Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | ... | 268

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1946291 24-Jan-2018 21:23

Its like waiting for cheaper doctor visits or easier access to specialists. Even mental health has to wait until the end of the year.

The Mental Health system needs a complete examination and overhaul. More funding is pretty much a given.

Labour is probably better qualified to look into this and will take a softer approach than National may have. Both were intending on reviewing it.

It's massively complex and I think they should setup up a 2 stage thing. One to deal with critical issues. Put $50m into a kitty for that, and then say within a year they will have guidelines for an overhaul.

It shouldn't be rushed.

Bottom line is, with things like Mental health, no matter how far we go, there will always be those who say we didn't go far enough. Makes it hard to judge. One of the things that happens in reviews, is that extreme fringe cases are presented, usually to or by the press, and this

is likely to cause an overreaction in Labour that may not occur in National. Overall though, I'm happy that Labour will examine it and give it some overdue attention.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1946303 24-Jan-2018 21:28

rjt123:. Pharmac already pays international drug companies high prices for drugs, can't get any worse.

Wrong. NZ's Pharmac procurement model is internationally recognised in multiple studies for delivering some of the lowest drug prices in the world. It's not a perfect system yet it is number one at the top of many lists.

mrfte

83 posts

Master Geek

#1946428 25-Jan-2018 09:39

MaxLV:

mrfte:

Companies could sue the government way before the TPP was even conceived as a thought.

There was a minor increase in the operational cost to pharmac ($2M per year) if I recall from the top of my head which was offset by the trade surplus NZ would achieve.

Companies cannot sue the government like they would have been able to with the proposed ISDS system.

Under the original TPPA (that the National government was willing to sign up to):

Pharmaceutical companies could have sued our government over policy decisions they perceived as negatively affecting their profits

Patent extensions could have meant delays and extra costs getting new drugs to NZ.

1) It was not limited to pharma. But any international company doing business in NZ - which was always the case. The chances of that happening are very slim to none. No one has taken the NZ OCO to task and won.

2) This is not true. My PG professor is one of the current directors of PHARMAC and he confirmed there will be no increased cost of buying the drug. However, the extra paperwork and manpower would cost NZ an extra 2.2 million a year in overheads which is negligible. The only "issue" was with drugs relating to biologics for which the research companies would have to be paid a premium for the use of said drugs. I see no problem with this seeing how the companies would have spent a fortune researching them anyway. Nevermind the fact that these are experimental drugs at this stage anyway.

If you were an international company owner, would you do business in a country where you know that you can never hold the government accountable or sell your product at a price you like? Didn't think so....

PHARMAC wasn't affected by TPPA and neither are ISDS laws. There are no factual arguments against the TPPA. We lost a great deal without USA at the table and as much as labour tries to glorify this as a win, it isn't.

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1946452 25-Jan-2018 10:05

mrfte:

MaxLV:

mrfte:

Companies could sue the government way before the TPP was even conceived as a thought.

There was a minor increase in the operational cost to pharmac ($2M per year) if I recall from the top of my head which was offset by the trade surplus NZ would achieve.

Companies cannot sue the government like they would have been able to with the proposed ISDS system.

Under the original TPPA (that the National government was willing to sign up to):

Pharmaceutical companies could have sued our government over policy decisions they perceived as negatively affecting their profits

Patent extensions could have meant delays and extra costs getting new drugs to NZ.

1) It was not limited to pharma. But any international company doing business in NZ - which was always the case. The chances of that happening are very slim to none. No one has taken the NZ OCO to task and won.

2) This is not true. My PG professor is one of the current directors of PHARMAC and he confirmed there will be no increased cost of buying the drug. However, the extra paperwork and manpower would cost NZ an extra 2.2 million a year in overheads which is negligible. The only "issue" was with drugs relating to biologics for which the research companies would have to be paid a premium for the use of said drugs. I see no problem with this seeing how the companies would have spent a fortune researching them anyway. Nevermind the fact that these are experimental drugs at this stage anyway.

