TPP roundup

Written By: - Date published: 6:34 am, October 7th, 2015 - 161 comments
Categories: capitalism, economy, farming, Globalisation, International, overseas investment, trade, us politics - Tags: , , , ,

Here’s some of the best analysis of and reaction to the TPP. Starting with the indefatigable Jane Kelsy:

National government betrays NZers in TPPA deal

‘This deal is a travesty of democracy’, said Professor Jane Kelsey about the conclusion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) in Atlanta, USA. ‘The government has ignored, insulted and lied to its citizens.’

‘Minister Groser has misled New Zealanders. He always knew he was on a hiding to nothing on dairy. I have predicted many times that he would not do as he said and walk away from a lousy deal, but would make claim that there were some intangible future gains from being in the club. That’s exactly what’s happened’. …

The indispensable Gordon Campbell at Scoop:

Gordon Campbell on the TPP deal reached in Atlanta

If the TPP was the Rugby World Cup, the New Zealand team probably wouldn’t be making it out of pool play. While the final details will not emerge for a month, the TPP is offering disappointing returns for New Zealand… and over a very long phase-in period… of up to 25 years in major areas important to us, even though many of the concessions we have made would take immediate effect. Typically, Prime Minister John Key has already been spinning the “93% tariff free” outcome across the TPP region, as if that situation was entirely due to the TPP deal. To get that figure, Key is adding all pre-existing tariff reductions and adding them to the TPP. To take a relevant example… 80% of US trade with other TPP members is already duty free.
…
So… while failing to achieve any significant – or immediate – market gains for our major export commodity, we have made major concessions on intellectual property, the operations of Pharmac and on investor state disputes. In each case, things could have been far worse: but that doesn’t mean the concessions we have made are insignificant, or good. …

The erudite Andrew Geddis at Pundit:

Of TPP’s, ISDS’s and the Constitution
…
I have real concerns about the potential for this ISDS process to straitjacket future Government actions (including actions taken by Parliament after MPs are elected on an express promise to carry it out). That’s because, once the ISDS procedures are in place, there will be very smart, well paid people whose job it is to make use of them to benefit the companies that pay their bills. And in spite of the reassurances currently being given, the ISDS procedures (and the TPP (maybe A) that they are a part of) of necessity contain a lot of vagueness that will be left to be clarified by future actions. So no-one, and I mean no-one, really knows how the agreement actually will play out in the future – because until that future happens, we won’t know what sort of clever arguments and applications will get dreamed up for using them.
…
Which means that if we sign up to the TPPA (assuming the “A” becomes a reality), we are going to change how our country is run into something else. Maybe that change really won’t be a big deal – maybe ExportNZ and John Key are right to say that ISDS’s are not a problem for us. Or maybe it will be a big deal – maybe we will find ourselves reasonably frequently hanging on the decision of three private individuals who are deciding if we are allowed to have a policy in place without having to pay many millions of dollars to an overseas company.

But you know what? I don’t think anyone – and that includes the people currently negotiating the TPP – really knows either. Which worries me. Quite a bit.

Labour’s position:

TPPA fails dairy and foreign buyers tests

The gains from the TPP for New Zealand’s largest export industry have failed to meet the test set by the government, Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson says.

“The government promised meaningful gains, but the dairy industry is describing the outcome as disappointing. … “While there are gains from tariff reductions in some sectors, this agreement was always going to be judged on the value to our largest export sector, and on that score it has failed. “Tim Groser says, ‘you take what you can get’. But that has to be balanced with what New Zealand loses.

“National needs to be clear whether this deal will stop a future government from further restricting land and housing purchases by overseas buyers. Early reports indicate that this has been traded away. Giving New Zealanders a fair go at owning our land and fulfilling the Kiwi dream of owning a home are core principles for Labour. We reserve the right to regulate and legislate to make this happen. …

And Labour blogger Rob Salmond:

TPP, eh?
…
New Zealand isn’t as big of a loser as Mexico, but its gains are very small, and could get swallowed by the sovereignty losses. On the gains:

• The increased beef access to Japan has to be shared with other big beef exporters and is slow to come in.
• The increased dairy access is pathetic. Fonterra is right to be disappointed.
• The US removing tariffs on baby formula but not milk powder is a non-event for New Zealand, because we mainly sell milk powder, not baby formula. Other, non-NZ, firms turn that milk powder into baby formula will reap the rewards.
• The cheese access isn’t a big deal, because it is only very partial in the US, and Japanese cuisine is cheese-light compared to most others through the TPP region.
…
As a small country, however, we are still in danger of being spent into the ground by lawyers representing clothing companies or Hollywood over parallel importing, or global tech firms over taxation. That scares me. Some in New Zealand – including Tim Groser – are claiming they can always renegotiate the bad bits of the deal later. I think they’re whistling Dixie. New Zealand has no leverage to demand a renegotiation, and nothing to trade with if one happens anyway. …

Reaction from the medical profession, a representative of Doctors for Healthy Trade:

Doctors not prepared to swallow TPP pill
…
We’ve been told repeatedly that the increase in the cost of medicines won’t be dramatic. Quite right – the extra costs from prolonging monopoly rights will be like watching a tree grow; it’s slow but gets bigger all the time. True, none of the technical rule changes will affect “the fundamentals of PHARMAC” either. Mostly they chip away at the foundations of the intellectual property regime that operates before PHARMAC gets a look in. Where there are changes to PHARMAC, they will nibble at its bargaining power and we hear will also mean higher administrative overheads.

But the biggest concern of the majority of Doctors for Healthy Trade supporters is that the TPPA will bring stagnation on actions to control the products that make people sick in the first place – tobacco control, managing junk food advertising to children and cutting down on fossil fuels being turned in to carbon emissions and climate change. …

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) says:

Statement by MSF on the conclusion of TPP negotiations in Atlanta

“MSF expresses its dismay that TPP countries have agreed to United States government and multinational drug company demands that will raise the price of medicines for millions by unnecessarily extending monopolies and further delaying price-lowering generic competition. The big losers in the TPP are patients and treatment providers in developing countries. Although the text has improved over the initial demands, the TPP will still go down in history as the worst trade agreement for access to medicines in developing countries, which will be forced to change their laws to incorporate abusive intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical companies. …

On what happens next – a practical summary in The Herald:

After the deal: 90 days for scrutiny

Once the Trans Pacific Partnership talks conclude, New Zealand and the 11 other countries must tick several boxes before the agreement can be brought into force. Under a rule set by the United States, any agreement cannot be signed until 90 days after negotiations end, to allow time for full consideration of its pros and cons. The same rule also says the agreement’s full text must be made available to the public after 30 days.

In New Zealand, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will provide a report to the Cabinet on the costs and benefits. The Cabinet will then decide whether to approve the agreement. Once the Cabinet approves the deal, the full text will be tabled in Parliament. It will then be scrutinised by a parliamentary committee, which will hear submissions from the public.

A pointless process, since Cabinet signs off on the deal without any inconvenient democracy in the loop.

New Zealand will likely have to change its laws to bring them into line with the agreement. This would probably be done through a single piece of legislation, and was likely to include changes to copyright, tariff and patent laws.
…
Once other countries have followed a similar process, the agreement will come into force. There is no set timeframe for this to happen, though Japan has proposed a minimum two-year limit.

Other countries that do have a democratic ratification process will not necessarily fall in to line. The US itself is a major unknown:

A TPP Deal Is Finally Reached, but Don’t Assume It Will Pass Congress

Election-year pressures and the deal’s actual details may yet scuttle final passage of TPP.
…
Several brewing political disturbances could form a perfect storm to defeat the TPP in early February. The most immediate danger is in the House, where fast-track trade promotion authority passed by very narrow margins during a drama that included one failed vote.

