Revised TPPA to be signed?

Written By: - Date published: 8:08 am, January 24th, 2018 - 218 comments
Categories: Economy, Free Trade, greens, jacinda ardern, labour, overseas investment, Politics, trade - Tags: , , ,

It appears that the revised TPPA agreement (now known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement) may be signed in March after Canadian concerns have been satisfied.

From Radio New Zealand:

The revised Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement is to be signed in March, the Trade Minister has confirmed.

Australia’s Trade Minister, Steve Ciobo, said the 11 nations, including New Zealand, are “finally at the finish line” following talks between officials in Tokyo.

Canada walked away from the 11-nation deal in November, but has since had several issues resolved.

Mr Ciobo said the pact would eliminate more than 98 percent of tariffs in the free-trade zone.

A spokesperson for the Minister for Trade, David Parker, has confirmed to RNZ that 8 March was the target for the signing.

Japan Economy Minister Toshimitsu Motegi said trade ministers would attend a signing ceremony in Chile in March.

He said the new agreement would be an “engine to overcome protectionism”.

The TPP was going to include the United States before Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in one of his first acts as President.

The rebranded the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), covers nearly 500 million people and the 11 countries involved make up 14 percent of global economic activity, or about $US10 trillion.

How does the new agreement compare to the TPPA?  Again from Radio New Zealand quoting Steven Jacobi:

He said it was a less problematic deal than the initial one.

“It suspends a number of the more problematic areas of TPP, particularly intellectual property provisions and some aspects of the investor state settlement that was very controversial in New Zealand.

“It’s taken the hard edge off TPP … in those areas.”

The new agreement will pose interesting issues for the Government, particularly if the changes are not sufficient to make the agreement acceptable to the Greens.  Everything will depend on the detail.

218 comments on “Revised TPPA to be signed?”

  1. Anon 1

    Annnd when Trump’s outed in ~3 years and the USA wants back in, what happens to those ‘suspended’ provisions???

    • Sacha 1.1

      Exactly. More kicking the can down the road, just like on climate change. Given the gutless plonkers who led most of our renegotiation, that’s no surprise.

      • Peter 1.1.1

        now you know why i did not vote labour, left wing my arse.

        • Anon 1.1.1.1

          They suckered me in with abortion reform, but they’re not doing anything yet so…

        • Sacha 1.1.1.2

          (the Nat ministers did most of it before they were dumped)

          • Sam 1.1.1.2.1

            (I’m just going to straight copy & pasta a reply I put up on The Daily Blog because I can’t be arsed writing something new up… https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/12/05/breaking-the-daily-blog-to-livestream-tppa-meeting-6pm-tonight/#comment-410066 )

            First off the government is engaging in R&D tax credits and infrastructure bonds to fill the missing $14bln capital expenditure. And I’ll come back to this.

            Secondly Macroeconomist say New Zealand is growing 3% year on year, give or take. And open up the books at the micro level, it’s a totally different picture. Totally close economy, barley even trading in minimum nutritional values. So hardly any trade there. Also our education system is designed to supply urban life. It’s not designed to supply non urban settings and be able to produce. There aren’t any clear rulz of engagement and division between the crown and the markets we trade in including abroad. Infact we’ve spent the last 9 years creating public private partnerships and the savage markets win all the time.

            Obviously you want markets to give you good set ups to put “infrastructure bonds” (those are Jacinda and Robertsons words not mine) into and that’s where this is where the bond markets come in. Bonds are great for those trading in accounts that need one winner covering all loses. So we don’t want to order stuff and have no one filling it. We really do need them to pay off (this is partly the recently announced Luxury Train Project being built from the carriage up in Christchurch I believe) and that means checking to see if people buy into the kiwi dream. We don’t want them to get to retirement only to relies it was all a scam.

            NZ both imports and exports oil because there’s different grades of it; sour cheap oil which is then refined which frees up higher quality oil to be exported. This could become a closed cycle and to a significant degree left unbought, unsold, un-refined, and unburnt. Plus it snowballs, of course. In spite of having stepped up oil explorations, NZ imports an ever greater amount of Middle East oil and gas. And I can’t say hand on hart that James Shaw raising oil royalties to the international 72% average is a bad thing.

            Same goes for Chinese dump steel. Hand on hart is taxing the shit out of harmful products with free range over adverts a bad thing? For me nah. I’d actually be quite happy with a domestic 1 for 1 replacement programme for all capital infrastructure.

            Under the old TPPA government most or all of this would have been sourced offshore for reasons only known to a drunk old liptard who lost New Zealand’s only TPPA negotiating text late one night and had to hold himself up in New Zealand U.S embassy.

            So there is a sunrise difference from the previous government and the current one.

  2. James 2

    Excellent news.

  3. Enough is Enough 3

    What a pile of horse shit.

    This government was elected partly in response to the undemocratic way this terrible deal was negotiated. Corporate New Zealand is celebrating this announcement which is all you need to know about who is going to benefit.

    Why did we change the government if they are going to continue down this same daft path of providing for the 1%.

    • BM 3.1

      Babies,Babies,Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies, Babies,Babies,

      No one cares about the TPPA.

      Babies

    • Ed 3.2

      We only have tweedledee and tweedledum as our 2 main choices.
      Neoliberal globalisation version 1 or neoliberal globalisation version 2.

      As Steve Cowan posted Marx was right

      http://nzagainstthecurrent.blogspot.co.nz/2018/01/inequality-marx-was-right.html?m=1

      • james 3.2.1

        As you wanted to Boycott the charities Alzheimer’s society and Kids heart, it does not surprise me that you are a fan of Marx

        http://www.wnd.com/2004/12/28036/

        The killing machine that is Marxism.

        “In total, Marxist regimes murdered nearly 110 million people from 1917 to 1987.”

        The caring left

        • Molly 3.2.1.1

          ““In total, Marxist regimes murdered nearly 110 million people from 1917 to 1987.””

          I read your link. It attributes all deaths in the author’s own category of Marxist countries as murder – whether caused by starvation or other means. Not well thought out really.

          People starve and are dispossessed in capitalist countries as well.

          In addition, you could quite easily trace the impact capitalism has on other countries – that are not capitalists – which results in dispossession of land and natural resources, war and famine. The total would climb considerably.

          After all, capitalists can be very efficient and decisive when it comes to reaching beyond their borders to kill. They do have so much practice at it.

          • Hornet 3.2.1.1.1

            Molly your references are to the impacts of wars. Wars are fought in the name of numerous ‘isms’, but that is not the fault of those ‘isms, per se. On the other hand, socialist/communist ideologies are out on their own when it comes to murder, starvation, human rights abuses, the list goes on. If you seriously support Marxism, you are either ignorant of it’s excesses, or you are a deluded fool.

            • Molly 3.2.1.1.1.1

              James, starts off with an unqualified “Marxism” kills, without anyone else referring to it. I pointed out the irrelevance of his redirect, and inaccuracy of his figures.

