She said Labour had always known the Greens would oppose it and it was made clear in negotiations before it signed up for its confidence and supply agreement.
It would not impact on the Government's ability to sign up to the CPTPP.
I am not sure the thread is anti Jacinda, but more anti Labour. They are running at the moment with an air of arrogance including several Ministers and the PM.
They are need to settle down a bit quicker and start working like a cohesive team. They desperately need some leadership and discipline.
Time will tell. If Jacinda can settle down and start speaking to all of NZ instead of a select few she could be one of the best PMs ever.
She, and her coalition government already speak for 50.4% of us.
This thread is mostly from some of the 44% who still haven't realised the majority of New Zealanders wanted and got New Zealand changed from the 'I'm all right Jack, keep your hands off my stack' previous government.
To the "We'll steal your stack and give it to those who have not earned it" government, I presume.
It's also a long bow to draw to claim that she speaks for 54% of the population. She doesn't. There is no evidence that a person who voted NZF wanted her or her party as PM etc, or that one who voted Green did.
So you think the taxes you pay is stealing by the government? I rest my case.
You're right, it's not 54%, but 50.4% of us voted for a change of government. Isn't it time you accepted that fact?
BTW I voted for NZF (party vote) and Labour (electorate vote) and as others have pointed out I wasn't the only one. As for the greens, They had an agreement with Labour to change the government. You might want to rethink your position on that.
What blow? From the article seems that National will support it. Still goes through without greens.
I don't like the thought of multinational companies having power to sue our govternment if we make a law that effects their business, nothing can do about it when both big parties seem to be happy to give them that power though.
You're right, it's not 54%, but 50.4% of us voted for a change of government. Isn't it time you accepted that fact?
That's an oversimplification of the existing MMP environment. Winston Peters may claim that, however voters going into the election voted on a number of key policies many of which many were not aligned at all between Labour, the Greens, NZ First or National. That isn't representative of voting for a change of government, rather some moderate changes in direction. Indeed many NZ First supporters I've interacted with are disappointed that he chose to go with Labour instead of National, others are concerned about the Greens influence, and others are okay with going with Labour on some issues. Hardly a cohesive "change of government" arrangement is it.
She said Labour had always known the Greens would oppose it and it was made clear in negotiations before it signed up for its confidence and supply agreement.
It would not impact on the Government's ability to sign up to the CPTPP.
You were saying?
It will only not impact the Government signing because they can get the support of National, without it, it will not pass. Ofcourse, it is not know what (if any) further changes to the legislation that the select committee will have or if National will want any concessions to help pass legislation. I would hope National doesn't do any "politicing" with the deal, if it looks good and is good for the country, then they should support it rather than try and use it as a chance to score points against Labour.
What happens to the next piece of legislation that goes against the Greens morals, will "Labour have always known they Greens would oppose it" too?
I am not sure the thread is anti Jacinda, but more anti Labour. They are running at the moment with an air of arrogance including several Ministers and the PM.
They are need to settle down a bit quicker and start working like a cohesive team. They desperately need some leadership and discipline.
Time will tell. If Jacinda can settle down and start speaking to all of NZ instead of a select few she could be one of the best PMs ever.
She, and her coalition government already speak for 50.4% of us.
This thread is mostly from some of the 44% who still haven't realised the majority of New Zealanders wanted and got New Zealand changed from the 'I'm all right Jack, keep your hands off my stack' previous government.
To the "We'll steal your stack and give it to those who have not earned it" government, I presume.
It's also a long bow to draw to claim that she speaks for 54% of the population. She doesn't. There is no evidence that a person who voted NZF wanted her or her party as PM etc, or that one who voted Green did.
So you think the taxes you pay is stealing by the government? I rest my case.
You're right, it's not 54%, but 50.4% of us voted for a change of government. Isn't it time you accepted that fact?
