The Daily Blog Open Mic – Wednesday 30th May 2018

1. While the meth cirus reigns on TV today; – look what the Government is pushing forward at the same time as they threw the ‘distraction’ of meth at us!!!!

   Did they think we would not see them shifting to ‘a thumbs up to CPTPP???????

   We are being played big time now folks sadly.

   Our verbal submission was 10 minutes last week and we are bitterly disapointed they did not even add any protectins we advocated for.

   When will Labour/National /NZF appologise to NZ, after the new cases of other disease comes here after their final rush to pass the final report to Parliament simnce the phoney “select Committee to review the TPTPP” was hoisted on us all as a “diversion” while their intent was to pass this toxic trade agreement as it already was???

   Chair Simon O’Connor (National MP) said he believed the CPTPP is o/k; – as is????

   Even though us and a lot of other submitters warned him and his committee that they will be setting us up for more “micro-plasma bovis” events.

   The submitters said they should include a clause be added to the ISDS agreement to allow in all cases Government contracts or with other parties allowing local/state governments and other parties to encourage Government to pass regulations to protect NZ citizens and the environment against foreign activities in NZ that may damage their future economic, environmental, health, and well-being after the trade agreement will be enacted in 2019.

   ‘Editored’ section involving environmental protection and no change from draft report originally proposed in march 2018.

   https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/SCR_78363/a1acbf19b29fdfcfb0f773ee52bffd2dfd522be3

   (Chair Simon O’Connor said he believed the CPTPP is o/k; – as is????)

   COMPREHENSIVE AND PROGRESSIVE AGREEMENT FOR TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (CPTPP)

   Page; 5

   Summary of issues discussed with submitters
   Many submitters, notably those opposed to the CPTPP, believe that the changes from the
   TPP do not substantively address their concerns. They consider that the CPTPP is
   effectively the same as the TPP.

   Investor-State dispute settlement and sovereignty
   We discussed some submitters’ concerns about the effect the CPTPP would have on the
   sovereign rights of New Zealanders to determine their own future through an elected
   Parliament. In particular, these submitters consider that the ISDS provisions unnecessarily
   empower and protect international investors.
   Some submitters believe that the threat of substantial awards against governments is a
   strong disincentive for the New Zealand Government to act in the interests of New
   Zealanders when those interests conflict with those of CPTPP investors. Submitters consider
   that this could have a chilling effect on the Government’s ability to make policy and regulate
   in areas including labour law and the mitigation of climate change.
   We also discussed the CPTPP’s relationship with New Zealand’s many international
   obligations, including the Paris Agreement to address climate change, and the United
   Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. We understand that this is problematic because
   many of these obligations are not enforceable, but the CPTPP contains enforcement
   mechanisms.
   Two dispute settlement mechanisms in CPTPP
   We understand that the CPTPP provides for two dispute settlement mechanisms: a
   government-to-government system to resolve disputes in the agreement, and ISDS. The
   ISDS mechanism provides for the settlement of disputes between foreign investors and the
   Government of the country in which the investment is made.
   Application of ISDS in CPTPP
   In the CPTPP, ISDS only applies to the Investment chapter and limited investment-related
   elements of the Financial Services chapter. The scope of the ISDS mechanism is narrower
   that it was in the TPP. Claims are no longer permitted in relation to investment contracts and
   COMPREHENSIVE AND PROGRESSIVE AGREEMENT FOR TRANS-PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP (CPTPP)
   6
   approval. This means that private companies which enter into an investment contract with
   the Government would not be able to use ISDS if there were a dispute about that contract.
   Decisions made under the Overseas Investment Act 2005 are also not subject to ISDS.
   Suspensions around the minimum standard of treatment concerning financial services
   further reduce the risk of successful claims under the CPTPP being taken against New
   Zealand. The minimum standard of treatment is an obligation that forms part of the body of
   customary international law, to accord fair and equitable treatment to covered investments,
   and not to deny justice.

Comments are closed.