              To emphasise – I counterpointed, but as you have responded with further waffle to that instead of addressing the original post about the TPPA, I think we’ll leave it, OK?

        • adam 3.2.1.2

          You know there is a difference from using Marx as a tool of analysis, and being a marxist ah james?

          But no use the big tar brush – fair enough then you nazi tool.

          See how fast it descends into a Godwin.

          A Godwin analysis should really apply to the right and their constant red spector Marxist boogie man, crap.

          • james 3.2.1.2.1

            we normally use the term communist as opposed to marxist when using your tar brush – ay Comrade.

          • patricia bremner 3.2.1.2.2

            Or dancing cossacks!!

          • Tuppence Shrewsbury 3.2.1.2.3

            “You know there is a difference from using Marx as a tool of analysis, and being a marxist ah james?

            But no use the big tar brush – fair enough then you nazi tool.

            See how fast it descends into a Godwin.

            A Godwin analysis should really apply to the right and their constant red spector Marxist boogie man, crap.”

            My my, how strong the hypocrisy is in this one. If someone uses free market economics as a tool of analysis their a neo-lib rwnj who likes the fact there are poor people.

            • McFlock 3.2.1.2.3.1

              Well, yeah.

              Because Marx described the economic problems well, but neolibs don’t.

              Where Marx fell down was using hegelian dialectic to make politico-economic predictions, because it’s almost as shit as neoliberal fantasy.

              But describing the social conflict and alienation caused by capitalism, Marx was bang on – which is more than can be said for Freidman.

        • joe90 3.2.1.3

          Apples with apples – you’re proffering world nut daily as reputable so fuck it, a Maoist view of the caring face of capitalism.

          https://maoistrebelnews.com/2012/03/16/1-6-billion-killed-by-capitalism/

          btw, the caring face of British.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule

    • alwyn 3.3

      Did you vote for them?
      Did you think they would really scrap the deal and leave us out in the cold?
      Are you now regretting that vote?
      We are just getting the same sensible policies but they are being introduced by a group of incompetents.
      It was certainly time for a change of Government. Nine years is always enough. The problem we have is that there was no capable alternative.

      • Enough is Enough 3.3.1

        I voted Green

        I accept your point though that the competency of this new government is questionable.

        • Michelle 3.3.1.1

          I think we need to give them a chance after 9 years of lies, broken promises, destroying our welfare state, selling more of our assets, increasing gst, huge breaches of privacy, increasing inequalities, wasting millions on a flag and wasting more millions on temporary motels for the poor with no proper solution to the housing conundrum we desperately needed a change of government. As for the Greens they need to rebuild the gnats took them out just like they took Winny out a few elections ago. The tories had there turn and they did exactly what they always do, make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Winny made the right decision why would he go with a group that did everything possible to try and get rid of him.

          • Enough is Enough 3.3.1.1.1

            Yeah. The Nats did exactly what they intended to do. Make the rich richer.

            That made them a very competent government. They achieved what they set out to do.

            Our current government needs to reverse that, and make this an equal society. Do they have the competency to do that?

            Signing up to something they have opposed would suggest not

      • We are just getting the same sensible policies but they are being introduced by a group of incompetents.

        Incompetent policies introduced by ideologues.

        The problem we have is that there was no capable alternative.

        No, the problem we have is that there’s no change from one to the other. The only party that’s not out to screw over NZ for the benefits of the rich and multi-national corporations is the Greens.

    • indiana 3.4

      Wasn’t the Youthquake meant to stop this?

      • Stuart Munro 3.4.1

        The ‘youthquake’ never happened here – it was lazy journalists copying a term from Corbynite Britain without bothering to determine if it was relevant locally. They tried the same thing with ‘captain’s call’ but couldn’t make it stick.

    • You_Fool 3.5

      The Labour party were always clear no their position on the TPPA (version whatever). The latest version is reported to meet those requirements so it shouldn’t be a surprise that it was signed.

      You might have expected something from NZF and The Greens, but then again they were only ~12%ish of the vote, enough to tip the balance, but not enough to demand complete change of tact (esp. when the only other viable option for governing was all for the TPPA as it stood, which was worse), so really the outcome as has happened was to be expected.

      To move away from this path, we need more to vote for an actual change. Labour and National are the same framework, but National focus on improving outcomes for (big) businesses, whilst Labour focus on improved outcomes for people. Even the Greens and NZF sort of play in the same playground, but at least they recognise the need to get new equipment

  4. Incognito 4

    This will be a good test of this Government’s promises to be (more) accountable and transparent and either take the people with them or continue on the well-trodden path of obfuscation and secrecy.

    For a bit of balance: http://103.14.3.1/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018629229/tpp-agreed-in-japan-we-need-to-see-details-jane-kelsey

  5. savenz 5

    Sad day.

    They could eliminate more than 98 percent of tariffs in the free-trade zone, they don’t need to screw over local people in the rest of the world with all the other 5599 pages.

    • james 5.1

      It cannot be a shock can it? – after all TPP was discussed during the election run up and Labour were very clear and transparent about what they were doing, and enough voted for them.

      • Anon 5.1.1

        I don’t remember that. Maybe because I figured we’d get screwed every which way by on most issues by either party (yes, either) and so voted for abortion law reform instead – a promise which has so far being ignored.

        What I should have remembered at the time and didn’t, is that Labour started the TPPA negotiations in the first place…

      • savenz 5.1.2

        Just like the high country sell offs, the governments don’t understand what they are signing and the effects of it. People are not economic systems and nor is the environment. The ability to adapt quickly in changing times is something that will not be able to be achieved with TPPA. It is a stone around countries necks to benefit a few.

      • weka 5.1.3

        “after all TPP was discussed during the election run up and Labour were very clear and transparent about what they were doing, and enough voted for them.”

        No they weren’t. They’ve changed their position a number of times in the past 3 years, and in the election campaign they took a ‘trust us we know what we are doing’ approach rather than a transparent one.

  6. Stunned Mullet 6

    Let’s see the deal before celebrating or wailing.

    • Anon 6.1

      /That’s the point/. This’ll get signed or not waaaay before we ever get to see it.

      • Stunned Mullet 6.1.1

        Yep more than likely. I’d still prefer to see what’s in this agreement to see if it’s significantly better/worse than previously before celebrating or wailing.

        • Gosman 6.1.1.1

          The question is why is it still being negotiated in secret? I thought this was an issue for many members of the Labour party and NZ First.

          • james 6.1.1.1.1

            Im pretty sure many of their MPs marched against it for that very reason.

            But – I expected nothing less from Labour.

            #LowExpectations

    • cleangreen 6.2

      I agree stunned mullet;

      We must see the terms of the final agreement first, where’s the “transparency”???

      I don’t trust any politician who holds back the details and uses simple ‘throw away words like “taken the hard edges off the agreement”

      I want to see the details first as if we don’t then we cannot determine if this deal is actually good or bad for us all.

