Judy Turner on Tibet
March 19th, 2008 at 12:20 pm by David FarrarNever thought I would be approvingly quoting from a Judy Turner speech, but hers was the highlight regarding China and Tibet. Turner is the second United Future MP. Some extracts:
However, it is sadly obvious that the Labour Government has bigger fish to fry than to uphold an oppressed people’s political freedoms and fundamental human rights. Worst still, it appears to the world New Zealand’s timid response has simply been bought by Chinese Yuan.
Ouch – and remember this is from a party which supports the Government.
The first response of the Government was to stall, saying more information is needed. Hopefully it will blow over, they are thinking – maybe if the People’s Liberation Army can crush the dissension quickly enough we might be able to sneak over to Beijing, sign on the dotted line and still gain the plaudits for being the first country to sign a bilateral free trade agreement with China.
The initial response was pretty appalling. To be fair the Government’s later position was much better as they talked about the right to peaceful protest.
As a proud New Zealander the very least I would expect is for the Prime Minister to summon the Chinese Ambassador and in no uncertain terms express our nation’s disappointment and disapproval. Or are we so subservient in this relationship that we cannot even do that?
Maybe we just emailed them a press release!
UnitedFuture leader Hon Peter Dunne hosted the Dalai Lama last year, an honour made strange by the fact that the Prime Minister refused to meet with the Tibetan leader. At the time, not a lot was really made of this.
Maybe now we are truly seeing which side of the fence this Labour Government sits on.
Again, this is from a Government ally whose Leader is a Minister.
I don’t go as far as the Greens in calling for there to be no FTA with China, because of what has happened. Let’s be honest – the Greens are against an FTA with anyone – this is just an excuse to oppose the FTA. But by that I don’t mean they are not sincere on the Tibet issue – they have a long and good record on that issue.
We should complete the FTA. But we shouldn’t let the desire for an FTA mean that we self-censor ourselves on fundamental issues such as the right to peaceful protest. Now again this doesn’t mean we get up and call the Chinese Government a bunch of bloody killers – rhetoric like that doesn’t tends to be counter-productive. But we should communicate our views directly to the Chinese Government, and have public statements that clearly support the right of peaceful protest, and condemn the use of force to stop such protests.
China claims that the violence was caused by the protesters. Well that is possible but the trouble is that there is no way to verify this, because of the media restrictions. If they allowed free movement of media, then one could judge independently what has happened. Without that media freedom, it is dangerous to assume the Chinese Government is telling the truth.
UPDATE: John Armstrong also likes Turner’s speech.
Tags: China, free speech, free trade agreement, John Armstrong, Judy Turner, Tibet
March 19th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Yeah I heard there was going to be a protest about it. How many will turn up? A pathetic low turn-out of bleeding heart liberals, maybe about 100. Typical hysterical middle-class whiteys, no doubt whipped up into a frenzy by a one-eyed press…
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Hmm, I wonder if it will be a silent protest?
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I suspect the Greens would base their objections to the FTA on the ‘slave labour’ aspect of an indefinable chunk of China’s exports to us, but that doesn’t seem to worry any one else one bit now does it?
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
Look I watched demented creeps like Minto stop a rugby game in 1980 and now the communist bastards say nothing and have no problems with a bunch of morally bankrupt sport person’s playing Olympics in the smog, while the pigs bash the Monks !!
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Oh sorry FTA? sorry I thought you said EFA.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
“China claims that the violence was caused by the protesters.”
Helen Clark was spinning the same line on TV last night.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Support the Tour Bash a Monk today Aunty Helen, go girl go and curse another sporting event !
