR
KCIP
KMCA
KMPI
KBCT
KHSA
KICC
KIDE
KCRS
KMFO
KRVC
KRGY
KR
KAWK
KG
KFIN
KHIV
KBIO
KOCI
KBTR
KNEI
KPOA
KCFE
KPLS
KSTC
KHDP
KPRP
KCRCM
KLIG
KCFC
KTER
KREC
KTBT
KPRV
KSTH
KRIM
KRAD
KWAC
KWMM
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KOMS
KX
KMIG
KRCM
KVRP
KBTS
KPAONZ
KNUC
KNAR
KPWR
KNPP
KDEMAF
KNUP
KNNPMNUC
KERG
KGIT
KPAI
KTLA
KFSC
KCSY
KSAC
KTRD
KID
KOM
KMOC
KJUST
KGCC
KREL
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KO
KNSD
KHUM
KSEC
KCMR
KCHG
KICA
KPIN
KESS
KDEV
KCGC
KWWMN
KPAK
KWNM
KWMNCS
KRFD
MOPS
MCAP
MPOS
MARR
MO
MNUC
MX
MASS
MG
MY
MU
ML
MR
MILITARY
MTCRE
MT
MEPP
MA
MDC
MP
MAR
MASSMNUC
MARAD
MAPP
MZ
MD
MI
MEETINGS
MK
MCC
MEPN
MRCRE
MAS
MIL
MASC
MC
MV
MTCR
MIK
MUCN
MEDIA
MERCOSUR
MW
MOPPS
MTS
MLS
MILI
MTRE
MEPI
MQADHAFI
MAPS
NO
NATO
NL
NP
NZ
NSF
NI
NH
NG
NAFTA
NU
NASA
NR
NATOPREL
NSSP
NSG
NA
NT
NW
NK
NPT
NPA
NATIONAL
NPG
NSFO
NS
NSC
NE
NGO
NDP
NIPP
NRR
NEW
NZUS
NC
NAR
NV
NORAD
OTRA
OPCW
OVIP
OAS
OREP
OPIC
OIIP
OPRC
ODIP
OEXC
OPDC
OSCE
OIC
OSCI
OECD
OFDP
OFDA
OMIG
OPAD
OFFICIALS
OVP
OIE
OHUM
OCS
OBSP
OTR
OSAC
ON
OCII
OES
PGOV
PREL
PHUM
PTER
PINS
PINR
PREF
PK
PROP
PA
PARM
PBTS
PMAR
PM
PGIV
PE
PRAM
PHUH
PHSA
PL
PNAT
PO
PLN
PAO
PSA
PHUMPGOV
PF
PEL
PBIO
POLITICS
PHUMBA
PAS
POL
PREO
PAHO
PMIL
POGOV
POV
PAK
PNR
PRL
PG
PREFA
PSI
PINL
PU
PARMS
PRGOV
PALESTINIAN
PAIGH
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POSTS
PROG
PORG
PTBS
PUNE
POLICY
PDOV
PCI
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PBT
PP
PS
PY
PTERE
PGOF
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PPA
PINT
PRELP
PSEPC
PGOVE
PINF
PNG
PGOC
PFOR
PCUL
POLINT
PGGV
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PGOVLO
PHUS
PDEM
PECON
PROV
PHUMPREL
RS
RU
RELATIONS
RW
RO
RM
RP
ROOD
RICE
RUPREL
RSO
RCMP
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RIGHTS
RF
RFE
RSP
RIGHTSPOLMIL
ROBERT
SU
SCUL
SNAR
SOCI
SF
SA
SHUM
SENV
SP
SR
SY
SANC
SC
SMIG
SZ
SARS
SW
SEVN
SO
SEN
SL
SNARCS
SNARN
SI
SG
SN
SH
SYR
SAARC
SPCE
SHI
SCRS
SENVKGHG
SYRIA
SWE
STEINBERG
SIPRS
ST
SNARIZ
SSA
SK
SPCVIS
SOFA
SIPDIS
SAN
TC
TI
TBIO
TH
TSPL
TRGY
TSPA
TPHY
TU
TW
TS
TAGS
TK
TX
TNGD
TZ
TF
TL
TV
TN
TD
TIP
TR
TP
TO
TT
TFIN
THPY
TERRORISM
TINT
TRSY
TURKEY
TBID
US
UK
UNGA
UP
UZ
UNMIK
USTR
UNO
UNSC
UN
UNESCO
UNAUS
UNHRC
UY
UG
UNHCR
UNCND
USOAS
USEU
UNICEF
UNEP
UV
UNPUOS
UNCSD
USUN
UNCHR
UNDC
USNC
UE
UNDP
UNC
USPS
USAID
UNVIE
UAE
UNFICYP
UNODC
UNCHS
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNCHC
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 05WELLINGTON987, 2006 NATIONAL TRADE ESTIMATE REPORT: NEW ZEALAND
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05WELLINGTON987.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
05WELLINGTON987 | 2005-12-21 04:22 | 2011-04-28 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED | Embassy Wellington |
VZCZCXRO1903
RR RUEHNZ
DE RUEHWL #0987/01 3550422
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 210422Z DEC 05
FM AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2168
INFO RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 4243
RUEHNZ/AMCONSUL AUCKLAND 0559
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 0011
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 WELLINGTON 000987
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
STATE FOR EB/MTA/MST AND EAP/ANP
STATE PASS USTR FOR BWEISEL AND GBLUE
COMMERCE FOR ABENAISSA/4530/ITA/MAC/AP/OSAO
