Closing the story on the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) Maybe?
It
is just over a year since TPP Free Wellington initiated the petition
to the Governor General (GG) then asking Sir Jerry Mateparae to
honour the constitution and not provide Royal Assent to the TPP
legislation.
A lot has happened in the year since including the swearing in of a New
Governor, Her Excellency General Dame Patsy Reddy 28 September 2016.
More recently the passage of the TPP Amendment Bill 15 November and the recent 5
December announcement by the leader of his resignation as PM Monday
12 December 2016.
TPP Petition to the Governor General - #1 - 30 January
We
made an initial presentation of the petition with over 4300
signatures Saturday 30 January 2016, when we passed the petition to
the GG's Official Secretary, Gregory Baughen at the Government House
gates.
We
continued collecting signatures on the petition accumulating another
4000+ to November 2016. We launched an online version of the petition
mid-year on which we collected a further 2600 signatures.
TPP Legislation, Trump and an ever hopeful NZ Government
The
Government pushed the TPP legislation forward despite its knowledge
that the TPP would fail whereby the US refuses to ratify the treaty.
The
election of Donald Trump as President elect of the US along with the
entrenchment of Republican majorities in both the US House of
Representatives and Senate, meant that the stomach to ratify TPP was
lost. This was confirmed when Obama US President till 20 January 2017
gave up attempting to push the TPP treaty through the US Congress
during their so-called lame duck period.
The
TPP legislation was passed by the Parliament on Tuesday 15 November
the final vote outcome read out at 4:44pm or thereabouts.
TPP Petition to the Governor General - #2 - 16 November
We
handed over the TPP petition to the Governor General's Official
Secretary, 3:30pm Wednesday 16 November, who advised that the GG
had assessed and considered it formally as of 21 November, see email
text:
Good
afternoon Greg and Amanda
The
Governor-General has asked me to contact you again. She would like to
reiterate that she received your petition last week on the same day
as you delivered it, and read what it said.
Since
then she has given it further thought. She would like you to know
that your petition has been received with respect and that she has
given it her consideration.
With
kind regards
Greg
Gregory
Baughen
Official
Secretary to the Governor-General of New Zealand
Wellington,
New Zealand
Soundings in the Matrix - More Deception Revealed
It
was Monday 5th December that I was advised by the Minister of Trade's
office that the TPP Amendment Bill was placed before the Governor
General and signed Monday 21 November 2016. What does it mean?
There's
this by Andrew Geddis, and guess when it was published – 21
November:
Andrew
Geddis makes a number of observations including these concluding
passages in his blog:
“This
Act comes into force on a date appointed by the Governor-General by
Order in Council, and 1 or more orders may be made appointing
different dates for different provisions and for different purposes.”
Under
this provision, it was left up to the executive branch (ministers) to
advise the Governor General on when to bring the Bill into force. But
at select committee this clause was changed so that the Bill could
only come into force if and when the TPP came into force - the
executive branch's power to advise the Governor-General to bring it
into effect "for different purposes" was removed and
instead this was strictly tied to "the date on which the
Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, done at Auckland on 4 February
2016, enters into force for New Zealand."
So,
if the Government was to sign up to a TPP-1 (minus the US) and then tell the
Governor-General to bring its provisions into effect, I don't think
she can do so because the conditions of the commencement clause have
not been met. And if the Governor-General were to go ahead and do so
anyway, I don't think that action would be lawful ... and someone
could go to court to challenge it.
Meaning
that if the Government does sign up to a TPP-1 agreement that
contains all the same provisions except for its entry into force, it
cannot rely on the Bill it already has passed through the House to
meet our domestic obligations under it. At the very least, it will
have to amend the commencement clause in the current Bill - which
will allow the House to debate whether it really is a good idea to
change our domestic laws to meet the trade demands of a country that
we no longer will be getting any reciprocal trade benefits from.
Open Government Partnership – The Alpha and Omega of Bullshit and Arrogance
It's
important to note that I asked the Trade Minister directly when the
Bill would be placed before Her Excellency on Monday 14th November
the day before the 3rd reading debate. I got the answer after several
prompts the last on the 1st December.
Here's
my emailed question for those who might want the details:
from:
Gregfullmoon * <gregfullmoon013@gmail.com>
to:
"T McClay (MIN)" <T.McClay@ministers.govt.nz>
date:
14 November 2016 at 15:18
Dear
Ministry, hello xxxxxx,
This
email formalises my phoned request for information in respect to the
timing of the presentation of the TPP Amendment Bill to Her
Excellency the Governor General for Her consideration in respect to
granting the mandatory Royal Assent to the Bill.
1.
Will the TPP Amendment Bill be presented immediately (following the
regular process) to Her Excellency the Governor General? or
2.
Will the NZ Government await a future occasion when there is
confirmation that there is ratification by sufficient TPP Partner
Nations as per the terms of the "entry into force"
provisions of the TPP treaty before presenting the TPP Amendment Bill
for Royal Assent?
Many
thanks in anticipation of your response.
Their
response to my request finally came Monday afternoon as I was assisting in the set up for the Lower Hutt Guy McPherson lecture and just after the leader's "bye announcement":
from:
T McClay (MIN) <T.McClay@ministers.govt.nz> via
parliament.govt.nz
to:
Gregfullmoon * <gregfullmoon013@gmail.com>
date:
5 December 2016 at 15:35
Hi
Greg,
A
response letter from the Minister is forthcoming. The Bill has
received Royal Assent on the 21st of November 2016.
