Monday, January 30, 2012

Far left academic blames Labour for Crafar farm purchase

Helen Clark attending a conference on Chinese farming in 2010 (in the centre)
From Stuff:

University of Auckland law professor Jane Kelsey said the Government could not treat applications from Chinese investors differently from similar applications from other countries' investors under what is known as the 'most-favoured-nation' rule.''

She agreed with Key that the Government could have faced an international law suit for breaching its free trade agreement with China if it declined the Shanghai Pengxin purchase.

''Shanghai Pengxin's application pointed to numerous purchases of farmland by investors of other nationalities, and claimed that rejection of its otherwise well-founded application would amount to anti-Chinese discrimination.
That would be the 650,000 hectares sold by Helen Clark between 1999-2008.

Then there's this from annointed leader, David Shearer:
Labour was not opposed to foreign investment, he said. 

''However we also believe no overseas purchaser has an automatic right to buy New Zealand land. That is a privilege and any purchase must provide some added value.'' 
Pathetic.  The OIO performs that exact task to ensure no overseas purchaser has an automatic right to buy New Zealand land - for sensitive land at least.  And "added value" (in a roundabout way) is almost always one of the OIO's criteria - you have to put a business case.

So essentially Shearer is arguing for status quo.   

It's very difficult analysing Shearer.

UPDATE: Farming is the apt topic because David Parker (ex partner in large law firm) has a bad dose of foot-in-mouth.
Meanwhile, the Government's being challenged over claims the free trade deal Labour struck with China meant the Crafar farm sale to Chinese interests had to be allowed.

Labour Finance spokesman David Parker says both the Prime Minister and the Land Information Minister have made the claim.

Mr Parker says the relevant clause in the free trade deal doesn't change New Zealand's ability to turn down applications for land purchases, and we still retain control of foreign investment in our country.

Mr Parker says assertions a most-favoured nation clause in the FTA prevents control of land sales is also wrong.
 Of course, it's not the first time Parker opens his mouth and gets things wrong.

He is welcome to debate Jane Kelsey on this.  I know who my money is on. 

SECOND UPDATE:  David Parker was just on Newstalk ZB stating Labour would have declined to give approval.  This does not seem consistent with his leader's position.



pdm said...

`Casper' Shearer is not starting off too well is he. First of all he is invisible and then when he emerges he makes inane statements on this matter and also the POA situation.

Anonymous said...

A damn lesbian and her queer partner,good friends of KEY another worry

Anonymous said...

There was always comfort in being a sovereign nation but I guess even that's gone now on the back of various politician's egos as they signed up to deals with all and sundry.

A threat of legal action if they don't get their own way? Nice.

I'm not averse to the sale but remain confused as to why the farms weren't split up. Being a package may have advantaged the Chinese bid.

It leaves me uncertain as to the ethics of the process. I suspect money talks - like it always has.


dad4justice said...

Is peter davis allowed in China?oops silly me = LAX.