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
D4J, the Springbok tour was 1981, not 1980.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Trading with a country gives tacit recognition of the government of that country. Why do we recognise the Chinese Communist Party as the legitimate government of China? When was the last time they won an election? For that matter, have they ever won an election? If we are going to trade with the dictatorship in Beijing, then there is no reason against trading with regimes such as the Nazis, or the Kim regime in North Korea. Democracy is the only legitimate form of government. There is no amount of money in the world that is worth more than blood. All the people who criticise the protesters should hang their heads in shame. The Communist Party of China has killed more people throughout history than Hitler and his henchmen ever did. Shame on you all.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
The PM needs to be taken seriously to task over this.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4443179a6160.html
So why wouldn’t she meet the Dalai Lama in NZ…. I guess she was hoping we had forgotten that the trade deal and our stance on Tibet are clearly interlinked.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
So it was ph, still suffering from fallout trauma and I have never quite recovered from the Minto Bars’ Blue and Red Squads at all three test matches that I attended. The same protesters today are extremely SILENT about the human right abuses occurring in China. Just imagine the communists in NZ if our good Yankee friends were doing this in 2008?
Vote:Sickening hypocrisy.
March 19th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
what dad said.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Why do we raise trade sanctions against some countries whose politics and human rights abuses we disagree with yet enter FTAs with others?
Seems a little inconsistent and (dare I use that word again: hypocritical)
If Helen is so sure that human rights be separated from the negotiation of trade deals, let’s see if she’s confident China feels the same way.
What would happen if NZ came out and issued a strong criticism of China’s actions in Tibet?
Would the FTA go through?
If China canceled the FTA as a result, would that not indicate that China does consider that they’re buying our silence on the issue through offering an FTA.
Remember we have a long record of pandering to the sensitivities of Chinese leadership. From snubbing the Dalai Lama on his visit, the use of buses to shield Chinese officials from protesters at the Christchurch Apec meeting to the forced removal of “Free Tibet” banners from K Road during the visit of Chinese dignatories it has become clear that when China says “jump” we just say “how high and on who?”
This is rather sad, considering the strong stance many Kiwis took in respect to issues such as apartheid in South Africa and nuclear weapons/power.
It’s amazing what a little political self-interest will do to a nation’s scruples and principles eh?
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
There is a sense in which not signing an FTA because of human rights abuses is self defeating. Trade between China and outsiders should help moderate and normalise both government behaviour and citizen’s expectations of their government. Furthermore, as China’s wealth increases, which trade helps to achieve, an expanding middle class will increasingly demand that their government behave, since bad behaviour threatens their rapidly improving standard of living.
A sensible approach, it seems to me, is to pick the ways of signaling disagreement that do not hurt us.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Not a lot on Key’s reaction on this blog either I see…
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
DPF:
“We should complete the FTA. But we shouldn’t let the desire for an FTA mean that we self-censor ourselves ohttp://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/03/judy_turner_on_tibet.html#
Editn fundamental issues such as the right to peaceful protest.”
So we spout some rhetoric, telling them not to be naughty, whilst endorsing them with the offer of closer economic ties. Anyone would think that you’re suggesting we send them a mixed message regarding their human rights abuses.
[DPF: No, I am saying it is silly to link an FTA which has spent years to negotiate and which will benefit NZ to what has happened. I also do think trading with China will make them less repressive in time. However we should not let the risk that China would walk from the FTA be a reason to not stand up for peaceful protest]
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Good point Stephen. Socialism comes in blue and red cans.
Vote:Edit; I forget it also comes in a Kermit green can.
March 19th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
d4j said: I have never quite recovered from the Minto Bars’ Blue and Red Squads at all three test matches that I attended. The same protesters today are extremely SILENT about the human right abuses occurring in China.
No we’re not, d4j! I was arrested on the field at Hamilton in 1981, and involved in a number of other Springbok Tour protests. I recall seeing Keith Locke at several of them too. As you can see, on this blog and others, I am far from silent on the human rights abuses in China, and Keith Locke is leading the opposition in Parliament to the Labour/National weasel words on this issue.
Interesting to read French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner’s call for a boycott of the Olympics opening ceremony in protest against the repression in Tibet.
Will Helen or John respond positively? No chance, I’d say.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Radar and Aardvark you write very well.
I also think the same. Our Government should send a formal protest to the Chinese embassy in Wellington deploring their activites in Lhasa. If the Chinese then rescind the FTA then we know the price of standing up for what is right.
In that respect I think that DPF should make clear whether he would go ahead and support moves to “communicate our views directly to the Chinese Government, and have public statements that clearly support the right of peaceful protest, and condemn the use of force to stop such protests” if it was certain that we would loose the FTA. One can only think that this socialist government thinks that the FTA will be cancelled if they protest too much.
