1000 Year Free Trade Continues
Posted
15th November 2000
Below
you will find a form letter prepared on behalf of GATT Watchdog
and CAFCA. With the Labour Party conference coming up in just over
a week, and with the news that the government intends to pursue
a free trade agreement with Hong Kong, we urge you to act quickly
on this. We suggest you email letter to MPs (the list and email
addresses can be found here.
(Your Name)
(Address)
(Date)
Dear
In
1997-98, public outrage led to the defeat of the proposed Multilateral
Agreement on Investment (MAI) which would have given unprecedented
powers to transnational corporations. Yet actions by this government
threaten to achieve many similar aims piece by piece. This is despite
both the Alliance coalition partner and the Greens, on which the
government's existence depends, having campaigned strongly against
such policies. The few controls on foreign investment that remain
are being weakened step by step. Major overseas takeovers continue.
Fletcher Paper and Air New Zealand are just two since the Labour/Alliance
government took power. I am very concerned that there has been no
action to strengthen the feeble controls that are still in place.
There are no "national interest" criteria for the great bulk of
foreign investment where no significant land or fishing quota is
involved. We need to regain the ability to choose investment that
suits us, and we need stronger "good character" laws for foreign
investors. The trigger point for investments to require Overseas
Investment Commission approval was raised from $10 million to $50
million by the outgoing National Government, and nothing has been
done to reverse that. In fact, the Singapore "Closer Economic Partnership"
cements that in place.
It commits us to opening even further to foreign investment over
the next few years, particularly in the services sector where important
social services such as health and education will eventually be
affected. On top of that it strips us of the ability to reinstate
international capital controls. I am concerned that this is only
the start. There are investment liberalisation agreements that were
negotiated by the previous government with Chile and Argentina in
1999, which have MAI-like "expropriation" clauses that would allow
investors to force the government to pay compensation, or even revoke
laws, if environmental or social measures reduce their profitability.
These need only Cabinet approval to go into effect. They have never
been opened to public consultation or Parliamentary debate. The
government has announced negotiations with Hong Kong on a similar
agreement to that with Singapore. It has committed itself to developing
a wider version of the Singapore and CER agreements with the whole
of South-East Asia, through negotiations headed by Bill Birch. It
has talked about new free trade and investment agreements with Chile
and the U.S.A. It supports opening more services to foreign investment
through the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) under
the WTO, and there are proposals for other investment agreements
there too.
gly
urge you to
* Oppose the Singapore agreement and any consequent legislation
* Gain an assurance that Cabinet will not approve the investment
agreements with Chile and Argentina
* Oppose further work on the proposed agreements with Hong Kong
and South-East Asia, and other similar agreements
* Support democratisation of the treaty approval process, including
releasing drafts of proposed agreements during negotiations so the
public can debate them properly.
* Work for a moratorium on further agreements and commitments under
the WTO until an independent review has been made of the effects
of previous agreements and the public have had an opportunity for
a wide-ranging and informed debate on these issues.
The
world's political climate has changed radically with the 1997 Asian
financial crisis, the Seattle debacle and the numerous demonstrations,
critical reports and studies that have followed. Though changes
in domestic policies recognise the failure of previous approaches,
New Zealand's international economic policies seem not to have taken
any notice of the sea-change that has occurred. Rather than continue
to follow the previous government's international free market policies,
which are completely at odds with the new government's opposition
to free market policies at home, New Zealand needs to manage its
economic relationship with the rest of the world. New Zealanders
need to have a say in that. Yours sincerely, .

|