Here is my prediction.
Talleys (and many other two-bit shits) will shortly be establishing Australian entities to own their NZ assets. This is so that they will then fall under the TPP ISDS system. This is gaming the system. And this for many corporates appears to be what it’s all about.
• If you raise minimum wages this will affect our future profits
• If you increase the opportunity for effective collective agreements this will affect our future profits
• If you change environmental laws ….
• If you change the fish quotas …..
• If you change ACC contributions….
• If….
• If..
The list will be extremely long, and it will not take many challenges for governments to back away from making any policy, regulatory or legislative changes because the risks of ISDS challenges. I’m not sure whether this is an intended consequence or unintended consequence of the TPP.
Third party funding is a fast growing industry and will undoubtedly play a large role in investment arbitration in the future. Investors will need or want to outsource the financial risks involved with investment arbitration.
Dr. Eric De Brabandere & Julia Lepeltak, Leiden University5
trp, while you are about, do you know if there is any discussion about how Labour might deal with the issues the TPPA brings post-signing and once in government? If Little is saying that they will go back to the signatories and deal with it there, has he said how that might happen?
My understanding is that the TPP has no entrenched mechanism for re-negotiation or review. Though, if there is, I’d be happy to hear about it. I suspect future governments will have to use the diplomatic route to re-start negotiations. I’ll have a dig and see what I can find out where Labour are heading with this aspect. Might be a post in it.
Bill has put up this argument, which on the face of it looks like a fairly significant impediment to renegotiation. Neither of us have found any expert opinion on that though (I don’t think either of us have looked).
it’s a lock down given that in seeking an amendment, any party can exercise a veto and any party seeking an amendments has, unlike in initial negotiations, no position to horse trade from.
Here’s the entire wording of Article 30.2 Amendments
The Parties may agree, in writing, to amend this Agreement. When so agreed by all Parties and approved in accordance with the applicable legal procedures of each Party, an amendment shall enter into force 60 days after the date on which all Parties have notified the Depositary in writing of the approval of the amendment in accordance with their respective applicable legal procedures, or on such other date as the Parties may agree
The 12 countries’ legislatures will have no ability to re-negotiate the deal’s terms, however, and will be limited to yes-or-no votes on signing it into law.
thanks for that. My quick reading of it is that that refers to pre-ratification.
Deal goes to parliaments
US President Barack Obama released a statement saying Americans would have months to read the Trans-Pacific Partnership before he signs it into law.
In the United States, the deal will next go to the Congress for consideration, and in New Zealand and other countries, it will go before the Parliament.
The 12 countries’ legislatures will have no ability to re-negotiate the deal’s terms, however, and will be limited to yes-or-no votes on signing it into law.
It’s a messy bit of reporting too, because in NZ at least, it won’t go before parliament.
The Greens and NZ First did their homework and immediately recognized TPPA was another corporate take-over move. Labour gives every impression they are just starting to wake up.
Can’t help wondering if there is conflict of interest among certain NT MPs ((John Key) springs to mind – any declaration of investment in those Third party funding investors. Who is really going to benefit from nation states having to go into arbitration (ISDS)?
It’s intended. Just look at how the National Government reacted to the Philip Morris case against the Australian Government. Too scared to do anything… just in case.
No, not too scared, but prudently letting the Australian taxpayers take the risk and foot the legal bill. If they were unsuccessful, then the precedent would be set and we would have to think hard about having a go ourselves.
I understand Andrew Little will support the TPPA if Labour get into power .
Can someone explain to me exactly what the official position is please?
Do we oppose and protest or do we support and settle down ?
The answer is that National must be opposed by all those who believe in NZ’s democractic sovereignty and freedom from corporate control. And so must Labour.
Labour. The perfect example of a peoples party which has become a party of the ruling establishment.
Andrew Little – insincere and incredible.
But apparently some here say that he is the best Labour speech maker in decades. Great.
“some here say that he is the best Labour speech maker in decades”
I think that is an accurate opinion. He is the best since David Lange.
That is mainly because all the other leaders ranged from terrible to dreadful.
Not sure who wrote the speech, but I reckon it’s Grant Robertson behind the policy as a Version 2 of the interest free student loans scheme he developed in 2005.
The perfect example of a peoples party which has become a party of the ruling establishment.
Actually, Labour has always been a capitalist party but it’s worked to save capitalism from itself. We’re now learning that this can’t actually be done.
The strategy is to run down the TPP even though we agree with it , hopefully this will fool and confuse enough people to get us over the line and into power.
Once in, we’ll spin some bullshit about how our hands are tied and it’s all Nationals fault.
Makes one wonder why you support it, CV. Must be hard being a paying poodle of those notorious supporters of the 1% but lets not call it hypocrisy, coz that’d be true, but mean.
and the perfect example of why I can’t be bothered with TS …. yea nah.
TRP’s last comment (re the EMbittered CV – possibly with good reason) was disingenuous, cowardly, conceited, holier-than-thou, in-bubble, and in short – complete and utter kaka. All the best of British TRP! (and all those that fawn all over you). Christ!!! and we wonder what’s wrong with Labour ffs! There ya have it in a nutshell – that ‘broad church’ we’re supposed to worship within – just as long as we worship our betters
I suppose you’re correct @ grey.
There are plenty worse BUT (I mean – the “voice of Reason ffs!) – how arrogant is THAT?!!!!
Then there’s another that’s so fucking up itself it runs as tho’ it was some sort of elementary cure for a disease. _I wonder whether Lanthanide could possibly cure the for ZIKA virus – it’s certainly so fucking arrogant and holier than thou it’d believe in marketing itself as a cure-all for all the ills of the world.
You’re correct however – neither (of those specimens) come close to what we need to battle.
It’s just that Labour really do need to have a fucking good look at themsleves (perhaps even spend less time bagging C.V. for bad experiences) and really look at their own inadequacies.
Like my father-in-law before me (after a lifetime of supporting Labour), they’ll NOT get my vote till after they’ve acknowledged, apologised, and proven themselves. I don’t see it tho’ in the near future.
Christ – I’m even considering a vote for Winston.
Key may not make it to election year – he’s looking old and tired and making mistakes. Time was he’d’ve relished an opportunity like Waitangi, but he can no longer cut the mustard.
The National Party Herald are in full rent-a-propaganda mode on the TPPA.
Audrey Young in her article titled “Protest fears put cork in TPP ministers celebration lunch at winery” blatantly pushes the pro-TPP argument quoting Todd McClay, Villa Maria founder Sir George Fistonich, executive director of Export New Zealand, Catherine Beard.
She totally misses the point that the people of NZ are STAKEHOLDERS in the TPPA.
We, the public, Maori and Pakeha, will be paying the costs of this agreement with our health, our environment, our jobs, our education and it is OUR sovereignty that is being traded without our having been consulted.
We , the public, were excluded from taking part in this agreement until the stage where we cannot make any changes to it.
Those groups opposed to the TPPA have been ignored or dismissed as scaremongers?
Where is the Health Cost Benefit Analysis called for by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists?
If a CEO presented an investment opportunity (and that is what the TPPA is being touted as) to a group of shareholders that promised an ROI of 1% after 10 years, the shareholders, after laughing him out of the boardroom, would be asking for his resignation. 1% is margin of error stuff. The problem I have with he TPPA is it is being pushed as some big trade opportunity when in reality, to me anyway, trade is just being used to make it palatable to Joe Public. The real intent is around the rules of trade and how it concentrates more power into the hands of corporates and limits what a sovereign government can do to protect the interests of the people it is meant to serve.
If a CEO presented an investment opportunity (and that is what the TPPA is being touted as) to a group of shareholders that promised an ROI of 1% after 10 years, the shareholders, after laughing him out of the boardroom, would be asking for his resignation. 1% is margin of error stuff.
that is exactly what it is…a few crumbs from the trade table to cement in the corporates power…as if they need more, they already lead the elected govs by the nose
The TPPA mitigates a lot more risk for the corporates by socializing it through legislation rather than them having to lobby governments on a case by case basis.
I was agreeing with you and adding to your statement. From a corporate perspective this is a rational extension of their strategies when dealing with externalising risk.
It requires an ever vigilant public to counter it. But the machine is very well funded and very powerful. It can offer lots of goodies to stifle criticism… somebody once said to me: “money might not be able to buy love but it can buy a pretty comfortable misery”. It seems to me that many are content in that regard.
Perfect from a corporate perspective… licence to gouge.
+1 Jones – yes the irony is that once TPPA is signed, corporations probably won’t waste money buying political figures, they can just litigate politicians decisions through their own kangaroo ISDS tribunals. Ha ha.
Like the cliched mafia “offer you can’t refuse” with the promise of becoming a “made man” for the politicians who show the greatest enthusiasm in facilitating it.
@Ben “We, the public, Maori and Pakeha, will be paying the costs of this agreement with our health, our environment, our jobs, our education”.
Our Health
The New Zealand Medical Association (NZMA) is repeating its call for an independent Health Impact Assessment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement (TPPA).
“As strong advocates for the profession and for our patients, we supported the call last year by a number of other health sector organisations for an independent assessment of the impact of the TPPA on health,” says NZMA Chair Dr Stephen Child.
“We need a clear understanding of the possible effects of the TPPA on current and future policy settings and directions.
“We must also ensure our ability to achieve legitimate public policy objectives—such as the protection of public health, safety and the environment—is protected. To do this we must have an independent assessment focused on these aspects.
“Much of the discussion around the TPPA has been on its economic value for the country. While we accept there might be financial benefits for the country, the NZMA believes wider issues need to be considered, including affordable access to medicines, and public health policies especially around tobacco and alcohol control.
“Last week’s release of the National Interest Analysis does not fully allay our concerns. Analysis focusing on the effects on health—including issues such as climate change—is still needed.”
The TPPA’s enforcement provisions are very similar to those first developed for the US/Peru FTA, and it is continued violations of Peru’s obligations under that agreement have become the case study in how enforcement of such environmental protections has failed. • When challenged on the need for ISDS provisions, ministers promoting the TPPA repeatedly stated that there would be no restraint on a government’s ability to regulate in the public interest. What the TPPA has delivered are provisions that completely fail to protect governments from being sued when taking such action. • The risk that a government could be successfully sued means the ISDS provisions would have a ‘chilling effect’ on a government’s willingness to undertake progressive environmental reform. This favours retaining low standards when these need to rise markedly. • There is a gross asymmetry in the rights and means accorded organisations that would seek to protect the commons for the public good, and rights and means accorded foreign investors to protect private wealth.
Imagine an education system where multi-national corporations could set up a school alongside your local public school, and then demand equal access to the taxpayer purse to fund that school.
It’s a likely scenario because global businesses are on the hunt for new ways of getting their fingers into nations’ multi-billion dollar public education purses. And here in New Zealand, the TPPA could provide that opportunity.
Even Singapore, which our education minister has hailed as one of the high performing education systems that we should look towards, has taken the precaution of carving education out of the TPPA deal.
Thank you for taking the time to compile a detailed response TMM (somewhat refreshing for opinions to be backed with analysis I might add). I shall read and digest your links.
You are welcome, Ben. You will find the link below useful as it contains peer-reviewed expert analysis on several chapters of the TPP. Thank you for being openminded and prepared to consider the information so that you can make up your own mind on the issue. My beef is against people who are wilfully ignorant: who deliberately refuse to read any information and suspend their own ability to think rationally, blindly following others without questioning.
You are obviously not one of those, thank goodness.
How long ago were you in primary school Ben? Presumably you are old enough to have had secondary ed and taught how to run a critical analysis of what you are reading.
Hard luck Labour supporters. It seems as though you are being let down by your party leaders once more. Looks like we are in the TPPA for the long haul.
I thinks it’s hard luck for a left coalition in total. If voters are against the TPPA, how can they vote to elect a left wing government that is committed to pulling out of the agreement?
Yes. As usual. None so blind…. chris.
The TPPA is in. Signed and sealed. Will be ratified by Cabinet and not by Parliament as will be done in Canada, and the Senate in USA. Finished.
Andrew can not cancel it. But they/we can fight against the aspects which are bad for NZ, when new legislation is brought to the House for Parliament to vote on.
The only way Labour Loyalists can stomach the cognitive dissonance is by buying into Labour’s line that the TPPA isn’t that bad, that the costs of being out of the TPPA are too high, so let’s just accept it.
Just more evidence for Kiwi voters that we don’t have a real Opposition.
We do have a real opposition – it’s just that Labour is not part of it.
Wise up. There are other Parties in Parliament.
It has been the case for some time that Labour thinks because it is the big brother it must control everything – that is going to change – as more and more voters wake up to the fact that if they really want an alternative voice they won’t find it in Labour.
Trouble is, CV believes that people should vote for the parties that match them culturally or that they believe in. In the absence of that, all parties are useless to him.
Until now Opposition parties have been urging the govt to pull out of the negotiations – only now is the time for them to publicly state that they will pull out, if given the opportunity. I expect that they will in due course. Unfortunately Labour have been ambivalent re the TPPA from the get go.
The latest statement from the Greens I feel is pretty clear. They will continue to oppose the TPPA. I think that that is as much as a Party can say on the matter. The TPPA has not yet been ratified and we await the outcome in the States, The problem with withdrawal is still fraught – it could end up costing billions – no matter which way you look at it. It’s a shit of a situation that National have signed us up to and they intend digging us even deeper in the hole.
I think there is a fair amount of political naivity in this thread (or disingenuousness on CV’s part because he should know better). Russell Norman said a few elections ago that one of the major problems with free trade agreements was that they bound NZ into contracts that incoming governments had no knowledge of. He was talking about ones done completely in secret, but this applies to the TPPA too because of the clusterfuck process and the complexity of the agreement. So for instance, if Labour campaigned on policy X and then came into government and discovered that there was a confidential clause in an agreement made by a previous govt that prohibited them from doing policy x, then their hands were tied. Plus they look like they’ve just gone back on their promise.
This is why I’m basically against all free trade that isn’t done via full democracy. Because the basic premise is that it’s ok for a govt elected for one term to bind NZ into contracts for eternity, and that’s not a free state.
And for people surprised that pulling out is not an easy thing to do, this is what a huge part of the protest has been about. It’s an inherently flawed idea and process and many people knew that from the start.
If a Party in opposition prior to an election indicates that it will withdraw from the TPPA then overseas corporates will be waiting for any sign – should that Party gain the Treasury benches – for filing suits against withdrawal and the loss of profits for all manner of reasons. It will be a can of worms. Parties opposed to the TPPA are also parties who want more action on environment, protection of NZ land, etc (provisions for which have been removed from the TPPA) so the field will be open for ISDS mayhem. It takes 6 months for a country to withdraw. Even with an electoral mandate, it would take an incoming Govt at least a year before final withdrawal and plenty of time for companies to lodge claims, however spurious. These courts are set up in the favour of corporates and manned by corporate lawyers. They are a farce and formed with the sole aim of handing the ability of a country to manage and govern itself in its own perceived interests into the hands of multinationals – nothing more nor less.
If a Party in opposition prior to an election indicates that it will withdraw from the TPPA then overseas corporates will be waiting for any sign – should that Party gain the Treasury benches – for filing suits against withdrawal and the loss of profits for all manner of reasons.
Would the short term loss caused by that be bigger than the continuing loss that is going to come from remaining in the TPPA?
The problem with withdrawal is still fraught – it could end up costing billions – no matter which way you look at it.
That would depend upon the process of withdrawal. Do the ISDS claims get to continue after we’ve withdrawn? If I was the government I’d make sure that any and all claims against the nation under TPPA would be closed at the same time that withdrawal took place. This should be standard operating procedure so as to prevent the spurious claims that you’re concerned about.
Nevertheless, if you want the best resistance to the TPPA and any other agreement like it, then voting for the GP is the thing to do. They’ve consistently said they opposed it (unlike Labour who are still pretty centrist and pro-free trade), and have been working for years on opposing these kind of agreements that undermine NZ.
btw, personal feelings of being represented aren’t necessary to use one’s vote, or even to feel politically empowered for useful.
“btw, personal feelings of being represented aren’t necessary to use one’s vote, or even to feel politically empowered for useful.”
Speak for yourself. I vote on policy, thus policy must reflect my views if a party wants to attain it.
When it comes to such a major political issue as this trade deal (and considering a poll on the matter showed the majority of voters were opposed) one would expect there to be political representation.
The Greens haven’t committed to withdrawing if renegotiations are unsuccessful, thus alternatives fail to advance.
Moreover, at this stage the Greens require Labour, hence Labour will largely be calling the shots. And there goes your resistance to the TPP.
Na I’m cool with Little’s handling of it, given that a the tpp is unlikely to make a blind bit of difference to my life and that Little is running a party with independent thinkers in it not like the whipped gutless tools in national.
A marvelous approach to democracy. Let the government of the day jail all its democratically elected opponents. Even Venezuela finds this a bit hard to do.
If this government were not riddled with corruption it would have nothing to fear. But corruption is fatal to democracies – and the consequences of failing democracies are well documented.
The bracing subantarctic climate would do wonders for Key’s integrity, and Gerry Brownlee might well prove attractive to sea elephants.
Though you misread my comment – it referred in fact directed to persons within Labour, who like yourself support treason against NZ in the form of the TPP.
I don’t see that as letting supporters down. It might be theoretically possible to pull out of the TPPA but practically the cost of doing so would be unaffordable.
You can’t sign up deals and then walk away from them without penalty. Actions have consequences, an arbitrary withdrawal would destroy much of the existing business & diplomatic relationships we have with member countries.
or trust that the US don’t ratify….the greedy corps lobbyists may yet shoot themselves in the foot in that regard…which reminds me …why the complete lack of concern expressed via the MSM around the issue of side letters?…
Yes. I heard that American on radio talking about US seeking side letters to “clarify” that the time was really 8 years not just 5 years as we have been told. Yet we have been told by Key that there will be no changes. Signed. Sealed. Untouchable. Huh!
Andrew Geddis” The confusion is over the length of time that “biologics” (i.e. medicines that are made using certain types of cells to produce the right kind of protein) will be given protection through a “market exclusivity period” in which “biosimilars” (which are akin to generic medicines) are prohibited. There’s an explainer on why this matters here.
It seems like NZ thinks we’ve agreed to a 5 year protection period, but the US wants at least 8, and no-one is quite sure exactly what the TPPA text says.”
This is why the Neoliberals always win, why Labour is so ineffective at changing the course of the things, and why the status quo continues to drift towards the right.
National and the corporates now know how to handle Labour.
You simply make deals which are too tough and costly to undo, and a gutless Labour will go along with it: to them staying in the TPP is the pragmatic, unavoidable decision.
