Jane Kelsey on Groser’s proven breach of duty

Written By: - Date published: 9:34 am, October 16th, 2015 - 24 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, accountability, Economy, Environment, International, making shit up - Tags:

Read it here

And for those who dismiss her arguments with ad hominem and the ridiculous “she never supported a single FTA”, let me remind you a Judge agreed with her arguments.

Oh, and Wayne Mapp? You never opposed a single FTA, so you and any others in that boat, by your own bizarre logic, lack any credibility on this topic. See how foolish this reads as an argument for or against something?

Update:  Donations to the fighting fund for an appeal can be made at https://givealittle.co.nz/cause/tppnosecrecy

24 comments on “Jane Kelsey on Groser’s proven breach of duty ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tracey 1
    16 October 2015 at 9:37 am

    You will need to know what this word means (I had to look it up).

    anodyne
    ˈanədʌɪn/Submit
    adjective
    1.
    not likely to cause offence or disagreement and somewhat dull.
    “anodyne music”
    synonyms: bland, inoffensive, innocuous, neutral, unobjectionable, unexceptionable, unremarkable, commonplace, dull, tedious, run-of-the-mill
    “she tried to keep the conversation as anodyne as possible”
    noun
    1.
    a painkilling drug or medicine.
    “she had even refused anodynes”
    synonyms: painkiller, painkilling drug, analgesic, pain reliever, palliativ

  2. Wayne 2
    16 October 2015 at 9:42 am

    Just a factual point, and thus a specific departure from not commenting on The Standard.

    While it is true that Jane has never supported a single FTA, I have never doubted Jane’s depth of research into these agreements. I have acknowledged that in many posts on The Standard.

    I was also not surprised she won the case, and for the reasons that the Judge has given.

    • tracey 2.1
      16 October 2015 at 9:49 am

      The point Wayne, is you have used the ad homiems (hard left) and sought to dismiss her arguments with scant argument of your own and the rather disdainful notion that others should dismiss her because she has never supported a single FTA so she has no credibility. You did so for your depth of political and ideological belief.

      To now acknowledge her depth of research as some kind of answer to that behaviour and state you thought she could win the case is to try to attribute some kind of balance to yourself which has been lacking throughout these discussions (here and other places).

    • tracey 2.2
      16 October 2015 at 3:47 pm

      “Throughout the TPPA negotiations Minister Groser sought to justify their obsessive secrecy with a mantra that ‘it’s always done this way’. That was parroted unquestioningly by every fellow travelling journo and politician”

      You too Wayne, you peddled this mantra anywhere you could post

    • KJT 2.3
      16 October 2015 at 6:50 pm

      Still waiting for the cost benefit analysis of the China FTA , I have asked for, from Wayne, on several fora.

      Note that Australia had similar increases in export trade to China, without an FTA.

      I am sure we will not get one for the TPPA until it is too late.

      Of course, as Grosser liar says, we will likely not be sued under the TPPA as National will not do anything to reduce corporate profits. With any future Government, looking after New Zealanders interests will just be too costly to even consider.,

      We are still waiting for the wage rises and better future promised since the, unilateral, removal of most of our industry protection in the 80’s and 90’s, hoping the world would be daft enough to do the same.

      I am equally sure that wages and incomes for most in New Zealand will drop even faster to “meet the market”, after TPPA while we wait in vain for Nationals “brighter future”. And more local business will lose local contract and sales to big box internationals and multinational construction firms. More income earning assets will be sold off, especially those who compete with private monopolies and keep them honest.

      SOE and Government operations to resist monopoly power and fix market failures will be the the first casualties.

      And the main cause of opposition. TPPA is not about “free trade” at all. It is about the rights of corporates to manage trade for their own interest. No way is allowing longer rentier terms on copyright, patents and drugs about “free trade”. It is simply protectionism for rentiers and large firms, who can bankrupt Governments with ISDS cases if they do not toe the line. Note the ISDS case against a South American country when they were trying to protect the last of their unpolluted water supplies from mining.

      A Magna Carta for corporates and a removal of our rights to determine our own fates through democracy.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.3.1
        16 October 2015 at 7:45 pm

        +1

        That’s it exactly. The TPPA is nothing less than a full corporate takeover of the Pacific Nations.

      • Tracey 2.3.2
        17 October 2015 at 8:34 am

        +1

        espesh that nats so cobfidant wexwont be sued cos they will never pass legislation that wld upset big corps.

        wayne owes you a cost/benefit analysis? that should be easy.

  3. ianmac 3
    16 October 2015 at 9:55 am

    “She had not (and still has not) concluded her review of the other two categories, which include cost benefit analyses and other studies, eg of the impacts on the price of medicines.”
    And I bet that they will fight tooth and nail to prevent those parts becoming public -until it is all too late.
    Do yo think that National is capable of bringing in urgent legislation to amend the rules around disclosure – in the Public interest of course.

    • tracey 3.1
      16 October 2015 at 10:22 am

      Except that this decision also cast the Ombudsmen in a bad light, if she drags her heels and does not give it due consideration her professional reputation is at stake, and that seems to matter to her given her reaction tot he decision.

