Thursday, January 26, 2017

IS ANDREW LITTLE FOR REAL?

Fascinating to see the little man on TV lording over the demise of the TPPA with the quite inane comment that while Labour was all in favour of free trade it would never ever commit to a deal that disadvantaged New Zealand workers.

Little taking crap in sound bites.   In negotiating a free trade agreement it is axiomatic that you have to give away something in order to achieve something ... hopefully a lot.   That for us was the essence of the TPPA.

So Labour, in negotiating the FTA with China back in April 2008, didn't stuff our lower end garment industry and the Pope is a Protestant.    In talking crap Little craps on his own.    One can understand why he wimped out from contesting the Miramar seat.

 

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can you inform us of a lower end garment industry company that still exists. We have a number of "higher end" companies whose product is made in Sth EA. Here is reference but I would like your considered rebuttal of this article and where it would advantage NZ apart from the "higher end". I;m afraid the current out sourcing like Serco has been less than impressive.


https://itsourfuture.org.nz/what-is-the-tppa/

Lord Egbut

Noel said...

Less horse trading in bilaterial deals than in multilaterials which is why I was never a fan of latter.

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... I can't because there isn't and that's the result of the China FTA. You give a 'little' to gain a lot and Labour in power was quite happy to see the lower end NZL rag trade go under in order to gain a lot. Little, in failing to acknowledge history (and trying to repudiate it), is talking in populist sound bites and, in doing so, shoots himself in the foot.

Noel ... and of course the China FTA was a bilateral deal

Noel said...

2008 between China and NZ.Your point?

Anonymous said...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bilateral_free-trade_agreements

Anonymous said...

The difference in the TPPA and the FTA is vast and trying to connect them with Mr Little's reaction to them is taking advantage of our credulity.

Mr Little enters a shop and buys a bag of apples, yum yum these are quite nice he says.

Tow weeks later he goes the same store and buys a bag of pears but returns an hour later complaining that some of he pears are inedible. The storekeepers throws a hissy fit and shouts "you accepted the apples you hypocrite".

Lord Egbut

The Veteran said...

Gueez ... some s l o w learners here. Labour was quite happy to enter into a FTA with China and, in doing so, disadvantage some NZ workers in order to gain a lot. Mr Little now sez no way under his leadership = no free trade deals under Labour.

Anonymous said...

I have no idea what goes through Mr Little's mind but things are changing between trading nations so rapidly that he has changed his mind......when the facts change I change my mind...what do you do?
It seems Adolph troll is deleting inconvenient posts on the basis that I send them...not true.

Lord Egbut

Noel said...

I was talking about the differences between FTAs.
Next time I'll use China Peru.

Noel said...

I no longer read Adolfs posts. Accepted that he doesnt want debate, just an opportunity to snipe. Total was of bandwidth.

The Veteran said...

Noel ... there is next to zip change of NZL negotiating a bilateral trade deal with either the US or Japan that involves dairy or beef and dairy and beef is what we do well. But a collective deal like the TPPA offers up that opportunity.

Egbut ... the evidence hasn't changed. 'He' said that under 'his' leadership and while Labour is in favour off free trade 'they' would never enter into an agreement that disadvantaged NZL workers. Claptrap. Everything we produce involves labour of some sort. You have to give on something to get something. So what's he effectively saying ... either (1) there will be no free trade deals under Labour or (2) I'm talking a load of cods. Some might say (1) and (2).

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Noeloss.

Noel said...

Proved my point Adolf you tosser.