Polity: Too much to swallow on the TPP
139 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Did anyone else notice John Key's dog-whistle on Q+A when he said that under the TPPA we'd have no power to ban foreigners from buying NZ property, but that was okay because China isn't a signatory to the agreement? He seems to think that if most of our land is owned by non-Chinese foreigners, that would be fine. The financial colonisation of our country is the logical conclusion if we sign the TPPA - but apparently that's fine. The Chinese will still have to apply for a rubber stamp from the Overseas Investment Commission.
-
Joe Boden, in reply to
After Northland, National’s 59 + ACT’s 1 is not enough in a 121 seat Parliament. They need Dunne or the Maori Party, too.
They might get Dunne, but I can't see how they would get the Maori Party.
-
bob daktari, in reply to
numbers don't matter
Assuming the government puts the TPPA to a vote in the House (which it doesn't have to do) a 'no' vote by Labour would have no legal effect because the Executive alone has the power to ratify."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/trade/news/article.cfm?c_id=96&objectid=11487555
-
Joe Boden, in reply to
numbers don’t matter
Excellent, government by fiat. :(
-
You mean prioritising the needs of all New Zealanders (consumers) over the needs of the rich businessmen (exporters).
How did you mange to make the leap from exporter to "rich businessmen"? My 5 person software development company exports 100% of it's services overseas...
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
As I say, perhaps think about why you are getting no pickup on that allegation. Plenty of stronger cases right now to rally opposition to this disgusting agreement.
Indeed. Key's Bank of America shareholding may be a legacy of his former employment at Merrill Lynch (BoA acquired Merrill in 2008), but I don't see how it's any different to holding shares in any other listed company.
-
Jane Kelsey on Labour's position;
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11487555
Trying to have a foot in both camps doesn't cut it for me either.
-
Sacha, in reply to
And he’s not even right – the existing China FTA has ‘most favoured nation’ ratchet clauses that automatically match anything in subsequent agreements (including the South Korean FTA). Of course, Key knows that, but lying to the public has been very profitable for him and his govt.
-
Well Dunne can be relied on to be a "willing seller" at the right price?
The Māori Party will probably be kept happy if the TPPA gets translated into Te Reo. After all, the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act is pretty much the F&S Act, just with a couple of Māori words in the title.
-
Katharine Moody, in reply to
About as useful as the ‘keep talking’ outcome of that Constitutional review that was part of the Māori Party coalition agreement with National;
-
I have to agree: why are we debating what's wrong with the TPP?
The first question to ask is what good it is to us. None, from what I can tell.
-
Naturesong, in reply to
Pottery, textiles, leather industry ... the list is long
-
Alfie, in reply to
Pottery, textiles, leather industry ... the list is long
Pardon? Could you possibly add some context to that list.
-
Morgan Nichol, in reply to
I think it's something like "industries that have gone away already".
-
Sacha, in reply to
The first question to ask is what good it is to us. None, from what I can tell.
Might be good for NZ's few large professional services multinationals looking to crack the govt sector in some signatory nations. So long as they don't mind US IP laws applying to them. Otherwise, stuff-all gains left for us to make.
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Who? There are only a few small boutique PS firms that are NZ owned or based.
-
Andrew R266, in reply to
I think that answer is a fudge.
If Labour votes against TPPA but National joins up anyway, then Labour simply has to leave the TPPA. No way should it be held to commitments made ny National that are not in New Zealand's interest. As for the possibility of penalties for leaving, pssft.
-
But those firms already can access government contracts under a recent trade in services agreement National signed. (Incidently I think that this agreement makes it hard to get rid of Serco. Thanks #honestjohn)
-
Andrew R266, in reply to
My previous post was a reply to Sacha replying to Tracey-Mac
-
Sacha, in reply to
Ones like Opus
-
Sacha, in reply to
True, TISA covers overlapping ground already (from what little of TPP we've had leaked). It's all a big grab for corporate control over governments rather than the other way around.
-
linger, in reply to
this agreement makes it hard to get rid of Serco
Serco is not fulfilling its side of the contract. That should be the end of the story. That it hasn't been so far is probably down to ministerial ass-covering (as suggested by I/S).
-
Rob Stowell, in reply to
Might be good for NZ’s few large professional services multinationals looking to crack the govt sector in some signatory nations.
I think there might be a few in tertiary education who think it could be their chance to conquer the world. Scary, really.
-
According to our classy Prime Minister, the Labour Party has a mental illness:
-
<sarcasm>Oh, but he's not being racist, so it's OK.</sarcasm>
Post your response…
This topic is closed.