Labour's written to the Prime Minister supporting the India Free Trade Deal being signed in New Delhi next week.
National needed their support to pass the deal into law, since it was opposed by coalition partner New Zealand First.
But Chris Hipkins remains concerned about the commitment to promote billions of dollars of investment in India, saying it's not affordable.
Labour’s Trade Spokesperson Damien O’Connor told Kerre Woodham the slow dribble of information was frustrating, but they’ve reached a point where the balance looks good for New Zealand.
He says it does come with risks, but there are huge opportunities as well, and they needed to make sure the Government was going to commit to them.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Morning's podcast from
News Talks He'd be.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Labors agreed to back the India Free Trade Agreement. Leader
Chris Hipkins says the deal will benefit the country, but
the party does still remain concerned about proposed investment in India.
A formal signing of the dealers due to take place
in New Delhi on Monday, and Labour's trade spokesperson Damien
O'Connor joins me. Now, very good morning to you. Thank
you for your time.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Hi Cura, Kerry, how are you good?
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thank you? What did you get out of it? What
were you managed? What did you manage to win and
return for the support.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
We needed to know the rationale for the negotiation, you know,
the mandate and what we were trying to achieve in
the process and legal advice around that we asked the
government for that. It will slow to dribble out, which
might be the process a little frustrating, but you know,
we reached a point where on balance this should be
good for New Zealand. It does come with its risks,
(01:01):
but of course there are huge opportunities as well with
the lowering of tariff. So you know, all of those
those concessions and advantages can be taken away as written
into the trade agreement if we don't meet the target.
The target is to promote twenty billion US from New
Zealand into It's an ambitious, it's not unrealistic target. We
(01:22):
need to make sure that that you know, the government
was going to commit to that. We haven't seen resources
money that will be used to promote it. I mean
they can do it with an MGT that I'd suggest
that the Indians, who will expect a far greater effort.
These are the things that will be judged in fifteen years,
and so people investing in the market and growing the exports,
(01:44):
shifting them from another market into India have to realize
that that those opportunities could be reversed, or the concessions
through lower tariffs could be reversed, should the Engines decide
that we haven't done enough to promote that investment.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Wouldn't one rocket I mean you know more than I
and so you can tell me, But wouldn't one rocket
label one way to workshop or the lake pretty much
cover that?
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Well? Twenty billion US is quite an amount of money.
We signed the FTA with China. Our single biggest trading
market in two thousand and eight. Since that time, we've
got an investment of about one point eight billion dollars
total in India. Sorry, in China, you know, I Fonterra
had a bigger investment. They sold that off. So those
(02:30):
are the kinds of confidence. We don't have lots of capital.
We do do joint ventures. I'm sure we can. We
will make progress, whether they consider we've done enough promotion
to reach that target. As I say, as a somewhat
subjective assessment, it will be done by the Indians in
fifteen years time.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
It was that the only danger I mean danger is
a strong word to use.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
It's at risk. Every trade agreement has risks. I mean
the fact that not a danger. Well, I mean depending
if you've invested as an exporter into the Indian market,
you've got one hundred million dollars worth of infrastructure, you're
shifting in half a billion dollars worth of apples or
something like that, and then you get a tariff of
say fifty percent slapped on in fifteen years time. That
(03:13):
may make you uncompetitive. Those are the kinds of business risks.
Now I've spoken to set the leaders and people in
forest industry just the other day and say are you
aware of these things? And they say, well, yes we are.