If you were an international company owner, would you do business in a country where you know that you can never hold the government accountable or sell your product at a price you like? Didn't think so....

PHARMAC wasn't affected by TPPA and neither are ISDS laws. There are no factual arguments against the TPPA. We lost a great deal without USA at the table and as much as labour tries to glorify this as a win, it isn't.

If the TPPA didn't affect Pharmac, then why is this suspension included in the CPTPP?

1. Pharmac is fully protected (Article 3 of Annex 26A suspended)

Pharmac’s purchasing model remains protected, including its ability to continue to negotiate the best price for medicines for New Zealanders. In addition, a provision that would have required Pharmac to make administrative changes that would primarily benefit the pharmaceutical industry has been suspended. Implementing these changes was expected to cost New Zealand an initial $4.5 million and $2.2 million per year thereafter.

As to your comment about international companies not wanting to sell here if they cant have free reign/carte blanche, so what. They should be, and are subject to the same laws as New Zealand companies, and shouldn't be granted exemptions as they were under the TPPA.

Again this 'right to sue with ISDS' in the original TPPA has been suspended under the CPTPP:

2. Businesses cannot sue the Government for investment contract breaches (Suspensions in the Investment Chapter)

The scope of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism is narrower in the CPTPP, while strong safeguards to protect the Government’s right to regulate in the public interest and prevent unwarranted claims have been retained.

I think the Foreign Affairs and Trade Department of the government carries a lot more weight than what your professor has told you....

You can read all about the 22 clause suspensions of the original TPPA here:

https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/free-trade-agreements/agreements-under-negotiation/cptpp-2/tpp-and-cptpp-the-differences-explained/

mrfte

83 posts

Master Geek

#1946461 25-Jan-2018 10:30

Pharmac’s purchasing model remains protected

Keyword : Remains.

Only change I see here is the suspension to the paperwork that would have cost us admin fees. Everything else is the same. Biologics will still cost NZ or any other country a lot of $$$.. TPP or not.

On closer examination of ISDS in CPTPP from the MFAT site:

A reciprocal agreement with Australia means that investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in the CPTPP will not apply between our countries. This covers 80 percent of our overseas investment from CPTPP countries as a whole. Where ISDS does apply, it is constrained to a more limited scope.

Basically, without the USA, we're just going to trade with our siblings in Australia... as usual. What I am trying to show here is that the CPTPP isn't what labour is making it out to be. That ship sailed long ago when USA bailed.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1946464 25-Jan-2018 10:33

networkn:
Pumpedd:

Its like waiting for cheaper doctor visits or easier access to specialists. Even mental health has to wait until the end of the year.

For crying out loud man, can you PLEASE PLEASE *please* learn to use the quoting function properly. Quoting a wall of text to add a half dozen words at the end is lazy and horrible to read.

I can teach you if you like?

Quote the section relevant to your comment. It would be rare to genuinely need to quote 6 blocks of text.

It's pretty hard if working on a phone. Just saying....

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1946483 25-Jan-2018 10:52

If you are replying to the response immediately before yours then you don't need to quote, really.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

MaxLV

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1946486 25-Jan-2018 11:03

mrfte:

Pharmac’s purchasing model remains protected

Keyword : Remains.

Only change I see here is the suspension to the paperwork that would have cost us admin fees. Everything else is the same. Biologics will still cost NZ or any other country a lot of $$$.. TPP or not.

The scope of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism is narrower in the CPTPP, while strong safeguards to protect the Government’s right to regulate in the public interest and prevent unwarranted claims have been retained.

On closer examination of ISDS in CPTPP from the MFAT site:

A reciprocal agreement with Australia means that investor state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses in the CPTPP will not apply between our countries. This covers 80 percent of our overseas investment from CPTPP countries as a whole. Where ISDS does apply, it is constrained to a more limited scope.

