NRT: An agreement for the sake of an agreement

Written By: - Date published: 3:42 pm, May 22nd, 2014 - 19 comments
Categories: copyright, Economy, farming - Tags: , , , , ,

no-right-turn-256The more you look at the Trans Pacific ‘Partnership’, the more you realise that unlike the trade agreements of the past 20 years, this agreement isn’t a agreement about freeing up trade. It is about putting restraints on trade. For NZ especially, it appears that we will not receive anything from it. All it does is makes it harder for our businesses. No Right Turn looks at the latest disaster of NZ diplomacy..

National is saying that they might sign up to the TPP even if it doesn’t give us free trade in agriculture:

Trade Minister Tim Groser says New Zealand may be open to a Pacific-wide trade deal that does not abolish tariffs on all agricultural goods.

Efforts to conclude the TPP in Singapore this week failed again, though analysts had not expected any breakthrough.

New Zealand wants full liberalisation in the TPP talks, but Mr Groser insists he’s not backing down, saying he will agree on the tariffs only if Japan and the United States prove they can show another way to achieve a high-quality agreement.

But what would be the point of such an agreement? To get it, we’d have to give away Pharmac, allow foreign corporations to dictate NZ policy, adopt US-style IP laws, and secretly extend our copyright term. And in exchange we’d get… nothing. It would be an agreement for the same of an agreement which would actively harm New Zealand. But I guess if it gives the government “trade deal with the US” headlines, they don’t care too much about that.

19 comments on “NRT: An agreement for the sake of an agreement ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. karol 1
    22 May 2014 at 6:46 pm

    And Key will be pushing a deal with his coming meeting with Obama.

  2. One Anonymous Bloke 2
    22 May 2014 at 6:53 pm

    To sign a contract from which we got nothing would be stupid indeed, but it’s quite* unlikely we’ll do so. What do we want? What are we prepared to relinquish to get it? I wish the debate was about these issues rather than the non-existent bogeymen the Chicken Littles promote.

    *staggeringly, beyond sense or reason.

    • Ergo Robertina 2.1
      22 May 2014 at 7:03 pm

      What do you want from the TPP OAB?
      What are you prepared to relinquish to get it?

      • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1
        23 May 2014 at 7:31 am

        What do I want? Agreements on minimum employment protection and human (including workers’) rights, affirmation that the first goal of trade is mutual benefit, strong environmental laws including enforcement with teeth.

        I’d give up the National Party. Sell them into slavery, but obviously, not with one of our trading partners, because they respect human rights.

        They say it’s good to adopt an extreme position at the start of negotiations, eh.

        • Ergo Robertina 2.1.1.1
          23 May 2014 at 9:32 am

          ‘I’d give up the National Party. Sell them into slavery, but obviously, not with one of our trading partners, because they respect human rights.’

          lol, you are such a cadre.
          Of course China respects human rights. The fifth Labour Govt did us proud hitching our trading interests there.

  3. Philj 3
    22 May 2014 at 7:21 pm

    xox
    Why don’t we just become an official state of the US and be done with it!

    • Draco T Bastard 3.1
      22 May 2014 at 7:43 pm

      I suspect that would be one action that would get any government that tried it kicked out by morning.

  4. Harry Holland 4
    22 May 2014 at 8:06 pm

    Time to just walk away…

  5. Descendant Of Sssmith 5
    22 May 2014 at 8:12 pm

    Free trade agreements are shit without free movement of labour. Most focus on the movement of capital and products.

    Of course many of these agreements allow the free movement of executives between countries but not of the everyday ordinary worker.

    That’s why Pacific Islanders get to come and do seasonal work but not to be electricians, accountants and so on.

    Of course our historical ties with OZ and the UK give some movement of predominantly white workers but it seems our historical ties with our other Pacific Island neighbours mean stuff all.

    Of course allowing the free movement of workers might stuff up the advantages of simply moving production elsewhere. It seems there’s always more desperate workers elsewhere in the world once the workers start demanding a fair share.

    • Colonial Viper 5.1
      23 May 2014 at 8:06 am

      Or to summarise – the power elite want the free movement of capital, not free movement for everyone else – unless it is to drop wages.

  6. Skinny 6
    22 May 2014 at 8:17 pm

    We need to preserve the rights of our own sovereignty. With trade agreements like the TTPA the greedy Multi Corporation’s will be gleefully hoping like hell that they can sucker a Uncle Sam friendly Government like Key-Nationals into signing first to help heard the othe nations aboard. Thank goodness the Japanese are throwing a spanner in the works.

    I really think we made a big mistake straying away from the ‘self sufficient first’ ideology that Muldoon was creating. If all turns tits up for the other Countries at least our geographical isolation stands us in good stead. This is the problem with flogging off our power assets.

  7. RedBaron CV 7
    22 May 2014 at 8:44 pm

    But so long as the US remains a corporate state then even if nobody signs this time there will be a “son of TPPA” coming down the track next unless I’m very much mistaken.. How do us other countries go on to the offensive so that any “son of TPPA” doesn’t emerge because the climate is too hostile..

  8. Steve Withers 8
    23 May 2014 at 9:22 am

    I had no expectation that the (Multi-) National 1% Party (NZ Branch) would return an agreement that was good for NZ. Instead, i would expect it to advantage foreign corporate rights over the rights of Kiwis.

    Looks like we’re headed that way. But I do intend to wait for any actual result before declaring success for the global corporatist agenda this government has been promoting since elected.