Groser must tell NZ public downside of TPPA talks

By
The Daily Blog
-
2
0
Source: Green Party – Press Release/Statement:

Headline: Groser must tell NZ public downside of TPPA talks


Wednesday, 11 Dec 2013 | Press Release

“As the TPPA negotiation moves towards a possible conclusion, the New Zealand public deserve to know what the Key Government is willing to give up to achieve this deal,” Dr Norman said.

Trade Minister Tim Groser needs to give the New Zealand public far more information about the end game for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) than he has so far, Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman said today.

The next round of TPPA talks are scheduled for January, when most of the twelve countries involved in the negotiations will be on Christmas holidays and their parliaments will be in recess.

“As the TPPA negotiation moves towards a possible conclusion, the New Zealand public deserve to know what the Key Government is willing to give up to achieve this deal,” Dr Norman said.

“Before the next round of TPPA talks starts in January, Tim Groser should; at the very least, tell the New Zealand public what our bottom lines are and what he is willing to sacrifice to get this deal done.

“Minister Groser has made various statements that no New Zealander will pay more for their prescriptions because of this deal,” Dr Norman said.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

“If New Zealanders have nothing to fear from the TPP negotiations why won’t the Minister tell us what he agreed to, particularly in relation to Pharmac?

“The TPPA will have far more impact on New Zealand’s ability to make laws protecting our environment and health than any other such agreement,” said Dr Norman.

“It is not good enough that Minister Groser and his officials are intent on getting this deal inked and approved by the Key cabinet before the public knows what we may be losing.”

—

The claims and opinions made in this statement are those of the release organisation and are not necessarily endorsed by, and are not necessarily those of, The Daily Blog. Also in no event shall The Daily Blog be responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on the above release content.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

2 COMMENTS

  2. Under the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement the US seeks to make independent sovereign governments (like the New Zealand government), subject to courts made up of appointees by the same companies likely to bring such cases against them.

    Despite government assurances that they will protect Pharmac’s ability to keep medicines and drugs affordable. Under a lot of diplomatic doubletalk Tim Groser reveals the fact that the government are preparing to renege on this promise. Tim Groser passes off this backdown, by saying that what the NZ government lose in being able to source affordable medicines, will be gained back by greater tax returns to the government from expected increase in business activity and trade that will flow from the TPPA opening up free trade. This premise is weak at best and doesn’t say anything about the affordability of medicines in an economic down turn or recession. During such downturns do the sick and dying do without?

    Tim Groser remains “upbeat” about TPPA

    Vernon Small Stuff.co.nz December 11, 2013

    “If we are stiffed at the end of the negotiation, we won’t sign,” Groser said.

    He said ministers in many areas had identified “potential landing zones” for a final agreement but they were needed in all areas.

    On the specific draft chapters in the deal Groser said he had seen nothing in the discussion that would make New Zealanders pay more for their medicines.

    The Government had committed to protecting the fundamentals of the Pharmac central drug-buying agency in the face of changes sought by the United States.

    However he would not rule out some extra cost to the Government to meet so-called transparency rules on Pharmac that would allow drug companies to challenge Pharmac’s decisions. That could require new regulations and there could be a cost involved with that.

    However, the extra costs would be “totally manageable and hugely outweighed” by the extra tax that would flow from the boost to exports from a TPP deal, he said.

    So there you have it. Despite the preceding double-talk Tim Groser admits that he is prepared to allow a clause in the TPPA that will allow US drug companies to ban Pharmac from buying cheap generic medicines at the risk of being sued by the big drug companies under proposed TPPA investor/government jurisdiction.

    In other news:

    While the US is trying to subject independent governments to be bound by rulings by an international convention made up of big business lawyers that will restrict the buying of medicines…. The US itself is refusing to be bound by rulings by an international convention of human rights lawyers that could impose penalties against, would you believe it, “genocide”.

    But no, it appears to be true:

    A Convention Against Genocide

    Jeffrey Bachman, Foreign Policy Focus, December 9, 2013

    The convention defines genocide as actions taken with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.” In contrast to the designation of “crimes against humanity,” which were at that time understood to happen only during war, the convention broke new ground in noting that genocide can also occur in peacetime — thus opening a broader set of acts of violence to international condemnation. The convention identified genocide as a crime under international law, outlined the specific criminal acts that constituted it, and called for cooperation among ratifying nations to stop it.

    Eventually, cases for the Genocide Convention came to be tried before the ICJ in The Hague, Netherlands.

    The United States became a signatory to this convention in 1948, but resisted passing the legislation to implement it until 1988. Moreover, the United States is one of only five parties to the Genocide Convention that refuse to recognize the jurisdiction of the ICJ.

Comments are closed.