BTW I voted for NZF (party vote) and Labour (electorate vote) and as others have pointed out I wasn't the only one. As for the greens, They had an agreement with Labour to change the government. You might want to rethink your position on that.
Again, I can't agree entirely. For example, the change some of them may have wanted was not necessarily the one they got. They may have been voting to get a different National coalition rather than the Labour one. However, as we have seen, voters do not necessarily get to do the choosing in NZ!
They chose to vote for Peters to represent them, and Peters chose to vote for Labour. Voters in NZ have more choices than the UK for example and have substantially more influence.
What blow? From the article seems that National will support it. Still goes through without greens.
I don't like the thought of multinational companies having power to sue our govternment if we make a law that effects their business, nothing can do about it when both big parties seem to be happy to give them that power though.
That right. If the Greens sunk it, thats democracy. As it happens, Labour wasnt in favour but have got concessions. National wants it, as now does Labour. The process works. No FTA will be 100% for everyone, but IMHO, this one does satisfy most, if not the Greens.
So you think the taxes you pay is stealing by the government? I rest my case.
You're right, it's not 54%, but 50.4% of us voted for a change of government. Isn't it time you accepted that fact?
BTW I voted for NZF (party vote) and Labour (electorate vote) and as others have pointed out I wasn't the only one. As for the greens, They had an agreement with Labour to change the government. You might want to rethink your position on that.
Again, I can't agree entirely. For example, the change some of them may have wanted was not necessarily the one they got. They may have been voting to get a different National coalition rather than the Labour one. However, as we have seen, voters do not necessarily get to do the choosing in NZ!
You need to wipe your glasses, they're all fogged up with desperation and blubbery tears.
NZF voters did not vote for a different National or a new Labour. They voted to get as many of the NZF policies over the line in the next three years. That's what they chose, that's what they got.
National will not hold your simplistic viewpoint on NZ politics thankfully, they will be working out how to get more parliamentary friends so they have a fighting chance next election, otherwise they'll lose again.
Fred99: I believe two objections to the TPP were ISDS and IP laws - particularly when the USA was to be a partner. With the USA out, then who knows what? I'm not in NZ atm, scouring of NZ news sites doesn't seem to indicate the media are interested. The original TPPA would have given NZ a very small net gain from increased access to markets, offset by a loss on increased cost of pharmaceutical and medical devices due to increased patent duration. It would seem to be nuts if TPPA with no USA would include that increase to patents - as only the US wanted it. I bloody well hope that Labour won't betray NZ interests in the vain hope of giving way to US demands, when now the US will offer nothing at all in return.
USA's contribution to global economic output is 25%. The current 11 countries put together make 15%. Without USA, this isn't that great a deal. The current 11 nations would be more than happy to sign FTAs with NZ without much fuss anyway.
Fred99: I believe two objections to the TPP were ISDS and IP laws - particularly when the USA was to be a partner. With the USA out, then who knows what? I'm not in NZ atm, scouring of NZ news sites doesn't seem to indicate the media are interested. The original TPPA would have given NZ a very small net gain from increased access to markets, offset by a loss on increased cost of pharmaceutical and medical devices due to increased patent duration. It would seem to be nuts if TPPA with no USA would include that increase to patents - as only the US wanted it. I bloody well hope that Labour won't betray NZ interests in the vain hope of giving way to US demands, when now the US will offer nothing at all in return.
USA's contribution to global economic output is 25%. The current 11 countries put together make 15%. Without USA, this isn't that great a deal. The current 11 nations would be more than happy to sign FTAs with NZ without much fuss anyway.
Hrm. Let's get TPPA 12 negotiations under way - bring in China. They're in the fairly rapid process of replacing the US anyway, might as well bring them on board.