It is too costly and too dangerous to wait for that point. Fascists, racists, extreme nationalists all become much more politically empowered at that point.
I fear it’s a vain hope too pat but one of the prepared scripts from the pro-TPP trolls (including the NZ Herald) is that we can always leave if it turns out to be no good.
The argument not to sign would be strengthened considerably if the likes of Labour admitted that we really can’t leave once we’ve signed; that it’s a one-way ticket. Politically that should help Labour by demonstrating to voters how undemocratic and authoritarian National is.
Six months notice. That’s all it takes on paper to get out of the TPP. Then it’s simply a case of standing firm and refusing to play ball on all the ISDS claims that would rain from the sky during those six months.
And the other threats of how there will be huge divestment and so on – face them all down.
Something to note. An argument for the TPP and specifically the dispute procedures, is that direct foreign investment plummets without them. A number of studies, including one by the World Bank, have found that claim to be entirely false.
Side note. Syriza, in spite of the express backing of the Greek voters, capitulated when it tried to play that game with Europe’s ‘big boys’. There is now rioting in Greece again.
“Six months notice. That’s all it takes on paper to get out of the TPP. Then it’s simply a case of standing firm and refusing to play ball on all the ISDS claims that would rain from the sky during those six months. ”
There’s more to it than that Bill. We currently trade with, and have good diplomatic relationships with, all the member countries. If we renege on the deal those countries will freeze us out. They’ll be pissed off with us and will show it. The US have shown time & again how vindictive they are, they alone would make life hard for us.
We won’t face an overt embargo. We’d just see a whole lot of subtle changes, obstacles put in our way, which would gradually reduce to a trickle the trade & investment we do with those countries.
Once we’re in the most hopeful outcome I can see is a breakaway by a group of nations; enough to weaken the remaining TPP bloc and enough to avoid the penalties that would befall a single nation quitting.
Yeah, short term. But, long term – as shown by various studies including by the World Bank – being in or out of these deals makes absolutely no difference to levels of trade/investment.
Despite what the tories and self-loathing labourites say, Little was pretty clear in Gosman’s link.
Labour is a party that supports free trade. This is not a surprise to anyone except the poor few who spend the first few minutes of every morning believing it’s 1972 again.
There are some bits in the TPPA that meet Labour’s free trade objectives.
There are other bits that fail to meet Labour’s expectations about sovreignty.
Therefore, Labour’s starting point is to try to keep those things it agrees with and renegotiate those things it finds unacceptable.
People demanding that NZ pull out of the deal see it as a wreck that should be written off. Labour see it as a do-er upper. How a LabGrn govt sees it? That has yet to be negotiated.
Labour leader Andrew Little says his party supports free trade but will not back the TPP unless their bottom lines are met.
Labour has set out five “non-negotiable” conditions for a Pacific-wide trade deal, including protection for Pharmac and the right to restrict house sales.
Leader Andrew Little said his party supported free trade but would not back the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) unless the five “non-negotiable bottom lines” were met.
…
Labour believes the conditions reflect protections in the 2008 free trade agreement it negotiated with China.
It has previously withheld support for the TPP pending the release of the final draft of the 12-nation deal.
But Thursday’s announcement is the first time it has put specific conditions on its support.
Bear in mind that ‘backs’ there is before any of us have seen the draft, including Labour, and that Little is talking about whether they will support National signing the agreement or not.
except that it is patently obvious that the US would not be in this deal without the ISDS provisions (see TTIP negotiations) and the ability to vet our legislation……as a small (the size of a moderate US city) we are in a weak bargaining position…this applies to any side letter issue, unlike say Japan who are able to bargain from a position of strength.
We have managed to export in the face of tariffs, quotas and subsidies to date and their is no need to bend over for this when the subsidies, quotas and tariffs (particularly in the Us) still remain and are merely “adjusted”…we would be far better off moving our exports up the value chain as advocated by many analysts…we will never be able to compete on volume …consider what we have done to this country by increasing the dairy herd from 130,000 to 1.3 million in canty, 5 million nationwide…the US has 90 million beasts and they are only the fifth largest country by herd numbers worldwide.
Nevertheless, Labour’s starting position is that the TPP will be a done deal before the next election, so the preferred option is to try to improve it before considering something like withdrawal.
If we don’t like some of the sovreignty issues, other nations (e.g. Canada) will have similar concerns. We can’t control, but we might be able to lead.
there will be no improving it….all efforts will be needed to ensure it is not made any worse….its a dog, a red zoned condemned property, not a doer upper
That might well be your perspective.
It does not seem to be the perspective of the Labour Party.
But how do you feel about free trade agreements in principle? I suspect that therein might lie some of the difference in perspective.
It’s way past time to quit using the old ‘you must be against free trade’ line.
Fundamentally the TPP will inhibit the kind of companies NZ needs in order to export higher quality products and will, as Oram points out, lock us more tightly into raw commodity producer status.
That isn’t free trade, it’s restrictive trade.
Little made it clear that Labour is not, and that they see free trade elements in the TPP. Assuming the second part is correct, then anyone 100% opposed to the TPP is also against the free trade elements.
I’m against the TPP because of the ISDS and intellectual property issues. But just as there’s bad stuff in it, there’s probably some good stuff in any 6000 page multilateral agreement.
But thanks for taking a reasonable suspicion and depicting it as a categorical claim. That always ensures some shit-hot conversationing.
Weren’t you replying to Pat, not ”some commenters”?
I know the Labour bashing thing recently here has got out of hand (personally I got over my disappointment with Labour’s TPP stance about 18 months ago), but Pat is actually informed about the unequal power relationship and specific risks that aren’t at all answered by an asinine there’s-good-stuff-and-bad-stuff-like-any-deal response.
I was, but I don’t have exhaustive records of every commenter’s opinions on a range of topics. My suspicion was based on pat’s categorical opposition to the entire thing (contrasting with Little’s more nuanced approach), and the fact that such an attitude is not exactly unheard of around here.
Pat advised me otherwise, and I took them at their word.
You might think that wanting to keep the bits Labour agrees with while trying to renegotiate the bits it doesn’t is “asinine”, but that seems to be Labour’s position.
Is there anything in particular you want from me, or should I just regard this little exchange as yet another meaningless piece of static?
I will confess that initially I had thought that with the ISDS provisions removed it may have been a workable document, but the more I look into it the worse it becomes and that includes the trade aspects…. I expect if and when it is implemented our balance of payments will deteriorate significantly.
Pat, the only hope is a democratic win in the States. In my view rather than asking if we can pull out, the focus should be getting the public to understand it’s not a done deal yet.
McFlock: I think you missed the bit where Little moved to outright opposition to TPP. While Little acknowledges that once a done deal NZ (effectively) can’t pull out, that was significant.
So you’re defending a position even Labour has abandoned.
I don’t want anything from you, but as a suggestion maybe try actually following some news before commenting on this?
@ergo I was aware of that. This subthread is about TC’s suggestion of withdrawal from the done deal vs trying to improve it first. So your “suggestion”, while snarky, adds no new information to the discussion and is not really relevant to anything I’ve written here. Just like your initial mischaracterization of my position.
So this is just another example of a completely pointless ergovmcf tit-for-tat, I would suggest that you actually think before jumping on your high horse, but past experience suggests that this would be futile. And as continuation would likely fill up pat’s reply tab, I say ‘good day’.
Oh, it must have escaped your notice – I directly addressed Pat too in my last reply, it’s not all about you.
Your concern for Pat’s reply tab is touching but unnecessary.
My other replies on this thread involve actual arguments about the TPP, and I daresay Pat’s not too bothered that I’ve used his reply tab a few times to make those comments.
I thought you were saying Labour’s current TPP position was that it was partly good and partly bad, I pointed out Labour had moved to outright opposition.
You’ve said you’re aware of Labour’s current position – OK, accepted.
Not keen on any future interaction with you, either.
There’s a fair chance the US will reject it – and who knows – those obtuse losers, the Gnats may change their minds as they see what little credibility they ever had vanishing down the plughole with foreign land sales, mounting debt and graphic incompetence.
It’s an odd translation but interesting points about varying radiation levels on food in countries trade.
Under TPPA consumers are going to have less and less knowledge of their food origin. It is the opposite of the 21st century farming where consumers want to know the origin of their food from farm gate to table …
“Dumping Radioactive Food from Japan on the World-Why the TPP is a Pending Disaster”
My reading is that it’s not so much that Little thinks they should stay in as it’s going to be too hard to leave. If Labour’s current position on sovereignty is to be believed, then that exists once we are in the agreement too and thus if leaving were easy then it would be easy. CV appears to take the view that Labour are lying, I take the view that Labour are caught between a rock and a hard place.
I’ll just add that most people criticising Labour for saying they won’t leave haven’t yet looked at what leaving would actually entail. Until that conversation is had it’s hard to put Labour’s decision into context.
So don’t buy food you don’t know the origin of. Local NZ companies will be wise to continue labeling their products as NZ made. I currently do that and buy only food that is NZ grown/made even if it costs more.
People need to understand we have power but we need to start believing in it and use it.
Not sure I want to start making my own pasta and rice and so forth. Not as easy as it sounds. It sort of like going back to 18th century . While I think you should buy as much locally grown as you can and limit food miles – some foods are not practical to buy locally and shouldn’t you be allowed to know where it came from and how safe it is? Under previous trade agreements country of origin labelling have been successfully challenged as a ‘trade barrier’.
of course, but the subthread was about how to stay empowered if corporate culture tries to take that from us.
There are people in NZ already making pasta. Wheat can easily be grown here.
Rice is trickier. It probably can be grown for larger distribution but to eat local we should be eating local and seasonal, which means that for many in NZ rice won’t be a staple. Plenty of other good choices though.
Buy fresh food from the local vege shop or market and use the internet to learn where other food is coming from. They might be able to limit the information on the label but evey company wants to put its logo on the product, so google it and find out.
There is currently an app to scan barcodes and find out if the product contain certified palm oil, I have a feeling if food labeling will be limited there will be more apps like that. It is kind of foolish from corporations to think they can completely block information. Not in this time and age.
More adverse comment against the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) rort.
TTIP investor court illegal, say German judges
BRUSSELS, 4. FEB, 18:17
German judges dealt a blow to EU-US free trade agreement talks after declaring a proposed arbitration court illegal.
The European Commission last September proposed setting up an investment tribunal court that would allow firms to challenge government decisions as part of its larger Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
Critics says the new court, which is intended to replace a much loathed investor-to-state dispute settlement (ISDS) system, will pressure governments into clawing back consumer protection rights and environmental standards in favour of corporate interest.
Earlier this week, the German Association of Magistrates, a Berlin-based judicial umbrella organisation, said it “sees neither a legal basis nor a need for such a court”.
It says existing national courts are good enough and that efforts by the Commission to create a new court undermines jurisdictions across the Union.
“The German Magistrates Association sees no need for the establishment of a special court for investors,” it states.
It says the new investor court would alter national court systems “and deprive courts of member states of their power.”
The German magistrates also cast doubt on the independence of the judges in the new system as well as their appointment procedures.
I refer to these ISDS courts as kangaroo courts – I find it absolutely mind boggling that anyone with even the most minutest understanding of their responsibility to ensure fair justice for the citizens of their country (yes I’m looking at you Tim, and you John, and you Todd) could agree to such a procedure – so open to abuse and bias, so flimsy in its appointments, which circumvents the International courts and the jurisdiction of the WTO, and with no right of appeal, and only for the benefit of Multi-nationals with Pockets way deeper than the GDPs of 75% of the countries involved.
well in Keyspeak, it’s a “no brainer” isn’t it? ISDS “arrangements” makes it anything but a “Free” trade agreement, and until the very notion of them is thrown out, how can we even think about anything else?
Thanks for the post, something to direct the believers to, when they accuse those that want to discuss further of being “rent a mob” or smelly hippies!
This TPPA reminds me of Y2K, once it is all passed the world wont stop spinning. our lives will go on as normal, All those who opposed it will have moved on to the next anti progress agenda.
Has anyone stopped to think how TPPA will benefit the poorer countries with trade to these other 11 countries.
I come from the point of why would 12 countries sell there country man and their own families down the drain.
I feel we will look back in 10 years time and say what was all the worry about.
All those who opposed it will have moved on to the next anti progress agenda.
The TPPA is only progress if you think going back to feudalism is progress.
Has anyone stopped to think how TPPA will benefit the poorer countries with trade to these other 11 countries.
It won’t benefit them at all. In fact, it will probably make them worse off as most of Africa is now worse off after they got ‘free-trade’ forced upon them by the rich nations. The rich nations did well out of it though because they bought up large amounts of the poor countries and shifted all the resources to them.
History shows quite clearly that poor countries do very badly out of these types of deals.
It’s also a point that all the developed countries developed under under heavy protection.
Chris Trotters Bowalley Road piece post-march is very thoughtful and sincere.
It also has an awe inspiring helicopter photo of Queen Street packed with heads as far as the eye can see.
Further he says, and I thought you all would be interested so have copied it for you (and have bolded a portion that expresses very well the situation):
John Key and his Government thus risk entering election year as a collection of figurative “Quislings”, guilty of conspiring against the national interest on behalf of entities without countries, morals or scruples. If this perception can be driven deep into the electorate’s mind, then National’s chances of re-election will be nil. More importantly, the victorious coalition of Labour, the Greens and NZ First will be swept into office with a broad mandate to take on a corporate plutocracy that has ruled without challenge for far too long.
No, but the way you are acting is on par with the worst of Labour MPs, so I have no doubt that if you were in their position you would be pulling the same kind of bullshit they are.
Weka, don’t know if you have followed the link in 4. above.
Andrew is very clear in stating that Labour will not pull out of the TPPA.
He clearly states the reason for that is that there is much in the agreement that will be good for NZ.
He is clear that there are certain provisions they would renegotiate, but reiterates that they will not pull out.
He says 3 times “The train has left the station”.
Labour have never said they would pull out. To suggest that Labour is now all of a sudden saying it won’t pull out is a nonsense, because they’ve never intended to pull out. That was clear last year, pulling out was never part of their agenda.
“He clearly states the reason for that is that there is much in the agreement that will be good for NZ.”
Can you please quote that bit, or at least post the time stamp?
Please post something that demonstrates that Labour have ever said anything that hints that they might pull out. Because this isn’t news, it’s always been their position.
That’s a bit disingenuous Weka. Not stating whether you will or will not do something is very different to confirming that you will or will not do something.
Up until yesterday I don’t believe Labour had made any definite statement that they would remain in the TPPA.
Maybe I’m wrong and someone can link to such a statement?
Can you please quote that bit, or at least post the time stamp?
Apologies, I should have quoted him directly the first time rather than paraphrasing from memory…
“(pieces of TPPA legislation) that support genuine free trade we will support, because we are a free trade Party.”
“…There are aspects that will help some exporters, we’ve never shied away from that.”
” if you are desperate to have only one answer to this, that it’s either completely wrong, or it’s completely right, then a 6,000 page agreement isn’t going to be like that. And a free trade agreement that has some aspects of free trade, and others that are not, it doesn’t break down that simply.”
“The train has left the station” x3.
I think the phrase is generally used to indicate that it is pointless to remain on the platform shouting at the rails.
yes, I have. Please post something that demonstrates that Labour have ever said anything that hints that they might pull out. Because this isn’t news, it’s always been their position.
lolz. Some of the centrists here might genuinely be puzzled, and some of the righties might be just taking the opportunity to spin, but you of all people know damn well that Labour were never considering pulling out, which makes you the King of the Disingenuous Ones. Still, whatever opportunity there is to poison the well, eh CV?
I’ll see if u can dig a link up later but I was asking about this on ts last year and the sense I had was that it was a given that Labour wouldn’t pull out. Honestly, I am surprised at all the surprise this week.
Labour last year said they would oppose the tppa if their bottom lines weren’t met. Then once the draft was out and they had time to really look at it they came out and said they oppose NZ signing and there is little they could do.
Btw, anyone who thought that last year that if Labour’s five bottom lines weren’t met that meant once in power Labour would pull out needs to put up their rationale. Because when I raised it it wasn’t even a consideration.
A bottom line not being met is generally accepted one won’t be part of any deal. It’s where one generally draws the line. Thus, what else were voters to think?
Labour have been playing on this, trying to appease both sides.
The thing is, it’s resulted in putting a number on the left and right off.
Not pulling out won’t win them much support from the left. And talk of flouting certain aspects of the deal is turning the right off.
Their handling of this has been pathetic and will come back to bite them IMO.
Stating there is little they can do is complete rubbish. There is an exit clause.
Moreover, they could be talking to vested interests now in preparation of pulling out.
Labour’s bottom lines were about whether to support National signing the TPPA or not. They weren’t about what Labour would do once in govt.
If you’re surprised that Labour don’t want to pull out, why were you not asking these questions last year when the issue first came up, including what the implications were of pulling out?
“Moreover, they could be talking to vested interests now in preparation of pulling out.”
Little has said that they are already talking to the signatories in preparation for changing the agreement.
National didn’t require Labours support. There was no vote on the signing of the TPP.
But thanks for highlighting how Labour were playing it.
Personally. I had a feeling Labour were attempting to pull the wool. And questioned it in discussions here.
Little also indicated it was to late to pull out if it passed in the US, suggesting we can’t really pull out even tho there is an exit clause. Therefore, wouldn’t that suggest our sovereignty is already being constrained?
As pulling out will relieve us of the obligations of the deal, they won’t have us over such a barrel. Thus, although they may hit us hard for withdrawing, it won’t be as bad as the long term consequences of remaining in the deal.
The Greens have always said they oppose the TPPA but as far as I am aware have never said they will pull NZ out if it is ratified. Last year in an interview with Jessica Williams (when she was with Radio Live) James Shaw said that it would be easier to renegotiate than withdraw. Since then he has has said they need to study the detail in the full document before detailing future actions other than opposing the ratification.
Labour put up the 5 conditions for support, then said that 4 out of the 5 seem to have been met but there was still the issue of sovereignty. Over the summer Andrew Little examined the full document and was able to persuade the rest of his caucus to oppose the signing of the agreement. This was not easy because of MPs like Goff and Shearer and the influence they had over some caucus members, but Labour has now said they would oppose it in its present form.
Both parties oppose the TPPA, neither have promised to withdraw from it when they are in government, and both have talked about renegotiation.
Labour’s situation is this.
They have always supported the TPPA and have never intended pulling out of it.
Ms Clark’s intervention was a clear signal of that.
But their absolute priority is to be the Government, and they know they cannot be the Government unless they retain the support of 3 disparate groupings: A mid to far left that is sliding ever harder left, core center left Labour voters, and about 6% of centrist voters that don’t currently vote Labour.
