Government lies about signing of TPPA in New Zealand
First there is a denial from the government of reports from Chile that not only is our sovereignty to be signed way but this is to happen here in OUR country.
Govt denies Chilean claim about TPPA signing
The Government is denying a date has been set for the signing of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPPA) next month.
A
TPP protest in Wellington. Photo: RNZ
/ Michael Cropp
14
January, 2015, 11.22 am
Duty
minister Simon Bridges said despite an official statement by the
Chilean government that the controversial trade deal will be signed
on 4 February in New Zealand, arrangements are not yet confirmed.
The
statement,
issued by Chile's General Directorate of International Economic
Relations head Andrés Rebolledo Smitmans, said the agreement would
be signed by ministers from the 12 countries that negotiated the
deal.
The
announcement sparked criticism from opponents of the deal, who said
the fact the public only learned about the signing from overseas
reports showed the government was still trying to limit the chance
for New Zealanders to make their opposition heard.
Labour
Party leader Andrew Little said it would be insulting to New
Zealanders if the Trans Pacific Trade Agreement was signed in this
country two days before Waitangi Day.
Mr
Little, who visited the United States in December, said the
controversial trade agreement was a bad deal for New Zealand and
other small countries because it would inhibit their ability to make
their own law.
He
said having a signing ceremony for an agreement that eroded national
sovereignty two days before New Zealand marked its own day of
sovereignty would be arrogant and provocative.
Mr
Little said he would be putting it to his caucus that a Labour-led
Government should be prepared to defy the TPP.
A
prominent critic of the controversial trade deal, Auckland University
law professor Jane Kelsey said the lack of any formal announcement by
the New Zealand government before now was consistent with its
"obsessive secrecy" throughout the negotiations.
Professor
Kelsey, who led a successful legal challenge against the government's
failure to release information about the negotiations, said the
signing was premature.
"It
seems quite reckless to sign a deal on the fourth of February when
everyone knows that US politics will determine the final content. So
there's a lot of water to go under the bridge here."
However,
New Zealand International Business Forum head Stephen Jacobi said it
would be very difficult for the United States - or any other country
- to renegotiate the deal at this stage.
"This
is a very delicately balanced set of agreements and understandings,
and changing some of them will simply change the balance. I would be
very surprised if this would come forward for negotiation, but you
can't completely exclude it."
However,
Simon Bridges said a number of countries were still working through
the domestic approval processes required before signature.
He
said arrangements for the TPPA's signing had not yet been confirmed
and further details would be announced when and if they were
confirmed
Opponents
of the deal have organised a series of public meetings this month,
starting with the Auckland Town Hall on January 26, followed by
Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin.
The
keynote speaker will be the director of the Washington-based Public
Citizen's Global Trade Watch, Lori Wallach.
And then this small notice from Radio NZ that confirms the government's plans to sign the treaty in Auckland. About the same time with NO REFERENCE to the previous denial.
Welcome to the and of George Orwell!
Govt confirms plans to sign TPP in Auckland
The
government is looking to host the signing of the Trans
Pacific Partnership trade agreement in
Auckland early next month, officials have confirmed.
Delegates
announcing the landmark agreement in Atlanta in October 2015. Photo: AFP
13 January, 2015, 11.22 am
The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said New Zealand had offered to
host the signing in early February.
It
said arrangements were still being finalised as TPP partner countries
completed their domestic procedures to sign it.
Last
week the Chilean
government announced the
signing would be taking place in New Zealand on about 4 February, but
duty minister Simon Bridges said at that time arrangements had still
to be confirmed.
The
12 countries which are signing the agreement are Australia, Brunei,
Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore,
the US and Vietnam.
The
deal relates to areas of trade ranging from drug patent protection
and digital data protection, to access to foreign dairy markets,
which has been crucial for the New Zealand.
Secrecy on signing aims to thwart protest
By Jane Kelsey
On
February 4, the Government intends to defy popular opinion and host
the signing of the secretly negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership
agreement in Auckland. We had to hear that from other governments.