TREASURY FOR OASIA
E.O. 12356: N/A
TAGS: ETRD ECON EFIN NZ
SUBJECT: 2006 NATIONAL TRADE ESTIMATE REPORT: NEW ZEALAND
REF: STATE 193384
¶1. Following is post's input for the 2006 National Trade
Estimate Report on New Zealand. We assume that
Washington agencies will provide updated trade and
investment data.
¶2. We also note that the section on "Biotechnology Food
Approval" should be consistent with the NTE on Australia.
¶3. Begin text of NTE submission:
IMPORT POLICIES
In general, tariff rates in New Zealand are low as a result of
several rounds of unilateral tariff cuts that began in the mid-
1980s and continued until the current Labor government, elected
in 1999, froze further reductions until July 2005. The New
Zealand government announced in September 2003 that it would
resume unilateral tariff reductions starting July 1, 2006. New
Zealand plans to begin gradual reductions of its highest tariff
rates of between 17 percent and 19 percent, taking them to 10
percent by July 1, 2009. The top rates apply mostly to clothing,
footwear, carpets, and certain automobiles and auto parts. Ad
valorem tariffs on other goods also will gradually be reduced to
5 percent by July 1, 2008. None of these low tariff rates are
bound. The New Zealand government will conduct a review in 2006
to determine rates for the period after July 1, 2009.
STANDARDS, TESTING, LABELING AND CERTIFICATION
Biotechnology Regulations
New Zealand's Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA)
reviews applications for the release of new organisms, including
genetically modified organisms (GMOs), on a case-by-case basis.
ERMA, an independent body, can issue three types of approval for
the release of new organisms: contained trials, conditional
release and full, unconditional release. The agency can approve
applications with conditions that aim to prevent, minimize or
manage any identified risks. Contained trials are strictly
regulated and monitored and can include field trials. A full
release is unregulated and has no controls, making it extremely
unlikely one would be granted for a GMO. Conditional release
fills the gap between these two extremes, providing controls and
regulation determined on a case-by-case basis. This allows for
specific conditions to be placed on the planting of a crop, which
can be any size from a contained trial to a large commercial
planting. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF)
monitors implementation of such approvals. To date applications
have been limited to a small number of contained trials.
Until October 2003, New Zealand maintained a voluntary two-year
moratorium on the introduction of all GMOs, which precluded
applications for the commercial planting of genetically modified
crops, the commercial importation of genetically modified seeds,
the release into the environment of genetically modified animals
and, to a lesser extent, some human and veterinary medicines
containing GMOs. The moratorium, however, did not apply to the
use and sale of processed genetically modified foods and
ingredients. With the moratorium's expiration, Parliament
amended the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 to
regulate the introduction of GMOs. The amendment, the New
Organisms and Other Matters Bill 2003, introduced the conditional
release category for approval of new organisms.
