When I was Minister of Labour we signed up to two big trade deals China and P4 (NZ, Chile, Singapore and Brunei.
Both pretty big deals – the associated memoranda were designed to protect us from undercutting – the competitive race to the bottom of the wage/skills spectrum. CTU and Business NZ both played a positive role because they saw our future heading up that spectrum.
Since then both organisations have been supportive of the work both governments have been doing on a NZ/US FTA. The CTU have worked with the AFLCIO whose support will be vital especially but not only for Democrat members of the house who must approve any agreement or at least give the President permission to negotiate with particular conditions. And Democrats and US unions don’t naturally support free trade. Nor for that matter do a significant proportion of Republicans.
The Memorandum of Understanding between China and New Zealand is very clear :-
4. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by weakening or reducing the protections afforded in domestic labour laws, regulations, policies and practices.
As is the P4 Memorandum of Understanding
5. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to set or use their labour laws, regulations, policies and practices for trade protectionist purposes.
6. The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to encourage trade or investment by weakening or reducing the protections afforded in domestic labour laws.
The important point for this blog is that it is inappropriate to reduce protections to encourage investment.
Which is exactly what the government did in order to secure the Warners Hobbit investment.
I don’t think it is likely that anyone will take a case against us – but one thing is for certain, any plans we had to work with the AFLCIO towards a US free trade deal died when Key gave Warners the pen on our industrial relations legislation.
You know your limits Trev? (Marae investigates 31 Oct).
“one thing is for certain, any plans we had to work with the AFLCIO towards a US free trade deal died when Key gave Warners the pen on our industrial relations legislation.”
I thought that happened back in July when Hellen Kelly convinced the AFLCIO head to snub NZ over the dispute on union access to the workplace.
Yes Jeremy, don’t you go offthread though.
I won’t go offthread either, on the matter, that won’t be mentioned here no siree
Jeremy offthread you were warned Trevor
How does a simple clarifying law giving certainty rather than confusion reduce anything? The whole premise of your post is yet again flawed.
Fisiani – you should write for Tui.
Fisiani:
The law clarification is in my opinion arguable in Trevor’s favour, as it does (at least attempt to) remove the right to contest your employment/contractor status based on actual conditions of work, as opposed to the line in the contract. Now you might argue that said employee/contractor shouldn’t have that option if they upfront sign a contract saying they are an independent contractor (and I’d probably agree with you), however that doesn’t take away from the fact that the option to go to court and make this arguement has been lost and the employee’s position weakened.
But the real problem with Trevor’s post is this bit:
“CTU and Business NZ both played a positive role because they saw our future heading up that spectrum.
Since then both organisations have been supportive of the work both governments have been doing on a NZ/US FTA.”
Wherein he seems to have forgotten that the CTU (as I noted earlier but for some reason got put into moderation) had actually withdrawn its support for the TPP in July and used its union contacts to cancel a tour of NZ by the AFLCIO head.
I believe Fisiani is an ultra-Leftist with a sense of humour – he certainly makes me laugh.
Fair cop – balance deleted – one more and you get yellow card. Trevor
did you and our unions insist that they pay their workers a wage/allowances equal to workers in NZ Trevor? I hope so.
Hi jabba
jab:
Hmmmm. Not sure its a great idea to start spreading this current NAT Government’s idea of ‘good’ labour relations around the world. We might start telling other countries that they should weaken their labour laws every time a foreign corporate complains.
crimson:
Yeah the CTU decided the NZ Government was acting in a way which did not deserve support (quite right too).
The course NAT is on, there seems no doubt that there will be more to come.
“the associated memoranda were designed to protect us from undercutting – the competitive race to the bottom of the wage/skills spectrum.”
If only even nation was like that…
Maybe make all our currency at the same value to (well try at least!)
“And Democrats and US unions don’t naturally support free trade. Nor for that matter do a significant proportion of Republicans.” Neither do big business, they like free trade into our markets but not theirs and a lot of republicans are against real free trade!
Try opening up the dairy market there for example, it would be a job and a half!
“Yeah the CTU decided the NZ Government was acting in a way which did not deserve support (quite right too).”
Which is all very interesting and leads to a whole other discussion about the CTU damaging the country’s interest (including workers who might benefit from favourable trade conditions which lead to new and better paid jobs) in an attempt to put pressure on the government. Some, but not I, have even suggested they stirred up the Hobbit incident for the same reason.
But the salient point is you can only withdraw your support once. You can’t claim that the recent “hobbit law” will endanger the union support of the TPP, when the CTU has already withdrawn support for the TPP and asked AFLCIO not to speak on NZ’s behalf either.
Good point, I’m looking forward to the next Labour Government’s actively blocking trade with China for their breach of point 5, whereas they refuse to float the Yuan…
As a side note Trevor, you banned me for two weeks over three weeks ago and all my accounts seem blocked still except for on my laptop, could you change this please before deleteing the second half of this post…
Ah, ‘the unions are the real threat’ meme. How can the unions be the real threat when the unions are the very workers wo keep our industries rolling?
OK, lets forget about the country’s interests for just a moment.
Forget that free trade agreements and free market arrangements often cause the offshoring of skilled jobs and destruction of local industries.
For starters, Free Trade != “Favourable Trade”. (what is this, some new Right Wing Crosby Textorism?)
And all other things been equal, why should workers support free trade efforts to increase NZ’s GDP when there is an impression that both those increases, and those from ‘productivity’ improvements, never make it to workers in a meaningful way (and in fact, both workers and worker unions remain under consistent attack by the NAT Govt). Instead the additional monies are sucked up along the way by other, asset wealthy players.