Bookings
at the height of holiday season would have been made months ago, yet
our Government initially said no decision had been made and this week
admitted it will be signed in Auckland but won't say when or where.
One
obvious reason for the secrecy is to thwart potential protests, a
further example of the TPP trumping democratic rights. Never before
has a New Zealand Government tried to sell such an unpopular
international treaty.
Nobel
laureate Joseph Stiglitz lamented in the Guardian last week how the
US had "concluded secret negotiations on what may turn out to be
the worst trade agreement in decades", and suggested that "in
2016, we should hope for the TPP's defeat and the beginning of a new
era of trade agreements that don't reward the powerful and punish the
weak".
Stiglitz's
wish for the TPP 's defeat might not happen in New Zealand, given the
Government's determination, but it could well happen in the US.
His
article was presumably penned before the latest incendiary lobbed at
the TPP by its beneficiaries.
As
part of a new strategy to provide symbolic leadership over climate
change, President Obama refused permission for Canadian energy giant
TransCanada Corporation's proposed Keystone XL pipeline to transport
oil extracted from tar sands from Canada to the US.
TransCanada
is now claiming US$15 billion compensation for lost investment and
future profits under the investment chapter of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).
This
latest investor-state case comes on top of Nafta challenges by US
corporates against a Canadian court's decision to refuse a medicine
patent, Quebec's moratorium on fracking, and an environmental panel's
rejection of a quarry permit in response to community concerns, among
others.
The
Keystone dispute will put another nail in the coffin of an already
intensely unpopular deal among US Democrats during an election year.
Further
alienating the Democrat base is not the end of Obama's problems.
Republicans
whose support he needs to get the deal through Congress are demanding
changes. Renegotiating the actual text would be very difficult so
they are pushing for side-letters that have a similar effect, and
ensuring other countries' "implementation" plans satisfy
the US, either by changes before the Congress votes or as a condition
of bringing the TPP into force.
The
major US corporate lobbies reinforced that message this week.
In
giving conditional support for the agreement they stressed the
political imperative to secure changes if the TPP is to pass a
Congress over which they wield significant influence.
They
have three main targets. First, the tobacco-specific exception that
allows governments to block investor-state disputes such as the one
Philip Morris brought against Australia's plain packaging law and
lost on a technicality.
Plain
packaging is currently stalled in New Zealand.
Second,
ensuring the marketing monopoly for new generation biologics
medicines is effectively eight years - longer than New Zealand's and
which the Government claims it won't have to change.
The
third relates to requirements for holding financial data within the
country.
Current
assessments are that Congress won't vote on the implementing law
before the election, and maybe not even in the lame duck period
between administrations.
That
means a new President with a new set of demands.
All
of which begs the question of why New Zealand or other governments
are prepared to sign a deal they admit is already far below their
original bottom lines.
Jane
Kelsey is a professor of law at the University of Auckland.
Obama
Gets Lukewarm TPP Response But NZ to Sign Regardless
Thursday,
14 January 2016, 8:21 am
Press
Release: New Zealand First Party
Fletcher
Tabuteau MP
Spokesperson
for Trade and Commerce
13
JANUARY 2016
New
Zealand First says the muted reaction to President Obama’s
promotion of the TPPA in his final State of the Union raises big
questions over what New Zealand is signing up to.
“Muted,
is the most accurate way to describe how American lawmakers reacted
to President Obama’s promotion of the TPP,” says New Zealand
First Trade Spokesperson, Fletcher Tabuteau.
“Even
President Obama’s TPPA entreaty to his Democratic Party only saw a
handful of U.S. lawmakers get to their feet while most remained
firmly seated.
“Without
the United States there is no TPPA and the legislative clock is
ticking.
“Why
on earth is our government pretending to hold a signing ceremony here
next month, when we know already that American lawmakers want
substantive changes to the TPP text - a text that all parties agree
cannot be changed without it all unravelling around them.
“Does
this mean that the National-led government is fully prepared to sign
a document that could change, in yet another round of signing blank
cheques?” Mr Tabuteau asked.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.