Biotechnology Food Approval
Imported genetically modified foods for sale in New Zealand must
be assessed and approved by Food Standards Australia New Zealand
(FSANZ), which operates under the authority of the New Zealand
Food Safety Authority (NZFSA). A mandatory standard for foods
produced using modern biotechnology came into effect in mid-1999.
The standard established under the Food Act 1981 prohibits the
sale of food produced using gene technology, unless such food has
been assessed by FSANZ and listed in the food code standard. As
of November 2005, FSANZ had received 34 applications for safety
assessments of bioengineered foods. Of these, 28 applications had
been approved (including four under review pending additional
assessment), four applications were being processed, and two
requests had been withdrawn.
Biotechnology Food Labeling
Mandatory labeling requirements for foods produced using gene
WELLINGTON 00000987 002 OF 005
technology took effect in December 2001. With few exceptions, a
food in its final form that contains detectable DNA or protein
resulting from genetic modification must be so labeled. Meeting
New Zealand's biotechnology food labeling regulations can be
burdensome and is especially relevant for U.S. agricultural
exporters who deal primarily in processed food. New Zealand
wholesalers and retailers frequently demand biotechnology-free
declarations from their suppliers. This effectively passes
liability for any biotechnology labeling non-compliance back to
the importer. New Zealand food legislation requires businesses to
exercise due diligence in complying with food standards, which
usually is defined as maintaining a paper or audit trail similar
to a quality assurance system.
The NZFSA conducts periodic compliance audits. Violators of food-
labeling requirements can be assessed penalties under the Food
Act 1981. The New Zealand government is reviewing penalties
stipulated under the act to ensure that they represent an
adequate economic deterrent. The effect of these regulations is
to discourage New Zealand food retailers from carrying
biotechnology food products.
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
New Zealand maintains a strict regimen of sanitary and
phytosanitary (SPS) controls for virtually all imported
agricultural products. The United States and New Zealand continue
to discuss specific SPS issues that negatively impact trade in
products supplied by the United States.
Imports of U.S. poultry meat (except canned product) remain
suspended due to restrictions on countries that have infectious
bursal disease. Imports of U.S. pork meat products are subject
to a pre-cooking requirement because of the presence of porcine
reproductive and respiratory syndrome in the United States.
Imports of California table grapes were restarted in 2005 as a
result of changes in import requirements, while market access
also was achieved for cherries from Idaho, Oregon and Washington.
U.S. beef and beef variety meats were restricted from entering
New Zealand following the December 2003 announcement of bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in the United States. Import
restrictions also were imposed on live cattle, certain pet food
and U.S. processed food products containing beef. The NZFSA had
required case-by-case assessment of U.S. bovine products before
importation. However, after completing an assessment of the U.S.
BSE regime, NZFSA decided to lift that restriction once both
sides agree on certification that must accompany meat imports.
MAF is conducting a review that may result in resumption of live
cattle trade.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) PROTECTION
The New Zealand government has proposed amendments to strengthen
its copyright and patent laws and enhance the country's
protection of intellectual property rights. With proposed
amendments to the Copyright Act 1994, the government aims to
address developments in digital technologies and international
developments in copyright law and to bring New Zealand law into
closer conformity with the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the
WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). The amendments
are expected to be reviewed and approved by Cabinet before they
are introduced in Parliament in 2006. If this legislation is
enacted, the New Zealand government then will determine whether
to accede to the WCT and WPPT treaties.
The Ministry of Economic Development in December 2004 released
draft legislation that is intended to replace the Patents Act
1953 and to bring New Zealand's patent law into closer conformity
with international standards. This draft would keep the maximum
patent term at 20 years, but would tighten the criteria for
granting a patent, from a patentable invention being new in New
Zealand, to being new anywhere in the world and involving an
inventive step. At year's end, the legislation had not yet been
introduced in Parliament.
The U.S. music industry opposes a proposed amendment to the
Copyright Act that would legalize the duplication of sound
recordings in other formats for a purchaser's private use. The
government says this would enable consumers to employ new digital
technologies and would legalize what already is common practice.
The government also notes the amendment would limit copying to
one copy per format, specify that the original sound recording
must be legitimate, and exclude making copies from borrowed or
rented recordings. The music industry warns that such an
WELLINGTON 00000987 003 OF 005
exception to copyright protection would make copyright
infringement difficult to police, send the wrong message to
consumers and cost the industry in sales revenue and profits.
