TPP Negotiators on Notice to Protect Environment: Poll

An opinion poll shows a clear majority of New Zealanders reject the concept of foreign investors having any ability to sue the government offshore if is sets stronger environmental standards.

New Zealand is currently negotiating a free trade agreement with ten other countries called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

61% of those surveyed believe that New Zealand should not sign the TPP agreement if it contains any clauses that allow foreign investors to sue the government in an offshore tribunal over new laws intended to protect the environment.

Of those that have an opinion, six times as many favour standing aside from any deal that would impose these terms, versus those that would still sign up.

The poll was conducted by Consumer Link for the Sustainability Council and indicates that just 9% of New Zealanders think securing this free trade agreement is important even if it could allow foreign investors to take such legal action against the government, while 30% have no opinion. The margin of error is 3.3%.

A leaked draft of the TPP text reveals how overseas companies would have the right to seek compensation if their expected profits are significantly reduced by stricter environmental requirements. The provisions are known as Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) terms and some 70% of cases brought under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have involved claims over natural resources or the environment.

The government maintains that clauses in the TPP text will preserve New Zealand’s ability to make stronger environmental laws without fear of the claims being successful. But there are recent investment arbitration cases where these clauses have failed to protect the public interest.

The poll cuts right through this legal interpretation issue as it shows most New Zealanders simply reject the ISDS concept when it comes to new laws intended to protect the environment.

The Australian Productivity Commission found in 2010 that such rights for foreign investors were not in Australia’s interest. It stated that: “There does not appear to be an underlying economic problem that necessitates the inclusion of ISDS provisions”. And at the time it reported, no Australian firm had ever used them.

What the Commission did find was that including such rights risked a “chilling effect” on a government’s willingness to undertake reforms to protect the public interest. In other words, governments become scared to raise environmental standards for fear of being sued.

As current demands on the environment often exceed what is sustainable, such protection for foreign investors paves the way for the government to hold back on setting proper limits. It seeks to create environmental property rights for foreign investors that no New Zealanders have, or should have.
ends

© Scoop Media

Gordon Campbell: On The 2013 Budget

Among Thursday’s main talking points:

We are apparently on track for a margin-of-error $75 million surplus, now in sight for 2014/15. But this sickly creature is hobbling out of the lab on the basis of all kinds of facilitative conjuring: such as trimming by $200 million the amount of new spending next time around.

With this strictly nominal surplus in sight, the 1984-ish justification for eternal austerity will have a news talisman: namely, getting Crown debt down to 20% of GDP by 2020. More>>

Budget Report, Lockup Audio & Images: Budget Day 2013 As always and especially after the managerial mishaps of the past few weeks and months, (e.g. Aaron Gilmore, the Mighty River Power share float, the GCSB mishaps) Budget Day 2013 was always going to be a pageant of reassurance... More>>

Budget 2013 Comment: Plain Sailing, But It's No America's Cup Pattrick Smellie: Compared to the last four budgets, this year's reflects an economy moving out of recession and into calmer waters... Yet if the fastest annual growth rate we can expect over the next two years is 3 percent - with the Christchurch rebuild in full swing - then you'd have to say New Zealand's underlying low-growth problem is far from fixed. More>>

Auckland Discord: Govt’s Power Hungry Housing Approach A Threat - Labour

Last week the Government said this, ‘The Government commits not to use any proposed or existing powers ... to override the council's planning and consenting processes’. But its housing Bill says this; ‘If an accord cannot be reached in an area of severe housing unaffordability, the Government can intervene by establishing special housing areas and issuing consents for developers’. More>>

ALSO:

• NZ Govt - Housing accords legislation passes first reading - Legislation For Housing Accords, Land Supply - Housing package improves affordability, access
• Greens - Budget numbers show National’s failure on home affordability
• Auckland Chamber of Commerce - Budget 2013: Housing intervention needed
• Out-Link - Gareth Morgan: Response to housing problem limp-wristed
• Earlier, Pre-Budget - Auckland Accord announced

Extending Protest Ban, Relaxing Permit Rules: Govt Abuses Urgency To Extend Anadarko Amendment

The Government is trying to pass legislation under urgency which would make the Anadarko Amendment – which limits protest at sea – apply to an additional 1.7 million square kilometres, the Green Party said today. More>>

ALSO:

• Parliament Today - Parliament Resumes To Pass Budget Bills
• Labour - Government to extend protest ban
• Greenpeace NZ - Oil Companies Lacking ‘Expertise’ and ‘Financial Ability’ Set to Be Handed Drilling Permits
• 2010 image via: Pacific.Scoop - Media watcher gives NZ press nil score card for China oil spill coverage