The National Party are weak on this too. Unfortunately they have a desire to follow economic benefits over moral causes which is an enormous millstone. Following money at any cost does not make a person any better.
Following on from what Radar said I have read “Mao: The Unknown Story” which gives an excellent account of the bloodbath that represents the Chinese Communist Party’s despicable acts in the last millenium and doesn’t look like changing this millenium either.
[DPF: No I wouldn't let the threat of cancelling the FTA affect our response. That is a price too high]
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Judy WHO?
While I am a bit of a political junkie I had to think twice when I read the first line of DPF’s post.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
So I assume we are all throwing out our ‘made in China” products then?
Vote:Also boycotting car travel to protest against Saudi Arabia’s human rights record?
Calling for a formal criticism of USA for Guantanamo Bay?
or just not driving Fords or GM cars?
March 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Equivocation is the new left? Personally I am opposed to the FTA because I believe it will be harmful to NZ’s workers and people in the longer-term. It is a shame that the Labour and National and Green party have not put as much effort into growing NZ’s own infrastructure as they have to turning a blind eye to the export of pollution, workers’ rights and importation of cheapo goods. Still as long as it keeps us in our ‘clean-green’ ‘holier than thou’ ‘buy!buy!buy! bubble…..
Vote:I’m worried about this move. If we had a half-decent manufacturing base I would be less worried, but we don’t – apart from dairy. ANd I give it fifteen years max before CHina has the capability to no longer need our milk….
March 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
# Short Shriveled and Slightly to the Left Add karma Subtract karma +0 Says:
March 19th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
So I assume we are all throwing out our ‘made in China” products then?
Also boycotting car travel to protest against Saudi Arabia’s human rights record?
Calling for a formal criticism of USA for Guantanamo Bay?
or just not driving Fords or GM cars?
So what you’re saying is NZ should be China’s bitch.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Lee C said: …the Labour and National and Green party have not put as much effort into growing NZ’s own infrastructure as they have to turning a blind eye to the export of pollution, workers’ rights and cheapo goods.
Give the Greens a fair go, Lee. They’ve never actually been in Government to have any ability to grow NZ’s own infrastructure. They have been a pretty good watchdog on the export of pollution and workers’ rights, but have never had the chance to implement their policies.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
“Give the Greens a fair go” What the hell – look at the damage Sue Bradford has done to this country !!!
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“What the hell – look at the damage Sue Bradford has done to this country !!!”
Vote:yeah, its like the Apocalypse outside
March 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
No OA I am not saying that.
Vote:Let’s just say over the last five or so years I’ve developed a cynicism about protester words versus protester actions.
Also I am ammused by Kiwiblog’s and its commentator’s selective human rights protests.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
SSASTTL,
in that case I didn’t notice the country was in a bad shape “outside” because the Green’s policies on pollution and workers’ right HASN’T been implemented.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
“What the hell – look at the damage Sue Bradford has done to this country !!!”
What, by getting the minimum wage for 16 year olds raised so they are no longer discriminated against, by making it illegal to bash your kids under the guise of “discipline”, and by encouraging business and consumers to Buy Kiwi Made. All sounds pretty good to me!
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“Maybe now we are truly seeing which side of the fence this Labour Government sits on.”
That’s easy – the side that believes in suppression of criticism of the governing party.
And Klark’s suggestion that the protestors may have caused the violence is just her picking up pure Beijing spin. She is a very evil individual.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
We have no business doing business with china untill their government has evolved to the point where they build a statue to tank man in the square.
No qualifications or exceptions.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Murray
I agree. When China are prepared to stop censoring information and stop persecution of Tibetean people they will be ready to come to the FTA table in good faith. Until then – we are being selective in our protest of human rights by even trading with them at all. Clark has shown us that she is nothing more than a cheap plastic puppet purchased in a $2 shop by accepting this situation and still pushing ahead with the FTA.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
george – John Key has basically been parroting Helen Clark on this. To his credit, DPF hasn’t towed the party line.
