Turei on Trade
Green co-leader was on Q+A this morning, and it was a pretty lamentable performance. While there were a couple of tough topics, she just didn’t cope with the scrutiny, and appeared very flustered and evasive.
I backed Turei as their best choice for co-leader (not that I get a vote!) as she has generally been a strong MP. But today showed up the gap between her and someone like Fitzsimons, who would have handled things much more calmly.
Of course part of the problem was that on the trade issue, Turei had a nonsensical position to defend. Every country on earth supports the move to freer trade, apart from pretty much just North Korea. The Green view on trade is very much a fringe view, and it got exposed today.
From the transcript (not yet online:
GUYON Okay let’s look at an economic idea that you are opposed to, and that is free trade largely. In your maiden speech in 2002 you said that, and I quote you, ‘the acceptance of free trade agreements threatens our economy, our environment, our people and our sovereignty.’ Do you not believe in any free trade agreements at all?
METIRIA Well our position is that you need to have systems of fair trade, that make sure that New Zealand can retain its economic sovereignty, and free trade deals tend to undermine the economic sovereignty.
GUYON All the free trade deals, I mean the free trade deal that we have with Australia for example that we’ve had for 20 years, has that undermined our sovereignty?
METIRIA It prevents New Zealand from being able to make the economic decisions around our manufacturing, around job retention, all of those issues that are best for New Zealand, and we want New Zealand to be a prosperous and sustainable economy, that means we have to move … we need to be able to make those decisions for ourselves.
GUYON Does that mean all free trade agreements, for example the CER agreement that we’ve had with Australia since 1982, does that cover that?
METIRIA Look the key issue for us…
GUYON No, can I get a straight answer for our viewers on this question please, because it’s all very well to give a speech about free trade.
Yet she still could not state whether or not the Green Party thought CER was a good or a bad thing.
I wonder why the Greens are so inconsistent on the issues of national sovereignty. They correctly point out climate change affects everyone regardless of national borders. They support surrendering sovereignty to the UN on every treaty there is. Yet on economic issues, they cite national sovereignty as a reason to prevent people freely trading with each other.
GUYON Okay with respect, let’s look at one of those countries, China. Now on Thursday it was the first anniversary of our Free Trade Agreement with China, our exports have climbed 61% over that year to 3.3 billion. I mean wouldn’t we all be the poorer if we’d listened to you and not gone ahead with that agreement?
METIRIA Oh look Guyon, I mean you can make that kind of accusation and I think it’s just silly, the truth is that so much of New Zealand’s economy at the moment is under serious threat if you like from the fact that we’re having to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars every week actually in order to just pay the interest on our current borrowing. We’re having a housing bubble at the moment which is going to also impact seriously on our economy and there are other kinds of tools that we can use to deal with economic issues that are affecting New Zealand, like increasing the ability for banks for example to lend ….
The stupidity of Metiria’s response is the China FTA means we are borrowing less. Exports rose 60% in the middle of a recession!! That is a huge sucess. She just had no answer at all to this.
GUYON Can we return to this agreement though because there are some real Green issues here in this China Free Trade Agreement and I want to talk to you about one of them, because the New Zealand Trade and Enterprise says areas like the health supplements in Manuka Honey are a great area for expansion of our exports, and in fact your own Super Fund has quite a large shareholding on Konvita New Zealand which has 18 branded stores in China and is actually doing very very well out of this China Free Trade Agreement, would you deny them that opportunity, because you opposed that agreement.
You have to love the irony. Their super fund is personally profiting from the China FTA that they battled against.
October 4th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
It’s negativity that kills politicians. As long as the Greens talk about everything other than how NZ can achieve gains for the environment without too much tradeoff, they’ll turn off 90% of the electorate. For example, I was at a recent seminar on how local government needs to consider the environment in it’s planning and all one Green Party member wanted to talk about was how unsustainable McDonalds is, and how NZ should not allow then to open any more stores.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Come in Toad, Greenfly et al Please tidy this mess up for all that is holy or was that HOLEY, VERY MUCH HOLEYER.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
“she just didn’t cope with the scrutiny, and appeared very flustered and evasive”
she obviously graduated from the Winston Peters School of Avoidance and Double-Talk
October 4th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
The funny thing about free trade is that, at its purest, free trade is fair. Fair trade is just enforced wealth redistribution.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/q-guyon-espiner-interviews-green-party-co-leader-metiria-turei-3046588/video
get your popcorn and coke – LMFAO (she’s just an amateur)
October 4th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
“I backed Turei as their best choice for co-leader”
Yep, and now I see why. Great Machiavellian strategy.