Fred99: I believe two objections to the TPP were ISDS and IP laws - particularly when the USA was to be a partner. With the USA out, then who knows what? I'm not in NZ atm, scouring of NZ news sites doesn't seem to indicate the media are interested. The original TPPA would have given NZ a very small net gain from increased access to markets, offset by a loss on increased cost of pharmaceutical and medical devices due to increased patent duration. It would seem to be nuts if TPPA with no USA would include that increase to patents - as only the US wanted it. I bloody well hope that Labour won't betray NZ interests in the vain hope of giving way to US demands, when now the US will offer nothing at all in return.
USA's contribution to global economic output is 25%. The current 11 countries put together make 15%. Without USA, this isn't that great a deal. The current 11 nations would be more than happy to sign FTAs with NZ without much fuss anyway.
Hrm. Let's get TPPA 12 negotiations under way - bring in China. They're in the fairly rapid process of replacing the US anyway, might as well bring them on board.
We already have an FTA with them which saw our exports increase 4 times over the decade since it was signed.
I do not get what Adern and Co. are trying to do here with Manus Island.
Australia created this issue and it is Australia's to deal with. Many times Australia have said a clear NO to us yet Arden doesnt let it go. She has now offered $2.7M to help these people. Why? I dont want Australia's problems here!!
She has created a rift between the 2 countries now. Has she not got enough to do? If she really wanted to help she was standing beside the Myanmar President quite a lot and did she offer them money as well to assist them in their humanitarian issues?
I also read in todays papers that Treasury are preparing to borrow NZ$billions more than Labour promised to satisfy their appetite for debt.
Stay at home Adern and look after the Kiwis you said you would!!! We are not a wealthy country like Australia.
and PS
Jacinda you looked a bit like a school girl on the diplomatic stage over the last 10 days. If you want to be taken seriously you need to look like a serious diplomat and also earn the reputation.
So you think the taxes you pay is stealing by the government? I rest my case.
You're right, it's not 54%, but 50.4% of us voted for a change of government. Isn't it time you accepted that fact?
BTW I voted for NZF (party vote) and Labour (electorate vote) and as others have pointed out I wasn't the only one. As for the greens, They had an agreement with Labour to change the government. You might want to rethink your position on that.
Again, I can't agree entirely. For example, the change some of them may have wanted was not necessarily the one they got. They may have been voting to get a different National coalition rather than the Labour one. However, as we have seen, voters do not necessarily get to do the choosing in NZ!
You need to wipe your glasses, they're all fogged up with desperation and blubbery tears.
NZF voters did not vote for a different National or a new Labour. They voted to get as many of the NZF policies over the line in the next three years. That's what they chose, that's what they got.
National will not hold your simplistic viewpoint on NZ politics thankfully, they will be working out how to get more parliamentary friends so they have a fighting chance next election, otherwise they'll lose again.
I agree with what you say.
To say that the majority of the voters voted for "change" sounds very nice, very idealistic, very aspirational. But let's be honest, when you cast your vote, you are specifically giving your support to that party/person and their policies. To paint some parties as a 'change' vote over against others is not correct. For sure, Labour was offering more change than Nat's. But what's the first thing Jacinda does? Continues the fight for the TPP the same as National had been doing for the last few years. National was somewhat campaigning on more of the same, but certainly for improvement and progress, not status quo.
A vote for a possible (or likely) coalition partner is not a vote for the major party, to consider it like that will end in the demise of the minor parties - which is what we've seen in this election. The minor parties are there to represent the minorities, the major parties represent the mainstream - and NZ needs both.
People who voted Green should feel short-changed, because they have been sold out cheap. They had every bit as much negotiating power as Winston/NZF but they got the thin end of the stick. So to say that a vote for Greens was a vote to get as many Green policies over the line should have been true, however, in this case all it has done is prop up labour, who have in turn rode roughshod over the greens opposition to the TPP.
So is this coalition a true representation of all the voters: Lab/NZF/Green? Not really. I think a Nat/Green or Nat/NZF coalition would have provided a better representation of the respective voters than this current govt.
Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly
to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.
Trusted
