WHAT THE SINGAPORE-NEW ZEALAND ‘CLOSER ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP’ MEANS FOR MAORI

What is the Singapore-New Zealand Closer Economic Partnership?

Closer Economic Partnership is free trade by another name. The Singapore and (National) NZ governments closer economic partnership went into effect in January 2001. Essentially, the agreement removes restrictions on trade in goods and services, and on investment, between NZ and Singapore. It was crafted when it became clear that attempts to push the global free markets agenda had come to a standstill.

· Individual countries have gone cold on reducing their trade and investment barriers without other countries matching them.

· APEC’s goal of free trade and investment regime by 2010 in rich countries and 2020 in poor ones has struck a rock.

· The meeting in Seattle failed to agree to a new round of free trade negotiations in the World Trade Organization.

How does this agreement promote globalization?

The plan is to kick start the free trade process again by negotiating a lot of smaller

agreements which can lock together to achieve the bigger goal. Singapore is almost as

gung-ho on global free markets as NZ has been. Both governments reckon if they can

agree on a model agreement, and extend it gradually to other countries, they can get

the free trade process underway again. As NZ’s former chief trade negotiator,

and now the head of Asia 2000, admitted: ‘Stated bluntly, the Singapore/NZ FTA

is a Trojan Horse for the real negotiating end-game: a possible new trade bloc

encompassing all of South East Asia and Australia and NZ’.

The Singapore agreement is just the start, the New Zealand government is currently

in the process of holding similar talks with Hong Kong.

Who is pushing this?

The supporters of globalisation in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT)

and some other officials, ministers and MPs in the old and new government who

support free trade and investment, and some of the business sector. The Prime

Minister has spoken out publicly in support. However, the Alliance and Greens

are opposed. Some Labour MPs and Ministers are too.

Why should this agreement be of concern to Maori?

Maori have interests in each of the major areas covered by the Singapore-NZ agreement,

eg.

Trade: The only tariffs NZ puts on goods imported from Singapore involve textiles and clothing. This is an area where around 30% of workers are Maori. Many are women and sometimes the only wage earners in the family. The factories are often in small towns where this is the major employer. After a big fight the National government agreed to slow down the removal of tariffs on clothing etc. The Labour/Alliance government has now agreed to stop the cuts until 2005. This agreement would remove those tariffs for Singapore. While that is quite a small part of clothing and textile imports, it could make a difference to whether the factories survive. Singapore also has investments in free trade zones with cheap labour and may try to bring in more clothes made in those places.

Services: Services include health, education, broadcasting, tourism. Free trade in services means NZ cannot discriminate in favour of its own service suppliers. Singaporeans have to be given as good (if not better) treatment. That could include access to NZ subsidies and might prevent NZ introducing local content quotas for Maori broadcasting or requiring professionals to have training in the Treaty and cultural safety before getting registered in NZ

Investment: For years, foreign investors have been stripping NZ assets, like forestry, and businesses, like Telecom or Tranzrail, for a quick profit. Most of this has been taken out of the country. Lots of Maori people have lost jobs and whole towns have been affected. Very few really new businesses have been created. Foreign investors have no long-term commitment to this country or its people. The rules already allow Singapore almost unrestricted rights to buy up NZ. This agreement is likely to stop the government imposing more restrictive rules, for example imposing a national interest test, including a Treaty of Waitangi assessment for any applications.

Are there any protections for the Treaty?

The government included a clause that says: nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the adoption by New Zealand of measures taken to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. But who decides what the Treaty obligations are? For example, the government is claiming that subsidies for Maori health or giving Maori preference to buy part of the radio spectrum are not responses to a Treaty obligation, just part of ‘closing the gaps’. That means it would fall outside this protection. If Singapore challenged the government’s interpretation, would Maori have a role in the dispute process? And who would decide – an international trade forum, the Waitangi Tribunal or who?

How was the agreement crafted?

It’s impossible to say because the negotiations were secret. The government refused to release the document that went to Cabinet setting out the instructions to negotiators. All that was released was a general information paper that stated that it would cover goods, services and investment, with a summary of the cost/benefit analysis the officials have done.

Was Te Puni Kokiri been involved in this process?

Te Puni Kokiri was briefed by trade officials in early November 1999. It said it couldn’t take a position because it hadn’t been given enough time or information – a familiar complaint about ‘consultation’ on international trade agreements. TPK was especially concerned about the possible effect on Maori workers.

What did TPK suggest?

It didn’t want to go over the same ground that’s been covered in ‘dialogue’ with Maori on the MAI, APEC and WTO. TPK asked for a detailed and carefully researched report on the implications of the Agreement for Maori to provide the background to an informed consultation process. The report was to cover:

· The Treaty of Waitangi exemption clause in the Agreement;

· Loosening the rules on investment;

· Eliminating tariffs, especially the effects on Maori workers and the rules which set down what can be defined as ‘made in Singapore’

· Removing restrictions on services supplied by Singapore;

· The framework proposed for intellectual property rights; and

· SOVEREIGNTY.

Trade officials agreed, but only went so far as to commission a legal opinion about the Treaty exemption clause, which basically said it’s fine and doesn’t raise any of the issues mentioned above.

When and where are the ‘consultations’ supposed to take place, and who gets to go?

“Consultation” was a one-way briefing of hand-selected interested parties. Around 20 handpicked “consultants” were invited to discuss the issues, other Maori were allowed to come, but there wasn’t a general hui. This controlled approach was also used for APEC and the WTO, after the MAI was rejected by Maori at the series of hui throughout the country. Maori who were ‘consulted’ were given a modified version of the very general outline given to everyone else.

What has happened with these consultations in the past?

Maori have consistently voiced their concerns, even in the hand-picked consultations. Major concerns have included:

· Intellectual property rights, and control of indigenous knowledge and bio-diversity;

· Exploitation of the country’s resources and people by foreign investors;

· Dominance of big corporations in these deals, with no voice for Maori small businesses;

· The dishonest portrayal of the position of Maori in the country’s economy

· Removing restrictions on resources like fisheries and forestry mainly benefits larger countries.

· Maori workers and businesses are no better off, and often worse off.

· What happens if the globalization strategy doesn’t work?

What control did Maori have over this process?

None. Parliament didn’t even control the process. These agreements bind the hands of future governments. But they are negotiated in secret and are signed off by the Cabinet. They don’t even have to follow the normal process for legislation. The select committee didn’t get to see this agreement or call for submissions until after negotiations were finished and it had already been signed. Parliament got to debate it, but with no right to stop it being finally approved. That makes it vital to stop the process while negotiations are still underway.

What can we learn from the Singapore-New Zealand Closer Economic Partnership?

While APEC may be stalled, free trade is still being forced upon us a country at a time. Bilateral agreements between the New Zealand government and other Asia-Pacific governments are undercutting the Treaty, our existing laws and the democratic process in New Zealand. Last year it was Singapore, this year the government is engaged in “exploratory talks “ with the government of Hong Kong.

How can Maori intervene?

· Get the word around and raise the issue in different forums and hui.

· Insist on the right to attend the ‘consultations’ and challenge the process and content of this agreement.

· The Maori Affairs select committee can call in the officials and demands answers.

· Press Maori MPs to demand that officials prepare the kind of report TPK asked for.

· Give Labour the message that Maori won’t support the current treaty making process or the global free market model.

· Demand a proper process that recognizes tino rangatiratanga in the international treaty making process, instead of meaningless consultation on the side.