January 24, 2016
Why the Government’s ‘Fact sheet’ on how TPPA impacts Maori is ridiculous
Why the Government's 'Fact sheet' on how TPPA impacts Maori is ridiculous
MARTYN BRADBURY
The Government have responded to criticism that the TPPA impacts Maori Treaty rights with a 'fact' sheet.
The 'facts' don't add up when you consider the consequences for Maori.
Here it is in its entirety, with my responses beneath.
Trade Minister Todd McClay today released a new TPP factsheet outlining how TPP specifically recognises the Treaty of Waitangi, as well as other areas of significance for Māori including opportunities for Māori exporters.
“There is a lot of misinformation out there about TPP,” Mr McClay says.(1)
“Nothing in TPP will prevent the Crown from meeting its obligations to Māori.
“As with all of New Zealand’s free trade agreements since 2001, TPP includes a specific provision preserving the pre-eminence of the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand.(2)
“The value of the Māori asset base is now over NZ$40 billion, with significant ownership in key export sectors such as red meat, dairy, kiwifruit, forestry, and seafood.(3)
“Maori therefore stand to benefit from the tariff savings under TPP on current exports across these sectors, which are estimated to be more than $200 million a year once the tariff commitments are fully phased in.(4)
“New Zealand’s approach in its free trade agreements reflects the constitutional significance of the Treaty of Waitangi to New Zealand.
“The Treaty of Waitangi exception is in addition to the fact that the obligations in TPP have been designed so as not to impair the ability of governments to make legitimate public policy, including in health, education, and protecting the environment.(5)
“Being part of TPP – which covers 36 per cent of global GDP, and takes 40 per cent of our exports – is strongly in New Zealand’s national interest.”
(1) The misinformation has been spread by this Government! They first said the TPPA would be debated in Parliament so that it would be open to scrutiny. We then find out that they are signing it a week before Parliament even opens. The Government initially denied the signing on the 4th and denied the venue and then later admitted it. The entire deal has been negotiated in secret and the notes where the real details of what we have signed up to won't be released to the public for 5 years after it is signed.
For the Government to claim misinformation when they have been the ones spreading all the misinformation is Orwellian double speak.
(2) Yes, the TPPA does include a clause that includes the Treaty, but that doesn't mean that the Treaty obligations are protected, they are merely noted as an interesting curiosity that pops up in our country.
(3) Yes and currently the Government alongside the Maori Party are rushing legislation through that will lower the decision making threshold for jointly owned Maori land. This will lead to less local democracy and more overseas interests which the TPPA will help generate, not protect from.
(4) There is already damning evidence that the so called monetary benefits of this deal are overblown and meaningless. Promising riches is easy, gaining them very difficult especially when this 'trade deal' is actually a geopolitical response by America to Chinese influence in the South Pacific.
(5) Here's the reality of what the inclusion of the Treaty in the TPPA means in real life. A corporation could say that they intend to challenge our Governments interpretation of the Treaty in one of these overseas tribunals. The legal cost of defending the case will be $50million. Sure, it's up to the Government to choose to fight the case, but that's still dependent on us spending the $50million to defend the issue.
Maori know first hand from previous National and Labour Governments that when the angry Pakeha majority rail against Maori rights, those Governments have always backed down to the angry beige mob. The decision not to spend money to defend a case becomes easy politically.
The reality is that the TPPA will create a defacto upper house in NZs Parliament ruled by Corporates. Academics have gone through the deal and have already listed the many ways Maori and Pakeha lose sovereignty from this appalling forced trade deal.
Consider the following…
KEY POINTS
• ‘With each instrument that it signs up to, the Crown has less freedom in how it can provide for and protect Māori, their tino rangatiratanga, and their interests in such diverse areas as culture, economic development and the environment.’ (Waitangi Tribunal, WAI-262, 2012)
• The TPPA fetters the sovereignty of New Zealand governments and has the potential to chill their future decisions, including those relating to Māori under te Tiriti o Waitangi, He Wakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga (Declaration of Independence), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and as a matter of public policy and social justice.
• The TPPA conflicts with Māori rights and Crown obligations under te Tiriti and the UNDRIP. The Crown’s prior commitment to indigenous peoples’ right to self-government and political autonomy and their right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties should have informed the negotiation of the TPPA.
• Because the TPPA has the potential to impact on hapu and iwi and their resources, it requires informed consent, or at the least a robust bona fide engagement so Māori views are fully incorporated into decision making.
• Despite the Wai 262 report saying the Crown’s then policies and practices did not comply with the Treaty, and too often came after decisions were made, there was no credible attempt to engage with Māori as the Crown’s Treaty Partner before or during the TPPA negotiations.
• Several chapters guarantee foreign states and their commercial interests the right to participate in New Zealand’s domestic decisions, while Māori as tangata whenua have no similar guarantees.
• Rights of Māori relating to Intellectual Property (IP), biodiversity, and environmental law and policy, guaranteed through te Tiriti o Waitangi and the UNDRIP, could be significantly affected by the TPPA.
• The IP chapter strengthens the rights of holders of state-recognized intellectual property rights, a form of intellectual property that has generally not protected mātauranga Māori and the rights of kaitiaki and has, in many cases, undermined those rights.
• Despite the Treaty of Waitangi exception, the provisions in the IP chapter will make it more difficult for Māori to achieve changes to New Zealand IP law that are necessary to protect rights and obligations of kaitiaki in relation to mātauranga Māori.
• Commercialisation of the mātauranga associated with genetic and biological resources, and of the resources themselves, can compromise the kaitiaki relationship and put the Crown in breach of Treaty principles. Yet the importance of conservation and biological diversity in theTPPA is framed by an objective of facilitating use of biological and genetic resources.
• The Environment chapter provides general commitments to environmental protection, specific detail on a small number of environmental issues, and some procedural mechanisms for cooperation between parties. But there is nothing that reflects Waitangi Tribunal recommendations to strengthen Māori participation in environmental decision-making, planning and management, including under the Resource Management Act.
• The UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples singled out investment chapters of agreements like the TPPA and investor-state dispute settlement as a risk to indigenous rights and a constraint on their ability to gain remedies.
• The TPPA leaves the rights and interests of Māori vulnerable to foreign states and corporations who have no obligations under te Tiriti or the UNDRIP, and who will have a legal right to pursue their interests through private international mechanisms. This may further undermine the willingness of governments to implement Tribunal recommendations for fear of legal action.
• The Treaty exception is limited in scope and relies on the good will of the government to protect Māori rights, which repeated Waitangi Tribunal reports show it has failed to do.
• The government has made far-fetched claims regarding the economic gains to New Zealand, and to Māori because of their significant presence in natural resource sectors of the economy. Those figures are not supported by evidence and ignore the tangible and intangible costs of the TPPA to Māori.
• The TPPA’s economic model is based on trade liberalisation, monopoly rights to own exploit intellectual property, and privileged rights for foreign investors, and will not serve a future Māori economic development agenda that is built around core Māori values, commitment to environmental sustainability, and tino rangatiratanga.
• The Waitangi Tribunal will hold an urgent hearing in March 2016 on a claim that the TPPA is inconsistent with te Tiriti, focusing on the Crown’s processes and whether the Treaty of Waitangi exception fully protects Māori using 3 studies: fracking, affordable medicines, and water. The Crown has refused to defer further action on the TPPA until the claim is resolved.
People are angry with the signing of the TPPA – and they have every right to be furious.
Martyn Bradbury
Editor – TheDailyBlog.co.nz
Facebook/CitizenBomber
twitter.com/CitizenBomber
Copyright © 2016, UMA Broadcasting Ltd: www.waateanews.com