The conundrum above explains why they presented as being ‘opposed’ to the TPPA, while simultaneously leaving open the question of whether their opposition extended as far as actually pulling out of it.
They were trying to leave room for all 3 of the vital groupings to believe that Labour might be on their side of the argument.
As the issue evolved, Labour has been very closely attempting to gauge where the overall public sentiment was going on the TPPA (to which side of the fence do you jump?).
The mid to far left clearly resolved this was a bottom line / every man to the barricades / show the maximum opposition we can muster issue.
Labour waited to see if that level of resolution moved through and was expressed strongly among the other 2 more centrist groupings. The turnout on Thursday of only 1000 hard core protestors and 13k peaceful marchers did not indicate this had occurred.
So the day after the TPPA signing, knowing ‘the train had left the station’ and it was time to move on, Labour decided which side of the fence it was best for them to come down on.
So they clarified that they would not withdraw from the TPPA.
That’s the reality folks. You are stuck with the TPPA.
No, sorry I didn’t Weka, but I trust Jessica Williams. She wouldn’t have said that if it wasn’t true, and Shaw has never denied it.
The Green Party have been consistently opposed to the TPPA right through this process but I haven’t found anything that says what they will do if the get into government if it has already been ratified
(and I have looked!!) I think James Shaw is a very careful person and he is unlikely to make any commitments to withdraw until he knows exactly what the repercussions will be for NZ . Very sensible I think, in spite of what some here believe.
Meanwhile the Greens (and now Labour) will oppose the ratification. Unfortunately parliament doesn’t get to decide this – they only get to vote on any law changes that are required.
[lprent: It pays not to request or demand apologies here. I have a tendency to view that kind of behaviour as flame starting. Since I (and the policy) tend to view such flame starters as attempting self-martyrdom. ]
“That’s an outright lie. Not going to bother reading the rest of your comment if that’s what you are doing.”
It is not a lie Weka.
Show me any proof that Labour have ever opposed the TPPA in principle?
If they opposed it, why would they confirm they would not pull out of it?
I think you’re just a bit sour, and don’t want to face up to the reality.
Best way to do that is throw all the toys out of the cot and refuse to play the game eh.
We’re opposed to the TPPA in its current form because compromises to New Zealand’s sovereignty are not justified by the meagre economic gains. A number of Labour people are involved in today’s protests, including MPs who’ve spoken at rallies around the country.
“THAT in light of the Labour Party’s strong commitment to both the benefits of international trade and New Zealand’s national sovereignty, and recognising the far-reaching implications for domestic policy of the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, in which trade is only a small part, Labour will support signing such an agreement which: …
(g) Had been negotiated with full public consultation including regular public releases of drafts of the text of the agreement, and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic impact assessment including public submissions.”
Leader Andrew Little said his party supported free trade but would not back the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) unless the five “non-negotiable bottom lines” were met.
That’s all we have to go on. I agree with your general assement here,
The Green Party have been consistently opposed to the TPPA right through this process but I haven’t found anything that says what they will do if the get into government if it has already been ratified
(and I have looked!!) I think James Shaw is a very careful person and he is unlikely to make any commitments to withdraw until he knows exactly what the repercussions will be for NZ . Very sensible I think, in spite of what some here believe.
Meanwhile the Greens (and now Labour) will oppose the ratification. Unfortunately parliament doesn’t get to decide this – they only get to vote on any law changes that are required.
So what happens when the renegotiation doesn’t achieve your aims? Either you stay in the agreement or you pull out. Which is going to be?
If you start from the position that you are going to stay then the renogiation is going to be a two way street, and have a low probability of success.
The whole TPP process is a mess. What we got was some weak analysis of the benefits and little on the downside of it. There was no BATNA analysis offered. Helen Clark et al got as far as saying it’s better to be in the tent pissing out, but no further. Countries such as Switzerland have avoided too many treaties and done quite well. Whereas North Korea has also avoided treaties but has not done so well.
NZ blew a raspberry to the USA about nuclear weapons back in the 1980’s and the sky did not fall. Mind you we still have chicken little.
The LP established its 5 points bottom line – a good clear easy to understand position. (And I am not going to go into why the points miss my major concerns.)
The LP has conducted its review of the TPP and decided that these bottom lines have not been achieved – a good clear easy to understand position.
It’s likely that it may be a few years before Labour get to be in the position of renegotiating or cancelling the agreement. This time should be productively spent in:
1. Establishing how to fix the NZ constitutional process where the Executive of one government can substantially modify the sovereignty of NZ without full cross party support or general explicit support of a super-majority of the people; and,
2. Put the partners on notice that withdrawal is an option on the table; and,
3. Undertaking a serious review of the TPP agreement to find out what it actually says and means. (I am surprised when people say that they have read the document and understood it as IMO we will soon have lawyers and academics studying it for years and still having disagreements. Its 6,000 pages are highly unlikely not to contain mistakes, internal contradictions, impossibilities and ambiguities); and,
4. Recasting what the 5 bottom line items are (maybe adding to them); whilst,
5. Cataloguing the successes and failures of TPP as it progresses; then,
6. Measure this catalogue against the yardstick; and if it does not measure up then,
7. Take action by seeking a renegotiation with a 6 month automatic withdrawal attached.
And meanwhile there is a tsunami of shit heading the world’s way in terms of economic and environmental issues. It’s only a matter of when this starts to be felt. So when NZ reaches TPP nirvana in 2030 (getting a 0.7% cumulative lift in economic activity) then my guess we should also be hearing the waves of the tsunami or already in its grips. Good timing.
But I don’t disagree with that bit and that’s not what I called a lie. I’ve also stated multiple times today that I’ve known since last year that Labour weren’t considering pulling out.
Lost sheep said “They have always supported the TPPA”. That’s a lie. I’ve explained how here,
Yeah, nah. Lost sheep wanting to run a line and chose to start with a lie and I called them on it. If you want to make out this is about who is technically correct about a sequence of events, have at it. I don’t give a shit. You could have asked, I would have told you, and in the end you did and I did, so what’s the problem? Weird to be using energy on this when it’s Ls that told the actual lie.
Weka, Labour fully support the principal of a TPPA agreement.
They do not support some of the clauses in the current agreement, but, they have confirmed they will not withdraw from the TPPA.
You have only linked to information that indicates Labours objections to some clauses, and linked to nothing that indicates they are against the TPPA principle itself.
Can you please link to any point at which Labour has said they do not support the TPPA in principal, as opposed to just some specific clauses?
Can you explain to me how confirming they will remain in the TPPA, despite their objections to some clauses indicates that Labour does not support the agreement as a whole?
If you can do both of those I will accept I was mistaken.
Can you please link to any point at which Labour has said they do not support the TPPA in principal, as opposed to just some specific clauses?
You didn’t say in principle, you just said they had always supported the TPPA, and I’ve demonstrated that they haven’t. Yes we can have a semantic argument about that but I think the real difference is that I accept that Labour are pro-free trade but I also know that they were dealing with a secret agreement and an internal civil war and so their approach looks odd to people who don’t take that into account. They’ve gone through various processes and changes in their position precisely because the agreement has been secret and been changing. It makes sense as a pro-free trade party that they would take a pro-TPPA stance so long as certain conditions were met, but it’s pretty clear that back in 2012 there were serious concerns about those conditions.
Labour have been playing the middle game, isn’t that what you want? Remind me, do you think Labour should leave the TPPA if it’s already ratified by next time they are in government?
Can you explain to me how confirming they will remain in the TPPA, despite their objections to some clauses indicates that Labour does not support the agreement as a whole?
Pretty simple, and this has been commented on a fair bit. It’s too difficult to leave once in. I don’t hear Labour saying oh the deal is great except for these five things. I hear Labour saying there are serious problems with this deal and there are serious problems with getting out of it. Of course that message comes out in a strangled way because of the neoliberal/left wing split in the party. So while I feel that Labour have been pretty consistent within their own kaupapa over the past few years I can understand that others feel differently.
btw, the difficulty of leaving once in is an issue for the GP too IMO. I don’t know what NZF are thinking. Anyone?
This is a good example of why science and commerce are not to be trusted until they are brought under the control of a third part of society that puts ethics and nature first. In the absence of the precautionary principle, we are currently gambling playing Russian Roulette with some pretty basic fundamentals of life.
Zika is one of the emerging new illnesses associated with human-manipulated environments. It causes birth defects when contracted during pregnancy. 11 cases in NZ so far.
Oxitec’s GM mosquitoes
An excellent article by Claire Bernish published last week on AntiMedia draws attention to an interesting aspect of the matter which has escaped mainstream media attention: the correlation between the incidence of Zika and the area of release of genetically modified Aedes aegypti mosquitos engineered for male insterility (see maps, above right).
The purpose of the release was to see if it controlled population of the mosquitos, which are the vector of Dengue fever, a potentially lethal disease. The same species also transmits the Zika virus.
Brazil is one of the biggest GMO experiments on planet, earth and has had toxic chemicals sprayed over its environment and populations for a generation
The mosquitoes are an extension of the experiment being waged against human rights
Zika has been known of for generations, with few to none ill effects
Zika has been known of for generations, with few to none ill effects
In Africa, where a majority have an immunity developed over many generations.
Not so in the Americas where in little more than a generation aedes aegypti has spread the virus through a large youthful population with an exceptionally high birth rate and no immunity.
The author suggests a mutated virus in Brazil is causing previously unheard of effects…and then I scrolled down….
Author’s note 2: I’m grateful to David Murphy for carrying out this work, and to James Babcock for drawing it to my attention. It appears that the hypothesis set out above is probably incorrect, and this must be a matter of considerable relief to all concerned.
Change of topic folks – Bomber on TDB has just announced he is going to go into competition with Seven Sharp on TV1 and the other show on TV3 with Heather duPlessis Allan at 7pm. It will be live on his site at 7.01 – but its early yet and he is going to announce more later about it.
So we will have an alternative current affairs programme we can go to after John Campbell on Channel 50 each night. What mana from heaven I told Bomber. Can’t wait.
He should stick to providing advice and policy to politicians. Oh, wait… maybe not. 30 minutes of bitter, anti-everything, frothing and ranting is something that I (and 99.99% of the population) will be giving a wide birth.
Ben what a sour puss you are. Don’t you think it would be nice for a change to get some balance into our daily news. Who wants to be fed with constant drivel about sports stars, film stars, your precious leader who can do no wrong, even saints you know do wrong – what’s your beef – so one-eyed you cannot see there are always two sides to anything at all. Your precious government does lots of things which are wrong but if MSM media has anything to do with it nobody in the population gets the opportunity to be informed. What do you want? a dictatorship in this country. Do we have to go back into history and meet in halls or listen to speakers on soap boxes like they do in Hyde Park (or do you even know about Hyde Park) to hear some truth of the matter. Get a grip Ben – all Bomber is trying to do is get some balance and less of the daily tripe we have shoved in our faces each night. You call Bomber a raving leftie – what on earth is your Government if not a raving Right Wing mish mash. What a loser you are and not too intelligent upstairs if you cannot see my argument.
Thankyou for informing us that the flawed TPPA is the fault of the Labour Party.
Your insight into these things is extraordinary. But then, you have the advantage of having the brain of a full time Buffoon. Utter Nonsense dribbles constantly from your twisted mouth like a crazed dog.
Dear Observer (Tokoroa)
I’m afraid you went to sleep on the job, and failed to observe fully as required. This is to advise you that your contract to observe and inform us fully and truthfully has been terminated, though you may like to continue your style of colourfully abusive diatribe, which is very amusing.
edited
What did Labour say about the TPPA? All the fragments of comment, when put together like a jigsaw, do they make a coherent whole? Or is it one of those odd results that we need an Aristotle to explain.
Quote by Aristotle: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”
But is this argument about Labour and TPPA a Reductio ad absurdum?
Wikipedia may provide the answer but I’m not going to read it because I want to listen to Monty Python because it is more fun than the argument that is going nowhere, and isn’t going to solve anything anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
What if the whole is actually lesser than the sum of its parts as it seems to be?
Time to take a break as we sink into The Philosophers’ Song with Monty Python done Oz style.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtgKkifJ0Pw
The Gauche One fretting about the image of cock meeting cock at Waitangi…..gone all around the world etc etc, appalling, blah, pearls, clutched ! Guess he’s not looking forward to the call from some dictator mate calling him a pussy cos’ no summary execution.
No Mr Preen Minster. It was you, the cock that started hauling NZ around the world, makin’ us look like cocks too (cos you’re our Preen Minster)…….it’s that that started it, years ago.
As I’ve always reminded myself…..what the fuck is (self-perceived) venerable Old Auckland Money thinking about this Gauche Nouveau ?
Yep. PM thinks the dildo was appalling! Tut tut. Hypocrisy anyone. Hair pulling. Soap. Dodgy personal habits. He laughs at his own funny behaviour. What a clown making international headlines.
But now Key sucks a lemon.
He is one of John Key’s rented trolls. Part of the Key rented troll assylum. Viper exceeds Hosking. Hooton, Garner, Slater, Farrar, English and Fanny Herald.
Mere screaming teeny weeny toddlers the lot of them.
Oh dear , Mr.Key feels awkward about images of the sex toy/Joyce going around the world. He forgets to feel awkward about signing the treaty under NZers noses, the day before Waitangi day, without even discussing it with us.
Charming!
Not feeling remotely awkward about molesting a young waitress numerous times or publicly advocating peeing in the shower – EWW – Hypocrisy is Mr Key’s game of choice it seems! So embarrassed that a sex toy found it’s way to Stevie’s “moosh”, yet not embarrassed that his repeated molestation of a young waitress went global! An attitude a certain older man who was a French high official would no doubt relate to.
A discussion about how National are prepared to do what Europe is refusing, i.e to trade sovereignty for a few bucks, would you accept a 1% pay rise in 15 years and agree to any decisions you make about your future be subject to secret off shore tribunals, with no right of appeal?
Lets face it if National were honest about their corporate welfare policies, they would not have been voted in anyway, so your point is irrelevant.
What is news are the deplorable rhetorical parries from the UK and Swedish governments, who both stated not just disagreement, but that the Working Group opinion would have absolutely no effect on their actions. This is not what one expects from democratic governments who usually support the UN mechanisms and international law.
Actually, this is exactly what I would expect from them. The powerful think that rules are there simply to punish those that they don’t like. They certainly don’t think that the rules apply to them.
Surprised she didn’t fix it so she was down at the Nines witnessing and excitedly reporting Mr Gauche publicly gagging on successive American hotdogs. Rather than the dull old business of up North experiencing an actual ‘Waitangi Day’. Waitangi Day the way people actually do it up here in the whiningly announced absence of an effete wannabee Yank. Who’s sniffing out Shaun Johnson down Aux right now.
Shaun Johnson’ll be the next unfortunate target…..you watch. The ‘can’t-himself-do’ criminal banker just loves sucking on the sap of NZ heroes. Guess you can demand anything you want when you’ve got that Preen Minster/John Key conjunction.
At first blush, Christopher Luxon’s comment at the parliamentary powhiri at Waitangi this year sounded tone deaf. The Leader of the Opposition in talking about the Treaty of Waitangi described New Zealand as “a little experiment”. It seemed to diminish the treaty and the very idea of our nation. Yet ...
by Don Franks While on holiday,I stayed a few days in Scotland with a friend who showed me one of the country’s great working-class achievements. It was a few miles out of central Edinburgh, a huge cantilever bridge across the river Forth. The Forth Bridge was the first major structure ...
A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week: Sun, Jan 29, 2023 thru Sat, Feb 4, 2023. Story of the Week Social change more important than physical tipping points1.5-degree Goal not plausible Photo: CLICCS / Universität Hamburg Limiting global warming ...
So Long - And Thanks For All The Fish: In the two-and-a-bit years since Jacinda Ardern’s electoral triumph of 2020, virtually every decision she made had gone politically awry. In the minds of many thousands of voters a chilling metamorphosis had taken place. The Faerie Queen had become the Wicked ...
The Herald’s headline writers are at it again! A sensible and balanced piece by Liam Dann on the battle against inflation carries a headline that suggests that NZ is doing worse than the rest of the world. Check it out and see for yourself if I am right. Is this ...
Workers Now is a new slate of candidates contesting this year’s general election. James Robb and Don Franks are the people behind this initiative and they are hoping to put the spotlight on working people’s interests. Both are seasoned activists who have campaigned for workers’ rights over many decades. Here is ...
Our Cranky Uncle Game can already be played in eight languages: English, Dutch, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish and Swedish. About 15 more languages are in the works at various stages of completion or have been offered to be done. To kick off the new year, we checked with how ...
The (new) Prime Minister said nobody understands what co-governance means, later modified to that there were so many varying interpretations that there was no common understanding.Co-governance cannot be derived from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It does not use the word. It refers to ‘government’ on ...
In March last year, in a panic over rising petrol prices caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the government made a poor decision, "temporarily" cutting fuel excise tax by 25 cents a litre. Of course, it turned out not to be temporary at all, having been extended in May, July, ...
Open access notables Via PNAS, Ceylan, Anderson & Wood present a paper squarely in the center of the Skeptical Science wheelhouse: Sharing of misinformation is habitual, not just lazy or biased. The signficance statement is obvious catnip: Misinformation is a worldwide concern carrying socioeconomic and political consequences. What drives ...
Time To Call A Halt: Chris Hipkins knows that iwi leaders possess the means to make life very difficult for his government. Notwithstanding their objections, however, the Prime Minister’s direction of travel – already clearly signalled by his very public demotion of Nanaia Mahuta – must be confirmed by an emphatic ...
Mark White from the Left free speech organisation Plebity looks at the disturbing trend of ‘book burning’ on US campuses In the abstract, people mostly agree that book banning is a bad thing. The Nazis did us the favor of being very clear about it and literally burning books, but ...
As PM Chris Hipkins says, it’s a “no brainer” to extend the fuel tax cut, half price public subsidy and the cut to the road user levy until mid-year. A no braoner if the prime purpose is to ease the burden on people struggling to cope with the cost of ...
One of the most effective, and successful, graphics developed by Skeptical Science is the escalator. The escalator shows how global surface temperature anomalies vary with time, and illustrates how "contrarians" tend to cherry-pick short time intervals so as to argue that there has been no recent warming, while "realists" recognise ...
Poor Mike Hosking. He has revealed himself in his most recent diatribe to be one of those public figures who is defined, not by who he is, but by who he isn’t, or at least not by what he is for, but by what he is against. Jacinda’s departure has ...
New Zealand is the second least corrupt country on earth according to the latest Corruption Perception Index published yesterday by Transparency International. But how much does this reflect reality? The problem with being continually feted for world-leading political integrity – which the Beehive and government departments love to boast about ...