      Never sign an agreement before you understand all the ramifications firstly is what labour need to be sure of for our future.

      What about the water tax from giving away all our best deep aquifer water to foreigners??????

      Fools the lot of them here.

  7. Gosman 7

    Are people here happy with the level of secrecy around this? I thought that was a big issue with the old TPPA.

    • james 7.1

      its only an issue when National do it.

      • You_Fool 7.1.1

        Yeah, it’s not like there is a post about this with 30+ comments on it complaining about the deal and the secrecy of it all and if it is a bad deal for NZ. When will the Standard put up a post like that eh? They did it all the time about National…..

    • Enough is Enough 7.2

      Yes it is an issue.

      That is why the vast majority of the left leaning comments on here are very negative.

      • Gosman 7.2.1

        The question then becomes why do you think the current government is behaving similar to the old one in relation to negotiation secrecy?

        • cleangreen 7.2.1.1

          Good point Gosman.

          Why trust any politician who is only there for a short time while this agreement will go on for 25 plus years.

  8. Son of Don 8

    This must be “backdown” number 4 or 5 (lies is another terminolo) following the rhetoric from the left pre election and the reality from the left post election.
    Trees, houses, Select Committees, TPPA; the list will go on for the CoL and it’s programme of promised Nirvana but really is BS.

  9. RedLogix 9

    The TPPA is one of those transitional global arrangements which are bound to arise. In a world dominated and dependent on trade between nations, rules that transcend national boundaries are essential and inevitable.

    And rules around intellectual property are a necessary part of this; it’s no more reasonable that a nation should act against the private interests of a foreign national, than those of their own citizens. Running away from this question progresses nothing.

    • Andre 9.2

      Yes, it would be a good thing if rules around intellectual property became standardised and enforceable across national boundaries. As long as they are fair and reasonable.

      But what is fair and reasonable about extending copyright to 70 years after the author’s death? That simply extends a little bit of rentier income to the author’s heirs, and a much bigger rentier income to the publisher, which is usually a large multinational. (Disclosure of interest: my family continues to benefit from copyright royalties on my grandfather’s work, who died before I was born). That 70 year term also stands in marked contrast to the patent terms on inventions, which are generally around 20 years or so.

      We still need to see the actual agreement to check if other objectionable provisions remain, such as an ISDS with unaccountable revolving-door tribunals staffed with corporate lawyers.

    • SPC 9.3

      Sure, but where IP converges with (unregulated) monopoly and huge profits and tax havens this enables a huge growth in inequality (between capital and labour).

      Free trade without international action in these other areas is dubious – and that is on top of the basic truth free trade maximises the return to capital and diminishes return to labour.

      People will cite the benefit to lower wage nations that derive from job transfer (reduced GDP per capita gap between nations) but at the same time first world wages fall compared to property values (because more of the first world value is now held by capital and not labour). So while third world wages rise, first world home ownership falls.

  10. james 10

    “The new Government will suffer a serious blow to its integrity if it proceeds to endorse an agreement that its three parties have previously opposed.

    Jane Kelsey a professor of law at Auckland University”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11940926

    yet here we are again. And of course there has been none of the promised openness and transparency promised.

    • Wayne 10.1

      So says Jane, but in truth not many other people are of the same view. Except the majority of Standardnistas.

      Most New Zealanders would be quite concerned (to the extent that they actually worry about such things) if New Zealand was outside of an agreement covering most of our Asia Pacific trade partners.

      I presume there have been some changes around investor state disputes but that the fundamentals of the deal negotiated prior to Trump remain intact. I wonder how much Canada actually got? I imagine not actually that much, or else the deal would become a bit hollow.

      • weka 10.1.1

        “So says Jane, but in truth not many other people are of the same view. Except the majority of Standardnistas.”

        and all the people that protested and signed petitions. And those whose voices we haven’t heard from yet.

        Nice try at marginalising though.

      • Stuart Munro 10.1.2

        Yes – your colleagues went to great lengths to avoid a public airing of the contents, they didn’t even perform a genuine cost benefit analysis. So, with a servile media, this wretched farce could actually proceed.

        It’s just a shame that we’ve had politicians so ashamed of their failures they lie to the public instead of negotiating for better terms.

        Australia did rather well out of a separate deal with Japan, but of course the Gnats were too slow on the uptake to pursue anything comparable on our behalf.

        That said, it’s the issue that got the most people marching to oppose it this decade. That would matter in a democracy, but under the entitled vermin who have misgoverned NZ for the last few decades public assent is not wanted. The public good is the last thing on the troughers’ minds.

      • swordfish 10.1.3

        My 2016 TPPA Poll analysis (with breakdowns by Party support)

        https://sub-z-p.blogspot.co.nz/2016/01/tppa.html

        https://sub-z-p.blogspot.co.nz/2016/02/flagtppa-update-latest-colmar-brunton.html

        3 News Reid Research (Nov 2015)
        Oppose TPPA
        (Breakdowns by Party Support)

        NZF Voters 87%
        Green Voters 84%
        Lab Voters 73%
        Nat Voters 23%

        1 News Colmar Brunton (Sep 2015)
        Oppose TPPA
        (Breakdowns by Party Support)

        Green Voters 82%
        NZF Voters 73%
        Lab Voters 53%
        Nat Voters 26%

        • Stunned Mullet 10.1.3.1

          Thx Swordfish.

        • Ad 10.1.3.2

          In one of your links the questions put were entirely about how much of an impact TPPA would have “on our sovereignty”. No other measure was used about whether they supported it or not. That’s a really biased way to get a sample on the public opinion about the now-defunct TPP.

          Your other link has its latest poll data from January 2016, which is 2 years ago. Pretty stale.

          I don’t see facts to support Wayne’s assertion either.

          Better to have less leading questions and an opinion from the public that represents the CPTPP plus the new government response to it.

    • cleangreen 10.2

      true that is Jaames unfortunately.

      David Parker is not a very nice person as he has not fronted here to assure us that all our concerns are met in this final; agreement not just bullshit as he did before.

    • Ad 10.3

      The comms is still shit from MFAT.

      The TVNZ coverage tonight is led by English and it’s all about the secrecy.

      Such an easy hit from the Opposition when the new gvoernment is trying to look slightly improved on governance and information transparency.

      https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/release-text-bill-english-wants-details-new-cptpp-deal-released-sign-respect-national

      Given that much of the early TPP version was entirely to benefit agribusiness industries including ours, it would be great if Federated Farmers and Fonterra had the balls to front to tv on this. But nah.

  11. infused 11

    I’m sure you will all be out in mass-protest.

    • Anon 11.1

      Yeah, I actually don’t agree with blocking roads though. And when/if it happens I’ll probably be at work.

  12. The new agreement will pose interesting issues for the Government

    We can watch their support drop starting now.

    Why do our governments keep doing what we don’t want?

