Goff on TPP

December 11th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

New Zealand would benefit more than most countries from a concluded Trans Pacific Partnership deal, former trade minister told the Herald last night.

“We have the least barriers and therefore we have the least we have to give away,” he said. “Other countries have to give away much more.

“While there are all sorts of problems involved in this negotiation, you have to look at the wider picture and the wider picture is that each country will benefit from a successful conclusion to it but New Zealand will benefit more than most.”

It’s great to have Phil Goff say this, but once again Labour is the yeah, nah party.

On union demands they say yeah to the unions and then tell employers nah, don’t worry.

On oil Shane Jones says yeah all for it, and Moana Mackey says Labour is against off shore drilling.

On Phil Goff says it will be beneficial for NZ, while other MPs such as Twyford organise protests against it.

This is Labour standing for nothing, and trying to be all things to all people.

Mr Goff made his comments just before Trade Ministers from the 12 countries negotiating the TPP ended four days of intense talks in Singapore in a bid to resolve the toughest issues.

New Zealand Trade Minister Tim Groser is thought to have played a central role in the talks, having been a professional trade negotiator and diplomat before entering politics.

Groser is excellent in these forums.

Mr Goff said opponents of the TPP were seeing the talks through their particular lens “and they are highlighting worst-case scenarios” and he was not criticising them.

“It’s unlikely we will get to a worst- case scenario and if it was a worst- case scenario, it is unlikely that we would agree to it.”

Exactly. I don’t like a lot of the stuff the US is proposing – but it is only a proposal. The leaked documents have shown that in fact the NZ Government is doing a great job in resisting any provisions that are bad for NZ.

Tags: , ,

15 Responses to “Goff on TPP”

  1. Yoza (1,545 comments) says:

    Has Goff signed up with the National Party yet?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Komata (1,110 comments) says:

    Having read Mr. Goff’s comments and those of his associates, it occurred to me that perhaps there is more to this than meet the eye, a question prompted by his somewhat unusual statement:

    “We have the least barriers and therefore we have the least we have to give away,”

    This therefore begs the question:

    Is it possible that Goff’s support is actually more in the nature of ‘solidarity’ with his socialist Democrat mates in the White House; that (as a socialist) he has a ‘vested interest’ in ensuring that there is a successful of this whole matter, and that his support (and the TPP) is part of the greater ‘One World Government’ intent which is being actively pursued by the Socialist International?

    In a few words: ‘Of course he’d say that’ (that he supports the efforts etc.)

    Given the ideologies of the left, such a response as he has made would seem to be totally in keeping with such an intent.

    Just a thought…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. UglyTruth (3,989 comments) says:

    … therefore we have the least we have to give away …

    Typical brain-dead politician, can’t distinguish a gift from compulsion.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. markm (98 comments) says:

    Why should we praise a politician who wants to appear on the winning side , when his party resolves to oppose this agreement.
    He is a typical lefty hypocrite.

    He should be bagged , along with his party for pushing opposing policies depending on the audience

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Than (425 comments) says:

    He’s not criticising his Labour colleagues. He’s just saying the exact same words as people who are.

    The need to finalise a policy position for the election will bring the internal divisions within Labour (moderates like Goff and Jones versus idealists like Mackey and Twyford) to a head. They can’t stay “yeah, nah” forever, they will have to actually agree on a position. I imagine this will involve some quite heated internal debates – here’s hoping some of those spill out in public.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. greenjacket (417 comments) says:

    Goff:
    Yeah – I am in favour of Free Trade and removal of trade barriers
    Nah – But I want barriers to foreign investment

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. smttc (692 comments) says:

    Would someone please tell that scaremongering chardonnay drinking socialist Jane Kelsey just to STFU. Why the MSM give this screeching academic the oxygen of air time is beyond me.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Fentex (867 comments) says:

    We have the least barriers and therefore we have the least we have to give away

    I agree with this line of thinking in relation to expanding free trade agreements – NZ having chosen to liberalise it’s trading a great deal is well positioned to participate in expanded free trade.

    It’s just irrelevant with regards to the TPPP which is not a free trade agreement and if Groser is honest and correct about NZ standing strong against what is not in our interest then NZ will never sign it.

    I am however sceptical, I suspect that NZ negotiators interests and ambitions are not wholly aligned with NZ’s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Komata (1,110 comments) says:

    Fentex

    Re: ‘I am however sceptical, I suspect that NZ negotiators interests and ambitions are not wholly aligned with NZ’s’.

    I’m intrigued; would you care to elaborate? Thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Lance (2,451 comments) says:

    Yoza seems to have a bi-polar view on issues.
    Either you are for the extreme far left in every way, shape and form or you are a far right running dog.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. tvb (4,205 comments) says:

    They are trying to use the TPP to force through political reforms as well in some countries. It will not happen if this is insisted on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Sam Buchanan (502 comments) says:

    Typical Goff – doesn’t articulate how and why we will benefit from the TPPA – just says “Oh it’ll be great”. The actual negotiators seem much more cynical about any benefits to NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. OneTrack (2,604 comments) says:

    “Yoza (968 comments) says:
    December 11th, 2013 at 10:08 am
    Has Goff signed up with the National Party yet?”

    It is reasonable that he is more comfortable with a centre-left party like National than the hard-left, identity politics, party of envy that Labour has morphed into.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Fentex (867 comments) says:

    [Fentex]: I suspect that NZ negotiators interests and ambitions are not wholly aligned with NZ’s’.
    [Komata]: I’m intrigued; would you care to elaborate?

    For the same reasons I said I thought Groser had a conflict of interest when he ran for head of the WTO while representing NZ in trade negotiations – winning that office requires pleasing people representing NZ requires displeasing.

    Politically ambitious people have often have ambitions for higher office, establishing legacies and memorials to themselves and any number of objectives that are more easily achieved by pleasing the powerful and influential than representing the interests of the small and unimportant.

    In international trade negotiations NZ is the small and unimportant player and people of ambition can be tempted to see benefits that don’t exist for New Zealand in negotiations that please the powerful who may grant favours and access to bigger and greater futures.

    It doesn’t require venal intentions for the worm of positive reinforcement to convince one that what is good for some is also good for all.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Harriet (4,514 comments) says:

    ‘Free’ trade. Yeah right.

    There is no such thing as a ‘free’ lunch – someone, somewhere, WILL pay – that is gaurenteed!!

    Less low skilled jobs is my pick!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.