I would have gone for Delahunty myself, but after reading the above, I guess its much of a muchness.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
In my opinion, the difficulty Metiria faced with the question of ‘free’ trade was over the nuances that ‘fair’ brings to the concept. All trade is not ‘fair’. Much trade has ‘unfair’ effects. Hardly something that Metiria could explain with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’. The CER with Australia does contain some thorns and it is those that give the Greens cause for caution over giving a ‘yes’ answer (this is only my opinion – I’m not knowledgable on these matters). As a viewer, that is how I saw it. Metiria didn’t have a happy interview, but unlike you, I believe that the reason was because the questions she was asked required more than a sound byte in response. The issue of the Green MP’s housing mistake and the requirement to explain on national TV would account, I believe, for Metiria’s ‘fluster’. Bill English has appeared similarly flustered in recent days. As to that issue, I’m awaiting developments with great interest. I’d like to know the facts, just as I’d like to know the facts of Bill English’s accomodation situation.
Winston, you card – a simple ‘NO’ from you will suffice.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
When I first saw her interviewed on Q and A on the day she was elected I remember thinking she did pretty well.
I have since seen her on Seven days and now this morning. She needs a huge amount of coaching if she is not to come off as a complete dipstick, regardless of what she is discussing. She couldn’t even seem to keep up with the questions, let alone answer them. Maybe one bit of coaching might be not to smoke anything green prior to interviews?
October 4th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Espiner to Turei;
“It was cynical wasn’t it, you didn’t tell people that behind the scenes you were tidying up your own arrangements before you laundered them and made sure they were legitimate – You’ve been telling other MPs in other political parties that you’re the moral compass of parliament yet you’ve been ripping the taxpayer off”
woohoo – love it
October 4th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
“I believe that the reason was because the questions she was asked required more than a sound byte in response”
No they didn’t.
“Do you support CER?”
“Overall, yes. There are some issues with it such as…”
See, it’s easy.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
The ‘Greens’ are in fact hard-line socialists. They are opposed to economic development. The problem for them is they cannot say as much as it would be political suicide, thus any sugar coating of their position will always fall apart under scrutiny.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Guyon interviews all politicians like that .. he seldom lets them finish a answer because they tend to rant on promoting themselves .. I thought that she was not prepared to answer questions as yes/no as the answer would not be popular.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Extract from ‘Doctor Idiots Dictionary’
Housing mistake. –Something concerning a rort by all the members of the Green Party.
Housing rort. —Something concerning a mistake by a member of the National Party
October 4th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Economies have to trade, or choose the Albanian option. That said, the rules of that trade are not fixed, automatic or necessarily obvious, as the BRIC economies are beginning to show in the WTO process. There are lots of possible configurations of world trade. The Greens need to choose one, or some combination thereof, which they are prepared to defend electorally and in power (when, if they ever get there, they’ll have to participate in negotiations of one sort or another). The problem is that they are riven internally – traditions believing in no growth, some growth, fair trade, no trade can be ‘fair’ under capitalism, to name but four. That’s why Clark was so clever – for trade, but under the banner of National Identity, that is, participating in the global economy but with an eye to our sovereignty and ’space’ to negotiate.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
About that housing rip-off, Turei said they do a market review each year which sets the rent you and I then pay to their Super fund.
So just precisely what rationale did they use to arrive at a figure of $1,000 p.w. in 2008?
Why was that halved this year, when the overall rental market hasn’t moved substantially?
What rental figures have they been using in all previous years?
October 4th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Same ones that valued Phillida’s mezzanine floor at $95/night in 2001.
October 4th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Sorry that was 1997 not 2001.
Courtesy Patrick Starr.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=173969
October 4th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Welcome to your new opposition party.
The media and one particular idiot blogger who are all over Bill English seem to have passed these people by. Has anyone done the sums to work our how many properties over how many years have been overcharged by $25k per year? Remember these people are only MPs with no ministerial responsibilities – not even when Labour was in power. 9 x 9 x 25 = $2.025 million!
When will they pay the money back?
October 4th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Must have had hemp curtains and a composting toilet to be worth that much a night.
October 4th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
All this is irrelevant, the fools that believe the Melons are the truth and the light are probably the last people you would expect to be watching Q&A on a Sunday morning. Most will be still in bed sleeping off a hangover or dreaming about the next dole day. Turei could have talked crap for a full hour and it wouldn’t matter a jot to the idiots that support the party. Most have a very warped view of the world and logic and clear thought go out the door when the reality of life is put to them. It’s all very well to be idealistic but idealistic doesn’t pay the bills, they just haven’t figured this out yet.
October 4th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Heh
Many right wing bloggers spend a lot of energy attacking a very minor party that can barely scrape above the 5% threshold. Why is that? Are they afraid?
[DPF: Most of the time I attack their policies because I think they would be very bad for NZ.]
October 4th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
the greens demand transperancy in others so when caught out, they look like scmucks and should be made to explain, nothing to be scared of really
October 4th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
After seeing the interview one would conclude Turei is really a “flake” and the Green Party is doomed with such leadership (great news!).
This poor woman should be going back to some P.R. firm to get advice on how to deal with the press, even when dealing with tepid questions she looked out of her depth.