They say a week is a long time in politics. For Mayor Wayne Brown, turns out 24 hours was long enough for many of us to see, quite obviously, “something isn’t right here…”. That in fact, a lot was going wrong. Very wrong indeed.Mainly because it turns ...
Currently the government's strategy for reducing transport emissions hinges on boosting vehicle fuel-efficiency, via the clean car standard and clean car discount, and some improvements to public transport. The former has been hugely successful, and has clearly set us on the right path, but its also not enough, and will ...
The quarterly labour market statistics were released this morning, showing that unemployment has risen slightly to 3.4%. There are now 99,000 people unemployed - 24,000 fewer than when Labour took office. So, I guess the Reserve Bank's plan to throw people out of work to stop wage rises "inflation", and ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins continues to be the new broom in Government, re-setting his Government away from its problem areas in his Cabinet reshuffle yesterday, and trying to convince voters that Labour is focused on “bread and butter” issues. The ministers responsible for unpopular reforms in water and DHB centralisation ...
Completed reads for January Lilith, by George MacDonald The Rime of the Ancient Mariner (poem), by Samuel Taylor Coleridge Christabel (poem), by Samuel Taylor Coleridge The Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok, by Anonymous The Lay of Kraka (poem), by Anonymous 1066 and All That, by W.C. Sellar and R.J. ...
On that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. And rain fell on the earth.Genesis 6:11-12THE TORRENTIAL DOWNPOURS that dumped a record-breaking amount of rain on Auckland this anniversary weekend will reoccur with ever-increasing frequency. The planet’s atmosphere is ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Jeff Masters When early settlers came to the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers before the California Gold Rush, Indigenous people warned them that the Sacramento Valley could become an inland sea when great winter rains came. The storytellers described water filling the ...
Last night’s opinion polls answered the big question of whether a switch of prime minister would really be a gamechanger for election year. The 1News and Newshub polls released at 6pm gave the same response: the shift from Jacinda Ardern to Chris Hipkins has changed everything, and Labour is back ...
A ‘small target’ strategy is not going to cut it anymore if National want to win the upcoming election. The game has changed and the game plan needs to change as well. Jacinda Ardern’s abrupt departure from the 9th floor has the potential to derail what looked to be an ...
I n some alternative universe, Auckland mayor Efeso Collins readily grasped the scale of Friday’s deluge, and quickly made the emergency declaration that enabled central government to immediately throw its resources behind the rescue and remediation effort. As Friday evening became night, Mayor Collins seemed to be everywhere: talking with ...
I know, that is a pretty corny title but given the circumstances here in the Auckland region, I just had to say it. The more oblique reference embedded in the […] ...
How much confidence should the public have in authorities managing natural disasters? Not much, judging by the farcical way in which the civil defence emergence in Auckland has played out. The way authorities dealt with Auckland’s extreme weather on Friday illustrated how hit-and-miss our civil defence emergency system is. In ...
Thanks for reading Frankly Speaking ! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.The recent leadership change in the governing Labour party resulted in a very strange response from National’s (current) leader, Christopher Luxon. Mr Luxon berated Labour for it’s change of leader, citing no actual change.As ...
A chronological listing of news articles posted on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week: Sun, Jan 22, 2023 thru Sat, Jan 28, 2023. Story of the Week New Study Reveals Arctic Ice, Tracked Both Above and Below, Is Freezing LaterClimate change is affecting the timing of both ...
Thanks for reading Frankly Speaking ! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.It was another ‘SHOCK! HORROR!’ headline from a media increasingly venturing into tabloid-style journalism:Andrea Vance’s article seemed to focus on the "million dollar sums from the Government as the country grapples with a housing ...
What Was the Prime Minister Reading in the Runup to Election Year?It’s the summer break. Everyone settles down with family, books, the sun and some fishing. But the Prime Minister has a pile of briefing papers prepared just before Christmas, which have to be worked through. I haven’t seen them. ...
In case you hadn't noticed, FYI, the public OIA request site, has been used to conduct a significant excavation into New Zealand's intelligence agencies, with requests made for assorted policies and procedures. Yesterday in response to one of these requests the GCSB released its policy on New Zealand Purpose and ...
South Islands farmers are whining about another drought, the third in three years. If only we knew what was causing this! If only someone had warned them that they faced a drying climate! But we do know what is causing it: climate change. And they have been warned, repeatedly, for ...
Ok, there’s good news and bad news in this week’s inflation figures, but bad > good. Our inflation rate held steady but hey, at a level below the inflation rate in Australia. The main reason for the so/so result here? A fall in petrol prices of 7.2% offset the really ...
Since her shock resignation announcement, Jacinda Ardern has been at pains to point out that she isn’t leaving because of the toxicity directed at her on social media and elsewhere, rebutting journalists who suggested misogyny and hate may have driven her from office. Yet there have been dozens of columns ...
The Clinical Magus: Of particular relevance to New Zealanders struggling to come to terms with the sudden departure of their prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, is Jung’s concept of the anima. Much more than what others have called “the feminine principle”, the anima is what the human male has made out of ...
Such are the 2020s, the age when no-one, it seems, actually respects the basic underpinnings of democracy. Even in New Zealand. This week, I stumbled across a pair of lengthy and genuinely serious articles, that basically argue that Something is Rotten in the state of New Zealand democracy. One ...
Smiling And Waiving A Golden Opportunity: Chris Hipkins knew that the day at Ratana would be Jacinda’s day – her final opportunity to bask in the unalloyed love and support of her followers. He simply could not afford to be seen to overshadow this last chance for his former boss ...
Extremism Consumes Itself: The plot of “Act of Oblivion” concerns the relentless pursuit of the “regicides” Edward Whalley and William Goffe – two of the fifty-nine signatories to King Charles I’s death warrant. As with his many other works of historical fiction, Robert Harris’s novel brings to life a period ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Samantha Harrington Imagine it’s a cold February night and your furnace breaks. You want to replace it with an electric heat pump because you’ve heard that tax credits will help pay for the switch. And you know that heat pumps can reduce ...
A very informative video discussion: Are we getting the whole story about Ukraine? | Robert Wright & Ivan Katchanovski Getting objective information on the situation in Ukraine and the cause of this current war is not easy. There is the current censorship and blatant mainstream media bias – which ...
In 2005, then-National Party leader based his entire election campaign on racism, with his infamous racist Orewa speech and racist iwi/kiwi billboards. Now, Christopher Luxon seems to want to do it all again: Fresh off using his platform at this week's Rātana celebrations to criticise the government's approach to ...
It’s a big day for New Zealand; our 41st Prime Minister has taken office and the new, “Chippy” era of politics is underway. Or, on the other hand, the Labour Party continues to govern with an overall majority and much the same leadership team in place. Life goes on and ...
NewsHub has a poll on the cost-of-living crisis, which has an interesting finding: the vast majority of kiwis prefer wage rises to tax cuts: When asked whether income has kept up with the cost of living, 54.8 percent of people surveyed said no and according to 58.6 percent of ...
Labour has begun 2023 with the centre-left bloc behind in the polls and losing ground. That being so, did his colleagues choose Chris Hipkins as the replacement for Jacinda Ardern because they think he has a realistic shot at leading them to victory this year, or because he‘s the best ...
This is a re-post from the Citizens' Climate Lobby blogIn last year’s passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Congress included about $20 billion earmarked for natural climate solutions. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is responsible for deciding how those funds should be allocated to meet the climate ...
Two Flags, Two Masters? Just as it required a full-scale military effort to destroy the first attempt at Māori self-government in the 1850s and 60s (an effort that divided Maoridom itself into supporters and opponents of the Crown) any second attempt to establish tino rangatiratanga, based on the confiscatory policies ...
You’ve really got to wonder at the introspection, or lack thereof, from much of the mainstream media post Jacinda Ardern stepping down. Some so-called journalists haven’t even taken a breath before once again putting the boot in, which clearly shows their inherent bias and lack of any misgivings about fueling ...
Over the weekend I was interviewed by a media outlet about the threats that Jacinda Ardern and her family have received while she has been PM and what can be […] ...
A Different Kind Of Vibe: In the days and weeks ahead, as the Hipkins ministry takes shape, the only question that matters is whether New Zealand’s new prime minister possesses both the wisdom and the courage to correct his party’s currently suicidal political course. If Chris “Chippy” Hipkins is able to steer ...
Going to try to get into the blogging thing again (ha!) what with anew PM, an election coming up and all that.So today I thought I'd start small and simple, by merely tackling the world's (second) richest man.I am not suggesting Elon Musk literally light this fire. But he is ...
Well, that was a disappointment. As of today, the New Zealand Labour Caucus opted for Chris Hipkins as our new Prime Minister, and I cannot help but let loose a cynical cackle. ...
Things have gone sideways… and it’s only the third week of January? It was political earthquake time. For some the Prime Minister made a truly significant announcement. For others – did you have this on your bingo card? – a body double did so (sit tight, you’ll understand later, ...
People complain about their jobs being meaningless. Does it matter?David Graeber, author of Bullshit Jobs: The Rise of Pointless Work and What We Can Do About It, would have smiled at Elon Musk’s sacking half the Twitter workforce. Musk seems to be confirming the main thesis of the book, that ...
I warned about the trap of virtue signaling in my article Virtue signaling over Ukraine. This video is still relevant – but have we moved on since then? The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was universally condemned at the time. Or was it? Certainly, the political atmosphere ...
Open access notables Bad news delivered by an all-star cast of familiar researchers: Another Year of Record Heat for the Oceans. From the abstract: In 2022, the world’s oceans, as given by OHC, were again the hottest in the historical record and exceeded the previous 2021 record maximum. According to IAP/CAS data, ...
One of my earliest political memories is the resignation of Prime Minister David Lange in August 1989. I remember this because of a brown felt-tipped pen drawing I did of the Beehive, the building that houses the Executive of the New Zealand Government. More than thirty years later, we ...
She gave it her all. No New Zealand Prime Minister has ever dominated the political scene at home as she has done, or has established an international profile to match hers. No New Zealand Prime Minister has had to confront such a sequence of domestic and international catastrophes – from ...
Jacinda Ardern's shock resignation announcement today has left a lot of us with a lot of complicated feelings. In my case, while I've been highly critical of Ardern's government, I'm still sorry to see her go. We've had far too many terrible things happen during her term as Prime Minister ...
The decision by Jacinda Ardern to end her term as Prime Minister on February 7 has come as a stunning surprise. It turns the task of a centre-left government winning re-election this year from difficult to nigh on impossible. No-one else among the Labour caucus has Ardern’s ability to explain ...
Jacinda Ardern’s first press conference as Labour leader in August 2017 was a defining moment in the past decade of New Zealand politics. A young woman (by the standards of politics) who had long been tipped for higher office, she had underperformed as a shadow minister and Andrew Little’s noble ...
An Astonishing Rapport: Jacinda Ardern's "Politics of Kindness" raised so many progressive possibilities. Her own tragedy, and New Zealand's, is that so few of them were realised.MUCH WILL BE WRITTEN in the coming days about "The Ardern Years", some of it sympathetic and insightful, most of it spiteful and wrong.For ...
The Herald this morning reports on the rich's efforts to buy this year's election. And you'll never guess who their chosen vehicle is: The National Party may start election year with a $2.3 million war chest raised from 24 big donors in 2022, while Labour has declared just $150,000 ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Sarah Wesseler You walk into your kitchen to make pasta. After filling a pot with water, you place a small silicone mat in the middle of your counter, then set the pot above it and open a stovetop app on your phone. ...
You know it as well as I, the famous Ring Verse from The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien: Three Rings for the Elven Kings under the sky Seven for the Dwarf Lords in their halls of stone Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die One ...
Kia ora e te whānau. Today, we mark the anniversary of the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi - and our commitment to working in partnership with Māori to deliver better outcomes and tackle the big issues, together. ...
We’ve just announced a massive infrastructure investment to kick-start new housing developments across New Zealand. Through our Infrastructure Acceleration Fund, we’re making sure that critical infrastructure - like pipes, roads and wastewater connections - is in place, so thousands more homes can be built. ...
The Green Party is joining more than 20 community organisations to call for an immediate rent freeze in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland, after reports of landlords intending to hike rents after flooding. ...
When Chris Hipkins took on the job of Prime Minister, he said bread and butter issues like the cost of living would be the Government’s top priority – and this week, we’ve set out extra support for families and businesses. ...
The Green Party is calling on the Government to provide direct support to low-income households and to stop subsidising fossil fuels during a climate crisis. ...
The tools exist to help families with surging costs – and as costs continue to rise it is more urgent than ever that we use them, the Green Party says. ...
Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta departs for India tomorrow as she continues to reconnect Aotearoa New Zealand to the world. The visit will begin in New Delhi where the Foreign Minister will meet with the Vice President Hon Jagdeep Dhankar and her Indian Government counterparts, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and ...
Over $10 million infrastructure funding to unlock housing in Whangārei The purchase of a 3.279 hectare site in Kerikeri to enable 56 new homes Northland becomes eligible for $100 million scheme for affordable rentals Multiple Northland communities will benefit from multiple Government housing investments, delivering thousands of new homes for ...
A memorial event at a key battle site in the New Zealand land wars is an important event to mark the progress in relations between Māori and the Crown as we head towards Waitangi Day, Minister for Te Arawhiti Kelvin Davis said. The Battle of Ohaeawai in June 1845 saw ...
More Police officers are being deployed to the frontline with the graduation of 54 new constables from the Royal New Zealand Police College today. The graduation ceremony for Recruit Wing 362 at Te Rauparaha Arena in Porirua was the first official event for Stuart Nash since his reappointment as Police ...
The Government is unlocking an additional $700,000 in support for regions that have been badly hit by the recent flooding and storm damage in the upper North Island. “We’re supporting the response and recovery of Auckland, Waikato, Coromandel, Northland, and Bay of Plenty regions, through activating Enhanced Taskforce Green to ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has welcomed the announcement that Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal, Princess Anne, will visit New Zealand this month. “Princess Anne is travelling to Aotearoa at the request of the NZ Army’s Royal New Zealand Corps of Signals, of which she is Colonel in Chief, to ...
A new Government and industry strategy launched today has its sights on growing the value of New Zealand’s horticultural production to $12 billion by 2035, Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor said. “Our food and fibre exports are vital to New Zealand’s economic security. We’re focussed on long-term strategies that build on ...
25 cents per litre petrol excise duty cut extended to 30 June 2023 – reducing an average 60 litre tank of petrol by $17.25 Road User Charge discount will be re-introduced and continue through until 30 June Half price public transport fares extended to the end of June 2023 saving ...
The strong economy has attracted more people into the workforce, with a record number of New Zealanders in paid work and wages rising to help with cost of living pressures. “The Government’s economic plan is delivering on more better-paid jobs, growing wages and creating more opportunities for more New Zealanders,” ...
The Government is providing a further $1 million to the Mayoral Relief Fund to help communities in Auckland following flooding, Minister for Emergency Management Kieran McAnulty announced today. “Cabinet today agreed that, given the severity of the event, a further $1 million contribution be made. Cabinet wishes to be proactive ...
The new Cabinet will be focused on core bread and butter issues like the cost of living, education, health, housing and keeping communities and businesses safe, Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has announced. “We need a greater focus on what’s in front of New Zealanders right now. The new Cabinet line ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins will travel to Canberra next week for an in person meeting with Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese. “The trans-Tasman relationship is New Zealand’s closest and most important, and it was crucial to me that my first overseas trip as Prime Minister was to Australia,” Chris Hipkins ...
The Government is providing establishment funding of $100,000 to the Mayoral Relief Fund to help communities in Auckland following flooding, Minister for Emergency Management Kieran McAnulty announced. “We moved quickly to make available this funding to support Aucklanders while the full extent of the damage is being assessed,” Kieran McAnulty ...
As the Mayor of Auckland has announced a state of emergency, the Government, through NEMA, is able to step up support for those affected by flooding in Auckland. “I’d urge people to follow the advice of authorities and check Auckland Emergency Management for the latest information. As always, the Government ...
Ka papā te whatitiri, Hikohiko ana te uira, wāhi rua mai ana rā runga mai o Huruiki maunga Kua hinga te māreikura o te Nota, a Titewhai Harawira Nā reira, e te kahurangi, takoto, e moe Ka mōwai koa a Whakapara, kua uhia te Tai Tokerau e te kapua pōuri ...
Carmel Sepuloni, Minister for Social Development and Employment, has activated Enhanced Taskforce Green (ETFG) in response to flooding and damaged caused by Cyclone Hale in the Tairāwhiti region. Up to $500,000 will be made available to employ job seekers to support the clean-up. We are still investigating whether other parts ...
The 2023 General Election will be held on Saturday 14 October 2023, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. “Announcing the election date early in the year provides New Zealanders with certainty and has become the practice of this Government and the previous one, and I believe is best practice,” Jacinda ...
Jacinda Ardern has announced she will step down as Prime Minister and Leader of the Labour Party. Her resignation will take effect on the appointment of a new Prime Minister. A caucus vote to elect a new Party Leader will occur in 3 days’ time on Sunday the 22nd of ...
Sure, Scotty Morrison’s Māori At Work is a wonderful resource for Aotearoa’s collective te reo Māori journey. But is it judgemental enough for the modern office environment?First published September 12 2019 The growing strength of te reo is palpable across Aotearoa, with record numbers of people participating in Mahuru ...
Screenwriter Dana Leaming’s debut comedy series Not Even is out now on Prime and Neon. This is the out the gate story of how it got there.Kia ora, Hi, What up? Up to? U up? …I’m Dana. I wrote and co-directed (with Ainsley Gardiner) the TV show Not Even ...
The Human Rights Commission, Te Kāhui Tika Tangata, last week released two reports on racism and the impact of colonialism in Aotearoa. Among their many insights was the necessity of a wider understanding of how racism manifests itself. I was honoured to accept an invitation by Te Kāhui Tika Tangata ...
Vincent O’Malley reviews a history of the battle of Gate Pā.First published February 5, 2019 Head up Cameron Road, one of Tauranga’s main arterial routes, a few kilometres out of the city centre and you drive over one of New Zealand’s most important historical sites. The road, named after ...
For nine years he steered the ship he built, but last week Duncan Greive announced his surprise resignation as CEO of The Spinoff. He joins guest host, Jane Yee, to discuss how doing things differently took The Spinoff from an irreverent TV blog to a respected online magazine, and why ...
Three decades ago one of the giants of New Zealand thinking and writing, Ranginui Walker, published Ka Whawhai Tonu Mātou, Struggle Without End. The book, originally released in 1990 and revised in 2004, is a history of Aotearoa from a Māori perspective. It had a profound influence and today remains ...
