Posts by Matthew Hooton
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Polity: Saudi sheep: Misappropriating…, in reply to David Hood,
I am unhappy with the governments negotiations in the TPP. What is the going rate on the government purchasing my ill-defined intellectual property?
I have similar concerns with the Ottawa Convention on Landmines (see http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Foreign-Relations/1-Global-Issues/Disarmament/0--Conventional-arms/0-land-mine-convention.php)
This means I have no hope of helping a friendly local landmines company sell its products to the New Zealand Army.
I want $4 million.
-
Polity: Saudi sheep: Misappropriating…, in reply to Kumara Republic,
In this case, it can't have been the Clark regime's fault.
It is true it banned live-sheep exports in 2003, as did the Howard government. But, in 2006, Trade Minister Goff launched FTA talks with the GCC, which Saudi largely controls. Trade Minister Groser completed these talks in 2009. By definition, this means NZ had excellent relations with Saudi/GCC from 2006 and 2009. It was what happened after the deal was completed that caused the problem - which was NZ going back on private assurances to re-start the live-sheep trade. (See http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Trade-and-Economic-Relations/2-Trade-Relationships-and-Agreements/Gulf-Cooperation-Council/index.php)
Personally, I think the government should have allowed the trade to restart with much stricter animal welfare rules (which is something I talked to Hmood and his people about in 2010). That is what Australia did. And, ironically, it also seems as if we have in fact restarted the trade informally, as the recent Mexico shipment proves (and even the Saudi air shipment).
But, if the government didn't want to do this because of domestic political considerations or even genuine animal welfare concerns, it shouldn't have made private promises to the contrary to the Saudis. And it should have negotiated a formal Agriculture Cooperation agreement with the Saudi govt, with taxpayers' dollars attached, as an annex to the FTA. This would have meant the Saudis couldn't have double-crossed us. They only get the cooperation and cash when the FTA is signed.
Instead, for reasons related to McCully's personality, the govt went down a path that - totally unnecessarily - involved deception, the misleading of the Prime Minister, the Cabinet, Treasury and the Auditor-General and even fraudulent invoices. And, now, because of his fear of McCully (Shipley's experience is instructive) the PM is so far in he is continuing to lie about it all.
Disgraceful in every respect.
PS. It is good to see Rob is better at analysing MFAT documents that real estate data and Chinese-sounding surnames.
-
Don't get me wrong Rob, you're right and everything. And I attacked the government for this disgraceful bribe as soon as it was made and before the byelection ( see http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/bridges-disgrace-gives-win-peters ) ...
But pretty much nobody cares.
-
Hard News: The epitome of reason, in reply to Roger Lacey,
I don't think there is an example (perhaps Muldoon in 1975???) where a party gets elected into government from opposition from saying "didn't we do a good job last time". Talking to a 25 year old voter in 2017 about the Cullen Fund is to talk about a policy that was implemented when they were about 7. (Cullen Fund was soon after 1999 election I think).
-
Hard News: The epitome of reason, in reply to Russell Brown,
"Pt Chev liberal" is shorthand, the same way "Waitakere Man" is.
-
Hard News: The epitome of reason, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
I agree in 2002, Labour's message was "look at those clowns". But in 2005, it was more "look at that threat". They tried that again in 2008 against Smile and Wave and it fell flat.
-
Yep, "Waitakere Man" has got a bit richer since Chris invented him six years ago, thanks to economic growth and house price inflation, and he's probably a bit more liberal on social issues. But he's still roughly the same person.
-
OnPoint: Beyond 'a bad look', in reply to Tristan,
And by Muldoon before her. It is pretty common for PMs to be asked to comment on whatever is in the news. People are interested in their attitude to the topic of the day.
-
Hard News: The Sky is the limit, in reply to ,
I still don’t understand why these glamor convention centers are so important
Because politicians get to cut the ribbons at their openings. This is what drives all "commercial" activity by the public sector.
-
Every minister in the Beehive used to have their own shower, dressing room etc, and maybe they still do.
So the story is a total beat up.
But the "secret annexe" bookshelf entrance does make it comical and therefore somewhat newsworthy.
What would have been wrong with a door?