      An Ombudsmen who ignores a Court decision might just not be fit for the job…

    • tracey 3.2
      16 October 2015 at 10:24 am

      I suspect they mostly care about the space any delay gives them to PR the “good stuff.. Kelsey is seeking documents that form the basis for their decision-making, so in many ways they may be more damning than the eventual agreement detail, but we know this government can fool half the people all the time, so 30 days or more gives them plenty of time for the machine to do its thing

      • Pat 3.2.1
        16 October 2015 at 12:54 pm

        having heard both Woodhouse and Key bat away the disgraceful actions of H&S reform yesterday (in the most bumbling manner)…and noting the complete lack of outraged demand for accountability or redress I would suggest Jane Kelsey can find a battery of smoking guns in the TPP documents and it will count for naught……the most important element of a working democracy is dysfunctional.

  4. tracey 4
    16 October 2015 at 10:31 am

    For those wanting to understand the reasons for some opposition to the Investor Provisions this is a relatively brief overview.

    • Nigel Gregory 4.1
      16 October 2015 at 10:47 am

      Excellent post.
      Thanks for this.

    • ianmac 4.2
      16 October 2015 at 11:41 am

      Crikey Tracey. That is a formidable list of legal minds who are deeply concerned enough to put themselves on the line.
      Surely they cannot be ignored by either politicians or the MSM or the people of NZ.

    • Ad 4.3
      16 October 2015 at 3:19 pm

      Very impressive.

      Wish I had seen this earlier.

      Thankyou Tracey for your post – I also really enjoyed Professor Kelsey’s recent book.

  5. dukeofurl 5
    16 October 2015 at 11:31 am

    THis part of Kelsey’s post is worth looking at in more detail.

    “The Chief Ombudsman has reacted defensively to the judgement that struck down a fundamentally flawed decision that she had legitimised. I am still waiting for her review of the Minister’s decision on the two outstanding categories. It would be nice to think her Office might imbibe some of the spirit of Anand Satyanand and actively facilitate access to information, so as to promote democratic debate and accountability of the government as foreshadowed by the Act.”

    Is there any way of finding out the text of the Ombudsman review that has been published. Its gone through the court so is hardly a secret

    From the courts decision, Kelsey first asked the Ombudsman to decline to review in order that it could go to the court for a decision without delay.

    It does seem to an outside observer the the Ombudsman has acted like a ‘fellow tarvellor’ to the Minister ( most likely his official-“Dr Walker, a Deputy Secretary at MFAT and New Zealand’s chief negotiator for the TPP Agreement)

    But Walker has made this statement which was recognised by the Court

    “… All TPP participants have agreed to hold documents in confidence for
    four years after the agreement enters into force, or if no agreement enters
    into force, for four years after the last round of negotiations. …

    We now know this to be not true and merely a ‘negotiating stance to fend off the public’ as the agreement will be released ( with 30 days I think?). Which was part of the US Congress deal.

    • ianmac 5.1
      16 October 2015 at 11:44 am

      ‘All TPP participants have agreed to hold documents in confidence for
      four years after the agreement enters into force,”
      Isn’t that just the detail of negotiations and not the full text of the Treaty?

      • dukeofurl 5.1.1
        16 October 2015 at 3:27 pm

        The US Congress , as part of their legislation deal said ” release text 30 days after signing”, so that stuff about keep it more secret than Vatican archives was all nonsense, swept away in an instant by ONE party.

    • Tracey 5.2
      16 October 2015 at 3:45 pm

      if you go to the Kelsey article I linked to in the post, and click the first link, she has all the documents there that you can read.

  6. Smilin 6
    17 October 2015 at 12:19 am

    Its easy to see what is different about Key than any other PM in NZ since 1945
    He didnt make his name in politics here like all the rest good or bad
    He created his own persona and has been selling to the country lock stock and BS ever since he was directed by the people who made him and created the environment for his undisclosed sanctioned running of another set of books on how to secure NZ for the purposes of south pacific strategic importance to the western alliance
    The prick is lookin dodgier as every event surrounding his government’s responsibilities become more obvious
    That alone is enough reason to have them outed for treason but strangely in this country we dont have that right like most other countries in the world

    Currently we are in a similar economic phase to that of the mid to late 60s but for one simple twist of fate the swing to the left in british politics and also in the move further to the left in the Democrats in the states has come sooner not by much though

    People are so comatosed by the second big piece of corporate diversion TPPA the first being the so called financial crash of 2008 which was a huge deception to get China to over produce in order that the west’s BS monetary system wouldnt have to carry the can for its own loses or for creating the deception in the first place because all thru the 2000s he west has been losing the trade game with China and the fact that the US spends 10 times more on defence than any other country in the world, and the cost to the world is almost completely paralyzing most economies

    But returning to what this is doing to NZ is that we are becoming more like the sheep that the Aussies rib us about and it should be a point of fear the way the Aussie penal system works because its really not new but it should be awake up call that we are being made to tow the line because Aussie is huge protection for us whether piss and wind Key wants to admit it or not.
    Lets face it this stupid damaging game Key has brought on us will change this country for ever and not for the good if we dont go left in 2017

  7. tracey 7
    13 November 2015 at 8:55 am

    Groser has given the fingers to the Judiciary and the Law of NZ.

    Justice Collins:

    “the Act plays a significant role in New Zealand’s constitutional and democratic arrangements. It is essential the Act’s meaning and purpose is fully honoured by those required to consider the release of official information.”

    BUT Tim Groser is above all that so

    “In relation to Cabinet mandates, one of the categories requested, the Minister says the documents have been collated but no officials will be available to review them until after 5 February 2016 – conveniently the first date on which the TPPA can be signed following the expiry of President Obama’s 90-day notification to the US Congress of his intention to do so. Professor Kelsey notes there is no guarantee when or if any of those documents will actually be released.”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1511/S00199/groser-avoids-principled-reconsideration-of-tppa-oia.htm