    • Stunned Mullet 12.1

      I doubt there’s enough people who give a damn to change the level of support at the next poll and if there is just mention babies.

    • cleangreen 12.2

      Draco, sadly looking at David Parker I am not confident that he is straight up with us all over this now.

      Answer to your question; ‘Because they are taking a bribe?’

      • Molly 12.2.1

        David Parker spoke at a TPPA protest in Queen Street, and his speech can be best described as “slick”.

        Despite the thousands of people present giving him an opportunity to address the issues spoken of by Jane Kelsey just before him, he spent five minutes saying nothing of worth, and just basking in the attention.

        Present at the protest, but not part of it.

        When attending the rushed select committee hearings, the Labour MP’s present had the same dismissive attitude. One of the main reasons I voted Green last election.

        Not only had I seen no indication that they would address the concerns around the TPPA, my feeling was that they would be just as keen as National to sign up. That suspicion appears to be vindicated.

    • infused 12.3

      This is when you realize your echo chamber is the minority.

      • No. This is when we realise that we live in a dictatorship and not a democracy.

        The majority of people do not want the TPPA.

        IMO, the majority of people have never wanted neo-liberalism. They’ve just never had a choice about it as the governments implemented it against the wishes of the people.

  13. Puckish Rogue 13

    So as I posted yesterday this government seems to be a more open to compromise which leads to me to think that a change in government maybe won’t be a big a deal as first thought

    Helen Clark took Labour centre-left, John Key shifted back to centre-right and now Jacinda has moved it back to centre-left and good on her as thats where the majority of people want NZ to be, in the centre not hard left or hard right

    So well done Jacinda and if decisions like this keep happening and Labour win the next election (as they’re likely to do) I’ll be ok with it

    • weka 13.1

      (I’ve left a note for you at the bottom of OM).

    • Helen Clark took Labour centre-right, John Key shifted back to hard-right and now Jacinda has moved it back to centre-right and good on her as thats where the majority of people businesses want NZ to be, in the centre not hard left or hard right

      FTFY

      Of course, Reality has a Hard Left bias. It is only on the Hard Left that we can find sustainability.

      • Puckish Rogue 13.2.1

        Naah i disagree, National raised some benefits, which would seem strange for a hard right government, also while they added some employment laws they also didn’t outlaw unions nor was corporate tax lowered massively

        • Hornet 13.2.1.1

          National is no more ‘hard right’ than Labour are ‘hard left’. Both are essentially centrist parties, who in government contain the excesses of their fringes for the sake of electoral survival.

          • Stuart Munro 13.2.1.1.1

            Selling off land, universal surveillance, driving people to suicide, burgeoning homelessness and open slather on low-wage migrants – the only way the Gnats could be further right would be with concentration camps. And SERCO was halfway there.

              • cleangreen

                Labour still need to carry out there regional development program and get our public owned rail going again.

                The roads are now jammed full of monster killing trucks so driving is so dangerous.

                Now i need to take a train but the whole East Coast of North island has no rail passenger service or in many parts no freight services either to take the trucks off the roads!!!!

                “lets do-this” labour.

            • Hornet 13.2.1.1.1.2

              The government, no government, drives people to suicide. NZ has also never had ‘open slather’ immigration. Your continued hyperbole just makes your arguments look silly.

              On the other hand, national raised benefits (for the first time in 30 years), maintained WFF, and the welfare system. That’s all really far right stuff there.

              • The government, no government, drives people to suicide.

                https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/87347930/aggressive-prosecution-focus-at-msd-preceded-womans-death-inquest-told
                https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/87527119/woman-found-dead-had-not-committed-benefit-fraud
                http://www.unite.org.nz/winz_bosses_murder_a_beneficiary_paula_bennet_is_responsible

                That’s a person driven to suicide by the National led government.

                NZ has also never had ‘open slather’ immigration.

                You would be wrong. There wasn’t any laws on immigration in the first few decades after the signing on Ti Tiriti.

                That said, you obviously missed the bit about it being on low wage jobs. And the cap on seasonal workers just keeps going up.

                On the other hand, national raised benefits (for the first time in 30 years),

                That’s actually a lie. National raised some benefits by a variable amount.

                maintained WFF, and the welfare system. That’s all really far right stuff there.

                Yes it is. WfF is a subsidy to businesses paying below subsistence wages.

                Welfare is a way to prevent bloody revolution due to the poverty caused by capitalism. National used it as a stick to beat poor people with to cause even more deprivation so as to lower taxes for the rich.

                • Hornet

                  Suicide is not caused by government policies, and none of your references support your contention. If you seriously think the cause of suicide is that simple, you have zero understanding.

                  WFF is a massive redistribution exercise. It is not a subsidy. And not all WFF recipients work for businesses.

                  And National did raise benefits, whatever your spin. https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/68742199/budget-2015-benefits-rise-in-bid-to-tackle-child-poverty
                  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11452700

                  • If you seriously think the cause of suicide is that simple, you have zero understanding.

                    Stress is always a major aggravating factor in suicide and WINZ, as part of National’s policy of Beneficiary Bashing, had caused massive stress upon the person pushing her to suicide.

                    So, yeah, National put in place policies that caused at least one person to suicide.

                    WFF is a massive redistribution exercise. It is not a subsidy.

                    Yes it is and that’s what makes it a subsidy from the workers to the business. The business should be paying enough for people to live on without the government subsidy.

                    And National did raise benefits, whatever your spin.

                    It’s not spin – simply the facts:

                    What seems a top up of a benefit will only really leave few better off, and most no better off. It is just another English con job by our Finance Minister and this government.

                    • Hornet

                      “Stress is always a major aggravating factor in suicide…”

                      That is a very different claim to a Government “driving people to suicide”.

                      “So, yeah, National put in place policies that caused at least one person to suicide.”

                      Policies don’t cause suicide. And your own comment above differentiates between ‘aggravating factors’ and ’cause’. I know of cases where women have committed suicide after an abortion. Do you suggest we condemn all abortions?

                      “The business should be paying enough for people to live on without the government subsidy.”

                      Businesses are paying what the market demands. You could argue all welfare payments to working people are a subsidy. You would still be wrong.

                      “It’s not spin – simply the facts:”
                      Based on an opinion piece on TS?
                      Try some better sources.
                      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11452700
                      https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/68742199/budget-2015-benefits-rise-in-bid-to-tackle-child-poverty

              • Stuart Munro

                Denial and window dressing.

                But of course it’s not merely the right wingery that made the Key Kleptocracy NZ’s worst government in living memory – the sheer scale of the corruption was unprecedented. It was as if the rule of law had never existed.

                • Stunned Mullet

                  🙄 this kind of daft commentary tends to give you the appearance of a fool Stuart is that what you’re going for ?

                  If so I think you’re doing yourself an injustice.

                  • Sam

                    National Party Policy makes sense when you consider John Key raised public debt by about $50bln for the benefit of foreign rent seekers…

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      Thanks Sam that adds a lot to the discussion.