The only parties to emerge with any credit here are the Greens, Maori Party and (somewhat surprisingly) United Future.
[DPF: Key's initial response was stronger than Clark's but I agree both should be stronger.]
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
toad
If the Green’s were serious they would vote against the govt from time to time rather than simply abstain. They don’t like free trade anyway so their disagreement with the China FTA could easily be considered to be nothing to do with China and just a consequence of their “great leap backward” policies.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
burt, the Greens often vote against the Government. On the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Act, we had the rather unusual spectactle of the Green, ACT and Maori Parties opposing it while National and other small parties supported it.
And the Greens allied with National and other parties to prevent the Government from passing the The Therapeutic Products and Medicines Bill into law.
The Green Party actually votes the same way as the Maori Party more often than it votes the same way as the Government.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
I am going to repeat others…
There is little doubt that hypocrisy has reared its ugly head and that this govt is selling out. This is a classic case of the govt, I think, assuming the people wont notice. But they do. They remember the stand taken against apartheid, nuclear power, etc, etc. Double standards seems to be the standard for this govt.
Then again, as others have commented, it is a difficult line to draw and if we were not to trade or have dealings with any govt with similar ‘issues’ half the world would be off limits.
And further, is a protester a terrorist or a freedom fighter? Very much depends on where you sit (except obviously in obvious cases).
2c
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
It’s this kind of thing that makes Kiwis vote for United Future, but unfortunately United Future ends up propping up NZ’s free-speech-shutting-down government. A bit of consistency would be appreciated. Gordon Copeland may get mocked, but he’s the lone truly honourable man from the Dunny mob.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
Well bugger me! The Greens really did give Labour some stick over this. And Michael Cullen responded with personal abuse.
They’ll have a field day on frogblog over this. If there’s one thing Greens can’t stand, it is attacking the person instead of arguing the issue.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
ah yes, judy turncoat…i well remember her reply to my email saying vote against the EFA…as I recall, she was talking about how it wasn’t about limiting free speech…fucking hypocrite happy clapper just chasing a headline.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
“Cearly my memory as a fellow student of the member at Canterbury University is now somewhat faulty on these matters. I must remember him referring to the Pol Pot regime.”
Low blow caustic sullen kullen . I would cut you to ribbons you twisted demented academic fuckwit !! ” Pol Pot ” was your father jerk brain. You low prick.
Edit; we pay for this shit – taxpayer.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
They’ll have a field day on frogblog over this. If there’s one thing Greens can’t stand, it is attacking the person instead of arguing the issue.
Vote:Oh yes, and yet their silence is deafening when Cullen is abusing the EB in order to promote the EFA.
March 19th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Singapore doesn’t even allow peaceful protest, let alone non-peaceful ones. Yet we have an FTA with Singapore. Why shouldn’t we have one with China? As with Singapore, NZ doesn’t need to comment on the internal politics of another nation.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Lee C: The Exclusive Brethren weren’t abused. They were held to account for what they actually did – trying to get the Government of their choice elected by throwing $1.2m behind the National Party, effectively circumventing political parties’ spending limit. I’d call it corruption, and it was why the rules needed to be tightened.
Doesn’t excuse the shambles the Government made with the EFA though, but at lesat it’s better than unlimited proxy advertising. One person, one vote – not one dollar, one vote eh. Isn’t that what democracy is based on?
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Utopian ginga spews ;”One person, one vote – not one dollar, one vote eh.”
Oh yeah Owen Glenn x one dollar = 600,000 the same number that signed the anti smacking ill bill and went missing from the cot cases employed at IRD.
God help New Zealand.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
supurb speech GBTH – I think you actually believed it.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
If you look at how china has influenced our government, police and even local councils you should realise this war was lost a long time ago. How can we protest against china when we traded with Saddam. Pincohet was throwing dissenters into the sea with concrete shoes but that was no problem. Has anyone noticed that Malaysia is a racist state that oppresses minorities and Indonesia is running a policy similar to china against non Muslims and minorities.
We sold butter to Russia under communist rule even Australia isn’t exactly an angel and Tonga is a dictatorship.