The industry says that the exception would discourage the
development of music products that would permit home copying
under contractual arrangements between the consumer and the
provider. The industry and government continue to discuss this
exception.
Additionally, the industry favors a wider approach to
technological protection measures (TPMs) than that provided in
the government's proposed amendments. The government's proposal
would prohibit the supply of devices or the means or information
to circumvent TPMs that would result in infringing any of a
copyright owner's exclusive rights, and not just copying as now
specified in the legislation. The industry says the act of
circumventing a TPM also should be illegal. It also wants
protection against the circumvention of TPMs that control access
to copyright material, in addition to TPMs that control copying.
U.S. industry also has expressed concern over a proposed
exception to the Copyright Act that would allow the unauthorized
time-shifting of virtually all works communicated to the public.
The industry warns that the exception would discourage rights
holders from developing new approaches to meeting consumer demand
for electronically delivered materials and reduce access and
choice for New Zealand consumers to these materials.
In the draft patents legislation, a prohibition of patents for
methods of medical treatment concerns some pharmaceutical
companies. The industry also is concerned by the Cabinet's
decision in mid-2004 to halt a study on the economic impact of
extending patent terms for pharmaceuticals. The draft patents
bill fails to address the issue of patent terms. The
pharmaceutical industry group, Researched Medicines Industry
Association of New Zealand, contends that New Zealand's effective
patent life for pharmaceuticals has been substantially eroded.
It asserts that extending the effective patent term would be in
line with international best practices.
The pharmaceutical industry also is concerned by an amendment,
enacted in December 2002, to the Patents Act 1953. This
amendment states that it is not a patent infringement for a
person to make, use, exercise or vend an invention for purposes
related to gaining regulatory approval in New Zealand or other
countries. This provision can be used to effectively expedite,
or "springboard," the approval process for generic competition to
products going off patent. The pharmaceutical industry strongly
opposes this legislation.
Some U.S. industries, particularly producers and distributors of
music and software, have voiced concerns about New Zealand law
that allows parallel imports of certain copyrighted goods, saying
such imports make it more difficult to detect and combat piracy
and erode the value of their products in New Zealand and third-
country markets. The New Zealand Parliament in October 2003
enacted a ban on the parallel importation of films, videos and
DVDs for the initial nine months after a film's international
release, but the ban does not apply to parallel importation of
music, software and books. The ban is scheduled to sunset in
2008, unless extended.
The October 2003 legislation, which amended the Copyright Act
1994, makes it easier to challenge copyright violations in court
by shifting the burden of proof in certain copyright infringement
cases to the defendant, who must prove that an imported film,
sound recording or computer software is not a pirated copy.
The United States continues to monitor developments in IPR issues
closely.
SERVICES BARRIERS
Local Content Quotas
Radio and television broadcasters have adopted voluntary local
content targets, but only after the New Zealand government made
it clear that it would otherwise pursue mandatory quotas.
Although New Zealand government officials have said they are
sensitive to the implications of quotas under the WTO General
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), they reserve the right to
impose them.
Telecommunications
WELLINGTON 00000987 004 OF 005
U.S. industry has expressed concern about the fees charged for
completing calls onto mobile networks in New Zealand, which are
among the highest in the world. After a year-long investigation
into mobile termination rates, the New Zealand regulating
authority said in June 2005 that mobile network operators had
been able to set unreasonably high rates because of limited
market competition. The authority called for such charges to be
regulated. The Communications Minister in August 2005 agreed
with the authority's position that the termination rates should
come down, but asked the authority to reconsider its
recommendations by examining several issues, including commercial
offers by New Zealand's two mobile-phone service providers for
rate reductions and how best to ensure that end users benefit
from reductions in wholesale rates. The authority was expected
to release a draft report soon.
Competitors of the formerly state-owned monopoly, Telecom, were
disappointed by the New Zealand government's decision in May 2004
against unbundling the local loop. Although under competitive
pressure, Telecom still dominates the market. The Communications
Minister accepted the regulator's recommendation against ordering
Telecom to open its national fixed-line network to competitors.
Saying he aimed to increase competition in broadband services,
the Minister also agreed with the regulator's recommendation to
require bitstream unbundling, or access to Telecom's equipment by
service providers in order to sell their own broadband services.