                    • Sam

                      Lets assume I care about your opinion. Jacinda gets max publicity, then give the $ to kiwis & get maximum virtuous exposure and her polls go up. The outrage mob will simply make her look better. Imagine if she charged $100 a ticket and announced she was giving it to David Farar for new toys. Still outrage

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      Thanks Sam that’s brilliant, let’s hear some more.

                    • Sam

                      I’m not here for your entertainment, Mullet.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      Maybe not, I do however find you quite entertaining.

                  • Stuart Munro

                    Let’s see a forensic audit of Brownlee’s peculations in Christchurch, Mullet. Then we can decide what’s daft – turning a blind eye to corruption or rooting it out and making an example of the malefactors. Napier was rebuilt in two years – Brownlee’s little corruption fest couldn’t do it in seven.

                    • Hornet

                      If you have proof of corruption, beyond your delusional ramblings, I suggest you present it to the relevant authorities.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      It’s not my job to pursue it Hornet – that’s a job for the (chronically understaffed) fraud squad.

                      But on the subject of delusional ramblings, your reckons on socialism rate pretty highly.

                      Why do you backward RWNJ come here with such pitiable crap? It belongs on whaleoil with the rest of the sound and fury.

                    • Hornet

                      “It’s not my job to pursue it Hornet ”

                      Yes, it is. You have implied corruption, a serious charge indeed. I would expect you to have proof?

                    • Stuart Munro

                      Well it’s as much your job as mine Hornet. Two of Brownlee’s CERA were successfully prosecuted for corruption, and word among the trades is that Southern Response is even worse. It’s not a hypothetical. Brownlee routinely mixes in extremely corrupt company – these are the kinds of staff he finds sympatico. And the ruins that dot Christchurch seven years after the event are testament to the fact that the funding for repairs is not reaching down far enough to actually get the repairs done.

                      But you of course don’t actually give a monkey’s about any of that – you’re just trying in your pitiful troll way, to deflect the argument back on to me instead of addressing the grievous shortcomings of the most corrupt administration ever to blight New Zealand. Because those corrupt ratbags are ‘your team’. You love them. You aspire to be one of them.

                • Hornet

                  What utter nonsense. But typical of most of your posts.

            • patricia bremner 13.2.1.1.1.3

              13.2.1.1.1 Yes Stuart, and getting that neo-liberal ship turned is a hugely complicated task, with many competing voices. We will not be able to drop this treaty, as it was agreed to. All we have done is change/nobble some of its worst features.

          • Puckish Rogue 13.2.1.1.2

            Agreed, Jacinda looks to have learnt off John Key and he learned off Helen Clark. NZers (ok its a bit of a generalisation) want centrist governments not extremes

        • Draco T Bastard 13.2.1.2

          National raised some benefits, which would seem strange for a hard right government

          They put in place the possibility of some people on some benefits maybe getting more while telling people (ie, lying about it) that they’d raised benefits by $25.

          Exactly what I’d expect from a hard-right government.

          also while they added some employment laws they also didn’t outlaw unions nor was corporate tax lowered massively

          They decreased the power of workers and made it harder to belong to or organise a union.

          And why would corporate taxes need to be lowered? A well run corporate doesn’t pay taxes because they have no profit. In fact, to encourage better run corporations taxes should have gone up on them to at least 75% and probably 100%. The taxes that the state should out of corporations is the personal taxation on dividends.

          They also turned NZ into a tax haven for foreign interests.

          Again, exactly what I’d expect from a hard-right government.

          • Puckish Rogue 13.2.1.2.1

            What you think is hard right and what i think is hard right differ slightly I feel

            • Draco T Bastard 13.2.1.2.1.1

              If it tries to ignore reality then it is right-wing. The more it does so the more right-wing it is.

              National is hard into denying reality.

            • cleangreen 13.2.1.2.1.2

              PR

              National have sold off all they could.

              Now labour have nothing more to sell, so they need to fix our failing economy because it will fail sooner than we think.

              Tauranga property is now ballooning faster than Auckland so we are headed for a major correction.

    • infused 13.3

      You’re incorrect. If Labour had more power, IE not reliant on Winston, this would all be a different story.

  14. Rosemary McDonald 14

    Oi! Government!

    Total Transparency before you sign this deal on our behalf.

    We can march in the other direction if necessary….

  15. weka 15

    Fuck Labour (sorry micky).

    I guess it’s back to the streets, and yet another round of all those people’s time and energy being tied up in pushing back against this. What a waste.

    • Puckish Rogue 15.1

      (Can’t believe I’m doing this but here goes)

      Why not wait until everything comes out and see what the deal is first, it might not be as bad as everyone thinks it is

      • McFlock 15.1.1

        bit late then, is the problem.

        • Puckish Rogue 15.1.1.1

          I’m assuming the details will be released before signing but none the less I don’ think the original negotiators for this would do a deal thats majorly bad for NZ

          Of course in any negotiation you have to give something up to gain something but still on balance the deal would be good for NZ so assuming thats the case any further negotiations that don’t include the USA can really only improve the deal for NZ

          Or am i being overly optimistic

          • McFlock 15.1.1.1.1

            I think it’s probably much better than when the yanks were involved.

            If by “original negotiators” you mean the nats, I disagree with you strongly.

            But if the current lot have fucked up the public interest legislative out that would help us keep pharmac and make imported workers have the same conditions as NZ workers, we’re in the shit.

            • Puckish Rogue 15.1.1.1.1.1

              I’m sorry but, unless proven otherwise, I just can’t see any NZ negotiators deliberately doing a bad deal for NZ

              I mean this guy seems to know his stuff:

              http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11583642

              “The first trade deal for which he was chief negotiator was the P4, the predecessor to the TPP comprising New Zealand, Singapore, Brunei and Chile.”

              “His first big one was the China deal in 2008, the first free trade agreement China had negotiated with an open economy.”

              I’m not sure how negotiators work but he must have had the confidence of Helen Clark and then the confidence of John Key

              • I’m sorry but, unless proven otherwise, I just can’t see any NZ negotiators deliberately doing a bad deal for NZ

                Neither can I but that doesn’t mean that they got a good deal. All indications were that the TPPA was going to be bad for us but National were crowing about how great it was.

                Thing is, I have seen any real change.

                And note how well the FTA with China is going:

                China has threatened “retaliatory measures” against New Zealand trade, warning it will slow the flow of dairy, wool and kiwifruit imports.

                The world’s biggest trading nation is angry at New Zealand inquiries into a glut of Chinese steel imports flooding the market; the Chinese believe New Zealand is part of a US-led alliance to target Chinese national interests.

                The behind-the-scenes threat comes just days before the arrival of US Vice President Joe Biden in New Zealand, forcing government and commerce officials to scramble to open urgent talks with China. New Zealand is angry that China should take such a combative approach, and is asking that it desist.

                So much for free-trade. And that really is actually bad for us as it removes our own power and sovereignty – our ability to make our own choices for our own good.