THE (new) Prime Minister said nobody understands what co-governance means, later modified to that there were so many varying interpretations that there was no common understanding. BRIAN EASTON writes: Co-governance cannot be derived from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It does not use the word. It ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has described this morning's Waitangi dawn service as moving and says he welcomes the shift away from a focus on politics. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne Mick Tsikas/AAP A federal Newspoll, conducted February 1-4 from a sample of 1,512, gave Labor a 55-45 lead, unchanged on ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Murray Goot, Emeritus Professor of Politics and International Relations, Macquarie University Support for embedding an Indigenous Voice to parliament in the Constitution has fallen. The polls provide good evidence once you work out how to find it. However, the voters who have ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Doug Drury, Professor/Head of Aviation, CQUniversity Australia Shutterstock When booking a flight, do you ever think about which seat will protect you the most in an emergency? Probably not. Most people book seats for comfort, such as leg room, or ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Libby Rumpff, Senior Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne David Crosling/AAP The Black Summer bushfires of 2019-20 were cataclysmic: a landmark in Australia’s environmental history. They burnt more than 10 million hectares, mostly forests in southeast Australia. Many of our most ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christine Grové, Fulbright Scholar and Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Monash University Anete Lusina/Pexels School attendance levels in Australia are a massive issue according to Education Minister Jason Clare. As he told reporters last week, he hopes to talk to state colleagues ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marion Terrill, Transport and Cities Program Director, Grattan Institute Revising the generous fuel tax credits given to businesses should be a priority for the Albanese government, because keeping them would conflict with two other pressing priorities: reducing carbon emissions and repairing the ...
Paul Diamond’s book about the 1920s scandal that shocked Whanganui is on the longlist for the Ockhams (in the hotly contested General Non-Fiction category). Victor Rodger reviews. A closeted mayor with huge ambitions. A handsome, young, returned soldier with ambiguous motivations.A scandalous shooting that leads to a spectacular ...
It is hard to separate the politics from Waitangi, but the day party leaders were welcomed on to Te Whare Rūnanga was largely free of inflammatory rhetoric and political point scoring. ...
An easy, low sugar jam that tastes even better than the sickly-sweet stuff. Often jam recipes call for much more sugar that I think is necessary, resulting in a cloyingly sweet jam whose flavour sadly becomes lost. Where some recipes will call for equal measures of fruit and sugar, this ...
Rheive Grey pays tribute to one political party’s unapologetic commitment to markers of Māori identity, from hei tiki to waiata to tikitiki. I’m proud to be Māori. If you’re like me, it’s hard to read that sentence without singing it in your head. That’s either the power of good campaigning, ...
When I was a man my dick was only average size, but learning how to tuck it out of sight is a steep learning curve for a girl on a budget. The Sunday Essay is made possible thanks to the support of Creative New Zealand.Illustrations: Sloane Hong The dick ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University Wes Mountain/The Conversation, CC BY-ND Australia’s Reserve Bank is set to push up rates once again at its first meeting for the year on Tuesday, according to all but ...
By David Robie When Papuan journalist Victor Mambor visited New Zealand almost nine years ago, he impressed student journalists from the Pacific Media Centre and community activists with his refreshing candour and courage. As the founder of the Jubi news media group, he remained defiant that he would tell the ...
Today, Te Pāti Māori officially announced Mariameno Kapa-Kingi as their candidate for the Te Tai Tokerau electorate in this year’s General Election. The announcement was part of the pōwhiri for MPs at Te Whare Rūnanga o Waitangi. “Making the announcement ...
Time To Call A Halt: Chris Hipkins knows that iwi leaders possess the means to make life very difficult for his government. Notwithstanding their objections, however, the Prime Minister’s direction of travel – already clearly signalled by his very public demotion of Nanaia Mahuta – must be confirmed by an emphatic and ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Enshrining a constitutional Voice to parliament will bring better practical outcomes and give the best chance for Closing the Gap, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will say in a major address on the referendum on Sunday. ...
It’s been exactly a decade since Seven Sharp first appeared on our screens. Remember the first episode? We’ve unearthed the tapes. On this day in 2013, a bombshell was thrown into the New Zealand television landscape. “Time for us to make way, because you’re here to see what everyone’s talking ...
MetService meteorologist Lewis Ferris has fronted endless media requests and live crosses this week. Is he getting it right? Lewis Ferris is trying to find his weather map. “This week’s been so insane” he mutters as he closes multiple tabs on the three screens across his Wellington desk. He’s ...
By Jamie Tahana, RNZ News Te Ao Māori journalist at Waitangi, and Russell Palmer, digital political journalist Iwi leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand have accused opposition parties National and ACT of “fanning the flames of racism”, urging the prime minister to be brave and not walk away from partnership on Three ...
After four years, executive director Max Tweedie has stepped down from Auckland Pride. He tells Sam Brooks about shepherding the festival through a tumultuous few years, and where he’s going from here.This year’s Auckland Pride Festival is set to be the biggest one yet. Over the course of more ...
A flailing mayor was only the public face of a multifaceted flooding communications failure. Duncan Greive examines the mess, and asks what can be done to improve it.It’s a chilling timeline. Stuff’s Kelly Dennett catalogued, beat-by-beat, the 12 hours in which Auckland was pummelled by a catastrophic deluge, interspersing ...
Labour's position has alternated over the past few days: first Prime Minister Chris Hipkins would speak, then he wouldn't, and then he would again. ...
Te Pāti Māori Co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer are announcing a transformative defence and foreign affairs policy which asserts the Mana Māori Motuhake and Tino Rangatiratanga of tangata whenua in Aotearoa at their Party’s ...
The Green Party calls on the Government to end perpetual leases over Māori land so that Māori landowners can directly control their lands. “Māori landowners continue to be locked out of their own whenua by perpetual leases that allow others ...
Buzz from the Beehive Politicians keen to curry favour with Māori tribal leaders have headed north for Waitangi weekend. More than a few million dollars of public funding are headed north, too. Not all of this money is being trumpeted on the Beehive website, the Government’s official website. ...
The Dunedin branch of the Green Party has selected Francisco Hernandez as its candidate for the Dunedin electorate in this year’s general election. Francisco Hernandez was the Otago University Students Association President in 2013. He has held a number ...
About this time last week it had become apparent that Auckland was in for a bit more than just a wet Friday. While the state of emergency remains in place for another seven days, it appears the worst should now be behind us. Last night, Niwa shared a fascinating thread ...
Viewers across the United States were today shown a slice of New Zealand, with a reporter for Good Morning America broadcasting live from Rotorua. Robin Roberts, a co-anchor for the popular morning TV show, has been touring the country this week. During her visit to Rotorua’s Te Puia centre, she ...
They can be environmentally unsound and are a symbol used to shame millennials, but everyone still loves an avo. I love avocados, always have, always will. The buttery golden-green flesh from a perfectly ripe avocado is a culinary blessing. Today I’d love to simply wax poetic about twisting open a ...
The only published and available best-selling indie book chart in New Zealand is the top 10 sales list recorded every week at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington.AUCKLAND1The Creative Act: A Way of Being by Rick Rubin (Penguin Press, $50) The beautiful ...
A new poem by Robin Peace. To the kahikatea I see from my bed Thinking inside the square, the ellipse, the round of what life is, I only see the trees. Not only as if that were the only thing I see, but only as if the tree matters more. ...
A week ago, Elton John’s first Auckland show was called off at the last minute. What was it like getting there, being there, and trying to return home afterwards?Elton John has long been a blessing for our ears, but in recent years his Auckland shows have been cursed. His ...
Auckland mayor Wayne Brown has conceded he “dropped the ball” during last Friday’s major flooding event. The state of emergency in the super city has today been extended for a further seven days, though Brown said he expects it will be lifted early. After a week of defensiveness over his ...
As the reality TV juggernaut returns for a new season, Tara Ward steps into the minds of the show’s relationship experts to assess the compatibility of this year’s brides and grooms. Married at First Sight: Australia returns on Monday night, and by season ten, you’d think the show’s relationship experts ...
Auckland’s state of emergency is expected to be extended for another seven days, according to the Herald. It was due to expire overnight after being declared a week ago, the day of the worst flooding in the super city. While weather conditions have improved, the city is continuing to experience ...
Iwi leaders have accused National and ACT of "fanning the flames of racism", urging the prime minister to be brave and not walk away from partnership on three waters. ...
The government has confirmed the money will be spent in Northland, including unlocking greenfields land and transport upgrades like a new bridge in Kamo. ...
Ours Not Mines is cautiously excited about reporting that the Government is drafting legislation to ban new mines on conservation land. The anti-mining group's spokesperson, Morgan Donoghue says: "The Government has been promising us some action for ...
People who enjoy the outdoors for recreation, fishing and hunting will lose rights under the Natural and Built Environments Bill. Fish & Game New Zealand chief executive Corina Jordan says the proposed replacement for the Resource Management ...
Proposed pay equity claim settlements for school librarians and science technicians have been reached between the Ministry of Education and NZEI Te Riu Roa, Secretary for Education, Iona Holsted and NZEI Te Riu Roa president, Mark Potter, announced ...
Members of NZEI Te Riu Roa negotiating on behalf of school librarians, library assistants and science technicians are excited to announce that proposed pay equity settlements are ready to be voted on by their colleagues. They include pay increases of up to ...
The Public Transport Users Association (PTUA) is calling for Michael Wood, the Minister of Transport, and now Auckland, to cancel the light rail project immediately. Auckland Light Rail was never going to happen, as our group has repeatedly said dozens of ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has been asked to intervene following confirmation today that the Government plans to implement a ban on all extractive sector activities on the conservation estate. Wayne Scott, CEO of the Aggregate and Quarry Association, ...
Buzz from the Beehive Two fresh press releases had been posted when we checked the Beehive website at noon, both of them posted yesterday. In one statement, in the runup to Waitangi Day, Maori Crown Relations Minister Kelvin Davis drew attention to happenings on a Northland battle site in 1845. ...
I am delighted to announce the appointment of John Price ONZM as the new Director Civil Defence Emergency Management and Deputy Chief Executive Emergency Management for the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). John has been a member of the ...
Coromandel Watchdog of Hauraki are calling on the new Prime Minister and new Minister of Conservation Willow Jean Prime to immediately implement the 2017 promise to ban new mining activity on conservation lands. “ The mining industry group Straterra ...
Analysis - Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has had a dream start with polls showing Labour ahead of National, but now he has to prove himself in Parliament and quickly deliver on his promises. ...
The Bus and Coach Association supports the Government’s decision to continue half-price fares on public transport services. The fare reduction was set to expire on 31 March 2023, but will now continue to 30 June 2023. “Half-price fares have cost ten-times ...
“The decision by the Reserve Bank of Australia to not replace the late Queen with Charles on the Aussie $5 note should indicate to our Reserve Bank that it’s time to change the NZ $20 note” said Lewis Holden, campaign chair of New ...
Establishing a Truth, Reconciliation and Justice Commission and recognising Māori tino rangatiratanga are among several recommendations in two pivotal reports released today (Friday 3 February) by Te Kāhui Tika Tangata Human Rights Commission. The ...
The decision turns Wellington into a 2023 battleground, with three brand new faces set to contest the electorate - and Shaw has already thrown his support behind Tamatha Paul. ...
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has undergone a stern baptisim of fire in his first week in his new job, but it doesn’t get any easier. Next week, he has a vital meeting in Canberra with his Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese, where he has to establish ...
Continuing fuel subsidies despite official and expert advice urging otherwise is focused on helping New Zealanders in the here and now, the finance minister says. ...
Buzz from the Beehive Cost-of-living pressures loomed large in Beehive announcements over the past 24 hours. The PM was obviously keen to announce further measures to keep those costs in check and demonstrate he means business when he talks of focusing his government on bread-and-butter issues. His statement was headed ...
Chris Hipkins says Aotearoa has "some tough calls to make as a country" regarding the future of communities in places vulnerable to extreme weather events. ...
A new Prime Minister, a revitalised Cabinet, and possibly revised priorities – but is the political and, importantly, economic landscape much different? Certainly some within the news media were excited by the changes which Chris Hipkins announced yesterday or – before the announcement – by the prospect of changes in ...
Analysis - Jacinda Ardern is one of New Zealand's most historically significant leaders. But she did not achieve the grand vision for Aotearoa her outsized rhetoric promised. ...
Here is my prediction.
Talleys (and many other two-bit shits) will shortly be establishing Australian entities to own their NZ assets. This is so that they will then fall under the TPP ISDS system. This is gaming the system. And this for many corporates appears to be what it’s all about.
• If you raise minimum wages this will affect our future profits
• If you increase the opportunity for effective collective agreements this will affect our future profits
• If you change environmental laws ….
• If you change the fish quotas …..
• If you change ACC contributions….
• If….
• If..
The list will be extremely long, and it will not take many challenges for governments to back away from making any policy, regulatory or legislative changes because the risks of ISDS challenges. I’m not sure whether this is an intended consequence or unintended consequence of the TPP.
Well jeez that woke me up! What a scam if that’s the case.
now read this, Gangnam Style
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/10/obscure-legal-system-lets-corportations-sue-states-ttip-icsid
and then this
Dr. Eric De Brabandere & Julia Lepeltak, Leiden University5
http://corporateeurope.org/trade/2012/11/chapter-5-speculating-injustice-third-party-funding-investment-disputes
Perhaps Andrew Little and the Labour Party has a secret plan to get us out of this corporatised morass.
Nope. They will stick with it apparently. You must be so happy /sarc
Hmmmm I missed the /sarc tags on my comment
I think Little and Robertson have no objective except to look like they oppose the TPPA when in fact the globalists Shearer et al hold sway
Some were claiming last week that Little’s ‘strong stance’ against the TPPA was evidence that he was in control of a united caucus.
Except that strong stance doesn’t even exist outside of spin.
Strawman, as usual.
trp, while you are about, do you know if there is any discussion about how Labour might deal with the issues the TPPA brings post-signing and once in government? If Little is saying that they will go back to the signatories and deal with it there, has he said how that might happen?
Hi, weka, great question!
My understanding is that the TPP has no entrenched mechanism for re-negotiation or review. Though, if there is, I’d be happy to hear about it. I suspect future governments will have to use the diplomatic route to re-start negotiations. I’ll have a dig and see what I can find out where Labour are heading with this aspect. Might be a post in it.
That would be great trp!
Bill has put up this argument, which on the face of it looks like a fairly significant impediment to renegotiation. Neither of us have found any expert opinion on that though (I don’t think either of us have looked).
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/286157/after-five-years,-tpp-deal-is-done
Yes, I would be interested to see how Andrew Little is going to do this and still stay part of the TPP.
thanks for that. My quick reading of it is that that refers to pre-ratification.
Deal goes to parliaments
US President Barack Obama released a statement saying Americans would have months to read the Trans-Pacific Partnership before he signs it into law.
In the United States, the deal will next go to the Congress for consideration, and in New Zealand and other countries, it will go before the Parliament.
The 12 countries’ legislatures will have no ability to re-negotiate the deal’s terms, however, and will be limited to yes-or-no votes on signing it into law.
It’s a messy bit of reporting too, because in NZ at least, it won’t go before parliament.
I just don’t see how you can renegotiate.
If Little thinks he can renegotiate a better deal, then what’s stopping the other 12 countries from trying their luck as well.
The whole thing would go back to square one again, which is why it has to be a yes or no situation.
You’re either in or you’re out.
Perhaps. So why is it that no-one is asking the question of how this might happen?
Colonial Viper +1
The Greens and NZ First did their homework and immediately recognized TPPA was another corporate take-over move. Labour gives every impression they are just starting to wake up.
Can’t help wondering if there is conflict of interest among certain NT MPs ((John Key) springs to mind – any declaration of investment in those Third party funding investors. Who is really going to benefit from nation states having to go into arbitration (ISDS)?
AND the lawyers have 6000 pages to play with.
It can’t be that bad, Labour has said that its better for NZ to stay in the TPPA than to leave it.
+1 Gristle
It’s intended. Just look at how the National Government reacted to the Philip Morris case against the Australian Government. Too scared to do anything… just in case.
No, not too scared, but prudently letting the Australian taxpayers take the risk and foot the legal bill. If they were unsuccessful, then the precedent would be set and we would have to think hard about having a go ourselves.
I understand Andrew Little will support the TPPA if Labour get into power .
Can someone explain to me exactly what the official position is please?
Do we oppose and protest or do we support and settle down ?
The answer is that National must be opposed by all those who believe in NZ’s democractic sovereignty and freedom from corporate control. And so must Labour.
Labour. The perfect example of a peoples party which has become a party of the ruling establishment.
Andrew Little – insincere and incredible.
But apparently some here say that he is the best Labour speech maker in decades. Great.
“some here say that he is the best Labour speech maker in decades”
I think that is an accurate opinion. He is the best since David Lange.
That is mainly because all the other leaders ranged from terrible to dreadful.
Do we actually know who wrote the speech delivered by Little about the new tertiary education policy?
Not sure who wrote the speech, but I reckon it’s Grant Robertson behind the policy as a Version 2 of the interest free student loans scheme he developed in 2005.
Labour has been captured in the new sense that dictionaries on the web haven’t quite conned yet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
Other words describing Labour’s situation – inveigled, undermined, disenfranchised,
capitulated, self-seeking and decrepit.
Google for meaning of enfeebled!
make weak or feeble.
“trade unions are in an enfeebled state”
Actually, Labour has always been a capitalist party but it’s worked to save capitalism from itself. We’re now learning that this can’t actually be done.
The strategy is to run down the TPP even though we agree with it , hopefully this will fool and confuse enough people to get us over the line and into power.
Once in, we’ll spin some bullshit about how our hands are tied and it’s all Nationals fault.
It’s not only transparent, it’s fucking gutless.
Makes one wonder why you support it, CV. Must be hard being a paying poodle of those notorious supporters of the 1% but lets not call it hypocrisy, coz that’d be true, but mean.
I’ve provided time and energy to the anti-TPP campaign and will continue to do so.
And yet you remain loyally pro TPP and the interests of the 1%. Funny old world, eh?
TRP
You’re a funny old man.
and the perfect example of why I can’t be bothered with TS …. yea nah.
TRP’s last comment (re the EMbittered CV – possibly with good reason) was disingenuous, cowardly, conceited, holier-than-thou, in-bubble, and in short – complete and utter kaka. All the best of British TRP! (and all those that fawn all over you). Christ!!! and we wonder what’s wrong with Labour ffs! There ya have it in a nutshell – that ‘broad church’ we’re supposed to worship within – just as long as we worship our betters
Don’t give up OWT – it’s just human nature. It’s how we are, ornery as the USA call it.
I suppose you’re correct @ grey.