TelstraClear, Telecom's primary land-line competitor, in November
2004 asked the regulator to determine the terms and conditions
for access to Telecom's unbundled bitstream service. The
regulator made that determination December 20, although Telecom
was considering a court appeal.
INVESTMENT BARRIERS
Investment Screening
New Zealand screens certain types of foreign investment through
the Overseas Investment Office (OIO). Amid growing public
concern about purchases of coastal properties by foreigners, the
New Zealand government enacted legislation in August 2005 that
toughened the screening and monitoring of land purchases, but
raised the minimum threshold for scrutiny of proposed business
purchases. Under the legislation, the threshold for screening
non-land business assets has been increased from NZ $50 million
to NZ $100 million, where a foreigner proposes to take ownership
or control of 25 percent or more of a business. Government
approval is required for purchases of land larger than 5 hectares
(12.35 acres) and land in certain sensitive or protected areas.
Any application involving land in any form must meet a national
interest test. For land purchases, foreigners who do not intend
to live in New Zealand must provide a management proposal
covering any historic, heritage, conservation or public access
matters and any economic development planned. That proposal
would have to be approved and generally made a condition of
consent. In addition, investors would be required to report
regularly on their compliance with the terms of the consent.
Overseas persons also must demonstrate the necessary experience
to manage the investment. The OIO, part of Land Information New
Zealand, took over the functions of the Overseas Investment
Commission in August 2005. The United States has raised concerns
about the continued use of this screening mechanism. New
Zealand's commitments under the GATS Agreement of the WTO are
limited as a result of New Zealand's screening program.
OTHER BARRIERS
Pharmaceuticals
The U.S. government continued to raise concerns about New
Zealand's pharmaceutical sector policies, which do not
appropriately value innovation and discourage investment in the
research and development of innovative pharmaceutical products.
New Zealand's Pharmaceutical Management Agency (PHARMAC), a stand-
alone Crown entity, administers a Pharmaceutical Schedule that
lists medicines subsidized by the New Zealand government and the
reimbursement paid for each pharmaceutical under the national
health care system. The schedule also specifies conditions for
prescribing a product listed for reimbursement. PHARMAC accounts
for 73 percent of New Zealand's expenditures on prescription
drugs. The government also supports hospitals' pharmaceutical
expenditures, bringing its share of total spending on
prescription drugs in the country to about 80 percent.
New Zealand does not directly restrict the sale of non-subsidized
pharmaceuticals in the country. However, private medical
WELLINGTON 00000987 005 OF 005
insurance companies will not cover the cost of non-subsidized
medicines and doctors are often reluctant to prescribe them to
patients who would have to pay the cost out of pocket. Thus,
PHARMAC's decisions have a major impact on the availability and
price of non-subsidized medicines and the ability of
pharmaceutical companies to sell their products in the New
Zealand market.
The United States has serious concerns relating to the
transparency, predictability and accountability of PHARMAC's
operations. U.S. pharmaceutical suppliers maintain that the
methodology used to determine Pharmaceutical Schedule decisions
lacks transparency. Meanwhile, PHARMAC is reviewing the way it
decides funding for high-cost medicines. And, the Labour Party,
in an agreement to form a new government in October 2005 with
support from the United Future party, assented to a review of the
nation's long-term medicines strategy, including PHARMAC's role.
The U.S. government will continue to closely monitor developments
in this sector.
The New Zealand and Australian governments signed a treaty on
December 10, 2003, to create a joint agency to regulate medical
devices, prescription and over-the-counter medicines, dietary and
nutritional supplements, and cosmetics such as sun creams. Aside
from prescription pharmaceuticals, New Zealand does not currently
regulate market entry of these products. Both governments must
enact implementing legislation, which probably will not be
introduced in their Parliaments until at least mid-2006. It is
expected that the new agency will charge full cost-recovery fees
to register products and require additional documentation and
assessments for certain products, even if they already have U.S.
Food and Drug Administration approval. Each country's government
will continue to separately determine funding of prescription
medicines. U.S. manufacturers and distributors of non-
pharmaceutical therapeutic products in New Zealand have expressed
concerns that those requirements would be overly burdensome and
costly, and could serve to discourage exports of their products
from the United States to New Zealand.
BURNETT