It's easy to say that. Now they have to make
sure that people investing are aware and they can mitigate
those risks in other ways. So look, every trade agreement
(03:34):
has its risk. Winston was saying, we're going to flood
the country with migrants from India. That's not reality, not
the truth. But we had to make sure that the
people who are coming in aren't exploited. And that has
said happened in the past. And given that the government
had shrunk the labor inspect for the shrunk funding for
most government agencies, then the ability to monitor that exploitation
(03:58):
has been reduced under the current government. We said to
them we want to see that boosted up again, and
they said that they would. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Okay, so that's one of the gains you got on
return for the support. I had somebody a text to
saying why would you need labor support? I mean, and
I was explaining that a lot of what is done
within Parliament is done collaboratively, isn't it. You know, there's
much more that you agree on than disagree on.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
We certainly do when it comes to trade, and you know,
different governments have negotiated trade agreements and we've been very
proud of our record and for the most part, you know,
National has supported that through legislation. The odd situation here
a couple of things. Firstly was that investment target, which
is quite unusual. The second was that our single biggest export, dairy,
(04:45):
was almost excluded from this trade agreement, and so I
suggested but cynically, that if we had negotiated it, there
would have been a lot of people across the primary
sector saying this is not a proper trade agreement because
it doesn't include dairy. It was always going to be difficult.
There are small opportunities and we accepted that. And the
third one was that we had a coalition government partner
(05:06):
that is MW Zealand first saying they weren't going to
support it and it was terrible for New Zealand. Now
that's a bit of an odd situation, so we had
to be cautious that. Firstly, Winston wasn't correct, so we
had to check that out. We had to check the
advice that government had received from Treasury and other agencies
to make sure that he's incorrect, and then we had
to make sure that their sectors are aware of the
(05:28):
dangers because in the end, the decision about whether this
proceeded ultimately was in our hands. We wanted we wanted
to remain by partisan when it came to trade, but
we didn't want to be held responsible for signing off
something that in fifteen years time is deemed to have
been disastrous.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
But you've been around in Parliament for a long time,
you know, this is what Winston does. Especially in an
election view.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
It's really unfortunate because you know, people are under pressure.
They don't have the same opportunity to scrutinize policies and
politicians and so you know, the rhetoric and the social
media that we live in now means that people get
misled quite easily. I mean, you know, aside from the
misinformation and the conscious campaigns, So people are making judgment.
(06:17):
I mean, Shane Jones has been making noises about supermarkets
for years and years and done nothing about it. He's
been in government and so now they're saying it again.
And so I think people just have to be reminded
to look to know the bonnet, see what people are saying,
what they've said before, and make a judgment on who
you should vote for. And you know, the economic reality
(06:38):
is this government said it was going to reduce debt
and all the rest that they have increased debt, increased unemployment,
were downgraded credit rating. Their so called economic management has
not been good.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
No, and we won't going to the reasons for that,
but people will have their.
Speaker 3 (06:53):
Chance to Well, they gave the tax cuts that I agree,
people hardly noticed it and now we can't afford to
pray for things that are absolutely urgent.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
I don't think that's as a result of tax scouts.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
It absolutely is because they continued to borrow for tax
cuts instead of borrowing or putting that money into other
core infrastructure.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Well, I'm sure I have a chance to elaborate on
that with the Loopris Sipkins when he comes in next third.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
I hope yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
But I mean, you know, and I know that if
this was a free trade with Sweden, Shane Jones wouldn't
be warning the country that the country was about to
be overrun with Swedes because people are quite like that.
It's racist there.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
That's the outrageous racism in race and baiting that is
creeping into MW Zealand. And you know Winston's done it before.
On immigration. Our country is full of wonderful migrants from
an Irish you know, migrant we all are, except for
Mary and the indigenous people.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
And even they came from somewhere seven hundred years before
we did.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Well. Absolutely, I guess you know that's that's true. But
dividing people up for political purposes is not good politics.
It's not the being a good person, I agree.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
But the free Trade Agreement is a good deal now with.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
The provis step forward. Yeah, I wouldn't call it inter
generational step forward, you know. I mean, of course the
government's going to overhyde, but let's be realistic and I
think that that was important that we did identify some
of the imperfections flaws. It's not the deal that we
would have negotiated. But nonetheless, you know, I've said right
from the start it seems like a step forward. I
(08:31):
think it is a step forward, but it comes with
some risks.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I thank you so much for your time. I know
you're busy. Damien O'Connor, Labour's trade spokesperson.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Kerry Wood and Morning's podcast from
News Talks He'd be.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Labors agreed to back the India Free Trade Agreement. Leader
Chris Hipkins says the deal will benefit the country, but
the party does still remain concerned about proposed investment in India.