Now, restless hardline conservatives just pushed House Speaker John Boehner out of his job. Several key leaders of this revolt are TPP opponents, and the fast-track vote actually played an underrated role in the revolt. … In the end, it’s clear that hard-right conservatives, who largely oppose TPP, have received a boost at the expense of more moderate members who tend to support the corporate objectives of the trade deal.
…
The same dynamic will be at play on the other side of the aisle, where 28 pro-trade Democrats provided essential votes that helped fast track pass. Most major unions and progressive groups are withholding any funding for these Democrats, and in some cases will be supporting anti-TPP primary challengers.

If even a relative handful of Democrats or Republicans get scared off by this new political situation—one quite different from what existed in June, when fast track passed—the narrow pro-trade margin in the House may evaporate. (Fast track passed by a larger margin in the Senate and TPP would likely do the same, especially since it will only need a simple majority. But it’s notable that Senator Orrin Hatch, a key architect of fast track and defender of the trade deal, is bashing the final agreement as “woefully short” of his expectations.)
…
Opposition to TPP from highly visible presidential candidates, smack in the middle of intensely watched primary-state voting, presents a serious challenge to final passage of the deal. This will be particularly true if Hillary Clinton comes out against the deal, which I personally anticipate she will. (It’s too important to major unions and key progressive activists for her to support TPP, and continued high poll numbers for Bernie Sanders may not leave her a choice.)
…
To put it simply, this is an extremely fluid situation with a very small avenue to passage for TPP. We may not know if will actually pass Congress until the final roll-call vote is over.

And just in case you need further reading, another roundup of points here: Twenty Perspectives on The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal.

161 comments on “TPP roundup ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Andrew R 1
    7 October 2015 at 6:51 am

    You missed Josie Pagani’s defence of the TPP deal.

  2. vto 2
    7 October 2015 at 7:07 am

    This is not sustainable as a method of increasing trade and growth.

    It is a one-hit ejaculation, after which a new equilibrium will be reached and all the world’s bankers and businessmen will begin a further search for the next growth ejaculation…

    It is exactly like farmers and irrigation. The argument runs that irrigation achieves growth, but it is only a spurt of growth, after which the equilibrium settles out and growth is over… resulting in no change other than fucked waterways… true this…

    Solution? Think need to look at ‘growth’. It is ‘growth’ that is the issue.

    • Paul 2.1
      7 October 2015 at 9:41 am

      Infinite growth on a finite planet.
      Capitalism is the problem.

    • greywarshark 2.2
      7 October 2015 at 10:24 am

      vto
      True, good thought that probably hasn’t crossed the minds much less the brains of our political and business ‘players’.

      • vto 2.2.1
        7 October 2015 at 10:48 am

        The reason certain things do not cross the minds or brains of our political and business players is that they run on very limited drivers…

        … political runs on the 3 year term
        … business runs on short term money

        They are entirely ill-suited to making these sorts of very long term tppa decisions for these exact reasons.

        Politicians and business people are entirely the wrong people to be making these decisions.

        • greywarshark 2.2.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 11:12 am

          The politicians are out of control of the NZ citizens. So in this case we do not have a democracy but what then is it called? A dictatorhip by manipulating the popular vote?

          What if we had more control over our politicians, and their forays into the world supposedly on our behalf? Possible methods have been put forward by others.

          The initiative idea, along with referendum and recall, was part of the political reforms urged by the Western progressive movement starting in the early 1900s.

          The point of all three was to give the people an expanded voice in governing.
          The initiative allows citizens to put a question on a general election ballot.
          The referendum requires legislation enacted by a legislature to be put on a ballot for approval before taking effect.
          Recall puts the question of a public official’s continuation in office on the ballot for citizen approval or rejection.
          http://www.ethanallen.org/html/the_citizen_initiative.html

  3. Paul 3
    7 October 2015 at 7:17 am

    An open letter to National voters by travellerev

    ‘When your nearest and dearest start dying of hunger, lack of medicines or heating they will have the loud party next door celebrating they can nick your land and other assets for cents on the dollar. When your friends and family start dying of the cancers their poisons spread and the fish disappear because Fukushima finally reaches your shores you will know an anguish you would not wish on your worst enemies.

    When your village drowns in toxins from fracking they’ll be circling to take the drags while your children die and your cattle can no longer feed of the land.

    You will know what it means to be a tenant on the land you once owned. You will know what it means to be driven off, used and abused, and left for dead while you try to make sense of what just happened.’

    https://aotearoaawiderperspective.wordpress.com/2015/10/06/open-letter-to-national-voters-you-wanted-this-deal-now-live-with-it/

  4. Pat 4
    7 October 2015 at 7:29 am

    “But you know what? I don’t think anyone – and that includes the people currently negotiating the TPP – really knows either. Which worries me. Quite a bit”…Andrew Geddes.

    Im inclined to think they have a pretty good idea and thats why they have specifically excluded big tobacco….if ISDS has been tidied up why the need for exclusions?

    • Manuka AOR 4.1
      7 October 2015 at 7:58 am

      “why they have specifically excluded big tobacco”

      And other companies may present greater problems than tobacco ever could. If we try to restrict certain pesticide or herbicide use, for example, or g.e / gmos. Monsanto has sued individuals – would they hesitate to sue a government?

      • Paul 4.1.1
        7 October 2015 at 8:05 am

        So apt the deal was signed in Atlanta, the home of Coca Cola.
        No sugar tax in NZ now to deal with diabetes and obesity.
        Doctors without borders said the real damage to health would the fact governments would not be able to tackle the causes of disease.

        • Bob 4.1.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 9:35 am

          “No sugar tax in NZ now to deal with diabetes and obesity.”
          Correct, there is no sugar tax in NZ now, there most certainly can be at any time in the future though:
          “The chapter does not in any way affect the rights of TPP Parties to regulate for public health, safety, security, and other public interest reasons.”
          http://www.tpp.mfat.govt.nz/assets/docs/TPP12%20summary%20of%20the%20Agreement.pdf

        • greywarshark 4.1.1.2
          7 October 2015 at 10:32 am

          Atlanta that obtained the Olympics by being creative with their temperatures causing unpleasant conditions for the sports people. And with other fragrant happenings down the years. The TPPA is a tourism triumph for investors, making money for the USA. Were meetings held all round the Pacific, in the other nations that border it?

          • Bob 4.1.1.2.1
            7 October 2015 at 11:10 am

            “Were meetings held all round the Pacific, in the other nations that border it?”

            Yes:

            Dates Location
            15–19 March 2010 – Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
            14–18 June 2010 – San Francisco, California, USA
            5–8 October 2010 – Brunei
            6–10 December 2010 – Auckland, New Zealand
            14–18 February 2011 – Santiago, Chile
            24 March – 1 April 2011 – Singapore
            15–24 June 2011 – Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
            6–15 September 2011 – Chicago, Illinois, USA
            22–29 October 2011 – Lima, Peru
            5–9 December 2011 – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
            2–9 March 2012 – Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
            8–18 May 2012 – Dallas, Texas, USA
            2–10 July 2012 – San Diego, California, USA
            6–15 September 2012 – Leesburg, Virginia, USA
            3–12 December 2012 – Auckland, New Zealand
            4–13 March 2013 – Singapore
            15–24 May 2013 – Lima, Peru
            15–24 July 2013 – Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
            23–30 August 2013 – Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei
            18–21 September 2013 – Washington, DC
            3-? Oct 2013 – Bali, Indonesia
            28 October – 1 November 2013 – Mexico City, Mexico
            30 October – 2 November 2013 – Washington, D.C.
            4 – 7 November 2013 – Santiago, Chile
            6 – 9 November 2013 – Washington, D.C.
            12 – 14 November 2013 – Washington, D.C.
            12 – 18 November – Salt Lake City, UT
            19–24 November 2013 – Salt Lake City, USA
            7–10 December 2013 – Singapore
            21–25 February 2014 – Singapore
            18–20 May 2014 – Singapore
            3–13 July 2014 – Ottawa, Canada (changed from Vancouver)
            1–10 September 2014 – Hanoi, Vietnam
            24–27 October 2014 – Sydney, Australia
            Nov-14 – Beijing, China
            8–12 December 2014 – Washington, D.C.
            26 January – 1 February – New York City, USA
            9–15 March 2015 – Hawaii
            23–26 April 2015 – Maryland
            14–28 May 2015 – Guam
            24–31 July 2015 – Hawaii, United States
            26 – 30 September 2015 – Atlanta, Georgia

            • greywarshark 4.1.1.2.1.1
              7 October 2015 at 11:30 am

              That is a dead giveaway Bob. You are obviously one of a dedicated pro-TPPA cadre. Pity that you can’t print out, because you don’t know, all the ways that we can be knee-capped by this tritty’s effects on us all and particularly the vulnerable poor.