Thanks,
The sheer arrogance is
what is astounding. The office must have known that the TPP Amendment
Bill once passed on 15 November would be going to the Governor in
Council (Cabinet or Executive) on Monday 21 November to be forwarded
to the GG for Assent that afternoon. The TPP and its process from
initiation to finalisation in the New Zealand Law has been a fascist
imposition. The secrecy at the end is another pile of shit in an
already full shit sandwich.
Which begs the question
whether I had reasonable grounds for sending this email in response
to their tardy and arrogant advice?
from:
Gregfullmoon * <gregfullmoon013@gmail.com>
to:
"T McClay (MIN)" <T.McClay@ministers.govt.nz>,
todd.mcclay@parliament.govt.nz,
todd.mcclay@national.org.nz
date:
6 December 2016 at 12:01
Greetings
xxxxxx and Minister,
This
is not amusing at all.
How
do you justify withholding this information, when I asked you on the
14th November? It would have been a reasonable courtesy to merely
respond in a timely manner between the 14th and 21st November to
inform me of the Cabinet's decision to place the Bill in front of the
Governor General immediately.
My
distrust grows with each passing experience of your malevolence.
Most
sincerely greg.
Out takes and Conclusions – TPP
I'm
attempting to make sense of the TPP Amendment Bill in relation to the
TPP Agreement coming into force clause Article 30.5.2 of the TPP
text:
In
the event that not all original signatories have notified the
Depositary in writing of the completion of their applicable legal
procedures within a period of two years of the date of signature of
this Agreement, it shall enter into force 60 days after the expiry of
this period if at least six of the original signatories, which
together account for at least 85 per cent of the combined gross
domestic product of the original signatories in 2013 have notified
the Depositary in writing of the completion of their applicable legal
procedures within this period.
I'll
come back and comment or edit the blog when I have further advice,
including the promised further correspondence from the Minister of
Trade. I am particularly keen to ensure that there are no alterations
to our domestic laws and arrangements from the TPP Amendment Bill
without the TPP proceeding as per the 4 February agreement – that
is the full satisfaction of the “Coming into Force” clause,
article 30.5.2. I'm keen to ensure no TPP and no change at all!
Out takes and conclusions – John Key Resignation announced 5 December
It
is of note that the leader John Key announced his resignation from
the top job on Monday 5 December. Does he just want to go out on top
of his game? Over the past 8 years of his Ministry a number of
changes have been implemented in Aotearoa New Zealand which do not
advantage the majority of the people.
I
attended the parliament Tuesday 6 December to witness Question time
and the special debate “ requested by Winston Peters NZ First
leader. You can watch the Parliament here, Question 2 etc. follow:
The
other 11 questions can be found here:
Hansard
of Question time:
Hansard
of urgent debate on the resignation of a Prime Minister:
Several
projects that Key has promoted including the TPP and the alteration
of the New Zealand flag have failed to move forward.
Has
the National Party's deep polling indicate
that the New Zealand public are keen to dig deep – what is the
truth about - climate change, mass surveillance, corporation rule, financial scandals, ecological destruction including polluted waterways, poverty, housing and a host of others not least public health? All have gone into reverse with increasing extremes of inequality.
Then
this from left, or is that right field, Key being talked about in the
context of the IMF?
Statescraft as Soulcraft – What Government Doesi
The
real question in all of this is what is the role of government? To
serve the public interest?
After
all who are public servants supposed to serve?
They
all get a great deal of money in the form of an income, plus a large
dose of gravitas and Mana for serving as politicians.
What
is the objective assessment of progress attributable to any
government? The elimination of need and a move towards a more inclusive
and egalitarian society - or other values?
Here's
how New Zealanders answer the values question, my recent blog post,
“Values - Dig deep what are we about?” published 29 November:
-----------------------------------------------
The Minister of Trade Todd McClay wrote 8 December with the following response about the Governor General's Royal Assent and the coming into force provisions of the TPP Amendment Bill, copy of letter uploaded to this dropbox link:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.dropbox.com/s/ocuofrv0puq3g26/207-16%20Greg%20Rzesniowiecki%20Response.pdf?dl=0
It appears that any Order in Council to bring TPP into force for New Zealand will be dependent on the "coming into force" provision of the TPP Agreement signed 4 February in Auckland. The particular clause Article 30.5.2 of the TPP text states:
"In the event that not all original signatories have notified the Depositary in writing of the completion of their applicable legal procedures within a period of two years of the date of signature of this Agreement, it shall enter into force 60 days after the expiry of this period if at least six of the original signatories, which together account for at least 85 per cent of the combined gross domestic product of the original signatories in 2013 have notified the Depositary in writing of the completion of their applicable legal procedures within this period."
The full article 30 is available at page 3 of this 5 page text of Chapter 30 of the Final TPP Agreement:
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/TPP-Final-Text-Final-Provisions.pdf
It remains to be seen what might happen by 4 February 2018 and 60 days later on or about 6 April 2018. After then I imagine the TPP legislation lapses as the "coming into force" provisions have not been met.
I'll update this if there's a counter view.