              • Gosman

                Mainly because I doubt you know where the benefits of free trade lie.

                • I’m pretty sure that you, along with your RWNJ brethren, don’t even know what free trade is.

                • Sam

                  Has your vast knowledge of ISDS improved since the last time we chatted eh goose?

                  • cleangreen

                    100% SAM,

                    Look you all right folks we all need to see the fine print firstly as we were promised “openness and fairness as well as transparency’

                    “Labour lets see this” before we agree to “do this”

                    This will affect us all for many generations negatively we know so lets see the benefits and negatives and discuss it all as promised by you.

                    “If it is a good deal then you will have nothing to hide”

                    • Sam

                      No one can be a master of all things. It takes time to sit through hrs/days/yrs of dialogue in order to master the concepts of geopolitics, free trade, fluid dynamics, culture. Since I’v just roasted some normie about how the Star Wars franchise can build out female characters properly (it takes time for muh roast hand to cool down and recharge again). But real quick in the Manga Yoda wanted to teach Leia the force<<< all us book nerds were quietly wanting this. Alternately Disney could have done a JJ Abrams and restarted the franchise after a The Jedi Returns and forget about the recent trilogies ala what he did with the Terminator franchise by restarting it from T2 and forgetting about the terrible sequels that tried to sell merchandise to a wider audience that don't read sci-fi comics.

                      In summary, turn around story = plot + continuity minus all the PR merchandising.

                      Now muh roast hand has refreshed a bit, the BEAR FLAGS!!! Are clearly visible. Fissures in the global economy, post-Davos, we might see a co-ordinated Global NWO attack on CFX space (currency exchanges). Expect tax legislation to catch up with the gains. 😉

                      The reason why the Trump pulled out of TPP/ect is because there are also a lot of shitholes in the U.S. But when these Shitholes are also defined as "Cities" or "Major Urban Centers" theyre highly correlated with Democrat city control of 20+ years. Dems create Shitholes through relentless State programs & bureaucracy. I've traveled the States many times. To outsiders its so glaringly obvious.., to normies its just Stockholm Syndrome. The biggest risk 'Mainly because I doubt you know where the benefits of free trade lie' are people who start sentences with "Mainly because I doubt you know where the benefits of free trade lie." .., Technically if you want to roast a bear you would need a very big BBQ. A domestic one wont cut it. So Goshen would have to go commercial / custom built. Probably looking at $12,000+ So he should sell the 1 luxury item he owns now or he'll only be roasting a rat over a fire next Christmas because all the shorts are being forced to cover right? think about that and invert the narrative/story to actual free trade.

                      LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…, the greatest gift to mankind in the history of mankind. Protect it and fight for it! The world is nothing without it.

                    • But when these Shitholes are also defined as “Cities” or “Major Urban Centers” theyre highly correlated with Democrat city control of 20+ years.

                      /facepalm

                      It’s the democratic states that are doing better in the US. The ‘shitholes’ are all Republican.

                    • Sam

                      Idk… Hillary did win Cali & New York…

              • McFlock

                The TPPA was projected to have a sub-marginal economic benefit at the expense of tying us into some harmful conditions around intellectual property and pharmac.

                It might not be deliberate, but it was a bad deal.

                But my concern wasn’t the diplomats, it was the politicians directing them.

                • Stunned Mullet

                  Bollocks, there were going to minimal if any changes to PHARMAC in the original agreement.

                  • McFlock

                    Right up until the first ISDS challenge.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      Cobblers, PHARMAC was still allowed to continue to run tenders and assess new medications for cost effectiveness and funding as usual. i.e delay funding of useful medications for decades.

                    • McFlock

                      And because it minimises the cost of drugs sold in NZ, it would be first on the block for a secret ISDS litigation. By competitors who would claim the prescription subsidy is unfair, and by corporations that lose money because of the single-buyer negotiation.

                    • McFlock

                      What, pharmac decisions were specifically excluded from any ISDS jurisdiction? where does your link say that?

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      ‘New Zealand’s obligations under Annex 26-A of the TPP are not subject to TPP’s dispute settlement mechanisms, including ISDS. Like other New Zealand free trade agreements, however, some general provisions of TPP apply where PHARMAC is acting as part of the New Zealand Government. In respect to ISDS, where an entity or individual is deemed to be an investor under TPP rules, various safeguards have been included in TPP that protect the delivery of public services, including healthcare and PHARMAC’s role in funding pharmaceuticals. No changes are required to New Zealand law to implement articles 18.50 and 18.51 of the TPP.’

                    • McFlock

                      so it isn’t but it is…

                      Edit: the old saying about “everything before however”

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      🙄 Come on then instead of just being argumentative for the sake of it give me an example of what you believe will happen to PHARMAC under the TPPA citing a medication/company whatever.

                    • McFlock

                      Really? Who predicted that tobacco companies would take a case against Aus via a country (Ukraine, as I recall) that has no tobacco trade with Australia in order to try to combat package labelling rules? Or a twenty year old bilateral agreement between Aus and Hong kong?

                      I know two things on this issue:
                      1: corporations will pay very expensive lawyers an awful lot of money to find some basis upon which to legally challenge and neuter Pharmac; and
                      2: they only need to win once.

                      Your complacency is hazardous to NZers’ health.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      🙄 how very McFlock adding nothing but a belch of hot air.

                      NZ and PHARMAC funding of medications are worth two tenths of fuck all to the international pharmaceutical industry.

                      The local representatives of international companies that still work here are a bunch of neutered ineffectual buffoons who have been trying their best to get new medicines funded here for the last many decades with little to no success with all methods apart from committing their own peculiar form of ritual seppuku.

                    • McFlock

                      Whatever dude. If you’d had a point you would have linked to an unequivocal and explicit exclusion for pharmac in the leaked tppa text. But you couldn’t.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      Apart from the text 6 comments above 😆

                    • McFlock

                      protip: Unequivocal statements tend to avoid using the word “however”.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      😆 do you need a big hug and cup of tea ?

                    • McFlock

                      It is time for a cuppa, I must say.

                      In the meantime, here’s something you need.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      My lovely last words..look at me look at me look at me …

              • Incognito

                I mean this guy seems to know his stuff

                Sure, he seems to know his stuff, he has an impressive track record, and he’s probably a very nice guy. But none of this does alleviate the concerns that people have nor does it justify the lack of transparency. But most crucial here is the stuff he does not know, which, without a doubt, is an awful lot more than his stuff. To counter some (but not all) of the inevitable blind sights, oversights, and groupthink, not to mention biases, for example, of the negotiators it would be highly advisable to share the documents much more widely and make them publically available. Only then can we have a chance at a genuine informed debate. We need to restore our faith in politics, the democratic-political process, and in politicians and civil servants alike. Now, that would be a silver lining, but we’re more likely to witness a “super blue blood moon eclipse” and Jacinda Ardern having twins.