              What’s in it for the ordinary person in the street? About as much as the great boon we have received from going free-market-neo-lib that has left us dependent on other countries produce for basics, with depressed business numbers, unemployment, under-employment, skilled and unskilled ‘no-hopers’, no hope for better conditions, on our way to an Indian style economy with some huge wealth and large numbers of people sleeping on the streets or in huts, shacks, cars, etc.

              A really good economy for now, for some, Bob and one where you have carved out a place of comfort for yourself. Me I can’t feel comfortable while the majority in the country live off the droppings from dairy farmers and speculators and asset-strippers, tunnel-visioned, vacuous or venal business and professional people.

              • Bob …
                7 October 2015 at 12:11 pm

                “That is a dead giveaway Bob. You are obviously one of a dedicated pro-TPPA cadre.”
                Wrong straight away, I was actually very skeptical of the who TPP process, I am a supporter of free trade deals as a general rule, but not at the expense of our sovereign rights and law making abilities. From what I can see from the details released (below), I actually think this could be a very good deal for NZ.
                http://www.tpp.mfat.govt.nz/assets/docs/TPP12%20summary%20of%20the%20Agreement.pdf
                http://beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/TPP-Q&A-Oct-2015.pdf

                “What’s in it for the ordinary person in the street?”
                That really depends on what they do for a job and in what industry. Basically this opens up the opportunities for the ordinary person on the street to be able to start any kind of export business and immediately have free access to an addition 800m people.

                “About as much as the great boon we have received from going free-market-neo-lib that has left us dependent on other countries produce for basics, with depressed business numbers, unemployment, under-employment, skilled and unskilled ‘no-hopers’, no hope for better conditions, on our way to an Indian style economy with some huge wealth and large numbers of people sleeping on the streets or in huts, shacks, cars, etc.”
                These are primarily social issues that will still be legislated for by central government. This deal theoretically won’t directly make any of these issues better or worse. However, you could point to the fact that these issues became more prominent in NZ after we lost our FTA with the UK when they joined the EU…

                “A really good economy for now, for some, Bob and one where you have carved out a place of comfort for yourself. Me I can’t feel comfortable while the majority in the country live off the droppings from dairy farmers and speculators and asset-strippers, tunnel-visioned, vacuous or venal business and professional people.”
                I haven’t carved a comfortable place for myself…I am a renter who is still working for ‘the man’, I simply see this as an opportunity for me to carve out a comfortable place for myself by relying on my own abilities, this is just a tool to help me get there and take my friends and family with me. Maybe if you stopped looking at the world as though it is all against you and tried to help yourself and those around you, you could do the same?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  7 October 2015 at 5:29 pm

                  What’s in it for the ordinary person in the street?”
                  That really depends on what they do for a job and in what industry. Basically this opens up the opportunities for the ordinary person on the street to be able to start any kind of export business and immediately have free access to an addition 800m people.

                  What utter fucking nonsense. You can tell it is utter fucking nonsense because the ruling class refuse to make public the details of the agreement and continue to hide how it actually works.

                  The TPPA is a corporate rights deal for corporations.

                  Local SMEs are going to be smashed.

                  And if you are an SME in a technology field the new patents and IP regs will fuck you good.

                  • northshoredoc …
                    7 October 2015 at 6:46 pm

                    “Local SMEs are going to be smashed.

                    And if you are an SME in a technology field the new patents and IP regs will fuck you good.”

                    Well it would be nice to hear from the SMEs on this issue and perhaps companies like Orion healthcare and F&P Healthcare as well which would both be considered SMEs from a TPPA perspective but probably not from a local perspective.

                    • KJT …
                      8 October 2015 at 9:00 am

                      Whangarei just built a new bridge.

                      Local firms were used where possible, as you do, because that keeps the profits local. With the firms that paid the council rates that built it.

                      Now that can, and will be, challenged under ISDS.

                      Except there will be no need to bring a court case. Council will now have to throw it open to international tenders, as we can’t afford a case from a multinational costing millions in the ISDS kangaroo court.. Locals need not apply.

                      Just another method, like the big box stores, of extracting money from communities, which is lost to them forever.

                  • greywarshark …
                    8 October 2015 at 1:46 pm

                    CV
                    Thanks for answering that mish mash of hopeful and naive fancies from Bob.

                    How he can say he isn’t a fervent supporter of TPPA when he has the time to copy all those meetings out from whatever report they were in
                    I can’t understand. My comment was in passing. A sentence from him rebutting would have sufficed.

                    He is sure TPPA will be good. Now we can all be exporters from our backyards, yeah right. A market of 800 million. No reason for those potential customers not to be looking out from their backyards and thinking exactly the same. NZ will not win in competition like that.

                    And then there is the well known new business statistic that you hardly make a living for two to three years, working all hours day or night, and often people borrow to get started with their home as collateral. But hey lots of NZ don’t have a home, their Mum’s garage then, a nice container once insulated might be worth something, a packing case, a shoebox in the middle of the road in exchange for cleaning duties?

                    Brahahahaha

      • Pat 4.1.2
        7 October 2015 at 8:26 am

        my take….yes they will hesitate…briefly, whereas the pariah industry (tobacco) would be full steam ahead i.e. Australia and Uruguay…big tobacco has shown they take direction from no-one and have little support publicly from any quarter(who knows what private support however)……the other industries are i believe trusted to be a little more circumspect in their pursuit of the public purse and they will be no less successful for that, just a little less conspicuous and controversial and a little more timely.

      • savenz 4.1.3
        7 October 2015 at 9:43 am

        +1 Manuka AOR – good point especially about Monsanto.

      • rawshark-yeshe 4.1.4
        7 October 2015 at 5:20 pm

        Because tobacco corps can still sue us under WTO arrangements — I am pretty sure this is the way the current case is being pursued against Australia.

        Easy for them to exclude tobacco from TPPA as it won’t make the tiniest little bit of difference … read this yesterday, and will try to find the link.

        This whole agreement is full of tiny bed bugs .. invisible until they bite, and then, very painfully.

        And apologies if this has been covered elsewhere, in which case a re-direct what has been agreed so far. could be helpful — but does anyone know how Australia got a $100 million ceiling for OIAs on land sales and we are stuck with a $200 million minimum ( an increase of $100 million from present minimum) ? What did they trade that we couldn’t or wouldn’t ?

        Also, another bed bug feast on New Zealand’s body — it would seem the increased costs for Pharmac that are being mentioned are simply to establish a more transparent system so pharma corps can fight us harder. The amounts mentioned, increasing by $2.5 million annually are nothing to do with actual drug prices and increases — simply the means of policing how we are getting fleeced.

        Please, please, let USA and Canada be unable to ratify.

        • rawshark-yeshe 4.1.4.1
          7 October 2015 at 5:34 pm

          No idea how I am now named “Undefined” ? This is rawshark yeshe.

          And this is the link .. it came from Andrew Geddis yesterday:

          “One bouquet here is that tobacco companies have been specifically shut out of the new ISDS rights, meaning we can now safely move to impose plain packaging on cigarettes. (They’d better get on with that now.)”

          Not so.

          There is a challenge to Australia’s plain packaging measure presently before the WTO – if this wins, then NZ would be equally liable under our WTO obligations.