There are plenty worse BUT (I mean – the “voice of Reason ffs!) – how arrogant is THAT?!!!!
Then there’s another that’s so fucking up itself it runs as tho’ it was some sort of elementary cure for a disease. _I wonder whether Lanthanide could possibly cure the for ZIKA virus – it’s certainly so fucking arrogant and holier than thou it’d believe in marketing itself as a cure-all for all the ills of the world.
You’re correct however – neither (of those specimens) come close to what we need to battle.
It’s just that Labour really do need to have a fucking good look at themsleves (perhaps even spend less time bagging C.V. for bad experiences) and really look at their own inadequacies.
Like my father-in-law before me (after a lifetime of supporting Labour), they’ll NOT get my vote till after they’ve acknowledged, apologised, and proven themselves. I don’t see it tho’ in the near future.
Christ – I’m even considering a vote for Winston.
Little will be destroyed by Key in election year.
The man has absolutely no credibility at all.
Grant Robertson, you’re next up.
BM will have flowers growing out of his arse in election year, from all the horsehit he’s been shoving up there. He has no credibility at all.
Not sure who your replacement will be.
Key may not make it to election year – he’s looking old and tired and making mistakes. Time was he’d’ve relished an opportunity like Waitangi, but he can no longer cut the mustard.
Grant Robertson is too “Wellington Bureaucratic”. Labour will go with Stuart Nash should Andrew Little step aside.
That reads more like a National Party strategy.
You could both be right – Jones/McGrath instead of Crosby/Textor – has a certain ring or is it toll?
The National Party Herald are in full rent-a-propaganda mode on the TPPA.
Audrey Young in her article titled “Protest fears put cork in TPP ministers celebration lunch at winery” blatantly pushes the pro-TPP argument quoting Todd McClay, Villa Maria founder Sir George Fistonich, executive director of Export New Zealand, Catherine Beard.
She totally misses the point that the people of NZ are STAKEHOLDERS in the TPPA.
We, the public, Maori and Pakeha, will be paying the costs of this agreement with our health, our environment, our jobs, our education and it is OUR sovereignty that is being traded without our having been consulted.
We , the public, were excluded from taking part in this agreement until the stage where we cannot make any changes to it.
Those groups opposed to the TPPA have been ignored or dismissed as scaremongers?
Where is the Health Cost Benefit Analysis called for by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists?
“Protest fears put cork in TPP ministers celebration lunch at winery”
How Marie Antoinette
If a CEO presented an investment opportunity (and that is what the TPPA is being touted as) to a group of shareholders that promised an ROI of 1% after 10 years, the shareholders, after laughing him out of the boardroom, would be asking for his resignation. 1% is margin of error stuff. The problem I have with he TPPA is it is being pushed as some big trade opportunity when in reality, to me anyway, trade is just being used to make it palatable to Joe Public. The real intent is around the rules of trade and how it concentrates more power into the hands of corporates and limits what a sovereign government can do to protect the interests of the people it is meant to serve.
+100, Kevin. Excellent analogy.
that is exactly what it is…a few crumbs from the trade table to cement in the corporates power…as if they need more, they already lead the elected govs by the nose
The TPPA mitigates a lot more risk for the corporates by socializing it through legislation rather than them having to lobby governments on a case by case basis.
understand the corporates desire for even greater control….was expressing disbelief we aquiesce
you are right of course….”we’ have allowed them to become too powerful, but it has been insidious
I was agreeing with you and adding to your statement. From a corporate perspective this is a rational extension of their strategies when dealing with externalising risk.
It requires an ever vigilant public to counter it. But the machine is very well funded and very powerful. It can offer lots of goodies to stifle criticism… somebody once said to me: “money might not be able to buy love but it can buy a pretty comfortable misery”. It seems to me that many are content in that regard.
Perfect from a corporate perspective… licence to gouge.
+1 Jones – yes the irony is that once TPPA is signed, corporations probably won’t waste money buying political figures, they can just litigate politicians decisions through their own kangaroo ISDS tribunals. Ha ha.
Not content with being recognised in law as individuals, they want to be on a par with nations – to be treated as another sovereign state.
Like the cliched mafia “offer you can’t refuse” with the promise of becoming a “made man” for the politicians who show the greatest enthusiasm in facilitating it.
well put
“We, the public, Maori and Pakeha, will be paying the costs of this agreement with our health, our environment, our jobs, our education”.
Can you please give examples of how we will paying the costs in each of the sectors you quote.
@Ben
“We, the public, Maori and Pakeha, will be paying the costs of this agreement with our health, our environment, our jobs, our education”.
Our Health
http://www.asms.org.nz/news/other-news/2016/02/05/nzma-repeats-call-for-health-analysis-of-tppa/
Our environment
“The environment will suffer under the final text of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), according to the Sustainability Council.” http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/294592/tpp's-environmental-chapter-slammed
Read the peer-reviewed expert analysis on the Environment.
https://tpplegal.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/ep4-environment.pdf
Our education
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11581754
Thank you for taking the time to compile a detailed response TMM (somewhat refreshing for opinions to be backed with analysis I might add). I shall read and digest your links.
You are welcome, Ben. You will find the link below useful as it contains peer-reviewed expert analysis on several chapters of the TPP. Thank you for being openminded and prepared to consider the information so that you can make up your own mind on the issue. My beef is against people who are wilfully ignorant: who deliberately refuse to read any information and suspend their own ability to think rationally, blindly following others without questioning.
You are obviously not one of those, thank goodness.
https://tpplegal.wordpress.com/
There Ben, a very full and clear answer to your question about how we will be paying the costs. Read and internalise.
You remind me of primary school. Chant after me: “I told you so, I told you so….”.
How long ago were you in primary school Ben? Presumably you are old enough to have had secondary ed and taught how to run a critical analysis of what you are reading.
Hard luck Labour supporters. It seems as though you are being let down by your party leaders once more. Looks like we are in the TPPA for the long haul.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Labour-wont-pull-out-of-the-TPP—Little/tabid/506/articleID/112603/Default.aspx
heh. Andrew Little is quite insincere and quite incredible.
I thinks it’s hard luck for a left coalition in total. If voters are against the TPPA, how can they vote to elect a left wing government that is committed to pulling out of the agreement?
They don’t vote for Labour.
Well now I’m confused, how can Labour condemn the TPP, censure David Shearer about being pro-TPP and yet now announces Labour won’t pull out of it?
Have I missed something?
Yes. As usual. None so blind…. chris.
The TPPA is in. Signed and sealed. Will be ratified by Cabinet and not by Parliament as will be done in Canada, and the Senate in USA. Finished.
Andrew can not cancel it. But they/we can fight against the aspects which are bad for NZ, when new legislation is brought to the House for Parliament to vote on.
I believe this is what the phrase “you can’t polish a turd” refers to
The only way Labour Loyalists can stomach the cognitive dissonance is by buying into Labour’s line that the TPPA isn’t that bad, that the costs of being out of the TPPA are too high, so let’s just accept it.
Just more evidence for Kiwi voters that we don’t have a real Opposition.
We do have a real opposition – it’s just that Labour is not part of it.
Wise up. There are other Parties in Parliament.
It has been the case for some time that Labour thinks because it is the big brother it must control everything – that is going to change – as more and more voters wake up to the fact that if they really want an alternative voice they won’t find it in Labour.
Trouble is, CV believes that people should vote for the parties that match them culturally or that they believe in. In the absence of that, all parties are useless to him.
Can you direct me to a NZ political party that has publicly come out and stated they would pull NZ out of the TPPA?
Until now Opposition parties have been urging the govt to pull out of the negotiations – only now is the time for them to publicly state that they will pull out, if given the opportunity. I expect that they will in due course. Unfortunately Labour have been ambivalent re the TPPA from the get go.
The latest statement from the Greens I feel is pretty clear. They will continue to oppose the TPPA. I think that that is as much as a Party can say on the matter. The TPPA has not yet been ratified and we await the outcome in the States, The problem with withdrawal is still fraught – it could end up costing billions – no matter which way you look at it. It’s a shit of a situation that National have signed us up to and they intend digging us even deeper in the hole.
Thanks for that link Macro.
I think there is a fair amount of political naivity in this thread (or disingenuousness on CV’s part because he should know better). Russell Norman said a few elections ago that one of the major problems with free trade agreements was that they bound NZ into contracts that incoming governments had no knowledge of. He was talking about ones done completely in secret, but this applies to the TPPA too because of the clusterfuck process and the complexity of the agreement. So for instance, if Labour campaigned on policy X and then came into government and discovered that there was a confidential clause in an agreement made by a previous govt that prohibited them from doing policy x, then their hands were tied. Plus they look like they’ve just gone back on their promise.
This is why I’m basically against all free trade that isn’t done via full democracy. Because the basic premise is that it’s ok for a govt elected for one term to bind NZ into contracts for eternity, and that’s not a free state.
And for people surprised that pulling out is not an easy thing to do, this is what a huge part of the protest has been about. It’s an inherently flawed idea and process and many people knew that from the start.
Can you explain how?
If a Party in opposition prior to an election indicates that it will withdraw from the TPPA then overseas corporates will be waiting for any sign – should that Party gain the Treasury benches – for filing suits against withdrawal and the loss of profits for all manner of reasons. It will be a can of worms. Parties opposed to the TPPA are also parties who want more action on environment, protection of NZ land, etc (provisions for which have been removed from the TPPA) so the field will be open for ISDS mayhem. It takes 6 months for a country to withdraw. Even with an electoral mandate, it would take an incoming Govt at least a year before final withdrawal and plenty of time for companies to lodge claims, however spurious. These courts are set up in the favour of corporates and manned by corporate lawyers. They are a farce and formed with the sole aim of handing the ability of a country to manage and govern itself in its own perceived interests into the hands of multinationals – nothing more nor less.
Would the short term loss caused by that be bigger than the continuing loss that is going to come from remaining in the TPPA?
That would depend upon the process of withdrawal. Do the ISDS claims get to continue after we’ve withdrawn? If I was the government I’d make sure that any and all claims against the nation under TPPA would be closed at the same time that withdrawal took place. This should be standard operating procedure so as to prevent the spurious claims that you’re concerned about.
As there is an exit clause, one would assume there wouldn’t be grounds for such filings (suits against withdrawal).
And until they do, voters that oppose the TPP (and expect us to withdraw if renegotiations are unsuccessful) have no political representation.
Now isn’t that a concern for our democratic system? Will we see more being disenfranchised, thus fail to vote?
Nevertheless, if you want the best resistance to the TPPA and any other agreement like it, then voting for the GP is the thing to do. They’ve consistently said they opposed it (unlike Labour who are still pretty centrist and pro-free trade), and have been working for years on opposing these kind of agreements that undermine NZ.
btw, personal feelings of being represented aren’t necessary to use one’s vote, or even to feel politically empowered for useful.
@ weka
“btw, personal feelings of being represented aren’t necessary to use one’s vote, or even to feel politically empowered for useful.”
Speak for yourself. I vote on policy, thus policy must reflect my views if a party wants to attain it.
When it comes to such a major political issue as this trade deal (and considering a poll on the matter showed the majority of voters were opposed) one would expect there to be political representation.
The Greens haven’t committed to withdrawing if renegotiations are unsuccessful, thus alternatives fail to advance.
Moreover, at this stage the Greens require Labour, hence Labour will largely be calling the shots. And there goes your resistance to the TPP.
Doh!!, must be very difficult being a Labour supporter at the moment……….
Na I’m cool with Little’s handling of it, given that a the tpp is unlikely to make a blind bit of difference to my life and that Little is running a party with independent thinkers in it not like the whipped gutless tools in national.
It’s really not a problem – we can build another prison for them. Bounty Island is a splendid place for reflection and penance.
Stuart,
A marvelous approach to democracy. Let the government of the day jail all its democratically elected opponents. Even Venezuela finds this a bit hard to do.
If this government were not riddled with corruption it would have nothing to fear. But corruption is fatal to democracies – and the consequences of failing democracies are well documented.
The bracing subantarctic climate would do wonders for Key’s integrity, and Gerry Brownlee might well prove attractive to sea elephants.
Though you misread my comment – it referred in fact directed to persons within Labour, who like yourself support treason against NZ in the form of the TPP.
I don’t see that as letting supporters down. It might be theoretically possible to pull out of the TPPA but practically the cost of doing so would be unaffordable.
You can’t sign up deals and then walk away from them without penalty. Actions have consequences, an arbitrary withdrawal would destroy much of the existing business & diplomatic relationships we have with member countries.
as any lawyer would advise…it is better not to sign a bad deal than try to extract yourself from one
The Government has already signed. So now we can only fight/expose the detail/ramifications.
or trust that the US don’t ratify….the greedy corps lobbyists may yet shoot themselves in the foot in that regard…which reminds me …why the complete lack of concern expressed via the MSM around the issue of side letters?…
Yes. I heard that American on radio talking about US seeking side letters to “clarify” that the time was really 8 years not just 5 years as we have been told. Yet we have been told by Key that there will be no changes. Signed. Sealed. Untouchable. Huh!
Andrew Geddis” The confusion is over the length of time that “biologics” (i.e. medicines that are made using certain types of cells to produce the right kind of protein) will be given protection through a “market exclusivity period” in which “biosimilars” (which are akin to generic medicines) are prohibited. There’s an explainer on why this matters here.
It seems like NZ thinks we’ve agreed to a 5 year protection period, but the US wants at least 8, and no-one is quite sure exactly what the TPPA text says.”
and apparently theres nothing to stop them reseeking the original 12…on a country by country basis as I understand it
“it is better not to sign a bad deal than try to extract yourself from one”
Bang on pat. I’d think everyone here has signed contracts before, surely everyone must understand about the consequences of breaking a contract.
I am a bit mystified why Labour aren’t straight out stating we can’t afford to pull out once we’re in, it’s in their favour to do so.
I would expect it is the hope that the situation will never reach the point where that decision has to be made….a vain hope in my opinion
This is why the Neoliberals always win, why Labour is so ineffective at changing the course of the things, and why the status quo continues to drift towards the right.
National and the corporates now know how to handle Labour.
You simply make deals which are too tough and costly to undo, and a gutless Labour will go along with it: to them staying in the TPP is the pragmatic, unavoidable decision.
until tipping point….
Look at Europe, look at the USA.
It is too costly and too dangerous to wait for that point. Fascists, racists, extreme nationalists all become much more politically empowered at that point.
didn’t say i advocated it…was pointing out the (almost) inevitable result
Col V
+1
I fear it’s a vain hope too pat but one of the prepared scripts from the pro-TPP trolls (including the NZ Herald) is that we can always leave if it turns out to be no good.
The argument not to sign would be strengthened considerably if the likes of Labour admitted that we really can’t leave once we’ve signed; that it’s a one-way ticket. Politically that should help Labour by demonstrating to voters how undemocratic and authoritarian National is.
Six months notice. That’s all it takes on paper to get out of the TPP. Then it’s simply a case of standing firm and refusing to play ball on all the ISDS claims that would rain from the sky during those six months.
And the other threats of how there will be huge divestment and so on – face them all down.
Something to note. An argument for the TPP and specifically the dispute procedures, is that direct foreign investment plummets without them. A number of studies, including one by the World Bank, have found that claim to be entirely false.
Side note. Syriza, in spite of the express backing of the Greek voters, capitulated when it tried to play that game with Europe’s ‘big boys’. There is now rioting in Greece again.
“Six months notice. That’s all it takes on paper to get out of the TPP. Then it’s simply a case of standing firm and refusing to play ball on all the ISDS claims that would rain from the sky during those six months. ”
There’s more to it than that Bill. We currently trade with, and have good diplomatic relationships with, all the member countries. If we renege on the deal those countries will freeze us out. They’ll be pissed off with us and will show it. The US have shown time & again how vindictive they are, they alone would make life hard for us.
We won’t face an overt embargo. We’d just see a whole lot of subtle changes, obstacles put in our way, which would gradually reduce to a trickle the trade & investment we do with those countries.
Once we’re in the most hopeful outcome I can see is a breakaway by a group of nations; enough to weaken the remaining TPP bloc and enough to avoid the penalties that would befall a single nation quitting.
Yeah, short term. But, long term – as shown by various studies including by the World Bank – being in or out of these deals makes absolutely no difference to levels of trade/investment.
Again you are ignoring the consequences of reneging on a deal Bill. Are you being deliberately obtuse or have you failed to understand that bit?
You paint a picture of two scenarios when there are clearly three here
1/ Not signing
2/ Signing
3/ Signing and then pulling out
Your argument applies only to 1/. I’ve been talking about 3/ which is what everyone else is talking about too.
No DH. I’m talking about pulling out if and when it’s ratified by Japan and the US.
So your argument is remaining in a bad deal is better than utilizing the exit clause?
What would be the consequences of utilizing the exit clause? And how would that compare to remaining in the deal?
And surely there will be consequences for flouting certain aspects of the deal.
Despite what the tories and self-loathing labourites say, Little was pretty clear in Gosman’s link.
Labour is a party that supports free trade. This is not a surprise to anyone except the poor few who spend the first few minutes of every morning believing it’s 1972 again.
There are some bits in the TPPA that meet Labour’s free trade objectives.
There are other bits that fail to meet Labour’s expectations about sovreignty.
Therefore, Labour’s starting point is to try to keep those things it agrees with and renegotiate those things it finds unacceptable.
People demanding that NZ pull out of the deal see it as a wreck that should be written off. Labour see it as a do-er upper. How a LabGrn govt sees it? That has yet to be negotiated.
Indeed.
From July last year,
Bear in mind that ‘backs’ there is before any of us have seen the draft, including Labour, and that Little is talking about whether they will support National signing the agreement or not.
except that it is patently obvious that the US would not be in this deal without the ISDS provisions (see TTIP negotiations) and the ability to vet our legislation……as a small (the size of a moderate US city) we are in a weak bargaining position…this applies to any side letter issue, unlike say Japan who are able to bargain from a position of strength.
We have managed to export in the face of tariffs, quotas and subsidies to date and their is no need to bend over for this when the subsidies, quotas and tariffs (particularly in the Us) still remain and are merely “adjusted”…we would be far better off moving our exports up the value chain as advocated by many analysts…we will never be able to compete on volume …consider what we have done to this country by increasing the dairy herd from 130,000 to 1.3 million in canty, 5 million nationwide…the US has 90 million beasts and they are only the fifth largest country by herd numbers worldwide.
Nevertheless, Labour’s starting position is that the TPP will be a done deal before the next election, so the preferred option is to try to improve it before considering something like withdrawal.
If we don’t like some of the sovreignty issues, other nations (e.g. Canada) will have similar concerns. We can’t control, but we might be able to lead.
there will be no improving it….all efforts will be needed to ensure it is not made any worse….its a dog, a red zoned condemned property, not a doer upper
That might well be your perspective.