Basically, without the USA, we're just going to trade with our siblings in Australia... as usual. What I am trying to show here is that the CPTPP isn't what labour is making it out to be. That ship sailed long ago when USA bailed.

Yes it is significantly different, and far better than what the National government was prepared to sign us up for. Again, see the MFAT site and the 22 suspensions, that were part of the original TPPA.

National was ready (and willing) to sign on the dotted line, and claimed they couldn't 'renegotiate' anything.

The new government went to Vietnam and negotiated the suspension of the 22 clauses with all the other countries, so it is what Labour is making it out to be, and note that National says it will fully support the changes they often said couldn't be made. The only party still not supporting the CPTPP is the Greens.

mrfte

83 posts

Master Geek

#1946489 25-Jan-2018 11:08

USA was still at the table when national was negotiating the TPPA... without the main party, the remaining country nor these changes mean much. Look at the current participants: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

We could easily have an FTA with all these countries without much effort. Whereas all of these countries excluding maybe Canada and Singapore, would fight to have an FTA with USA.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1950031 1-Feb-2018 12:32

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11985999

As someone affected by these abuses in the 1980's I am of two minds about this. I think we need to ensure these things don't happen again, but I am pretty sure the processes to prevent it were in place long ago. It threatens to open old wounds. Other than potential compensation for some victims, I am unsure what is to be gained.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1950055 1-Feb-2018 12:43

networkn:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11985999

As someone affected by these abuses in the 1980's I am of two minds about this. I think we need to ensure these things don't happen again, but I am pretty sure the processes to prevent it were in place long ago. It threatens to open old wounds. Other than potential compensation for some victims, I am unsure what is to be gained.

It is a risk that it will release pent up emotions but it is important that it is exposed, admitted and action taken to assist those affected. This goes towards the healing process and future prevention. If the abuse was such that compensation is appropriate then so be it.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1950096 1-Feb-2018 13:26

I have seen several comments on RNZ by victims and they mostly seem to feel a strong need for a full inquiry, with everything that goes with that. The victims are the ones affected and I think they should be the ones to choose.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1950111 1-Feb-2018 13:47

Rikkitic:

I have seen several comments on RNZ by victims and they mostly seem to feel a strong need for a full inquiry, with everything that goes with that. The victims are the ones affected and I think they should be the ones to choose.

I was stating my concerns related to this inquiry as a "victim". There are some "Victims" who may prefer to never be reminded of that troubling time in their lives, wounds re-opened and reminders given.

It's a complicated thing. It's not as simple as "if you don't want to be affected, don't participate", in case that was the next response.

The press will publish details, discussions will be had in the "public" arena etc.

I am just not entirely sure of the benefit of a royal enquiry over the current system which has acknowledged that abuses have occurred and for which there is a recourse for victims to seek compensation if they wish.

Just because you *can* have an inquiry, doesn't mean you should is more or less the thing it comes down to for me.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1952553 6-Feb-2018 17:51

Well boy the press have certainly given JA plenty of undeserved press. She turns up pregnant and as woman and surprise surprise no one physically imposes themselves on her, or throws a sex toy. This is deemed a "success" by the press. Waitangi is "peaceful" and it's all her doing.

She just comes across as so fake to me, she says what people want to hear but in a kind of sickly unauthentic way. I'd *love* to hear what her *thoughts* are at the same time she is delivering these sickly speeches.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1952563 6-Feb-2018 18:49

networkn:
Well boy the press have certainly given JA plenty of undeserved press. She turns up pregnant and as woman and surprise surprise no one physically imposes themselves on her, or throws a sex toy. This is deemed a "success" by the press. Waitangi is "peaceful" and it's all her doing.

She just comes across as so fake to me, she says what people want to hear but in a kind of sickly unauthentic way. I'd *love* to hear what her *thoughts* are at the same time she is delivering these sickly speeches.

Really? I think this thread is fake.

1 | ... | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | ... | 268