          By the same token, Philip Morris’ challenge against Australia under its BIT with Hong Kong is still in play. If that wins, NZ potentially could be proceeded against under the ISDS provisions in one of our other FTA’s with Asian nations.

          All excluding tobacco from the TPPA does is stop US tobacco companies directly bringing proceedings under that instrument. There’s still other potential fishhooks out there that will keep plain packaging off the books for another year.

          http://publicaddress.net/speaker/tpp-eh/

          • greywarshark 4.1.4.1.1
            8 October 2015 at 1:51 pm

            Good facts rawsharke-yeshe and please please…. USA and Canada. But Canada is wallowing in RW bog and sinking I am thinking.

  5. Mr Nobody 5
    7 October 2015 at 7:45 am

    I think the most important words on the subject have been said my Former Labour Leader and NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark:
    “What always haunts a Prime Minister is ‘will there be a series of trade blocs develop that you are not part of?’ Because that is unthinkable for New Zealand as an export-oriented, small trading nation. So of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with the TPP.

    [lprent: And what the NZ Herald *chose* not to report was the caveat, but Tim Groser had to emphasize to the Audrey Young was the rider..

    On the issue of Helen Clark’s comments about the TPP – she said it was unthinkable New Zealand wouldn’t be part of the deal – he said she had added a crucial rider – “provided the deal was good”.

    That the Herald chose to lie by omission, I suspect, shows a large breach in journalistic standards. I suspect that if we went and pinned down the journalist responsible, we’d find that they reported a PR sheet from this government ]

    • Paul 5.1
      7 October 2015 at 7:52 am

      Clark showed her true neoliberal colours at that moment.

    • maui 5.2
      7 October 2015 at 9:16 am

      I cannot see the other tpp countries refusing our exports if we refused to be part of this. The States might threaten us that’s about it.

      • Enough is Enough 5.2.1
        7 October 2015 at 9:52 am

        They don’t refuse our products Maui. They put enormous tariffs on them – which ensures it is cost prohibitive for us to export.

        The problem is those tariffs remain under this deal.

        • maui 5.2.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 10:13 am

          Yeah I dunno, it would have been nice to see us stand up for our sovereignty and then see if we would be held to ransom or not. We could always change positions from there too.

        • greywarshark 5.2.1.2
          7 October 2015 at 10:38 am

          I thought we could object to the WTO about unreasonable tariffs and trade barriers already? Though it was a big effort and expensive. But I don’t think worse than what we will be up for with TPPA and their cosy coterie.

          Just a thought do others think that firing squads are very efficient and quick methods of execution?

    • Mr Nobody 5.3
      7 October 2015 at 2:03 pm

      Hi Lprent,

      I’m simply going off the video of Helen Clark saying:
      “”What always hunts one as a New Zealand Prime Minister is will there be a series of trade blocs develop that you are not part of. Because that is unthinkable for New Zealand as an export orientate small trading nation so of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with TPP and go for the very best deal it can as the as the agreement expands from beyond the original 4 economies to a wider regional agreement””

      Video Link: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/-new-zealand-has-to-be-in-on-the-action-helen-clark-backs-tpp-avid-060a2b340101010501010f1013-000000-4b5334f6cfdf0094-6e440060dd44-a8b1

      Coul you please point to where where Helen Clark actually makes that point herself or are we simply taking the word of Tim Grosser who previously has had his hearing and intellect questioned (http://thestandard.org.nz/groser-an-arrogant-git-with-a-tin-ear/)?

      Thanks

      • lprent 5.3.1
        7 October 2015 at 6:30 pm

        Better argument. It is nice that some of you actually read the warnings.

        The problem is that the clip of what Helen said was truncated. What she said next would have been interesting.

        She usually puts one side of the argument – usually the pro first, and then states the con. It is her characteristic style, and from what I heard was the despair of her media people. I had several decades of watching her doing that at LECs, press interviews, speeches and interviews when I was volunteering in her electorate.

        I have also seen that interesting habit that journos have of being selective in what they quote and show to pep up a line in a story. Most recently at the NZ First conference watch Winston Peters talking to media.

        Tim Groser would have probably seen the whole statement including the “crucial rider” he referred when speaking to Audrey.

        If you want to denigrate his version, then I’d suggest that you find the uncut version of the statement by Helen.

        • Mr Nobody 5.3.1.1
          8 October 2015 at 8:39 am

          Of course it would be interesting to know what she said next, she could have revealed the truth behind the JFK Assassination, whether or not the moon landings were faked or anything.

          But in the absence of her coming out and making an actual statement clarifying her position we can only judge on the words we actually have, where she quite clearly says nothing about “provided the deal being good” but does state ” for New Zealand as an export orientate small trading nation so of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with TPP and go for the very best deal it can”.

          As for Tim Groser he’s completely irrelevant, in fact you yourself have made the following statements about him:
          “I’m continuously amazed about how mind-numbingly stupid and outright ignorant Tim Groser is in his pursuit of the TTP.” – Lprent 15/08/2015
          http://tinyurl.com/nlb3y2c

          “We need this ‘protection’ in NZ ICT like we need Tim Groser’s hearing and intellect – not at all.” – Lprent 15/08/2015
          http://tinyurl.com/nlb3y2c

          Which makes me wonder how you can take his words seriously now?

          • One Anonymous Bloke 5.3.1.1.1
            8 October 2015 at 9:34 am

            look carefully at what I said. I am not responsible for the way media or others spin things.

            Can you take Helen Clark’s word for it?

            I note that Tv1’s video is shorter than the one Fairfax put up. It misses several remarks at the beginning. Who knows what was cut off the end?

            Groser seems to know. He says National agrees with Clark’s crucial rider.

    • Bob 5.4
      7 October 2015 at 3:48 pm

      lprent, Tim Groser mis-quoted Helen Clark and Audrey Young has run with Tim Groser’s mis-quote, the Herald didn’t lie as you state above:

      “On the issue of Helen Clark’s comments about the TPP – she said it was unthinkable New Zealand wouldn’t be part of the deal – he said she had added a crucial rider – “provided the deal was good”.”
      She never said “provided it was a good deal” she actually said “So of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with the TPP and go for the very best deal it can”: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/-new-zealand-has-to-be-in-on-the-action-helen-clark-backs-tpp-avid-060a2b340101010501010f1013-000000-4b5334f6cfdf0094-6e440060dd44-a8b1

      Here is the full quote “What always haunts one as the New Zealand Prime Minister is ‘will there be a series of trade blocs you’re not part of?’. Because that’s unthinkable for New Zealand, an exporter and small trading nation. So of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with the TPP and go for the very best deal it can.”
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/72604363/former-pm-clark-backs-controversial-trade-deal

      • lprent 5.4.1
        7 October 2015 at 6:04 pm

        Those were all segments, not the whole thing. To date I haven’t seen anything that isn’t cut off. Presumably Tim Groser did. It is part of his job to do so because getting support from Labour is going to be pretty critical at making this deal stick. And Helen’s opinion counts.

        However the spin put out by the media including the Herald was that she supported the TPPA was complete crap. What she described even in the fragment you are looking at was an explanation of the reasons why being involved in the TPPA was worth doing (edit: not an endorsement as the media claimed). What I would have expected was that she would have then continued to outline the reasons why it might not be a good idea because that is what she usually does. But that appears to have been cut out. You’d need a copy of the whole statement to know one way or another.

        However, it is definitely not the kind of thing that she is saying in social media. For instance have a look at
        http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/10/03/breaking-helen-clark-misrepresented-on-tppa-why-groser-is-now-sucking-up-to-labour/

        It is pretty clear that she is (diplomatically) pissed off with the media. There will be a whole pile of people inside Labour who are pissed off with that treatment and whoever orchestrated it. In my opinion, the most likely candidate (or his staff) was standing next to her.

        • northshoredoc 5.4.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 6:42 pm

          In my opinion she is and always has been a pragmatist and her comment that

          “So of course New Zealand has to be in on the action with the TPP and go for the very best deal it can” , sums up her position very well and would most likely have reflected her position if she still led NZ’s government.