It does not seem to be the perspective of the Labour Party.
But how do you feel about free trade agreements in principle? I suspect that therein might lie some of the difference in perspective.
you suspect wrong….but then TPPA isn’t a free trade agreement
Fair call.
But some parts of it do deal with free trade. Some parts donot.
It’s way past time to quit using the old ‘you must be against free trade’ line.
Fundamentally the TPP will inhibit the kind of companies NZ needs in order to export higher quality products and will, as Oram points out, lock us more tightly into raw commodity producer status.
That isn’t free trade, it’s restrictive trade.
Some commenters here are against free trade.
Little made it clear that Labour is not, and that they see free trade elements in the TPP. Assuming the second part is correct, then anyone 100% opposed to the TPP is also against the free trade elements.
I’m against the TPP because of the ISDS and intellectual property issues. But just as there’s bad stuff in it, there’s probably some good stuff in any 6000 page multilateral agreement.
But thanks for taking a reasonable suspicion and depicting it as a categorical claim. That always ensures some shit-hot conversationing.
Weren’t you replying to Pat, not ”some commenters”?
I know the Labour bashing thing recently here has got out of hand (personally I got over my disappointment with Labour’s TPP stance about 18 months ago), but Pat is actually informed about the unequal power relationship and specific risks that aren’t at all answered by an asinine there’s-good-stuff-and-bad-stuff-like-any-deal response.
I was, but I don’t have exhaustive records of every commenter’s opinions on a range of topics. My suspicion was based on pat’s categorical opposition to the entire thing (contrasting with Little’s more nuanced approach), and the fact that such an attitude is not exactly unheard of around here.
Pat advised me otherwise, and I took them at their word.
You might think that wanting to keep the bits Labour agrees with while trying to renegotiate the bits it doesn’t is “asinine”, but that seems to be Labour’s position.
Is there anything in particular you want from me, or should I just regard this little exchange as yet another meaningless piece of static?
I will confess that initially I had thought that with the ISDS provisions removed it may have been a workable document, but the more I look into it the worse it becomes and that includes the trade aspects…. I expect if and when it is implemented our balance of payments will deteriorate significantly.
Pat, the only hope is a democratic win in the States. In my view rather than asking if we can pull out, the focus should be getting the public to understand it’s not a done deal yet.
McFlock: I think you missed the bit where Little moved to outright opposition to TPP. While Little acknowledges that once a done deal NZ (effectively) can’t pull out, that was significant.
So you’re defending a position even Labour has abandoned.
I don’t want anything from you, but as a suggestion maybe try actually following some news before commenting on this?
@ergo
I was aware of that. This subthread is about TC’s suggestion of withdrawal from the done deal vs trying to improve it first. So your “suggestion”, while snarky, adds no new information to the discussion and is not really relevant to anything I’ve written here. Just like your initial mischaracterization of my position.
So this is just another example of a completely pointless ergovmcf tit-for-tat, I would suggest that you actually think before jumping on your high horse, but past experience suggests that this would be futile. And as continuation would likely fill up pat’s reply tab, I say ‘good day’.
Oh, it must have escaped your notice – I directly addressed Pat too in my last reply, it’s not all about you.
Your concern for Pat’s reply tab is touching but unnecessary.
My other replies on this thread involve actual arguments about the TPP, and I daresay Pat’s not too bothered that I’ve used his reply tab a few times to make those comments.
I thought you were saying Labour’s current TPP position was that it was partly good and partly bad, I pointed out Labour had moved to outright opposition.
You’ve said you’re aware of Labour’s current position – OK, accepted.
Not keen on any future interaction with you, either.
Yeah, nah. Labour have never said they would consider pulling out. Some of you having been paying attention.
There’s a fair chance the US will reject it – and who knows – those obtuse losers, the Gnats may change their minds as they see what little credibility they ever had vanishing down the plughole with foreign land sales, mounting debt and graphic incompetence.
It’s an odd translation but interesting points about varying radiation levels on food in countries trade.
Under TPPA consumers are going to have less and less knowledge of their food origin. It is the opposite of the 21st century farming where consumers want to know the origin of their food from farm gate to table …
“Dumping Radioactive Food from Japan on the World-Why the TPP is a Pending Disaster”
https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/01/09/dumping-radioactive-food-from-japan-on-the-world-why-the-tpp-is-a-pending-disaster/
Maybe someone should inform Andrew Little about this upcoming public health and agricultural disaster?
He seems to think that NZ should stay in the TPPA.
Or perhaps this is one of the provisions of the TPPA that Labour is going to “flout”?
Labour’s positioning is insincere and incredible.
But great speeches.
“He seems to think that NZ should stay in the TPPA.”
[citation needed]
Which based on previous experience I’m guessing you won’t provide. You’re now getting pretty close to lying about Little territory.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/MARK-SAINSBURY-Andrew-Little-you-cant-have-it-both-ways-on-TPP/tabid/504/articleID/112642/Default.aspx
In which Andrew Little confirms that NZ will remain in the TPPA even if Labour is elected to government
My reading is that it’s not so much that Little thinks they should stay in as it’s going to be too hard to leave. If Labour’s current position on sovereignty is to be believed, then that exists once we are in the agreement too and thus if leaving were easy then it would be easy. CV appears to take the view that Labour are lying, I take the view that Labour are caught between a rock and a hard place.
I’ll just add that most people criticising Labour for saying they won’t leave haven’t yet looked at what leaving would actually entail. Until that conversation is had it’s hard to put Labour’s decision into context.
So don’t buy food you don’t know the origin of. Local NZ companies will be wise to continue labeling their products as NZ made. I currently do that and buy only food that is NZ grown/made even if it costs more.
People need to understand we have power but we need to start believing in it and use it.
+1
And what happens when food labelling under the TPP is changed so it is much less clear where the origins of various ingredients are from?
The corporates are on to us like a fucking rash.
buy from the people that grow and make it.
Not sure I want to start making my own pasta and rice and so forth. Not as easy as it sounds. It sort of like going back to 18th century . While I think you should buy as much locally grown as you can and limit food miles – some foods are not practical to buy locally and shouldn’t you be allowed to know where it came from and how safe it is? Under previous trade agreements country of origin labelling have been successfully challenged as a ‘trade barrier’.
of course, but the subthread was about how to stay empowered if corporate culture tries to take that from us.
There are people in NZ already making pasta. Wheat can easily be grown here.
Rice is trickier. It probably can be grown for larger distribution but to eat local we should be eating local and seasonal, which means that for many in NZ rice won’t be a staple. Plenty of other good choices though.
Buy fresh food from the local vege shop or market and use the internet to learn where other food is coming from. They might be able to limit the information on the label but evey company wants to put its logo on the product, so google it and find out.
There is currently an app to scan barcodes and find out if the product contain certified palm oil, I have a feeling if food labeling will be limited there will be more apps like that. It is kind of foolish from corporations to think they can completely block information. Not in this time and age.
How many companies control NZ…in comparison with the ten claimed here for Australia?
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/labor-senator-sam-dastyari-claims-10-companies-have-taken-complete-control-of-australias-political-process-20160205-gmmy30.html
more to the point where are the NZ political equivalents of Dastyari, current or retired….
More adverse comment against the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) rort.
https://euobserver.com/economic/132142
And they are right to object. Wonder if NZ Law will point out the same dangers? Perhaps not if they all support the Government.
I refer to these ISDS courts as kangaroo courts – I find it absolutely mind boggling that anyone with even the most minutest understanding of their responsibility to ensure fair justice for the citizens of their country (yes I’m looking at you Tim, and you John, and you Todd) could agree to such a procedure – so open to abuse and bias, so flimsy in its appointments, which circumvents the International courts and the jurisdiction of the WTO, and with no right of appeal, and only for the benefit of Multi-nationals with Pockets way deeper than the GDPs of 75% of the countries involved.
well in Keyspeak, it’s a “no brainer” isn’t it? ISDS “arrangements” makes it anything but a “Free” trade agreement, and until the very notion of them is thrown out, how can we even think about anything else?
Thanks for the post, something to direct the believers to, when they accuse those that want to discuss further of being “rent a mob” or smelly hippies!
Is it possible to get the ISDS ruled to be illegal by the United Nations?
“TTIP investor court illegal, say German judges”
https://euobserver.com/economic/132142
This TPPA reminds me of Y2K, once it is all passed the world wont stop spinning. our lives will go on as normal, All those who opposed it will have moved on to the next anti progress agenda.
Has anyone stopped to think how TPPA will benefit the poorer countries with trade to these other 11 countries.
I come from the point of why would 12 countries sell there country man and their own families down the drain.
I feel we will look back in 10 years time and say what was all the worry about.
The TPPA is only progress if you think going back to feudalism is progress.
It won’t benefit them at all. In fact, it will probably make them worse off as most of Africa is now worse off after they got ‘free-trade’ forced upon them by the rich nations. The rich nations did well out of it though because they bought up large amounts of the poor countries and shifted all the resources to them.
History shows quite clearly that poor countries do very badly out of these types of deals.
It’s also a point that all the developed countries developed under under heavy protection.
Chris Trotters Bowalley Road piece post-march is very thoughtful and sincere.
It also has an awe inspiring helicopter photo of Queen Street packed with heads as far as the eye can see.
Further he says, and I thought you all would be interested so have copied it for you (and have bolded a portion that expresses very well the situation):
Too bad that Labour says that we have to stay in the TPP now, because.
Reluctant corporate collaborators are still corporate collaborators.
Too bad that CV is now making shit up about Labour and spraying it all over the place.
Happy for Labour to show me wrong and actually stand up against the TPP, not just mouth the words.
Happy for CV to show us all that he’s right and produce something that affects good change in the world, not just mouthing the words.
I don’t get millions of dollars of tax payer funding in order to pretend at being the Opposition.
No, but the way you are acting is on par with the worst of Labour MPs, so I have no doubt that if you were in their position you would be pulling the same kind of bullshit they are.
+ 1 Weka
He’s been doing that for a while now….
it’s tedious, and he seems to be on another mission today.
Weka, don’t know if you have followed the link in 4. above.
Andrew is very clear in stating that Labour will not pull out of the TPPA.
He clearly states the reason for that is that there is much in the agreement that will be good for NZ.
He is clear that there are certain provisions they would renegotiate, but reiterates that they will not pull out.
He says 3 times “The train has left the station”.
Yes, I listened to that yesterday.
Labour have never said they would pull out. To suggest that Labour is now all of a sudden saying it won’t pull out is a nonsense, because they’ve never intended to pull out. That was clear last year, pulling out was never part of their agenda.
“He clearly states the reason for that is that there is much in the agreement that will be good for NZ.”
Can you please quote that bit, or at least post the time stamp?
I agree with you, Labour never ever had any intention of pulling out of the TPP.
But I do think that its worth repeating ad nauseaum now that Little has confirmed it clearly.
Please post something that demonstrates that Labour have ever said anything that hints that they might pull out. Because this isn’t news, it’s always been their position.
That’s a bit disingenuous Weka. Not stating whether you will or will not do something is very different to confirming that you will or will not do something.
Up until yesterday I don’t believe Labour had made any definite statement that they would remain in the TPPA.
Maybe I’m wrong and someone can link to such a statement?
Can you please quote that bit, or at least post the time stamp?
Apologies, I should have quoted him directly the first time rather than paraphrasing from memory…
“(pieces of TPPA legislation) that support genuine free trade we will support, because we are a free trade Party.”
“…There are aspects that will help some exporters, we’ve never shied away from that.”
” if you are desperate to have only one answer to this, that it’s either completely wrong, or it’s completely right, then a 6,000 page agreement isn’t going to be like that. And a free trade agreement that has some aspects of free trade, and others that are not, it doesn’t break down that simply.”
“The train has left the station” x3.
I think the phrase is generally used to indicate that it is pointless to remain on the platform shouting at the rails.
Good The Lost Sheep.
Do you think that Labour should pull out once in govt?
yes
Have you not seen this?
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Labour-wont-pull-out-of-the-TPP—Little/tabid/506/articleID/112603/Default.aspx
yes, I have. Please post something that demonstrates that Labour have ever said anything that hints that they might pull out. Because this isn’t news, it’s always been their position.
Nah that’s disingenuous apologising.
A version of “that’s not news, everybody has always known that Labour opposition to the TPP was merely window dressing”
lolz. Some of the centrists here might genuinely be puzzled, and some of the righties might be just taking the opportunity to spin, but you of all people know damn well that Labour were never considering pulling out, which makes you the King of the Disingenuous Ones. Still, whatever opportunity there is to poison the well, eh CV?
This is Phil Quin.
Phil Quin is much like the object thrown at Stephen Joyce, but limper.
Don’t be like Phil Quin.
Their five bottom lines for a start. Especially as they weren’t all met.
This announcement last week.
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/labour-finally-confirms-it-s-opposed-to-controversial-tppa
And basically all the noise they’ve been making opposing it suggested so.
I’ll see if u can dig a link up later but I was asking about this on ts last year and the sense I had was that it was a given that Labour wouldn’t pull out. Honestly, I am surprised at all the surprise this week.
Labour last year said they would oppose the tppa if their bottom lines weren’t met. Then once the draft was out and they had time to really look at it they came out and said they oppose NZ signing and there is little they could do.
Btw, anyone who thought that last year that if Labour’s five bottom lines weren’t met that meant once in power Labour would pull out needs to put up their rationale. Because when I raised it it wasn’t even a consideration.
A bottom line not being met is generally accepted one won’t be part of any deal. It’s where one generally draws the line. Thus, what else were voters to think?
Labour have been playing on this, trying to appease both sides.
The thing is, it’s resulted in putting a number on the left and right off.
Not pulling out won’t win them much support from the left. And talk of flouting certain aspects of the deal is turning the right off.
Their handling of this has been pathetic and will come back to bite them IMO.
Stating there is little they can do is complete rubbish. There is an exit clause.
Moreover, they could be talking to vested interests now in preparation of pulling out.
Labour’s bottom lines were about whether to support National signing the TPPA or not. They weren’t about what Labour would do once in govt.
If you’re surprised that Labour don’t want to pull out, why were you not asking these questions last year when the issue first came up, including what the implications were of pulling out?
“Moreover, they could be talking to vested interests now in preparation of pulling out.”
Little has said that they are already talking to the signatories in preparation for changing the agreement.
National didn’t require Labours support. There was no vote on the signing of the TPP.
But thanks for highlighting how Labour were playing it.
Personally. I had a feeling Labour were attempting to pull the wool. And questioned it in discussions here.
Little also indicated it was to late to pull out if it passed in the US, suggesting we can’t really pull out even tho there is an exit clause. Therefore, wouldn’t that suggest our sovereignty is already being constrained?
Do you want Labour to pull out if that’s an option?
Do you want Labour to pull out of the TPPA if it’s ratified and once they are in govt?
It would probably be the wiser option , unless of course Labour can make significant changes.
Moreover, now that they have given their hand away, they no longer have the possibility of them pulling out as a leveraging.
What do you think the implications would be of pulling out?
As pulling out will relieve us of the obligations of the deal, they won’t have us over such a barrel. Thus, although they may hit us hard for withdrawing, it won’t be as bad as the long term consequences of remaining in the deal.
The Greens have always said they oppose the TPPA but as far as I am aware have never said they will pull NZ out if it is ratified. Last year in an interview with Jessica Williams (when she was with Radio Live) James Shaw said that it would be easier to renegotiate than withdraw. Since then he has has said they need to study the detail in the full document before detailing future actions other than opposing the ratification.
Labour put up the 5 conditions for support, then said that 4 out of the 5 seem to have been met but there was still the issue of sovereignty. Over the summer Andrew Little examined the full document and was able to persuade the rest of his caucus to oppose the signing of the agreement. This was not easy because of MPs like Goff and Shearer and the influence they had over some caucus members, but Labour has now said they would oppose it in its present form.
Both parties oppose the TPPA, neither have promised to withdraw from it when they are in government, and both have talked about renegotiation.
Did you hear the interview with Williams Karen? I’ve only seen her tweet referring to it and she didn’t respond to my asking for clarification.
It’d be good to have a reference for what Shaw has said more recently too.
Both parties oppose the TPPA, neither have promised to withdraw from it when they are in government, and both have talked about renegotiation.
+1.
Labour’s situation is this.
They have always supported the TPPA and have never intended pulling out of it.
Ms Clark’s intervention was a clear signal of that.
But their absolute priority is to be the Government, and they know they cannot be the Government unless they retain the support of 3 disparate groupings: A mid to far left that is sliding ever harder left, core center left Labour voters, and about 6% of centrist voters that don’t currently vote Labour.
The conundrum above explains why they presented as being ‘opposed’ to the TPPA, while simultaneously leaving open the question of whether their opposition extended as far as actually pulling out of it.
They were trying to leave room for all 3 of the vital groupings to believe that Labour might be on their side of the argument.
As the issue evolved, Labour has been very closely attempting to gauge where the overall public sentiment was going on the TPPA (to which side of the fence do you jump?).
The mid to far left clearly resolved this was a bottom line / every man to the barricades / show the maximum opposition we can muster issue.
Labour waited to see if that level of resolution moved through and was expressed strongly among the other 2 more centrist groupings. The turnout on Thursday of only 1000 hard core protestors and 13k peaceful marchers did not indicate this had occurred.
So the day after the TPPA signing, knowing ‘the train had left the station’ and it was time to move on, Labour decided which side of the fence it was best for them to come down on.
So they clarified that they would not withdraw from the TPPA.
That’s the reality folks. You are stuck with the TPPA.
“They have always supported the TPPA and have never intended pulling out of it.”
That’s an outright lie. Not going to bother reading the rest of your comment if that’s what you are doing.
No, sorry I didn’t Weka, but I trust Jessica Williams. She wouldn’t have said that if it wasn’t true, and Shaw has never denied it.
The Green Party have been consistently opposed to the TPPA right through this process but I haven’t found anything that says what they will do if the get into government if it has already been ratified
(and I have looked!!) I think James Shaw is a very careful person and he is unlikely to make any commitments to withdraw until he knows exactly what the repercussions will be for NZ . Very sensible I think, in spite of what some here believe.
Meanwhile the Greens (and now Labour) will oppose the ratification. Unfortunately parliament doesn’t get to decide this – they only get to vote on any law changes that are required.
I think you may owe lost sheep an apology.
Little admitted the other day pulling out of the TPP was not something he’s contemplated. Although, he has openly stated he opposes the TPP.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/76579212/Live-chat-Labour-leader-Andrew-Little-on-TPPA-signing
[lprent: It pays not to request or demand apologies here. I have a tendency to view that kind of behaviour as flame starting. Since I (and the policy) tend to view such flame starters as attempting self-martyrdom. ]
“That’s an outright lie. Not going to bother reading the rest of your comment if that’s what you are doing.”