A formal signing of the dealers due to take place
in New Delhi on Monday, and Labour's trade spokesperson Damien
O'Connor joins me. Now, very good morning to you. Thank
you for your time.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
Hi Cura, Kerry, how are you good?
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thank you? What did you get out of it? What
were you managed? What did you manage to win and
return for the support.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
We needed to know the rationale for the negotiation, you know,
the mandate and what we were trying to achieve in
the process and legal advice around that we asked the
government for that. It will slow to dribble out, which
might be the process a little frustrating, but you know,
we reached a point where on balance this should be
good for New Zealand. It does come with its risks,
(01:01):
but of course there are huge opportunities as well with
the lowering of tariff. So you know, all of those
those concessions and advantages can be taken away as written
into the trade agreement if we don't meet the target.
The target is to promote twenty billion US from New
Zealand into It's an ambitious, it's not unrealistic target. We
(01:22):
need to make sure that that you know, the government
was going to commit to that. We haven't seen resources
money that will be used to promote it. I mean
they can do it with an MGT that I'd suggest
that the Indians, who will expect a far greater effort.
These are the things that will be judged in fifteen years,
and so people investing in the market and growing the exports,
(01:44):
shifting them from another market into India have to realize
that that those opportunities could be reversed, or the concessions
through lower tariffs could be reversed, should the Engines decide
that we haven't done enough to promote that investment.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
Wouldn't one rocket I mean you know more than I
and so you can tell me, But wouldn't one rocket
label one way to workshop or the lake pretty much
cover that?
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Well? Twenty billion US is quite an amount of money.
We signed the FTA with China. Our single biggest trading
market in two thousand and eight. Since that time, we've
got an investment of about one point eight billion dollars
total in India. Sorry, in China, you know, I Fonterra
had a bigger investment. They sold that off. So those
(02:30):
are the kinds of confidence. We don't have lots of capital.
We do do joint ventures. I'm sure we can. We
will make progress, whether they consider we've done enough promotion
to reach that target. As I say, as a somewhat
subjective assessment, it will be done by the Indians in
fifteen years time.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
It was that the only danger I mean danger is
a strong word to use.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
It's at risk. Every trade agreement has risks. I mean
the fact that not a danger. Well, I mean depending
if you've invested as an exporter into the Indian market,
you've got one hundred million dollars worth of infrastructure, you're
shifting in half a billion dollars worth of apples or
something like that, and then you get a tariff of
say fifty percent slapped on in fifteen years time. That
(03:13):
may make you uncompetitive. Those are the kinds of business risks.
Now I've spoken to set the leaders and people in
forest industry just the other day and say are you
aware of these things? And they say, well, yes we are.
It's easy to say that. Now they have to make
sure that people investing are aware and they can mitigate
those risks in other ways. So look, every trade agreement
(03:34):
has its risk. Winston was saying, we're going to flood
the country with migrants from India. That's not reality, not
the truth. But we had to make sure that the
people who are coming in aren't exploited. And that has
said happened in the past. And given that the government
had shrunk the labor inspect for the shrunk funding for
most government agencies, then the ability to monitor that exploitation
(03:58):
has been reduced under the current government. We said to
them we want to see that boosted up again, and
they said that they would. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
Okay, so that's one of the gains you got on
return for the support. I had somebody a text to
saying why would you need labor support? I mean, and
I was explaining that a lot of what is done
within Parliament is done collaboratively, isn't it. You know, there's
much more that you agree on than disagree on.
Speaker 3 (04:24):
We certainly do when it comes to trade, and you know,
different governments have negotiated trade agreements and we've been very
proud of our record and for the most part, you know,
National has supported that through legislation. The odd situation here
a couple of things. Firstly was that investment target, which
is quite unusual. The second was that our single biggest export, dairy,
(04:45):
was almost excluded from this trade agreement, and so I
suggested but cynically, that if we had negotiated it, there
would have been a lot of people across the primary
sector saying this is not a proper trade agreement because
it doesn't include dairy. It was always going to be difficult.
