If nothing else, President Trump remains consistent with his "America First" push. He has already withdrawn the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP). That left the 11 remaining members of the TPP, who held a meeting on the sidelines of APEC, to announce they had finally agreed to go ahead without the US. But suspending 20 provisions from the original deal. New Zealand is a member of the TPP along with Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Vietnam, Japan and Singapore.
Like most people I have tried to follow the TPP discussions since the idea was first proposed. That's going back nearly 10 years. I have read and attended information sessions; some held by the previous Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. All with the view to be better informed about a trade deal that the government believed would be the "best thing since sliced bread".
It tried hard to convince us this was what was needed but when some concerned commentators wanted to know more, asked penetrating questions and started digging deeper to unearth the details, public opinion became divided. More details please?
Numerous requests were refused. We were told negotiations are complicated and best left to those who have trade experience and understand these matters.
But it's the detail that gets governments hung up every time. The devil is always in the detail. And so it is with TPP.
When it was eventually revealed that our government could be sued by an overseas corporate, if it acted contrary to their best interests (not ours), public anxiety increased. There were other fishhooks too that became evident.
I watched discussions on our current affairs programmes on TV and could see the promoters of TPP getting hot and bothered. They brushed aside questions and were evasive with their answers. The public were treated like fools. So were the learned scholars who also asked probing questions.
We had the Prime Minister's assurance we could be confident the government wouldn't do anything to compromise our sovereign position. I think it is unwise for any government to push ahead with something as important as the TPP without the agreement of the majority of its citizens. We want to know exactly what the government, on our behalf, is agreeing and committing New Zealand to.
Now I would rather listen to Rotorua lawyer Annette Sykes and Professor of Law Jane Kelsey of Auckland University any day. They know law and they know when agreements are shonky. Both have done their research on the proposed agreement.
They are adamant the government must have the welfare of New Zealand citizens at the centre of any trade agreement. Not the profits of multinational corporates who want to dictate the terms of our country's future.
You would think the previous government would have flicked the various drafts past Professor Kelsey to ensure they were on the right track. That they were inserting and deleting provisions so that New Zealand's best interests are served.
True to form "government knows best". Couldn't possibly use a law expert who might inject some "black hat thinking". Put trade experience alongside of constitutional knowledge and sovereign rights. Apply a wider test.
We know agreements are typically negotiated long before any summit takes place. They are worked out in technical groups by experts who come to the bargaining table with a hard-nosed view of their national interests. However past experience tells us when push comes to shove, every leader tends to fall back on his or her nation's sovereign rights.
This is exactly what Annette Sykes and Professor Kelsey believe is at stake with the proposed TPP. Our sovereign rights belong to the citizens of New Zealand. They must never be put at risk.
Merepeka Raukawa-Tait is a Rotorua Lakes Council councillor, Lakes District Health Board member and chairs the North Island Whanau Ora Commissioning Agency. She writes, speaks and broadcasts to thwart political correctness.