It is not a lie Weka.
Show me any proof that Labour have ever opposed the TPPA in principle?
If they opposed it, why would they confirm they would not pull out of it?
I think you’re just a bit sour, and don’t want to face up to the reality.
Best way to do that is throw all the toys out of the cot and refuse to play the game eh.
@TC and the lost sheep,
Lost sheep said “They have always supported the TPPA and have never intended pulling out of it.”
“They have always supported the TPPA” is an outright lie.
Labour’s actual positions going back to at least 2012 and up until 2 days ago,
Labour cannot support the TPPA as it stands
Labour will vote against any TPPA enabling legislation that cuts across New Zealand’s right to pass laws in its own interests.
http://www.labour.org.nz/our_position_on_the_tpp
Feb 4 2016 2:37 PM
We’re opposed to the TPPA in its current form because compromises to New Zealand’s sovereignty are not justified by the meagre economic gains. A number of Labour people are involved in today’s protests, including MPs who’ve spoken at rallies around the country.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/76579212/Live-chat-Labour-leader-Andrew-Little-on-TPPA-signing
“THAT in light of the Labour Party’s strong commitment to both the benefits of international trade and New Zealand’s national sovereignty, and recognising the far-reaching implications for domestic policy of the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, in which trade is only a small part, Labour will support signing such an agreement which: …
(g) Had been negotiated with full public consultation including regular public releases of drafts of the text of the agreement, and ratification being conditional on a full social, environmental and economic impact assessment including public submissions.”
Sept 2013
http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/17/cunliffe-moves-labour-off-the-fence-on-the-tppa/
Full remit here http://thestandard.org.nz/cunliffe-declares-war-national-tppa/
Labour believes the conditions reflect protections in the 2008 free trade agreement it negotiated with China.
It has previously withheld support for the TPP pending the release of the final draft of the 12-nation deal.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/70496910/labour-sets-nonnegotiable-stance-on-tpp-free-trade-talks
Leader Andrew Little said his party supported free trade but would not back the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) unless the five “non-negotiable bottom lines” were met.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/70496910/labour-sets-nonnegotiable-stance-on-tpp-free-trade-talks
“If they opposed it, why would they confirm they would not pull out of it?”
Because there would be significant consequences, including ones that aren’t apparent yet.
@Karen,
No, sorry I didn’t Weka, but I trust Jessica Williams. She wouldn’t have said that if it wasn’t true, and Shaw has never denied it.
Here’s the tweet exchange. Williams says she asked Shaw “if, practically, an exit from the TPP by a future L/G govt was possible”,
“then @jamespeshaw said it’d be better to fix the problems than dump it.”
In there is she also implying something from Shaw’s silence between question and answer (it’s unclear what).
That’s all we have to go on. I agree with your general assement here,
The Green Party have been consistently opposed to the TPPA right through this process but I haven’t found anything that says what they will do if the get into government if it has already been ratified
(and I have looked!!) I think James Shaw is a very careful person and he is unlikely to make any commitments to withdraw until he knows exactly what the repercussions will be for NZ . Very sensible I think, in spite of what some here believe.
Meanwhile the Greens (and now Labour) will oppose the ratification. Unfortunately parliament doesn’t get to decide this – they only get to vote on any law changes that are required.
weka
You affirmed my later point but did not address my initial (and main) point.
Little admitted the other day pulling out of the TPP was not something he’s contemplated.
Why do you think I owe lost sheep an apology? He lied, I’ve just supplied multiple links over 3+ years demonstrating that his comment was a lie.
“Little admitted the other day pulling out of the TPP was not something he’s contemplated. Although, he has openly stated he opposes the TPP. ”
Yes, I agree with that (except he stated that Labour opposed the TPPA), what’s your point?
Little certainly has played his supporters for fools,
His credibility must be nonexistent.
Blah blah Labour blah blah blach fools blah blah whatever…
Are you sure you’re not a bot BM?
Andrew Little went on the record yesterday saying that Labour will not pull out of the TPPA if elected to Government.
http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Labour-wont-pull-out-of-the-TPP—Little/tabid/506/articleID/112603/Default.aspx
Do you want Labour to pull out of the TPPA if it’s ratified and once they are in govt?
read the rest of the thread. I knew last year that Labour weren’t considering pulling out. This is not news.
So what happens when the renegotiation doesn’t achieve your aims? Either you stay in the agreement or you pull out. Which is going to be?
If you start from the position that you are going to stay then the renogiation is going to be a two way street, and have a low probability of success.
The whole TPP process is a mess. What we got was some weak analysis of the benefits and little on the downside of it. There was no BATNA analysis offered. Helen Clark et al got as far as saying it’s better to be in the tent pissing out, but no further. Countries such as Switzerland have avoided too many treaties and done quite well. Whereas North Korea has also avoided treaties but has not done so well.
NZ blew a raspberry to the USA about nuclear weapons back in the 1980’s and the sky did not fall. Mind you we still have chicken little.
Someone really needs to ask Little those questions.
I’m curious, what do you think Labour should do?
The LP established its 5 points bottom line – a good clear easy to understand position. (And I am not going to go into why the points miss my major concerns.)
The LP has conducted its review of the TPP and decided that these bottom lines have not been achieved – a good clear easy to understand position.
It’s likely that it may be a few years before Labour get to be in the position of renegotiating or cancelling the agreement. This time should be productively spent in:
1. Establishing how to fix the NZ constitutional process where the Executive of one government can substantially modify the sovereignty of NZ without full cross party support or general explicit support of a super-majority of the people; and,
2. Put the partners on notice that withdrawal is an option on the table; and,
3. Undertaking a serious review of the TPP agreement to find out what it actually says and means. (I am surprised when people say that they have read the document and understood it as IMO we will soon have lawyers and academics studying it for years and still having disagreements. Its 6,000 pages are highly unlikely not to contain mistakes, internal contradictions, impossibilities and ambiguities); and,
4. Recasting what the 5 bottom line items are (maybe adding to them); whilst,
5. Cataloguing the successes and failures of TPP as it progresses; then,
6. Measure this catalogue against the yardstick; and if it does not measure up then,
7. Take action by seeking a renegotiation with a 6 month automatic withdrawal attached.
And meanwhile there is a tsunami of shit heading the world’s way in terms of economic and environmental issues. It’s only a matter of when this starts to be felt. So when NZ reaches TPP nirvana in 2030 (getting a 0.7% cumulative lift in economic activity) then my guess we should also be hearing the waves of the tsunami or already in its grips. Good timing.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, this is the kind of thing I had been hoping for.
“Someone really needs to ask Little those questions.”
Looks to the media.
😉
“Why do you think I owe lost sheep an apology?”
As I highlighted above, Little admitted the other day pulling out of the TPP was not something he’s contemplated, thus lost sheep was correct.
But I don’t disagree with that bit and that’s not what I called a lie. I’ve also stated multiple times today that I’ve known since last year that Labour weren’t considering pulling out.
Lost sheep said “They have always supported the TPPA”. That’s a lie. I’ve explained how here,
“and that’s not what I called a lie”
Yet, you quoted it (see above) when doing so (called a lie).
Because I wanted the lie to be in context. You could have asked for clarity. I’ve explained myself extensively so there’s no confusion now.
By doing so, you misled others.
There is no confusion now because I called you on it.
Yeah, nah. Lost sheep wanting to run a line and chose to start with a lie and I called them on it. If you want to make out this is about who is technically correct about a sequence of events, have at it. I don’t give a shit. You could have asked, I would have told you, and in the end you did and I did, so what’s the problem? Weird to be using energy on this when it’s Ls that told the actual lie.
Weka, Labour fully support the principal of a TPPA agreement.
They do not support some of the clauses in the current agreement, but, they have confirmed they will not withdraw from the TPPA.
You have only linked to information that indicates Labours objections to some clauses, and linked to nothing that indicates they are against the TPPA principle itself.
Can you please link to any point at which Labour has said they do not support the TPPA in principal, as opposed to just some specific clauses?
Can you explain to me how confirming they will remain in the TPPA, despite their objections to some clauses indicates that Labour does not support the agreement as a whole?
If you can do both of those I will accept I was mistaken.
Initially, I was merely correcting the false implication you made (by the use of the full quote). You replied, thus dragged the conversation on.
@lost sheep,
Can you please link to any point at which Labour has said they do not support the TPPA in principal, as opposed to just some specific clauses?
You didn’t say in principle, you just said they had always supported the TPPA, and I’ve demonstrated that they haven’t. Yes we can have a semantic argument about that but I think the real difference is that I accept that Labour are pro-free trade but I also know that they were dealing with a secret agreement and an internal civil war and so their approach looks odd to people who don’t take that into account. They’ve gone through various processes and changes in their position precisely because the agreement has been secret and been changing. It makes sense as a pro-free trade party that they would take a pro-TPPA stance so long as certain conditions were met, but it’s pretty clear that back in 2012 there were serious concerns about those conditions.
Labour have been playing the middle game, isn’t that what you want? Remind me, do you think Labour should leave the TPPA if it’s already ratified by next time they are in government?
Can you explain to me how confirming they will remain in the TPPA, despite their objections to some clauses indicates that Labour does not support the agreement as a whole?
Pretty simple, and this has been commented on a fair bit. It’s too difficult to leave once in. I don’t hear Labour saying oh the deal is great except for these five things. I hear Labour saying there are serious problems with this deal and there are serious problems with getting out of it. Of course that message comes out in a strangled way because of the neoliberal/left wing split in the party. So while I feel that Labour have been pretty consistent within their own kaupapa over the past few years I can understand that others feel differently.
btw, the difficulty of leaving once in is an issue for the GP too IMO. I don’t know what NZF are thinking. Anyone?
@TC, ah, I forgot you like to have the last word. Have at it mate.
This is the Chris Trotter who today proclaimed
right?
That old dinosaur should be put out of his misery before he starts soiling himself in public.
This is a good example of why science and commerce are not to be trusted until they are brought under the control of a third part of society that puts ethics and nature first. In the absence of the precautionary principle, we are currently
gamblingplaying Russian Roulette with some pretty basic fundamentals of life.Zika is one of the emerging new illnesses associated with human-manipulated environments. It causes birth defects when contracted during pregnancy. 11 cases in NZ so far.
http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2987024/pandoras_box_how_gm_mosquitos_could_have_caused_brazils_microcephaly_diasaster.html
Brazil is one of the biggest GMO experiments on planet, earth and has had toxic chemicals sprayed over its environment and populations for a generation
The mosquitoes are an extension of the experiment being waged against human rights
Zika has been known of for generations, with few to none ill effects
Nope, zika found it’s way out of Africa in the sixties and thanks to aedes aegypti has spread through the Americas.
Which part of my comment are you disagreeing with, specifically ?
In Africa, where a majority have an immunity developed over many generations.
Not so in the Americas where in little more than a generation aedes aegypti has spread the virus through a large youthful population with an exceptionally high birth rate and no immunity.
Did you read the article joe? I’d be interested in your thoughts on it.
The author suggests a mutated virus in Brazil is causing previously unheard of effects…and then I scrolled down….
Author’s note 2: I’m grateful to David Murphy for carrying out this work, and to James Babcock for drawing it to my attention. It appears that the hypothesis set out above is probably incorrect, and this must be a matter of considerable relief to all concerned.
The sentence regarding Zika, was independent of the sentences concerning genetic experimentation in Brazil
The impacts of genetic experimentation over extended periods of time in Brazil, are largely missing from the mainstream discussion
‘The virus’ is the primary fascination, once again. At the exclusion of logic and rationale, from what I can tell
Change of topic folks – Bomber on TDB has just announced he is going to go into competition with Seven Sharp on TV1 and the other show on TV3 with Heather duPlessis Allan at 7pm. It will be live on his site at 7.01 – but its early yet and he is going to announce more later about it.
So we will have an alternative current affairs programme we can go to after John Campbell on Channel 50 each night. What mana from heaven I told Bomber. Can’t wait.
He should stick to providing advice and policy to politicians. Oh, wait… maybe not. 30 minutes of bitter, anti-everything, frothing and ranting is something that I (and 99.99% of the population) will be giving a wide birth.
Ben what a sour puss you are. Don’t you think it would be nice for a change to get some balance into our daily news. Who wants to be fed with constant drivel about sports stars, film stars, your precious leader who can do no wrong, even saints you know do wrong – what’s your beef – so one-eyed you cannot see there are always two sides to anything at all. Your precious government does lots of things which are wrong but if MSM media has anything to do with it nobody in the population gets the opportunity to be informed. What do you want? a dictatorship in this country. Do we have to go back into history and meet in halls or listen to speakers on soap boxes like they do in Hyde Park (or do you even know about Hyde Park) to hear some truth of the matter. Get a grip Ben – all Bomber is trying to do is get some balance and less of the daily tripe we have shoved in our faces each night. You call Bomber a raving leftie – what on earth is your Government if not a raving Right Wing mish mash. What a loser you are and not too intelligent upstairs if you cannot see my argument.
You lost me when you used the word “balance” in relation to Martyn Bradbury.
The MSM in this country is in a sad state, but you can rest assured that the socialist dribblings of MB won’t make it any better.
p.s it is not “my” Government, it is our Government – that’s right, yours too.
Unfortunately, as I didn’t vote for it and I sleep at night because I didn’t.
You couldn’t do half Bomber’s shit Ben so shut your stoopid mouth. None of you Tory trolls could !
Hi Colonial Viper
+ a Billion
Thankyou for informing us that the flawed TPPA is the fault of the Labour Party.
Your insight into these things is extraordinary. But then, you have the advantage of having the brain of a full time Buffoon. Utter Nonsense dribbles constantly from your twisted mouth like a crazed dog.
This.
Dear Observer (Tokoroa)
I’m afraid you went to sleep on the job, and failed to observe fully as required. This is to advise you that your contract to observe and inform us fully and truthfully has been terminated, though you may like to continue your style of colourfully abusive diatribe, which is very amusing.
edited
Cv speaks a lot of sense re the hypocracy of labour, that’s where it ends though
What did Labour say about the TPPA? All the fragments of comment, when put together like a jigsaw, do they make a coherent whole? Or is it one of those odd results that we need an Aristotle to explain.
Quote by Aristotle: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”
But is this argument about Labour and TPPA a Reductio ad absurdum?
Wikipedia may provide the answer but I’m not going to read it because I want to listen to Monty Python because it is more fun than the argument that is going nowhere, and isn’t going to solve anything anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
What if the whole is actually lesser than the sum of its parts as it seems to be?
Time to take a break as we sink into The Philosophers’ Song with Monty Python done Oz style.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtgKkifJ0Pw
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11585707
The Gauche One fretting about the image of cock meeting cock at Waitangi…..gone all around the world etc etc, appalling, blah, pearls, clutched ! Guess he’s not looking forward to the call from some dictator mate calling him a pussy cos’ no summary execution.
No Mr Preen Minster. It was you, the cock that started hauling NZ around the world, makin’ us look like cocks too (cos you’re our Preen Minster)…….it’s that that started it, years ago.
As I’ve always reminded myself…..what the fuck is (self-perceived) venerable Old Auckland Money thinking about this Gauche Nouveau ?
Yep. PM thinks the dildo was appalling! Tut tut. Hypocrisy anyone. Hair pulling. Soap. Dodgy personal habits. He laughs at his own funny behaviour. What a clown making international headlines.
But now Key sucks a lemon.
Yeah, something touched a nerve there.
But there’s something about uptight rightwingers and toy dicks. There’s been a couple of meltdowns now. The Mundy boy lost it in fine style and it was all down hill for them from there… http://usuncut.com/news/watch-jon-ritzheimer-oregon-militia-leader-goes-berserk-over-mailed-in-dildos-and-bags-of-dicks/
I thought Joyce took it very well, and by his twitter invitation, seeing it as the theatre that sometimes occurs on that Marae on 5/2
@ greywarshark
I did not intend to abuse the viper. Merely wanted to draw attention to his stupidity.
Colonial Viper forever echos his hero John Key. They both shout constantly the mantra “It’s Labour’s Fault”
It’s Labour’s Fault
It’s Labour’s Fault
It’s Labour’s Fault
He is one of John Key’s rented trolls. Part of the Key rented troll assylum. Viper exceeds Hosking. Hooton, Garner, Slater, Farrar, English and Fanny Herald.
Mere screaming teeny weeny toddlers the lot of them.
cv simply highlights labour and little angry Andy hypocracy and false pretext, this may make you uncomfortable but some times the truth hurts
Oh dear , Mr.Key feels awkward about images of the sex toy/Joyce going around the world. He forgets to feel awkward about signing the treaty under NZers noses, the day before Waitangi day, without even discussing it with us.
Charming!
Not feeling remotely awkward about molesting a young waitress numerous times or publicly advocating peeing in the shower – EWW – Hypocrisy is Mr Key’s game of choice it seems! So embarrassed that a sex toy found it’s way to Stevie’s “moosh”, yet not embarrassed that his repeated molestation of a young waitress went global! An attitude a certain older man who was a French high official would no doubt relate to.
What kind of discussion do you suggest, the election was the discussion
A discussion about how National are prepared to do what Europe is refusing, i.e to trade sovereignty for a few bucks, would you accept a 1% pay rise in 15 years and agree to any decisions you make about your future be subject to secret off shore tribunals, with no right of appeal?
Lets face it if National were honest about their corporate welfare policies, they would not have been voted in anyway, so your point is irrelevant.
On Assange, Following the Rules or Flouting Them?
Actually, this is exactly what I would expect from them. The powerful think that rules are there simply to punish those that they don’t like. They certainly don’t think that the rules apply to them.
God……Trev’ of The Herald’s a wanker is she not ?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11585729
Surprised she didn’t fix it so she was down at the Nines witnessing and excitedly reporting Mr Gauche publicly gagging on successive American hotdogs. Rather than the dull old business of up North experiencing an actual ‘Waitangi Day’. Waitangi Day the way people actually do it up here in the whiningly announced absence of an effete wannabee Yank. Who’s sniffing out Shaun Johnson down Aux right now.
Shaun Johnson’ll be the next unfortunate target…..you watch. The ‘can’t-himself-do’ criminal banker just loves sucking on the sap of NZ heroes. Guess you can demand anything you want when you’ve got that Preen Minster/John Key conjunction.
Bit wickedly vampirish though……what ?
Saw the prick on the box cuddling up to Mal Meninga too.
It’s a child in large parts of its being.
Jk seemed quite popular with the punters at the nines didn’t he