My column in this weeks community newspaper The Star on page 12 digital.thestar.co.nz/olive/ode/str_daily/ MPS VIEW What’s all the fuss about the TPPA? Clare Curran Dunedin South MP Last weekend, thousands of New Zealanders took to the streets to protest about a trade agreement being negotiated between NZ and 11 other countries. Protests about trade agreements aren’t unheard of, but this one has a different feel. So what’s all the fuss about? Back in 2008/9 when the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement first emerged, its stated objective was a high›quality and comprehensive agreement for more access to markets for our dairy, sheep, beef and other agricultural products and the hope that no products would be exempted from the removal of tariffs over time. The first inkling of a problem was information leaking out that it was a huge agreement about much more than trade. This was followed by a consistent refusal by negotiating countries to release the text of the agreement. As more countries were added, criticism mounted about the proceedings’ secrecy, the agreement’s scope, and controversial clauses in drafts leaked to the public. Five years after the negotiations began in earnest it appears the original goal has slipped out of reach as the deal between Pacific nations has become dominated by talks between the United States and Japan and gains in market access for New Zealand look slim. Labour has publicly said a second›rate deal on dairy in the TPP would totally contradict the agreed purpose of the original Pacific trade agreement. We’ve also outlined bottom lines that we must not compromise on. The fear is that those bottom lines will get crossed by a government desperate to be part of a deal. Worryingly, the TPPA is now being described as a 21st› century agreement that will reach further ‘‘behind the border’’ than any previous free trade or investment agreement. There are about 29 chapters, very few of which involve old› fashioned trade. In practice, it gives foreign governments and well› resourced foreign companies the right to influence our domestic decisions, and marginalise our own national priorities, advocates and agencies, including Parliament and our courts. New rules would limit our ability to regulate in our own interests on intellectual property, investment, financial services, government procurement, even health and environment laws. New rules are weighted towards the interests of the big international corporates and light›handed regulation while domestic lawmakers will have to comply. The most potent threat to open government and national autonomy is the Investor›State Dispute mechanism that would allow investors from TPPA countries, especially the litigious US, to sue our Government directly in private offshore tribunals. New Zealand would lose control of its sovereign right to make laws in its own interests. Preserving the sovereign right of New Zealand to protect the public good, particularly in health and the environment laws, is a bottom line for Labour. If these rights are weakened and the agricultural benefits are not crash hot, you’ve got to ask yourself, what’s the point?
Posted on: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 21:25:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015