The Green Party’s position on the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) is unchanged, Co-leader James Shaw said today.
“We recognise Trade Minister David Parker has made significant progress on some controversial provisions in the TPP, including investor-state dispute settlement, and we support those changes. However, we still don’t believe there are sufficient safeguards for people and the environment that would enable us to support the deal,” Mr Shaw said
“Our position on trade and the TPP in particular has been well canvassed with Labour and there are no surprises here.
“It is a sign of the strength of our relationship with Labour that we can respectfully disagree on an issue like the TPPA and still be able to get on with the business of government together.
“New Zealand and the world need to move away from old fashioned trade deals like the TPP and develop new types of agreements that better support global action on things like climate change and inequality.
“The EU has scrapped its version of the TPP, the TTIP, and is modernising its approach to trade agreements. New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific region should too.
“Kiwi exporters will benefit more from the new government’s commitments to add value to our exports and strengthen our international clean, green brand, than they will from the TPP,” Mr Shaw said.
Well at least they know what they are doing.
The EU might be a useful ally for the Greens in modernising trade arrangements.
They have yet to reach a FTA with ASEAN or India (negotiating with both) and if pushed by the EU to a higher standard FTA this would have a positive impact on ASEAN’s other arrangements with China, Japan, South Korea, us and Oz.
“It is a sign of the strength of our relationship with Labour that we can respectfully disagree on an issue like the TPPA and still be able to get on with the business of government together.”
Is it really a sign of the strength of their relationship, or is it merely a case of Labour not caring about the Greens opposition in this case as it won’t make a grain of difference?
If the Greens did support Labour on this, wouldn’t it be the death of them come next election?
I think it will be the death of NZF, which should give the Greens some uplift come next election.
The Greens are not part of the coalition and National would support the government it in the House. No leverage.
Exactly. The Green’s opposition won’t make a grain of difference. Which is why I believe Labour are largely comfortable with it.
Wait until Smith’s Kermadec Bill gets drawn from the ballot.
That would be a case where the Greens could “respectfully disagree” and accomplish something that is part of their Green Party policies.
My prediction is that they will hurriedly hide from sight if that bill ever comes to the House. Winston wouldn’t like it, and Winston rules.
Too hard when National was in government with the MP? Did the MP rule then?
National gave them what they wanted. The Maori Party were, or at least seem to have said they were, willing to withdraw from the Government Coalition on the issue.
Would the Green Party even consider doing the same? What a silly question eh?
The Greens have already said that they’re not supporting it.
And, as they aren’t in the coalition, they can’t withdraw from it.
They can do any of a number of things if they really wanted to.
1. They can demand that the TPPA be dropped or they will withdraw Confidence and Supply.
2. They can leave that in place but resign their Minister’s jobs and go to the cross benches and negotiate support for every bill other than Confidence and Supply as they arise.
3. They can do nothing and retain the Baubles of Office and keep travelling in the Beemers.
Which one do you think will happen?
1. Withdrawal of confidence and supply would result in a National NZ First coalition government AND TPP.
2. There is consultation and on-going negotiation now.
3. Apart from … voting against TPP in the House.
Your faith is to be admired. Particularly about comment 2.
I don’t see why number 1 would happen. Why do you think Winston would side up with National after his actions just prior to the election?
As far as 3 goes it simply means that they will feed their faithful a morsel and pretend that they have some influence, but do whatever they are told about anything that actually matters.
Right. You think they will keep the Baubles. They certainly don’t have any power do they?
1. A government needs a confidence and supply majority to stay in office, without the Greens only one arrangement is possible.
2. All 3 parties will compromise from time to time.
3. Achieved, removing National from government by rejecting any National-Green option and giving NZF the greenlight to go with Labour. Anything extra is ambition for excellence.
It’s not about leverage, it’s about principles. In this case, it’s the principles that underly the GP policy on the TPPA, and I’m sure there are lot of GP members and voters who are pleased to see the press release.
It’s also about the principles in the Charter about relationship. Having people in parliament who can disagree and still work together and respect each other is a good thing.
The party has principles and policies and not being part of the coalition is free to stand by them. It also has no leverage on FTA’s – given National support them.
How firmly the party stands by its principles and policies is only really known when it has leverage.
The main problem for the Green Party is the lack of a sound relationship with NZF. Yet to remove National from office it had to be supportive of the coalition formed by Labour and NZ First. Labour built up some credit with Greens by consulting them during that process.
There will come a time when Greens and NZF come into conflict over a looming parliamentary vote, and one wonders how that might be … leveraged (Labour negotiating some compromise between them on that issue or across a range of issues).
It’s a sign of the strength of the relationship/similarity between Labour & National.
The best thing for the Greens though is to grin and bear it, since they’re in the best possible position to affect what they can, and any alternative is a worse outcome.
Yes I agree with most who say greens have got it right here, as they are as good as their words to oppose this carpetbagging agreement that will rot our country further under Labour again now sadly.
Japan and all other countries are not going to play nice here.
These countries will aggressively get everything they want here over us as they nwant.
They will further devastate our environment further so we are headed for a fall here and the Government will be powerless to stop the demise of our once ‘clean green’ country.
The Green Party can only ever increase their vote as the weather becomes even more unpredictable and dangerous. Thank God they are still here for us, nobody else is going to help mitigating the serious situation we are all in.
The North Shore of Auckland yesterday had two hours of rainfall such as it has never seen before located in one small area – they called it a storm cell what ever that means but it scared the bejesus out of a lot of home dwellers – we have resided here in Auckland 40 years and have never seen anything like it. Isn’t it time citizens began to seriously worry over the climate. So this new agreement is meant to help us – well buggar me I do not think so.
The Greens are the only sane party in the house these days – the economy can go on hold as far as I am concerned, we need to preserve our planet first and foremost. It is the most pressing serious problem we have to solve right now. Jacinda Adhern has a new baby coming – doesn’t she worry over the kid’s future – I bloody well would.
I am so disappointed that they the Government are not making Climate Change a number 1 urgent problem to tackle. This Trade Agreement will not be doing one jot to tackle this seriously harmful climate situation.
Totally with you on all that.
You sound a tad worked up Whispering Kate 5
24 January 2018 at 8:22 pm
And yet the Greens anti-science stance on issues like glyphosate has me worried.
And then there is the EU.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/24/eu-brink-historic-decision-pervasive-glyphosate-weedkiller