    • Colonial Viper 5.5
      7 October 2015 at 5:32 pm

      we’d find that they reported a PR sheet from this government

      And of course, that is not “reporting” that is “stenography.”

  6. Ad 6
    7 October 2015 at 7:49 am

    Strategy aside, I think this will be positive polling for the government.

    Blanket MSM coverage, very mild and uncoordinated Opposition responses, government’s primary policy plank for the term is won.

    Plus, dairy trades are rising, spring’s arrived, we’re in the quarter finals, countdown to Christmas.

    Looking for next poll, I bet 1-2% bump for National, NZF down, others stable.

    • Paul 6.1
      7 October 2015 at 7:57 am

      The best comment I have read was by poster Tony Veitch.

      ‘It is with considerable regret that I have to inform the New Zealand public that its democracy contracted a wasting disease overnight. Dissolution is inevitable, but the disease is likely to be a protracted one. There is no known cure, once infected, except by really radical surgical means, which will, unfortunately, not be undertaken in the near future.
      At the moment, the patient is seemingly doing well, but this insidious disease will progressively sap the sovereignty from the body corporate, until only a skeleton remains.
      R.I.P.’

      • greywarshark 6.1.1
        7 October 2015 at 10:40 am

        Who is this Tony Veitch? Surely not the celebrity bozo who has garnered much publicity in the past.

        • Bill 6.1.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 11:20 am

          No.

        • Tony Veitch 6.1.1.2
          7 October 2015 at 1:37 pm

          Just to set the record straight, not the plonker who kicked his girlfriend down the stairs – I had my name long before he disgraced it!

          • greywarshark 6.1.1.2.1
            9 October 2015 at 2:56 pm

            Well sorry Tony Veitch, but your doppelganger has created an image for the name and if you use it for blogging then you will confuse people, giving him undeserved street cred with the left. But then perhaps you are mucking his image as a callous spoilt rich kid who has watched too much footage of Mike Tyson and Pretorius.

    • lprent 6.2
      7 October 2015 at 11:49 am

      The dairy trades will fall later in the season. It is a pretty standard pattern.

      • Ad 6.2.1
        7 October 2015 at 11:56 am

        Indeed. But the government takes the momentary political money and runs.

        Swear to God this is the dumbest, luckiest government we’ve had in a century.

    • Pat 6.3
      7 October 2015 at 11:53 am

      dairy trades are rising on reduced supply …both contrived and on farm

  7. half crown 7
    7 October 2015 at 8:03 am

    I think Anthony Hopkins Title is very appropriate.

    TPP “Roundup”

    It is toxic it
    Leaves a residue in the soil
    Mansanto is now a major threat
    We will never be able to get rid of it.
    It WILL pollute the New Zealand way of life.

  8. Ad 8
    7 October 2015 at 8:08 am

    Veitch’s comment was defeatist melancholy.
    The Public cynicism through the hollow Select Committee process will weaken participation. Fine.

    We got beat this time. But the primary remaining power the left can still win, is Parliament.

    So forget this battle, and start a new one.

    • Paul 8.1
      7 October 2015 at 8:10 am

      Parliament in NZ will rubber stamp it.
      We must rely on the US congress to protect us from Key and Groser’s vanity project.

      • Steve Reeves 8.1.1
        7 October 2015 at 9:34 am

        The Parliament in NZ doesn’t get a say.

        Unlike Congress in the USA.

        • dukeofurl 8.1.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 9:44 am

          Canadian elections in 2 weeks time. There is much more visible cost to them for dairying and cars.
          Not sure a new government would agree to negotiations made by the current Harper government .
          “A free-trade deal that opens a small part of the Canadian dairy market to cheaper foreign imports could spell the beginning of the end for the country’s dairy supply management system, and push inefficient farmers out of business, observers say.”

          Beginning of end never goes well with dairy farmers who can influence rural electorates. And there is an up front cost to the budget. ( even for the tiny amounts that quotas allow -mostly for US producers)

          “The deal is accompanied by $4.3-billion in federal subsidies aimed at softening the blow to dairy, chicken and egg farmers. who have enjoyed price and market protection for decades,”
          http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/tpp-deal-could-mark-start-of-the-end-for-supply-management-in-canada/article26671722/

    • greywarshark 8.2
      7 October 2015 at 10:42 am

      Gee Ad. Sometimes you sound left, sometimes you sound bourgeois, sometimes you sound Right and sometimes I dunno. But if you want do do any good for NZ you need to stop drawing lines in the sand and continually redrawing them elsewhere when the tide obliterates them.

      • Ad 8.2.1
        7 October 2015 at 10:50 am

        I like being complex.

        And you do have to redrew boundaries when you’ve actually and physically lost the battle. Maybe it’s too early for some people.

        But here’s how the politics looks to me right now.

        There was significant groundswell in both the public and the media against the TPPA. From scoop to TS to Kiwiblog to Whaleoil, to the marches, the mood was ready for turning.
        The reactions now are as mixed in Canada and Peru as they are in Australia and New Zealand.

        A great moment for the left globally to get its shit together in parliaments right across the world.

        Labour, the Greens and NZFirst had the potential to launch a coherent and united attack, as they have done in the past.

        Instead, heroes like Jane Kelsey aside, National Ministers have had free run in the MSM, Key has simply enabled Groser to take the hits rather than spend any further Preferred Prime Minister political capital, and the media are close to zipping this up like a body bag.

        This is a real failure of political management to form a coherent and forceful Opposition platform that would have shown the public that they could be an alternative government.
        Sorry if that’s too early for you, but we lost, move on.

        • thatguynz 8.2.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 1:02 pm

          Not sure that I understand or agree with that mindset mate. It’s not a game like an All Black test or Netball international whereby the “fans” or even the players dust themselves off post loss, get a good sleep under their belt and then look to refocus for the next “game”. This is the country that our children are inheriting from us – slightly more important than a win/loss comparison isn’t it?

          Or have I misunderstood?

          • Ad 8.2.1.1.1
            7 October 2015 at 1:15 pm

            You have misunderstood.

            Politics is not a pure analogue to a contact sport, but it is certainly a rapid exchange of power, under millions of viewers, requiring relentless tactical changes, and a whole bunch of coaching. Which I commented on. Simple.

  9. esoteric pineapples 9
    7 October 2015 at 8:32 am

    I wouldn’t mind betting that rather than this government being cautious about involving corporates in projects in case it gets sued by them, it will be keen to invite corporates to participate in projects like, say, undersea mining off the Chatham Islands so that when people protest,, environment courts turn down the application etc, it will be able to say it has no choice but to go through with them because otherwise New Zealand will be sued for mega millions (which it will).

  10. Mike Bond 10
    7 October 2015 at 9:07 am

    I do understand that the left as the opposition must show the current government up if they screw up. That National has obliged and done on numerous occasions. However the continued negativity based on hearsay and no facts is really hurting the lefts cause. After all, if we were left out of this deal, there would be no change and no benefit at all. The worst case scenario from the left has been that we will only see 1% benefit. Well we all know that is not true but 1% is still better than zero! I see some comments refer to an increase in the polls for National is anticipated. That is without a doubt true as they have maintained their position despite numerous screw ups and Little has not capitalised and only looks like a negative party pooper. Labour need to get it together if they want any say at the next election.

    • dukeofurl 10.1
      7 October 2015 at 9:47 am

      Thats why is called the Opposition- they oppose!

      • Mike Bond 10.1.1
        7 October 2015 at 9:50 am

        So even if the deal is good, they must oppose because they are the opposition? Makes them look stupid and lose support.

        • savenz 10.1.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 10:01 am

          Hello, Mike, the deal is NOT good! From the horse’s mouth, we have to swallow dead rats!

          • Mike Bond 10.1.1.1.1
            7 October 2015 at 10:46 am

            From what we know, it is not bad either and at least we are part of it. I do not know the finer details, nor do you, so we really can’t criticise something we do not know.