Nah we’ll just follow the lead of the US, after all they are the leaders of the Free World, yeah? (even though they are working real hard to actively depreciate the USD as we speak)
Crim – “CTU damaging the country’s interest (including workers who might benefit from favourable trade conditions which lead to new and better paid jobs) ” Speaks to the point. When going from regulated markets to free enterprise you should not go in one jump AKA as we did in the 80′s. Think of our auto industry, we still have some of the best back yard mechanics around, but these guys were never given the step needed to take their skills and move into the better paying jobs, only now do we have a NZ supercar that can potentially compete through the natural trade barriers (cost & Distance). We have since lost the factories and downstream industries. This is why we have a generation lost to better paying jobs. Why not stop and think about how we can have both?
Perestroika!
“For starters, Free Trade != “Favourable Trade”. (what is this, some new Right Wing Crosby Textorism?)”
I would have thought it was a “Left wing UMR-ism”, given Trevor seems to be arguing that losing a free trade deal with the US is a bad thing.
Not that any of that is really relevant to Trevor’s original post. He argues that the “Hobbit Law” will turn the CTU and therefore AFLCIO against the TPP. Except they already decided to oppose the TPP.
I WISH people would stop over complicating this.
Unions bad. Jackson good.
That’s the line we were fed, that most didnt question, swallowed and regurgitated. Oh sure, they dressed it up in rationalisations and justifications, but this was the underlying message.
MIssion accomplished, Jackson, Warners and Nat Govt…meanwhile they sat back and watched bloggers and posters do the arguing and justification for them but all that was smoke and mirrors
Unions bad. Jackson Good. The end
Jeremy:
I wouldn’t argue that removing all our trade barriers in one stroke (or unilaterally for that matter) was smart.
I would argue that since we already did that, we should try to convince other countries into removing theirs.
The CTU is destroying the country. I am stunned at how easily some have swallowed the pill specifically prepared for them without question, without delving without research.
National mut sit at its strategy meetings and laugh at how easy most NZers are to manipulate. Of course, you have to deny you’re being manipulated cos that would be like saying you were foolish, so no one does that, they clingharder to their justifications and rationalisations. BUT that doesnt changed you’re being played.
I am not saying CTU is perfect, but boy this hobbit stuff has been very one-sided. Unions bad. Movie people exulted
The unions are not “the very workers” they are part of the workers, about 15% – 20%… They represent only those workers in their membership and they are good thing when they negotiate for those that cannot themselves and provide access to legal advice at a fair price but when they align themselves with political parties, they give up some of their advocation for their workers for “the greater good of the movement” and that is just cr*p…
It’s why Unite is such a good union – no affiliation, I encourage those I know with poor bosses/conditions who want to join a union to join Unite…
Didn’t read that interpretation since in his post he said
His important point was not about losing a free trade deal (your reading). Its about not losing worker protections.
Workers have figured it out, all these promises of increased GDP through free trade/foreign investment, but which never quite translate into actual benefits in terms and conditions for ordinary workers. And quite to the contrary, in this environment seems to be associated with attacks on wage increases, on reductions in employment law protections, etc.
Tracey:
Its more a case of Union stupid, Warner Brothers handed all the bargining chips on a silver platter, Peter Jackson stuck in the middle wanting them all to shut up and let him make a film.
The free world leader (USA) is one of the most regulated countries int he free world. Free trade for the USA has always meant they can freely trade with everyone and everyone has to get past barriers to trade with them.
Close.
Unions bad. Jackson good.
Warner’s a**holes.
Opps Crimson beat me to the punch…
*Sigh*
The workers ARE the country. Not the capitalists, not the top 5% of wealth owners, not the foreign corporates, their foreign executives and their local agents.
And as you clearly seem to realise, this is class war, and workers are going to fight back hard in the battle of 2011.
Why don’t you stop representing the asset wealth and power in this country with your comments and start representing and recognising the contribution of ordinary workers to New Zealand.
And their fight for fair recognition and a fair share of the value that they create for the country.
tracey when my comment comes out of moderation I’m just talking to myself there
Surely you didn’t mean that?
The fourth Labour government reduced protections and privileges spectacularly well for the express purpose of encouraging investment. And thank goodness it did!
If ‘investment’ = selling off our critical assets and infrastructure to foreign private interests for a song while simultaneously destroying our productive economy and a couple of hundred thousand jobs at the same time then yeah.
It was spectacular.
“His important point was not about losing a free trade deal (your reading). Its about not losing worker protections.”
You did read the title of Trevor’s post right? “Key forgets about US FTA as he reduces worker protection for Warner Bros.”
Or maybe his (incorrect) conclusion:
“I don’t think it is likely that anyone will take a case against us – but one thing is for certain, any plans we had to work with the AFLCIO towards a US free trade deal died when Key gave Warners the pen on our industrial relations legislation. ”
Sort of speaks for itself.
Well there’s dead, and then there’s dead and buried.
“The fourth Labour government reduced protections and privileges spectacularly well for the express purpose of encouraging investment. And thank goodness it did!”
They only real good was that came it the ‘reforms’ was lowering interest rates and making it easier to get a loan.
Credit flooded NZ but not real productive investment.
Instead nearly killed the rest of the econmoy in one swipe!
We got rogered
Well, now we know why NACT didnt want strong unions as they have in Australia, as part of their “closing the gap” agreement. Funny how they conveniently only wanted parts of Australia’s web to achieve higher wages etc etc….
WHAT a joke.
$20m to Warners
$20m to SCF foreign investors NOT covered by the guarantee
No wonder we cant pay for more hip operations, or special needs resources, or much of anything, and still we borrow $250m each week…