Key defends TPP secrecy

Prime Minister John Key says thousands who protested against the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement over the weekend were wrong to criticise the trade deal's secret negotiations.

The PM says other trade deals, including the FTA brokered with China by Labour, have also been negotiated in secret. 

"The China FTA was like every single FTA we do, negotiated behind closed doors. You never do your negotiations, where you’re trying to get the best deal for your country, in the purview of everyone else," Mr Key said on Breakfast this morning.

"When Labour signed the China FTA, were these people out there protesting?"

Trade expert Stephen Jacobi backs Mr Key's version of events, telling NBR ONLINE the free-trade deal with China was "negotiated exactly the same way as TPP.  Labour will say they shared more info behind the scenes with unions but that didn't extend to revealing the text."

Protestors also called the TPP undemocratic. Mr Key says the investor-state dispute resolution provision – which allows multinationals to sue a government* over what they see as unfavourable policy – was also part of the China FTA, "But there are safeguards, so we can carry on with the public policy we want." The TPP would also have safeguards.

The prime minister also staunchly defended the TPP overall, saying, "This is a free-trade agreement with the US and Japan – two enormous markets. So are we really saying New Zealand would be better off not having a free-trade deal? In the end New Zealand is a trading nation. If having a FTA with the US is not a good idea – and by extension a FTA with China, South Korea and Australia – then how is New Zealand going to get rich? Selling things to each other?"

Wariness extends beyond the Kelsey brigade
Auckland University academic Jane Kelsey is anti all free-trade agreements, Mr Key said. The prime minister's problem, however, is dubiousness about the TPP on the centre right. During n NBR Ask Me Anything session last week, Federated Farmers Diary Industry Group chairman Andrew Hoggard said he had given the government an "earful" about the TPP. 

"We need greater market access around the world, more trade deals that are actually about trade rather than keep protectionism under a different name," Mr Hoggard said.

Staffers in the money
Over the weekend, the Taxpayers' Union picked up on a report that said more than a third of ministerial staff are paid more than $100,000.

“The vast majority of staff in the Beehive are of a secretarial support nature. It seems extraordinary to us that ministers are remunerating so well, and that the salaries are so top heavy," executive director Jordan Williams said.

“With more than one third of the Beehive support staff earning more than $100,000 it appears being a spin doctor or political advisor is a surefire way to the big bucks without being responsible for the decisions. As a comparison, Auckland councillors, are paid $102,000 and arguably do a lot more.”

Neatly dodging the question of how total pay compared to other sectors, Mr Key said ministerial staff got an average 32% pay rise over the period of the survey (2006 to 2014), compared to 32% for the public sector as a whole and 33% across the economy as a whole.

"We have taken the call that we’re going to have fewer staff of better quality," he said.

"You’re talking about TPP. The TPP like any FTA is hugely complicated. We’ve got very good people doing the current negotiating. They cost money. Do you want us to have not good people negotiating very important issues for New Zealand?"

On August 1, what was billed as the final week of TPP talks in Hawaii broke down without any agreement being signed.

Mr Groser expects TPP talks to resume in Kuala Lumpur in a few weeks' time. A date has yet to be set.

The government is still hopeful the TPP can be wrapped up by the end of the year. NBR political editor Rob Hosking is more cynical, comparing the trade deal to Monty Python's parrot.

See also: NBR Radio: Jacobi squares off against Kelsey on TPP

* Mr Jacobi says the ISDS "is about seeking compensation for poor treatment under policy and for expropriation of assets. Governments remain free to make any policy they like but they must be careful about expropriation."