          • Rosemary McDonald 15.1.1.1.2

            “Or am i being overly optimistic(?)”

            Yes.

          • SPC 15.1.1.1.3

            National as party of landlords, farmers, and business owners were prepared to sacrifice sovereignty, health and local property ownership to make a deal. Labour not so much.

            Some of this was mitigated late in the process, but it could have been a better deal for us.

      • weka 15.1.2

        because Labour aren’t listening to the objections and taking them seriously. This is a huge challenge to democracy.

        Plus, it’s going to tie up all that activist time/energy, again, and we urgently need it for other things.

    • Rosemary McDonald 15.2

      “Fuck Labour (sorry micky).”

      To be fair weka….Labour was always flipfloppy on this….

      http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_on_the_tppa

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/76703408/TPPA-Labour-will-not-pull-out-of-trade-deal-if-Govt-Andrew-Little

      Just one of the reasons I didn’t vote for them.

      • weka 15.2.1

        yep.

        • Rosemary McDonald 15.2.2.1

          Am I misremembering Andrew Little being set against the TPPA…then him going to a meeting at the Beehive with Government and coming out with a softened stance?

          Discussion at the time speculated that he had a) undergone rapid brainwashing or b) been abducted by aliens/New World Order/Illuminati and replaced with a robot.

          I can’t find any media reference to this meeting…

          Must be lunchtime….

        • cleangreen 15.2.2.2

          How can we trust the politicians now?

          We again will be subjected to being ruled by even more ‘belligerent’ multi-national corporations now thanks to David Parker who will retire after this I bet..

  16. The Chairman 16

    It will be interesting to see if the left (Labour in particular) take a big dive in the next round of polls.

    There is a lot of disappointment on the left out there.

    I see Winston Peters is supporting Labour on this, bet a good number of his supporters will be gutted.

  17. Siobhan 17

    “It’s taken the hard edge off TPP … in those areas.”

    In those areas…what exactly does that mean?..could we maybe have some detail on the areas where The Hard Edges have been left intact, because i think we, the regular residents of all the countries involved*, would dearly like to know

    * and while we are on the topic, which countries signing have wide public support for the TPP?

  18. McFlock 18

    It’s also interesting what not just the Greens but NZ1 think of it. Sort of in the party name, really.

    Many a slip ‘twixt dress and draws

  19. Carolyn_Nth 19

    There needs to be some transparency on the crucial issues in the latest version of TPPA. I don’t have a lot of faith in Grant Robertson and David Parker – they continue with economic and financial positions of soft neoliberalism.

    I fear they have too much power within the current government.

  20. SPC 20

    The original concept of an APEC area wide FTA is before the last Labour government. The target back in 1999 was 2020.

    Labour merely participated in developing the TPP form, which unfortunately for us was managed by National and included some of the areas the American insisted on.

    We would realise most, an equivalent or more gain without the TPP burdens if we had FTA’s with China and Japan of the Oz standard.

    For which reason we need to supplant this TPP by developing a better agreement – building a comprehensive arrangement around FTA’s ASEAN has with Oz, us, China, South Korea and Japan, India (not part of APEC) and maybe Russia (part of APEC).

    • Ad 20.1

      It’s good that both sides of the House have accepted this initiative.

      Japan is the big prize, but the failure of proper dairy access into Canada has got to be the big loss.

      Under the present anti-multilateral political bias in the developed world, CPTPP is as close as renewed global trade cooperation looks like.

      Anyone know if the amendments will have to come back to our Parliament ?

      • Exkiwiforces 20.1.1

        Yes Ad, it would good for Japan as well as I think the RNZAF might be going Japanese now as a result of the new TPP and really stick it to the Yanks.

    • Stuart Munro 20.2

      That was the original intent – would’ve been a good deal too. But the Stupid Party decided they’d rather be a Trojan Horse for the US than get a good deal.

  21. DoublePlusGood 21

    As ever, Labour says the right things and does the exact opposite.
    This is why I vote Green.

    • indiana 21.1

      That’s a wasted vote too, as the Greens helped form the coalition government as it is stands today…recall how many commentators bragged how national had no friends to form a government?

  22. Whispering Kate 22

    With our weather turning to shit and high high temps being the norm I think the Greens will be getting heaps more votes in the future. Somebody has to save his planet and I’m sure it isn’t the blue hats or the red hats, I can’t seem to see much difference in either one of them. I didn’t trust Labour with this new deal so I am not surprised one bit.

    Life is going to get a whole lot more nasty before things begin to change and then, as it ever was, it will be too late. By the way I voted for the Greens – some people have vision for the future, hopefully more will vote for them when they realise life is never going to be healthy or liveable again.

  23. Tony Veitch (not etc) 23

    Any trade deal that requires the support of National to get it ratified can’t, simply can’t be good for the working people of this country!

    • Gosman 23.1

      And yet the supposed party of NZ workers supports the deal as well. Go figure that one out.

    • Puckish Rogue 23.2

      Being that it looks like approx 90% of government is going to support I’d say its got pretty broad support

      • DoublePlusGood 23.2.1

        In parliament yes. Outside of parliament, no.

        • Alan 23.2.1.1

          maybe in your circle of friends, certainly not in mine.

          • DoublePlusGood 23.2.1.1.1

            Yes, but your comments here have always indicated that you hang around rapacious bastards.

            • Alan 23.2.1.1.1.1

              mmm, teachers, accountants, truck drivers, nurses, caregivers, small business owners, retired people, office managers – just some of the people in our circle of friends – all rapacious bastards eh?
              Good on you mate, you are a shining light for your cause!

              • Sam

                It’s comments like these why people like Winston and Wayne Mapp continue to fall out of love National 😂

  24. The Chairman 24

    Who are Labour doing this for?

    Exporters make up a very small number of businesses and export value is around 30% of total GDP.

    And with voters being vastly against it, who exactly are Labour doing this for? The many or the few?

    • SPC 24.1

      They’re doing it for the high stocking rates on farms … (or is that National?). More seriously they are doing it to build up a more diverse economy so we are less reliant on environment degradation for our livelihood.

      • The Chairman 24.1.1

        The TPP isn’t the only way to diversify our economy. Moreover, that is a reason for why they are doing it, not who are they doing it for.

      • More seriously they are doing it to build up a more diverse economy so we are less reliant on environment degradation for our livelihood.

        Actually, canning trade will build diversity more and faster.

        Trade is about specialisation. It’s trade that is pushing the degradation of our ecosystem through farming. Trade that is keeping our wages down. Trade with international ownership that is causing massive increases in inequality.

        • SPC 24.1.2.1

          We are already wide open to free trade now, but these agreements open up other markets that are in some part closed to us (and our concessions to realise this are less since the Americans withdrew).

          Not signing TPP would make no difference in the matter of foreign supply into our market.

          As to withdrawing from trade, I am not sure how a nation would manage that economic transformation. Has any nation actually done it (there was some revival of protectionism with the great depression) in recent times – since the post 1945 globalisation?