October 4th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
I think several minor party’s policies would be very bad for NZ, but I never bother to mention them. I don’t see those parties as a serious threat, as their chances of getting their bills passed are low
October 4th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Manolo – only doomed by reasonable people who don’t vote for them anyway. No, their voters really are on a different planet. A eclectic collection of socialists, whacked-out Gaia worshipers and unthinking ex-pats who feel ‘nice’ about supporting NZs green image from their smoggy cities.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
“After seeing the interview one would conclude Turei is really a “flake””
I couldn’t help wondering where I had seen that look on Turei’s face,………………….. now its suddenly come back to me. 2am in the morning travelling down to Cooks Beach – a possum in the middle of the road, first hit by my headlights -looking right at me approaching at 100k – just the look on its face in that final second………………..BadoompBadoomp
October 4th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Slogans over substance
October 4th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
rimu 3:57 pm,
I trust you haven’t forgotten a certain bill put forward by Green Party member Sue Bradford which passed into law just recently?
No serious threat to the freedoms of NZers whatsoever, right?
Hardly worth a mention really, eh?
Just some little ineffectual ‘minor’ party?
This is the curse of MMP; little ‘minor’ parties DO have a disproportionate effect on policy, and can hold major parties to ransom. Ever heard the term ‘king maker’ before? Didn’t exist prior to MMP.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
You mean that one that both Labour and National voted for?
October 4th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Pretty hard to talk against free trade when measuring the economic expansion of the last 25 years…
Although I think Libertarians are bat s**t crazy one of the points I read on their site rang very true, it read, “Do you support tariffs between the North and South Island? If not your a free trader because they are ALL just lines on a map”…
October 4th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
WAtch Sunday tonight on TVOne.
We could do with some free trade in gold.
Bill Garnder has been battling for years to get a right to sell the stuff overseas and earn us about $300 million from a few hectares of land.
October 4th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
So, the Green super fund has investments in a company that was impacted by the NZ/Aus harmonisation of food licensing? And invested in insulation companies that made profits from the insulation subsidy? And invested in wind farms that made profits from the renewable energy targets?
So, sure, probably those are all innocent investments. But they didn’t cut Bill English much slack, did they?
So, after we finish with the Greens’ housing in Wellington, and the Greens’ and Labour’s office accommodation in electorates and elsewhere, shall we move on to their super fund investments in areas impacted by policies they have input into?
October 4th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
I had a look at Redalert and Phil Twiford brought up her lack of ability to convey their poilcy etc with China .. I mentioned that Helen Clark said before the election (I think she she it before that last 3 elections) that she wanted to hook up with the Greens in a partnership so i asked how they would deal with the huge gap in policy .. Trev deleted because I was off thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Both sentences were about what Phil had written .. wtf
Owen .. I saw the shorts and I can’t wait to hear the mad looking woman that they interviewed
October 4th, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Did the Greeny on Sunday (on TV One) look like Sue Bradford or what?
Or maybe this is just indicative of the ‘close-knit’ Greeny community.
Anyone got a banjo?
October 4th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
You have to love the irony. Their super fund is personally profiting from the China FTA that they battled against.
Nice catch.
But in some ways it is the exact opposite of irony: there is no part of the economy the Greens could put their superannuation money that does not benefit from trading, if not in the short term then certainly in the long term.
Even manufacturing, although it now employs fewer people in first world economies, still produces far more output than thirty years ago. There have been astounding gains in productivity in manufacturing, in good part because that sector has gained access to capital and ideas both locally and from overseas through trade.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Asking a green specific questions about economics is unfair and cruel, much like demanding that a 5 year old explain the logistics of the Tooth Fairy. And yet funny as shit !
October 4th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
Ok got you. So we are borrowing too much. I guess that means we should cut back both in government and particularly in personal borrowing since you mention the housing boom…
Huhbutwhat? First she says we borrowed too much, then she says she wants to make it easier for banks to lend (further increase borrowing).
In spite of what Turei says about “economic sovereignty”, the only real problem with free trade is that it tends to get applied asymetrically by hypocrites: the likes of the EU (france in particular) and the US, who lobby other countries to reduce trade barriers but keep their own intact. Were there more even handed reductions in trade barriers, developing countries would benefit enormously as their comparatively cheap labour would give them the edge.
Now I guess the greens would say this would result in exploitation of the developing country labour force, however it is obvious that in the long term, the increase in empolyment in the deveoping countries would force the wage rates up, raising their standards of living.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:09 am
You heard it here first, I will give kudos to Helen Clark over one matter. At some time during the last 9 years, the great crusader Bob Geldof, the Boomtown Ratter who had more to dislike than just Modays, asked NZ to provide more help to developing countries. She replied that NZ had removed trade barriers to developing countries and suggested that he encourage countries from his neck of the woods to do the same. I thought it was a good reply.
While trade barriers may keep wealthy countries wealthy, they also keep poor countries poor. From New Zealand’s point of view, being a agriculture and commodity dependent economy, are we also still a developing country?
October 5th, 2009 at 12:12 am
Yes I believe we are. But I believe we could live sustainably with little trade. We have enough resource to live quite comfortably, if we limit imagration. We can determine our own future, while holding onto our unique cultural identity.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:27 am
Mmm, can’t wait to sup Victory Gin whilst hailing the victory of autarky.