There are small opportunities and we accepted that. And the
third one was that we had a coalition government partner
(05:06):
that is MW Zealand first saying they weren't going to
support it and it was terrible for New Zealand. Now
that's a bit of an odd situation, so we had
to be cautious that. Firstly, Winston wasn't correct, so we
had to check that out. We had to check the
advice that government had received from Treasury and other agencies
to make sure that he's incorrect, and then we had
to make sure that their sectors are aware of the
(05:28):
dangers because in the end, the decision about whether this
proceeded ultimately was in our hands. We wanted we wanted
to remain by partisan when it came to trade, but
we didn't want to be held responsible for signing off
something that in fifteen years time is deemed to have
been disastrous.
Speaker 2 (05:44):
But you've been around in Parliament for a long time,
you know, this is what Winston does. Especially in an
election view.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
It's really unfortunate because you know, people are under pressure.
They don't have the same opportunity to scrutinize policies and
politicians and so you know, the rhetoric and the social
media that we live in now means that people get
misled quite easily. I mean, you know, aside from the
misinformation and the conscious campaigns, So people are making judgment.
(06:17):
I mean, Shane Jones has been making noises about supermarkets
for years and years and done nothing about it. He's
been in government and so now they're saying it again.
And so I think people just have to be reminded
to look to know the bonnet, see what people are saying,
what they've said before, and make a judgment on who
you should vote for. And you know, the economic reality
(06:38):
is this government said it was going to reduce debt
and all the rest that they have increased debt, increased unemployment,
were downgraded credit rating. Their so called economic management has
not been good.
Speaker 2 (06:50):
No, and we won't going to the reasons for that,
but people will have their.
Speaker 3 (06:53):
Chance to Well, they gave the tax cuts that I agree,
people hardly noticed it and now we can't afford to
pray for things that are absolutely urgent.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
I don't think that's as a result of tax scouts.
Speaker 3 (07:06):
It absolutely is because they continued to borrow for tax
cuts instead of borrowing or putting that money into other
core infrastructure.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Well, I'm sure I have a chance to elaborate on
that with the Loopris Sipkins when he comes in next third.
Speaker 3 (07:19):
I hope yeah.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
But I mean, you know, and I know that if
this was a free trade with Sweden, Shane Jones wouldn't
be warning the country that the country was about to
be overrun with Swedes because people are quite like that.
It's racist there.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
That's the outrageous racism in race and baiting that is
creeping into MW Zealand. And you know Winston's done it before.
On immigration. Our country is full of wonderful migrants from
an Irish you know, migrant we all are, except for
Mary and the indigenous people.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
And even they came from somewhere seven hundred years before
we did.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Well. Absolutely, I guess you know that's that's true. But
dividing people up for political purposes is not good politics.
It's not the being a good person, I agree.
Speaker 2 (08:08):
But the free Trade Agreement is a good deal now with.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
The provis step forward. Yeah, I wouldn't call it inter
generational step forward, you know. I mean, of course the
government's going to overhyde, but let's be realistic and I
think that that was important that we did identify some
of the imperfections flaws. It's not the deal that we
would have negotiated. But nonetheless, you know, I've said right
from the start it seems like a step forward. I
(08:31):
think it is a step forward, but it comes with
some risks.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
I thank you so much for your time. I know
you're busy. Damien O'Connor, Labour's trade spokesperson.
Speaker 1 (08:40):
For more from Kerry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
news talks that'd be from nine am weekdays or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The MeatEater Podcast
Building on the belief that a deeper understanding of the natural world enriches all of our lives, host Steven Rinella brings an in-depth and relevant look at all outdoor topics including hunting, fishing, nature, conservation, and wild foods. Filled with humor, irreverence, and things that will surprise the hell out of you, each episode welcomes a diverse group of guests who add their own expertise to the vast world of the outdoors. Part of The MeatEater Podcast Network.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.