          • Draco T Bastard 24.1.2.1.1

            Has any nation actually done it (there was some revival of protectionism with the great depression) in recent times – since the post 1945 globalisation?

            Not as far as I know. The global institutions have forced open countries usually at that countries expense and the benefit of the rich countries.

            And it’s not really about putting up walls. It’s actually about free-trade.

            The basis of free-trade is Willing Buyer, Willing Seller.

            As a nation bound by the rule of law all that needs to be done is that we say that other nations need to meet our standards before we will trade with them but once they do then trade is open. All other nations need to do the same.

            If a nation doesn’t meet our standards then we’re not willing to trade with them. If they do then we will. Free choice on both sides.

            At that point there we’d actually have free-trade and no FTAs in evidence anywhere.

  25. veutoviper 25

    But will National support the legislation?

    The negativity and ‘throw his toys’ behaviour Bill English has been showing over the last week or so has turned me even further off him and nothing would surprise me.

    Todd McClay was reported on the RNZ National 2pm news bulletin as calling for the Government to release the details of the revised TPPA as soon as possible to allow National – and the public – to consider the details. He said that they (National) were open to supporting the needed legislation but wanted to see the details of the agreement first. He also suggested that the details should be released before signature on 8 March and the Government should not wait for other countries to agree to the release …

    First item in this link

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/programmes/news-bulletin/story/2018629275/radio-new-zealand-news

    • Puckish Rogue 25.1

      They’ll support it, they’ll make noises around this (of course) but in the end they’ll support it plus they may even wrangle another concession out of Labour for something down the road

      • veutoviper 25.1.1

        Agreed. By the way, glad you are still around as I usually enjoy your puckish comments and they go with your ‘name’, and I have seen a big change in your views etc over time. Pity some others can’t … but their problem, not yours.

  26. cleangreen 26

    yes, Todd McClay said that he wants to see the agreement.

    So come on labour; – do carry out the promise to be ‘transparent’!!!!

    Or face the music for years to come again.

    ‘Lets do this Transparency’ please.

  27. Jackel 27

    Look at the big logic here. It’s about going below a bar that is almost at ground level. If things look bad for a very long time, you can’t claim that’s a period of long-term peace and prosperity as many do. Marx understood that capitalism would eventually consume itself.

  28. koreropono 28

    The duplicitous bastards were always going to sign the TPPA under whatever guise/name. Pre election bottom lines, they really had none, double speak they had plenty.

    Labour have let New Zealand down, they have let voters down, they could have, and should have done better than this farce they are forcing us into (see https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/100831653/newlook-tpp-to-be-signed-in-march). Sadly this simply reinforces my belief that Labour will continue to be the same Labour that has sold us out since the 80’s…meanwhile we’ll be stuck with a deal that a majority of people did not want.

  29. Tanz 29

    oh, the hypocrisy! Winston, please do PM for most of the three year term, you lovely old duffer. Our first Maori PM, too, wow, I remember predicting that. So very exciting. Legacy and Knighthood in one. Bring it on, I can’t wait. Wait till the House sits later this year, with Winnie in the tob job! A bit hard on the Labour caucus. Bill English looks really happy these days, think he is enjoying his new role, he looks amazing.

    • cleangreen 29.1

      Jacinda,

      Two wrongs don’t make a right Labour.

      “Just remember your vision was for a kinder, gentler, caring, inclusive, transparent, government after nine years of a secretive national government.

      And you today say “we have been as transparent as we can be???????

      That is a lie!!!!

      You must open the TPP final agreement now to allow the whole country to see it firstly before signing it or suffer the consequences of your actions of your wrongs here.

      Your poll ratings will now slide if you do not honour your promises of transparency.

      “Lets do this transparency”

      David Parker is not your boss Jacinda you are the boss so do this.

  30. RedBaronCV 30

    Well if they are going to sign this rubbish then labour had better get busy bolstering the Overseas Investment Act beyond the rather tame lot of amendments currently out for comment.
    When did we last see this act being used for actual inwards investment – say actually building a factory.
    It should be called the Overseas purchase of NZ Assets act.

    Forbid the sale of land and allow leases only up to X years.
    Get rid of the clauses about donating to the community ( that is just another name for paying a bribe to a local school).
    You have to sell any existing asset you own if you fail to meet the conditions or the government will repossess it. Most of what people say are just vague promises.

    Count negative environmental and workplace effects.

  31. Tanz 31

    Many bitter comments. Suck it up, it’s the govt most of you wanted.

    • adam 31.1

      Stupid comment Tanz. Most people here are over neoliberalism – some are over liberalism, myself included in that. So this is not the government I wanted, and for many it’s not even close.

      That said, it’s better than partisan Tory hacks who presided over the growing gap between rich and poor. Who have effectively gutter the civil service, and destroyed education, all in the name of ideological purity.

      So yeah people might be angry, but they are well within their right to be so.

    • Exkiwiforces 31.2

      Most us can remember the 90’s as if was yesterday, so you can stick your neo- Lib economic theory bollocks etc where the sun don’t shine. Because your Muppet mates destroyed my career in the NZDF, along with every other Government Department “The Lost Decade”. My Father got made redundant because of the ECA, Mines Department and your so called OHS laws etc. As a result of this neo- lib bollocks, I and many others left the country for better pay and conditions along with a better work/ lifestyle balance than putting with up your shit in the 90’s and the last 9yrs which was repeat of the 90’s no matter how you dress it up.

      Those that stay around are still fighting for something they believe in than your neo- Lib bollocks and if I was still around ie still in Queens Uniform and they asked me to go war to defend their beliefs and values as I would at drop of a hat, just like my grandfather and uncle did in WW2 unlike your load of bollocks isn’t worth getting killed for.

      So stuck it up you neo- Lib princess and remember the world isn’t going fall over tomorrow, so enjoy the change. I got the Government I wanted because it’s not National and their toadies.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • New digital service to make business easy
    A new digital platform aims to make it easier for small businesses to access services from multiple government agencies, leaving them more time to focus on their own priorities. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Minister for Small Business Stuart Nash ...
    4 days ago
  • Million-dollar start to gun collection events
    Million-dollar start to gun collection events  Police Minister Stuart Nash says a solid start has been made to the gun buyback and amnesty after the first weekend of community collection events. “Gun owners will walk away with more than ...
    5 days ago
  • Praise after first firearms collection event
    Police Minister Stuart Nash has praised Police and gun owners after the first firearms collection event saw a busy turnout at Riccarton Racecourse in Christchurch. “Police officers and staff have put a tremendous effort into planning and logistics for the ...
    5 days ago
  • New Police constables deployed to regions
    Seventy-eight new Police constables are heading out to the regions following today’s graduation of a new recruit wing from the Royal New Zealand Police College. Police Minister Stuart Nash says the record high number of new Police officers being recruited, ...
    2 weeks ago