I’m sorry but if you want to be taken seriously then you have to be consistent and looking at the laws being enacted in NZ I don’t believe we are moving in the right direction either.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Sean said: “Singapore doesn’t even allow peaceful protest, let alone non-peaceful ones. Yet we have an FTA with Singapore. Why shouldn’t we have one with China? As with Singapore, NZ doesn’t need to comment on the internal politics of another nation.”
But Singapore doesn’t annex its neighbours and impose its own political and religious views on them, nor does it oppress their culture and torture their peoples.
Singapore’s residents seem to have little issue with their freedoms or the lack thereof. The people of Tibet obviously have a huge issue with what China is doing to them.
Vote:March 19th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Why has no one mentioned the obvious fact that Ms Turner is simply being a mouthpiece for Peter Dunne on this issue … . He is well known to be pro Taiwan, this merely reflects a longstanding China position of her party leader … which he was not prepared to vocalise himself as a Minister in the coalition government.
And no doubt the trade deal with China will be one of the achievements of United in the coalition which they will cite in the 2008 campaign.
On the issue of China – the facts are, does the UN recognise an independent Tibet? (it does not recognise an independent Taiwan). It would be unwise for New Zealand to take a position independent of the UN on this. As unwise as having a policy on Northern Ireland (republican nationalism) or Basque independence which involved a revision of trade relations with the EU.
As for our policy on human rights in nations we trade with, the rights of women in Saudi Arabia? – freedom of religion in Moslem (no right to convert to another religion) countries? – freedom of speech and right to protest in Singapore, the USA neo-imperialism and Cold War era activity in Latin America, its behaviour in the war against terrorism, its illegal occuptaion of Iraq …
In our country people who had no plan of any action, but merely had broken gun laws were treated in what way …, in Tibet clearly some of the uprising involved use of violence, if that had actually happened here what would the armed offenders guys have done on the ground when the violence was happening … . I guess its just lucky for us, we were not negotiating this trade treaty in the 1860′s …
Vote:March 20th, 2008 at 1:11 am
OMG – That did address the question….
toad.
The Greens did a great job. Good to see. If they stopped abstaining on confidence and supply then they should rocket in the polls as people start to see them as principled and standing up for what they believe again.
Vote:March 20th, 2008 at 1:16 am
Bury.
Vote:March 20th, 2008 at 5:38 am
NZ’s response to and stance versus Red China has been driven by pragmatic economic self-interest for 20-odd years. As an economic midget wanting a slice of one of the biggest and fastest growing markets in the world, NZ has no choice in this instance but to resile from its mealy-mouthed holier-than-thou figleaf commitment to international human rights.
As other posters have commented, there are more flexible double standards in NZ’s international human rights than one can shake a stick at [e.g.] Malaysia, Saudi, Tonga etc.. But I’ll toss another example into the pot: Fiji. No one was killed, the troops had empty weapons, a corrupt regime was purged – but this time, NZ thinks of itself as the 600Kg gorilla that can chuck its self-righteous weight around and claim some gimcrack moral high ground by banning boy scouts and netballers.
Get over it NZ. As an insignificant global economic player, the way to get back at the Red Chinese is to box clever and to screw them over economically and socially in ways they cannot imagine at levels they do not recognise.
Vote:March 20th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Great to see Judy Turner and United Future sticking up for Tibet.. if we had any balls we’d be saying screw your FTA and screw your olympics.. we’re not going!!
Vote:March 20th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Turner ‘turned heads’, including Clark’s with this one! NO-one could ever call her & United Future any form of (Tibetan) poodle now! I sense Dunne would have said the same had he been in the house but his deputy/co-leaders showed her instinct for common sense & reality in his absence. Dunne is right on to it with this call to review MMP. Judy Turner has also hit a big nail on the head with this paternity testing. Why would anyone oppose any factor to help verify paternity? The more I look at the likes of what her & Dunne have achieved, as of April 1, business tax finally down to 30%; full rebate of all tax paid if any individual or company gives 3 times their tax due to registered charities the more I think MMP could work if we had 20 MP’s like these 2 looking out for the best interests of all of us instead of the self serving traits of the larger (& some smaller) parties. Ian
Vote: