|
|
Responses to the email
ACT Response Thank you for your enquiry - ACT supports moves to stem the rise of IPR infringement, and will be watching negotiations with interest. Regards Sally Guinness Executive Assistant to: HEATHER ROY MP Deputy Leader, ACT New Zealand Anderton Response As a member of the government and leader of the Progressive Party, the Hon Jim Anderton supports the work currently under way regarding this Anti Counterfeiting initiative Tony Simpson Advisor Green Response We appreciate your interest and concern on this topic. It appears that you have taken a great interest in the Anti-Counterfeit? Trade Agreement negotiations http://acta.lemming-brothers.com/tiki-index.php?page=Completed+Submission. The Green Party’s position on the agreement is limited by the dearth of official information available on the topic. Because much has been negotiated in secret, there is concern that it may be used to prevent the fair use of copyrighted materials, require Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to monitor all consumers’ Internet communications, or undermine access to low-cost generic medicines. In May this year, Cabinet agreed to join the negotiations but failed to let the NZ public know about this. These agreements are negotiated behind closed doors and so we will not know the outcome until the final outcome is brought to the House. Negotiations on international trade agreements such as this must be done publicly to facilitate healthy debate and prevent unjust laws from being passed. Unfortunately the Green Party has very little influence over matters such as these; there are only six of us and most of our authority exists in more immediate, domestic issues. The Green party constantly raises concerns that the NZ public are shut out from knowing what is being negotiated or what the consequences are for us. Check out our blog: http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/09/18/the-anti-counterfeiting-trade-agreement/ Sincerely, Metiria Turei Green MP Democratic Party for Social Credit Response Speaking as an executive member of CAFCA (since 1992) I personally find the proposed treaty quite appalling. The policy of Democrats for Social Credit was created before we were aware that this proposed treaty existed, so I will have to refer to general principles that the party holds to. Firstly, we disagree with international treaties being negotiated in secret. Secondly, we are in favour of an independant foreign policy. Thirdly, if any existing treaty is found not to be in New Zealand's interest, a Democrats for Social Credit government will withdraw from that treaty. Fourthly, we do have principles that could be loosely summed up as meaning we would be nice to developing countries. Those policies do allow for a range of interpretations. However, it is important to remember that a Social Credit analysis is different from both Marxist analyses and standard Capitalist analyses in a number of ways, one of which is that the Social Credit view attaches a high importance to invention, but accepts that every inventor stands on the shoulders of previous inventors, and the culture that surrounds them. (It is doubtful whether metalworkers in Florence in Leonardo da Vinci's day would have been able to make some of the things he designed. One of the reasons that Britain's industrial revolution succeeded was that there was a large pool of people in the midlands who were able to make what somebody else designed.) Thus, every member of society has some claim to the benefits of what inventors do. In addition, it must be remembered that back in the 1950s the first leader of the New Zealand Social Credit Political League (inc.) was a manufacturer of generic pharmaceuticals. (There used to be a lot of them in New Zealand, but foreign interests bought them all out and closed them down.) While the matter has not been put to a party conference, I am totally certain that the party membership would oppose this thing.
|
Login |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||