            • vto 10.1.1.1.1.1
              7 October 2015 at 10:52 am

              “it is not bad either” … sheesh, like that is a good reason …

              “and at least we are part of it.” … sheesh, like that is a good reason…

              “I do not know the finer details, nor do you, so we really can’t criticise something we do not know.” … sheesh, like that is a good reason ….

              has to be the worst case put for an argument in the history of this site.. appalling

              • Reddelusion …
                7 October 2015 at 10:57 am

                Helen agrees with Mikes logic so can’t be all bad

                [lprent: No she doesn’t. The Herald appears to have deliberately misreported her statement by leaving a crucial rider off it.

                Let me emphasis how annoyed I am about this. Banned for two weeks for lying, or find the link I am talking about and report it back.

                I will be adding a further week for each person that I find repeating this. ]

                • Mike Bond …
                  7 October 2015 at 11:26 am

                  Thank you!

                • maui …
                  7 October 2015 at 11:47 am

                  This could get embarassing fast for Mike if we start doing comparisons with Helen.

                • Wayne …
                  7 October 2015 at 12:02 pm

                  Ridiculous censorship by Iprent.

                  Of course it is his blog, he can do want he wants.

                  But he is implying that Helen would have walked away from this particular deal. In my view she would not have done so.

                  [lprent: Why? I have left notes pointing this out several times. So far none of the people making this claim have responded. One repeated their statement.

                  The “crucial rider” is perfectly clear. So what we have is a classic propaganda meme building exercise. Do notice these trolls aren’t even bothering to leave a link to the omission by lying article in the Herald.

                  The pattern is one of the classic National party social media exercises popularized as “Dirty Politics”. It isn’t like neither of us haven’t seen this before.

                  I have no idea if HC would have walked away or not. What I am objecting to is the outright lying by idiots saying that she supported the TPPA wholeheartedly. Has anyone bothered to ask her if it was a “good deal”? ]

                • JanMeyer …
                  7 October 2015 at 12:18 pm

                  Does anyone seriously think Helen Clark would say the current TPP deal is “not good enough”?? People need to accept that she is a free trader and would most definitely have signed up to this. Deploy your arguments against the deal but why play semantics on Clark’s stance?

                  • northshoredoc …
                    7 October 2015 at 2:00 pm

                    Agreed Helen Clark was nothing if not pragmatic, and IMO she would have been in boots and all to this trade agreement.

              • northshoredoc …
                7 October 2015 at 10:59 am

                “has to be the worst case put for an argument in the history of this site”

                Not even close.

              • Mike Bond …
                7 October 2015 at 11:00 am

                Yeah? So lets just shot it down and look like a bunch of idiots that are protesting against something we know nothing about. Now can you see why I say Labour are looking like fools and the polls reflect that?

                [lprent: Don’t even try to imply directly or indirectly that this site is part of any other organisation. Read the about if you want to know what we are. Read the policy to see how seriously we take people lying about us. This is your one warning. ]

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  7 October 2015 at 11:13 am

                  No. It makes you look like yet another complete numpty who thinks The Standard is the NZLP.

                  • Mike Bond …
                    7 October 2015 at 11:27 am

                    Who said anything about The Standard being the NZLP?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      7 October 2015 at 11:32 am

                      Reading is a skill. So is writing: both convey meaning. Your insulting remarks about those who “shot [sic] it down” can be linked to the Labour Party, according to you.

                      What a bore it is having to explain things to you.

                  • stigie …
                    7 October 2015 at 11:58 am

                    If you Google The Standard, you get nowhere but if you Google Labours blog the Standard, it takes you straight to it…? Funny that !

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      7 October 2015 at 12:00 pm

                      So I Googled The Standard, and this site is the top link.

                      Yes, I agree, it was amusing.

                    • lprent …
                      7 October 2015 at 12:21 pm

                      That depends on where you google from and who you are. From NZ I get “The Standard” at the top. From a aussie entry point, I get some local paper. From a US one, I get a hotel. From a UK one I get a paper in Africa. etc…

                      What you are actually demonstrating is your ignorance about how the google search algorithm works.

                    • stigie …
                      7 October 2015 at 1:56 pm

                      No OAB, the first up when you Google the Standard is an insurance co., but if you Google Labours blog the Standard, its right there at the top of the list…?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      7 October 2015 at 2:37 pm

                      No, Stigie, you are demonstrating your pitiful ignorance of the Google search algorithm.

                      Since I’m feeling charitable, and you clearly need some charity, look up Wikipedia’s article “Google Personalised Search”.

                      Don’t worry Stigie, your ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of.

                • Puddleglum …
                  7 October 2015 at 2:49 pm

                  “a bunch of idiots that are protesting against something we know nothing about.”

                  Presumably it is also just as idiotic to praise something we know nothing about?

            • savenz 10.1.1.1.1.2
              7 October 2015 at 10:58 am

              @ Mike Bond “From what we know, it is not bad either and at least we are part of it”

              Not true – Being part of a bad deal is NOT a good deal. Analysis of the OZ/US free trade agreement found they are both worse off 10 years later. To be a preferred partner did not deliver benefits and they would have been better off without it.

              Why do you think MANY of the countries citizens and opposition parties are strongly opposed to TPPA and why it is so secret?

              http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2015/02/08/the-costs-of-australias-free-trade-agreement-with-america/

              Remember US has trillions is dollars of debt now, their citizens live in manufactured fear that everyone is ‘out to get them’ in particular Muslims, in disasters like Katrina the privatised services failed to deliver and people in the US starved to death. medicines are unaffordable, everyone is suing everyone and has to have massive insurance, Loads of people lost everything in the financial crisis but the taxpayers bailed out the banks and the people who caused it were rewarded for their behaviour while Joe Bloggs lost their job and house, huge taxpayers dollars being spent occupying the middle East with zero solution in sight.

              That is what happens when lobbyists, greed and ideology get in the way of common sense.

              • Mike Bond …
                7 October 2015 at 11:04 am

                You are calling it a “bad” deal yet you have no idea what the full deal is and what implications it holds for New Zealand. You go on to say that any free trade agreement is not a good thing, yet Labour are taking credit for the China deal , and quiet rightly so, as the country did benefit overall. You left supporters are to easily lead by the nose and should start thinking for yourselves.

                [lprent: You have been saying that it is a good deal. Exactly the same arguments apply to you. Please read the Gosman rule in the policy before I wind up banning you. I’m afraid that being a hypocrite in your arguments isn’t an endearing trait, even in a fool. ]

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  7 October 2015 at 11:10 am

                  Downward pressure on wages, for example. You really should start paying attention to things that happen on Earth, and stop insulting people and projecting your personal failings onto them.

                  • Mike Bond …
                    7 October 2015 at 11:29 am

                    “Downward pressure on wages”? Just where did you suck that piece of information from or are you a typical lefty that throws out statements with no proof at all and in the same vain, accept everything you read as gospel as long as it suits your agenda?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke …
                      7 October 2015 at 11:54 am

                      No, it’s an example of how a fact-based debate might start. Instead, you’re too busy throwing insults around and pretending your personal opinions about left-wingers reflect something other than bile and prejudice.

                      If you’d read the links in the OP, by the way, you’d know where some of the evidence on wages comes from.

                      Or perhaps you did read them, and your bile and prejudice caused a massive comprehension fail.

                • Mike Bond …
                  7 October 2015 at 1:02 pm

                  It is your prerogative to ban me. Sad though that you have to resort to that level to avoid criticism. You do need to look at the last election result and exactly what Labour continues to do and then you will realise that being negative about everything that National does is not going down well with voters. I just want to see a stronger Labour party that stand for what they believe in and not a gutless party that proposes something and when National implement it, they shot it down! National have had it to easy and we desperately need a strong opposition that can challenge them.

                  [lprent: I’m not particularly interested in your opinions or your whining. I am interested in your behaviour on our site.

                  Clearly you aren’t interested in finding out about the site rules about behaviour (read the policy). I’d suggest you might want to try because there is a limit to my patience dealing with lazy fuckwits chewing up my time. ]

                  • One Anonymous Bloke …
                    7 October 2015 at 2:39 pm

                    …to avoid pitifully ignorant bores FIFY.

                    Did you read the policy or are you arrogant as well as ignorant?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.2
          7 October 2015 at 10:01 am

          Back on Earth, opposition is vital to good decision making.

          Try weighing up the pros and cons of that opinion, for example.

          • Mike Bond 10.1.1.2.1
            7 October 2015 at 10:37 am

            So you are happy to remain in opposition?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.2.1.1
              7 October 2015 at 11:02 am

              A loaded question which presupposes that your comment at 10 has some practical connection to reality. It doesn’t.

        • maui 10.1.1.3
          7 October 2015 at 10:23 am

          Is the tv news telling you the truth? They have lots of reasons not to.

          • Mike Bond 10.1.1.3.1
            7 October 2015 at 10:41 am

            Any news source lately is a joke. We have been arguing about this deal for how long and we still don’t know what it actually encompasses overall. Labour backed the Pharmac route and it seems they now again look like a bunch of wankers. Just how can you be anti something, if you don’t know what that something is? I know! It is because it is National, so it must be bad! Really lame and short-sighted views.

            • greywarshark 10.1.1.3.1.1
              7 October 2015 at 10:47 am

              Mike Bond
              You laugh and say you know something. Before you can make that statement you need to close your mouth and use your eyes and ears to learn what the problems are with TPPA. Not make silly jabs at the left for disagreeing and abusing National. You’re coming here like a kid in the playground, yah boo you dopes you’re scaredy cats. If you had a brain in use you would understand why we are scared and be very concerned yourself.

              • Mike Bond …
                7 October 2015 at 11:06 am

                Just give me one piece of hard evidence and proof that will make me realise that I need to be concerned! Please don’t let hard evidence get in the way of a good storey.

    • Pat 10.2
      7 October 2015 at 9:58 am

      so change for changes sake?

      • Mike Bond 10.2.1
        7 October 2015 at 10:42 am

        So complain for complains sake? We had to be part of this deal. We are to small to sit on the side-line while the worlds economies move forward.

  11. savenz 11
    7 October 2015 at 9:59 am

    The best sum up of our TPP negotiations is the Pineapple lumps add.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q800G-x8qA0

    To continue the analogy the ‘Kiwi’ Pineapple lumps by Pascal’s is owned by Mondelez International an American multinational.

    We didn’t even get magic beans just lollies.

    Groser ‘sweet as, bro’

    Key ‘I’ve got blind trust shares in that”.

  12. savenz 12
    7 October 2015 at 10:18 am

    http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2015/02/08/the-costs-of-australias-free-trade-agreement-with-america/

    The costs of Australia’s ‘free trade’ agreement with America
    8 February 2015
    Author: Shiro Armstrong, ANU
    The critics were right. Ten years after the Australia–United States free trade agreement (AUSFTA) came into force, new analysis of the data shows that the agreement diverted trade away from the lowest cost sources. Australia and the United States have reduced their trade by US$53 billion with rest of the world and are worse off than they would have been without the agreement.

    • greywarshark 12.1
      7 October 2015 at 10:49 am

      savenz
      Thanks for that info and link. Valuable.

    • Ad 12.2
      7 October 2015 at 11:49 am

      Succinct and punchy critique of a major bilateral trade deal.

      Not sure it’s an argument against free trade however.
      More an argument against bilateral deals that are rushed and politicized too much.

  13. One Two 13
    7 October 2015 at 10:22 am

    ‘Regular Kiwis’ will decide the success or failure level of TPPA

  14. Reddelusion 14
    7 October 2015 at 10:50 am

    2nd day in a row the sun came up post TPP, amazing !

    • vto 14.1
      7 October 2015 at 10:56 am

      the sun came out after each day of the holocaust too don’t you know

      and Genghis khan saw the sun most days I am thinking

      pretty sure the sun also came out during the dinosaur extinction, just couldn’t penetrate the cloud layer

      what on earth is your stupid point reddelusion?

    • scotty 14.2
      7 October 2015 at 11:36 am

      Yup as regular as the brain dead – parroting the National Party
      Good morning sunshine.

  15. The Chairman 15
    7 October 2015 at 11:47 am

    Listen to this interview with Tim Groser and Guyon Espiner.

    When questioned on whole milk-powder tariffs in the US, Groser stated it was the one he was focusing personally on, but couldn’t remember what the time frame for removal would be.

    Unbelievably, Guyon let that comment ride.

    Groser then went on to say it’s up to 25 years or some other figure?

    Guyon accepts the 25 years figure given, without questioning him whether or not it was 25 years or some other figure.

    Using the 25 years figure, Guyon then says it doesn’t sound like we’ve got great access.

    Groser’s response was our main market for whole milk-powder has never been the US, it’s China.

    Guyon failed to put it to him, wasn’t that the purpose of the TTP to help grow new markets?

    Guyon then asks are you disappointed with that (25 years)?

    Groser’s response was of course he wanted a better deal, but when you go up to 5am with the conference ending 2 hours later you take what you can get.

    Guyon failed to ask him if he genuinely wanted a better deal, why not hold off to the next round of negotiations? Which, apparently would have been next month.
    When asked why sign a deal that in your own words fall far short, Groser replied because it still leaves us far better off.

    Again, Guyon failed to ask why not hold off till the next round? Pointing out we may have secured an even better deal knowing 25 years was acceptable, thus fallen back upon if a better deal couldn’t have been achieved.

    http://tinyurl.com/p364nsg

  16. Grantoc 16
    7 October 2015 at 12:21 pm

    This is clearly a biased and narrow representation of the many views being expressed about the the TPP agreement.

    I notice that you have not provided balance by including the opinions of others who comment positively about the deal and its implications for NZ – bank economists, NZIER, trade negotiators, academics, informed journalists (e.g. Fran O’Sullivan) and so on – all of whom have specific expertise to analyse the deal from a rational rather than an emotional perspective.

    Even if the immediate gains to NZ by signing up to the deal are relatively modest, this has to be a better outcome than not signing up where the gains would be non existent. This doesn’t take into account potential future gains as the agreement changes and evolves.

    What you have failed to do in your commentary is articulate precisely what the downside is for NZ by agreeing to this deal; and how NZ benefits if it had chosen not to sign up to it.

    It seems to me that had NZ deliberately not signed up, we would be heading towards becoming an isolationist state; which is hardly a smart place to be given that we rely on trade for our over all wellbeing economically and socially.

    Is the your preferred option?

    • Pat 16.1
      7 October 2015 at 12:34 pm

      where does isolationist come from?…the most open trading economy in world and that would remain so whether a signatory to TPP or not…if anything by signing we are restricting our options…if you seek isolationism theres that aplenty amongst the TPP members

    • Tiro 16.2
      7 October 2015 at 12:47 pm

      It could not be that countries who are independent (not isolated, plains will still fly) are still free to deal with any country in the world? Why do you not think that it will increase competition, more of the same in the same market, leading to a downward price spiral for the producer.
      Is this a case where we cross the road and only look to one side before crossing.

    • The Chairman 16.3
      7 October 2015 at 3:28 pm

      Grantoc

      “Even if the immediate gains to NZ by signing up to the deal are relatively modest, this has to be a better outcome than not signing up where the gains would be non existent. This doesn’t take into account potential future gains as the agreement changes and evolves.”

      That has to be balanced with what New Zealand loses.

      Putting the impact on property, Pharmac and fiscal costs aside, what value do we as a country put on our sovereignty?

      When it comes to NZ trade, here is something to ponder:

      Over 75 per cent of all NZ firms have never generated overseas income.

      This is consistent with most small businesses reporting that they either cannot or are not interested in exporting.

      97 per cent of enterprises in New Zealand are small businesses.

      http://tinyurl.com/oa5kzdf

      Therefore, 25% of all firms (mostly private and some offshore owned) may directly benefit from this deal. Yet, the nation loses the right to fully govern as we see fit.

      So again, what value do we as a country put on our sovereignty?

    • Mike Bond 16.4
      7 October 2015 at 3:54 pm

      Great comment Grantoc. It would be very interesting getting an unbiased comment from someone in the know. We are left to decide based on comments pro and against which are really premature as the full details are not known. Easy if you want to point out bad points and Just as easy to highlight the good points. Can Labour tell us what the alternative to not signing would be? Would there have been any benefit to us walking away from this deal? I doubt it because if there was a benefit not getting involved, I am sure we would have heard about it by now!

      • One Anonymous Bloke 16.4.1
        7 October 2015 at 3:59 pm

        The full details are not known, and the US negotiators have posted a summary of all 29 chapters. So that’s what some of us have been discussing. By all means join in.

        If you want to hear from Labour you’re in the wrong place. I note Grant Robertson’s remarks have been analysed closely and roundly criticised by some. Again, you can join that conversation any time you like too.

        Or would you prefer to continue to let that diluted shit dribble down your chin?

        • Mike Bond 16.4.1.1
          7 October 2015 at 4:23 pm

          Again as I have said. Based on half baked info some of you are discussing and criticising without all the details known. You fit in here like a glove, so let me not upset you and make you realise that reality is far from the world you live in.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 16.4.1.1.1
            7 October 2015 at 4:29 pm

            Far from being “half-baked”, I’m picking that the US negotiators’ summary is informed enough to be worth discussing. I note your continued failure to say anything substantive.

            If the detail of the proposed treaty differs wildly from the negotiators’ account, that in itself will be significant. Discussion of the summary is therefore not only inevitable, it’s also useful. Unless, like you, one has nothing to say.

            Oh, apart from a bunch of bile and prejudice, that is. Choke on it.

  17. Rolf 17
    7 October 2015 at 12:27 pm

    New Zealand is now under full control of the USA, annexed, just as Korea was annexed by Japan from 1910 to 1946. New Zealand is now a new Rhodesia, or Belgian Congo, all by agreement. Kiwis are now second class Americans, just taking the orders from Washington as delivered.

    • Grantoc 17.1
      7 October 2015 at 12:36 pm

      Rolf

      Can you please explain how this is so.

      Can you provide actual examples of how NZ is “just taking orders from Washington as delivered”?

      And how we are “now under full control of the USA” as a result of signing the TPP agreement?

      • Mike Bond 17.1.1
        7 October 2015 at 3:58 pm

        Don’t hold your breath for an answer Grantoc. This is a typical left response. Throw out a statement such as that and no evidence to back it up.

        [lprent: If you got off your lazy arse and looked (it just takes a click on the name), you’d have found that Rolf leaves occasional comments, usually once per day and usually around midday. He has gone for the day.

        You really are an idiotic fool. I can’t see much point in having you here, and you are costing me too much time moderating. I tend to answer queries addressed into the air rather than to specific people. Everyone leaves their OWN opinions here. Trying to pin an individual to a group is pretty stupid. The “left” are a wide and diverse bunch, as I have explained to you before. Clearly you haven’t read the about yet.

        Banned for 2 days so you can read the policy, that way I might not have to explain the bleeding obvious to you quite so often.]

  18. joe90 18
    7 October 2015 at 12:46 pm

    Lie down with dogs, get fleeced.

    This study documents the 77 known NAFTA investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) claims up to January 1 2015. These include 35 against Canada, 20 against the U.S., and 22 against Mexico. Canada has paid out NAFTA damages totaling over $CAD172 million, while Mexico has paid damages of $US204 million. The U.S. has yet to lose a NAFTA chapter 11 case. All three governments have incurred tens of millions of dollars in legal costs to defend themselves against investor claims.

    https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/nafta-chapter-11-investor-state-disputes-january-1-2015 (pdf inside)

    • Manuka AOR 18.1
      7 October 2015 at 1:25 pm

      Excerpt: “Foreign investors are seeking over $6 billiion in damages from the Canadian Govt. These include challenges to a ban on fracking… and a decision by a Canadian federal court to invalidate a pharma patent on the basis that it was not sufficiently innovative or useful.

      “The pervasive threat of investor-state challenge under NAFTA chapter 11 puts a chill on public interest regulation. Current trends will only worsen unless political and legal action is taken.”

    • dukeofurl 18.2
      7 October 2015 at 8:47 pm

      Pharmaceutical giant Ely Lilly is suing the government of Egypt for lifting the minimum wage( This is a mix up its french company Veolia). Canada is being sued for a ban on fracking and Germany for its phasing out of nuclear power; all actions taken under ISDS clauses in free trade pacts.

      US corporations are the biggest litigants, having brought some 127 cases thus far against sovereign government decisions which they claim have damaged their financial interests. Taxpayers have the pleasure of footing the legal defence bills.

      http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/tpp-the-devils-in-the-unknown-details-20151007-gk326i.html

  19. Chooky 19
    7 October 2015 at 1:29 pm

    +100…Great Post summary …thanks Anthony Robins

  20. Rosemary McDonald 20
    7 October 2015 at 2:04 pm

    Meanwhile, there is cheering, yes cheering, over the TPPA in the Bay…

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1510/S00238/three-cheers-for-wine-exports-in-tpp-agreement.htm

    Now, wasn’t a Certain Person involved in the happy industry?

  23. ianmac 23
    7 October 2015 at 3:07 pm

    Bryan Gould writes to balance the proTPP lobby:

    “There is of course a powerful case for an international agreement that would regulate the activities of international corporate investors across national boundaries. Such an agreement would ensure that overseas companies would – inter alia – comply with national law, would protect the interests of their workforces and would avoid damage to the environment.

    But the TPPA is not such an agreement. Instead of defining the obligations of large foreign corporations in relation to the domestic economy, it tips the balance the other way. The TPPA is a blueprint for extending the operation of those corporations without their having to bother with the restrictions that might be placed on them by national governments in the interests of their domestic populations……”

    And on the Disputes/Resolution:
    “Much soothing language is at present being used to try to reassure people that there is nothing to fear on this score. Our own lunch-time TV news even reported – parroting the official line – that this power had never been used. That assertion had been dropped by the time we had got to the evening news.

    The reality is that there have been hundreds of occasions where a power of this kind has been used – and that is to say nothing of those many more occasions where governments have been deterred from proceeding with their plans for fear of being hauled before a tribunal….”
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11525299

    • ianmac 24.1
      7 October 2015 at 4:01 pm

      Looks pretty fulsome for the Japanese. How come?
      Will we wait for at least a month and then documents will be released in the middle of some dramatic sideshow?

  25. Paul 25
    7 October 2015 at 3:39 pm

    The Merchants of Doubt hard at work I see

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j8ii9zGFDtc

  26. Smilin 26
    7 October 2015 at 7:52 pm

    Bit like if NZ thru ignorance or error of the agreement fail to comply with the TPPA we will find out the hard way when the international tpp court,ie USA admin pulls us up and we get the old line, ignorance of the law is no excuse pay the penalty, Warner bros, tobacco corps financial controllers, banks add any to the list that currently screw this country
    Paying for more govt in your life

  27. Macro 27
    8 October 2015 at 8:50 am

    I think First Dog sums it up nicely – as per usual:
    The TPPA will shut down all our Kitten Hospitals!
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2015/oct/07/the-trans-pacific-partnership-will-shut-down-all-your-kitten-hospitals

  28. greywarshark 28
    9 October 2015 at 3:06 pm

    macro
    Wonderful awakening to the wonders of TPPA and satire of us all.
    And then piece on IMF wanting to see tax rises!
    http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2015/oct/09/imfs-call-for-tax-increases-will-be-a-tough-sell-for-turnbull-and-morrison